User:Phoe/Archive/August 2006

Just curious :)

• How do you pronounce your name (username)? Is it Phoe like in "Foe", or is it Pho-ee like in "Chloe" QuizQuick 00:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Succession

• Hallo, hallo, danke für deinen Eintrag in meinem User Talk. Ich habe aber irgendwie nicht verstanden, um was es konkret ging.
  VM 07:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

British Royalty

Phoe/Archive/August 2006, WikiProject British Royalty wants you! WikiProject British Royalty is an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

DBD 11:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Templates

• The wikitable class already implements a background colour for headings which is consistent with the selected stylesheet. Using a custom colour should be avoided unless it conveys a specific meaning. Pastel colours make look nice on the monobook skin, but not everyone uses it. Thanks, ed g2s • talk 17:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• Can't you just read the text? ed g2s • talk 17:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• Didn't mean that to be rude. Unless you have your monitor misadjusted, the background should look a slightly darker grey that the background of the cells. Or are you not using the monobook skin? Most of the other skins are incomplete. ed g2s • talk 17:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• The problem with choosing a colour scheme is it's always a personal preference. The default wikimedia skin, monobook, is fairly dull, but its designed, I imagine, to be as neutral as possible, so as appease the most number of users. Users can use a different stylesheet (in your preference), or you can define your own styles in User:Phoe/monobook.css file (see meta:Gallery of user styles. If you think our stylesheet needs a new class, you can discuss it at Mediawiki:Monobook.css. ed g2s • talk 18:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• Use of colours in templates is quite widespread. For example, there is a blue colour used in the heading of Template:NavigationBox. Colours are also used liberally in boilerplates, particularly on talk pages but also pages in main article space. The same thing about using different stylesheets could apply equally to talk pages.

• The colours did add something to the succession boxes. On the other hand, I do appreciate the argument against defining colours outside of the stylesheet. From a web design point of view, it's OK to specify a background colour as long as the foreground colour is specified too. So could we add background: #ff0000; color: #000 or whatever to the templates? Then at least if someone uses a stylesheet with non-standard colours (e.g. white on black) they will be able to read the headings. JRawle (Talk) 20:18, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• What did they add? I would say you only need you only need color when it is describing something (London_Underground#Lines), or emphasising a point (Comparison_of_Web_Browsers#Operating_system_support). ed g2s • talk 20:28, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• For anyone who reads/edits a lot of (particularly political) biographical articles, the coloured headings helped to identify at a glance which types of office were described. Anyway, shouldn't something be done about colours in NavigationBox? JRawle (Talk) 20:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• Ooops! Not having seen this discussion, I had restored the colours. Having read the discussion, I can understand why the colours were removed, although I think the decision is mistaken (for the same resaon that JRawle liked them). Could we discuss this on the project page? --BrownHairedGirl 15:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Dashes

• Did I goof? I thought I was replacing "–" with "–", the character itself (which looks like a hyphen in fixed-width text, like the edit box). Choess 17:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

• Um, right. I inserted "–" (ndash) between the years, not "-" (hyphen). It's the same character that appears when you type "–"; it just makes it a little easier to read when editing. Choess 18:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

• WP:MOSDASH seems to prefer the typed character to the character entity. If you do run across something contradictory in another MOS, let me know. Choess 18:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Capital A

• Hi. I saw your comment on Proteus's page. The capital A in FitzAlan is a matter of family choice, not linguistic necessity. It does not mean that there is a FitzMaurice, etc. Most people with Fitz don't use capitals. So it would be Fitzmaurice, Fitzlyons, Fitzalan, Fitzgerald, etc. However some branches use a capital. So the Geraldine branch of the Fitzgeralds are FitzGerald, for example. The former Irish taoiseach is Garret FitzGerald. But he was replaced as a TD in Dublin South East by Frances Fitzgerald (no relation). I hope that clarifies things somewhat. FearÉIREANN\^{(caint) 14:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)}

• In noble families, the capital is normal. These cases are no exception, and FitzMaurice and FitzPatrick are correct. Good job spotting them. Proteus (Talk) 11:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Succession box headers

• If you're going to create new headers for the succession boxes, you may wish to leave notices at Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization. Choess 03:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• My apologies to you. That page is on my watchlist, but somehow I missed the announcement. Thank you for all your hard work on succession boxes. Choess 03:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Member for

• Hi Phoe. We had a long discussion a few weeks ago on the correct style for the succession boxes for members of the UK parliament and the agreed style at the end was 'Member for' rather than 'Member of Parliament for' but with a link to 'Member of Parliament'. The page on Harold Wilson shows this best. If you could re-do your changes to Henry Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston to come into line with this it would be much appreciated. Cheers Galloglass 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for sorting it phoe and a big thank you for removing the life title on Harold Wilson. It was one of those things I've been mean to to do for weeks and never got around to. Cheers Galloglass 13:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Phoe, thanks for your note about this. I never saw any such discussion (apart from a short one on Talk:Harold Wilson), and would argue that it is a deeply mistaken to use "Member for": that's an abreviated construct used by MPs only in the chamber itself. On their letterhead, on their websites, and everywhere else, MPs use "Member of Parliament for". --BrownHairedGirl ^{(talk) • (contribs)} 08:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)