Wikia

WoWWiki

Template: Patches - new design

101,494pages on
this wiki

Forum page

Revision as of 22:46, December 8, 2010 by Raylan13 (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ←Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Forums: Index WoWWiki general Template: Patches - new design
(This is a dead topic, Please do not edit this page!)

The current design is as follows:

I proposed a new look for it and A'noob approved -- but others did not:

-- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei
| CMorph has made 8,581 contribution(s) to WoWWiki. | TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) IconSmall Gnome MaleMorphgnomeIconSmall Draenei MaleMorphdraenei 05:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

CommentsEdit

Moved from Template talk:Patches
I like it, clearer to see the global patch and its sub-patches.
Checked and Approved!
IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 18:47, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I liked the old one - I really dislike huge templates. Frowney I think the names are aesthetically nice but not very useful and terribly space consuming. People always refer to patches by their number so that made the other template really easy to use, without being forced to click "show".

I'm gonna roll back the change, and maybe we should have a vote or at least a forum. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 5:00 PM, 24 Jul 2009 (EDT)

I am okay with this version or the version I made, but try it with Tables inside template too if it work out.

So I changed the template before, because it is kind of obvious that the template isn't really well navigated. The boded number itself seems to blend into the background too easily, making it way harder to connect minor stories in Warcraft:Cinematic stories and short stories/lores in the Blizzard ?Merchandising, especially making people have little experience with wikis very hard to understand. (cf — I think the amount of articles in Help Category and Verification in regards to lores clearly shows that)

Forgot to mention, merge Client Patch, since they are in Chronological Order coincidentally, it look more neater. --Ramu50 (talk) 05:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I like the condensed version myself. User:Coobra/Sig4 05:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I just think we should use the accordion style sparingly, mostly because it's auto-folding. Internet users are scanners, and hidden material disrupts scanning. The current design isn't broken - it's neatly organized, it's not really running out of space, and adding all the patch names really is overkill. Almost no one refers to patches by name - they refer to them by number. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 8:17 AM, 25 Jul 2009 (EDT)
I'm not sure I even like this, but here's another idea I'm throwing out there, if your goal is to emphasize the major revisions. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 9:22 AM, 25 Jul 2009 (EDT)
Perhaps we could have the patch name in the tooltip, like 3.1.0? --Gengar orange 22x22Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:16 AM PST 26 Jul 2009
Ya I tried to do that but couldn't figure out how (I know it's the "title" attribute). Glad you knew something I didn't.
As a side note, do you think it would be possible in the preferences section to set the autofolding Javascript off, so these kinds of templates were always in "open" mode? I don't know how configurable the prefs are. Or is there someway I could do that with a custom skin that had Javascript in it? Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 9:53 PM, 26 Jul 2009 (EDT)
I thought the "collapsible" class made it collapsible, but the "autocollapse" class was what made it collapse itself when first rendered. I guess {{navbox}} needs to be reworked to make it easier to turn off autocollapse by default. From what I can tell you could do {{navbox|<state=nocollapse>|<...>}} to make it not autocollapse. Not exactly sure what to put in state= but "nocollapse" or "noauto" should probably work. --Gengar orange 22x22Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:57 AM PST 27 Jul 2009
I think autocollapse by default might be okay, I just dislike it personally. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 8:27 AM, 28 Jul 2009 (EDT)
I still prefer Morph's template. If find 3.1.0 a bit "messy" when placed in a middle of a line.
IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 12:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Is it any better without the highlighting?
Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 9:22 AM, 28 Jul 2009 (EDT)
I'm not sure the icons add that much... --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 15:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
I like them. --Gengar orange 22x22Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:25 PM PST 29 Jul 2009

So what do people like?

  1. Bars (|), dashes (–), or hidden groupings? Just wondering if there's some agreement on any of these items, so we could move forward.
  2. Icons, no icons?
  3. Explicit names, mouseover names (Fandy's idea), or none (patch number only)?
  4. Current formatting, or highlighting major revisions, or underlining major revisions?

I'm only opinionated against (1) hidden groupings. I have a leaning towards (1) bars, (2) icons, (3) mouseover names, (4) current formatting. (Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 6:42 PM, 29 Jul 2009 (EDT)

Morph will rule the wolrd! (collapsed template n°1)
IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 22:54, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

The version right at the top, I have to agree is just too large and spread out. But, for the version directly above this comment, I'm with Howbizr on the idea of bars, icons and mouseover names. Kirkburn  talk  contr 16:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

What about changing the colors of the major revisions, rather than just having them be bolded? Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 9:23 AM, 15 Aug 2009 (EDT)
We could use boxes around major patches instead of colors.
For some reason, I don't like the vertical bars (|). Perhaps it's because they're bright white, but I can live with it. --Gengar orange 22x22Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:48 AM PST 18 Aug 2009
How about going back to – instead of |? Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 1:26 PM, 21 Aug 2009 (EDT)
Another idea... what about doing something similar for {{mountfooter}}, and just show ones from this expansion? The top row would be the expansion, the bottom row, the patches.
Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 1:40 PM, 21 Aug 2009 (EDT)
One more thought... You could make the separators (bars or dashes) gray:

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki