User talk:Jon2harman

Infobox GB station: image size
Hi, I see that you are carrying out edits - there should be no need to do that, because use of the image_name parameter will use the default size for  images, which is 265px; this gives a consistent appearance for the (several thousand) pages using that infobox. If it is necessary to size the image, for example a very tall image may need to be narrowed to make it a reasonable height, the imagesize parameter is available for this purpose, ie Bootle Oriel Road.jpg 250px --14:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. I was attempting to introduce some uniformity to some Merseyrail station articles, unaware that Template:Infobox GB station had a default image size. I couldn't see it listed on the infobox page - do you know if it's listed anywhere? Indeed, could you tell me how I can find out the styling for the infobox and any other defaults? Shall I reverse the said changes I made? Thanks for for your help, Jon2harman (talk) 14:38, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * See the template's documentation; under Optional fields it shows:

| image      = or | image_name = Crewe station platform12.jpg | imagesize  = 265px Note: only one of the image fields should be used. 'image' allows an image width to be specified, while 'image_name' automatically sets the width to 265px unless 'imagesize' is specified (preferred).
 * It's a bit ambiguous I suppose, but to me this means that the image_nameimagesize pair are preferred over image, and that if image_name is provided but imagesize is omitted the default width is 265px.
 * When you use image_name, you must be careful that if a imagesize parameter is provided, it mustn't be left blank - that can cause an absolutely enormous image to be shown. Try putting the following line into a sandbox page:
 * Then try the same but omitting the imagesize.
 * The image parameter also has a pitfall, but less dramatic - some people try to use it to display a caption, as in  - that simply won't work, captions must be placed in the caption parameter whether image or image_name is used.
 * Some templates are a bit short on details in their documentation. I often double-check by clicking the "Edit" or "View source" tab at the top, to see how the template actually works.
 * As regards reversing your changes: if the previous version didn't explicitly use imagesize to state a size, and the image is in landscape format, it's probably a good idea. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Redrose. I hadn't seen "'image_name' automatically sets the width to 265px" on the Template:Infobox GB station page. I was just curious to know if there was a way of looking at the source code of the template to see how it parses the markup, but I'll leave that to another day! I've reversed my changes. Jon2harman (talk) 22:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Redrose. I hadn't seen "'image_name' automatically sets the width to 265px" on the Template:Infobox GB station page. I was just curious to know if there was a way of looking at the source code of the template to see how it parses the markup, but I'll leave that to another day! I've reversed my changes. Jon2harman (talk) 22:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Hooton railway station. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Raywil (talk) 23:41, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll make sure to do this in future. Sorry, I was getting lazy.... Oh, does this include my talk page too?

Image galleries
Hi, re and similar edits: I don't think that a gallery of just one (or two) images is necessarily a "good thing" - placing images here and there through the article is permitted by the manual of style. In several articles there are right-aligned images directly below the infobox, and this can cause problems with certain browsers (such as Internet Explorer) where excessive amounts of blank space then occur to the left of the infobox. In such cases I find that it's easiest to align the image left, and move it down into a suitable section - for an old photo like this, just below the "History" heading would be a good place. This keeps the image at a visible size (gallery images are tiny), and also keeps it in context. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for the advice. I'm glad you're keeping an eye on what I'm doing! I'll read the manual of style and other Wikipedia documentation before I make big edits (for me, anyway) like this in future. I know, starting with the links at the top of this page would be a good idea! Do you think I should edit these pages to reflect your advice?
 * I'm not watching everything you're doing: just those pages which happen to be on my watchlist. I've moved the image up the page again, but this time put it in the history section, . It's probably best to take it on a case by case basis, as sometimes there is so little text that the use of more than one or two images will dominate the article. See also WP:IG for more on image galleries. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

 * Thanks Mike!

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)