Elections and Referendums Template‑class | |||||||
|
Politics Template‑class | |||||||
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Composition bar template. |
|
Archives: 1 |
The way I understand the problem, this template creates a line of text (of standard height) within a box, and the text within the box is positioned somewhat lower than text outside the box (to allow for space between the border of the box and the text within). The solution would be to change the box' alignment and have its top be somewhat higher than the surrounding text - enough to compensate for the space between the border of the box and the top of the text within the box. After some cursory tests, adding position:relative; top:-0.1em
to the code for the box itself should resolve the issue. I'll implement that and check whether it works as intended when used within the political party infobox.
Huon (
talk) 17:32, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
top:-0.05em
might be better, but I've left it at -0.1em for now.
Huon (
talk) 18:11, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Now nominated for deletion. Frietjes ( talk) 18:25, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
The color that appears in the bar graphs that are generated by this template and that give the upper and lower house seats in political iboxes is being discussed at Template talk:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color, and a consensus is needed that requires a color that is WMF compliant and still meets democratic party standards. You are welcome to come and participate in the discussion. – Paine 08:53, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
To editor Alakzi: My first indication that changes to this template were made was on the other talk page, where the Comp bar boxes stretched across the whole page. I looked at a typical information box, and the changes there did not appear very constructive either. Did you test these changes in the sandbox? It seems to me they need more testing before they are ready to go live. And I further suggest that you come here to discuss this rather than indulging in an edit war! – Paine 11:00, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Democratic Party of Georgia | |
---|---|
Chairperson | DuBose Porter |
Senate leader | Steve Henson |
House leader | Stacey Abrams |
Headquarters | Atlanta, GA |
Ideology |
Liberalism Progressivism Social liberalism |
National affiliation | Democratic Party |
Colors | Blue |
Seats in the Upper House | 18 / 56 |
Seats in the Lower House | 60 / 180 |
Website | |
www | |
1. – #3333FF – status quo background color
2. – #34AAE0 – present background color
3. – #49BFF5 – suggested background color
4. – #B0CEFF – suggested background color
I see in the page for the recent Canadian election ( /info/en/?search=Canadian_federal_election,_2015#Summary_analysis) that the Green Party received 1 of 338 seats, but no strip of green appears in the Composition bar at all, even if I preview it using a width of 340 or 700 pixels. (one out of 338 is disappointing enough for them, but apparently reducing it to zero is adding insult to injury :-) I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with the deeper programming details of the Composition bar, but is it possible that the fraction 1/338 is being converted (truncated) to 0/100, resulting in the coloured bar with a width of zero? As a separate point, would it be possible to add an option to request some decimal points of precision on the percentage? (e.g., "0.3%") -LetMeLookItUp 19:19, 21 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LetMeLookItUp ( talk • contribs)
I was just casually looking through some Turkish politics articles, and noticed how they, like the Wikipedias in virtually all other languages, have not replaced the old seat bar with the current composition bar here on the English-language Wikipedia.
I never liked the new bar to begin with, and I think it was unnecessary to replace the old one with the current one. Why couldn't you instead just have the new one, in addition to the old one? One of the main reasons for my dislike of the new one is its inherent trait of expanding row size in tables. Just see how smooth the table in the Turkish wiki – with the old bars – looks: https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Kuzey_K%C4%B1br%C4%B1s_parlamento_se%C3%A7imleri
Then compare it to any table using the new bar; don't tell me they look half as good.
While I would personally prefer bringing back the old one and remove the new one entirely, I'd be happy with just having the old "infobox:political party/seats" back as an alternative, to use where it fits better.
Any thoughts?
Μαρκος Δ ( talk) 11:24, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I propose to bring back the old political party seats bar – either as a replacement of the current composition bar, or in addition to it – for practical and aesthetic reasons. The old bar looked like this. I have proposed it on the template talk page, and have only had a single reply, which was positive. Μαρκος Δ ( talk) 14:59, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I find the shadow around the numbers a bit too pronounced for my taste so I tried something else: before, after. Comments? Abjiklɐm ( tɐlk) 14:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
I do not understand the rationale behind this edit. But on functionality- and aesthetics-wise I really doubt the new composition bar is better than the old one. Firstly, the design of thick dark grey bar with bold white text is very awk and it totally steals away the attention from the other information in an article; Secondly, the number is now buried in the bar and it makes it more difficult to read the data - the most important information in the bar(!) when the height of the bar is cut half in which all the information has to be compressed into a small space; Thirdly, the the width of the bar is now not fixed by default and editor has to change to width every time and it is not user-friendly; Fourthly and most importantly, this template is used on approximately 4,900 pages and it raises wide concern if any changes are made and I think a longer discussion and broader consensus should be reached before any edit. Lmmnhn ( talk) 11:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I've reverted to the 2015 version, with the minor addition of role="img". And started a fork at Template:Composition bar compact. The 2015 version cannot do auto width, relative width, or even em width, however, fixed px width only. Fixed width may look okay on desktop, but it is an obstacle to mobile friendly design. I'd recommend checking how this template looks in tables on mobile and maybe reconsider relative width. Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 04:51, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
role="img"
to an empty element? This role has a very explicit purpose that this use does not meet,
see MDN docs. I think this edit should be reverted as this is not an image nor a group of images, and it does not have accessible label.
stjn 18:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Can we please just revert back to the previous incarnation of this template, which has served us so well for so many years. This one not only has aesthetic flaws with the colour filling up the box starting inwards to the right, meaning that there are two, really annoying lines at the far left of the box, but also fails to serve the fundamental purpose of this template: to give a graphic representation of political party composition. Refer to the examples of the Australian Greens and how hard it has made the slight tinge of green to be seen in the first HoR seats box; also draw your attention to the current Socialist Alliance page and how it fails to show with colour any of the seats which they have won AT ALL, all due to this change. I hate to use this argument, but please, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. LeoC12 ( talk) 12:32, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Would anyone be interested in duplicating this template on Norwegian Wikipedia? The one we have is an eye sour. -- Politikk ( talk) 22:57, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Is there a way to make the numbers bold or Italic? Micmicm ( talk) 03:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Elections and Referendums Template‑class | |||||||
|
Politics Template‑class | |||||||
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Composition bar template. |
|
Archives: 1 |
The way I understand the problem, this template creates a line of text (of standard height) within a box, and the text within the box is positioned somewhat lower than text outside the box (to allow for space between the border of the box and the text within). The solution would be to change the box' alignment and have its top be somewhat higher than the surrounding text - enough to compensate for the space between the border of the box and the top of the text within the box. After some cursory tests, adding position:relative; top:-0.1em
to the code for the box itself should resolve the issue. I'll implement that and check whether it works as intended when used within the political party infobox.
Huon (
talk) 17:32, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
top:-0.05em
might be better, but I've left it at -0.1em for now.
Huon (
talk) 18:11, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Now nominated for deletion. Frietjes ( talk) 18:25, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
The color that appears in the bar graphs that are generated by this template and that give the upper and lower house seats in political iboxes is being discussed at Template talk:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color, and a consensus is needed that requires a color that is WMF compliant and still meets democratic party standards. You are welcome to come and participate in the discussion. – Paine 08:53, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
To editor Alakzi: My first indication that changes to this template were made was on the other talk page, where the Comp bar boxes stretched across the whole page. I looked at a typical information box, and the changes there did not appear very constructive either. Did you test these changes in the sandbox? It seems to me they need more testing before they are ready to go live. And I further suggest that you come here to discuss this rather than indulging in an edit war! – Paine 11:00, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Democratic Party of Georgia | |
---|---|
Chairperson | DuBose Porter |
Senate leader | Steve Henson |
House leader | Stacey Abrams |
Headquarters | Atlanta, GA |
Ideology |
Liberalism Progressivism Social liberalism |
National affiliation | Democratic Party |
Colors | Blue |
Seats in the Upper House | 18 / 56 |
Seats in the Lower House | 60 / 180 |
Website | |
www | |
1. – #3333FF – status quo background color
2. – #34AAE0 – present background color
3. – #49BFF5 – suggested background color
4. – #B0CEFF – suggested background color
I see in the page for the recent Canadian election ( /info/en/?search=Canadian_federal_election,_2015#Summary_analysis) that the Green Party received 1 of 338 seats, but no strip of green appears in the Composition bar at all, even if I preview it using a width of 340 or 700 pixels. (one out of 338 is disappointing enough for them, but apparently reducing it to zero is adding insult to injury :-) I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with the deeper programming details of the Composition bar, but is it possible that the fraction 1/338 is being converted (truncated) to 0/100, resulting in the coloured bar with a width of zero? As a separate point, would it be possible to add an option to request some decimal points of precision on the percentage? (e.g., "0.3%") -LetMeLookItUp 19:19, 21 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LetMeLookItUp ( talk • contribs)
I was just casually looking through some Turkish politics articles, and noticed how they, like the Wikipedias in virtually all other languages, have not replaced the old seat bar with the current composition bar here on the English-language Wikipedia.
I never liked the new bar to begin with, and I think it was unnecessary to replace the old one with the current one. Why couldn't you instead just have the new one, in addition to the old one? One of the main reasons for my dislike of the new one is its inherent trait of expanding row size in tables. Just see how smooth the table in the Turkish wiki – with the old bars – looks: https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Kuzey_K%C4%B1br%C4%B1s_parlamento_se%C3%A7imleri
Then compare it to any table using the new bar; don't tell me they look half as good.
While I would personally prefer bringing back the old one and remove the new one entirely, I'd be happy with just having the old "infobox:political party/seats" back as an alternative, to use where it fits better.
Any thoughts?
Μαρκος Δ ( talk) 11:24, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I propose to bring back the old political party seats bar – either as a replacement of the current composition bar, or in addition to it – for practical and aesthetic reasons. The old bar looked like this. I have proposed it on the template talk page, and have only had a single reply, which was positive. Μαρκος Δ ( talk) 14:59, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I find the shadow around the numbers a bit too pronounced for my taste so I tried something else: before, after. Comments? Abjiklɐm ( tɐlk) 14:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
I do not understand the rationale behind this edit. But on functionality- and aesthetics-wise I really doubt the new composition bar is better than the old one. Firstly, the design of thick dark grey bar with bold white text is very awk and it totally steals away the attention from the other information in an article; Secondly, the number is now buried in the bar and it makes it more difficult to read the data - the most important information in the bar(!) when the height of the bar is cut half in which all the information has to be compressed into a small space; Thirdly, the the width of the bar is now not fixed by default and editor has to change to width every time and it is not user-friendly; Fourthly and most importantly, this template is used on approximately 4,900 pages and it raises wide concern if any changes are made and I think a longer discussion and broader consensus should be reached before any edit. Lmmnhn ( talk) 11:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I've reverted to the 2015 version, with the minor addition of role="img". And started a fork at Template:Composition bar compact. The 2015 version cannot do auto width, relative width, or even em width, however, fixed px width only. Fixed width may look okay on desktop, but it is an obstacle to mobile friendly design. I'd recommend checking how this template looks in tables on mobile and maybe reconsider relative width. Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 04:51, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
role="img"
to an empty element? This role has a very explicit purpose that this use does not meet,
see MDN docs. I think this edit should be reverted as this is not an image nor a group of images, and it does not have accessible label.
stjn 18:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Can we please just revert back to the previous incarnation of this template, which has served us so well for so many years. This one not only has aesthetic flaws with the colour filling up the box starting inwards to the right, meaning that there are two, really annoying lines at the far left of the box, but also fails to serve the fundamental purpose of this template: to give a graphic representation of political party composition. Refer to the examples of the Australian Greens and how hard it has made the slight tinge of green to be seen in the first HoR seats box; also draw your attention to the current Socialist Alliance page and how it fails to show with colour any of the seats which they have won AT ALL, all due to this change. I hate to use this argument, but please, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. LeoC12 ( talk) 12:32, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Would anyone be interested in duplicating this template on Norwegian Wikipedia? The one we have is an eye sour. -- Politikk ( talk) 22:57, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Is there a way to make the numbers bold or Italic? Micmicm ( talk) 03:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)