Board Thread:Wiki Discussion/@comment-26143371-20180715133847/@comment-26143371-20180802214716

It being the same as the order of the tabs on the event pages is something I meant to write as well. And yes, the tab order is alphabetically, at least theoretically. I kind of like the order it has now though, at least for the items. I don't really like the quests being the top entries, since characters and building seem more important to me. But that would split the items. I don't know of a better place to put them either. With the meta-template the order can still be changed later, maybe it shouldn't be too much of a concern.

Yeah, the amount of permanent items is going to be very small. I feel like it's not worth marking them at all. Most readers probably won't understand the meaning anyway if it is this thing that appears in this one place and nowhere else they've looked so far.

Of course, if the navboxes differ by update type, then they should have different categories. Do you have specific differences in mind? I currently don't see a reason why they would need to be.

Good point about the double dots. I've actually never been a huge fan of those. Similar to the rare permanent items, I feel like it's something that's generally not understood. Sure, you and I know that they divide the list in additional subgroups, with different concrete meaning depending on the exact context they are used in. Again from the perspective of the average reader, they might just be dismissed as some weird mistake.

I've moved the category to the meta template, which is a bit more elegant. Also I've added a general "Returning Content" list for now. The idea is to put in all items (i.e. no quests) in alphabetical order, with no further subgrouping. From a quick swipe through some event pages, it looks like there usually is a significantly lower amount of them than of the new items. So it might be fine to put them all in one row. Also ultimately they aren't as important as the new ones, so having only one row for them seems adequate. The alternatives that I can see are either not having them at all, or doing the same as for new content, but in a separate subgroup that is collapsed.