Template talk:Bc
From WoWWiki
What purpose does this green dot serve? I'd like to see it go, if it has no valuable purpose. Schmidt 21:30, 10 June 2006 (EDT)
- It's gone. Very :-) --Mikk 16:45, 23 June 2006 (EDT)
Beta is not under a NDA. "Unreleased content" is NOT fair game (ie, using a model viewer to grab a boss picture that you can't get to via the client). Screenshots of stuff via the client are fine. -- Jaxdahl 01:46, 12 October 2006 (EDT)
Contents |
Protection
This template is used in many, many places. It will be protected to prevent future attempts at vandalizing this page. If you would like to make an edit to the template, propose it here first.--Hobinheim (talk · contr) 15:11, 4 January 2007 (EST)
bc vs. BC
I'm not sure its a big deal, but {{bc}} (lowercase) was supposed to be for stuff that is currently seen in the BC Beta and {{BC}} was to be used for stuff that has been confirmed to be in the released version. Should we kill {{BC}}? --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:56 PM PST 7 Jan 2006
Prevalence
So how prevalent should this tag be? Should it be on every single location, mob and npc in the expansion, or is it enough to put it on the 'highest ranking' article? For example, instead of putting the tag on every single NPC and location and item and mob in Eversong, Silvermoon and Ghostlands, we could just put it on Quel'Thalas and thus conclude that everything inside Quel'Thalas is implicitly also part of the expansion.
If it should be on every article about BC content, it might be best to have a bot to put it there as articles will keep popping up without the tag. ---- 
Varghedin talk / contribs 06:10, 20 January 2007 (EST)
- Hard to use a bot unless there is something that tells the bot its BC content. I don't like the idea of implicitness... How is someone supposed to know something is implicitly part of BC? If they knew that, we wouldn't need the tag anywhere. --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:09 PM PST 14 Feb 2007
Too many clr templates
Can someone fix this template so it works more like the old one? This template (or bc/content) wastes alot of screen space by forcing things to start above or below it and it doesn't go into the text flow like the old one did.
If someone doesn't make this change, I will do it, but let this serve as a warning that it's coming. --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:06 PM PST 14 Feb 2007
- Well you could have atleast waited for responses... I would suggest reading the talk page for the template and the village pump where it's design was discussed before hand. But i'll sum it up for you.
- It is deisgned to encompass the whole article as a banner, and not fit into the flow of text. Hence the 100% width, hence the styling, hence why thinks should and will go above or below it. The old one did not differenciate between inline (section) and global (article), that is one of the many reasons it got replaced. This new one is for articles only, not sections, not to be used inline.
- As to the positioning mentioned in your edit summaries, this was done by Kirkburn to verticle align the text and images, because if my rant's haven't been clear enough before, css is highly flawed. It was initially a float design, but the verticle alignment was naturally off, and i can tell you, in terms of playing nice in existing pages, a float would have been worse. Why? Becuase the wowbox is very poorly designed and does not play nicely with any floats around it.
- Also like to add, there was no need or justified reason to the change the colours from 3 to 6 figures. In the process, you also changed the colours, as each hex is duplicated, eg. #333 = #333333, not #303030 as you have done. --Zealtalkcontrweb 21:30, 14 February 2007 (EST)
- I understand most of your points, but then what do we do about section tags? Should this new tag always go at the top (or just below the stub)? If you make big changes and the reasoning isn't obvious (at least it wasn't to me), perhaps you should at least put some usage info in the template.
- BTW, it's just good practice to use 6-digit hex.
- I'm not criticizing anyone in particular, but if you look at the history for this template, there is almost no info on changes unless you check each diff. If I'm going to look at the rant about why there are changes to the {{bc}} template, I'm not going to look in the village pump (which I personally think is a stupid thing, but that's neither here nor there).
- In short, explain your changes minimally when you make them, not when someone like me complains. --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:52 AM PST 16 Feb 2007
- They weren't my changes, the fact i talked about them during their changes, and that talk exists on both the village pump and it's talk page does provide a logical and clear sequence of events along with the hows and whys. I fail to see your point here. But yes, of course, documentation is missing currently.
- The placement i don't know, Kirkburn seems to have decided to place it above everything except wiki templates (stubs, delete, disambig etc).
- 6-digit hex is in no way better pratice over 3-digit hex. They both provide the same result, the latter is usually done when you have determined a final colour and simply reduce the digits to shrink the amount of code. It is actually best practice to do this, as there is no valid reason to keep 6 digits when 3 provides a clear (although obviously minimal) benefit.
- And i'll just add one more point, after a long and heated discussion on IRC, i'm planning to propose several ways in which to use this template, from it's complete obolishment to it's existing use, as there are many difference opinions as to how it should be used and if it's even desired. --Zealtalkcontrweb 23:56, 16 February 2007 (EST)
Removing the bc template from various places
Please discuss here or at WoWWiki talk:Village pump#The BC template. Discussing here is preferred to me, but its all about choice (I hope). --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:31 PM 13 May 2007
