UESPWiki:Archive/CP Gameinfo Template

This is an archive of past UESPWiki:Community Portal discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page, except for maintenance such as updating links.

Gameinfo Template

Recently, I made a change to the front pages for most of the games, combining the tables and images, and Joram followed up with a new {{Gameinfo}} template. Elliot reverted all of these changes. Compare the current versions listed below along with the revisions beside them that show the pages using the new template:

• Arena:Arena (using template)
• Battlespire:Battlespire (using template)
• Bloodmoon:Bloodmoon (using template)
• Daggerfall:Daggerfall (using template)
• Dawnstar (using template)
• Morrowind:Morrowind (using template)
• Oblivion:Oblivion (using template)
• Redguard:Redguard (using template)
• Shadowkey:Shadowkey (using template)
• Shivering:Shivering Isles (using template)
• Stormhold (using template)
• Tribunal:Tribunal (using template)

Personally, I feel that it looks much better to get that little table out of the middle of the page and on the side, under the main box art. Any thoughts from anyone else? --GK^talk2me 03:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I like it both ways. The template gives consistency to all the games which is a bonus. If a small table is preferred the same template can be used by removing the box art. ? Joram?Talk 04:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I think the new layout - with the template - is much better than the old version. I've never liked having a table stuck in the middle of the page but putting it beneath the first box picture works really well. Update: I'd make the box a bit wider though. Not too much, but I get quite a bit of wrap going on with some of the games. –rpeh •T•C•E• 09:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I like it too. There is definitely better layout to be won from using the template and it looks so much better with the infobox placed under the cover. --Krusty 11:51, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I liked the initiative shown and I prefer the new layout. It reminds me of the usual informative sidebars of Wikipedia, which look better unorganized than the loose table and images. All I would suggest is to increase the top and bottom margins of the table a bit, to make it better distinguishable from the cover images. --Timenn-<talk> 12:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Like this? [Removed by author]

I tried it as a single table but couldn't get the cells above and below the middle table to be transparent and borderless. ? Joram?Talk 19:33, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

\=> You don't need a table if you just want to align a couple of elements. See here for my example on how it would appear with the extra margin. It seems that the thumbnails already require some margin themselves. --Timenn-<talk> 12:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Even simpler and it gets back to the thumbnails used in the original design. I was getting a tad table-happy. ? Joram?Talk 20:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Tomorrow will be a week since the proposal, so can I request one of you update the template so it can be used? Thanks! --GK^talk2me 02:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm on it. ? Joram?Talk 03:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Got distracted but it's done now with a minor improvement. ? Joram?Talk 04:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)