Forums: Helping Hand > Can we get a Building infobox?
Use the following template for a nicely presented post:
{{Forum post|Write your message here!|~~~~}}
I just feel a building infobox would be helpful as we currently use the Location infobox and its not quite right.
Titles for this proped box include (but are not limited to)
- Name of Building
- Type of building (e.g. tavern, store, house, tower, etc)
- Location
- Owner
- Services provided
- Notable Inhabitants
- Volo's ratings (if applicable for taverns)
anyone else like this idea??
or can you think of more titles we would need?Thomaslove92 23:01, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
Even though I would have to redo all my pages... I actually agree :) Plus, I have been waiting for someone to say... exports... ale... why are they exporting ale and ruler... why does the inn have a ruler!
Darkwynters 02:30, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
I've created a sandbox template over at User:Cronje/Template:Sandbox and an example of its use at User:Cronje/Sandbox for a first draft of a working template. The coloring will probably change, as yellow isn't great, but overall I think it's okay. Let me know what you think!
That draft looks pretty good to me, thanks for setting that up.
Thomaslove92 10:00, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
Done. I've also rearranged the rows so that occupants is grouped with owner.
Cronje, Do you think it is okay to use your template... I really like it and would love to change all my pages, but I just want to make sure the Admins are on board..., before I go infoboxing away :)
Darkwynters 00:03, February 2, 2012 (UTC)
Excellent Cronje, it looks really good, thanks for making this happen.
Really appreciate it.
edit: Are you going to make it look more like the other info boxes?Thomaslove92 00:50, February 2, 2012 (UTC)
Looking at the code to several of the more popular infoboxes (Template:Person, Template:Book, and Template:Spell), none of them use the exact same formatting. I could do away with the rounded edges to make it more standard, if you like. I'd also like suggestions for the color; I really don't like the yellow and am not sure why I used it in the first place. :P
After that, I'll copy it over to a proper (non-user subpage) template page.
Is brick red taken? Sounds like a good color for a building :)
Moviesign 04:23, February 2, 2012 (UTC)
Updated and moved over to Template:Building. Enjoy!
Excellent, thanks dude, lucky one of us knows how to write wikia code :p
Thomaslove92 12:01, February 2, 2012 (UTC)
Yay a brand new template, good now the pages will be much cleaner and the Volo ratings won't be floating in space anymore.
Pharuan Undearth 18:17, February 2, 2012 (UTC)
Great job, Cronje... can we have the Inhabitants or Organizations of links added. For example, the Elfsong Tavern... has Inhabitants of the Elfsong Tavern. What do you think?
Sure, I can do that. Would you prefer the functionality of the location template, where you choose to individually show the links to the appropriate categories, or have the wiki detect if the categories exist automatically? The problem with the latter option is that it won't detect if the category has anything in it unless the page is created. So anything in Special:WantedCategories, even though they have stuff in them, won't be detected by the parser function.
The first option is the best... and you can even remove the Notible Inhabitants, since the Inhabitants of the Elfsong Tavern would be the same thing... and add maybe races... since a lot of the building will have no actual innkeeper, but might say gnomes run the place, like the Barrelstone Inn... as for different owners... such as the Broken Dagger tavern... I guess we could just use <br/> and have the dates be in () after the names... any thoughts after looking at these pages? Still I really like what you are doing Cronje... I just hope the admins will be cool with it... I really hate to change everything and then... boom, change it back :)
Darkwynters 01:22, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
I've included the functionality for inhabitants, locations, and organizations and removed the occupants parameter as suggested. As for the owners issue, that parameter need not be specific; Gnomes is fine, as opposed to Nanfoodle or something similar. In my opinion, if there were previous owners, one or two can be in the infobox (using <br /> as suggested), but any more than that is unnecessary and should go in a == History == section.
Okay... I think I will try this on the Broken Dagger tavern and see how it looks... Cronje, you have really been working hard on this one :)
Darkwynters 02:55, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Nice work on this template. It's a good addition to the wiki, I feel. I would like to suggest that it has the same layout as {{Person}} as I would like to see all of the templates eventually acquiring this layout. Perhaps keep the brick red styling though, to distinguish it from other similar infoboxes?
I think it's important to have a single look and feel for the infobox templates, although I appreciate it's a lot of work to convert them all over, and we don't have enough of them converted just yet.
The {{Person}} template is what I consider to be a step forward in terms of template simplicity and flexibility, so any template in that style will remain easy to edit and easy to change "en masse" if we decide to refresh the look later.
I have the ability to alter the stylesheet for the wiki in case extra CSS rules are required to make any templates work. Just let me know here or on my talk page.
Fw190a8 22:28, February 8, 2012 (UTC)
If I may be so bold, why must we follow the {{Person}} style? It's the only of the infoboxes that uses <div> instead of the wiki table code. Having glanced at a couple of the infobox templates used over at Wookipedia (as one of the bigger wikis) and Wikipedia, it looks to me like they use the table code instead of <div>. Combine that with the tags like <dt> and >dd> and I'd argue that it's MORE confusing.
Here's the short answer ;) http://shouldiusetablesforlayout.com/
For the long answer, check out the history of {{Person}} and the code is much cleaner and more concise using the div-based format.
Having said that, as long as the infoboxes all look pretty much the same and look nice, whatever gets the job done, really.
Fw190a8 23:03, February 8, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I definitely agree that it's cleaner than previous iterations, but I'd argue that it could have been simplified using wiki table code just as easily, which would have kept it standard with our other infoboxes. I assume that external link (which is pretty funny, by the way) is referring to web pages in general. My argument there would be that the Wikia code isn't very clean by itself, so trying to bring our infoboxes up to web standards of quality is pretty pointless. :P