Template talk:Spoilers

Z:OoT
Zelda: Ocarina of Time messes up with this, do you know how it can be fixed? Should we use Template:- before the section on that page? -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 08:40, 18 June 2006 (PDT)
 * Fixed in the template, since that's probably the best place. :-) --DrBob (Talk) 08:54, 18 June 2006 (PDT)
 * Thanks, and I also put one before the section, since it looks nicer that way. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 09:27, 18 June 2006 (PDT)

Icon?
Why does this need an icon? It a bit to big for a spoiler warning anyway. I say we keep it nice and simple, like the old centered spoiler warning, maybe with a border around it. --blendmaster 17:48, 23 June 2006 (PDT)


 * The icon and style are there to fit in with the other templates (such as wip). The icon helps imho because it draws people's attention to the notice, making sure they know they're entering a spoiler area. I suppose the icon could be made a little smaller, but we'd have to consider carefully if we want to set that precedent for the other templates as well. --DrBob (Talk) 17:55, 23 June 2006 (PDT)


 * I made a change to the template, so it might be even better. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 22:26, 23 June 2006 (PDT)


 * Well. I see you are using the tango icons. You could at least use the 32x32 or 22x22 ones, kind of like this. --blendmaster 11:47, 24 June 2006 (PDT)


 * Icon looks too small then, really. It needs to catch your attention, and the smaller icon instead just looks rather incidental. --DrBob (Talk) 12:56, 24 June 2006 (PDT)


 * how about with 48x48 icons? --blendmaster 13:38, 24 June 2006 (PDT)


 * 48x48 is good - if you want to change the templates to use the images at that size, feel free. :-) I don't like the second image though - it feels repetitive. It feels repetitive. --DrBob (Talk) 13:42, 24 June 2006 (PDT)

New template
I saw this thing in the Cave Story guides and I hate it. I made a new version that I like a lot more--what do you guys think? -- towers   00:33, 17 November 2007 (CST)
 * I can't really see the appeal in a replacement. What don't you like about the current one? --DrBob (talk) 10:27, 17 November 2007 (CST)
 * The color strikes me first. It's less "Look! This is important!" than it is irritating and warm looking. And the image, I feel, is just... kind of ridiculous? If it looked more afraid, I could support it I think, but as it is, I can't. I feel like it is just mildly surprised. I also don't like the alignment or the full page stretch; I think it's kind of ugly.


 * Hence mine sticks out against the white, is alarming, cuts down on images in guide pages, has a centered approach for aesthetics, etc. If people feel I am completely wrong here then that's fine, but I feel like if even we don't use my revamp, the current version could be improved a lot. -- towers  Towers_trex.gif 11:35, 17 November 2007 (CST)
 * Ok, there's a few faults with that template that you probably haven't realized, but that we sysops (namely DrBob and Notmyhandle) are changing in almost every template. Color values cannot be hard-coded into the template. This is because some people like to "reskin" the site (change the colors, etc.) via CSS, but you can only modify class attributes via CSS. Therefore, we've been switching templates from hard-coded colors into CSS classes, which yours isn't. Secondly, your code is really messy, way too many divs and ps and strongs and such. It needs to be cleaned up quite a bit. And finally, those exclamation points look really pixelated, and present an overall not-good appearance to the template. An image, such as our current one, looks much more cleaner. -- 12:20, 17 November 2007 (CST)
 * I never said we should transplant mine directly. Anyways--
 * I hard coded the style elements because of course I can't just edit the main css file and create my own class. I needed something exemplary that I could do myself. Hard coding attributes was the only option short of skinning the site myself, something you all wouldn't be able to see lest you implemented my changes and then dropped them after, two unnecessary steps.
 * I know the code is messy. I never said it wasn't. It's just an example of the way it could look--the code can be solved later. As in all things, you make a design, and then build it--this should still be considered a design. It's better than a useless image uploaded of what I threw together in Photoshop, which is what is typical for design.
 * Pixelated? You are citing pixelation on a video game wiki? If anything, I think pixelation is charming and to be expected every now and then. The jaggedness, I feel, also catches one's eye.
 * I don't see how any of the issues you listed couldn't be ironed out in about five minutes, and that's work I'd be willing to do for you if you'll let me. I can clean code and I can write a css document; if you want me to make a class I will. I just figured less overall edits where they weren't needed to illustrate my point would be better for the history database.


 * In any case, we don't have to move on with a new template. If I am just completely outvoted, then that's fine; I'll reskin StrategyWiki myself and move on, but I would like to see what other normal users think about this. -- towers  Towers_trex.gif 12:49, 17 November 2007 (CST)
 * Hmm. As far as the colour goes, I can sort of see what you mean, although I don't think it's anywhere near as extreme as you make out. If the red was any stronger, it would clash against the blues in the rest of the site, and a clash isn't good. I think it gets your attention quite nicely as it is, but then different people do react differently to colours.
 * Would you really be scared after reading spoilers? I know that I would only be shocked (if anything), and so I can't see why the image should be a scared emoticon. :-P
 * The width and alignment are a standard thing for all header boxes, and that's definitely not going to change. In summary, I might support a change of colour, but probably not much else that you've suggested so far. I'm still open to other suggestions, though, as the template's not perfect. --DrBob (talk) 14:16, 17 November 2007 (CST)
 * Well, alright. I understand the width and alignment being standard, so that's fine. But I do think the color should be changed--something less pink, I feel. The image drives me nuts, but I could override that myself if nobody else seems to hate it. -- towers  Towers_trex.gif 19:19, 17 November 2007 (CST)
 * As I've said earlier, none of the colors are hard-coded (the image is, however, so you're kinda stuck with that. Well, you can make it vanish, but you can't change it via CSS). Anyway, as such (that everything is defined by classes), if the color drives you nuts, simply modify your BlueCloud.css page to change the color of it. A small tutorial in case you're lost on that whole process. -- 19:44, 17 November 2007 (CST)
 * I guess I'll play with my CSS then. Sorry to cause something of a fuss, I guess. And thanks for the tutorial, I wasn't sure how to do that in wikis. (In it though you should explain the distinction between IDs and classes--IDs being for one or two objects while classes are meant for many more). -- towers  Towers_trex.gif 00:13, 18 November 2007 (CST)
 * Is the image even needed? I realize that it was put there to draw attention to the template, but it's a bright pink box with large, bolded text. It's going to attract attention even without an image which, I personally think, is an eyesore and makes the entire page look worse. - Koweja 13:05, 19 January 2008 (CST)

Position
Why does the template go above the nav? It would look better directly below it. The nav box is just that - navigation, while the spoiler tag is content. The way we have it, the page goes navigation -> article content -> navigation -> article content. Putting the nav above the warning would make it nav -> content, as pages should be, as well as make the navigation in the same place across all pages. - Koweja 13:05, 19 January 2008 (CST)


 * Above the navigation would symbolize the entire article, whereas underneath the nav would be more of a sectional warning for the introduction of the article. -- 21:22, 21 January 2008 (CST)
 * So why don't we reword it, or make another template for entire page spoilers? - Koweja 01:01, 22 January 2008 (CST)


 * If you would like to change the description, just write what you want to replace here and I'll change it accordingly. If you would like to propose a section spoilers (sect-spoilers perhaps) template (we have an individual spoilers template at the moment I believe) then you can bring it up in the community issues since this deals with site wide policy changes. If you want to propose an amendment to the template (such as a variable that changes what the template displays - section or whole article) I would also bring it up in the CI so everyone takes note.  -- 01:08, 22 January 2008 (CST)
 * You're probably looking for spoiler. --DrBob (talk) 01:22, 22 January 2008 (CST)

spoilers is used both as the entire page spoiler or a section spoiler. If the entire page is a spoiler, it is put up on top above the nav. If it is a section spoiler, use the optional first parameter to make it link to the next heading. It is above the nav because that's where all of our other whole-page tags go as well (like cleanup and future). -- 11:49, 22 January 2008 (CST)
 * But spoilers is different. Future and (in theory) clean-up will eventually be removed, but spoilers is permanent, and is more like content than a tag. - Koweja 12:49, 22 January 2008 (CST)


 * No it's a tag, since it's a warning of what the content may contain - it does not make the guide any better, it simply is courtesy towards new players. -- 16:43, 22 January 2008 (CST)
 * Fair enough. By "like content" I meant that it's directed at people reading the guides, not editing them in the sense that the cleanup tag is. - Koweja 20:56, 22 January 2008 (CST)


 * Got it. Also note that most of our cleanup tags reside on the right side under the toolbox rather than in the middle.  -- 21:24, 22 January 2008 (CST)
 * Notmyhandle, they reside in both places, except the large tag on the page itself is hidden by default. -- 11:35, 23 January 2008 (CST)
 * Ok, so they're still off to the side 90% of the time. -- 22:00, 23 January 2008 (CST)