Template talk:Ambox/Archive 11

message: They're too similar. It used to be that I could tell what they were at a glance but now I have to read them to find out what they're about. Sometimes non-conformity is better, you know? 86.137.127.139 16:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And they're too easy to ignore. I don't know, my eye just scrolls past them without even noticing they're there. I liked the old, ugly ones. They got my attention. 86.137.127.139 16:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree somewhat with your point. Making the article messageboxes look nice and uniform shouldn't be a big concern, especially if it might interfere with usability. Personally I find the look too cheery and festive which strikes me as out of sync with their purpose. That said they may just take some getting used to. Cheers. —dv82matt 11:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Standardization of some sort was necessary, though. Before, people would often place redundant or incorrect tags on pages just because they were so disorganized. This helps with that problem somewhat. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 15:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Adding distinctive icons to more of them should help indentifying them at a glance.  Unfortunately, some people seem to be objecting to icons on the grounds that "they're for birds and illiterates" (paraphrased, can't remember exact wording) and that people should just read the text.  Some of the same people seem to object to the "kindergarten colors" in the sidebars too.  —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If we could make the icons a little smaller, I'd be happier with them ;) They're useful, but they often don't need to be as large as they are. --Quiddity 18:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the icons, as they are now, seem a little too quirky and fun for what should. I'd like to make a batch of smaller (around 24px), simpler and less obtrusive icons for wikipedia, but I'm worried that such an undertaking might be rather fruitless in the face of hundreds of picky editors. Should I do a test run in an SVG file and post it here? —Down10 TACO 06:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see the last few posts in the thread below at #Unity of design. I'd love to see some new icons made available, and draft/sketch examples would be great. This would indeed be a possibly contentious undertaking, and would need a separate page/project to work at (Make a subpage at Wikipedia:Icons perhaps). Wikipedia:Graphic Lab might be able to help, too. --Quiddity 18:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  They look better, but 

message: thumb
*Note: This also creates vertical scroll bar. -Rocket000 06:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, didn't realize that. Thank you for fixing it, and thank you for fixing this page ;) -Rocket000 15:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another issue 

message: To avoid this:
Res ip sur lociter Res ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociterRes ip sur lociter
This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help [ improve this article] by adding citations to reliable sources.Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.
Rich Farmbrough, 11:22 29 September 2007 (GMT).
:Please  see discussion here: Template talk:Ambox#New suggestion. Several ideas are still under discussion. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 01:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clear both at top of stack as well as bottom? 

message: Theoritically(Aesthetics) colors should be distributed throughout the area. So bar on right and image on left or vice versa would be better.
	This article documents a current event.  Information may change rapidly as the event progresses.
how does it look? or
This article documents a current event.  Information may change rapidly as the event progresses.	
Either of this would certainly look good than currently "imbalanced" layout. Thanks. Lara_bran 15:09, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This was discussed earlier: Wikipedia_talk:Article message boxes/Archive 1#Single left bar.3B or two bars.2C one each side.3F.  I like thin bars on either side, but most of the respondents liked a single bar.--Father Goose 20:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can customize your own layout to the right-border or double-border by copying the relevant ambox content from MediaWiki:Common.css to Special:Mypage/monobook.css and changing the CSS as you see fit - mostly changing "border-left 10px solid #xxxxxx" to "border-right 5px solid #xxxxxx; border-left 10px solid #xxxxxx". There's a consensus already that the left-bar design is generally good. Nihiltres(t.l) 21:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Single bar is fine, but bar and image on same side will make layout highly imbalanced(See :Category:Visual arts theory). Thanks. Lara_bran 04:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks User:Nihiltres, but i hardly browse articles when logged in, i mean my pc keeps changing. Lara_bran 04:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  bar and image in opposite sides. 

message: I still notice various older, more general cleanup tags that have not had their formatting standardized nor the color system introduced. I propose that we gather them and fix them up so that all cleanup tags will be standardized. Judgesurreal777 21:52, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let us know which ones we missed.  Some have escaped notice by not being listed at WP:TM.  Others are talk page notices, and follow the standard "talk page" style.--Father Goose 22:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And let me know where your finding these (for my little project). Thanks. Rocket000 04:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do! Judgesurreal777 14:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! Rocket000 21:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Just two sections below i have given 2 templates which should be incorporated into ambox. Please give a look, thanks. Lara_bran 16:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorporating the rest 

message: Two templates that appear in the middle of the article yet to be amboxed. Since these 2 messages appear not in bottom i would support converting them to ambox. But standard size ambox would be too big, one line text message would be ideal. Two template talks are: Template_talk:Expand_list#proposal and Template_talk:Sectstub#ambox. Proposed versions are:
and
You can see current version. I think text message should be left unaltered. Thanks. Lara_bran 04:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the expand section one I think of as a "section stub", and stubs aren't amboxed. If you do make that one an ambox, though, I would make it the same width as the trivia one. As for the list one, that goes on like every list, and a lot of the times those lists will never be complete. I would rather have more subtle message like we have now. Rocket000 05:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree "stubs aren't amboxed". But this is not exactly one of the 100s of stub templates that appear at bottom of the article. These appear in the middle of the article, to distinguish it from the article text, a box is necessary. These(above) would be the subtlest possible solution, but the messages MUST be distinguished from the article text by a box. Thanks. Lara_bran 05:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand what you mean, but there doesn't seem to be any consensus over the expansion templates. We have  (stub-style) and  (ambox-style), because people can't agree which to use. In addition we have  (ambox-style) which could be used for either sections or articles. So you can have your pick. I still would prefer keeping  the way it is, to match  and . Rocket000 06:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, so these are not just 2 templates. But my point had been that which are not related to article content should be boxed. I have brought to community notice, bid bye now. Thanks. Lara_bran 08:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  two templates to ambox 

message: Style and content templates are not really very important to someone who is just using the encyclopedia as a reference, yet with colour and icon they tend to stand out even more than the text they are moaning about.
They get in the way of reading the articles. Unlike the other varieties they tend to be scattered through an article. 
There are those who say they should be removed altogether - rather I think they should merely be made much less noticable. Such pages tend to be categorized so there's no real issue of losing the information conveyed. Color and icons and graphics should be used mainly for enhancing the article content, not the editorial annotations.  Quirkie 20:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See my reply at the Village pump thread: Wikipedia:Village pump %28proposals%29#Quieter cleanup style templates. --Quiddity 07:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Downplay style and content templates. 

message: I found this sight from the notices link on the Community bulletin board. So this is where all the changes have been happening. You are doing a great job. Keep up the good work. -- Jreferee   t/c 07:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two thumbs up 

message: I uploaded a new image, :Image:Verify-icon.png for use on cleanup templates.
This is one example:
I like the new ambox style, it's excellent!! --Solumeiras talk 16:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I think that there's a general consensus that the red-border ambox should be exclusive to deletion-related issues, content issues are orange, cleanup is yellow, and expansion tags, notices (e.g. current event), and general templates are blue. This is a standardization issue, after all. :) Nihiltres(t.l) 21:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

text: *Very true, Nihiltres... but what I'm suggesting is we add a third colour, maybe green (like my username is in my signature above!) - and this one could be used for some other use - any ideas for this one?? --Solumeiras talk 21:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh no, not the green again. lol. Rocket000 22:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Default icon size is 40px. Do you have an SVG version?  — Edokter • Talk •  21:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup template suggestions 

message: For those of you interested, a similar standardization project is starting up for category message boxes. Your input would be greatly appreciated at Wikipedia:Category message boxes. Cheers, Rocket000 06:29, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category message boxes 

message: :Template:Backlog hasn't been unified. -Halo 21:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is not an article message.  — Edokter • Talk •  21:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but what about all the  and the like?  Not all of them have been standardized yet... ~user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 01:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  is used in article space (as well as all others).  As far as I can tell,  only goes in the Wikipedia: namespace.  But there are discussions to standardize other namespaces underway right now.--Father Goose 03:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  is used in the category namespace too. But I agree that it shouldn't be ambox'd Rocket000 03:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

text: That one would be better off just being deleted. Rocket000 23:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've nominated it for deletion. szyslak 09:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  You missed one 

message: There is discussion of adding an icon for the template unreferenced: Template_talk:Unreferenced#Icon_in_the_template. I gather that it's been discussed regularly in the past, and in different locations. I'd suggest discussing it there, or post there why you don't think it should be discussed there. :-) -Agyle 03:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template unreferenced, revisited 

message: , used in the Wikipedia: namespace, is another good candidate for standardization. -- The Anome 12:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That already conforms to the standard as used in the rest of the templates listed at Wikipedia:Template messages/Wikipedia namespace. --Quiddity 18:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  (edit conflict) That's the Wikipedia namespace. Unless my eyes deceive me, the title of this page is "Article message boxes". Nihiltres(t.l) 18:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Template:Essay]] 

message: I think tint without border looks hip.
Hardcoded box.
Hardcoded box.
Current gray border with gray tint looks bad, and to distinguish infobox and bordered images from amb's, colored tint would be better than gray. Other-being-sep (talk) 06:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The standard objection is that some people (especially those with impaired color vision) find colored backgrounds extremely hard to read.  Check the archives of this talk page.  —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 13:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another thing, I have a PC and a Mac, and you cannot see the tint at all on the mac.-- Penubag  00:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tint, but without border 

message: I just happened to look at the French wiki and found that they have implemented a very similar template system to ours.  violet/riga (t) 01:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  French 

message: What is Rainbowflage?
It is a color pattern that projects positive frequency's from earth to the universe.
Camouflage is Tactical and deceptive.
Rainbowflage symbolizes:Truth,courage,and love.
Created By:Artist Blake 2002, on the Big island of Hawaii.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.100.221 (talk) 09:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ...and now for something completely different: my signature utilising two different shades of green. -- Reaper  X 21:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rainbowflage instead of Camouflage. 

message: See :Template:Bio-context. It's not widely used, so it must have simply been overlooked when the templates were being upgraded, but it should be standardised to appear the same as the rest. Terraxos (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

text: szyslak 03:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-standardised template discovered 

message: Template:Alphabetize -- penubag  02:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: szyslak 03:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: another

message: Is it possible to have the templates institute a buffer underneath the bottom, only providing there are no  templates below it?  This may be impossible, and while I really and supported the new standardization, I just get annoyed by the look of article message boxes abutting the tops of infoboxes.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 19:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Alternatively, adding a 2-4 pixel margin-top for all infoboxes. Adding .infobox {margin-top:4px;} to my monobook.css temporarily solves the abutment issue. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

text: It could be done using javascript, as it involves changing a CSS property of the bottom box.  — Edokter • Talk •  21:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to request that margin-top:5em be added to the infobox class in mediawiki:common.css.  It cramps things like disambig hatnotes as well.--Father Goose (talk) 00:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Awesome, let us know how it goes.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 01:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done already. Clear caches :) -- Quiddity (talk) 02:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  buffer? 

message: :From the (in)famous creator of the , here comes a new meta-template:
I have coded up a solution for the message boxes that are used on several types of pages. Take a look at the  template. It helps other templates detect what type of page they are on, so they can change appearance. And I think I have managed to make it really easy to use.
If you also need to detect category pages then there is a template for that too: .
Disclaimer: The first sentence above is a joke. The ambox was very much a teamwork and a lot of people worked hard in this project. 
--David Göthberg (talk) 03:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main talk other 

message: Please comment on a new article space template at TfD Images needed. GregManninLB (talk) 08:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images needed template in article space 

message: To standardise the look of message boxes in image space and category space we have now coded up some suggestions. See the new meta-templates  and  and discuss the design for them at their talk pages.
I will announce this standardisation effort in the appropriate places here at Wikipedia during the next few days. 
--David Göthberg (talk) 12:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Message box standardisation 

message: Wikipedia:Words to avoid is tagged with , but it does not appear on the page as it is supposed to be; it has a thicker-than-normal grey border all around and no sidebar, and the lettering is smaller. In the source, the code is a simple , and I wonder what could be responsible for this change in appearance. Waltham, The Duke of 07:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That template, or actually , is set up to have a different appearance in different namespaces.  In articles it adopts the  style, on talk pages it follows the standard "coffeeroll" color scheme, and in other namespaces it looks the way you see on the page you linked to.  The point is that you can use the same template on any page, and it will adapt itself to the specific visual style used in each namespace.  —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 07:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I kind of knew that already, but it escaped me that the page in question was in the project namespace. I'll try to be more careful in the future, but I promise nothing. :-) Anyway, thanks. Waltham, The Duke of 08:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  
Mysterious
 change in appearance 

message: Last summer we deployed  for article message boxes and some weeks ago we deployed  and  for image page and category page message boxes. 
Now we have coded up the  for talk pages and the  for all other types of pages such as "Wikipedia:" pages. This means all the namespaces are covered. Everyone is invited to take a look at the new boxes and have a say at their talk pages. 
--David Göthberg (talk) 12:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Message box standardisation, all namespaces 

message: was created on 9 September 2007 and probably escaped the standardization effort because it is not categorized. It is similar to , with the only difference in text being that the former refers to "the lead section" and the latter refers to "this section".  Since the "disputed-lead" template is only used in one article, perhaps a better solution would change it to a redirect. -- Zyxw (talk) 18:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Endorse.  — Edokter • Talk •  00:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just updated  to the new style. It uses the same format and text as , but replaces the word "article" with "lead section". I did this instead of using a redirect after noticing a similar template named  which is only used in two articles, yet survived a WP:TFD nomination (archived here). -- Zyxw (talk) 05:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article message box needing standardization or merging 

message: As illustrated in the foregoing examples, PNGs developed from :Image:Ambox warning orange.svg (for an updated Image:Ambox content.png) and :Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg (for an updated Image:Ambox style) will require MOVEs of existing Images, which I still consider useful.  Should both exclamation-triangle Ambox ID images be adopted, recommend the following MOVEs for the pre-existing Images:
*:Image:Ambox content.png -> :Image:Ambox alert.png, as the circle-exclamation is good for Notices of needful items less serious than Deletion, Content or Style Issues.
*:Image:Ambox style.png -> :Image:Ambox cleanup.png, as the broom is an instant-ID cleanup indicator.
- B. C. Schmerker (talk) 18:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Contingency MOVEs for existing Images supplanted

message: I was asked to solve a problem with the disambig and set index boxes. (There are a whole bunch of them.) And while solving that problem I realised it would be better if they used a single meta-template. And they have pretty much the same needs as the other mboxes. So I made the  which works like the other mboxes but looks like a disambig or set index box.
--David Göthberg (talk) 02:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Now we have a dmbox too