From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sydney/Archive_1#Railway station userbox header redesign.
[edit] Minor Improvements to Template
A few minor adjustments to the template include:
- Changing the link for "Station Code" from List of Sydney railway stations to List of New South Wales railway station codes since the table of station codes has been moved
- As it had been discussed that the template was too long (see here), "Distance from Central Station" and "Station Altitude (above sea level)" headings has been modified slightly to fit on one line whilst preserving the meaning of the headings. The resultant reduction in length can be seen below
- Background color and border has been adjusted to match current CityRail colouring principles listed in NSW Ministry of Transport approved pictograms and arrows. Please note that this change is not based on personal preferences.
Below is a comparison of a transcluded current template (right) and the proposed changes (left) based on the Redfern Station infobox. For the template code itself, it can be found here. As these are very minor adjustments to the template and will not affect its functionalities, if there are no objections, I will carry out the changes in the next week (it will only take me a few minutes). Thank you! --Pikablu0530 13:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
| PROPOSED TEMPLATE |
CURRENT TEMPLATE |
Redfern
|
 |
| South Coast Line |
| Blue Mountains Line |
| Newcastle and Central Coast Line |
| Eastern Suburbs & Illawarra Line |
| Bankstown Line |
| Inner West Line |
| Airport & East Hills Line |
| South Line |
| Western Line |
| Olympic Park Line |
| Northern Line |
| Station code |
RDF |
| Suburb |
Redfern |
| Street(s) |
Lawson St
Gibbons St |
| Distance from Central Station |
1.30 km |
| Altitude (above sea level) |
? m |
| Types of stopping trains |
Suburban all stations
Suburban limited stops
Intercity |
| Number of platforms |
12 |
| Number of tracks |
12 |
| Platform arrangement |
2 side
5 island |
| Type of station |
Ground
Underground |
| Ticket barriers |
Yes |
| Transfers available |
Train
Bus |
| Disabled access |
No |
| Station facilities |
Link |
|
|
- Pikablu, trying to get round my objections by placing it here is not going to help. There is no reason to change the template - but I'm fine with the first change. The template is not too long - that suggestion was rejected; and there's no need to use Ministry colours - we've already used them extensively and you yourself have been reverting templates away from Ministry colours anyway. The reason there is not much data on elevation is that one particular user was still in the process of obtaining it, but there is certainly no reason to change it to one line. Let's leave alone what does not need changing. JRG 08:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Hello - I'd been admiring this template for a while, and I must say the proposed changes look awful. I'm not familiar with the politics of the template or JRG's whinging above, but I'll put in my say on the colours anyway. Lonelygirl16 08:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for the honest opinions. JRG has proposed a compromise template in his sandbox that retains the original alternating coloring but modified the header. The above sample has been changed to transclude from JRG's sandbox. Any thoughts? --Pikablu0530 13:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- I like the change of the background colour, although it would be better if it were the exact same shade (#006AAF) as the header image. In regards to the alternating line colouring, the Suburb and Street fields have the same background. In the current template, it's the Suburb and Town fields that do so. I prefer it the current way. Harryboyles 03:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- I have fixed the Suburb and Towns fields background colour such that they are the same colour (just like the original one). As for the background colour of the header, I agree it should be the same shade (#006AAF) as the image, however when I tried it it appears to be a different colour, any reason why this is the case? Maybe it's just my computer/browser's colour settings. Feel free to change it to #006AAF at anytime though. Thanks. --Pikablu0530 10:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Conversion to ParserFunctions
Please list problem cases here, so that we can fix any problems. Don't reinsert deprecated and now defunct Wikipedia:hiddenStructure CSS hack. --Ligulem 09:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- I don't see the problem with the old code - it wasn't causing any problems. Who cares if it's defunct? Anyway, the latest alternative you suggested completely changed and wrecked the template, which people have spent hours making. I liked the first alternative you suggested, which seems to have stopped not loading the pictures now, so I'm happy to leave it at that. (JROBBO 00:33, 15 October 2006 (UTC))
- No problem with that. Per the "wrecking": I assume you're referring to this edit. I have applied that very same code pattern to numerous templates already and it worked well. I also checked inclusions and couldn't find a single bad wrecked article. So I would be really interested in knowing an actual specific call of this template that was broken. Could you give an example? Which article was wrecked? I'm really curious. BTW I'm certainly not up to destroying the work of others. --Ligulem 00:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- If you applied that template to all the railway station pages on which it was located (I checked at least three and they all had the same problem), it kept coming up with the header text all out of alignment and the boxes in which the station attributes were located were far too small. The edit which you have done now has made it much better, but the initial problems I had with the pictures not loading must have been a wikipedia problem with the image server, and not to do with the template itself. (JROBBO 01:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC))
Ok. For your reference, I copied [1] to here and transclude that to the lefthand side below using the call from Redfern railway station, Sydney. On the right-hand side is the current version of the template (which at the moment is this version):
Redfern
|
 |
| South Coast Line |
| Blue Mountains Line |
| Newcastle and Central Coast Line |
| Eastern Suburbs/Illawarra Line |
| Bankstown Line |
| Inner West Line |
| Airport & East Hills Line |
| South Line |
| Western Line |
| Olympic Park Line |
| Northern Line |
| Station code |
RDF |
| Suburb |
Redfern |
| Street(s) |
Lawson St
Gibbons St |
| Distance from Central Station |
1.3 km |
| Station Altitude (above sea level) |
? m |
| Types of stopping trains |
Suburban all stations
Suburban limited stops
Intercity |
| Number of platforms |
12 |
| Number of tracks |
12 |
| Platform arrangement |
2 side
5 island |
| Type of station |
Ground/Underground |
| Ticket barriers |
Yes |
| Transfers available |
Train
Bus |
| Disabled access |
No |
| Station facilities |
Link |
|
|
- I can't see any difference. Could you please provide an example call that would show how my version (the left side) is "wrecked" as you say? --Ligulem 13:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- They appear to be working now - but I am not lying when I say that they had problems before. You may notice that Harryboyles played around with the top header because of the problems he had with the text at the top. There were problems with it initially, but they appear to have cleared up now. Can we leave it at your initial replacement of the HiddenStructure code though? It doesn't cause any problems so I think it's best if we leave it for now. (JROBBO 13:56, 15 October 2006 (UTC))
- As I already said I have no problem with your version and I won't revert you. I just don't understand why the removal of that pipe in my edit you reverted "wrecked" anything. The pipe makes the image parameter not to display on the template page itself and has zilch influence on the transclusions because it is in the conditional part of an if clause checking for exactly that parameter. Flatly stating that my edit "wrecked" the template without being able to provide evidence for that claim is rather odd. I hope you do understand that. If not, I'm sorry. I'm not saying you're lying, but you are simply in error. Probably you missed something here. That's all. --Ligulem 15:10, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- As I've already said, it WAS not displaying properly and the display was all over the place. The header text was all out of alignment on the pages where the template is located, and the text boxes below weren't correct there either. I don't know why it was like that, and I'm sorry for blaming you when it may not have been your fault. It certainly looked "wrecked" at that time though. It isn't now. (JROBBO 06:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC))
- With regards to the header, someone changed the padding between the headings in the main CSS code, making the headers look out of alignment. I changed the image to fix this problem. Then the change to the heading padding was reverted. Thus the image for the template had to be reverted. I agree with JROBBO that the template looked wrecked before. Now everything looks right and it appears that the code has been updated. I think we can leave it at that/ Harryboyles 06:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
The header image, Image:Cityrailsign.svg, is being stretched and you see horrible artefacts around the edge of the yellow circle. Should we get a higher resolution copy of the image, or make the header smaller? enochlau (talk) 13:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- It's not horrible artifacts, it's actually a slightly lighter colour for the border. The size is fine on my computer and I've used two different browsers to check. JROBBO 09:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
