Forum:Hey, bud! How’s it growing?
Given that we are gathering farming plant images, I have the following 3 proposals:
Proposal 1[edit source]
With the current project to add scenery pages to the wiki we should be documenting all versions of each object. Because of this we should update the infobox to use the newwhich allows us to add all versions of the plant. This will include healthy, watered, diseased and dead.
Proposal 2[edit source]
We change the plant images to consist of just a single plant object rather than the whole patch. The reason for this is that it looks much cleaner, easily made transparent, and can also be gathered from the cache which makes obtaining and maintaining these images much more managable. We also would not have to reply on OSWF tasks to obtain these.
Proposal 3[edit source]
With the ability to obtain images for each version of a plant, these can be easily displayed in a simple table which expands on the existing healthy plant images.
13:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Support - I do like this. I have always looked at the plants and thought "What use is the plot being in the picture?" and its good to see someone feels the same way. The main focus should be on the plant itself, not the plot it's in. In the end I can really see this being a benefit and highly recommend it gets added. Kosmiklove (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Support - Proposal 1: I think the use of the multi infobox looks very clean and easy to get the information that you want from it. One thing I would suggest is to have the default option on the multi infobox display the grown plant07:58, 17 July 2021 (UTC).
- The default option is set to the grown plant, however because I've linked to a section on the page for the demo it's overriding that. You can see here for it working with the grown plant as the default. 11:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Support 2, Comment 3, Comment 1:
- Proposal 2 - I think this is an excellent idea and showcases the actual models of the plants better instead of combining it with the model of the patch, which has its own dedicated article.
- Proposal 3 - This table seems like it would no longer be necessary as you are presenting it if some variantion of proposals 1 and 2 are implemented. Wouldn't this be repetitive with the infobox images?
- Proposal 1 - Two comments on this one.
- In general, the intent of the Multi Infobox template was to combine multiple types of infoboxes into a swap (specifically limited in RSW to pets only currently per the template documentation). This usage of the template does not seem to be necessary to me, as each one of the substages that are listed in the multibox could be part of a single drop down in the scenery template. Currently, the example you have for the old version of potatoes doesn't do this (and also appears to be a little broken in your sandbox), but it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison of what the old template would look like if granularity of scenery objects were implemented there as well, instead of just in the multi-version.
- Visually, there are three art styles that end up being used when using a multi-box with a switch box nested inside of it, which is visually jarring (see  for what I mean). If Proposal 1 passes, I would request that the gradient background for the switch boxes be set to match the solid, squared off backgrounds of infobox section headers.
20:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Support all - I have always envied the osrs' wikis presentation on these pages. Feels like all the proposals would be a big improvement on our current pages. I think having both #1 and #3 is necessary for infobox tracking of missing images and easy visual comparison for users. I'm glad you have found a way to get better plant images too, though I would like to give a massive thanks to the new editors who have been working hard to capture images in-game lately!10:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Support 3, Neutral 2, Comment 1 - I like the table of images, makes sense if we're going to have all of them, and I like them being in a visible table rather than just in the infobox. For 1, I'm still not a fan of the nested switches (especially since switching by anchor and syncing does not work) but I also wouldn't add 20ish versions to the same dropdown. Since images will be on the page anyways, and assuming the versions are the outer ones (growing, watered, diseased, dead) the only other (visible) difference is examine, maybe just make the examine a (numbered?) list? (Note for advanced peeps, we can do the same with id, and still set individual smw objects if we want/need too).11:51, 19 July 2021 (UTC)