Template talk:Construction
This template was originally designed to excuse the incompleteness of a MarioWiki or Help page that was part of a Project (even a PipeProject was tagged for a day). I remember tagging Pipe Plaza, The 'Shroom, Help:Userbox, and one PipeProject before. The category, I agree, we can live without, but this is not for normal articles that are unfinished (and thus stubbed for another contributor to take up). Wayoshi ( T·C·@ ) 02:03, 27 August 2006 (EDT)
Incompleteness
When I look through most of articles with this template on, most say "we hope to have this article completed in no defined time" and some have been left on articles for more than a month. I understand that these kinds of articles take a long time to finish but is it right to leave this template on an article and keep procrastinating about "how you'll do it later"? As Wayoshi said above, maybe we should use this only for MarioWiki pages. What do you guys think?Knife (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2007 (EST)
Template Change
The template would look better like this:
--Bryce Wilson | talk 05:00, 26 October 2011 (EDT)
- The two templates are identical...from what I can see, the only difference is that you've edited the image to appear on the left, when appearing on the left is the default anyways (in this case). I don't think this change is necessary. (
| )
- K, thanks for your opinion. --Bryce Wilson | talk 08:00, 26 October 2011 (EDT)
- Actually, if your computer screen's narrow and the text doesn't fit in one line, in the current template the next line starts underneath the image, whereas this version has the text line up next to the image, which is an improvement. Of course, I feel like the best thing to do would be to simply remove the image: imo, the gif does nothing but make the template more of a distracting eyesore for the article saddled with it... - Walkazo 21:17, 26 October 2011 (EDT)
- K, thanks for your opinion. --Bryce Wilson | talk 08:00, 26 October 2011 (EDT)
GIF
I think the GIF looked great! I don't see why it was be removed.
Because it was annoying? -- Super FAMICOM™ 64 (Talk - Contribs) 09:15, 20 February 2012 (EST)
Quite possibly... YoshiKong (talk)
Keeping the Mario hammer gif
Template:SettledTPP OPPOSE 4-14
Forgive me if you don't agree, but I think the Construction Template should be left as it was, with the on the left. The admins has dubbed it unnessesary, but I just don't agree with this particular decision. Yes, it is unnessesary, but it should be left there for purely decorative and nostalgic purposes.
I was once viewing an article with a Construction Template, and I was at home. My Dad walked past and looked over my shoulder, and he instantly recognised the gif from the first Mario game Donkey Kong. So, you see, that gif reflects a great part of Mario's history, and whoever originally had the idea to put it on one of the most widly used maintinence template on the Wiki was really smart.
so, if you agree, please support me in bringing back the gif so it's there to stay! Thanks :)
Proposer: YoshiKong (talk)
Deadline: March 5, 2012, 23:59 GMT
Support
- YoshiKong (talk) Per my proposal
- Zero777 (talk) I don't really care what the proposal say, but I do enjoy that gif on the construction template.
- Commander Code-8 (talk) I liked the gif. It added a Mario touch to the template.
- BoygeyMario (talk) It's a good way of saying an article's under construction.
Oppose
- BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) IMO, I don't really like the GIF. I wouldn't mind if it was a static image, but the GIF is certainly distracting. It also screws up the text in lower resolution computers if the text exceeds to two lines which really bothers me. I have to agree with the administrators that it was an "unnecessary" change and it looks better without the gif.
- Mario4Ever (talk) It is an unnecessary image that makes the template look unprofessional. Its removal was a joint decision.
- Walkazo (talk) -
I actually ran removing the GIF by the other admins before I took it off, and I alluded to that in my edit summary, so marketing this TPP as if it was just me deeming it unnecessary and taking it out as I saw fit isn't fair.Multiple admins agreed to removing the GIF, with reasons ranging from "annoying" to "unprofessional" and, of course, the "unnecessary" criticism - all of which I agree with (I just put the one down, assuming that'd be a sufficient summary). Like BLOF, I also find it distracting and have been bothered by the ill-formatted text wrapping for months as well (although to be fair, that could be fixed using the forgotten formatting drafted by B.wilson above, but the issues with the GIF itself still stand). Notice templates are tools, not banners, and the goal is to get the construction template off the article as soon as possible: it's not supposed to be pretty or fun, it's supposed to be a garish orange motivator to get pages written faster. - MeritC (talk) - Per all.
- Bop1996 (talk) Per all.
- Glowsquid (talk) - I have no problem with having Mario images on wiki templates and such, but I find gifs like that to be gaudy and annoying.
- Super Famicom 64 (talk) Per all, especially Mario4Ever and Walkazo.
- New Super Yoshi (talk) Per All. I also find it to look ugly.
- UltraMario3000 (talk) Per all.
- Bowser's luma (talk) It looks dumb and unprofessional on a template that is used as often as this one. Plus, the hammer is bigger than his head. What's up with that? Per all.
- Lakituthequick (talk) Per Glowsquid. Have a image, non-animated.
- LeftyGreenMario (talk) I would rather have a picture that is not animated (with my ADHD, the picture is murderous to my focus) than no picture at all (so I disagree with Walkazo somewhat. Hey, I like illustrations. I don't want this wiki to be boring and tasteless.) I want to see if the template I created below is better, though, because we can definitely go with that for those who would love a picture.
- SuperPaperFan (talk) Per all. It is not needed.
- Fawfulfury65 (talk) It's pretty unnecessary and distracting. It didn't look very good either.
Comments
Since the proposal was reworded, I slashed out the part of my vote that concerned that aspect of the proposal. - Walkazo 09:49, 21 February 2012 (EST)
It's a little late in the proposal, but I hope it wouldn't hurt if we included a properly resized stationary image from the sprite sheet in http://www.mfgg.net/index.php?act=resdb¶m=02&c=1&id=4279. I don't see why we have to nix the picture altogether. It's just a little suggestion. Mario-HOHO! (Talk / Stalk) 23:30, 22 February 2012 (EST)
What do you think? I hope this isn't distracting enough to annoy users but the picture is enough to please those that want a bit of illustration in these templates. And yes, I mentioned a lot earlier that the GIF is a major distraction. Mario-HOHO! (Talk / Stalk) 23:42, 22 February 2012 (EST)
- LGM, I use a higher resolution computer so I don't know what I really looks like but I like it so far. It looks better than the one with the GIF Ray Trace(T|C)
That one looks better than the current one. I think we should have that one. SuperPaperFan
Nice job LGM, I like it. We should use this one. If there were a third option to use this version, that would be my vote. Bowser's luma (talk)
- Good! I've always wanted to use this sprite instead of the current one because I liked it much more. Too bad I don't have the privileges to do so. Mario-HOHO! (Talk / Stalk) 21:44, 23 February 2012 (EST)
- The only problem with that is the Construction template isn't meant to be admired because its sole function is to remind users to finish an article and then remove the template, so there's not much point in adorning it with anything. Mario4Ever (talk)
- It doesn't mean we have to nix altogether, though. If you really want it, we can remove the Bob-omb in the delete template, the Mario head in the stub template, the picture in the lastwarn template, etc. What I like about the pictures, though, is that it adds a Mario feel to the templates, and as the lastwarn's case, it just looks better with it. Mario-HOHO! (Talk / Stalk) 22:27, 23 February 2012 (EST)
- The only problem with that is the Construction template isn't meant to be admired because its sole function is to remind users to finish an article and then remove the template, so there's not much point in adorning it with anything. Mario4Ever (talk)
- Good! I've always wanted to use this sprite instead of the current one because I liked it much more. Too bad I don't have the privileges to do so. Mario-HOHO! (Talk / Stalk) 21:44, 23 February 2012 (EST)
I agree. This is the MARIO wiki after all. That picture is better than no picture at all. SuperPaperFan
- I've changed stuff in the proposal, so if you like the new design, please vote in the new section! YoshiKong (talk)
- Sorry, but you can't change the proposal at this point, since it's been up for four days, and changes can only happen within the first three days (see Rule 12). Instead, you can wait and make another proposal a month after the end of this one, or you can request for an admin to cancel this proposal so that you can make a new three-option proposal right away. - Walkazo 09:52, 24 February 2012 (EST)
- I've changed stuff in the proposal, so if you like the new design, please vote in the new section! YoshiKong (talk)
Create a parameter for "article" and "section"
Honestly (and this is just my opinion), I think there should be a separate parameter for article-wide and section-wide construction. If you don't understand me, please read on.
Like, if the editor just types {{construction}}
, it would look like this:
Or, if the editor types {{construction||section}}
, it would look like this:
Feel free to take a vote as well. SuperLeaf1(Raccoon/Fox) 18:32, 26 January 2014 (EST)