This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nikkimaria (talk | contribs) at 21:54, 5 April 2013 (→Con-infobox: +). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:54, 5 April 2013 by Nikkimaria (talk | contribs) (→Con-infobox: +)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Scope
- Problem
Quality editors are adding and removing infoboxes across a number of articles including, but not limited to, Classical music composers. This is at times reaching the point of edit warring which can lead to discontent, a lack of harmony, and even blocks and discretionary sanctions. A secondary problem may be the concept that there is a disagreement on community consensus vs. local consensus. (an agreement developed at a project level)
- Proposed solution
To have a discussion to determine the best way forward, hopefully just an informal agreement and consensus, but if a formalized WP:RFC needs to be presented to the global community, then so be it. I'm not a big fan of instruction creep myself, and would rather not get into even more policy setting that reduces any flexibility, but the constant bickering isn't an option either. IF a "formal" RfC with "options" absolutely needs to be created, then I suppose that can be worked out here and we'll draft one.
Viewpoints Discussion
Pro-infobox
- (placeholder: may expand on this later) I like to see an infobox as a quick reference guide to a topic when I don't have the time or desire to read the entire article. — Ched : ? 16:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Con-infobox
- If an article is just a stub, an infobox can be a distraction as far as formatting. Even if an article is further developed, an infobox can disrupt the formatting of a page.
- Can make the article difficult to view on small devices such as phones and tablets. However, I personally think that as Misplaced Pages is primarily a computer presentation, then the solution here is the development of various apps to provide some sort of screen reader rather than to remove function from the full platform. — Ched : ? 16:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
- something something metadata (someone else familiar with this argument can fill this in)
- Infoboxes oversimplify information and/or mislead readers
- Infoboxes focus on quantifiable details rather than the most significant facts about a subject
- There is an inherent tension between the desire for a short-and-quick reference (=short box) and the desire for more metadata (=long box)
- They're just plain ugly
- Infoboxes present a barrier to editing for newbies
Possible items to be addressed
- the infobox in general - good or bad (should an infobox be considered default or status-quo?)
- info box at Composers and or Classical music projects
- local consensus vs. community consensus
- input of major contributor
- is the term "infobox" correct, or is the term ??? ...