Template talk:Villagepumppages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Old discussions

[edit] Newsect2 template

I've put it back to the version not using the new section template because of it was still going over the 5 template limit on some pages (it uses that template in the header of each page too). May as well have all of them as the non-template version rather than half and half. violet/riga (t) 23:09, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Category

I've removed the Category:Wikipedia village pump link from this because people were using it on non-Pump pages (like user pages. Will add the category to each pump page itself. -- Netoholic @ 07:26, 2005 May 7 (UTC)

[edit] Use on user pages

Many people were using this template on their user pages, but with the recent changes to this template, it now looks like s**t on said pages. Why couldn't a new template be devised rather than changing this one? — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 02:27, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What about this new image, which has no background?

Village pump – {{{1}}}
{{{2}}} Village Pump

Main page · News (post) · Policy (post) · Technical (post) · Proposals (post) · Assistance (post) · Miscellaneous (post)

-- SoothingR(pour) 22:15, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shortcut

The new third parameter allows to specify the shortcut, same idea as for guidelines, policies, etc., see Wikipedia header templates. Qif magic for the shortcut is apparently unnecessary, the template is (almost) only included on Village Pump sections, and they all have WP:VPx shortcuts.

Joining the nav nox with the lead table could make sense for very long intro texts, but that's not the case, floating with the ToC is IMHO better. Omniplex  12:11, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

For legacy browsers some padding / spacing helps to separate the 2nd row (= 2nd parameter) from the last row (= sig and posting info), and to separate the left column (= text) from the right column (= shortcut). {{Lorem Ipsum}} was unrealistic for VP section intro texts (= 2nd parameter), I replaced it by {{Lorem}}. Omniplex  13:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted you. In both browsers I've tried it in (Firefox 1.5 and Internet Explorer 7.0) the shortcut box is aligned to the right with some padding around it. Which browser are you using that has the shortcut box in the wrong location? —Locke Cole • t • c 04:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I've added a colon to your comment because I didn't see it... ;-) I use an old mozilla 3, CSS has zero effect with this monster. Stuff like align= works under certain conditions. If the cell padding / spacing is too big for your browser simply shrink it, but not to zero. Or overwrite it with CSS, then you get the CSS version, and I get the legacy version. The archive link is a PITA on the talk pages, maybe a Qif-talk link would be better, but I'm not yet sure how to do this, {{Sif}} or similar. Omniplex  04:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Ick.. you use this on purpose? =) It might be possible to detect the current namespace and omit the archive link on talk pages (AzaToth probably has a quick idea for that if you want to ask him). But seriously, unless you're using a 386/486 I think you should be able to use Firefox or IE 6.x (obviously I don't know your situation so maybe you are using a 386/486 or some odd hardware setup that doesn't support FF/IE) and then the whole issue would be kind of moot. =)
In any event, I've self reverted for now. Ping AzaToth if you want to try and get the archive link worked out (unless you want to investigate that yourself of course). =) And sorry for not indenting my reply, don't know how I forgot that. :( —Locke Cole • t • c 05:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Missing colon: that was a critical race, you did your rv magic before documenting it, I added the talk shortcuts at the same time, and my comment here (see below) came before your comment, therefore I missed it... ;-) Yes, I'm using the monster mozilla on purpose, OS/2 Warp 3 isn't tested with FF, and 2 GB isn't my RAM but the complete harddisk space. That's why I was so pissed by the WP:AUM war, WP:HIDE has simply no effect for me. Omniplex  07:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry, you weren't the only one pissed off about WP:AUM. It's rejected at least now, and most people (yourself included I see) seem to agree WP:HIDE is an overall bad idea. =) I don't know if you've seen it, but take a look at User:Locke Cole/Don't use hiddenStructure. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 10:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
You could add Template talk:See#Caveats to your collection of ugly effects - inline PNGs are somewhat pointless for really old or text mode browsers <gd&r> Omniplex  13:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

If you clicked on one of the archive links on the Template:Villagepumppages (edit talk links history) page you're redirected to this page with the documentation & discussion of the template. I've created a mainly pointless {{R to documentation}} for this purpose. Omniplex  20:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

The archive link is certainly ugly on talk pages, because it doesn't work there. But the shortcuts [[WT:VPx]] are okay now, I'll add them to WT:WT. Omniplex  04:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that works now, I didn't know that {{ns:Project}}:x results in Wikipedia:x, or that anybody uses this template on other projects. Because I don't "see" inline PNGs (unless I click on them) or CSS colours I can only hope that Locke Cole got this right. As far as I'm concerned the right column needs no colours, and I certainly won't start any <font color="tricks"> ;-) Omniplex  09:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
See Help:Variable for a list of MediaWiki variables. =) As for it's use on other projects/languages, it happens from time to time and little pre-emptive measures like this can make life easier on those copying/pasting it. =) (Of course it's doubtful they call their archive an "Archive", but it's one less thing to change). Agreed on the colors. —Locke Cole • t • c 10:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Explanations for Gennaro

Some issues: Apparently you tried to replace aling="center" and similar constructs by style="text-align: center". That's pointless, for modern browsers there's no difference, for old browsers it breaks the alignment. Very critical for left+right, old browsers take this as hint to start floating left+right. Just leave it as it is, and try your CSS magic on top of it: Modern browsers will ignore the legacy markup if there's better (real or wannabe) CSS. Old browsers never see the CSS.

I tried to repair it, but there were at least four critical (wrt backwards compatibility) changes. Please try it in smaller steps if possible. The <hr /> worked, but IMO it's kind of ugly. For anything you did only with CSS I can't judge it, just reinsert it if it was fine from your POV. Maybe say which problem you're trying to solve. Extremely long section titles in the ToC by chance? -- Omniplex 09:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)