Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Stargate task force/Templates/Archive 1

Character template
I was thinking about coding the characters by color. I mean, changing the backgroud color of the character name according to pre-determined guide, similar to the one used in the Comics project or the Harry Potter one. Right now, all the character use a dark red colour as a background. My idea was to differentiate the character by race: a colour for humans, another for Jaffa, another for Goaul'd, etc. What do you think? -- Andromeda 00:24, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Proposed background colors:

I'm leaving the dark red for humans since this is the default color it had been used since now and most pages that already use the template are of human characters. It can be changed of course. It just would mean editing more pages. Those colours would also be used in the proposed race template below.

Opinions? -- Andromeda 02:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Excellent idea, I actually suggested this myself, then came onto this page and saw that you'd beaten me to it. --alfakim 16:18, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Races template
After I saw some informative boxes in some Star Trek pages (the Romulans for example), I was thinking about creating a template for Stargate races but I'm not sure if it would be too much. This one in the right is my idea. What do you think?

A filled-in example:

-- Andromeda 02:09, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

This is cool, and I think the template should also be coloured to follow the above work on the character templates. So the Asgard should be a blue template.--alfakim 16:11, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Template information page
I've created a page with the information about the current templates (always taking into account that the bgcolours and the race template are still under discussion). I wanted to make the templates easy to use for new people, but I'm not sure if I've gone to far in the other direction. Opinions? -- Andromeda 08:19, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Nice work, I'm all for the current templates.--alfakim 19:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! Since it seems there's no opposition, I'll start using the colors and the race template today. -- Andromeda 05:32, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Stub Template vs. Project Template
I think the glyph used in the stubs should be the same as the one for the project. Maybe it's just me, but I'd them to be consistent, and I like to blue-on-black better. Thoughts? -- Sigma 04:06, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

We've now added a THIRD type of icon the these templates (The same that is on the Project's main page). I'd really rather we kept things consistent instead of using multiple icons. Please comment. SigmaEpsilon → &Sigma;&Epsilon; 04:47, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Template for the gate addresses?
I left a comment on Talk:Athos (Stargate) but was told to put it here, so I am.

I made a template to make putting a gate address on a page somewhat easier. I copied Athos (Stargate) (as of 17:50, 19 August 2005 (UTC)) to User:Andy Janata/Athos (Stargate) and edited it to use the template. I think having a template for the addresses would make it easier to enter the addresses, as you just need the glyph numbers for the template.

As an example, Athos (Stargate) has  as the code to produce the gate address. The template converts that mess into, which I feel is much easier to read and edit.

Feedback would be appreciated. --Andy Janata 21:27, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Great job! That makes it a lot easier. --Mattwj2002 23:43, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I added a template for the Milky Way Gates as well. It works in a similar matter.   produces  which is the Abydos Stargate address.

produces --Mattwj2002 01:35, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, now do we want to make these "normal" namespace templates, and convert existing pages over? --Andy Janata 01:49, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I converted the user space templates to namespace templates.  produces
 * This is just one of the best ideas ever. what's the final template name and yes, convert all!--alfakim 23:10, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Good idea and, as it seems there's consensus, I'll add them to the templates page. Can you tell me the template names, please? Thanks! -- Andromeda 03:27, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Mattwj2002 posted them a couple inches up over a day ago. --Andy Janata 13:32, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Added to the template page alongside a Glyph list for reference. -- Andromeda 05:39, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Nice templates, but they don't yet handle some border cases. Neither of them handles 8-coordinate addresses and the Pegasus one doesn't handle unknown glyphs. I'll take a look at whether I can easily fix this in coming days, just a heads-up in case anyone else wants to take a crack at it. Bryan 09:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see there's already a workaround for 8-symbol addresses. Just leaves the Pegasus unknowns to deal with, then. Bryan 09:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * We can just upload AtlantisGlyphUnknown.png = StargateGlyphUnknown.png and then it'll work. Something I'm not happy about though is that the default for the addresses is to come out big with brackets around it. Where is this format actually used? Anyway, I'll upload the new image to make it work.--  Alfakim  --  talk   14:15, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Template Standardisation
So begins a big debate. Stargate templates are found in many forms, and there seems to be an awful lot of them at the moment. I did some minor editing to add some consistency, but as a tribute to Wikipedia, they're constantly evolving. The question is, how do we want these to looks? And more importantly, is there really a need for all of them? -b 19:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) What do we want to see in the navigational templates?
 * 2) What purpose are these templates intended to serve?
 * 3) How do we want these templates to look?
 * 4) What is the color scheme?
 * 5) On which pages should each template be found?

I would answer (as the creator of some):
 * 1. What is necessary to the articles. There should be a general Stargate template for navigating around Stargate as a whole topic, and there should be more specialized ones for specialized things (like races or technology).
 * 2. They allow quick navigation around Stargate topics. The generic template allows a virgin user to find all the background information on Stargate (from all the main articles) while the specialized templates allows both virgin and experienced users to find particular articles quickly.
 * 3. Whatever is necessary to make them look sexy. I don't think standardization looks good if you're forced into line breaks and things where they clearly don't belong.
 * 4. *shrug*
 * 5. The pages they relate to. Generic on most, Technology and Generic on Technology, and Races and Generic on races. Staxringold 22:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I mostly agree with Staxringold. I think they all are necisary. The topics template is the most important of them all. Races, Tech and charcters are all important too. I don't care if they're the same or not just as long as they look good, and link to every page they should. Tobyk777 00:00, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

If a page came from a template, that same template should be on the page. That's pretty much a rule of thumb. But I don't see what the problem is really. The templates are doing well. I like the current use of Generic + 1 other on most pages. If we think more about categorising pages (in the wikiproject) eg into Races, Characters, Planets, Technology, etc, then there can be a template for each ubercategory to go with each article in it. which is the case mostly, anyway.

purpose of templates? navigation mainly. but it also helps categorise, as said. like a quick list of the recurring characters, so they're all there in one space to jump between.

they should look like they do now. font-size:10pt in the title, bold, center, blue background. font-size:90% in the body, center, light-blue bg. edit and to the side. but i think the bg colours can change between templates if we like. like the alien races one is a bit green i think. or perhaps each subtemplate should use a similar colourscheme. --  Alfakim  --  talk   14:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Is there a danger of having...too many templates? -b 05:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Also, particularly, perhaps way too big? -b 05:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Side note, especially when there's Category:Stargate_technology. -b 05:11, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I think they're fine. StargateTech could be cut down to more essential items if you want. be bold. --  Alfakim  --  talk   17:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * rolls eyes* I like to think I'm damn bold for a n00b. P.S., wanna e-mail me your msn? -b 00:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Disagree Stargate Tech is fine. there are way bigger templates on wikipedia.  Tobyk777 03:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Color Templates
Pardon me, but I'm the only here who thinks that the color templates are a bit of an overkill? To have a template just to set up a color it seems so trivial and a squandering of Wikipedia's resources. I haven't seen this kind of templates anywhere else, even with projects that have lots more pages that use templates that us. Comments? --Andromeda 07:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * A template isn't a big thing you know. It's just a tiny bit of text, it's not like templates live in the Halls of Templatia and these new ones aren't posh enough. You get templates much more seemingly little than this. If templates really did suck Wikipedia resources (which they don't, at all, by the way), would user boxes be allowed? Countless wikipedians have around 10-50-100 user box templates on their userpages. Templates are there to make things easier, in fact their function is described as "to make it easy to standardise the look of articles", which is precisely what's going on here.


 * As for triviality, i don't think so. I added the colour templates for the one reason that i wanted to change the colours for the races (i thought the old ones were very yucky). Rather than just going and changing every single article's colour code, i just went that extra little bit more to make a template. This way, if anyone disagrees with my new colouring it can be changed back in one edit, and indeed, if anyone ever grows a disliking towards the colours in the future, they will also be able to easily change the colours.


 * Lastly, it was you that invented the colourscheming, yes? The problem was that every time a new character/race article got made, you had to run off to the wikiproject page to collect the colour code for that race. Now, all you need to do is 1) know what race the character is (which you obviously do), then 2) use and it'll give you the standard colour we can decide upon at SGColor Tau'ri or whatever.


 * --  Alfakim  --  talk   07:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) It's not if the template is big, but that the template calls another, which documentations says to avoid when posible. Instead of using a metatemplate, we can try to implement the if syntax like, for example, the language template does. It's a bit tricky, but I think I get how they do it.
 * 2) That's your opinion. Could you just have asked about the color scheme before starting doing this change all by yourself?
 * 3) I proposed a scheme and people agreed. I don't mind changing them, I mind how you are doing it.
 * --Andromeda 11:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't see the need to ask as, with what I implemented, it could be changed back instantly.


 * Never heard of this IF syntax, but if we can achieve these effects with it them I'm all for it. I'll investigate.


 * I agreed to the scheme too. I just changed my mind. This makes it easier to change minds.


 * I've never heard this documentation that says avoid using metatemplates. Can you point me to it?


 * --  Alfakim  --  talk   21:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I've been to look at the IF code. It is actually a clever usage of metatemplates. The language template embeds the qif template which embeds the boolne and booleq templates. Template:Language is actually a spaghetti of metatemplating. I honestly don't know where you've heard to avoid metatemplating as I've never heard it and it doesn't slow things down in any way.


 * As for actually employing the IF code ourselves (i.e. embedding the qif template into the Stargate race template and Stargate character template), what's the point? That would involve adding a very complex template to achieve something that can be done with a much much easier template: SGColor.


 * --  Alfakim  --  talk   22:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) Avoid using meta-templates
 * 2) I don't know what code did you look at. The code I saw just implemented a colour array and then the template choose the colour from it based in the value "language family" passed when invoked. It would be just a couple lines of code. And why? Because it would be a lot easier to use. People won't have to remember the name of any template, or any special syntax, just the race the character belongs to. The template will seek the colour automatically. --Andromeda 16:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) The article you pointed me to doesn't say that metatemplated slow things down (as I knew they didnt). And furthermore it says "avoid doing it if it makes the template fragile." And it's talking about complex, multilayered metatemplating, not just 1 in another 1. Firstly, this new colour template isn't complex, secondly it doesn't make anything fragile in any way.
 * 2) I looked at it again just to be sure, and I'm right. The part you looked at (which says "if=") is again part of a metatemplate. Look at the code again. Any time you see a {{ then whatever's after it is within a template.
 * 3) Their method of selecting colours is actually no more or less difficult than ours, other than this one is simpler. For theirs, you need to say "familycolor=black" or something. But that's no good for this because the idea is that you don't have to remember the colour, just the race, and then it puts in the correct colour for you. If you are making an article about Jack O'Neill, you know he's Tau'ri (or you wouldn't be making the article), so you you just stick in {{SGColor|Tau'ri}} . Damned simple. --  Alfakim  --  talk   04:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * For you, perhaps, but for a lot of users templates aren't so simple to use. And I wasn't saying to do it *exactly* like them. In fact, I wanted to use the already set "race" field, so people wouldn't have to put any color definition whatsoever. Just set the race field and the template does the rest. --Andromeda 09:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Not possible due to the categories we use. i.e. we don't have a colour for the Re'tu, we have a colour for "Other". So unless the Race field was filled out as "Other", that strategy wouldn't work.


 * Anyway, the actual use of the template hardly matters. Once it's in the article it's there, it doesn't matter if other people understand it (and damn, if they don't, they shouldn't be editing it!) Furthermore, the template would only really be used when creating a new character article, and anyone who creates articles and fills out an infobox KNOWS how to use a template as simple as SGColor.--  Alfakim  --  talk   00:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It will work very easily. In the array, you just specify as the value for Re'tu the value for Other, or you make "Other" the default color: if it doesn't matches anything else, then use the "Other" color.
 * 1) It matters. The easier to edit it is, the more people will collaborate. 2) You're not very realistic, aren't you? Lots of people try to use infoboxes without having the slightiest idea of how to use them. I've seen some real barbarities done. There's not "shouldn't edit" in Wikipedia. A template should be as easier to use as possible, even if it means that's a bit harder to edit, because a lot less people will edit it. --Andromeda 20:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * There are some cases where the "Race" field still wont fit the bill (i could implement this in about three seconds btw if we decide to do it). eg in the Jaffa article, the "Race" is "Jaffa (genetically altered human)". Would you prefer we sacrificed that and wrote simply "Jaffa", "Ancient", etc rather than the former more descriptive items? But i have an idea. how about IF the user DOESNT specify a colour, only THEN does it pick one automatically? sound good?--  Alfakim  --  talk   22:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) Sometimes, less is more. In infoboxes, sometimes too much information is added. I really prefer simply "Jaffa" to "Jaffa (genetically altered human)". Anyone who wants to know what a Jaffa is, it has only to click the link.
 * 2) And how do you plan to do that? --Andromeda 10:00, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I a Wikimarkup Zen master. shall i go through? If no colour is specified (like #232342) then it selects an automatic one based on the race field? yes? --  Alfakim  --  talk   04:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) What?¿? 2) But that doesn't solve the problem. People still has to specify a colour, at least in some cases, which also leads to the editing problem if we decide to change a problem. In that sense, is no change from the actual system. I prefer the other approach, freeing people from having to choose a colour and also giving us (as in the Project) more flexibility changing colours when needed. --Andromeda 08:36, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You seem to have misunderstood. My above proposal is this:
 * User can set colour directly to #xxxxxx
 * If User wants, he can use {{tl|SGColor}}
 * If the colour field is completely unspecified, only then one is chosen automatically based on the Race field.
 * It will either be recommended to use {{tl|SGColor}} or to leave the field blank so the automatic version kicks in.
 * In either case, all colours can be altered in a single movement, with ease, anytime needed.
 * Sound good? --  Alfakim  --  talk   09:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Sincerely? No. I think it's even worse than now. You are complicating things too much. Templates should be real easy to use, not make people think too hard about them, because they will simply not use them then. They're a complement, something that adds to the page, not the content itself. If you make them too hard to use, people loses patience with them. I've worked in a help desk. People wants things easy, specially if you're asking them to make the effort to collaborate in something. "Do I have to use a hex color, a template or what?" makes a lot of people think "To hell with it" and leave without collaborating. Which may be good on a coder's part (flexibility) it's not always good on the user's part. We should choose one method, the easiest one, and stick to it. --Andromeda 10:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * You're really not getting this... anyway - yes. My proposal is the same as yours, you're... just not seeing it. Long and short of it: i'll implement the automatic system. It'll be up to us to go and remove the colour fields from all the templates though, and to make sure the Race field is standard "e.g. Jaffa, not Jaffa (gen human)". Even more summarised: after this edit, both Stargate race and Stargate character will choose colours based on the Race field. --  Alfakim  --  talk   11:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you're not getting it. What's the advantage of that if you keep using the colours templates that started all of this? I still think they're not a good idea. The question was to use a colour array instead of them, not to put more code in top of them. --Andromeda 17:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Let's come back over here. I thought we resolved the colour templates issue. No one is now ever going to have to use {{tl|SGColor}}. It's straight and simple. However {{tl|SGColor}} is the colour array that you're talking about, which is called through {{tl|Stargate race}} and {{tl|Stargate character}}. There's no point adding the colour array directly to either of those two because it has to be the same across the two of them. So the colour array is defined in {{tl|SGColor}} and is called through the Race field of the two top-level templates.

Then to actually change the colour array across all articles at once, you merely alter SGColor Tau'ri to change the Tau'ri's colour. It really is very uncomplex now. --  Alfakim  --  talk   01:07, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You're missing the point. The point, besides usability, was having one self-contained template, instead eight six-character ones where the comments are longer than the template itself, which I still think is an overkill. Also, if you want to alter colours, you have to alter eight templates, instead of just editing two (and in fact doing the job only once, since afterwards you just copy & paste the colour array in the other template, if necessary). And it's always easier to maintain two templates than ten.
 * Also, the new colours you changed are ugly. The Asgard is also almost unreadable. --Andromeda 23:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Good, I'm glad it's ugly. Now you can change it really easily.


 * On a more serious note, there are only 7 templates that ever need to be altered. (each of the ones containing the colour codes). they're in distinct templates to make things easier as {{tl|SGColor}} points races to the correct colours through a fairly complex array (taking into account links, errors, etc). If the colours were straight-off defined in {{tl|SGColor}}, then changes would have to be doubled down the list a couple of times, with a large margin for hard-to-detect errors creeping in. this way, that cant happen, as the colour code is stored and called seperately.


 * If you're that annoyed about having 7 templates rather than 1 which defines all colours, i can convert it again to do that. Then we'd have {{tl|SGColor}} (which is really more of a go-between to filter out errors), and one other template like {{tl|SGColorArray}} that defines the seven colours. frankly i dont see the need for this and think it makes it much more complicated, but if you insist then i can do it.--  Alfakim  --  talk   01:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)