![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I personally have no preference on this, but, if we are thinking about eventual Commons standardization, we should consider if the license template should be full-page width or the same size as other {{ imbox}} templates. For comparison, see {{ PD-art}} and Commons:Template:PD-art. Keep in mind that some license templates can contain a lot of text. Kelly hi! 16:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion to make these changes to the code:
examples of the codes:
{{User:Oahiyeel/Sandbox/Imbox|imageright=wiki.png|imagerightsize=200|text={{lorem}}}}
{{User:Oahiyeel/Sandbox/Imbox|image=wiki.png|imageright=wiki.png|text={{lorem}}}}
comments? - oahiyeel talk 14:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
|imageright=
position, and the 90px images look a little ungainly anyway. I don't think we'd get howls of complaint if we scaled them down a bit. However I can see that {{
db-i1}}
has legitimate use for a larger image (although of course it could just be placed within the text cell as it is currently). As I've said above, I don't have a big problem with 'unlocking' the image size; as long as it's genuinely necessary. My main complaint was with the unnecessary specialisation promised (threatened, in my opinion) by |imagerightsize=
and |imageright=Foo.jpg
, etc.
Happy‑
melon
15:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)To help distinguish between Speedy and Normal deletions at a glance, as on some monitors the pink background is unclear, I have created
Image:Ambox speedy delete.png, which comes out as:
. What do you think?......
Dendodge ..
Talk
Help
17:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[un-dent] Me likes Dendodge's pic for speedies. A lot. Niko Silver 22:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I think I am mostly complete on compiling the major lists of imagespace templates in my userspace (they're linked at the top of this page), though I'm sure there are more out there that I haven't been able to turn up. Should I make copies of them on subpages of this page for people to work with? Eventually WP:TMIN needs to be updated (it's in sad shape) and the license template pages are also incomplete. There are quite a few redundant templates that need to be listed for deletion, also. Kelly hi! 23:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Before I forget... You have mentioned project space, Mr Göthberg. Are there any plans in sight regarding the standardisation of the templates within that namespace? Be candid with me, or you shall suffer my extreme displeasure and the terrible consequences thereof. Waltham, The Duke of 03:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | {{{1}}} |
Could an admin please update {{ GFDL-with-disclaimers}}? I have placed the new code on the template talk page and created the /doc page as well. Kelly hi! 16:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the
GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
Should we have a default of 52px if no size is specified? Kelly hi! 16:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
|image=
parameter.
Happy‑
melon
17:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
{{
imbox}}
code and/or site CSS so that it doesn't have to be set on each individual license template?
Happy‑
melon
17:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
I like the standard text size with only the name of the license bolded (your first example of the four). Kelly hi! 17:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
The default icon for "license" type boxes doesn't matter that much since all license boxes can and should set a more specific icon when they use {{ imbox}}. But since the icon has been changed I thought we should discuss it here.
When we first made that box type we used the public domain icon, mostly since we had not come up with a better alternative yet. Looking like this:
![]() | Image:PD-icon-transparent-bg.svg, a slight adaptation of Image:PD-icon.svg. |
But using an icon with a distinct license meaning as default like the public domain icon might be a bad thing since then it might be used by accident on other licenses.
Kelly suggested this one:
![]() | Image:PDmaybe-icon.svg |
David Levy tonight made and changed the default icon to a question mark within a circle:
![]() | Image:Imbox license.png |
(David if you have the time and think it is a good idea: Could you make the question mark slightly smaller and fatter? I think it looks a bit skinny inside that circle now.)
I like both Kelly's and David Levy's alternatives. Both works for me. Any one else have any points of view?
-- David Göthberg ( talk) 19:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Quisque non nisi id urna lacinia semper. Sed pede ipsum, sagittis nec, sollicitudin nec, aliquam in, nisl. Maecenas convallis fermentum dolor. In facilisis venenatis diam. Maecenas id arcu. Proin posuere enim ac elit. |
Three other protected license templates ready for update - {{ GFDL}}, {{ GFDL-1.2}}, and {{ GFDL-1.2-en}}. The new code is on the template talk pages and /doc pages have been created. Kelly hi! 00:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
If we use imbox for license tags, it's going to be most common for the right image to be a flag. Testing this with the US flag (with a size of 50px for the copyright icon and 70 px for the flag) results in the following:
![]() | This image is in the public domain in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see the template documentation for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image might not be in the public domain outside the United States. See Wikipedia:Public domain and Wikipedia:Copyrights for more details. |
![]() |
The right border of the flag butts up against the margin, which I don't think looks quite right. Also, could someone who is a math wizard figure out the best size for a flag to balance with the copyright icon, given the different size ratios of the different icons? Kelly hi! 13:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
{{#expr:||}}
" and "{{#if:||}}
" functions I can code up a rather complex thing where if you feed an image larger than 52 pixels then have to feed an "image size" and "image size right" parameter too. Thus the box internally can use a "fixed" size appropriate for your image. But I would rather not do that since then the box code will be a monster that not many people could understand and manage.Please comment about it here, revert at will. Used to attract attention to the discussion page of an image. CompuHacker ( talk) 02:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This could be the {{ see talk}} template. |
{{
See talk}}
code could be useful, but are we in agreement that adding extra code to {{
imbox}}
is unnecessary?
Happy‑
melon
08:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)I would like to restart this discussion. Does anyone have a any ideas on how to include, separate, or improve Template:IMGseetalk? Please put out any ideas you have concerning making a standardized template for this. CompuHacker ( talk) 15:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
imbox}}
, but code along the lines of:{{imbox | type = notice | image = [[Image:Speech balloon.svg|40x40px]] | text = {{{text}}} }}
I tried turning {{ ShouldBePNG}} into an imbox and this is what I got:
{{imbox | type = style | image = [[Image:Comparison of JPEG and PNG.png|100px|ℹ]] | imageright = | style = | textstyle = | text = This image was [[Wikipedia:Uploading images|uploaded]] in a format such as [[GIF]] or [[JPEG]]. It could be stored, however, in the [[Portable Network Graphics|PNG]] format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "[[#filelinks|File links]]" header), tag the old version with <code>{{[[Template:PNG version available|PNG version available]]|NewImage.png}}</code>, and remove this tag. For more information, see [[Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload]]. }}
This image was
uploaded in a format such as
GIF or
JPEG. It could be stored, however, in the
PNG format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "
File links" header), tag the old version with {{
PNG version available|NewImage.png}} , and remove this tag. For more information, see
Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload. |
The culprit appears to be a div wrapping the image with style="width: 52px;". When the style parameter is removed it looks fine:
This image was
uploaded in a format such as
GIF or
JPEG. It could be stored, however, in the
PNG format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "
File links" header), tag the old version with {{
PNG version available|NewImage.png}} , and remove this tag. For more information, see
Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload. |
— Remember the dot ( talk) 01:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
{{imbox | type = style | image = style | imageright = [[Image:Comparison of JPEG and PNG.png|100px|ℹ]] | style = | textstyle = | text = This image was [[Wikipedia:Uploading images|uploaded]] in a format such as [[GIF]] or [[JPEG]]. It could be stored, however, in the [[Portable Network Graphics|PNG]] format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "[[#filelinks|File links]]" header), tag the old version with <code>{{[[Template:PNG version available|PNG version available]]|NewImage.png}}</code>, and remove this tag. For more information, see [[Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload]]. }}
style | This image was
uploaded in a format such as
GIF or
JPEG. It could be stored, however, in the
PNG format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "
File links" header), tag the old version with {{
PNG version available|NewImage.png}} , and remove this tag. For more information, see
Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload. |
![]() |
Looking it over, I think your solution might be to place the larger image on the right, which makes it work correctly. I think this type of template is what the imageright parameter was designed for. -- CapitalR ( talk) 02:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
{{ PD-self}} is ready for update, with code on talk page. This will give the server some work, so I will hold off on doing any other widely-used license templates tonight. Kelly hi! 01:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
{{ GFDL-self}} and {{ GFDL-self-with-disclaimers}} are ready for update, code on talk pages. Kelly hi! 14:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Just as a sanity check: are we summarily getting rid of the different background colors for templates like {{ Copyrighted free use}}, are we keeping those colors, or are we treating them on a case-by-case basis? There's quite a few (see User:Kelly/Image_license_templates), so I want to be sure before any mass conversion. -- CapitalR ( talk) 04:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I haven't even been able to find a template creating the box saying "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. The description on its description page there is shown below." I feel that it should conform to the imbox style, because:
But there are people with better knowledge of these things, whom I invite to comment here. Waltham, The Duke of 22:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC), modified 22:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I have now added the imbox CSS classes to MediaWiki:Common.css.
Due to caching of the style sheet in the web browsers we can not use these classes in the imbox template until 13 June. Until then imbox has to continue to use hardcoded styles. But we can use the classes for testing in the {{ imbox/sandbox}}.
If anyone wants to have a look at the classes they are easier to view and there is some explanation at MediaWiki talk:Common.css#Ambox, imbox and cmbox.
-- David Göthberg ( talk) 02:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at {{ cc-by-sa-2.0-de}} and figure out a good way to imbox it? I'm having trouble making it look good because of the 52px left image restriction. If you can get that one to work I can mass convert the rest of the CC templates. -- CapitalR ( talk) 07:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
|imageright=
as a dumping ground for oversized images strikes me as trying to avoid dealing with the problem :D. Any particular reason to prefer 72px?
Happy‑
melon
09:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Same problem affects {{ Convert to SVG and copy to Wikimedia Commons}}. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 21:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
What has happened to {{ Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}? It is displaying in Ambox format when used outside the image namespace. I can't think of any cases where an Ambox-type version of this template would be needed. Kelly hi! 23:38, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
{{Copy to Wikimedia Commons|demospace=main}}
{{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}
Could someone with access to the tools please override the default border color on {{ PD}} and change it from gray to red? This is to reflect that it is a deprecated license. Thanks! Kelly hi! 12:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I listed an alternative as "Nested alternative 2 with needed verbiage change", but the change was to include a notice at the end that the license should not be considered valid if used after a cutoff date. Please include this in whatever version is selected, thanks! Kelly hi! 16:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) I saw no ugly whitespace. However, I'm not a fan of alt three, becuase it is a bit of a kludge codewise (in that I share David's concern). Alt 2 is still my choice because the licence box should be the main box, instead of the warning box (as in alt 1), which could be mistaken to apply to the whole page. — Edokter • Talk • 20:49, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I like nested-2, as seems to be popular above. The concerns about the awkward 'hack' code required are valid, but I see this as an opportunity for further standardisation. Let's create a {{
deprecated license}}
midleman template as a framework for these more complicated imboxes; I'm sure we're all aware of the familiar list of advantages of centralising code like this: consistent fomatting, ease of maintenance, and a quick-and-dirty way of finding deprecated licenses through WhatLinksHere. Plus, we can make the code as complicated as necessary, knowing that it only has to be done once.
Happy‑
melon
08:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
PD}}
will call {{
Deprecated license PD}}
, which will in turn call {{
imbox}}
with the necessary styling hacks.
Happy‑
melon
21:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC){{
deprecated license}}
based on the nested-2 style, and added a new example to
Template:PD/sandbox to demonstrate it. What do you think?
Happy‑
melon
21:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
Deprecated license PD}}
), geared towards PD licences. I think that's more convenient then using a blanket template, requiring to pass the text from every parent template. —
Edokter •
Talk •
21:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
deprecated license PD}}
call {{
deprecated license}}
, which we could convert to just incorporate the hack for the nested imboxes, and the 'standard' features of the inner box (the css class, image and general layout - rather like the bottom part of {{
deprecated license}}
's current code). That achieves the best of both worlds - all code and text is centralised at one level or another, and is easy to use at each stage, the functionality of each template remains broadly the same. Then again, that would leave us with a chain of four templates just to get one deprecated license to display nicely :D... I think I need to sleep on it.
Happy‑
melon
22:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)<undent>I deal a lot with image licenses...there are not many deprecated templates, most get cleaned up fairly quickly. After {{ PD}}, which has about 10,000 usages and will take a long time to clean up, the next most common deprecated license is {{ PD-Russia}}, with somewhere under 1000 usages. The verbiage on PD-Russia is somewhat different from {{ PD}}. After that, I think the next most commons was {{ PD-LOC}} - it was used on several hundred images but I finally finished cleaning that up after a n effort of several weeks and nominated the license for deletion. Kelly hi! 00:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
deprecated license PD}}
then - seems mine is designed for a class of templates that doesn't actually exist :D...
Happy‑
melon
10:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)I was bold and updated {{ PD}} with the nested 2 version using {{ deprecated license PD}}. Shall I update {{ PD-Russia}} in teh same way? — Edokter • Talk • 11:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
There is now a general nesting template at {{ Imbox nested}}. — Edokter • Talk • 17:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The protected template {{ Di-no license}} requires conversion by an admin. Kelly hi! 19:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I see that some of you have already started deploying this template. And it seems we have a fairly good consensus on the functions and looks of this template.
Special:MostLinkedTemplates is only updated about once every second day or so. So while waiting for proper stats I have done a rough calculation of how many pages now use {{ imbox}} based on some other sources. It seems imbox already is used on at least 277,000 pages! That means it is already the 18th most used template.
So can we say we are now officially deploying this template?
-- David Göthberg ( talk) 14:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
ambox}}
?? I wasn't expecting that! Given that according to
Special:Statistics we only have ~783,000 media files, that means we've hit over 96% of the image namespace. It will be interesting to see how those numbers line up: doing an intersection of
Special:Allpages/Image: and not
Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Imbox would be a quick way of flagging unlicensed images, images with wierd or substituted templates, and general rubbish we need to clean out.
Happy‑
melon
17:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)One of the candidates is the "This is a file from Commons..." box. It is not a template however, but I can't find it anywhere. OK, it's
here. Should this message be made to look like Imbox too? —
Edokter •
Talk •
23:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that the Creative Commons license templates have not yet been updated (most are protected). Was there a technical issue with image size? I can't remember. Kelly hi! 15:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I may have a solution; not setting a div widht at all, accomplished by using bigimage = yes
. But I don't have firefox at hand. Can someone look at
Template:Imbox/sandbox#Examples of varying width and see if the text overlaps the big CC logo? (Also look at the big book icons above that.) If not, we have a solution. —
Edokter •
Talk •
18:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, I've put it in. Now we can start converting the CC licences. Just put in bigimage = yes
if the template has images wider then 52px. —
Edokter •
Talk •
18:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
width: 52px;
with padding: 0 6px;
. —
Edokter •
Talk •
13:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)image=none
. That way we get pretty text indenting, without an image appearing, without messing up the big image workaround stuff.
Nihiltres{
t.
l}
20:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)image=none
" but rather "image=blank
", right? And instead of using a blank image for that case I think it is better to simply insert a div for that specific case. Although now that the image cell width will vary then "image=blank
" will be even less meaningful than before.image=none
or, as it may be, image=blank
would be quite effective.
Nihiltres{
t.
l}
14:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)David, Wikipedia is supposed to be a collaborative project; If you cannot tolerate others working with you, then I shall leave this project well alone. I fully understand all the code involved; do not asume that I am some amature. If I made an error, rervert it, but please do not make me out to be a code-breaker out to destroy your work. My only goal is to get as clean code, with as least ambiguous code as possible. In fact, here's a tip: don't use inline CSS at all, as that only hampers development. Instead, put the CSS in your monobook, or put it in a subpage and import that into your monobook. That way, these kind of frustrations will be cut entirely. — Edokter • Talk • 16:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I personally have no preference on this, but, if we are thinking about eventual Commons standardization, we should consider if the license template should be full-page width or the same size as other {{ imbox}} templates. For comparison, see {{ PD-art}} and Commons:Template:PD-art. Keep in mind that some license templates can contain a lot of text. Kelly hi! 16:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion to make these changes to the code:
examples of the codes:
{{User:Oahiyeel/Sandbox/Imbox|imageright=wiki.png|imagerightsize=200|text={{lorem}}}}
{{User:Oahiyeel/Sandbox/Imbox|image=wiki.png|imageright=wiki.png|text={{lorem}}}}
comments? - oahiyeel talk 14:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
|imageright=
position, and the 90px images look a little ungainly anyway. I don't think we'd get howls of complaint if we scaled them down a bit. However I can see that {{
db-i1}}
has legitimate use for a larger image (although of course it could just be placed within the text cell as it is currently). As I've said above, I don't have a big problem with 'unlocking' the image size; as long as it's genuinely necessary. My main complaint was with the unnecessary specialisation promised (threatened, in my opinion) by |imagerightsize=
and |imageright=Foo.jpg
, etc.
Happy‑
melon
15:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)To help distinguish between Speedy and Normal deletions at a glance, as on some monitors the pink background is unclear, I have created
Image:Ambox speedy delete.png, which comes out as:
. What do you think?......
Dendodge ..
Talk
Help
17:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[un-dent] Me likes Dendodge's pic for speedies. A lot. Niko Silver 22:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I think I am mostly complete on compiling the major lists of imagespace templates in my userspace (they're linked at the top of this page), though I'm sure there are more out there that I haven't been able to turn up. Should I make copies of them on subpages of this page for people to work with? Eventually WP:TMIN needs to be updated (it's in sad shape) and the license template pages are also incomplete. There are quite a few redundant templates that need to be listed for deletion, also. Kelly hi! 23:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Before I forget... You have mentioned project space, Mr Göthberg. Are there any plans in sight regarding the standardisation of the templates within that namespace? Be candid with me, or you shall suffer my extreme displeasure and the terrible consequences thereof. Waltham, The Duke of 03:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | {{{1}}} |
Could an admin please update {{ GFDL-with-disclaimers}}? I have placed the new code on the template talk page and created the /doc page as well. Kelly hi! 16:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the
GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
Should we have a default of 52px if no size is specified? Kelly hi! 16:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
|image=
parameter.
Happy‑
melon
17:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
{{
imbox}}
code and/or site CSS so that it doesn't have to be set on each individual license template?
Happy‑
melon
17:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
![]() | Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers. |
I like the standard text size with only the name of the license bolded (your first example of the four). Kelly hi! 17:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
The default icon for "license" type boxes doesn't matter that much since all license boxes can and should set a more specific icon when they use {{ imbox}}. But since the icon has been changed I thought we should discuss it here.
When we first made that box type we used the public domain icon, mostly since we had not come up with a better alternative yet. Looking like this:
![]() | Image:PD-icon-transparent-bg.svg, a slight adaptation of Image:PD-icon.svg. |
But using an icon with a distinct license meaning as default like the public domain icon might be a bad thing since then it might be used by accident on other licenses.
Kelly suggested this one:
![]() | Image:PDmaybe-icon.svg |
David Levy tonight made and changed the default icon to a question mark within a circle:
![]() | Image:Imbox license.png |
(David if you have the time and think it is a good idea: Could you make the question mark slightly smaller and fatter? I think it looks a bit skinny inside that circle now.)
I like both Kelly's and David Levy's alternatives. Both works for me. Any one else have any points of view?
-- David Göthberg ( talk) 19:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Quisque non nisi id urna lacinia semper. Sed pede ipsum, sagittis nec, sollicitudin nec, aliquam in, nisl. Maecenas convallis fermentum dolor. In facilisis venenatis diam. Maecenas id arcu. Proin posuere enim ac elit. |
Three other protected license templates ready for update - {{ GFDL}}, {{ GFDL-1.2}}, and {{ GFDL-1.2-en}}. The new code is on the template talk pages and /doc pages have been created. Kelly hi! 00:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
If we use imbox for license tags, it's going to be most common for the right image to be a flag. Testing this with the US flag (with a size of 50px for the copyright icon and 70 px for the flag) results in the following:
![]() | This image is in the public domain in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see the template documentation for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image might not be in the public domain outside the United States. See Wikipedia:Public domain and Wikipedia:Copyrights for more details. |
![]() |
The right border of the flag butts up against the margin, which I don't think looks quite right. Also, could someone who is a math wizard figure out the best size for a flag to balance with the copyright icon, given the different size ratios of the different icons? Kelly hi! 13:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
{{#expr:||}}
" and "{{#if:||}}
" functions I can code up a rather complex thing where if you feed an image larger than 52 pixels then have to feed an "image size" and "image size right" parameter too. Thus the box internally can use a "fixed" size appropriate for your image. But I would rather not do that since then the box code will be a monster that not many people could understand and manage.Please comment about it here, revert at will. Used to attract attention to the discussion page of an image. CompuHacker ( talk) 02:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This could be the {{ see talk}} template. |
{{
See talk}}
code could be useful, but are we in agreement that adding extra code to {{
imbox}}
is unnecessary?
Happy‑
melon
08:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)I would like to restart this discussion. Does anyone have a any ideas on how to include, separate, or improve Template:IMGseetalk? Please put out any ideas you have concerning making a standardized template for this. CompuHacker ( talk) 15:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
imbox}}
, but code along the lines of:{{imbox | type = notice | image = [[Image:Speech balloon.svg|40x40px]] | text = {{{text}}} }}
I tried turning {{ ShouldBePNG}} into an imbox and this is what I got:
{{imbox | type = style | image = [[Image:Comparison of JPEG and PNG.png|100px|ℹ]] | imageright = | style = | textstyle = | text = This image was [[Wikipedia:Uploading images|uploaded]] in a format such as [[GIF]] or [[JPEG]]. It could be stored, however, in the [[Portable Network Graphics|PNG]] format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "[[#filelinks|File links]]" header), tag the old version with <code>{{[[Template:PNG version available|PNG version available]]|NewImage.png}}</code>, and remove this tag. For more information, see [[Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload]]. }}
This image was
uploaded in a format such as
GIF or
JPEG. It could be stored, however, in the
PNG format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "
File links" header), tag the old version with {{
PNG version available|NewImage.png}} , and remove this tag. For more information, see
Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload. |
The culprit appears to be a div wrapping the image with style="width: 52px;". When the style parameter is removed it looks fine:
This image was
uploaded in a format such as
GIF or
JPEG. It could be stored, however, in the
PNG format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "
File links" header), tag the old version with {{
PNG version available|NewImage.png}} , and remove this tag. For more information, see
Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload. |
— Remember the dot ( talk) 01:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
{{imbox | type = style | image = style | imageright = [[Image:Comparison of JPEG and PNG.png|100px|ℹ]] | style = | textstyle = | text = This image was [[Wikipedia:Uploading images|uploaded]] in a format such as [[GIF]] or [[JPEG]]. It could be stored, however, in the [[Portable Network Graphics|PNG]] format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "[[#filelinks|File links]]" header), tag the old version with <code>{{[[Template:PNG version available|PNG version available]]|NewImage.png}}</code>, and remove this tag. For more information, see [[Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload]]. }}
style | This image was
uploaded in a format such as
GIF or
JPEG. It could be stored, however, in the
PNG format, which supports lossless compression and transparency. Because the PNG format supports lossless compression, edits made to PNG files do not reduce their quality. If possible, please upload a PNG version of this image. After doing so, please replace all instances of the previous version throughout Wikipedia (noted under the "
File links" header), tag the old version with {{
PNG version available|NewImage.png}} , and remove this tag. For more information, see
Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload. |
![]() |
Looking it over, I think your solution might be to place the larger image on the right, which makes it work correctly. I think this type of template is what the imageright parameter was designed for. -- CapitalR ( talk) 02:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
{{ PD-self}} is ready for update, with code on talk page. This will give the server some work, so I will hold off on doing any other widely-used license templates tonight. Kelly hi! 01:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
{{ GFDL-self}} and {{ GFDL-self-with-disclaimers}} are ready for update, code on talk pages. Kelly hi! 14:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Just as a sanity check: are we summarily getting rid of the different background colors for templates like {{ Copyrighted free use}}, are we keeping those colors, or are we treating them on a case-by-case basis? There's quite a few (see User:Kelly/Image_license_templates), so I want to be sure before any mass conversion. -- CapitalR ( talk) 04:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I haven't even been able to find a template creating the box saying "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. The description on its description page there is shown below." I feel that it should conform to the imbox style, because:
But there are people with better knowledge of these things, whom I invite to comment here. Waltham, The Duke of 22:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC), modified 22:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I have now added the imbox CSS classes to MediaWiki:Common.css.
Due to caching of the style sheet in the web browsers we can not use these classes in the imbox template until 13 June. Until then imbox has to continue to use hardcoded styles. But we can use the classes for testing in the {{ imbox/sandbox}}.
If anyone wants to have a look at the classes they are easier to view and there is some explanation at MediaWiki talk:Common.css#Ambox, imbox and cmbox.
-- David Göthberg ( talk) 02:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at {{ cc-by-sa-2.0-de}} and figure out a good way to imbox it? I'm having trouble making it look good because of the 52px left image restriction. If you can get that one to work I can mass convert the rest of the CC templates. -- CapitalR ( talk) 07:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
|imageright=
as a dumping ground for oversized images strikes me as trying to avoid dealing with the problem :D. Any particular reason to prefer 72px?
Happy‑
melon
09:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Same problem affects {{ Convert to SVG and copy to Wikimedia Commons}}. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 21:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
What has happened to {{ Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}? It is displaying in Ambox format when used outside the image namespace. I can't think of any cases where an Ambox-type version of this template would be needed. Kelly hi! 23:38, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
{{Copy to Wikimedia Commons|demospace=main}}
{{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}
Could someone with access to the tools please override the default border color on {{ PD}} and change it from gray to red? This is to reflect that it is a deprecated license. Thanks! Kelly hi! 12:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I listed an alternative as "Nested alternative 2 with needed verbiage change", but the change was to include a notice at the end that the license should not be considered valid if used after a cutoff date. Please include this in whatever version is selected, thanks! Kelly hi! 16:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) I saw no ugly whitespace. However, I'm not a fan of alt three, becuase it is a bit of a kludge codewise (in that I share David's concern). Alt 2 is still my choice because the licence box should be the main box, instead of the warning box (as in alt 1), which could be mistaken to apply to the whole page. — Edokter • Talk • 20:49, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I like nested-2, as seems to be popular above. The concerns about the awkward 'hack' code required are valid, but I see this as an opportunity for further standardisation. Let's create a {{
deprecated license}}
midleman template as a framework for these more complicated imboxes; I'm sure we're all aware of the familiar list of advantages of centralising code like this: consistent fomatting, ease of maintenance, and a quick-and-dirty way of finding deprecated licenses through WhatLinksHere. Plus, we can make the code as complicated as necessary, knowing that it only has to be done once.
Happy‑
melon
08:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
PD}}
will call {{
Deprecated license PD}}
, which will in turn call {{
imbox}}
with the necessary styling hacks.
Happy‑
melon
21:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC){{
deprecated license}}
based on the nested-2 style, and added a new example to
Template:PD/sandbox to demonstrate it. What do you think?
Happy‑
melon
21:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
Deprecated license PD}}
), geared towards PD licences. I think that's more convenient then using a blanket template, requiring to pass the text from every parent template. —
Edokter •
Talk •
21:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
deprecated license PD}}
call {{
deprecated license}}
, which we could convert to just incorporate the hack for the nested imboxes, and the 'standard' features of the inner box (the css class, image and general layout - rather like the bottom part of {{
deprecated license}}
's current code). That achieves the best of both worlds - all code and text is centralised at one level or another, and is easy to use at each stage, the functionality of each template remains broadly the same. Then again, that would leave us with a chain of four templates just to get one deprecated license to display nicely :D... I think I need to sleep on it.
Happy‑
melon
22:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)<undent>I deal a lot with image licenses...there are not many deprecated templates, most get cleaned up fairly quickly. After {{ PD}}, which has about 10,000 usages and will take a long time to clean up, the next most common deprecated license is {{ PD-Russia}}, with somewhere under 1000 usages. The verbiage on PD-Russia is somewhat different from {{ PD}}. After that, I think the next most commons was {{ PD-LOC}} - it was used on several hundred images but I finally finished cleaning that up after a n effort of several weeks and nominated the license for deletion. Kelly hi! 00:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
deprecated license PD}}
then - seems mine is designed for a class of templates that doesn't actually exist :D...
Happy‑
melon
10:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)I was bold and updated {{ PD}} with the nested 2 version using {{ deprecated license PD}}. Shall I update {{ PD-Russia}} in teh same way? — Edokter • Talk • 11:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
There is now a general nesting template at {{ Imbox nested}}. — Edokter • Talk • 17:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The protected template {{ Di-no license}} requires conversion by an admin. Kelly hi! 19:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I see that some of you have already started deploying this template. And it seems we have a fairly good consensus on the functions and looks of this template.
Special:MostLinkedTemplates is only updated about once every second day or so. So while waiting for proper stats I have done a rough calculation of how many pages now use {{ imbox}} based on some other sources. It seems imbox already is used on at least 277,000 pages! That means it is already the 18th most used template.
So can we say we are now officially deploying this template?
-- David Göthberg ( talk) 14:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
{{
ambox}}
?? I wasn't expecting that! Given that according to
Special:Statistics we only have ~783,000 media files, that means we've hit over 96% of the image namespace. It will be interesting to see how those numbers line up: doing an intersection of
Special:Allpages/Image: and not
Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Imbox would be a quick way of flagging unlicensed images, images with wierd or substituted templates, and general rubbish we need to clean out.
Happy‑
melon
17:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)One of the candidates is the "This is a file from Commons..." box. It is not a template however, but I can't find it anywhere. OK, it's
here. Should this message be made to look like Imbox too? —
Edokter •
Talk •
23:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that the Creative Commons license templates have not yet been updated (most are protected). Was there a technical issue with image size? I can't remember. Kelly hi! 15:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I may have a solution; not setting a div widht at all, accomplished by using bigimage = yes
. But I don't have firefox at hand. Can someone look at
Template:Imbox/sandbox#Examples of varying width and see if the text overlaps the big CC logo? (Also look at the big book icons above that.) If not, we have a solution. —
Edokter •
Talk •
18:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, I've put it in. Now we can start converting the CC licences. Just put in bigimage = yes
if the template has images wider then 52px. —
Edokter •
Talk •
18:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
width: 52px;
with padding: 0 6px;
. —
Edokter •
Talk •
13:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)image=none
. That way we get pretty text indenting, without an image appearing, without messing up the big image workaround stuff.
Nihiltres{
t.
l}
20:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)image=none
" but rather "image=blank
", right? And instead of using a blank image for that case I think it is better to simply insert a div for that specific case. Although now that the image cell width will vary then "image=blank
" will be even less meaningful than before.image=none
or, as it may be, image=blank
would be quite effective.
Nihiltres{
t.
l}
14:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)David, Wikipedia is supposed to be a collaborative project; If you cannot tolerate others working with you, then I shall leave this project well alone. I fully understand all the code involved; do not asume that I am some amature. If I made an error, rervert it, but please do not make me out to be a code-breaker out to destroy your work. My only goal is to get as clean code, with as least ambiguous code as possible. In fact, here's a tip: don't use inline CSS at all, as that only hampers development. Instead, put the CSS in your monobook, or put it in a subpage and import that into your monobook. That way, these kind of frustrations will be cut entirely. — Edokter • Talk • 16:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)