Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Infoboxes

Why?

As many of you may know, I have this page which was created originally to reorganise the colour schemes used in the infoboxes, and then as a means of keeping track of the existing colours. I've linked to it several times on different talk pages when discussion has come about about colours, or when new infoboxes have been created using the same colour as an existing one.

I think we should have this page as a reference for anyone who makes an infobox. This way they can try fit their box into an existing scheme, or if the topic is completely new, add their color to this page. I had been decided by consensus on a few talk pages that the colour of the infobox should relate to the article topic for recognizability. I hope that everyone else here can see the value in keeping this page.

Plus, it looks a lot better to have this somewhere official rather than my namespace. :P - BeX 07:56, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

Font size

Sorry to be banging an old drum again, but when and why was it decided to use a small font in the info boxes? It's kinda difficult to read, which rather spoils the point of an infobox. --NieA7 12:04, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

Whoever made the first one. I copied the code when I made a couple of others cause it's better than the style gwiki has, and then other people copied it again. I personally don't find it difficult to read at all, and I'm so short sighted that I can see about 20 centimeters and then everything immediately blurs. :P I think though, that with the skill box, you may be able to override the font size in your .css. If all the other infoboxes are switched over to div formatting (which is hopefully going to happen) you'd be able to do the same thing. I do think though, that that would be the best option here, if it's possible, because out of all the people browsing the wiki, I think I've heard 2 complaints about the infoboxes and a multitude of compliments. - BeX 22:56, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

I'm one of the complainants, therefore it is important :p I can read them, but it's not as easy as reading the rest of the page and I don't really see what it adds to the whole. Small font sizes seem to be the fashion among lots of websites, always seems a triumph of style over content to me. Interesting you say it can be overrode with local CSS though - if all the templates include the same code can a switch be added to the main (left) nav bar in the default theme to increase the size? Obviously that'd be a big change so it'd need to be talked over, but would it be technically possible? --NieA7 05:49, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

And of course Demonic Flesh' skill page looks horrible with large fonts @ 1024! Look at that progression bar interfering with the info box! Horrible! So yay for small font sizes! (Disclaimer: this comment was made in jest.) -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 05:55, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

Fair point that there's freak skills out there though (most of them Necro, because Necromancers are teh win liek that), but if you look at the info box there's actually a lot of white space in it already that the font could simply expand into... Besides, never have found a convincing use for Demonic Flesh yet. May as well be called "Panic Monk". --NieA7 06:04, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

At the moment NieA7, the only infobox which you would be able to override is Biro's skill infobox, because it's the only one currently styled using .css. Asking him would be the best way to go about it. The other infoboxes are planned to also be converted to that style, but seeing as Biro is the only one that really knows how to do it, it might take a little while. I'll ask him to teach me and I'll have a go at converting them soon. - BeX 06:47, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

The CSS you could use to alter the default skillbox text size is this:

.skill-box {
	font-size: 10pt !IMPORTANT;
}

Obviously replace 10pt with any size you like :) LordBiro 06:57, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

Ohh, I like that! Can we have that for {{skill progression}} too??? (That'll teach Demonic Flesh.) -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 07:21, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for that Biro, great stuff. I still don't like the smaller font as a point of style, but at least I can override it even if everybody else suffers in the name of fashion :p I take it the code should live at User:NieA7/monobook.css? --NieA7 09:00, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

Yep, unless you use a different skin than monobook. -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 09:33, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

Template

Well in simplicity i agree with BeXoR but, why a skill progression bar/skill bar/etc... is green on a Mesmer skill/boss info page? shouldn't be Purple? it would look ok if it was a necromancer or a Ranger skill/boss. Well its not an important issue, but why don't we add templates for each prof., it would give us a lot of work, well every changes does but visually it would look better. IMO we could let the default as the default (see as an example template) and add 1 for each prof. on every template with the correct color of its prof..

• Warrior > Yellow
• Ranger > Green

...

I'll add an example of a progression skill bar here, note i used the colors based on the prof. and based on the colors used on the page List_of_elite_skills_by_campaign from GWW:

Progression
{{{attribute}}}	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21

This template could, for example "saved" on this page Template:w_skill_progression (this is a fiction page for now). - --The preceding unsigned comment was added by - Sı¦эитSтøям .

When the skill infobox was being redesigned, this was discussed, and the majority of people agreed that the progression bar should be matched to the skill infobox color for consistency. There are already 3 things in the article that clearly show profession, not counting the skill icon. I don't think this necessary, and the current situation matches across the wiki, with all templates about a certain topic matching their infobox colour. - BeX 23:09, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

I think it was just the fact that green was used that would cause these arguments. Maybe a colour that doesn't imply a profession be used instead? Might be difficult to find a good one though (maybe black? light shades of gray?). But I also agree that the colors used for any table in any article should match the corresponding infobox. -- ab.er.rant 23:52, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

There are various infobox colours, and there are 10 profession colours. There aren't enough colours in the spectrum to have separate colours for infoboxes and professions, unfortunately. I think having an enormous profession icon in skill articles is enough to show you what profession this skill belongs to, and the green box means that you can instantly recognise that it's a skill. LordBiro 04:36, 3 May 2007 (EDT)

I was refering to any template used on skill/boss page/article change. Also the problem isnt the default color being used is green, but because the template colors should (imo) be based on the prof. (skill/boss) that is being displayed. Of course ppl. know if the skillbox is refering or gives info that it's a skill, because the page or article gives u info about it, not because the green represents skill type templates. I think we can try a test page so we could see the diferents it would make (only for a period of time)? - Sı¦эитSтøям

If you want to make a test page, you can do it in your namespace but make sure you don't include the article into any categories. - BeX 12:32, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

Ok I've used my personal space to create a test page, the prob is i cant copy the code from the skillbox template so i can change its color, it appears an error, i need help on that, since u made the template could u help me BeX? the link for the test page is this user:SiLentStorm create a template page with the link User:SiLentStorm/w-skillbox. tks in advance! - Sı¦эитSтøям

In case you're interested, I believe this was the original discussion on the color: Template_talk:Skill_infobox#Altered skill box design. -- ab.er.rant 21:26, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

There is actually quite a lot of discussion here too. - BeX 22:53, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

Color templates

Anyone think color templates might be a good idea for these colors? Something like the profession color templates. -- ab.er.rant 22:09, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't know that they'd be used/useful enough. It'd be helpful if templates needed to be updated with new colours, but once a template is made, it only needs that colour input once and never again. I don't think we'll come across many situations where the colours will need updating. - BeX 01:28, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

Navbar

Should navbars come under this formatting guideline? It might be nice to have the infoboxes and navbars all colored the same. That way, it might be a justification for templating the colors :P -- ab.er.rant 21:37, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

They are already mentioned in there. Still dont think they warrant templating - anything we need is already made, and anything new would need a new colour anyway. - BeX 00:39, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't see them mentioned.... -- ab.er.rant 01:52, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Infobox colors should not be reused, except for template of the same topic which has a spelling error so I'll fix it and make it clearer. - BeX 02:27, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Oh.... :P I guess I was looking specifically for the word "navbar", heheh. -- ab.er.rant 04:24, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Current colors

Shouldn't NPCs be green, skills be grey, elites be yellow/gold, players be blue, towns/outposts be a tan/brown color, etc? - Tarun 03:46, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

NPCs can be enemies also. The colour ranges are just used to group types of content together, not to denote what the content is. - BeX 03:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

These are the colors for the infoboxes and navbars that we use, not how they're represented in the game. But... I kinda liking Tarun's alternate color scheme. -- ab.er.rant 03:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I am indifferent about the NPC box (red/green are the same to me), wouldn't want grey for skills, elites don't need a separate box, players is really just the guild infobox, but brown for towns is a nice idea. The only problem is that using primary colors on something that only needs 1 box is a bit of a waste, because then the myriad of shades are wasted. I don't know how many distinguishable shades of brown we could come up with without making the colours too dark. I don't think it would be a great idea to change the colour scheme after the current colours have been established for this long. - BeX 04:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Colors of community pages

I wondered if it was possible to change the color scheme of community related pages. For a long time the Guild infobox was the only community-related infobox and the color it uses was fine. But I created the User-infobox now and it is nearly impossible to find a good color for it. I got lots of complains about the yellow I use now but i can't really do anything about it since I am forced to use some kind of yellow. Since noone seems to be able to find a yellow tint that looks good I think it would be best to completly change the color scheme of community-related pages. Because I couldn't think of something else that isn't used already I'd suggest grey tints, but if anyone has a better idea please let me know. So what do others think? Does this need to be changed, should I change it and if so what color scheme should be used? -- nachdenki [ user | talk | contribs ] 00:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Everybody loves pink. Real men dare to wear it too. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 00:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't do this to me :p Nah, seriously, I thought about pink but though a lot of people love pink lots of people hate it too. I just think you can't force people to use pink on their guild/userpages (since those are personal pages). Nobody says "uh, blue, ugly" but some people would say that about pink. I mean it actually is better than yellow (because it doesn't hurt the eyes :D) but there has to be a better solution. You don't like the grey idea? -- nachdenki [ user | talk | contribs ] 01:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I really don't think grey is a great alternative, but I agree that pink wont be that popular. Just stick with the yellow you've got, because it doesn't look like anyone has any great ideas, and swapping colors with a mainspace template for something that's an optional userspace doo-dad won't happen. - BeX 04:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Skill Boxes?

I have a question. why is the skill box theme green? shouldnt we update the skill template to adjust it's color scheme to w/e class the skill is. It's not like we dont already have the data to see what class the skill is for. Just my thought :P Anyone else? --Lou-Saydus 17:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

It was decided by consensus that skill pages are using the green color theme. It makes the page instantly recognizable as belonging to a skill. See here and here for more responses to a similar question. If you want to change the currently in effect formatting guide, I suggest you create a few subpages in your userspace and use those to point out why you would fancy that design and try to convince the others to go for it. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 17:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

The idea is that the color of an infobox is based on what it is detailing about, not the profession of whatever its detailing about. It feels more consistent this way but some infoboxes don't have profession info. -- ab.er.rant 01:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Effects

I took the liberty of adding the Effects box, including my recently created infoboxes:

• Template:Blessing infobox
• Template:Environment effect infobox

Hope you don't mind. Feel free too comment on the colors...reanor 22:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

First, I think that both should use green colors as they are internal handled as skills and we use a green color for skills already (also this colors hurt in my eyes).

Second, I think both could be implemented through the skill infobox unless you cannot provide me some examples where the additional parameters are used.. poke | talk 22:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I also agree that they should use green colors, since blues has been assigned to "Tasks", and the "effects" are really just a type of skills. I've also raised a discussion at Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Skills#Effects infobox on whether we want to separate them or merge them. -- ab.er.rant 01:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Agree with the colors thing. Here are the examples:

• Current blessing format reference: Great Dwarf's Blessing
• Blessings with new infobox:
  • Battle Fervor
  • Asuran Bodyguard
  • Blessing of the Kurzicks
  • Holy Blessing (ONLY blessing with energy cost and activation time, but still covered.)

• Environment effects:
  • Cathedral Collapse

reanor 03:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

works to me, the colors suit well as the blessing skills, as well as the envoronment effects use shades that are very similar to the boxes' colors. —ZerphaThe Improver 01:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Removing hr tags from navboxes

I think we should remove <hr> and manually include it above navboxes to make articles with multiple navboxes cleaner. -- Gordon Ecker 06:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed! poke | talk 06:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

me2:) --BramStoker (talk, contribs) 13:10, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

But... but... I went through the trouble of working around this for the henchmen nav!! :P -- ab.er.rant 14:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

hm? :P poke | talk 14:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

/me likes Ab.er.rant's solution. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 16:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

But it doesn't work for mixed nav boxes. poke | talk 16:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The hr is not a big design issue for me, I don't mind if we removed it totally. So do what you find best :P - anja 17:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

If we remove it from the navbars, does that mean we should manually add the hr to all articles that use navbars....? -- ab.er.rant 05:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Only if you think it makes the article better. Backsword 10:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Couldn't the nav templates be modified to not show the hr when you add a parameter? - Bex 10:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Now why didn't I think of that.... *slaps me head* doh! :D -- ab.er.rant 10:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Would be fine with me, tho' I don't think manually adding a parameter would be much different from manually adding the tag in the first place. Backsword 13:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Consider it this way. Maybe 75% of articles only use one nav box. That means you only have to edit 25% of pages. Otherwise you'd have to edit the full 100%. - Bex 13:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Switch

Proposal: move objects to #F8A and give #EB6 to bundles. Backsword 01:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

agreed, as interactive objects aren't actually items. —ZerphaThe Improver 01:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

NOTOC tag

I have seen on many of the pages that many infoboxes are used on, that someone has to manually add a __NOTOC__ tag. Specifically locations and NPC pages. I suggest adding this to the guideline to allow the __NOTOC__ tag to be added to the templates pages. 42 - talk 06:20, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Could you please just stop spreading these ideas around? poke | talk 09:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

This seems to be the most appropriate place to discuss the issue. IMO unconditional __NOTOC__ tags should be prohibited from templates. I don't have any problem with using them in some templates as long as they are easily disabled and the template documentation explains how to do so. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 08:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

but it makes no sense to add a parameter "no_notoc = y" or something, if you can just add the tag itself in front of the template call.. poke | talk 09:37, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Gordon about the _NOTOC_ tags. -- riyen ♥ 09:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I meant having it hide the TOC by default, with a parameter such as "toc=y" to override it. My main point was that automatic, unconditional TOC hiding is overkill. I don't support automatic TOC hiding in infoboxes, but if we're going to do it, I'd like a way to override it for long articles. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 11:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

| toc = y is still not really shorter than __TOC__. It makes no sense to move it out into all infoboxes.. those are complicated enough already. poke | talk 14:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)