Template talk:Infobox airport/Archive 6

Formal edit request
Please change the color of the text from white to black on Template:Infobox airport, becasue the current color scheme violates WP:COLOR. Grapesoda22 23:50, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done GeoffreyT2000  ( talk,  contribs ) 01:44, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The hyperlinks are still colored white. Grapesoda22 04:09, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * A further change by Jonesey95 was made to the template, and I also changed the color for Air Force Materiel Command from white to black in the template documentation. GeoffreyT2000  ( talk,  contribs ) 05:16, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Grapesoda22 00:42, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , your signature violates WP:SIGLINK. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

, What is the specific violation of WP:COLOR? In my opinion, black on dark blue is much harder to read than white on dark blue. I don't agree with this sudden change to a template found on about 14,000 pages. — Sunnya343&#9992; (háblame • my work) 20:25, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , we could make the background color lighter or darker. But, 669ACD/black =  is a much greater contrast than 669ACD/white = . Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  21:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The contrast ratio has to be at least 7 on this checker. Grapesoda22 (talk) 00:18, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , if you want white text, the lightest alternative (ratio greater than 7) would be . Thanks Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 18:29, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , the current situation still doesn't seem optimal to me. Could we try this, which has a higher contrast ratio of 13.65: . This is the style for the Major US Airports template. Regards — Sunnya343&#9992; (háblame • my work) 03:13, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , that's better, and even better would be which has a  contrast ratio.  this is the secondary color used by navbox as set by MediaWiki:Common.css. Frietjes (talk) 14:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , could you try implementing your suggestion? — Sunnya343&#9992; (háblame • my work) 01:33, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * done, using the "Level 2 color" defined by MediaWiki:Common.css, and the "Level 3 color" in the data table. Frietjes (talk) 14:10, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, it looks much better now. — Sunnya343&#9992; (háblame • my work) 16:13, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Improving colors once more

 * This is not good enough yet. The navbox colors were chosen and set to make a navbox recognisable as ... being a navbox (color supporting the semantics/meaning).


 * Let's start with a different color ('hue'), and then varying into two shades (calculations were done offline). I propose:
 * Hue: a different blue: (H=140/360; it should be a skyish blue of course)
 * 'level 2': (140-85/255-255/255). Ratio:  ✅ (changed after OP)
 * 'level 3': (140-50/255-255/255). Ratio:  ✅
 * OK? -DePiep (talk) 23:53, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Now in testcases. -DePiep (talk) 01:44, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Changed the first color into #AAE6FF (darker) to get more diff with the lighter one. -DePiep (talk) 08:55, 9 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Title bar background now the same as headers. Shall I propose a darker 'level-1' color for the title? -DePiep (talk) 08:59, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * 2nd proposal: add a separate title bar color.
 * 'level 1': (140-120/255-255/255). Ratio:  ✅
 * A tile bar is something else as a header bar (semantics). -DePiep (talk) 09:17, 9 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Pls consider the proposal, see the testcases. -DePiep (talk) 22:04, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Everything looks good in the test cases except the white on gray on blue of "Air Force Materiel Command". That should be the same black on blue of the other headers. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:21, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * That "Air Force Materiel Command" (looks bad) is entered as a style if by an individual article editor. Not a useful testcase. I'll remove it. -DePiep (talk) 00:16, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I really think the current colors are fine. That bright blue is off-putting to me. — Sunnya343&#9992; (háblame • my work) 22:42, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You could ask for an other kind of blue (or purple. For airfields?), I'm just throwing a first ball.
 * What do you think of that new 3rd, separate color for the title background? Can you agree with me that the infobox title should be distinct from a header?
 * About semantics, the meaning of a color on a website. To put it straight: If I'd mention this issue on a relevant Wiki forum, this "abuse of navbox colors" would not survive. -DePiep (talk) 00:16, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see a serious issue with using the same colour more than once. [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%2F%5BdD%5D%5BdD%5D%5BdD%5D%5BdD%5D%5BfF%5D%5BfF%5D%2F&title=Special:Search&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns108=1&ns109=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns446=1&ns447=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1&ns2300=1&ns2301=1&ns2302=1&ns2303=1 this search returns several thousand].  but I also don't object to using a different colour scheme.  a light sky blue or a light steel blue would work for me. Frietjes (talk) 00:03, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * "More than once" is not the issue. "For multiple meanings" is. Especially since this is an infobox, confusion with a (sidebar) navbox is too easy. Hell, people were coding  and then came complaints that the nice table did not print. Semantics. (btw, a very 'otherstuffexists' argument you made). -DePiep (talk) 01:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * "More than once" is not the issue. "For multiple meanings" is. Especially since this is an infobox, confusion with a (sidebar) navbox is too easy. Hell, people were coding  and then came complaints that the nice table did not print. Semantics. (btw, a very 'otherstuffexists' argument you made). -DePiep (talk) 01:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Issue with Statistics field on mobile view
On mobile view, the Statistics field often shortend and shift to left when you see it on your phone. To fix this, I replaced subbox by child, and the field is displaying properly on the test cases while I see it on mobile browser. -- Great Brightstar (talk) 04:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Great Brightstar, I believe the use of "subbox" here was intentional to prevent the labels from having the same width as the labels in the rest of the infobox. For example, in first test, you can see that the statistics labels are very long compared to the labels at the top of the page.  The sandbox version wraps the labels in the statistics block, but the live template does not.  Can you modify the sandbox so this unnecessary wrapping doesn't happen?  Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  16:18, 8 April 2021 (UTC)


 * OK, I understand. The problem for subbox is mainly because of the mobile view inject  for the most of table elements if the screen is narrower than 720 px, which cause display problems for some smaller tables, I've proposed a solution at MediaWiki talk:Common.css. -- Great Brightstar (talk) 14:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 6 October 2021
This is a very minor edit request.

At label19 = Elevation AMSL, have AMSL link to Height above sea level as that's the current target. – The Grid  ( talk )  14:31, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * okay. Frietjes (talk) 17:51, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Number of gates in the infobox
I think there should be an option to include the number of active gates being used by the airport in the infobox. The number of active gates is a quick and broadly easily understandable way to demonstrate and show the scale of an airport's operations. Airports themselves recognize this, too: that is why whenever airports expand, they usually communicate the size of the expansion at least partly in terms of the number of new gates added. For example, Nashville International Airport would typically talk about its new international gates in promotional materials. This is because the number of gates is far more tangible than, e.g., passenger capacity. We can't envision what it would mean for an airport to handle, say, 6 million more people annually. But we can certainly envision what it would mean for an airport to have 15 more gates.--Henrygg98 (talk) 20:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Short description?
Would there be any objection to adding a "type in location" short description to this infobox? Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:41, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That looks like a good idea to me. You can test it in the sandbox if you are feeling brave. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm just going to port over the fairly light type in location code from the other infoboxes I've added this to. Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 06:37, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Image Protocol
Is there an agreed protocol to use for the image and image2 variables? Should one be a photo of the terminal and the other should be a aerial view of the runway? Or is it more free form? I have some photos of general aviation airports and wanted to know where I should put them within the template. -Ichabod (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ichabod (talk • contribs) 03:29, 15 January 2014‎ (UTC)

Architect field in Infobox
Hi. I would like to propose adding the field of "Architect" to the infobox. For famous structures and buildings, it makes sense to cite who designed & built it. It is mentioned in most every article but not in the infobox.

For infobox_museums, it worked via embedding Infobox building, which has also got a few other architecture-related parameters, like architectural_style with this code:

undefined

Can we do the same for Airports? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nconcklin (talk • contribs) 17:11, 7 August 2015‎ (UTC)