Forum:Deletion templates revamp/Archive1

Go to User:Nx/sandbox2.

Aside from {{messagebox}}-ifying them, I made some coding fixes and made the wording and formatting more consistent.

Add your opinion below:

• Warning (triangle) icon or error (octagonal) icon?
• Alternative icons:
  • delete key
  • trash can
  • paper shredder
• Black or white background?
• Brain or no brain (or only on Mission template)?
• Something else?
• Leave them alone (the "Why are you ruining our wiki?" option)

-- Nx / talk 22:07, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I like our traditional black background for these, I have no real opinion on the icon used. Don't think any need the brain. ħuman 22:23, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the mission template is grey, and the speedy template used to be red with black text, then crimson with white text. -- Nx / talk 09:36, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The speedy template isn't used & shouldn't be used. IMO, we should just get rid of it. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 10:30, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

No warning triangles or octagons. They make us look like a Wikipedia clone. PS. Why are you ruining our wiki? Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 10:48, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia's deletion templates don't have icons. -- Nx / talk 11:40, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

But most of its other message templates do. These make our templates look like the style of Wikipedia, which I don't think we should be going for. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:47, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

They're not going to look less like the style of Wikipedia if we remove the icons. -- Nx / talk 12:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

That's a spectacularly weak argument. Does this look like the style of Wikipedia? They only look like WP message boxes now because you've made them that way. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 12:07, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Note that I used the word less. The template you linked to has this in common with WP's delete template:

• The text is in a box that's narrower than the content area
• It doesn't have an icon.

The current delete template has this in common with WP's delete template:

• The text is in a box that's narrower than the content area
• The text is left-aligned
• It doesn't have an icon

-- Nx / talk 12:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

May I add that they are both on a wiki, that is how they are most similar. - π 12:15, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia's templates were built by geeks with no life, and no sense of style. Also no sense of making it so regular folks could improve them. We're headed there fast, IMO. Use messagebox sparingly. And don't fuck up all our other templates which people worked hard to make. ħuman 05:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Because regular folks also regularly improve MediaWiki, right? Sorry Human, but your argument is weak. Instead of having to reinvent the wheel every time (usually coded like a drunk), or copying some other crappy coding, you have a template that makes it easy to create a message box. (The userbox template would be another good example, but the parameters need to be simplified). It's not just about visual consistency. -- Nx / talk 09:36, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Nx, the best of the public can make a far better template than the wiki experts. - π 09:43, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is the best of the public. -- Nx / talk 09:52, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

No, it is a lynch mob. The best of the public consists only of the people we wish to listen to. - π 09:55, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Can we borrow another red icon from wikicommons? - π 11:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Which ones? -- Nx / talk 11:40, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I just want icons to look at for no reason. - π 12:14, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I suggest using a picture of a delete key on the delete template instead of an icon, like this one. I'm trying to find a better version. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete key would be nice for it. Tell you what, remind me and when I get back home after the holidays I'll fire up Photoshop or Illustrator and make a cool looking, almost cartoony one, perhaps a fat finger ready to press it or something. And perhaps if people like it and agree, I can start a bit of a project to make RW specific icons in the same way. ^gnostic 00:20, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I like that idea. ħuman 04:59, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Opening up the discussion

The point I'm driving at with my comments in the section above is this: we should be discussing the question of what should templates at RationalWiki look like? as an open question without prior assumptions. I find it very irritating that we're only being asked for feedback on the minutiae of black versus white, triangles versus octagons, etc.

Personally, I don't like most of what has happened to the templates later. I much prefer templates that are individual and quirky-looking, like this or even this. Different sizes, shapes & colours are fine by me. The templates that follow a fixed pattern, especially with dull icons like warning triangles, are dreary and easy to ignore. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 12:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

That goat template should be taken out and shot. What does it even do besides take up a lot of space? - π 12:44, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

IMHO the current ones are fugly (that counts as constructive criticism around here). Anyway, I've reverted the delete template to its pre-messagebox state, so your can vote for "Leave them alone" above. Do we also want to discuss the copyright templates again? Because if we do, we need a new thread for that. -- Nx / talk 12:52, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

IMRO there is too much, "I can only code like shit, don't code better than me" about this whole template business. - π 12:55, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I can copy anything you can write, or that Nx can write - as long as you work "in the wiki" and not on the server (and write coherent instructions). Here's my complaint: "I can code like a motherfucker and out-code you (but I suck at getting consensus and doing a decent job of page layout)". ħuman 05:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

And your complaint is usually "I don't understand it, so it has to go" (remind you of someone?) -- Nx / talk 09:46, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Weaseloid's argument that we should not look like a WP clone has merit. But I don't think the solution is that we should look like crap. -- Nx / talk 13:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

So we need to find the middle ground between those two possibilities. I suggest scrapping functional icons in favour of pictures or at least fun alternatives (like smileys in some cases, but not on every template) would be one way to do this. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. The Weasel is very right. The idea that all our templates should look the same is very weak, and unsupported by any clear argument. The idea that our site should have a "personality" and have a lot of quirky features is at least supported by our entire history, and the attitude of many/most of our contributors.^{[citation needed]} ħuman 04:59, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was just laziness/not knowing how to do it/fear from the wrath of Human, God King of the Wiki. -- Nx / talk 09:36, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Really what we probably "need" are two general classes of templates - a bunch of messageboxy ones that are, I dunno, "technical" announcements, and a bunch of quirky, varying ones that are probably sillier in intent or content. For instance, I think we'd lose a lot of style if we put all the "WP", "CP", "stub", "navbox", etc. templates into messagebox format. But most of the "article header" type ones probably benefit from sharing a similar appearance. ħuman 23:33, 26 December 2009 (UTC)