![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Won has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Won}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Changes:
It may be useful to check the edit history for a step-by-step breakdown of the changes.
Current shade | Proposed shade |
---|---|
Won[1] | Won[1] |
Link | Link |
3[1] | 3[1] |
Link | Link |
-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 18:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC) Fernando Trebien ( talk) 18:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
|color=
to be defined. Was this intentional?
Primefac (
talk)
18:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Nom has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Nom}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Change: color minimally tweaked to provide WCAG AAA level contrast against blue links, similar to what was done recently for {{ No2}}.
Current shade | Proposed shade |
---|---|
Text[1] | Text[1] |
Link | Link |
-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 13:45, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Won has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Won}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Change: Added contrast check when background or text color is set in articles. Articles that use color combinations with contrast below WCAG AA are added to a tracking category. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 23:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC) Fernando Trebien ( talk) 23:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
ensure that color is not the only method used to communicate important information( MOS:COLOR), the exact shade should not be relevant. If you find an article where information requires color, you can change it so that it does not have such requirement. I've recently changed a few to achieve that. I'm not against changing that shade, but there are many types of color blindness and ultimately only changes in lightness can properly embrace all types, and then we're limited to very few options that satisfy WCAG AA or AAA. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 19:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Is there a reason why {{
rh}}
and {{
rh2}}
default to left-aligned, instead of center-aligned like all of the other templates? I don't necessarily object... but even in our regular tables, headers don't default to left-aligned. And it does contradict the TemplateData documentation shared among all of the templates. (Which claims "Default center
" for |align=
, without noting the exception(s). So I guess if nothing else, that should be expanded if possible.)
FeRDNYC (
talk)
10:57, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
plainrowheaders
(see
WP:DTT) is for tables using only row headers and also left-aligns. It might make sense to point this out in the template docs. --
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
11:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
{{
rh}}
and {{
rh2}}
don't take an unnamed argument, also un-like all the other templates. Right now that is addressed in the TD, after a fashion, but it's addressed like this: text to be displayed instead of the default; if this doesn't work put the text after the template, possibly with a vertical bar | in between...Underwhelming.
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Won has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Won}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Changes:
place=platinum
, suitable for articles such as
List of awards and nominations received by Avril Lavigne and
List of awards and nominations received by Britney Spears. These articles currently use a colour combination that does not pass
WCAG AA, so I'm proposing a darker grey shade that does, such that these articles don't look too different when the new shade is used.-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 18:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC) Fernando Trebien ( talk) 18:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
sockstrike. Primefac ( talk) 10:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC) | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
Please replace all code in {{ Nom}} with sandbox code ( diff). Changes: shade changed from very light yellow (
|
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Nom has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Nom}} with sandbox code ( diff).
Changes: class changed from no table-no2
to partial table-partial
and shade changed from light red (#FFE3E3
) to light yellow (#FFD
) matching {{
some}} and {{
CFinalist}}.
Rationale: as contestants advance, they go from {{ longlisted}} (light blue) to {{ shortlisted}} (darker light yellow) to {{ nominated}} (conceptually similar to {{ CFinalist}}, which is light yellow) to {{ won}} (light green, gold / colorful yellow, silver or a lighter shade of bronze) or {{ lost}} (darker light red). Most uses of nom use it for its default meaning, so the colour change does not affect their content in any significant way. A similar change was implemented in 2019 in this edit, but it was undone because it wasn't discussed.
This change would help solve another problem: this large set of lists uses {{ nom}} to represent the opposite of nominated: Not Nominated. I would change this set as follows:
{{good|Nominated}}
→ {{nom}}
and{{nom|Not Nominated}}
→ {{no2|Not Nominated}}
(or create {{notnom}}
)But {{
nom}} and {{
no2}} have (and have been for a long time) the exact same colour (now #FFE3E3
, a while ago #FDD
), so the change would make Nominated and Not Nominated indistinguishable in this set, which would likely generate confusion, but the proposed colour change would enable the transition to a more meaningful use of this template.
Sorry to request another change this soon, but I was unaware of this whole situation. Fernando Trebien ( talk) 20:13, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Undo this… it should not be the same colour as pending
JosHeartTransplant (
talk) 21:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock.
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
17:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Could someone please explain the reason why the color for {{
nom}} has changed from (#FFE3E3
) to (#FFD
)? The color change now conflates the colors for {{
pending}} with {{
nom}}, which creates some confusion in awards tables. I don't want to make a Template change request without understanding the reason first. No hostility intended.
Ajack15 (
talk) 13:29, 15 January 2022 (CT)
#FFB
) instead of the new color (#FFD
), although in that case it would also make sense to change {{
CFinalist}} to that colour for consistency. --
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
19:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)table-partial
class, so it seems to make sense.Proposed shade | Basis | Similar | Classes | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Previous | No2 | Lost | table-no2, table-failure | |
Current | Some | Finalist | Pending | table-partial |
Proposal 1 | Partial | Shortlisted | Gold | table-partial, table-no2 (shortlisted) |
Proposal 2 | Unofficial2 | Good | Won | table-partial, table-yes2 (good) |
Proposal 3 | Included | Runner-up | table-included | |
— | Longlisted | Guest | table-no2 (longlisted) |
#FFE3E3
) anyway. Undo this
User:Primefac. No idea why this has been suggested, let alone actually carried out by an administrator when it’s the same colour as Pending.
JosHeartTransplant (
talk) 21:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Ensure that color is not the only method used to communicate important information.If an article depends on color to convey information, it should be rewritten to avoid this. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 22:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
#FFE3E3
). — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
JosHeartTransplant (
talk •
contribs) 22:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC) nerds?
what a daft comment? WP:CIV, WP:HOTHEADS. It was broken as I already explained, please help find a solution, not perpetuate a problem. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 22:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
If an article depends on color to convey information, it should be rewritten to avoid this, so, surely, in the same vein, if information is obscured by use of color, it should be changed to avoid this. Just reading "nominated" is clear, but then someone notices it is the same color as "pending" and gets confused, wondering if the meaning is different. Kingsif ( talk) 22:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
And do you not want to revert to a stable, useful, version, for the time being while we hash out a color scheme? Why not?Already explained in Template talk:Table cell templates/Archive 2 § Template-protected edit request on 14 January 2022 (2).
And, you say you based those options on existing colors, again, too similar to work on some screens anyway.The same is true for the old shade, which collides with {{ no2}}. As explained in Template talk:Table cell templates/Archive 2 § Template-protected edit request on 14 January 2022 (2), it is not very logical to assign red to an outcome that is better than {{ shortlisted}} and {{ longlisted}}. What if instead we assign red to {{ shortlisted}} and {{ shortlisted}}'s light gold to {{ nom}}? Even so, red normally has a negative connotation, that's why it's the colour of {{ no2}}. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 22:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Revert an edit if it is not an improvement, and it cannot be immediately fixed by refinement. Consider reverting only when necessary. BRD does not encourage reverting, but recognizes that reversions happen.I believe we are discussing the possibility of a refinement. I've proposed a refinement quickly to try to prevent an escalation, and I now know the real size of the problem (see § Template-protected edit request on 15 January 2022 (2)). With the problem being somewhat infrequent, I suspect that a refinement is less work for everyone. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 01:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
It would be a refinement under BRD if someone else was doing it, but since you're changing your own edit, I don't find it to be the same thing. To put it briefly, the current consensus seems to be that the edit should be reverted, and it almost certainly would have been reverted already if the page wasn't protected. Again, I don't think anyone is outright rejecting your proposal, but it deserves more deliberation. RunningTiger123 ( talk) 03:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
that "shortlisted" and "nominated" are the sameI'm a little intrigued by this. This search finds 90 articles where {{ nom}} and {{ shortlisted}} are used in the same tables. The two have always used very different colors, so are they the same? If so, wouldn't it make sense for them to have the same colour? -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 04:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Stemming from this discussion, I would like to offer my full support in having "nom" move away from red. Red normally carries negative connotations. Being nominated for something is typically an honor. Look at this list, the disqualified and withdrawn submissions are nearly the same as those nominated for an Oscar! And shortlisted are nearly the same color as the Oscar winner. This is highly misleading, in my opinion. See the previous edit for what it looked like with different templates used (such as "good" for a nomination). So, I would ask that the "nom" template be changed to a green color, and "notnom" changed to a red color. Shortlisted should be a different color from gold or yellow, so blue is a good option, I believe. Jmj713 ( talk) 14:19, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Template call | Current shade | Proposed shade |
---|---|---|
{{ no2|Not won}} | Not won | Not won |
{{ notnom}} | Not nominated | Not nominated |
{{ won|place=2|Silver}} | Silver | Silver |
{{ won|place=3|Bronze}} | Bronze | Bronze |
{{ won|place=1|Gold}} | Gold | Gold |
{{ won}} | Won | Won |
{{ nom}} | Nominated | Nominated |
{{ runner-up}} | Runner-up | Runner-up |
{{ sho}} | Shortlisted | Shortlisted |
{{ longlisted}} | Longlisted | Longlisted |
it would be a significant overhaul of a systemI believe you are proposing an overhaul, but it is not what is being proposed or discussed, which is a much simpler change. Keep in mind that these templates are, by definition, for comparison tables, they are not an absolute measure of achievement, but rather an indication of relative achievement between similar works or artists (or sometimes sportspersons in the case of {{ won}}).
the collection of film color templates for award tables will have to be standardized across all awarding bodiesStandardization is good. From what I've seen so far, it seems very well standardized in various contexts.
and should have its own RfCI believe it shouldn't.
Extensive discussion of such changes, too, is to be discouraged—ideally, to be avoided completely—though a little explanation and statement of opinion never hurt anyone, and may be a good idea.( WP:COLORWAR). -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 11:51, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Nom has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Revert all color changes to templates requested in the last month by Ftrebien, as they are actively misleading, per my comments here. Not a perfect solution, but much better until there can be an actual discussion. Kingsif ( talk) 22:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Support Absolutely agree! I think most of us have no idea why it was changed in the first place.
JosHeartTransplant (
talk) 22:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock.
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
17:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose as explained in Template talk:Table cell templates/Archive 2 § Template-protected edit request on 14 January 2022 (2). Alternative solutions for both issues were proposed in § Color change in "Nominated". -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 23:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
You guys know this isn't a !vote thing, right?? And, Fernando, as said, there should be a full discussion before more changes, and a stable revert is the immediate solution until there is a consensus on colors. While you are of course free to propose making more changes that aren't agreed upon based on what you think will fix things, it doesn't seem like a reasonable course of action - more unilateral changes are only likely to mean even more discussion is needed, and why would you so fiercely want to have such changes implemented on a template that is used on hundreds of thousands of articles without giving people a chance to discuss? You are not omniscient to colors in templates, and "I proposed a solution" isn't a good response to people bringing up concerns. Kingsif ( talk) 23:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree. Or maybe, if you're not opposed to it, an entirely new shade all together. Just something to make the difference discernible.-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 03:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
During a dispute discussion, until a consensus is established, you should not revert away from the status quo. Given that the template had used the old color for years without issues, it's reasonable to call it the status quo, and it seemed to work well during that time, so we should respect that by keeping it that way unless there is clear consensus to change. RunningTiger123 ( talk) 03:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
If there is a dispute, editors should work towards consensus. Instead of engaging in an edit war, which is harmful, propose your reverted change on the article's talk page or pursue other dispute resolution alternatives.And followed by:
It is not appropriate to use reversion to control the content of an article through status quo stonewalling.-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 03:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
We don’t need it to be changed, the original colour was fine.
JosHeartTransplant (
talk) 00:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock.
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
17:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Won has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Won}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Change: added value place=honorary
which can be used in articles such as
List of Japanese Academy Award winners and nominees and
List of French submissions for the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film to represent the Honorary Award result.
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
00:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Should the colour of unified cell template {{ nom}} (representing Nominated) be light red, light green, or light yellow? Fernando Trebien ( talk) 21:32, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
In Template talk:Table cell templates § Color change in "Nominated" it was also suggested that:
More than 33,000 articles use {{ nom}} in tables listing or comparing awards. In most of them, for example, Nicole Scherzinger § Awards and nominations, the template is used as intended. The discussion started because a group of about 200 articles related to Oscar nominations, for example, List of submissions to the 93rd Academy Awards for Best International Feature Film, were using {{ nom}} for Not Nominated, which is the opposite of its intent. After switching to {{ nom}} and the newly created {{ notnom}} in the articles of this group, the colour symbolism in their comparison tables seems counter-intuitive, as Nominated is considered a good result, while the symbolism of red is usually more negative. A change of {{ nom}} to very light yellow turned out to be controversial due to a collision with the colour of {{ pending}} in about 1200 articles. As a quick fix, it was proposed changing {{ nom}} to a darker but still light yellow, because unified cell templates representing partial success are usually of this hue. Later, it was proposed changing it to a light green/aquamarine, to reflect the positive character of being nominated compared to other possible results in contests. The following table may help visualize the impact on tables listing or comparing awards:
Template call | Current shade | Proposed shade | |
---|---|---|---|
{{ no2|Not won}} | Not won | Not won | |
{{ notnom}} | Not nominated | Not nominated [a] | Not nominated [b] |
{{ won|place=2|Silver}} | Silver | Silver | |
{{ won|place=3|Bronze}} | Bronze | Bronze | |
{{ won|place=1|Gold}} | Gold | Gold | |
{{ won}} | Won | Won | |
{{ nom}} | Nominated | Nominated [a] | Nominated [a] |
{{ pending}} | Pending | Pending | Pending [b] |
{{ runner-up}} | Runner-up | Runner-up | |
{{ sho}} | Shortlisted | Shortlisted [a] | |
{{ longlisted}} | Longlisted | Longlisted |
-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 21:37, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
{{
reply to|Chess}}
on reply)
22:28, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
{{
reply to|Chess}}
on reply)
03:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
So has there been any further discussion anywhere? Jmj713 ( talk) 23:26, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Won has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Won}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Changes:
It may be useful to check the edit history for a step-by-step breakdown of the changes.
Current shade | Proposed shade |
---|---|
Won[1] | Won[1] |
Link | Link |
3[1] | 3[1] |
Link | Link |
-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 18:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC) Fernando Trebien ( talk) 18:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
|color=
to be defined. Was this intentional?
Primefac (
talk)
18:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Nom has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Nom}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Change: color minimally tweaked to provide WCAG AAA level contrast against blue links, similar to what was done recently for {{ No2}}.
Current shade | Proposed shade |
---|---|
Text[1] | Text[1] |
Link | Link |
-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 13:45, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Won has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Won}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Change: Added contrast check when background or text color is set in articles. Articles that use color combinations with contrast below WCAG AA are added to a tracking category. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 23:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC) Fernando Trebien ( talk) 23:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
ensure that color is not the only method used to communicate important information( MOS:COLOR), the exact shade should not be relevant. If you find an article where information requires color, you can change it so that it does not have such requirement. I've recently changed a few to achieve that. I'm not against changing that shade, but there are many types of color blindness and ultimately only changes in lightness can properly embrace all types, and then we're limited to very few options that satisfy WCAG AA or AAA. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 19:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Is there a reason why {{
rh}}
and {{
rh2}}
default to left-aligned, instead of center-aligned like all of the other templates? I don't necessarily object... but even in our regular tables, headers don't default to left-aligned. And it does contradict the TemplateData documentation shared among all of the templates. (Which claims "Default center
" for |align=
, without noting the exception(s). So I guess if nothing else, that should be expanded if possible.)
FeRDNYC (
talk)
10:57, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
plainrowheaders
(see
WP:DTT) is for tables using only row headers and also left-aligns. It might make sense to point this out in the template docs. --
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
11:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
{{
rh}}
and {{
rh2}}
don't take an unnamed argument, also un-like all the other templates. Right now that is addressed in the TD, after a fashion, but it's addressed like this: text to be displayed instead of the default; if this doesn't work put the text after the template, possibly with a vertical bar | in between...Underwhelming.
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Won has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Won}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Changes:
place=platinum
, suitable for articles such as
List of awards and nominations received by Avril Lavigne and
List of awards and nominations received by Britney Spears. These articles currently use a colour combination that does not pass
WCAG AA, so I'm proposing a darker grey shade that does, such that these articles don't look too different when the new shade is used.-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 18:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC) Fernando Trebien ( talk) 18:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
sockstrike. Primefac ( talk) 10:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC) | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
Please replace all code in {{ Nom}} with sandbox code ( diff). Changes: shade changed from very light yellow (
|
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Nom has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Nom}} with sandbox code ( diff).
Changes: class changed from no table-no2
to partial table-partial
and shade changed from light red (#FFE3E3
) to light yellow (#FFD
) matching {{
some}} and {{
CFinalist}}.
Rationale: as contestants advance, they go from {{ longlisted}} (light blue) to {{ shortlisted}} (darker light yellow) to {{ nominated}} (conceptually similar to {{ CFinalist}}, which is light yellow) to {{ won}} (light green, gold / colorful yellow, silver or a lighter shade of bronze) or {{ lost}} (darker light red). Most uses of nom use it for its default meaning, so the colour change does not affect their content in any significant way. A similar change was implemented in 2019 in this edit, but it was undone because it wasn't discussed.
This change would help solve another problem: this large set of lists uses {{ nom}} to represent the opposite of nominated: Not Nominated. I would change this set as follows:
{{good|Nominated}}
→ {{nom}}
and{{nom|Not Nominated}}
→ {{no2|Not Nominated}}
(or create {{notnom}}
)But {{
nom}} and {{
no2}} have (and have been for a long time) the exact same colour (now #FFE3E3
, a while ago #FDD
), so the change would make Nominated and Not Nominated indistinguishable in this set, which would likely generate confusion, but the proposed colour change would enable the transition to a more meaningful use of this template.
Sorry to request another change this soon, but I was unaware of this whole situation. Fernando Trebien ( talk) 20:13, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Undo this… it should not be the same colour as pending
JosHeartTransplant (
talk) 21:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock.
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
17:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Could someone please explain the reason why the color for {{
nom}} has changed from (#FFE3E3
) to (#FFD
)? The color change now conflates the colors for {{
pending}} with {{
nom}}, which creates some confusion in awards tables. I don't want to make a Template change request without understanding the reason first. No hostility intended.
Ajack15 (
talk) 13:29, 15 January 2022 (CT)
#FFB
) instead of the new color (#FFD
), although in that case it would also make sense to change {{
CFinalist}} to that colour for consistency. --
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
19:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)table-partial
class, so it seems to make sense.Proposed shade | Basis | Similar | Classes | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Previous | No2 | Lost | table-no2, table-failure | |
Current | Some | Finalist | Pending | table-partial |
Proposal 1 | Partial | Shortlisted | Gold | table-partial, table-no2 (shortlisted) |
Proposal 2 | Unofficial2 | Good | Won | table-partial, table-yes2 (good) |
Proposal 3 | Included | Runner-up | table-included | |
— | Longlisted | Guest | table-no2 (longlisted) |
#FFE3E3
) anyway. Undo this
User:Primefac. No idea why this has been suggested, let alone actually carried out by an administrator when it’s the same colour as Pending.
JosHeartTransplant (
talk) 21:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Ensure that color is not the only method used to communicate important information.If an article depends on color to convey information, it should be rewritten to avoid this. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 22:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
#FFE3E3
). — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
JosHeartTransplant (
talk •
contribs) 22:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC) nerds?
what a daft comment? WP:CIV, WP:HOTHEADS. It was broken as I already explained, please help find a solution, not perpetuate a problem. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 22:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
If an article depends on color to convey information, it should be rewritten to avoid this, so, surely, in the same vein, if information is obscured by use of color, it should be changed to avoid this. Just reading "nominated" is clear, but then someone notices it is the same color as "pending" and gets confused, wondering if the meaning is different. Kingsif ( talk) 22:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
And do you not want to revert to a stable, useful, version, for the time being while we hash out a color scheme? Why not?Already explained in Template talk:Table cell templates/Archive 2 § Template-protected edit request on 14 January 2022 (2).
And, you say you based those options on existing colors, again, too similar to work on some screens anyway.The same is true for the old shade, which collides with {{ no2}}. As explained in Template talk:Table cell templates/Archive 2 § Template-protected edit request on 14 January 2022 (2), it is not very logical to assign red to an outcome that is better than {{ shortlisted}} and {{ longlisted}}. What if instead we assign red to {{ shortlisted}} and {{ shortlisted}}'s light gold to {{ nom}}? Even so, red normally has a negative connotation, that's why it's the colour of {{ no2}}. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 22:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Revert an edit if it is not an improvement, and it cannot be immediately fixed by refinement. Consider reverting only when necessary. BRD does not encourage reverting, but recognizes that reversions happen.I believe we are discussing the possibility of a refinement. I've proposed a refinement quickly to try to prevent an escalation, and I now know the real size of the problem (see § Template-protected edit request on 15 January 2022 (2)). With the problem being somewhat infrequent, I suspect that a refinement is less work for everyone. -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 01:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
It would be a refinement under BRD if someone else was doing it, but since you're changing your own edit, I don't find it to be the same thing. To put it briefly, the current consensus seems to be that the edit should be reverted, and it almost certainly would have been reverted already if the page wasn't protected. Again, I don't think anyone is outright rejecting your proposal, but it deserves more deliberation. RunningTiger123 ( talk) 03:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
that "shortlisted" and "nominated" are the sameI'm a little intrigued by this. This search finds 90 articles where {{ nom}} and {{ shortlisted}} are used in the same tables. The two have always used very different colors, so are they the same? If so, wouldn't it make sense for them to have the same colour? -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 04:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Stemming from this discussion, I would like to offer my full support in having "nom" move away from red. Red normally carries negative connotations. Being nominated for something is typically an honor. Look at this list, the disqualified and withdrawn submissions are nearly the same as those nominated for an Oscar! And shortlisted are nearly the same color as the Oscar winner. This is highly misleading, in my opinion. See the previous edit for what it looked like with different templates used (such as "good" for a nomination). So, I would ask that the "nom" template be changed to a green color, and "notnom" changed to a red color. Shortlisted should be a different color from gold or yellow, so blue is a good option, I believe. Jmj713 ( talk) 14:19, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Template call | Current shade | Proposed shade |
---|---|---|
{{ no2|Not won}} | Not won | Not won |
{{ notnom}} | Not nominated | Not nominated |
{{ won|place=2|Silver}} | Silver | Silver |
{{ won|place=3|Bronze}} | Bronze | Bronze |
{{ won|place=1|Gold}} | Gold | Gold |
{{ won}} | Won | Won |
{{ nom}} | Nominated | Nominated |
{{ runner-up}} | Runner-up | Runner-up |
{{ sho}} | Shortlisted | Shortlisted |
{{ longlisted}} | Longlisted | Longlisted |
it would be a significant overhaul of a systemI believe you are proposing an overhaul, but it is not what is being proposed or discussed, which is a much simpler change. Keep in mind that these templates are, by definition, for comparison tables, they are not an absolute measure of achievement, but rather an indication of relative achievement between similar works or artists (or sometimes sportspersons in the case of {{ won}}).
the collection of film color templates for award tables will have to be standardized across all awarding bodiesStandardization is good. From what I've seen so far, it seems very well standardized in various contexts.
and should have its own RfCI believe it shouldn't.
Extensive discussion of such changes, too, is to be discouraged—ideally, to be avoided completely—though a little explanation and statement of opinion never hurt anyone, and may be a good idea.( WP:COLORWAR). -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 11:51, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Nom has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Revert all color changes to templates requested in the last month by Ftrebien, as they are actively misleading, per my comments here. Not a perfect solution, but much better until there can be an actual discussion. Kingsif ( talk) 22:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Support Absolutely agree! I think most of us have no idea why it was changed in the first place.
JosHeartTransplant (
talk) 22:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock.
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
17:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose as explained in Template talk:Table cell templates/Archive 2 § Template-protected edit request on 14 January 2022 (2). Alternative solutions for both issues were proposed in § Color change in "Nominated". -- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 23:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
You guys know this isn't a !vote thing, right?? And, Fernando, as said, there should be a full discussion before more changes, and a stable revert is the immediate solution until there is a consensus on colors. While you are of course free to propose making more changes that aren't agreed upon based on what you think will fix things, it doesn't seem like a reasonable course of action - more unilateral changes are only likely to mean even more discussion is needed, and why would you so fiercely want to have such changes implemented on a template that is used on hundreds of thousands of articles without giving people a chance to discuss? You are not omniscient to colors in templates, and "I proposed a solution" isn't a good response to people bringing up concerns. Kingsif ( talk) 23:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree. Or maybe, if you're not opposed to it, an entirely new shade all together. Just something to make the difference discernible.-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 03:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
During a dispute discussion, until a consensus is established, you should not revert away from the status quo. Given that the template had used the old color for years without issues, it's reasonable to call it the status quo, and it seemed to work well during that time, so we should respect that by keeping it that way unless there is clear consensus to change. RunningTiger123 ( talk) 03:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
If there is a dispute, editors should work towards consensus. Instead of engaging in an edit war, which is harmful, propose your reverted change on the article's talk page or pursue other dispute resolution alternatives.And followed by:
It is not appropriate to use reversion to control the content of an article through status quo stonewalling.-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 03:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
We don’t need it to be changed, the original colour was fine.
JosHeartTransplant (
talk) 00:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock.
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
17:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Won has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code in {{ Won}} with sandbox code ( diff)
Change: added value place=honorary
which can be used in articles such as
List of Japanese Academy Award winners and nominees and
List of French submissions for the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film to represent the Honorary Award result.
Fernando Trebien (
talk)
00:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Should the colour of unified cell template {{ nom}} (representing Nominated) be light red, light green, or light yellow? Fernando Trebien ( talk) 21:32, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
In Template talk:Table cell templates § Color change in "Nominated" it was also suggested that:
More than 33,000 articles use {{ nom}} in tables listing or comparing awards. In most of them, for example, Nicole Scherzinger § Awards and nominations, the template is used as intended. The discussion started because a group of about 200 articles related to Oscar nominations, for example, List of submissions to the 93rd Academy Awards for Best International Feature Film, were using {{ nom}} for Not Nominated, which is the opposite of its intent. After switching to {{ nom}} and the newly created {{ notnom}} in the articles of this group, the colour symbolism in their comparison tables seems counter-intuitive, as Nominated is considered a good result, while the symbolism of red is usually more negative. A change of {{ nom}} to very light yellow turned out to be controversial due to a collision with the colour of {{ pending}} in about 1200 articles. As a quick fix, it was proposed changing {{ nom}} to a darker but still light yellow, because unified cell templates representing partial success are usually of this hue. Later, it was proposed changing it to a light green/aquamarine, to reflect the positive character of being nominated compared to other possible results in contests. The following table may help visualize the impact on tables listing or comparing awards:
Template call | Current shade | Proposed shade | |
---|---|---|---|
{{ no2|Not won}} | Not won | Not won | |
{{ notnom}} | Not nominated | Not nominated [a] | Not nominated [b] |
{{ won|place=2|Silver}} | Silver | Silver | |
{{ won|place=3|Bronze}} | Bronze | Bronze | |
{{ won|place=1|Gold}} | Gold | Gold | |
{{ won}} | Won | Won | |
{{ nom}} | Nominated | Nominated [a] | Nominated [a] |
{{ pending}} | Pending | Pending | Pending [b] |
{{ runner-up}} | Runner-up | Runner-up | |
{{ sho}} | Shortlisted | Shortlisted [a] | |
{{ longlisted}} | Longlisted | Longlisted |
-- Fernando Trebien ( talk) 21:37, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
{{
reply to|Chess}}
on reply)
22:28, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
{{
reply to|Chess}}
on reply)
03:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
So has there been any further discussion anywhere? Jmj713 ( talk) 23:26, 4 February 2022 (UTC)