Template talk:Infobox Dotcom company
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
see Talk:YouTube/Archive_4#Use_of_Infobox_Website
[edit] Use on websites
I won't revert this situation, but until this template is fully tested, fully documented, and ideally reviewed by experienced editors (both for code- and value-wise), I would suggest not adding it to any current articles, especially if it means replacing other more mature ones. Don't rush things...it appears only a day old! -- Huntster T • @ • C 10:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I've added a basic description but don't worry for the maturity, it's only {{Infobox Company}} + {{Infobox Website}}. 16@r 13:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Screenshot location
The resulting infobox looks rather odd with the screenshot image right in the middle of all the text. I would suggest moving the screenshot parameter to the bottom of the box (or perhaps omitting it entirely). Does anyone agree? --CrazyLegsKC 05:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'd suggest omitting altogether. I recently noticed a deletion proceeding of a screenshot (though I cannot remember the file), where the very valid argument for deletion was that even though a website may copyright itself, it may contain visual elements that are themselves copyrighted by another organisation. I'm always wary of making it seem as if an image is require, when copyright issues such as this can so easily (and honestly) be overlooked. But that's just my opinion...if a screenshot is desired, it can be added to an appropriate section of the page in which the specific content is discussed (thus fulfilling that part of Fair-use requirements). — Huntster (t • @ • c) 06:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- It just seems like more clutter in the infobox. If it is to be included, I suggest going with CrazyLeg's suggestion of moving it to the bottom, so that all regular text data is kept together. There are plenty of other infoboxes that do exactly this...I think this is the only one to substantially change the formula. Also, it is generally a good idea to discuss such changes before making them. Would you mind doing so in the future? — Huntster (t • @ • c) 20:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Well, it depends... I know generally it's a good thing to DISCUSS ideas before making major overhauls, but in this case, I didn't feel it's was one. Plus as the template's creator I was nearly the only contributor till here, that's probably why I didn't feel necessary to discuss it before doing it, but I agree with your opinion (discussing before acting) and yes I am aware I'm not at all the template's owner. Apart from this, the pro of my proposal is that the location of the screenshot (in the middle of the infobox) clearly allows to distinguish information concerning the company and information about the website. What do you think of it? 16@r (talk) 21:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Sorry about earlier, I was in a foul mood and it showed :/ Okay, the code you are using now is a nice, seamless integration into the infobox architecture, so I can't complain about that, especially since it is hidden by default. I still think placement at the bottom of the infobox would be better (see how Infobox Album or Single do it), or most appropriately, placement outside of the infobox so that fair-use violations won't be an issue (having the screenshot actually in the section of prose discussing the contents of the site). I'm concerned more for policy violation than appearance, to clarify. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 10:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Extra space
Something in this template is triggering an extra line of space at the top of every page where this is used. The code is too complex for me this fix it. Help! ☆ CieloEstrellado 05:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
