Template talk:About

From GodWiki
Revision as of 21:04, 16 November 2019 by Djonni (talk | contribs) (No problem! :))
Jump to: navigation, search

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Template:About page.

  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • No personal attacks
  • Do not bite the newcomers
  • Respond in a mature manner
  • Be welcoming
  • Maintain civility at all times

Hatnote not hatting?

From what I understand from both the name and the documentation, a hatnote is supposed to be at the top of the page, just below the title I guess. I forgot to check on my computer, but at the moment on phone the hatnote appear below the infobox. Is this intended or is this something to fix? --WardPhoenix (talk) 00:05, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice this problem existed. It seems to be a wrapping issue. Since the template call is beneath the infobox, and the infobox is floated, the hatnote appears to the left of the infobox when there is enough space to render it there, otherwise, it appears beneath the infobox (as that's where the element physically is in the document)
The only problem with this is that the infobox templates potentially call the missing image hatnote.
There are three places the about/for hatnote could go:
  1. above stub/infoxbox, where it would always be at the top of the page (above the other hatnotes).
  2. above infobox, but below stub. This would make it so the hatnote is *always* above infobox, but in the case that infobox calls the missing image template, the about/for hatnote would get sandwiched between two other hatnotes. (or be above a hatnote, if stub isn't present, which is probably unlikely, by nature of when stub is there)
  3. below infobox/stub (as I have been placing it). This follows the pattern I described above: on mobile layouts (especially phones in portrait), the hatnote will render below the infobox, and on desktop or with sufficient width, it'll appear inline with the infobox, below the stub/missing image hatnotes.
Each of these options has positives and negatives, and it's really a matter of preference. The only logical way I can think that would permanently fix this is if the infobox templates we use could somehow call the about/for templates (and in those we would place them accordingly. If you want, I could try to work out an additional parameter for the infobox templates that would reasonably wrap said templates. eg: (| disambiguation = {{About|blah}}, or | has-artifact = yes (on {{equipment}})
I've been editing these on desktop, so I didn't catch that issue. If we do opt to modify the infobox templates like this, what'll likely end up happening is:
  • missing image template is called first
  • about/for is wrapped in a container div that is floated left and immediately cleared (or really opposite the parameter that defaults right, forgot its name)
This should resolve all of the issues. There could be very fringe ones I'm just not thinking of though. I'll definitely test it thoroughly before modifying the infoboxes, if we opt to do this.
Sorry, I should've expected this would happen. That's my bad. -- Emptysora (talk) 06:00, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
If you call the following from Special:ExpandTemplates:
you can see what I mean by modifying the infobox templates being the only true way to fix it. (the source from my sandbox is pulled from Template:Monster) -- Emptysora (talk) 06:18, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
Although... I just saw your edit on Icebreaker_(Equipment). When I was visualizing everything in my head, I ruled *that* out as an option. Personally, I think your edit looks better than mine. I’ll go in and modify the other pages to reflect this.
on a separate note, something baffling me on that page is how the floated infobox appears below the line on the page. It *shouldn't* do that, to my knowledge. But, I like *that* better that way too. It’s just weird. — Emptysora (talk) 06:56, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
I agree that {{About}} and {{Distinguish}} should both appear at the very top of the pages, above {{Stub}}. We should've had these templates here a very long time ago, thank you Emptysora! --Djonni (talk) 07:20, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Underscores in links and page names

Perhaps I'm missing something (it definitely happens) but having underscores instead of spaces in links seems like a bad idea to me. It's definitely not necessary for the wiki, spaces are correctly handled. Those underscores aren't present in Wikipedia:Template:About. And it's confusing for new users who see it and Robert why it's not plain English.

In my opinion, sides should never be replaced with underscores unless necessary, on either side of a piped link. Occasionally on a talk page I copy-paste a long section link from the URL and can't be bothered to go through and change the underscores back to discs, as they should be, but placing underscores into pages on purpose seems like a good way to have new users confused about how page naming is supposed to work on a wiki. 😊

I actually replaced the underscores with spaces, assuming they were a mistake, and they were changed back in a recent edit. As I said, am I missing something that explains why we should have underscores in page links for this template? -- Djonni (talk) 07:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

For a second, I had no clue what you meant. But, I see now... Sorry. When I last modified it, I didn’t realize you modified it to remove the underscores. I modified the code already in my sandbox, which is why it reverted. That was a mistake.
Note to self: check revision history before assuming a template hasn’t been changed.
I’ll change it back now if you didn’t already. I meant to remove the underscores myself anyway but I forgot. Thanks, and sorry. — Emptysora (talk) 20:50, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
No no, no harm done! Easy thing to do when you work on a template offline or in a sandbox, I've done similar enough times. I don't always think to show changes when I paste a template in, like I should, heh. No need for an apology, I was sincerely just confused and figured there was something esoteric I was missing!
Thanks again for adding these templates to our toolkit. You probably noticed already, but I also popped in a quick implementation of Template:Main to add another to the set, and added them all to Category:Cross-reference templates. -- Djonni (talk) 21:04, 16 November 2019 (UTC)