Battlestar Wiki talk:Think Tank/TOS Article Pips

I would have to agree with this proposal, given that the RDM content has pretty much dwarfed the original series (and 1980) stuff.

As for constructive criticism: The badge in use right now needs to have a better contrast against the black background of the page, and the badge should be nearly flush with the right margin. (As I believe Shane noted, the alignment of this pip would be an issue if other pips are used as well.) -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 11:08, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Well, that's the trick, too. It should have good contrast in general, as who knows what color scheme or skin we might have in the future. (It looks OK on monobook, but bsgbook is the default). --Steelviper 11:35, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Well, what if there was an effect around the pip? For instance, how about a cloud effect similar to those seen in the promos for the new BSG series? -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 11:43, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

I like the idea of a luminous cloud, a tiny effect that brightens it. My wiki skillz are insufficient to move the icon to the far right as it should, something I did note. Should we break down a version for 1980 stuff as well? --Spencerian 11:59, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

The locx parameter specifies the number of pixels the image is displaced from the right side of the screen, while the locy parameter specifies the number of pixels the image is displaced from the top, I believe. The reason for its current placement was to avoid overlapping with any of the MANY possible icons. However, if it had to be far right either we could adjust all the other icons more to the left, or displace it off of the "top" row by adding a higher "locy" value.

I tried adding a white "outer glow" effect via photoshop, but it looked pretty ugly. That might be a job for Merc or somebody else with artistic skillz. --Steelviper 12:03, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for the clarification on the locx. I think this pip should always be dead last (closest to right edge). That way, collision with others will be less and we form some consistency. Yeah, the effect shouldn't be more than a few pixels, but has to be very very gradual. Definitely a job for Merc. I can see it in my minds eye... One critical side-effect of the use of these is that series-common articles (like Earth and Kobol) should be split. A lot of contributors argue for that anyway, and with the direction that RDM is going, it's a near-necessity now. --Spencerian 12:55, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Agreed. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 13:28, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

The LocX is always an issue. Since we have "High Traffic", "Sound", "QA", and "FA" (in that order) or them all contained within {{POV Real}} template. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 15:52, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Crazy thought... What if the logo changed whenever you entered a page dedicated to TOS? -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 16:11, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

I don't think that can happen. A template can't set a PHP var what would be needed to change the logo information. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 16:16, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

I've tried another approach, my friend. Check out Adama (TOS). -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 17:37, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Addendum: Obviously, the image might need to be revised for it to lock over the winged icon. Or we could just overlap an entirely new TOS-based logo over the existing logo, so as to signify a TOS article vs. an RDM one. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 17:46, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Hm. I don't see the change. Where it at? --Spencerian 18:34, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

You'll see the TOS image above the logo. You may have to do a hard refresh. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 18:43, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Got it. I like the implementation, but it's not as visible mostly because of the busyness around the logo and it being to the left. Maybe we should try a full logo as you noted, with the diamond filling the center. --Spencerian 19:31, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Looks great, but as said it's not very obvious and easily missed if you don't know about the feature. --Serenity 06:55, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

It could also be offset so that its on the bottom right hand corner of the logo, "in orbit" as it were. Something similar in appearance to Image:BSG WIKI Project.png. However, the more I think about it, the more I rather covering up the logo with a TOS-themed one. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 16:56, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

We also have to consider that load order can be odd. When I do a hard refresh I see the TOS logo load first, then the wiki logo loads over it (covering it up completely). --Steelviper 11:47, 17 April 2007 (CDT)

I see this template is in use on Adama (TOS) ... just an FYI that I see the image underneath the main logo, rather than over it. This is on Internet Explorer 6 (which I have to use at work) ... I'll try it with Firefox when I get home. JubalHarshaw 15:21, 17 April 2007 (CDT)

Yes, can we make a good retro TOS logo for those pages? I'm rather jazzed for it myself. --Spencerian 01:54, 15 April 2007 (CDT)

The logo seems quite harmless, but I want to be wary of giving the RDM continuity "first among equals" status. Speaking as an avowed RDM fan who has never watched TOS, there are still TOS-only fans out there and we gain nothing by alienating them. --April Arcus 11:14, 17 April 2007 (CDT)

Some articles are more equal than others? I don't think the intention was to in any way disparage or marginalize TOS-only fans so much as provide a distinctive visual cue that can help establish which series a particular article belongs to. While one can easily tell by the category, I'm not sure how intuitive that is for most people, and it is at the bottom of the page (at least in the current skin implementations). While the images are usually a give-away (and the TOS articles are generally rife with them), there are situations where that might lead you astray (like perhaps with the Centurion Model 0005).

What would be ideal would be a subtle (but distinctive) visual cue that was somehow "automagically" tied to the category of the article, visually distinguishing the TOS, 1980, RDM, Caprica (if that ever happens), and "other" continuities. I just don't know if that is technically feasible. --Steelviper 11:39, 17 April 2007 (CDT)

A change in the background and a pip would do that, but may be more complicated. I'm for the simpliest idea. The spirit of this plan is to enhance the visibility of TOS articles, not diminish them, so while pips are easy to enter in with a bot and category, advanced options may increase these article's visibility more as well. For now, I'm just focusing on TOS. As things grow, it may be practical to mark other continuities. --Spencerian 11:52, 17 April 2007 (CDT)

I think it looks really good changing the logo in the top left corner. I don't mind creating a new image especially once my pc is back up to 100%. A different background would be quite cool but its not very easy to do unless all the TOS articles were on a custom namespace, which isn't going to happen. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 13:42, 17 April 2007 (CDT)

As Mercifull said, the background thing isn't going to happen unless we move the TOS articles to their own namespace. (Which itself isn't going to happen either, unless the mediawiki devs change something.) Anyway, Matt, go ahead and make a new image once your PC is back up. :-) -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 15:42, 17 April 2007 (CDT)

I managed to make an image quickly because it was only really basic, someone might be able to make a cleaner one? Made using the original series colours. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 03:47, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

For the record... I stand against labeling articles TOS and RDM with any logo from the start.. i think we discussed this at one point also, but we want to make sure now that a logo says it's an TOS article that we still not forget still adding a dismb. to the top of articles of RDM, etc. stating there are different types of articles. Earth, Earth (TOS), Earth (RDM). And remember this template must be placed before the interwiki links because if the bot comes through, it will change it for us, but to save the bot a query it's better to do it that way per BW:SAC. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 06:24, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

I understand your comments shane but remember that the majority of TOS articles do not have an equivalent RDM page to warrent naming it (TOS) in brackets. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 07:31, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

Then maybe just the stand-alone articles and not the combined. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 07:34, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

Well, that's definitely a consideration, but to that end several people have been working on breaking out any combined articles into their own pages so we don't have that overlap. By the time we're done with that effort the TOS articles and RDM articles ought to better be able to stand on their own without crossing over into each others' turf. --Steelviper 07:46, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

oops. let me clear my point up. If there was only Earth and it's only a TOS article, Earth would get {{TOS}}. If Earth also had Earth (TOS) and Earth (RDM), Earth (TOS) would not get the {{TOS}} because it's already indicated in the article name that's it's TOS. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 17:15, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

But it would look a bit confusing to the visitor if the logo didn't appear on all pages. Its not very user friendly to only have the logo on some articles and not others when logically I would excpect ALL tos pages to have the logo. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 17:20, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

As Mercifull said, it's got to be consistently applied to all TOS pages, so as to avoid confusion. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 17:49, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

So...

So do we want to go ahead and apply this to all TOS articles? --Steelviper 18:06, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

There's a minor issue with the template in IE 6 that needs to be sorted out... -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New} 18:26, 1 June 2007 (CDT)