Template talk:Yes

message: This template was nominated for deletion, but consensus was to keep it. See Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/Deleted/June_2005. However, as indicated by that discussion, please do not use this template for voting on anything. Radiant_>|< June 30, 2005 09:23 (UTC)
This template was proposed to contain a light and desaturated background or an image in place of the text, but consensus was for it to remain with text upon a saturated background. Althepal 18:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ...

message: User:BGC, as you can see, this template name has been used for a long time for a completely unrelated purpose - to consistently display "Yes" in Wikipedia, mainly in comparison tables. Your template would need a different name - probably  or something. User:logixoul 14:09, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rock band 

message: I actually would like to save over the templates for a minute just to look at some real tables and see how useful the symbols are. But then again, there would be one minute where everybody would be like, "WHAT?! What happened to the YES and NO??? (It's so wonderful now! Ahhh...)" lol ;) –Althepal 21:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You know what, the yes/no tables in MapleStory are much easier to get around than the tables in Comparison of raster graphics editors, since the current yes and no template colors are so similar. Changing the background color or switching to symbols would make it easier to get along. I mean, the way it is now, it is just TOO HARD to get an idea of the differences between the things being compared when the colors are so close. Sure, you can still find the information, but it is hard to get a general feel for the differences. That is bad for Wikipedia. I actually find it easier, less of a strain, on the eyes to look at the versions with more contrast. Althepal 22:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yes and No background color, contents

message: By 23:59 March 21, 2007, OR 100 total votes
Can we agree to decide on whichever choice is the first to get at least 2/3 majority with at least five votes for it? Althepal 02:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where's the fire? ¦ Reisio 02:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol. No rush, it's just that I don't want somebody to change the templates as soon as they think there is a solid vote for one option, when others might want to wait longer before making changes. I want there to be some written, predefined way to decide when the vote has concluded, so there will be a clear end. Althepal 02:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with both Reisio and Althepal. This is a good cause, and "Weighty Questions ask for deliberate Answers." But there must be an end that can be agreed upon. I move that after 100 unique votes or 14 days (whichever comes first) the issue be put to rest. --Museerouge 03:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe. If others are okay with the two week or 100 posts thing, I'll go along. Althepal 03:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Motion submitted. Can we get any Wikipedians who have voted or posted in this talk page already to seccond the motion? --Museerouge 04:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: While 100 is a little long, remember there is a time limit as well. I think 100 is a resonable level and I support this motion but remember this isn't a vote. Nil Einne 08:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Eventual conclusion

message: Accessibility is good, but I think there is too little contrast between text and the darker background color.  Being able to read the text is important for the no2 template and other cases where one might use the no background color, but customize what the text is.  --Karnesky 06:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps we can have a gradient background or a dark border with the light background in order to both maximize contrast and provide a stronger visual cue for the colorblind?  I'm sure that many who prefer the status quo will object that no other table cells have special borders or gradients, but I'd really like a way where colorblind people can distinguish the colors and the contrast is strong enough to actually read the text. --Karnesky 15:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a gradient would be more distracting. I have no problem reading text on a saturated background. Althepal 19:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And neither of have problems telling the difference between pale green to pale red.  The fact is that a darker background decreases contrast.  Why should we ignore this? --Karnesky 20:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the contrast decrease is minute, and the colors themselves tell the story. Althepal 23:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You've made this argument that text isn't important because of color a few times on this page and I don't buy it.  Not only do people explicitly substitute something other than "yes" or "no" in the templates, but they append footnotes or other information to them.  Text visibility is still important.  --Karnesky 01:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The contrast ratio dropped from ~16:1 to ~9:1.  This is hardly "minute," but I will note that 9:1 is still strong enough to pass web accessibility tests.  Maybe I just need better monitors.  --Karnesky 02:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Other stats: The brightness difference dropped from 237 to 177 (threshold 125).  The color difference dropped from 697 to 543 (threshold 500).    Again, the readability has diminished, but not to below the suggested thresholds. --Karnesky 02:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text contrast with dark backgrounds 

message: Am I correct in my understanding that red/green colourblind people can usually recognise the difference between the green and red when they are saturated but not when they are light? Nil Einne 08:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading the discussion at the top, it appears the answer is yes, at least for mattb Nil Einne 08:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess it's easier to imagine for a non-color blind person by trying to picture watching two different hues in a black & white picture. The more desaturated and lighter they get, the harder they are to distinguish, while deeper colors would at least provide a better hint to the color difference, with the B&W analogy making one more noticeably closer to the black than the other. -- Northgrove 09:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are different types of colorblindness, but in general red/green colorblindness is set off by light hues. -- mattb @ 2007-03-08T15:02Z
Why don't you guys do what the traffic lights do- mix colors. (yes, I'm American and don't spell "color" with a "U"!) The red isn't a true red. It's miked with, like, yellow or a bit of blue. I'm just sayin', it works for the government traffic dept. Habeouscorpus (talk) 23:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colourblind 

message: * Yes and No. Decide Unknown, Partial and Depends, but separately. (I would vote to have all except Yes and No to be either Standard text or Symbols. Yes and No could be Dark background or Symbols.) Althepal 03:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Include in Decision

message: Lighter background: 2;
Darker background: 0;
Symbols: 0;
Symbols on dark background: 0
Lighter background        	Yes
Darker background         	Yes
Symbols                   	
Symbols on dark background	
* Lighter background (or Symbols both) bring the information easily. Althepal 04:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: {{tl|but yes}}

message: Lighter background: 2;
Darker background: 0;
Symbols: 0;
Symbols on dark background: 0
Lighter background        	No
Darker background         	No
Symbols                   	
Symbols on dark background	
* Lighter background (or Symbols both) bring the information easily. Althepal 04:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: {{tl|but no}}

message: Lighter background: 3;
Darker background: 0;
Symbols: 0;
Symbols on dark background: 0
Lighter background        	Unknown
Darker background         	Unknown
Symbols                   	
Symbols on dark background	
* Lighter background (or Symbols both) bring the information easily. Althepal 04:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: {{tl|unk}}

message: Lighter background: 3;
Darker background: 0;
Symbols: 0;
Symbols on dark background: 0
Lighter background        	Partial
Darker background         	Partial
Symbols                   	
Symbols on dark background	
* Lighter background (or Symbols both) bring the information easily. Althepal 04:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: {{tl|partial}}

message: Lighter background: 3;
Darker background: 0;
Symbols: 0;
Symbols on dark background: 0
Lighter background        	Depends
Darker background         	Depends
Symbols                   	
Symbols on dark background	
* Lighter background (or Symbols both) bring the information easily. Althepal 04:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: {{tl|depends}}

message: I strongly am against the use of "but yes" and "but no" since an encyclopedia tells the facts, not whether something is good or bad. As I've said elsewhere, I would be for deleting those templates. And Ashley, the person who reverted the yes and no templates to be pale and the one who keeps pushing on adding these backwards templates to the equation is the one who created these but yes and but no templates in the first place. And ONLY 7 articles exist that use these templates! And where the templates are used, they seem to be used incorrectly. For example this comparison of media players says that it is good that GOM Player is remote controllable, but bad that iTunes is. ??? If it requires qualification, it should be No or Depends with a footnote, not "but yes" with a footnote. If anybody seconds my opinion, I would tag those templates for deletion.
Furthermore, "but yes" and "but no" templates take away the fact that green means yes and that red means no. It tries to make it so green means good and red means bad - very un-encyclopedic.
Any support on deleting those templates? Althepal 00:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do you think green means yes and red means no? It's much more common that green means "OK" and red means "warning". —Ashley Y 00:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Green means "go", red means "don't go"; one is positive and one is negative. I agree with Althepal about "but yes" and "but no". Mike92591 01:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I third the motion for deletion of "but yes" and "but no". --MuséeRouge 08:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Even though both the symbol and the colour are commonly associated with warnings, and there's no text, it's unambiguous to you that it means "salmon is not poisonous"? —Ashley Y 01:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes Mike92591 01:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes --MuséeRouge 07:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a warning book. Everybody knows that there are no warnings on eating fish: just information. X means no, not "bad". It means that the answer to the question "Is salmon poisonous?" is "Negative." How can you think that your example means that this is a warning that salmon is poisonous??! Althepal 03:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a big red "X". In the real world, big red "X"s almost always mean "warning" or "forbidden" and never "no, you're fine". Without text this is dangerously ambiguous. Your assertion that "red" always means "no" is ill-founded. —Ashley Y 01:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See the red icon with the X at the top of your internet browser window? Does that mean, "Cancel the program," or "Clicking this will crash your computer."? Althepal 04:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It means "stop", "close", "end". That's rather different from "no". —Ashley Y 04:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What a warning. Althepal 05:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: More a warning than a "no", though. —Ashley Y 05:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How is that saying "Danger" more than it is saying "Cancel"? Althepal 05:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How is it saying "No" more than it is saying "Cancel"? —Ashley Y 05:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Your example is not standard in tables, and that is not my point. My point is that X does not always mean warning. (Did you notice the name of the image of the red x?: Crystal Clear action button cancel.png - Where's the warning?)
That suggests this(in dialogue form):
A: Is salmon poisonous?
B: Don't continue to ask this question. Mike92591 19:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Delete "but yes" and "but no" anybody?

message: I understand the need for people to advertise the existence of this discussion, but putting confusing links next to these tags which appear in hundreds of articles is not the way to go.  I see that even my compromise was reverted back to the original version (with no link to this discussion).  Perhaps you should post a comment on one of the WP:VP noticeboards instead.--Konstable 02:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion advertising 

message: The yes and no templates shall have a darker background. Althepal 00:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DECISION 

message: I have made the background darker as per this discussion in a way I think the way it was before it was made lighter. But I'm not sure. Should it be like in {{|bg-green}} and {{|bg-red}}?Althepal 04:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shading 

message: Just a note to say I've added "color:black" to all table style elements, as users may have "td {color:green}" or similar in their user style sheets. --h2g2bob (talk) 00:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  color: black 

message: I've switched this template to use a /doc subpage pattern. When this template is used a lot, its important that the template use as little code as possible. Cheers. --MZMcBride 22:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Switch to /doc 

message: This template precludes having "yes" span columns (or rows).  It would be easy to support this via an optional parameter (or two), so I'm looking for feedback on the idea.  Feel free to suggest implementation ideas as well.  I'm assuming it would be done for all templates listed at :Template:Table cell templates.  Thanks.  67.101.6.75 (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanning columns (and perhaps rows) 

message: Following Wikipedia:Template documentation, shouldn't :Template:Table cell templates be moved to something like Template:Any/doc?  Thanks. 67.101.6.75 (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Documentation

message: I have changed the non-protected table cell templates to use uniform code and style. I have not yet changed the background colors to those that I am proposing in Template talk:Table cell templates. Nevertheless, the protected template , , ,  and  should probably follow suit. — Christoph Päper 12:05, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistency 

message: There's a chart on the  iPod/iPhone/iPad comparison page that gets difficult to read once the user scrolls below the headings. I'm trying to create a slightly larger border between the different products, but they won't work with  or  templates. See the table and what I am trying to do with it  in my sandbox. Chris3145 (talk) 18:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is something like this acceptable? --MZMcBride (talk) 19:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The example in documentation requires double quotes for style= — like this: style="parameter:value;" — whereas in actual practice the  template only accepts additional CSS rules without quotes. -Mardus (talk) 02:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

text: *The point being that documentation should reflect this. -Mardus (talk) 02:31, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trying to make this work with style tags 

message: Looking at html source with yes and no in place, there is as extra space before each color after Yes. See the following, which should line up, but doesn't.
No
Yes
Can this extra space (x2) be removed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.18.220 (talk) 17:41, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not quite a bug, but... 

message: Can background be an optional color. I want to be able to pick yellow for the nested use I am thinking. I have an if/else (yes / no) situations where I want to specify a "maybe". All that needs to be done is #90ff90; replaced with #90ff90; -- とある白い猫 chi? 01:01, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: I would like to propose to add "limite", aside of "partial". The services I'am currently comparing have several actors providing services with limitations, such as (limited to) "6 users max", (limited to) "10 projects max", (limited to) "512Mo", etc, while competitors are provide unlimited services. Please confirm support so I/someone can move ahead and add it. Yug (talk) 11:10, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Limite" 

message: Would be nice if this template accepted background color parameters. Not every article where this template is used or where "no" equates to something negative, or not as good. Take for instance the article Comparison_of_C_Sharp_and_Java where Unified Type System for Java is no, but that isn't necessarily a negative thing, just a difference in design, and C# and Java both may be better for different applications in that regard.
BlitzGreg (talk) 04:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. —  (t • e • c) 11:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 21 April 2014 

message: For many articles I've found a linkeable yes/no template would be useful - e.g. see the list of free and open-source Android applications or the list of Wikipedia mobile applications; in both of them yes/no could be linked to the specific site that the application can be found on (which also is a reference to the linked yes/no; note that many of such apps can not be found in the stores such as playstore and are only available on the programmer's website...).--Fixuture (talk) 19:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linkable yes? 

message: Where and when was the consensus reached to change the colour of the no template to light pink?--Twofortnights (talk) 19:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Ironically it seems that there is consensus to use the darker colour. But the light color is too pinkish and completely ruins lists especially in the astronomy department (see List_of_potentially_habitable_exoplanets) Davidbuddy9 (talk) 22:13, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No change 

message: Please add , per a nomination by   ery (talk) 21:23, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:42, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  A mistake was made; you may want to review your edit. I'm tracking it down currently. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 21:54, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  This happens when I misunderstand the syntax of , which I do from time to time.  ery (talk) 21:56, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Thanks, I was scratching my head at what the error was, and hoping it wasn't just some weird caching thing on my end. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 22:01, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: As  just mentioned, it's the newline between the two </noinclude> <noinclude> tags that needs to be fixed. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 22:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just delete the 
</noinclude>
<noinclude>
Then the new line will be in the noincludes, and it will be fixed. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 22:10, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Done by BethNaught Amortias (T)(C) 23:02, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 5 April 2018 

message: Please add , to the noinclude section at the top then change the  parameter to point to the correct day , per a nomination by   ery (talk) 01:30, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 6 April 2018 

message: what colour should be used for Template:No? Gooduserdude (talk) 16:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Description                                  	Web color	Examples of use                      	Examples of use          	WCAG level of contrast with blue links
Old color of                                 	#F99     	Regular textA typical reference link.	Unvisited link to article	
The darkest shade of red reaching WCAG AA    	#FFA4A4  	Regular text                         	Unvisited link to article	
Color User:Ftrebien proposed for             	#FAA     	Regular text                         	Unvisited link to article	
Color the chosen for  after former discussion	#FFC7C7  	Regular text                         	Unvisited link to article	
Color of                                     	#FFE3E3  	Regular text                         	Unvisited link to article	
===Survey===
* #F99, Clearer Gooduserdude (talk) 16:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

text: This is a longer example of text	and links with darker, low-contrast background
This is a longer example of text	and links with lighter, higher-contrast background
* #FAA is not too light but not too dark. Thingofme (talk) 15:08, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC on the colour of Template:No (more options) 

message: * #F99, Clearer Gooduserdude (talk) 16:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a longer example of text	and links with darker, low-contrast background
This is a longer example of text	and links with lighter, higher-contrast background
* #FAA is not too light but not too dark. Thingofme (talk) 15:08, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey