Forum:Change to some infoboxes

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Change to some infoboxes
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 28 July 2011 by Thebrains222.

I'd like to address a small issue on some articles. That is, slightly disrupted text due to image interference. To clarify that, my simply proposal:

As inventory images are small, I think that we should add detailed item images to the infobox (leaving miscellaneous images, such as chatheads with the item) where the inventory ican currently is, moving the inventory icon to a new line in the infobox, preferably right under the detailed item image. Why? It would look better than having a detailed item image move a paragraph of the text to the right (which looks even stranger if there's a chathead under it, which also moves some text, but not evenly (example)), especially if there are multiple images there. The infobox will become slightly longer, but I don't think that matters. For items that do not have a detailed image, we simply leave the infoboxes the way they are, removing the inventory icon line and adding the inventory icon to the detailed image box in the infobox (if the changes are embedded), if that makes sense. This applies for the following types of articles:

  • Item with detailed image
  • Furniture
  • Dungeon/Oubliette guard
  • Slayer monster
  • Farming plants
  • Perhaps something I'm missing

So, summarised: Move the detailed item/monster/furniture/etc. image to the inventory/skill guide icon space in the infobox and create an extra line for the icon.

Discussion

Support - Discuss away! User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 10:52, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Would look weird, imo. Ts4kNfA.png 11:20, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Based on this, it looks rather bad. 222 talk 11:24, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I meant to add the text "Icon", like "Members only? - Yes" User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 11:32, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose (why are we doing bullets?) I just think it looks bad. Not aesthetically pleasing at all. Besides, it shifts down infoboxes that are already starved for space. Having a detailed/chat head image in the corner is sort of a hallmark of our design...it breaks up the monotony of the text, and changing that just seems silly. I do not think that the shifting of text, even when there are multiple images, is as big of a problem as you claim it is. ʞooɔ 11:27, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Doesn't look good at all. Having one nice inventory image under a bigger, off-centered detailed image is just bleh. I like our standard of having detailed images to the left. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 15:54, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Support - I like the look of it. xScoobsx Talk Contribs 17:28, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - The images are far more grabbing of attention than the tiny inventory icons, and it looks very nice. But there's one problem- not all items can have detailed images, creating too much inconsistency. (davelopo) 20:55, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Maybe if we keep the item image where it is (at the top of the infobox), and just create a new line at the bottom of the infobox for the full detailed image? White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 03:07, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

On some computer, one might have to scroll a bit down to see it. Some people don't do that and as such wouldn't see the image. ~~
I don't think it's many people's priority to see the detailed image of something. They could always just scroll down a bit. If they're too lazy to... well, then, too bad. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 17:22, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

Nou - I like the idea, but just as Cook said, it does look bad. I understand what you mean by this, but it wold destroy the structure of the page, and it is much simpler/easier and better looking as it is now, and I really don't see any need for something like this - and a change to over 200 pages just based on your personal preference, in my opinion, is out of the question. Adam SavageTalk 03:40, July 5, 2011 (UTC)

Just an FYI, it would be 3,708 pages. ;3= sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 03:42, July 5, 2011 (UTC)
Even more. <3 User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 05:31, July 5, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - The detailed image catches the eye and compels them to read what is next to it. User:Exor Solieve 03:43, July 5, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral - I can't really see the difference I might need to find some details on this before i can have a proper say. I need 2 same pages but one with the proposed idea. Under sandbox xD. Coaster4321 Talk # Sign GG 23:34, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

This is the proposed idea. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 02:35, July 16, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - It is not aesthetically pleasing, and it does not look interesting to Smithing (talk | contribs) 03:22, July 18, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - The suggested changes will not be implemented. 222 talk 06:51, July 28, 2011 (UTC)