Forum:Making Maps More Massive

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Making Maps More Massive
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 14 June 2020 by KelseW.

Currently, since the implementation of Doogle Maps, the default map size per the module code was set at 300px. It has come to my attention that the policy RuneScape:Images_and_media_policy#Minimaps dictates that maps should be set at 250px, and that this policy should apply for Doogle Maps in infoboxes. The current module has been updated today to be set at 250px, in line with the policy, but I believe that Doogle Maps should be set at 300px, as it effectively lines up with the NPC infoboxes without weirdly sized internal borders.

My proposal - set Module:Map back to default at 300px, then modify the policy to permit Doogle Maps to be set at 300px instead of being set at 250px.

Examples of the two pixel size alternatives in use in an NPC infobox are at User:Aescopalus/Sandbox

Discussion[edit source]

Support - Smithing.pngAescopalus talkCrafting.png 17:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't think the minimap needs to be any larger. I feel that making them larger makes the minimap the main object of the infobox rather than the other information. Lava hawk.png BlackHawk (Talk)    17:28, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Support - After seeing the discussions around this and looking at the demos a little more I've been swayed. Lava hawk.png BlackHawk (Talk)    06:47, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Support - There's already a precedent/de facto standard for using the entire infobox width to display large header images (e.g. for infobox event; see Mental Health Awareness Week), so doing something similar near the bottom for maps wouldn't be out of place. If the increased map size was a concern for areas outside the infobox where there are several maps used in succession (example: Shop assistant#Locations, perhaps it would make sense to continue using the reduced dimensions there. And although the various RS wikis aren't meant to be uniform in appearance, RSW certainly seems to be the odd duck out: Cook (Lumbridge) vs. osrsw:Cook (Lumbridge) vs. classicrsw:Cook. MrDew (talk) 17:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Support - ye Choose OptionTalk-to MitcheII Slayer of Imps (skill: 2,685). . . . . . . . . . real life easter egg, :wowee: don't tell anyone though! Talk-to MitcheII Slayer of Imps (skill: 2,685) 02:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Support - IIRC this policy is from back before infoboxes were standardized to 300px. I am having a hard time seeing the downside here. ʞooɔ 06:53, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Support - Velhart2 (talk) 20:09, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Support I think it would look better Mejrs (talk) 20:23, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Support Allows for more context around the specified point which helps users. -- Talk pageSevto     21:34, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Closed - There is a consensus for allowing Doogle maps to be 300px rather than the traditional 250px. Talk-to Kelsey 03:21, 14 June 2020 (UTC)