Template talk:South China Sea

The recent expansion

I have undone the recent expansion of the template as it was simply unnavigable: far too large, taking up the whole height of my quite generously sized display, and losing whatever information someone might want to find within all its entries. Some of it did not belong in any box: decorative flags and entries that do not link to any article, but even with those removed it would be far too large. See e.g. WP:NAVBOX, which says "Navigation templates are particularly useful for a small, well-defined group of articles;" and gives a series of tests, most of which the articles in this navbox fail to satisfy. But mostly it’s common sense: it is not useful as a navbox being far larger than many of the articles mentioned.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 08:59, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

User:JohnBlackburne: Well, I disagree, but to address your complaints, I've reverted back to this Sunday's version that only contains blue links. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:09, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Will do some more work to reduce vertical height. Patience please. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:11, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

User:JohnBlackburne: I must admit I prefer the newly svelte template. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:52, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

(But I'm going to grumble with the way you went about the process - I disagree with much of your bad-tempered brain dump, and completely disagree with your statement "most of which the articles in this navbox fail to satisfy") But never mind. Next time, could you please WP:AGF and be more polite? Pdfpdf (talk) 09:52, 5 July 2017 (UTC)