Template talk:Faction disambiguation

This template doesn't work on disambiguated item pages, such as Vicious Gladiator's Medallion of Meditation. -- 21:26, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * "Doesn't work" appears to mean that uses of Template:itemtip, when transcluded, render differently than it does on the original page. That would be an itemtip problem that we can probably fix.
 * What do we do with other things that won't work when an item disambiguation page is used in place of an item: should incoming links be formatted (i.e. Vicious Gladiator's Medallion of Meditation vs Vicious Gladiator's Medallion of Meditation (Alliance))? What should happen if someone were to try and include the disambiguation page in a loot/item/reagent/whatever box? "Nothing, let it fail" is probably an acceptable choice, but some confirmation of this would nevertheless be nice. &mdash; foxlit (talk) 15:52, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The suggestion was more of a "let people see both versions on one page", instead of browsing to see both. I'm perfectly fine with just having a disambiguation page, which people would probably have to look at and see why their loot/item/reagent/whatever box/link doesn't work. -- 15:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation forcata/old and normal/hc
Should there be created a disambiguation-template like this for fx quests that have both a cataclysm page and an vanilla page (ex. Quest:Elune's Tear & Quest:Elune's Tear (original)), and for weapons that have both a normal and heroic version (ex. Battleplate of the Apocalypse & Battleplate of the Apocalypse (heroic))? - Aedror (talk) 11:45, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * No, there would be no space for it. This template is specifically for items and quests that ends with (Horde) and (Alliance). -- 12:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That's why he was asking about creating a different template. Maybe it would be a good idea for heroic items, but I think normal disambiguation works for other stuff. -- 12:20, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * So you want a (normal) and (heroic) now? No thanks, it's fine as it is. Why change something that isn't broken? -- 12:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh this was created because the links were broken? I didn't know, sorry for asking then. I just thought it would be simpler or something if we did it like i proposed. But ofcourse if ii isn't then just ignore what i wrote :)
 * - Aedror (talk) 13:46, 29 May 2011 (UTC)