Template talk:Ambox/Archive 7

message: I'm not sure where we'll be going with all this, but look at all the awesome ideas coming in! Even if some of them don't work for the article templates, I'm going to be snagging many of these color themes and styles for other uses. A lot of great stuff can come out of a good 'ol style-fight! -- Ned Scott 20:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many many great ideas 

message: The  template has been modified for a narrower width than the other tags. While it's supposed to be put in sections instead of on top of the article, this may merit further discussion. See Template talk:Trivia#Width/date. szyslak 23:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Custom width for {{[[Template:Trivia|trivia]]}}? 

message: e.g. NATO bombing of the Radio Television of Serbia headquarters. Template goes over infobox, shouldn't do that. Can this be fixed, or is this just inevitable? User:Krator (t c) 22:48, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge tags should be at the very top. I've moved it there. --Quiddity 22:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, any message templates should be at the top (they are not part of the article proper, should only be temporary), followed by any dablink templates (again not part of the article proper, but long term), then the infobox and the intro (start of the article proper). Hope that makes sense, and I have ordered the page accordingly. mattbr 23:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any way to stop these templates 'sticking' to infoboxes? Examples: House music, Euro-Mir. I've noticed a lot of 'current event' articles linked to from the main page have been using line breaks, but that's not acceptable to have to alter every article. Seaserpent85Talk 00:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a break () after the template in House music and it fixed it. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 00:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But that's not my point - these templates have been suddenly rolled out across the whole of Wikipedia. It would be a million times easier to modify the templates rather than every single article in which they are included surely? Seaserpent85Talk 00:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We could just put  at the bottom of the ambox template. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't that break the stacking? --Quiddity 07:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I added a  tag above that section. It isn't a pretty fix, but it works for now. Perhaps some coding for "small left" alignment? -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 06:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Float issue 

message: It's not this bad for me, but when I make it like this, I have to get close up to the screen or I can't read it all.  ←BenB4 18:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, people with severely low vision will have difficulty reading any part of Wikipedia. Badagnani 19:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  :(  Those of us with moderately low vision have difficulty with the shaded backgrounds and no problem with white backgrounds. ←BenB4 20:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

text: This argument would make sense if the templates would include more text, but it's mostly short and static. If you had such bad vision that you couldn't read it, you'd have to use some sort of other accessibility aids anyway. Also, not all templates use this particular blue shade, the others are lighter. Reinistalk 19:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What does the amount of text have to so with it?  Hard to read is hard to read.  Are you saying that I should just grin and bear it to satisfy your unsourced sense of aesthetics? ←BenB4 20:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My what?… Anyway, it's not that hard to read, there's very little of it, not all templates use that color, and if it's really so bad, it can always be made lighter. Reinistalk 21:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Above you say that you are making "rational arguments," but you have raised objections based on your own personal preferences alone, and not on any respected graphic design source (you haven't cited anything but a google search.)  I am very much in favor of making the background as light as it is in the  now, and I have an objective reason for it.  Do you have any source which agrees with your repeated preferences? ←BenB4 21:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Try this source as a starting point. Tyrenius 04:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It says, "Successful design incorporates the use of the principles and elements to serve the designer's purpose and visual goals. There is no hard and fast rule for their use - it is directed by intent. The designer's purpose drives the decisions made to achieve appropriate scale and good proportion, as well as the degree of harmony between all the elements achieved through the sensitive balance of variety and unity." ←BenB4 04:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the pastel background looks like with low vision 

message: This page is clearly about tags designed to be placed at the top of an article (or section). However, that is a fraction of the templates used in article space; there are all the stub ones for a start. I think that this page should be moved to a more appropriate location, unless a broader discussion of all article templates is to be brought into this page.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd agree with that - it's too ambiguous as it stands.  violet/riga (t) 20:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We will need an admin to do it since someone went ahead and pressed the full protect button. :|  FunPika 21:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That won't be a problem.  We need to come up with a name first though.  violet/riga (t) 21:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Article message boxes? ←BenB4 21:49, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:AMB That sounds good. FunPika 21:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Sounds good to me too. -- Visviva 12:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Wikipedia:Article message boxes is a very good name. --David Göthberg 14:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location/scope of this