Template talk:Fork

Why does this template: -- Nx  / talk 19:17, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Put a huge banner before the content the reader is actually interested in?
 * Put two lines of irrelevant text before the content the reader is actually interested in?
 * From the edit history, I'd say it's because Human says so. Totnesmartin (talk) 19:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It's always bothered me. But as it's rarely used, it's never been a high priority. It's definitely worth fixing up a little. The thing is, we don't have as many articles as WP so we don't have large disambiguation pages, they tend to have about two or three only. 20:00, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Which makes the overhead even more jarring. -- Nx  / talk 20:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've taken out the stale goat pilaf stuff & replaced it with a functional opener.  The box part could probably do with improving too, but I think there should be something there to identify it as a fork & make the point about avoiding links to it.   20:41, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * How does it look now?  20:46, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good from here. Totnesmartin (talk) 12:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not really supposed to be on content pages, so the issue of it being above content is moot. Also, yeah, don't we only have like two of these?  18:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No it's not moot. The content in this case is the article I was looking for, which I can get to via one of the links. Which was preceded by the goat nonsense. Say I search for Mass. What do I see (with the old template)? "Perhaps you were looking for goat" No stupid wiki, if I was, I would've typed goat, not mass. -- Nx  / talk 16:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, how about using messagebox, and digging up an image of a fork? 18:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * IMHO an image would be too distracting, but let's try it. -- Nx  / talk 16:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

take your pick or find a better image. -- Nx  / talk 18:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If it were totally up to me, I'd randomise it. But the last looks best to me. 18:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * What about something like this (but a bit less shit)?  18:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I prefer just a fork. It's cleaner and simpler. -- Nx  / talk 19:01, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I like the first three and the fifth ones, yeah, let's randomize them? 22:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * How about using something like this:ForkInRoad.svg 04:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Toast FTW! 04:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes.  07:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

07:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Make it so, Number One. -- Nx  / talk 00:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not a number, I am a free man! I copied it over. 00:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)