This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
This template was considered for deletion on 2020 February 21. The result of the discussion was "No merge". |
I am sorry if someone disagrees with my change but I changed the alphabetic order of the main characters to the order of importance and chronological order they had in the series. I don't think alphabetic order makes sense here in the template. Even the major villains are ordered chronologically, not alphabetically, so I think the main characters deserve a better criterion of order. Feel free however to change the characters after Angel, I wasn't sure in what order to put them.-- 177.134.2.172 ( talk) 00:22, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Please review Wikipedia:Content disclaimer
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not censored - Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable.. some articles may include objectionable text, images, or links if they are relevant to the content
Aren't Buffy the Vampire Slayer adult parodies relevant to the Buffyverse (and therefore it's template)? -- Buffyverse 15:39, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I changed "harm" to "harmony", "dru" to "drusilla", etc. I understand that an attempt has been made to make the infobox look perfect for one particular editor's monitor. As different people will have different screen sizes and have their text sizes set differently as well, there's no point in attempting this. -- Xyzzyplugh 05:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
This is ridiculously large and, in some cases, fills relatively brief, pithy articles with a mountain of unnecessary material. At most there should be a link to List_of_Buffyverse-related_topics. -- Tony Sidaway 03:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Since the characters tend to take too much room, can we at least have a separate template for the characters specifically? I've seen template splits before. Just look around the Star Wars articles of this site as an example. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 06:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, here is my opinion on what the template for the Buffyverse should change to:
If would be better if you could merge the Characters links into one and we can have a list of ALL characters from not only the TV shows but from the canon comics also, but I would create this page once it's accepted.
This makes it nice, compact and functional. More importantly, it recognises the changing face of the Buffyverse, with the new direction in canon comics. You can also then go on to have specific Buffy or Angel nav boxes as well. Matty bon ( talk) 03:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay, here's my version, exlcusive to Buffy only, we also need to make an Angel one. One thing is I'm not entirely satisfied with the "Series" section? I think maybe we need a better name? Also, I'd like the Buffy template to be shades of red rather than blue. The Buffy and Angel boxsets are red and blue respectively so I think it would make sense for the navboxes to match. I'm not sure how to change the colour though. If we're going to split the template into two, should we move Template:Buffyversenav to Template:Buffynav and create a separate Tempate:Angelnav page? Paul 730 20:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Would "Franchise" work in place of "Series"? Something along those lines, anyway?~ Zythe Talk to me! 10:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Except it's not two distinct series, it is the two distinct series, all spin-offs, and all related and expanded media. While some of the expanded universe and comics can be attributed to their own parent shows, there are still some things which are born from both and some articles which touch on both (music, academia, and awards to start with). Not to mention that Angel, one of these "two distinct" shows, is itself a spin-off of Buffy, and one which draws heavily from the parent at that. Throughout the whole series of Angel, the main cast list never fell below a 50/50 ratio of Buffy alums. These two television shows and their related articles are intertwined so deeply that they cannot be separated, and, personally, I like the template the way it is. If you want to make it look smaller and prettier, though, the key seems to be to follow the trend of the other navboxes and make everything left justified. I don't know how much good it will do, but it is a start. kingdom2 ( talk) 03:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay, you have swayed me (which is not something that is easily done). However, as for the wikiquote, what reason do you give for not putting it in. It seems like a perfectly reasonable inclusion to me. As for Paul's template, because the characters pages have all the people listed in them, I can see why listing them would be redundant. I would like to point out that there are separate pages for Buffy and Angel novels and comics, so we should change that on Paul's template. I would like to ask, though, if there is a reasonably easy way to put these two templates in the individual pages without having to go through each one by one. Also, Willow was in three episodes of Angel, saving the day in the third, but I can see what you mean. kingdom2 ( talk) 21:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good, 'cause most Buffy articles only have the Buffyverse template. I would like to ask, even though this is the wrong discussion page, if these new templates make the Angel and Buffy characters ones redundant. These templates are only found on the actual character pages, and in the crossover characters both are found, making for some unnecessary stack-up. I was just wondering if we should get rid of or redirect the Buffy character one and make the Angel character one redirect to the new Angel nav. This would save a couple of pages worth of work and make the whole subject area more uniform. Besides, as I said, the character templates seem redundant. Just a thought. kingdom2 ( talk) 02:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I keep editing at the same time. Yeah that is enough of a loophole. She was in the opener, granted as a mean and cruel trick, and she was in more episodes than Oz or Riley. Also, can't forget Angel. He was a regular for two seasons. kingdom2 ( talk) 03:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't like that idea, and I think that all of the controversy that Paul mentioned would start can be subverted by simply saying "If they were listed in the opening credits at any time, then they go in." Tara was in, so she goes. Joyce was not, so she does not. Simple as that. With Bignole's idea, the only people listed in Buffy would be Buffy, Xander, and Willow, and the only ones for Angel would be Angel and Wesley, which is a pathetic character section. There would be no conflict or edit warring, it is a simple rule. Also, when I listed the Angel characters to go on the list, I forgot Illyria. kingdom2 ( talk) 16:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with the way it looks. The character lists are even practically the same length. What do you think? kingdom2 ( talk) 18:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
After a couple of tries, I got the move, but I can't figure out what to do with the character templates. I want this nav to replace the Buffy character nav and the Angelnav to replace the Angel character template, but because you can only replace code and cannot merge articles into each other with moves, something is going to have to be deleted and there will be a lot of fallout and cleanup. Otherwise we are going to have duplicate templates, like we already have with this template and Template: Buffynav. kingdom2 ( talk) 01:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
It might be good to create a new section to separate the canon Buffy comics from those that are not. It might make things less confusing in the long run -- 220.238.175.38 17:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I Agree, it has been stated by Joss that he reguards canon as very important, so this should be done. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.46.103.78 (
talk) 18:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Is there a page dedicated to inside jokes in the 'verse? There's no such thing as leprechauns, etc. samwaltz 11:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I think the list of people in the box is getting excessively long. Several of the characters are very minor, and are really just cluttering things up in my opinion. I'm thinking specifically of people like Clem, Groo, Scott (who?), and Senator Brucker (seriously, she was in three episodes). Villains who weren't actually the "Big Bad" of their season, like Caleb, are also borderline in my eyes. Jeff-El 05:02, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Does Angel's hairy girlfriend really belong here? Paul730 01:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Are we going to see any chacters from season 8 in there, like Generall Voll or satsu etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.103.78 ( talk) 17:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
We already have Major and minor character links for both Buffy and Angel. Do we really need a list of all these people? And by first name only? It's not that useful for navigation right now, in my opinion. Maybe if we trimmed it down to just people who actually appeared in the opening credits? - Chunky Rice ( talk) 01:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
For Angel: {{ Angel The Series Characters}} For Buffy: {{ Buffy The Vampire Slayer Characters}} I hope this will help out with the large template issue you have with the other one. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 19:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
In Expanded universe, we have a comics link, but then links to a comic (Fray) and two comics series (Tales of Slayers/Vampires). Same with novels. Is there a reason these are bumped out? WOuldn't it make more sense to have: Novels, Comics, Video Games, Fan Films - maybe borrow the RPG and card game from Auxilliary.
For that matter, I'm not really sure what the Auxilliary category is. - Chunky Rice ( talk) 19:50, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
...unless you know where to look, or see the character in the template, you will not know that a wikipedia article exists about the character. Say I am new to the series, go onto Wikipedia, find Spike, like reading about Spike, want to know more about others around Spike, where do I look ? Just use the faulty wikipedia search engine ? Oh, wait, there is a Template:Buffyversenav template with more names and information linking directly to the articles I am looking for. Yippie. Thank you for reading and considering rkmlai ( talk) 06:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
...are redundant, and clutter up articles. Don't we have a characters list (let's try for featured list!) and some fairly useful categories already? I think the point of a new, slimmer navbox is to do away with the bulky clutter of listing every single important character in the series. If we have to list characters (by some massive consensus), should we not keep it to just credited cast?~ Zythe Talk to me! 10:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Some people are now listed under both "characters" and "villains".
The "Angel" link in the villains section could probably be made to link to the Angelus section of the article, as he's noth a villain and a main character, but otherwise people like Holtz should just be in one or the other.
Doesn't Jasmine qualify as a Villian big enough to be listed on the template? It's been a while, but it seems like she was a pretty big deal, what with her connection to Cordelia and all... Certainly bigger than some on the template, like Veruca, who was only in three episoes, or Jinx, who was a sidekick... Nerrolken ( talk) 01:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Having characters divided into essentially "goodies" and "badies" is a very conjectural approach and borders original research. Looking along the list of "People", there's plent that could be also considered villains at some point in the show (Andrew, Angel, Anya, Connor, Cordelia, Faith... and I'm just up to F here). Plus, the label of "People" is rather vague also - denoting that the villains are all non-humans, which of course many are but some aren't. Let me know your thoughts on this one so I can judge consensus. As it stands however I feel very uncomfortable about the groups being divided this way. Tphi ( talk) 23:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I actually totally agree, it's not black & white - for instance, Darla is under 'Recurring' in the Angel characters template, but under 'Villians' in the Buffyverse template. I think we should switch it to 'Main' and 'Supporting' or 'Regular' and 'Recurring' and just differentiate by that 124.181.102.9 ( talk) 23:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Why are Kendra and Veruca included? Seriously... if anyone can give any reasonable argument as to why they should stay they should be removed. 124.181.102.9 ( talk) 11:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I've just created it for the actors template. {{ Buffy and Angel cast}}
It's based off of the Star Trek DS9 Template:
Like that one. It's used for the articles of major cast members who appeared in the opening credits of both series. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 12:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
The title of the template currently links to the page Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The problem with that is that the link takes readers to a disambiguation page, which is strongly discouraged. Ideally, the link at the top of this template should take the reader to an article that provides an overview of the whole "BtVS" fictional concept and pointers to more specific information. The closest thing to such an overview is in the article Buffyverse, but this template does not link to it, and in any case that article focuses more on the setting of the fiction than on the characters or plots. I think the ultimate problem is that Buffy the Vampire Slayer should not be a disambiguation page, but an introductory/summary article that provides readers with an overview of the topic and directs them to more detailed articles on particular aspects. Anyone want to write such a thing? -- Russ (talk) 21:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
These rules are already stated in the "Too big" section, but I decided to write them again in a new section so that they are clear and readily available. The rule is as follows:
This rule was chosen because of its complete objectivity. While people can debate for hours on the relative importance of characters, there is not debate on what actors appeared in the opening sequence. This rule also means that, because of her one appearance in the opening credits, Tara Maclay is included on the template.
The point of this template is to represent the franchise as a whole, not every little detail and aspect of it. That is exactly what happened with the old Buffyverse template and exactly what we want to avoid with this one. kingdom2 ( talk) 16:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
I redirected all of the other templates to this template. At first users tried that but they were just redirecting the Slayernav page and that was it instead of redirecting all of the templates that were redirecting to Slayernav. So you were seeing the "REDIRECT:" on many pages. That shouldn't happen anymore. If you guys decide to change the name again, remember to change all of the template redirects or else the same issue will happen again. Here is a listing of the templates that redirect here for future reference. -- Woohookitty Woohoo! 13:32, 14 October 2008 (UTC)"
There is no such thing as the "Angelverse". "Buffyverse" applies to both Buffy and Angel TV shows and all media based on them, including the film. While I like the idea of the franchise page, I do not know who will make it, and I do not think that there is enough information to make one. With 40 years of Star Trek, it is easy to have a franchise page. If you include the film, Buffy has only been around for 16 years, and 11 without the film. I think that, while it is not a perfect solution, we should just have the title link be to the TV series page. That is where most of the subjects stem from and it is obvious that having the disam link is going to be divisive. I'll go ahead and change it. kingdom2 ( talk) 16:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
OK, I think the debate has to happen. Why is it in the series section I ask?
This is what is written in the nav: ATTENTION! DO NOT MOVE THE FILM TO EXPANDED UNIVERSE. THE ENTIRE BUFFY FRANCHISE IS DERIVED FROM THE FILM, SO, WHILE IT IS NOT CANON, IT IS HARDLY EXPANDED UNIVERSE. THANK YOU.
a. The nav isn't about Buffy the Vampire Slayer as a universe, it's even linked in the title as Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV Series), the television series is the basis on the nav. b. The film does not equal the series, this has been stated time and time and time and time and time and time and time again c. If it is indeed part of the 'series' then why isn't Pike, Merrick and those lame vampire antagonists in the 'characters' section? Credited cast? d. The film is related to the television series and season eight, but it is not part of the 'series, therefore film = expanded universe. Can we please move it? Thankyoubye. 58.164.112.194 ( talk) 00:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
The title has been delinked, but the film is still staying in the Series section. We have reached a decent compromise, so accept your losses and gains and go home. kingdom2 ( talk) 19:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Just bring up an issue here that's been nagging me for a bit now... and it also affects {{ Angelnav}}.
In light of WP:COLOR and WP:ACCESS, the background of the title bar really needs to be changed. As it stands, the deep blue makes all the default text colors hard, if not impossible, to read.
Is there a washed out version of the blue that would be acceptable to use instead?
- J Greb ( talk) 17:30, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Should their be mention to the related show angel in the template? Angel the TV show has many charters from Buffy The Vampire Slayer and has a plot based off Buffy the vampire slayer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.54.34.61 ( talk) 22:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Why is Faith not in this box? I think she is a notable enough character, certainly moreso than some of the others included 67.246.14.41 ( talk) 03:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. [Insert whinge about the pointlessness of moving templates when you can just create redirects.] Jenks24 ( talk) 09:11, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Template:Buffynav →
Template:Buffy the Vampire Slayer – This and Angel are the only television series that use "nav" in the template and are not just named after the show itself.
Aspects (
talk) 23:42, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
I've notified Wikipedia:WikiProject Buffyverse about this discussion -- Netoholic @ 09:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
This template was considered for deletion on 2020 February 21. The result of the discussion was "No merge". |
I am sorry if someone disagrees with my change but I changed the alphabetic order of the main characters to the order of importance and chronological order they had in the series. I don't think alphabetic order makes sense here in the template. Even the major villains are ordered chronologically, not alphabetically, so I think the main characters deserve a better criterion of order. Feel free however to change the characters after Angel, I wasn't sure in what order to put them.-- 177.134.2.172 ( talk) 00:22, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Please review Wikipedia:Content disclaimer
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not censored - Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable.. some articles may include objectionable text, images, or links if they are relevant to the content
Aren't Buffy the Vampire Slayer adult parodies relevant to the Buffyverse (and therefore it's template)? -- Buffyverse 15:39, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I changed "harm" to "harmony", "dru" to "drusilla", etc. I understand that an attempt has been made to make the infobox look perfect for one particular editor's monitor. As different people will have different screen sizes and have their text sizes set differently as well, there's no point in attempting this. -- Xyzzyplugh 05:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
This is ridiculously large and, in some cases, fills relatively brief, pithy articles with a mountain of unnecessary material. At most there should be a link to List_of_Buffyverse-related_topics. -- Tony Sidaway 03:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Since the characters tend to take too much room, can we at least have a separate template for the characters specifically? I've seen template splits before. Just look around the Star Wars articles of this site as an example. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 06:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, here is my opinion on what the template for the Buffyverse should change to:
If would be better if you could merge the Characters links into one and we can have a list of ALL characters from not only the TV shows but from the canon comics also, but I would create this page once it's accepted.
This makes it nice, compact and functional. More importantly, it recognises the changing face of the Buffyverse, with the new direction in canon comics. You can also then go on to have specific Buffy or Angel nav boxes as well. Matty bon ( talk) 03:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay, here's my version, exlcusive to Buffy only, we also need to make an Angel one. One thing is I'm not entirely satisfied with the "Series" section? I think maybe we need a better name? Also, I'd like the Buffy template to be shades of red rather than blue. The Buffy and Angel boxsets are red and blue respectively so I think it would make sense for the navboxes to match. I'm not sure how to change the colour though. If we're going to split the template into two, should we move Template:Buffyversenav to Template:Buffynav and create a separate Tempate:Angelnav page? Paul 730 20:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Would "Franchise" work in place of "Series"? Something along those lines, anyway?~ Zythe Talk to me! 10:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Except it's not two distinct series, it is the two distinct series, all spin-offs, and all related and expanded media. While some of the expanded universe and comics can be attributed to their own parent shows, there are still some things which are born from both and some articles which touch on both (music, academia, and awards to start with). Not to mention that Angel, one of these "two distinct" shows, is itself a spin-off of Buffy, and one which draws heavily from the parent at that. Throughout the whole series of Angel, the main cast list never fell below a 50/50 ratio of Buffy alums. These two television shows and their related articles are intertwined so deeply that they cannot be separated, and, personally, I like the template the way it is. If you want to make it look smaller and prettier, though, the key seems to be to follow the trend of the other navboxes and make everything left justified. I don't know how much good it will do, but it is a start. kingdom2 ( talk) 03:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay, you have swayed me (which is not something that is easily done). However, as for the wikiquote, what reason do you give for not putting it in. It seems like a perfectly reasonable inclusion to me. As for Paul's template, because the characters pages have all the people listed in them, I can see why listing them would be redundant. I would like to point out that there are separate pages for Buffy and Angel novels and comics, so we should change that on Paul's template. I would like to ask, though, if there is a reasonably easy way to put these two templates in the individual pages without having to go through each one by one. Also, Willow was in three episodes of Angel, saving the day in the third, but I can see what you mean. kingdom2 ( talk) 21:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good, 'cause most Buffy articles only have the Buffyverse template. I would like to ask, even though this is the wrong discussion page, if these new templates make the Angel and Buffy characters ones redundant. These templates are only found on the actual character pages, and in the crossover characters both are found, making for some unnecessary stack-up. I was just wondering if we should get rid of or redirect the Buffy character one and make the Angel character one redirect to the new Angel nav. This would save a couple of pages worth of work and make the whole subject area more uniform. Besides, as I said, the character templates seem redundant. Just a thought. kingdom2 ( talk) 02:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I keep editing at the same time. Yeah that is enough of a loophole. She was in the opener, granted as a mean and cruel trick, and she was in more episodes than Oz or Riley. Also, can't forget Angel. He was a regular for two seasons. kingdom2 ( talk) 03:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't like that idea, and I think that all of the controversy that Paul mentioned would start can be subverted by simply saying "If they were listed in the opening credits at any time, then they go in." Tara was in, so she goes. Joyce was not, so she does not. Simple as that. With Bignole's idea, the only people listed in Buffy would be Buffy, Xander, and Willow, and the only ones for Angel would be Angel and Wesley, which is a pathetic character section. There would be no conflict or edit warring, it is a simple rule. Also, when I listed the Angel characters to go on the list, I forgot Illyria. kingdom2 ( talk) 16:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with the way it looks. The character lists are even practically the same length. What do you think? kingdom2 ( talk) 18:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
After a couple of tries, I got the move, but I can't figure out what to do with the character templates. I want this nav to replace the Buffy character nav and the Angelnav to replace the Angel character template, but because you can only replace code and cannot merge articles into each other with moves, something is going to have to be deleted and there will be a lot of fallout and cleanup. Otherwise we are going to have duplicate templates, like we already have with this template and Template: Buffynav. kingdom2 ( talk) 01:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
It might be good to create a new section to separate the canon Buffy comics from those that are not. It might make things less confusing in the long run -- 220.238.175.38 17:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I Agree, it has been stated by Joss that he reguards canon as very important, so this should be done. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.46.103.78 (
talk) 18:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Is there a page dedicated to inside jokes in the 'verse? There's no such thing as leprechauns, etc. samwaltz 11:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I think the list of people in the box is getting excessively long. Several of the characters are very minor, and are really just cluttering things up in my opinion. I'm thinking specifically of people like Clem, Groo, Scott (who?), and Senator Brucker (seriously, she was in three episodes). Villains who weren't actually the "Big Bad" of their season, like Caleb, are also borderline in my eyes. Jeff-El 05:02, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Does Angel's hairy girlfriend really belong here? Paul730 01:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Are we going to see any chacters from season 8 in there, like Generall Voll or satsu etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.103.78 ( talk) 17:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
We already have Major and minor character links for both Buffy and Angel. Do we really need a list of all these people? And by first name only? It's not that useful for navigation right now, in my opinion. Maybe if we trimmed it down to just people who actually appeared in the opening credits? - Chunky Rice ( talk) 01:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
For Angel: {{ Angel The Series Characters}} For Buffy: {{ Buffy The Vampire Slayer Characters}} I hope this will help out with the large template issue you have with the other one. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 19:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
In Expanded universe, we have a comics link, but then links to a comic (Fray) and two comics series (Tales of Slayers/Vampires). Same with novels. Is there a reason these are bumped out? WOuldn't it make more sense to have: Novels, Comics, Video Games, Fan Films - maybe borrow the RPG and card game from Auxilliary.
For that matter, I'm not really sure what the Auxilliary category is. - Chunky Rice ( talk) 19:50, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
...unless you know where to look, or see the character in the template, you will not know that a wikipedia article exists about the character. Say I am new to the series, go onto Wikipedia, find Spike, like reading about Spike, want to know more about others around Spike, where do I look ? Just use the faulty wikipedia search engine ? Oh, wait, there is a Template:Buffyversenav template with more names and information linking directly to the articles I am looking for. Yippie. Thank you for reading and considering rkmlai ( talk) 06:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
...are redundant, and clutter up articles. Don't we have a characters list (let's try for featured list!) and some fairly useful categories already? I think the point of a new, slimmer navbox is to do away with the bulky clutter of listing every single important character in the series. If we have to list characters (by some massive consensus), should we not keep it to just credited cast?~ Zythe Talk to me! 10:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Some people are now listed under both "characters" and "villains".
The "Angel" link in the villains section could probably be made to link to the Angelus section of the article, as he's noth a villain and a main character, but otherwise people like Holtz should just be in one or the other.
Doesn't Jasmine qualify as a Villian big enough to be listed on the template? It's been a while, but it seems like she was a pretty big deal, what with her connection to Cordelia and all... Certainly bigger than some on the template, like Veruca, who was only in three episoes, or Jinx, who was a sidekick... Nerrolken ( talk) 01:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Having characters divided into essentially "goodies" and "badies" is a very conjectural approach and borders original research. Looking along the list of "People", there's plent that could be also considered villains at some point in the show (Andrew, Angel, Anya, Connor, Cordelia, Faith... and I'm just up to F here). Plus, the label of "People" is rather vague also - denoting that the villains are all non-humans, which of course many are but some aren't. Let me know your thoughts on this one so I can judge consensus. As it stands however I feel very uncomfortable about the groups being divided this way. Tphi ( talk) 23:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I actually totally agree, it's not black & white - for instance, Darla is under 'Recurring' in the Angel characters template, but under 'Villians' in the Buffyverse template. I think we should switch it to 'Main' and 'Supporting' or 'Regular' and 'Recurring' and just differentiate by that 124.181.102.9 ( talk) 23:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Why are Kendra and Veruca included? Seriously... if anyone can give any reasonable argument as to why they should stay they should be removed. 124.181.102.9 ( talk) 11:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I've just created it for the actors template. {{ Buffy and Angel cast}}
It's based off of the Star Trek DS9 Template:
Like that one. It's used for the articles of major cast members who appeared in the opening credits of both series. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 12:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
The title of the template currently links to the page Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The problem with that is that the link takes readers to a disambiguation page, which is strongly discouraged. Ideally, the link at the top of this template should take the reader to an article that provides an overview of the whole "BtVS" fictional concept and pointers to more specific information. The closest thing to such an overview is in the article Buffyverse, but this template does not link to it, and in any case that article focuses more on the setting of the fiction than on the characters or plots. I think the ultimate problem is that Buffy the Vampire Slayer should not be a disambiguation page, but an introductory/summary article that provides readers with an overview of the topic and directs them to more detailed articles on particular aspects. Anyone want to write such a thing? -- Russ (talk) 21:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
These rules are already stated in the "Too big" section, but I decided to write them again in a new section so that they are clear and readily available. The rule is as follows:
This rule was chosen because of its complete objectivity. While people can debate for hours on the relative importance of characters, there is not debate on what actors appeared in the opening sequence. This rule also means that, because of her one appearance in the opening credits, Tara Maclay is included on the template.
The point of this template is to represent the franchise as a whole, not every little detail and aspect of it. That is exactly what happened with the old Buffyverse template and exactly what we want to avoid with this one. kingdom2 ( talk) 16:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
I redirected all of the other templates to this template. At first users tried that but they were just redirecting the Slayernav page and that was it instead of redirecting all of the templates that were redirecting to Slayernav. So you were seeing the "REDIRECT:" on many pages. That shouldn't happen anymore. If you guys decide to change the name again, remember to change all of the template redirects or else the same issue will happen again. Here is a listing of the templates that redirect here for future reference. -- Woohookitty Woohoo! 13:32, 14 October 2008 (UTC)"
There is no such thing as the "Angelverse". "Buffyverse" applies to both Buffy and Angel TV shows and all media based on them, including the film. While I like the idea of the franchise page, I do not know who will make it, and I do not think that there is enough information to make one. With 40 years of Star Trek, it is easy to have a franchise page. If you include the film, Buffy has only been around for 16 years, and 11 without the film. I think that, while it is not a perfect solution, we should just have the title link be to the TV series page. That is where most of the subjects stem from and it is obvious that having the disam link is going to be divisive. I'll go ahead and change it. kingdom2 ( talk) 16:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
OK, I think the debate has to happen. Why is it in the series section I ask?
This is what is written in the nav: ATTENTION! DO NOT MOVE THE FILM TO EXPANDED UNIVERSE. THE ENTIRE BUFFY FRANCHISE IS DERIVED FROM THE FILM, SO, WHILE IT IS NOT CANON, IT IS HARDLY EXPANDED UNIVERSE. THANK YOU.
a. The nav isn't about Buffy the Vampire Slayer as a universe, it's even linked in the title as Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV Series), the television series is the basis on the nav. b. The film does not equal the series, this has been stated time and time and time and time and time and time and time again c. If it is indeed part of the 'series' then why isn't Pike, Merrick and those lame vampire antagonists in the 'characters' section? Credited cast? d. The film is related to the television series and season eight, but it is not part of the 'series, therefore film = expanded universe. Can we please move it? Thankyoubye. 58.164.112.194 ( talk) 00:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
The title has been delinked, but the film is still staying in the Series section. We have reached a decent compromise, so accept your losses and gains and go home. kingdom2 ( talk) 19:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Just bring up an issue here that's been nagging me for a bit now... and it also affects {{ Angelnav}}.
In light of WP:COLOR and WP:ACCESS, the background of the title bar really needs to be changed. As it stands, the deep blue makes all the default text colors hard, if not impossible, to read.
Is there a washed out version of the blue that would be acceptable to use instead?
- J Greb ( talk) 17:30, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Should their be mention to the related show angel in the template? Angel the TV show has many charters from Buffy The Vampire Slayer and has a plot based off Buffy the vampire slayer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.54.34.61 ( talk) 22:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Why is Faith not in this box? I think she is a notable enough character, certainly moreso than some of the others included 67.246.14.41 ( talk) 03:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. [Insert whinge about the pointlessness of moving templates when you can just create redirects.] Jenks24 ( talk) 09:11, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Template:Buffynav →
Template:Buffy the Vampire Slayer – This and Angel are the only television series that use "nav" in the template and are not just named after the show itself.
Aspects (
talk) 23:42, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
I've notified Wikipedia:WikiProject Buffyverse about this discussion -- Netoholic @ 09:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC)