Template talk:Favor - Revision history

Arindor: /* Link to Favor page */

2017-03-18T07:56:59Z

Link to Favor page

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:56, 18 March 2017
Line 13:		Line 13:
	:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
	::::::There's no underline. Let's go with that. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 01:33, 18 March 2017 (CDT)		::::::There's no underline. Let's go with that. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 01:33, 18 March 2017 (CDT)
			:::::::Implemented. Let me know if any issues! [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 02:56, 18 March 2017 (CDT)

Alleryn at 06:33, 18 March 2017

2017-03-18T06:33:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:33, 18 March 2017
Line 12:		Line 12:
	:::::<span lang="ur">[[Favor\|<span title="Favor Level" style="color:grey">[''Favor Level'']</span>]]</span>		:::::<span lang="ur">[[Favor\|<span title="Favor Level" style="color:grey">[''Favor Level'']</span>]]</span>
	:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
			::::::There's no underline. Let's go with that. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 01:33, 18 March 2017 (CDT)

Arindor: typo

2017-03-18T03:05:31Z

typo

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, 18 March 2017
Line 11:		Line 11:
	:::::How does this look on your browser?		:::::How does this look on your browser?
	:::::<span lang="ur">[[Favor\|<span title="Favor Level" style="color:grey">[''Favor Level'']</span>]]</span>		:::::<span lang="ur">[[Favor\|<span title="Favor Level" style="color:grey">[''Favor Level'']</span>]]</span>
	:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for ~~use~~, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

Arindor: /* Link to Favor page */

2017-03-18T03:04:39Z

Link to Favor page

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:04, 18 March 2017
Line 8:		Line 8:

	::::I do see the underline all the time, but that doesn't really bother me. I guess it's not a big deal; it just feels weird to me to have one page linked so many times. If it doesn't bother anyone else, i'd say just leave it. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 17:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		::::I do see the underline all the time, but that doesn't really bother me. I guess it's not a big deal; it just feels weird to me to have one page linked so many times. If it doesn't bother anyone else, i'd say just leave it. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 17:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

			:::::How does this look on your browser?
			:::::<span lang="ur">[[Favor\|<span title="Favor Level" style="color:grey">[''Favor Level'']</span>]]</span>
			:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for use, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

Alleryn at 22:16, 17 March 2017

2017-03-17T22:16:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:16, 17 March 2017
Line 6:		Line 6:

	:::On my browser, I'm seeing the exact same behaviour before and after the change to add the links - they're "hidden" unless you mouseover the item, and only then the underline shows. Maybe you're seeing a different behaviour? Perhaps I could make the links completely hidden, such that the underline never shows, but they are still "clickable". Do you think that would help? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 17:03, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:::On my browser, I'm seeing the exact same behaviour before and after the change to add the links - they're "hidden" unless you mouseover the item, and only then the underline shows. Maybe you're seeing a different behaviour? Perhaps I could make the links completely hidden, such that the underline never shows, but they are still "clickable". Do you think that would help? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 17:03, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

			::::I do see the underline all the time, but that doesn't really bother me. I guess it's not a big deal; it just feels weird to me to have one page linked so many times. If it doesn't bother anyone else, i'd say just leave it. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 17:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

Arindor: /* Link to Favor page */

2017-03-17T22:03:34Z

Link to Favor page

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:03, 17 March 2017
Line 4:		Line 4:

	::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that's only my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll leave it as is if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that's only my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll leave it as is if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

			:::On my browser, I'm seeing the exact same behaviour before and after the change to add the links - they're "hidden" unless you mouseover the item, and only then the underline shows. Maybe you're seeing a different behaviour? Perhaps I could make the links completely hidden, such that the underline never shows, but they are still "clickable". Do you think that would help? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 17:03, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

Alleryn at 19:18, 17 March 2017

2017-03-17T19:18:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:18, 17 March 2017
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

	::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that's only my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll ~~just~~ leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that's only my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll leave it as is if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

Alleryn at 19:17, 17 March 2017

2017-03-17T19:17:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:17, 17 March 2017
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

	::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that ~~would just be~~ my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll just leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that's only my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll just leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

Alleryn at 19:17, 17 March 2017

2017-03-17T19:17:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:17, 17 March 2017
Line 2:		Line 2:
	I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
	:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

	::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that would just be my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll just leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that would just be my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll just leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

Alleryn at 19:16, 17 March 2017

2017-03-17T19:16:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:16, 17 March 2017
Line 2:		Line 2:
	I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
	:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
			::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that would just be my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll just leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:56, 18 March 2017
Line 13:		Line 13:
	:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
	::::::There's no underline. Let's go with that. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 01:33, 18 March 2017 (CDT)		::::::There's no underline. Let's go with that. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 01:33, 18 March 2017 (CDT)
			:::::::Implemented. Let me know if any issues! [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 02:56, 18 March 2017 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:33, 18 March 2017
Line 12:		Line 12:
	:::::<span lang="ur">[[Favor\|<span title="Favor Level" style="color:grey">[''Favor Level'']</span>]]</span>		:::::<span lang="ur">[[Favor\|<span title="Favor Level" style="color:grey">[''Favor Level'']</span>]]</span>
	:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:::::That is the only way I could find to remove the underscore and preserve the link (on hover on my side) - wiki really wants links underlined! If it works for you, we can use that as a fallback technique, if desired. [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
			::::::There's no underline. Let's go with that. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 01:33, 18 March 2017 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:17, 17 March 2017
Line 2:		Line 2:
	I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
	:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

	::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that would just be my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll just leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that would just be my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll just leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:16, 17 March 2017
Line 2:		Line 2:
	I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
	:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)		:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor\|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor\|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
			::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that would just be my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll just leave it if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn\|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn\|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)