Jump to content

MediaWiki talk:Gadget-geonotice-core.css

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Protected edit request on 30 August 2016

[edit]

Started a thread at VPT about the font-size for geonotices (permalink). Can the following lines be removed from the CSS: 

#watchlist-message .geonotice span {
	font-size: 144.5%;
}

I believe the default 100% for geonotice spans should be sufficient for visibility/accessibility, and would not overpower existing watchlist notices right below it. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 02:51, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. This has been discussed before. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:20, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Advertised to: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Geonotice_size, Wikipedia_talk:Geonotice#font_size_of_notice, and MediaWiki_talk:Watchlist-messages#Geonotice_size. — xaosflux Talk 13:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should the font size for geonotices be changed?

[edit]

  • Support (Using default size). I don't think it's fair that geonotices get to be twice as big as the other watchlist notices such as the signpost notice, open RFA notice, etc. Seems like undue weight. It's also a bit of an eyesore since it stands out from the style used on the rest of the page (it's as big as a heading but it is not a heading). –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:20, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't support 120 percent. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Novem Linguae: Can you expand on why this is a fairness issue? My impression is that geonotices are a *less* obnoxious advertisement of in-person events compared to CentralNotice banners that are often used for conferences. It seems reasonable to me that they are more prominent of a notice because attending an in-person event requires an earlier notice and more advance planning than e.g. commenting on an RfA or RfC does.
    I'm still pretty new to the in-person events planning space, but I am concerned with suddenly having these notices that used to be super in your face now blend in with everything else, which is why I suggested 120% as a middle ground. There would be nothing stopping us from then reducing it to a normal size at a later time, but it also gives time for us and event planners to see if the change has any impact, and whether it's positive or negative. Legoktm (talk) 21:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (Using default size) I think we have given undo weight to these, they already have top-placement over watchlist notices on that page as well. — xaosflux Talk 13:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    120 is less jarring, second choice to 100. — xaosflux Talk 10:24, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (Using default size) I see no reason for the geonotice to be larger in font size. The geonotice usually is not much more important than the watchlist notice, at least not important enough to justify the increased font size. I think that I've always seen this larger size as odd and out of place. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 20:08, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    120% would be reasonable but I don't think I'd support anything larger than 120%. Ideally I'd still prefer the default size. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 11:42, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it's reasonable for geonotices to be larger than normal watchlist notices, they're usually narrowly geographically targeted, which increases the likelihood that they'll be relevant to the users who see them. The size is a bit obnoxious currently, I think bringing it down to maybe 120% would be more reasonable. @Xaosflux: I don't understand why a numbered vote was started without any discussion, especially one that asks a binary question (current size or default size) without offering the space for compromising alternatives. It also seems dubious to cast a vote for someone based on something they said 6 years ago... Legoktm (talk) 06:39, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Legoktm I somehow overlooked a timestamp there when this whole thing re-started, removed where I listed Andy W; also changed to not be "numbered" and gave this subsection a less boolean title (the 'advertisements' were more neutral), this is certainly just a discussion not a "vote" - thanks for the feedback! — xaosflux Talk 09:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 120%, agree that it's reasonable for these to be distinct and a bit more prominent than the standard notices since they are more targeted. However the current sizing is overkill. I did wonder about using standard font size and replacing the bullet point for Geonotices with something distinctive: 📍, or the OOUI map pin, but in my experimenting couldn't get either to look great. the wub "?!" 21:41, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The discussion above has mostly died down, I'm putting in the 120% suggested as at least a "first step" here, if it ends up being a negative we can revisit of course. — xaosflux Talk 20:35, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (Using default size) and oppose 120%; despite their geographical targeting, I doubt they interest more than a small portion of editors. Using a bigger font size for some announcement, because they might otherwise 'blend in' or be ignored, is an unfortunate logic that tries to address banner blindness in a way that worsens it in the long-run. DFlhb (talk) 14:04, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Gadget-geonotice-core.css&oldid=1184845699"