This template is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to
animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can
the article attached to this page, help out with the
open tasks, or contribute to the
discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Futurama, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Futurama articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FuturamaWikipedia:WikiProject FuturamaTemplate:WikiProject FuturamaFuturama articles
This template was considered for
deletion on 13 July 2013. The result of the discussion was "keep".
Related companies
Ok, so, perhaps "related companies" should be defined -- or renamed. "Related companies", I would imagine, would be limited to companies having worked with RDS or on the same project as RDS. Whether all the currently listed "related companies" fit this description, I don't know. It just seems a bit over-length. Just throwing that out there. -- Chickenmonkey X sign? 17:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Navboxes should consist of links between articles that a reader would be likely to want to go to from the article they are currently on. Navboxes should also be inclusive enough to encompass the whole of a subject without becoming watered down with extraneous links to articles which may have a loose connection to each other. The "related companies" group is not needed and has consistently been increased to overpower the other information contained in the template. Therefore, I think the "related companies" group should be discarded. Does anyone disagree? Chickenmonkey 21:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC)reply
Coloring of the template
There have been a couple of recent edits adding "darkorange" coloring to this template. I contend that this is a gratuitous use of coloring, and is entirely unwarranted. As such, it goes against current Wikipedia policy on color use. Perhaps a discussion on this issue can be had here, instead of pursuing an edit-war. Chickenmonkey 23:05, 28 June 2010 (UTC)reply