Template talk:BSG Character
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Usage
| Race | |
|---|---|
| Gender | |
| Portrayed by | |
{{BSG Character
| image =
| caption =
| bgcolor = #fc0
| fgcolor = #000
| name =
| race =
| gender =
| callsign =
| rank =
| colony =
| affiliation =
| portrayed =
}}
I think there might be something wrong with this template because in the Leoben_Conoy article, where it should say affiliation, it says callsign instead. I don't know really know how to fix that as the actual code says affiliation not callsign. Can someone who knows what they're doing help? Crito2161 20:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Your right, *fixes it* thanks/MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 20:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Fixed.
. thanks/MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 20:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Fixed.
[edit] Gender
Should the template not say Sex rather than Gender? Gender is used in social or cultural context; sex is biological. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.41.20.200 (talk) 23:14, September 23, 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Usage?
I think an agreement needs to be reached on handling unused fields. It seems that many instances of the template use "N/A" for certain fields. This is non-standard and adds clutter. In every other infobox I have experience with on Wikipedia, unused fields are simply left blank. There's no reason for so many characters who aren't even military personnel to have "Callsign: N/A" in their character box... "Unknown" might be a valid entry, depending on the character and the field, but "N/A" really isn't. -- Fru1tbat 17:29, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree anything saying N/A should be removed, msot of the fields are optional now anyway so N/A is well.. N/A (-: thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 17:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Caption parameter
I'm adding an optional "caption" parameter to accompany the image. The current convention (putting the caption in the "image" parameter) shouldn't be broken, so no existing uses will be affected, but the new parameter will allow the caption style to be standardized and more easily modified, and should make caption inclusion less error-prone and cluttered. If there's no image or no caption, it won't show up. I'm testing it out using the Commander Cain article. Feel free to implement the parameter elsewhere, or modify the style as you see fit (assuming I haven't broken anything). -- Fru1tbat 17:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think it would be good also to make the "image" param more robust.. thoughts? Matthew Fenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 17:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- I was thinking the same thing, actually. One change that might be worth making would be to separate the image name and the size. The template would take care of the link automatically, rather than the link being part of the parameter value. The only problem is how to make it so that it deprecates gracefully (not that there are all that many articles to fix if we have to "break" a parameter, I suppose). What changes did you have in mind? -- Fru1tbat 17:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] original continuity
The original continuity characters use a shade of red, not yellow... this should be noted somewhere. 132.205.93.19 04:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- I have been wondering if it might be good to follow, say, Template:Infobox Album's example and instead of using separate color fields, use a field that defines the type/class of character (just 1978 or 2004 continuity, for now), and have the colors defined automatically...
- Pros: Addresses your concern; makes changing the color scheme easier should the need/desire arise.
- Cons: Makes instantiating the template slightly less user-friendly.
- Comments? -- Fru1tbat 16:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
