![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Could we perhaps do this template without the colours/parties? It looks very "busy" and hard to comprehend. -- Barrylb 22:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
It is busy, but one of the the points was to visually show the party distribution by state. I'm not sure how to do this without colours. I'll try making the colurs paler and see what people think. The 8 transcluded subpages which contain the colours are:
Moondyne ≡ talk 03:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
This is wrong. There are more than 3 Victorian ALP Senators. Someone has mixed something up. Xtra 08:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
The coloured sub templates are nice! Great idea -- it's dramatically improved. I updated them so they take a parameter instead -- otherwise you have to remember to do a closing span tag and it's unintuitive.
There is still a little problem though -- it's really hard to see the current politician bolded when you're on a politician's article. I wonder if there's a way to make the colours still helpful but less distracting and/or increase the text size without making it more difficult to follow? — Донама 10:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
These are still too light. I can't tell one party from the other. Perhaps a coloured box next to each person would be better? ( JROBBO 10:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC))
What is the point of the template when categories do the job cleaner and with less clutter? Dysprosia 05:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the issue was with the previous revision, the current revision for me at least now has quite a large space to the right of the template and looks completely off balance. Timeshift 14:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I was looking at the SA upper house candidates, which is based on this one as it turns out, and noticed some major usability issues - I'll reproduce them here for wider discussion.
(Edit: On looking VERY carefully I can sort of make out a difference between the Green/Dem and other ones. But that took around 15 seconds to identify.)
It's important to remember that many Wikipedians are sight impaired and may not have access to the most modern or reliable computer equipment, so usability issues are very important. Orderinchaos 12:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Is there a way to |state = uncollapsed this template? Timeshift 18:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Template:Australian Senators is looking good except for Lambie's background colour, it is clearly the odd one out, due to a much darker shade of colour than the other 75 Senators. On many screens it would be too hard to read the text with that dark shade of colour! Can it be lightened up a bit please? Timeshift ( talk) 02:40, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Also, Members of the Australian Senate, 2016–2019 needs significant updating. Timeshift ( talk) 02:53, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
This template is really useful but I haven't seen a really nice way of having the senators presented as party/blocs. For what it's worth I drafted something here: User:Donama/Australian Senators by party. Any thoughts? Donama ( talk) 01:52, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi again, I'm interested in this template being useful to visualise the likely voting blocs once again. Do you think it (or something like it) would be better than the current breakdown by state? Thanks Donama ( talk) 05:03, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Could we perhaps do this template without the colours/parties? It looks very "busy" and hard to comprehend. -- Barrylb 22:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
It is busy, but one of the the points was to visually show the party distribution by state. I'm not sure how to do this without colours. I'll try making the colurs paler and see what people think. The 8 transcluded subpages which contain the colours are:
Moondyne ≡ talk 03:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
This is wrong. There are more than 3 Victorian ALP Senators. Someone has mixed something up. Xtra 08:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
The coloured sub templates are nice! Great idea -- it's dramatically improved. I updated them so they take a parameter instead -- otherwise you have to remember to do a closing span tag and it's unintuitive.
There is still a little problem though -- it's really hard to see the current politician bolded when you're on a politician's article. I wonder if there's a way to make the colours still helpful but less distracting and/or increase the text size without making it more difficult to follow? — Донама 10:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
These are still too light. I can't tell one party from the other. Perhaps a coloured box next to each person would be better? ( JROBBO 10:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC))
What is the point of the template when categories do the job cleaner and with less clutter? Dysprosia 05:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the issue was with the previous revision, the current revision for me at least now has quite a large space to the right of the template and looks completely off balance. Timeshift 14:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I was looking at the SA upper house candidates, which is based on this one as it turns out, and noticed some major usability issues - I'll reproduce them here for wider discussion.
(Edit: On looking VERY carefully I can sort of make out a difference between the Green/Dem and other ones. But that took around 15 seconds to identify.)
It's important to remember that many Wikipedians are sight impaired and may not have access to the most modern or reliable computer equipment, so usability issues are very important. Orderinchaos 12:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Is there a way to |state = uncollapsed this template? Timeshift 18:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Template:Australian Senators is looking good except for Lambie's background colour, it is clearly the odd one out, due to a much darker shade of colour than the other 75 Senators. On many screens it would be too hard to read the text with that dark shade of colour! Can it be lightened up a bit please? Timeshift ( talk) 02:40, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Also, Members of the Australian Senate, 2016–2019 needs significant updating. Timeshift ( talk) 02:53, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
This template is really useful but I haven't seen a really nice way of having the senators presented as party/blocs. For what it's worth I drafted something here: User:Donama/Australian Senators by party. Any thoughts? Donama ( talk) 01:52, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi again, I'm interested in this template being useful to visualise the likely voting blocs once again. Do you think it (or something like it) would be better than the current breakdown by state? Thanks Donama ( talk) 05:03, 27 June 2019 (UTC)