Template talk:Big Brother housemates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	The Big Brother WikiProject aims to improve articles relating to Big Brother, and Template:Big Brother housemates has been identified as one of these articles. Anybody can help the WikiProject by trying to improve existing articles. Please add your name to the list of participants, if you are committed to helping out.
NA	This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.

Contents 1 Alternating colours 2 Alignment 3 Nominated and Evicted 4 Up for Relocation 5 If a housemate walks/is removed... 6 Adding "rem": what's the harm 7 A consensus 8 Rem colour 9 4th legend? 10 Problems 11 TABLE'S MESSED UP! 12 A straw poll 12.1 Discussion 13 Veto 14 The use of colours after a season's end 15 Legend 16 Nominated Colour 17 9cds's Voice From the Grave package 18 Exit Before Enter 19 Alternating colour stuff

[edit] Alternating colours

Can we have them removed? They look very out of place on pages with blue and red coloured boxes. For example, look at Big Brother (UK series 7). Cheers, AntzUK 17:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

No. Because it will affect readability when the colours are removed when the series ends. -- 9cds^(talk) 18:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The colours don't even need to be removed. They could just stay there. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 14:43, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with AntzUK; It looks dreadful and really confusing!! Ellisjm 12:27 UTC 22 June 06

For about 2 days. -- 9cds^(talk) 12:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alignment

From HCI 2e: Alignment of lists is also very important. For users who read text from left to right, lists of text items should normally be aligned to the left. Numbers, however, should normally be aligned to the right (for integers) or at the decimal point. This is because the shape of the column then gives an indication of magnitude -- a sort of mini-histogram. Items like names are particularly difficult. Consider list (i) in Figure 3.21. It is clearly hard to look up someone if you only know their surname. To make it easy, such lists should be laid out in columns as in (ii), or have forename and surname reversed as in (iii). The dates in Figure 3.20 pose similar problems, as the years do not align, even when the folder is sorted by date. So unless anyone has a good reason to centre-align the text, it should remain left-aligned. -- 9cds^(talk) 10:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Not everybody reads like a textbook. Maybe you should see what the people would prefer; hold a vote of some kind here, like on the BB06 AU article maybe. --JD^talk_email 11:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

This is the HCI textbook, the authors are world leaders in the subject. So in this case, a strong case needs to be made against left-aligned. -- 9cds^(talk) 11:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't what the real people think be more important than some book written by world leaders? Like I said, hold some sort of vote. --JD^talk_email 11:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Voting is evil. -- 9cds^(talk) 11:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Voting would get a real opinion from the people that would actually be using the table. --JD^talk_email 11:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Now that Ellisjm has changed the wording on the colour key (not that I have a problem with that), the word Legend looks even worse when it's left aligned. --JD^talk_email 12:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nominated and Evicted

At least change Nominated to Up for Eviction; they are both different things. --JD^talk_email 12:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

What's the difference? We need it to be short, and to the point. -- 9cds^(talk) 13:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't "we" need it to be accurate as well? --JD^talk_email 13:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

How is saying "nominated" wrong? -- 9cds^(talk) 13:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I have shortened "No longer in house" to "Not in house", but "nominated" is correct, unless anyone can state otherwise. -- 9cds^(talk) 13:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You can be nominated, and still not be up for eviction; especially in the Australian one, where nominations work with a point system. --JD^talk_email 13:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Up for Relocation

The up for eviction should be changed this week to incorporate the fact that the housemate will not be evicted, simply relocated... Ellisjm 15;07 UTC 27 June 06

No, it shouldn't. This template is used in other articles than the UK one. -- 9cds^(talk) 15:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I changed it to Up for Public Vote earlier. --JD[^talk|_email] 15:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Would it be useful after 2 days, though? -- 9cds^(talk) 15:43, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Up for Public Vote would. That's why I changed it to that. --JD[^talk|_email] 15:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Hm, after thought, it'd be more relevant for other circumstances too. -- 9cds^(talk) 16:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

This template is designed to be available for use as a template for each and every Big Brother series article. It can't keep being changed at every twist that Big Brother comes up with, week to week, and then change it back again depending on circumstances. Pick something you can all agree on, which can be used for each and every Big Brother series (and in the future), and stick to it. — FireFox 16:09, 28 June '06

Er, Up for Public Vote..? --JD[^talk|_email] 16:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Calm down. -- 9cds^(talk) 16:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I am perfectly calm, I've had enough tea to last me a life time. I am just tired of everybody disagreeing with each other at every single turn, and getting into edit wars about it. Look - it's pointless isn't it? And as soon as someone starts a discussion on the talk page it takes less than one hour to come to an agreement. Can we do this more often please, instead of edit warring with each other? Thanks, — FireFox 16:16, 28 June '06

What's your point? -- 9cds^(talk) 16:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Forget it. — FireFox 16:19, 28 June '06

Have a cucumber instead. -- 9cds^(talk) 16:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Good god. You are all arguing over 3 words in a template which affects 12 or so articles concerning a reality television show that in all liklihood won't exist in 2 years. Besides this I had stopped editing, but seeing you all bicker over something so mundane irritated me so much that I did something about it. Since the main problem seems to be that each show has a different way of running things, I introduce "legendevic" and "legendnom", two spanking new variables for your use. I bet you can guess what they do. --SomeStranger^(t) 17:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yay, no more arguing :). But, one thing... How does it work? I can't get it to work in the BB06 AU article. --JD[^talk|_email] 17:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] If a housemate walks/is removed...

You should put <small>(Walked)</small> after the 'exit' day. We do not need extra colours. The thing will look too confusing. Please see past uses of the infobox the template is based on for precident, and examples.

[edit] Adding "rem": what's the harm

My personal feeling is that adding a separate color for people who are removed and people who are ejected is not a big deal, as long as the colors for both are similar so the table doesn't get confusing. Anybody else have any thoughts? -- Where 00:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

But it's not a table for how people left. It's a table to list the housemates. That's all. See Big Brother (UK series 6) as an example for the infobox it's based on: it doesn't have any colours. In fact, colours should be stripped after the show has finished. -- 9cds^(talk) 00:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Add the colours. Or better yet, take one of my many other suggestions, one of them being having separate templates for different countries. Failing that, yeah, add the colours. Nobody's going to suffer from it. You can't say it only lists the housemates, because you removed the tables from most of the pages, that showed how the housemates left. If there isn't going to be anything else, the infobox should have the extra colour added, and they should be left there after the series ends. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

An extra note is that there are many ways you can exit.. you can be evicted, walk, ejected, among other stuff. You can also be nominated for all reasons. It's unreasonable to accomodate all of this. -- 9cds^(talk) 01:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

There's only four things to accomodate, at most - Up for Eviction, Evicted, Removed, Walked. That would fit nicely in a 2x2 grid under the infobox. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 01:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Colors help to make lots of information visible in a single glance. Thus, I figure, what's wrong with showing more info? Why not make as much information as possible as the easiest to see within the shortest amount of time? Your thoughts? -- Where 01:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

But will it be, after every other line is a different colour? -- 9cds^(talk) 01:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Naturally not. But if there are a reasonable amount of categories (4ish), this shouldn't be a problem. -- Where 01:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at Big Brother (UK series 6) - the information is there - it clearly says why they left, if it wasn't eviction. How is that confusing? -- 9cds^(talk) 01:18, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with it. However, you can see it more clearly with colors, in my opinion; it really stands out. I guess then we just have an aesthetic disagreement at this point? If so, I maybe we should take a survey out of those involved in the bb06 article? -- Where 01:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, not another one... --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 01:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

That's now no longer readable - three reds? -- 9cds^(talk) 03:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Cell borders. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 03:10, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the best solution here would be for the infobox to be independantly put on the article in question, rather than use the template. However, the table should still try to look like the rest of the infoboxes. -- 9cds^(talk) 07:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Another template? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 11:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

No, handcode the infobox using Wikisyntax -- 9cds^(talk) 11:42, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

What's wrong with another template? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 11:43, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

The fact it will only be used on one page. -- 9cds^(talk) 11:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

If it's going to be done, it may as well be done so it can be used on all Big Brother Australia articles. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 11:46, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Maybe I'm missing something here, but there a removed bit in the legend, but there doesn't appear to be any code to actually make the rows that colour... --Lorian^T_C 13:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I only put it on for row 9 and 10, as BB06 was the article that needed it at the time. Should it be put on all the rows? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 13:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it should. --Lorian^T_C 13:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 13:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A consensus

Ok... since one hasn't been made.. The new colours... should they stay or go? Consunsus will close Friday 7th July.-- 9cds^(talk) 13:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Stay: (keep 'removed' legend)

1. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 13:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Go: (return to red and blue for nominated/gone):

1. -- 9cds^(talk)
2. --Lorian^T_C 14:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
3. Geoking66_{talk|Additions}

Not a huge amount, but more people want the original two. However, I have kept the third legend, but it will not be 'removed' instead, it will be "legend three" - which can be used for different situations. I'm gonna make it a nice neutral yellow. -- 9cds^(talk) 16:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rem colour

The colour for removed housemates really needs to be changed. The colour that was there before (#FFB600) wasn't a bad one, but if anybody agrees and has anything to say on the matter, please comment. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 14:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 4th legend?

Now that we have nominated, not in house, and legend 3 (which is yellow), I'm wondering if we should have a 4th colour, like the 3rd legend - maybe green. Opinions? -- 9cds^(talk) 17:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I was going to add a fourth box to the second row, saying Walked, before you removed the Removed box from the template a few days ago. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 17:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The difference is, this will be optinal, and will not have a default legend. (And will be discussed first ;)-- 9cds^(talk) 18:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

If it's optional, why not put it on now? Then separate discussions can be had on separate seasons' talk pages. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 18:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

To make sure nobody disagrees with the idea :) I'll go ahead if nobody disagrees by tonight. -- 9cds^(talk) 18:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Why would anybody disagree if it's optional? If they don't want, they just don't use. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 18:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Add the fourth colour. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 17:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problems

There seems to be a problem concerning the legend. Unexpectadly, part of it is cut off and does not fully cover the bottom of the template. This happens in both the UK and US versions. Geoking66 17:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Got a screenshot? -- 9cds^(talk) 17:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The template

Notice that in the legend, part of it is missing.Geoking66 17:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that'd be my fault... I was wondering why nothing had happened on my computer. Check it again in 2 mins. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 17:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Has it changed now? I reverted back my edits. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 17:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

That's that one solved. Time to dig out the warnings: "Please do not attempt to alter it unless you are certain that you understand the setup and are prepared to repair any consequent collateral damage if the results are unexpected. Any experiments should be conducted in the template sandbox or your user space." -- 9cds^(talk) 17:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

What's the need? Tell me; what, is, the need? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 17:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

It's working now. Thanks for the help, I hope that I brought up something good. I think we've learned a lesson: Do not alter templates unless you know what's going on. Thanks JD, it's ok, we all make mistakes (I accidentally deleted half of the Moscow Metro article). Geoking66 17:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

How about this: why don't I put a sandbox in a subpage here, complete with a sample template and article? That way, editors can experiment all they want without affecting all the Big Brother articles across Wikipedia, and without having editors create separate instances every time. This also has the added benefit of some possible extra eyes to catch subtle problems. Sound good? Dancter 23:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Separate infoboxes for each country's Big Brother would be better, because then anything could be done to each template without affecting every single Big Brother article, and it can be better adapted to that particular country without having to hold back because of another country's different format. If this were already the case, I wouldn't have tried to do what I tried to do. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

This would make the pages less standardised, which is directly against the project's aims. As far as I'm aware, there are no extra features needed to the infobox which don't directly go against consensus or precident. -- 9cds^(talk) 23:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

If you want to acheive standardisation, you need to draw the line somewhere. Drawing it right at the end of the board isn't going to help any of the articles - you need to ease up on a few things. No two Big Brother series are the same. You don't even know how using separate templates could turn out - it could be much better. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Even if separate infoboxes are decided upon, a set of guidelines should probably be established for infobox structure, so that there remains some consistency across Big Brother articles, while allowing more flexibility for individual implementations. Maybe a proposal should be made at the project talk page? I'm not volunteering. Dancter 00:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Here. If there's enough people that think it should be done, for whatever reason, then I think that would be enough to do it. I would be willing to do the Australia articles. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TABLE'S MESSED UP!

Can someone please tell me what has happened to the table?? It's gone all messed up - at my end anyway?!? ellisjm 14:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

And where, exactly, is your end? — FireFox 14:22, 12 July '06

At my house, on my computer - I'll try and upload a screenshot... one moment... ellisjm 14:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I meant in which article, but okay. — FireFox 14:25, 12 July '06

OK. I can't upload the file at the moment so here's how it is...

The table is messed up in that the housemates status is on the right in a tiny little "box". The Legend is unequal (the against public vote and not in house are different sizes, and it is just generally confusing. I don't want to start an edit war, but what was wrong with the old version?? ellisjm 14:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It's fine, there is nothing wrong with it. — FireFox 14:42, 12 July '06

Well I'm telling you that at my end (on my computer), there is a problem. Anyway, that didn't answer my question. What was wrong with the last one? ellisjm 14:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It looked horrible when all housemates were up for eviction except one. — FireFox 14:45, 12 July '06

Yes, well it will only be until Friday... ellisjm 14:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

So? What if it happens again? — FireFox 14:52, 12 July '06

Well, we cross that bridge if or when we come to it... ellisjm 14:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

We are already crossing it. — FireFox 15:16, 12 July '06

Here's a screenshot:

Now basically, if you look, the legend is messed up and it's harder to see who's gone and who's up for eviction etc... Can't we just put it back so everyone can see it again in all its former glory??? ellisjm 15:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it any better now? It's not right in the middle, as I don't know how to do that, but it should be closer. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 15:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks yeah. But that's only half my problem. Is it just me, or are there others of the same opinion? The tiny box on the right with the housemate status is, well, confusing. Not confusing, but it takes longer to realise their status. What was wrong with it covering their name etc? Personally I think it looks much better and is clearer. What do others think? If others are of the opposite opinion to me, then I'll back down, but I'm sorry, I think it looks hideous!! Comments please... ellisjm 15:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I know it's a bit complicated at first, especially when you're used to the old one; but the alternating colours, and the way you couldn't tell sometimes, was really pissing me off. Plus, the USA articles needed a fourth column, and now they have one :). And, like this, the colours can stay on the infobox after the series ends without it being so in your face. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 15:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from, but it takes a lot longer to work out who's up for eviction and who has been evicted etc!! ellisjm 15:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

How does this implementation of a fourth column benefit the USA articles? As far as I can tell, the only significant change made was pushing the color-coding into a tiny column off to the side. I'm with ellisjm: this is not the best solution.

And what's with the unilateral changes? First, you shoot down my idea of a common sandbox for people to collaborate on changes to the project infobox, saying separate infoboxes would be better. Then you turn around and seemingly abandon the separate infobox idea, making major changes to the project infobox, affecting several Big Brother pages without even warning others. Are you just trying to cut editors like me out of the process? Dancter 15:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course not; I was actually going to ask if that sandbox could be made, earlier today, before I started butchering the table as it was. If other people think a separate table should be used for each country, then I'm all for it. 9cds said the USA articles needed a separate column for the Power of Veto thing. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 15:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Am I the only one that likes it? Except for the underscore in the column header, what;s up with that? --Lorian^T_C 16:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm trying to space it out so the column's bigger than it was when I first redid it, but every other thing I tried either didn't work, or looked terrible. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 16:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

How's the spacing on that column now? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 16:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking about a separate column for things such as the Power of Veto, but it looks like the fourth column as currently implemented doesn't actually allow for the uses I had imagined for it. I don't have time right now, but perhaps when I set up the sandbox, I can show what I have in mind. Dancter 16:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I wanted a fourth column for a while, and had this use in mind. There seem to be mixed opinions on it though. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 16:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I noticed the same thing. It's not right. The US ones do not need a power of veto indicator. It is not that important. This is quite confusing. Can we revert back to how it was before. If we're going to do things like this, then a template sandbox should be in effect immediately. Why are people doing this? It ruins the infobox and many articles. Geoking66 16:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Why didn't you say something when I brought it up days ago? And as for what's important, my understanding was that the whole point to the colors was to provide a way for readers to ascertain the current status of the houseguests at a glance. For the US series, I would think that includes indications of Head of Household and Power of Veto. Otherwise, I don't see why colors and the like should even be bothered with at all, as one might as well just scroll to the Game Table section. Just indicating nominations and evictions doesn't do it for me. Dancter 17:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

You want a fourth colour then? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 17:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Not really. Too many colors can get confusing. And like I had mentioned before, a fourth color wouldn't actually work for Power of Veto. What I would like is some decent communication amongst the editors here, instead of this act/react situation that seems to be the default. Hopefully this can be a start. Don't let me hold things up, but it may take until tonight or tomorrow before I have the block of time I need to get the sandbox running. Dancter 17:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

JD, not to be mean, but you can't just change the infobox on your own accord, it affects too many articles. I think it's better covering their names; more concise, more to the point. With the US infobox, I was putting the "stat" back into it's original form: hm1stat, not hm1-stat. Geoking66 20:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

No, I totally understand. I only did a small bit of the work on the new design, but I can try and put the hm-stat thing back to hmstat, if it's easier; or you could do it, if you know how. I put the colouring in a fourth column because the alternating colours was really making the table difficult for some people to read, especially with the current BB7 UK Nominations, and BB7 and BB06 Evictions all packed up in a group of alternating red, and random grey in the middle that could easily be mistaken for blue or red at times. It was also an opportunity to make the fourth column that the US article could use; the Power of Veto could be put in the fourth column now, can it not? (Seriously, I'm asking there, as I don't know). I was being bold by making a change that I felt benefitted all of the Big Brother articles, and I was prepared to tidy up any mess that I created along the way, which I have. As it stands now, some people like it, while others don't. That probably leaves two options; I had a third one, but I can't remember it now: fork the template now, and use separate templates for each article, or each country; or have a vote here to decide whether the template should be used on all Big Brother articles. I don't take offence at all to the fact that some people don't like the new design, but as there are some people that do like it, I think a well-informed decision should be made, either in the best interests of separate countries' Big Brother articles; or all Big Brother articles in general. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 20:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Veto

I've added the stuff so the fourth column can be used for Power of Veto as well as status colours now. You need to use | hmnn-veto = [[Image:No_sign.svg|16px]] on a separate line inside the table syntax, for it to work, where nn is the number of the housemate. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 20:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I suck at working with templates, anyway that you can keep it so that the color goes entirely over the line, but keeps the veto symbol in the fourth column. Geoking66 04:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The use of colours after a season's end

Would I be alone on thinking colours should stay on the template after a season has ended? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 17:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably, seeing as there would be no need for the blue "nominated". Although, we could create a template with colours for evicted, walked, ejected, winner, (runner up?) etc...ellisjm 18:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Create a template? What do you mean by that? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 18:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

A template with a different legend for the colours I mentioned above... ellisjm 18:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, right. Yeah, that doesn't sound too bad. I think four colours should be used, at most. What do other people think though? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 18:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea, what colours should we use? --Lorian^T_C 18:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The same ones that are there now (only the red and yellow)? There was a nice orange in use for what's now the third box before. Dunno about the fourth colour though. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 18:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The orange colour was #FFB600. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 18:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Legend

Is someone able to fix the template legend so that the Nominated and Evicted boxes are the same size? ellisjm 23:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nominated Colour

Instead of #D1E8EF for the nominated colour, how about azure (#007FFF)? Geoking66 20:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

That's too dark. It would make it too hard to see that there's links there. Why do you want to change it? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 20:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

It's hard to see on my computer. I don't know whether it's the browser that's rendering it lightly or the operating system. Geoking66 20:44, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I wonder what solution we could have to that problem... Nah, seriously though, it looks fine on my computer. Can you get a screenshot? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 20:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

How about #73fb76 to tie in with green used in previous series etc?? ellisjm 20:55, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

If we're doing the whole consistency thing, then green wouldn't be suitable. What is actually wrong with blue? If we can't see the colour or whatever so badly, then the old template would solve this problem. But I'm not going to go on like a sad tragic; either do that or pick a different colour that isn't already in use on the nominations tables. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 20:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's a screenshot. You'll have to click for a magnification, it's kind of small.

The light blue colour.

Geoking66 22:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks fine to me... --Lorian^T_C 22:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks fine to me too and I'm usin Safari on a Mac too! ellisjm 22:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Guess my eyesight's kind of weird. I noticed that it looked better on the screenshot. Who knows? Sorry for the disturbance. Geoking66 22:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 9cds's Voice From the Grave package

9cds has pointed something out to me. With alternating colours, people that are affected by certain types of colour-blindness see the table as loads of alternating colours [1]. There's one solution I can think of that doesn't involve removing the colours completely. Two colours that look different with a monochrome view, and the standard colours for the rows, could be used to show the status of housemates; but with the problem of alternating colours and the rows that was discussed before, the only way this can really be done without that problem is by having single solid colours in the fourth column, and having the rest of the rows alternating grey. I would change it straight away, but with the response I'd get, I'm posting it here first so others can say what they need to; or in case somebody else has a better solution. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 20:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't the reader realise that anyone who is evicted has a Day of exit marking and that anyone else highlighted is nominated? Geoking66 03:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Maybe, but the colours are there; and people might try to read them off. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 09:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Exit Before Enter

How come the Exit column is list before the enter column? It just doesn't make sense to me. TeckWiz^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 23:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I would change it, but apparently it contains esoteric features of template syntax. This scares me. Jake95_(talk!) 16:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I've made the change. Tra (Talk) 17:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I like the exit before entry, because it's easier to see when a housemate was evicted, and it's been this way until today. Geoking66 20:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it's still quite easy to read across to see when they were evicted, and as you read across the row, it's more logical to see the two day numbers in chronological order. As for it always being like this, the initial change to exit then enter was made on 6 June 2006 in this edit with the edit summary 'Lets try this...'. As far as I am aware, there has been no significant discussion on this topic until now. Tra (Talk) 20:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alternating colour stuff

The only colours that alternate are the ones used to show housemates that are "evicted". Either all colours should alternate, which would take a while to do; my earlier idea of having colours in their own column at the end (which some people didn't like because it used too much space even though the table occupies the same amount of space now as it did when that was used) should be used again; or somebody needs to think up a new idea for the infobox. J Di 22:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Just scrap the alternating colours. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Or we could do that... J Di 22:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Well Cleo and Jade's colours don't match the legend so it might confuse some people. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:18, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Right. Alternating colours are gone, so now on Celebrity Big Brother 2007 (UK) we have a block of blue, a block of red, a block of yellow, and a red and a yellow in the middle. Doesn't look too good... J Di 15:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

How about if each row is separated by a grey border? It would look like what I've got here. Tra (Talk) 18:17, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I suggested borders before but somebody (not mentioning any names) said no and I couldn't be bothered to suggest it here at the time, what with everything else that was going on. The borders look good. J Di 18:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

The borders look good! It just needs the grey to go all the way across. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

All the way across? J Di 22:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I just checked; it's a browser issue. FireFox handles the borders correctly for empty cells, but Internet Explorer turns them white. I think this problem can be fixed by making the template display &nbsp; for when a parameter is not specified, instead of nothing (e.g. replace {{{hm2-enter}}} with {{{hm2-enter|&nbsp;}}} ). This version shows what it would look like if the workaround was applied. Tra (Talk) 22:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I refuse to use Internet Explorer unless I absolutely have to so I'm not going to be seeing any empty cells any time soon but it doesn't look as though anybody that has commented (massive response, as always) has any objections so if it works, go for it, I guess. J Di 23:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. I used a slightly different workaround than the one I mentioned (which didn't seem to work in practise) but it's now working in both FireFox and Internet Explorer. Tra (Talk) 00:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

That's much better now :) — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

How about putting a solid black line under under the legend box to separate it as a title? Timclare ^(talk) _{(sign here)} 11:45 (UTC) 1 April 2007

A black line made the row look as though it was meant to be separate so I have made the word "Legend" bold. J Di 18:28, 28 January 2007 (UTC)