Forum:CT:Rounded corners are so 2005

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Rounded corners are so 2005

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was: No consensus, sitewide appearance will remain as is (revert to policy). Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 14:09, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

At some point, I don't even remember when or why, we decided to round off the corners on everything. Infoboxes, attention templates, link templates, the main page, and on and on and on.

Problem is, we've had a skin (Monaco) forced on us by our oh-so-attentive hosts (Wikia) that is square to the extreme. It clashes. And we can't really do a whole lot about it. It frankly wouldn't be worth the effort to try to round it off, since it could just change next week anyway, plus there's the next problem:

The various hacks and kludges that round off the corners on our pretty-but-dated boxes are somewhat hit-or-miss. I may post some screenshots in this space when I get home from work in a few hours (Yes, I'm editing Wookieepedia at lunch. Don't judge me.) if people think it's necessary, but a lot of our "round" corners either just plain don't work, or explode into some outright weirdness on browsers other than Firefox.

This is a very simple issue, but it has far-reaching effects, so I think it calls for a CT. It's a simple yes-or-no vote. The skin is sitewide, therefore the style change should be sitewide, so there's no need to add weasel options like "evaluate case-by-case" or anything like that. We either evolve, or stay in 2005. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 15:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Kill the rounded corners

  1. Per me. Darth Culator (Talk) 15:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  2. Actually, I think Sikon just sort of …implemented them. Let's take this first step towards a complete makeover. --Imperialles 15:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  3. I think they look sleek, but I'm using Firefox. This should happen because it's best for the site overall. - JMAS Hey, it's me! 16:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  4. IT AIN'T 2005 ANYMORE. THINGS CHANGE. BE MATURE AND ACCEPT IT. Yes, I did have to use all caps there. And if it seems that I'm being too dramatic for a simple thing like this, then you're naive. Diplomacy be darned, there are more things here that still need to change (and should have changed long ago), but didn't and still might not due to certain people. Chack Jadson (Talk) 16:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  5. Changed my mind. Template:Rt and Template:Rb become messy when they're in <table></table> and viewed in IE. However, I hope that the new look for templates work well. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 16:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  6. Per JMAS. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 19:31, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  7. Never liked em. I liked things being well-defined. --RedemptionRedemptionusersymbol(Talk) 05:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  8. Though I'd prefer to see the new ones first, I'll still push to kill. JorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 15:26, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  9. While I think the rounded corners are a distinctive look to this site, I agree that they cause a lot of problems. I wish we could see something else first, but beggars can't be choosers. Kill! — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 23:29, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  10. Per JMAS and Fiolli. Cylka-talk- 23:49, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
    round corners dont look good Ureachicken 22:15, 21 July 2009 (UTC)Ureachicken (Vote stricken per policy)

Don't kill the rounded corners

Visit Tesfanon; we're rounded the corners for a few Monaco-related things. Of course, we haven't updated w:c:tesfanon:MediaWiki:Monaco.css since April, so rounded corners haven't been added to the wikianswers widget or the user page header; however, I think you guys could figure all that out. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 16:41, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Whoops, I was assuming everyone was using Firefox. Still, you need Firefox to see the rounded corners in your Monobook as well. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 16:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  1. In short: I like rounded templates more than square ones. MauserComlink 17:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
    • I like rounded corners as well. Unfortunately, they have unexpected behavior in IE, and not everyone uses Firefox. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 17:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
      • I'm usually using Opera, but when I open Wookieepedia in my IE, the whole Monaco skin is seriously messed up, not just round corners. Sorry, but occasional web-designer in me says: don't care about IE, let the people get normal browsers. And I like rounded corners. MauserComlink 17:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
        • I assure you that the design we end up with will look better than that horrible squared template. Also, brushing off the world's most popular browser is not really an option. --Imperialles 17:20, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
          • If we're not using rounded corners, what will we end up with besides squared corners? —Xwing328(Talk) 23:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  2. I use IE and Monaco, and I don't see any issues that would warrant such a sweeping change. Sure, there's something slightly off here or there, but such problems are infrequent enough that it's not worth making this dramatic of a change. And yes it would be dramatic, because IMO the rounded corners are far, far cleaner than squared corners, which are quite jarring—just look at the examples Mauser linked to. And as far as Imp's statement that the new design "will look better than that horrible squared template", I won't believe it until I see it, if you'll pardon the cliché; I can't for the life of me figure out how non-rounded corners can look better than what we have now. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 05:17, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  3. First, I want to see the new design, then I may vote differently. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 15:14, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  4. Per Jon and Pranay. First, show me something better than current rounded corners. If I like it, I may reconsider my vote. But until then, it's absolute NO. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 19:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  5. No way. What could be better than rounded corners? Do you even have any ideas laid out? Any examples at all? Otherwise, I think it's unfair to have this open without any evidence and having people judge because they don't like rounded corners and switch it with something nonexistent. Ideas/examples should've been presented to begin with... –Victor Squishy Vic (talk page) 21:11, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  6. Until I see a possible new look, I say stick with what we've got. I don't want to go back to the 2005 blocky site we used to have. In addition, some of our rounded hacks could probably be cleaned up, as mozilla implements rounded corners using CSS. Since the current hack doesn't work in IE anyways, they would just see normal squared-off boxes instead of messed up curves. —Xwing328(Talk) 23:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  7. Per Xwing JangFett Talk 03:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  8. I blame Wikia for causing all this. Per X-wing. SoresuMakashi(Everything I tell you is the truth) 03:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
  9. I like the rounded corners better. Period. Trak Nar Ramble on 03:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
  10. What I see right now looks ugly as hell. Make it look good and this vote can float. Graestan(Talk) 21:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
  11. I use Firefox and I prefer the rounded corners as in Mauser's examples. Although, like a fair few other people opposing, if the IE-friendly boxes look okay then I might change my mind. NayayenOld Republic military symboltalk 11:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
  12. Per Graestan. Green Tentacle (Talk) 18:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
  13. All the more reason to not use that POS IE. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
  14. Tinwe 10:42, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
  15. IFYLOFD (You will pay the price for your lack of vision!) 22:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Before I vote, can you at least show me how it'll look like? MauserComlink 16:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

  • We'll establish a coordination page or project to work out the specifics of the new look. If there's anything controversial, we will take it to CT. --Imperialles 16:34, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Imp/Culator, since it seems as though several people are opposing on the basis of not having seen the new options, I'd suggest creating example and getting them shown here ASAP. Chack Jadson (Talk) 23:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Not that it really matters, but just to straighten out the record, rounded borders were added when we switched from our MP2 to MP3 styling in early 2007, not 2005. If you want to see how bad the MP2 non-rounded styling can be, take a look at my incredibly ugly userpage, that I really need to update :P —Xwing328(Talk) 03:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Isn't the default skin determined by the admins? It says in my preferences: The admins for this wiki have chosen: Monaco Custom as the default skin. Is this not changeable? SoresuMakashi(Everything I tell you is the truth) 11:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

  • It is true, but we're limited in our options to Monaco and Awesome themes. We can no longer use monobook as a site-wide skin, unless that's what Default is meant to be? —Xwing328(Talk) 20:38, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
    • I believe Monaco is default, and awhile back Wikia told us that Monobook would no longer be default or selectable as the site-wide theme. :\ –Victor Squishy Vic (talk page) 21:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Epic meh from me. I like the rounded look better, but I can't just assume that everyone will have the intelligence to A) Use Firefox and B) Use Monobook. That said, I refuse to support any kind of change without an example of what it will look like…no matter what flags are waved, I won't go along with an idea until I know what it is. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 16:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

It's reversible

I don't think that this is worth whining about. If there's one good thing about MediaWiki is that you can always revert to a previous version. If we don't like the new look, we can always revert back to the old look. Really, don't expect these changes to be permanent. If you hate the changes, create a new forum and vote to revert the changes. For now, let's do something totally different. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 16:34, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

  • PS: I hope that this isn't a version of the future. Weren't we promised a lot more than boxes? --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 16:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I'm seeing these "examples" pooping up on the forums, too. IMO they look terrible. Also, I thought the idea here was to create examples (say, on a user subpage), show them here, and then implement them after being approved by the community. Instead, they're just being implemented anyway even though there's clearly no consensus above. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 19:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
  • The Recentchangestext change was to bring it in line with the other box on the Recent changes page. The forum header was changed due to the rounded corners hack not displaying correctly. The two have been made functional, nothing else. The changes are not indicative of any planned look. --Imperialles 20:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
    • "The forum header was changed due to the rounded corners hack not displaying correctly." It was displaying perfectly fine for me with IE and Monaco. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 21:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)