Okay, no backstory-thing since I think this is a fairly simple proposal:
I think it would be useful to add view, edit and discussion links to most/all mainspace-based templates (infoboxes, notices, etc), by way of Template:Tnavbar. The usage of that template (be it mini, plain, or whatever) would be done on a case-by-case basis.
Here is a quick example (with Template:Stub):
- Edit - See here for examples
The main reason I posted this here (rather than just be bold and do it) is because it will affect a huge number of pages; very likely every page in the mainspace, and the many, many instances in other namespaces.
|Affected templates (total: 40)|
*[[Template:Infobox kingdom|Infobox kingdom]]
I'd appreciate a few users looking through the list to make sure I didn't miss any, or wrongly included some.
- Proposal summary
Add view-talk-edit links to the above templates by way of Template:Tnavbar.22:59, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
- Quicker and easier to get to the template page; e.g. to check documentation.
- Quicker and easier to get to the template discussion page; e.g. to suggest changes
- Quicker and easier to edit templates; e.g. to look at the code or fix small spelling/grammar mistakes
- Cons/Why not
- Cannot be done by a bot - as each placement is different. I'd be willing to do this.
- The links may look out of place - such examples could have the links moved or not used.
- Could increase edits to a template, maybe even vandalism.
- 18:45, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
Support as nominator.22:59, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
Neutral - Gaz, you never mentioned why it would be useful to add the Tnavbar links to these templates.
The "Tnavbar" links are used in navboxes because they always "grow" (new items are introduced into the game). Since they are being edited often (more often than non-navboxes), the links will be useful for quick editing. Without the links, it would be a two-step process: clicking the "edit this page" link, scrolling down to the end of the page ("Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page:"), and clicking the "edit" link for a particular template.
Here are several reasons why I think the Tnavbar links shouldn't be added:
- In notification templates, it distracts the user from the actual message. Even in the example given above, the links are too conspicuous.
- Most of these templates need not be updated as often as navboxes.
- With the edit link easily accessible, people might edit high-use templates without consensus. Who knows?
- People can still edit the templates using the two-step process mentioned above.
I would support adding the Tnavbar links to some templates, such as Template:Pyre ships and [[Template:TableOfSilverItems]], where there is potential of the template "growing". For the other templates, let's leave it as they are. 06:00, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
- I added a pro/con thing.
- The two-step way is all well and good, but not all users no of it (e.g. only relatively recently I noticed the list of links there). Also, there is an extra page to load in the process, possibly causing lag on some computers/connections.
- That is a point. I'll sort the list later to remove notification ones.
- The infoboxes have a lot of params so the links would probably be more often used check documentation than to edit the template.
- If its high use it would be noticed quickly and reverted (maybe using the link to get to the page?). It could also warrant protection.
- (per above)
- Thanks, 18:46, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, infoboxes... If it's for checking documentation, then only the "talk/discuss" and "view" links are needed. Also, when users want to know about parameters, they would already be in edit mode. They wouldn't know anything about parameters otherwise, as they would only be seeing the end product in view mode. When you're already editing the page, there won't be any extra page to load. [The link to the template (and documentation) and the link to edit is located at the bottom of the page in edit mode.] Only the discuss link requires an additional click.
- Infoboxes are also high-use templates. The edits can easily be reverted, but edits to high-use templates actually increases the job queue and subsequently the server workload.
- My main concern right now is where the links will be placed in each template. The links need to noticeable to any user, and at the same time not interfere with the information presented by the infobox. Striking a delicate balance between the two could be a challenge. Please show us some examples, Gaz. 19:54, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
- Notice templates removed (70 less, click here to see the removals).
- Makes sense. An adjustment needs to be made to Tnavbar to support view and discuss links only, or it can be coded without using tnavbar. Ones which list content (like [[Template:AssignmentD]] or the above examples) I think should still have the edit link (like content navboxes do), since they have more of a potential to expand.
- Yeah, you're right. I like your logic
- I had a crack at a handful of example templates (Bonuses and Item infobox, Summoning pouch infobar, and poison weapon exchange table) here. I couldn't decide which was better for the summon one, so did an extra variant (which may cause a problem on different sized windows, since its absoltely positioned rather than floated). 21:59, September 8, 2009 (UTC)
Oppose some, Support some - Some of the most used templates, like the stub, would more easily be a vandal target if spammer noobs chose to vandal the wiki. I doubt they would go find the template itself, but if the could more easily get to it, change it so that it puts random comments on the thousands of pages that use it. (did somebody already make that point? :p) for those not like it, I support.10:27, September 7, 2009 (UTC)
- In case something's messed up with them... Gone. 18:15, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
- Most of the remaining templates either
- have the potential to be expanded ([[Template:AssignmentD|1]] 2 [[Template:TableOfSilverItems|3]] [[Template:Slayer Assignments/Turael|4]]); hence get 3 links: v-d-e (view-discuss-edit)
- have many/complex parameters (all others), so it would be useful for checking documentation or suggesting changes; hence get 2 links: [view]-[talk]
- 19:19, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
Strongly Opposes - This may be a little helpful for the editor, but this wiki isn't for the editor, its for the viewer. Some1 who has not been here long may think "oh, more info on the item/whatever" they click and they get the syntax.....then boom! their brain explodes. Is this really needed to slightly increase (and i'm talking like .01% increase) productivity. Also the editor can just look at the template's page.22:32, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
And I suggest that the links should be located outside the template "box", not within...
- for templates which float right (usually infoboxes) - bottom right
- for templates which float left - bottom left
- for templates which span the entire width of the page ([[Template:Slayer Assignments/Turael]], Template:Quest details, [[Template:TableOfSilverItems]], etc.) - either bottom center/bottom left
How does that sound?06:53, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
- I like it! I changed the format in my sandbox. The quest details one was interesting, in that the links could be placed above or below the spoiler notice (actually, floating it between and to the right was most appealing to me, in that it was visible but not drawing unnecessary attention to it, but I didn't add that version).
- I wrapped each template by a property-less <div> tag (so text from outside the template doesn't bother the positioning); is that necessary? Or does the transclusion process cover that? 21:21, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think wrapping DIV tags is necesssary. Try adding "margin-top:-10px" (or "margin-top:-5px") to the links. This reduces the space between the links and the template. For "Quest details", in-between and right-aligned sounds good. 07:26, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Since the infotables are made up of individual templates, it would be unwise to add the links to each template. We should just ignore these templates. 10:36, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
Discussion closed - There does not appear to be any additional thoughts on this discussion and it seems to have come to an end, with nearly three months since the last comment. I'm considering this thread resolved and a sort of consensus reached here. --Robert Horning 20:58, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Shouldn't this be closed only after the infoboxes have been modified with the v-d-e links? While the discussion may be over, the changes have not been put into effect, and thus this discussion should NOT be archived. 08:59, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
(Re-)Closed - I have added the links to the 40 templates listed above. In future, if and/or when templates that may benefit from these links are found or created then they can be added, and in a way that follows az's design points above, and on a case-by-case basis (to see what arrangement is most aesthetically pleasing without detracting from the template's information).18:09, March 24, 2010 (UTC)
(re-)Opening - This is causing issues with left-aligned images, which are in use on most of our article pages. Compare the page before updating the template to the page after updating the template. I'm reverting the changes so they don't screw up page formatting --Aburnett (Talk) 00:52, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
- Code removed- hopefully we can fix this. Also, in case this was an isolated issue, I'm using Firefox 3.6 on Windows 7 --Aburnett (Talk) 01:22, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
- Aha. Earlier, I was adding information to this article and I couldn't figure out why the full-face image was appearing near the bottom left of the page rather than at the top left. 01:29, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how isolated it is. I'm using Firefox 3.6 on Windows Vista...and had the same problem. It very well may apply to several versions of windows/firefox. HaloTalk 15:32, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
- I use Opera (ver 10.51) and same problem. 17:14, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
Oops - My bad. At a quick glance at my base code I copypasta'd I think the problem is the
clear:left; (or right) used, I'll test it out. 14:42, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
- It was the clear. I did have a bunch of images but photobucket doesn't want to let me upload them (I'll keep trying later). For now I have the better of my attempts saved here, it seems to fix the problem. It does moved some of the table attributes out into a div, but hopefully that shouldn't be a problem. 17:14, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
Seeing as there was no extra feedback on my proposed solution I went ahead and implemented it. Only problem I spotted was when very large images were used in infoboxes it disrupted the text, such images should be resized to something smaller (add |200px or something, check before - after). Also using infoboxes one over the other caused problems, which is probably better organised on a case-by-case basis (e.g. see before - after). I'll leave this open for a short while longer for any more comments and then we can finally close it 17:46, April 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Looks good Not much more to say... Oil4 Talk 18:14, April 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I think I may have fixed the infobox problem - add
display:table;to the div (i.e.
<div style="float:right; width:33%; display:table;">). That fixed the problem for me on the example I tried. I'll add this in later unless someone has some objection. 19:28, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
- A lot (A LOT) of pages are still broken, like the "Bob the cat" page as an example.--Agamemnus 03:27, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
- I think I may have fixed the infobox problem - add
- Bueller? Any fix in sight? :\ --Agamemnus 21:59, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
Comment - After much procrastination I've added the fixes to all relevant templates. I missed out quest details since that takes up 100% of the page anyway, and log table since I'm unsure of the best placement of the links in the first place (become much of a user template anyway). Hopefully we can put this to rest now.22:57, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
- Great, I don't see any problems now. Thanks!--Agamemnus 03:47, April 28, 2010 (UTC)