Topic on User talk:Andytizer

Hey, just thought I'd give my feedback on the new article style being implemented. I really like the new icons, but I'm worried we will end up with too many different ones, which will be confusing for both the editors and the readers. The way I see it, we should restrict ourselves to four icon types.

1. Green plus - positives
2. Red minus - negatives
3. Blue i - information
4. Small window - instructions

I think we should do away with the red i and any other icons as it is just confusing to look at, even if upon hovering over the icon, it gives you a description. The information presented under the red i at the moment can just as easily be presented as either a negative with the red minus, or as information with the blue i. I also don't think each issue requires a red i symbol before the header - this is unnecessary.

We need to be careful not to overdo the icons, they can be a bit distracting to look at whilst trying to read the article, and spoils the flow. In my honest opinion, it would be better to merge all the points of the same type in each section into one symbol each to keep some form of prose and structure. For example, there would only be a single red minus outlining the negatives under "Issue: 'Mic in use by game'" in the Orcs Must Die! 2 article.

Finally, I think we should retain the "Issues and Fixes" header name rather than just calling it "Issues". Shortening it to issues is confusing because we also have the "Unresolved Issues" section which is for issues with no known fix, and we want to make it clear to users which issues have fixes and which don't. If you don't like Issues and Fixes, then we could go with "Resolved Issues" or something similar?

Anyway, just some ideas. -Tom

Hi Tom thanks for the feedback.

Agreement about the icons - 4 types is enough. I'll make some adjustments this weekend. I'm thinking of beefing up the way we do attributions- self-note look at the Cite extension properly. Was previously using the Template:Star icon for that.

Regarding number of icons - I want to use them as bullet points. Partly because there shouldn't really be a 'flow' to the article - when it comes to fixes, there shouldn't be a point that is more than 2 sentences long. Using a bullet format forces people to be as concise as possible (people tend to waste precious space by saying 'an advantage is that.. a disadvantage however, is..' etc.) I think by forcing icon/bullet point usage it makes finding a fix a lot easier (especially as the content is nested).

Issues - I initially wanted Issues and Fixes and Unresolved Issues because I wanted to include points like 'there is no FOV slider', 'no option for mouse acceleration'. However we've put these at the top of the article with the new templates which present 'missing' essential features very quickly. With the rest of the issues, I don't think there needs to be a distinction between resolved and unresolved issues - it just creates an unnecessary 2nd level header. People tend to just want to know succinct info on an issue in my opinion. What do you think?

I can see your point regarding using icons as bullet points and it does make sense. I still feel that we need to have distinct resolved and unresolved issues however - not only does it separate issues which have been dealt with from those outstanding, therefore offering a rough guide as to how good the PC port/version is, it also makes it easier for people to contribute - they can quickly see which issues don't have fixes and therefore if they decide they have a fix for an unresolved issue they can spot this more quickly and add their fix to the article.

Also, I think if you're searching for a fix for your problem, its nice to know quickly and definitively if there is currently no fix, and the "Unresolved Issues" header serves this purpose.

Finally, I think it just plain looks nicer xD

-Tom

I see a good point for adding these as two separate headers, thanks.