Forum:Removing themes for article templates

Simply put, templates such as Delete are aimed at the editors who maintain the articles, who only represent a tiny minority of overall visitors. To everyone else, the big monolithic templates only act as an eyesore. As such, I propose we make the templates more minimalistic; while this may not be as fun for editors, it's better for the bigger picture. 17:23, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
i agree. 17:25, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea. Have it as an addon to. 17:28, May 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * How do you mean? 18:50, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think he means like the 'featured' is on it. Though I'd like to have a separate top icon set for them. 18:53, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Philly's idea is good. I can make the image now :3 17:49, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. 17:51, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Me gusta. Sgt. S.S. 18:25, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Disagree, the themed templates are brilliant. 18:52, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * They take up gigantic portions of the page, are only helpful to the few users who edit the page, and quite a lot of them are really awkwardly phrased. (The AfD one is a perfect example.) According to the Admin Dashboard we got 2.3 million page views last week, how many of those were actually from contributing users? 19:21, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

hi -- 18:54, May 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * fap 18:59, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * N7 came 19:21, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

While I agree with Smuff that the large templates are quite an eyesore, I also agree with COD4, the themed templates add a little bit of fun to our templates and make them seem much more friendly. Making every template alike and that same stale green makes everything seem too strict and dull in a way. 19:27, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * I looked over a few of the templates, and yes a few of them are awkwardly phrased as Smuff said. But, they can easily be reworded. :3 19:29, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Which is why something like Phillcj's idea would make sense, it's not an eyesore and you don't need to beat around the bush trying to make everything seem less imposing or worry about awkward wording. 19:31, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Also, I'm not sure if this would just apply to improvement templates (like Delete) or other things like the spoilers template. 19:31, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, Mass Effect Wiki has a rather pretty spoiler template that doesn't take up the entire page and still can have a nice quote attached. 19:38, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Those kinds of templates would be pretty nice. 19:40, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * We should definitely have something like


 * 19:55, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Swag. Sgt. S.S. 20:01, May 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * Or you could have the logo on both sides of the template (Up to whoever), and the logo could change with each game it's added to also! 20:03, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Per Redskin and CoD4, I see no reason to take away themes on templates, a little light-hearted humor won't destroy the wiki, nor will it deter anybody just visiting the page. 19:36, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Forcing themes on the templates makes half of them sound really awkward. 19:38, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * So we can re-word them a bit. What regular person is going to be on the page like "Oh, that template is a little oddly worded, screw this website."? We're a wiki, not a government or very important site, be a little in-formal. 19:42, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Either way, it doesn't detract from the fact are current templates are ugly as hell. Like I said above, Mass Effect Wiki has a rather pretty spoiler template and you could still keep your quotes. The pictures (and the subsequent colour schemes which try to match the picture) are half of what get in the way so much. 19:47, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * K, then change them if you want, but you're making it sound like a couple templates that don't meet your standards are going to destroy the entire site. 19:55, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * To be fair, at school my friends were looking at the site and asked what those pictures were doing at the top. 19:56, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Smilular, I don't know about you, but I'd rather have a neat template that tells me concisely what it is there for than a template with some corny modified quote and an irrelevant image. Sgt. S.S. 20:04, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Sgt. S.S., I don't know about you, but I rather have a few lighthearted templates ever now and then, rather then a ton of identical, stale, dull, Olive Drab Green templates everywhere. 20:09, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * You can still have quotes, like we established above it's more the pictures and the awkward wording which could do with a rethink. 20:28, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Looking though I think we should take a middle ground. We keep the templates small with perhaps just the CoD wiki logo (the one used in the forum header) as the image, but the text can have a quote, followed by what needs to be done. Also as most designs (infoboxes, navboxes) are using black we should make the templates black, not olive. 20:38, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Here's my example.

I had something different in mind for a compromise; how about making the templates simply smaller, or maybe at the bottom of a page instead? That way, it doesn't seem too out of place, and themes are kept. 21:09, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not overly sure if I like solid black, maybe more of a gray black like the background maybe? 21:24, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

& Look okay to anyone? 01:38, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd nix the grey background. Having it just plain white should be sufficient. 13:21, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * I like it. 20:03, May 14, 2012 (UTC)



Thoughts? 02:21, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

The idea of having the templates so attention-grabbing is to promote the betterment of the articles by its readers. Having a deletion template that draws a reader's attention will convince them to look into that article's AfD page and possibly raise a good point, whereas a template that is minimalistic will be passed over by most readers. Smuff has missed the majority of the reasoning as to why these templates have remained so large, in his reasoning that they only aid those that edit the articles, in that he has not considered the fact that they are primarily there so that readers who do not regularly check such pages as the AfD and ID may be subsequently inspired to do so. Joe Copp 01:51, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * Per Joe. 03:58, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah but at the same time you're completely missing the point of what the wiki is to begin with. Yes, the large templates are helpful for the editors, but >%90 of traffic is done by non-contributing anons who will, at best, comment on blogs. To the majority of the readers, the titular templates serve as nothing but an eyesore. Yes, I understand the editors at the wiki may enjoy the templates, but it's not the editors who make up the majority of this wikis readership. 13:11, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * And I assume you're bringing this up as these anons have started complaining about them? 13:27, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * Personally I haven't noticed any visible complaints from anons about the templates. 13:33, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * If it's attention-grabbing we're focusing on, couldn't we consider making the text in the template larger? Kat's proposed stub template looks ideal -- the big font draws the eye quite well. Sgt. S.S. 19:18, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * The largest reason we have such templates at the top of pages and so large and attention-grabbing is so readers are inspired and convinced to edit them. Joe Copp 13:50, May 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * Then why are stub templates at the bottom of the page? 14:01, May 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * Though it's probably not the reason, I think it looks silly (or at least not as good as the other templates) on top of the page. 14:04, May 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware that stub templates were to be placed on the bottom of pages. It wouldn't make a difference, however, because chances are that readers wouldn't have to scroll much, if at all, to see the template. Joe Copp 14:08, May 16, 2012 (UTC)

One of the biggest reasons I don't even bother reading the templates is because, as stated previously in the forum, the templates are eyesores. When I'm reading an article, I ignore the template as best as I can because it just looks so ugly, I don't even bother reading the damn thing. They may try to grab attention, but at least go gentle on the eyes and readers may actually read the template, like the template KATANAGOD made. That's just my two cents. 23:54, May 14, 2012 (UTC)

I see no trouble with them. There a large template at the top of the page, they aren't getting in the way of anything. 01:47, May 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * Per Damac. 15:45, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

As other people have stated before, I prefer the big templates with pictures and quotes because I notice them. I usually don't pay any attention to the normalized templates. 22:49, May 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * But like I said above, couldn't an alternative to a big picture and quote be a larger font size? The stub template that KATANA proposed has a large font that draws the eye quite well. I think something like that could work. Sgt. S.S. 08:59, May 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah well you'd notice this as well, and it's not a monolithic template. Hell, it's a spoiler template and if anything should take precedence over templates for editors. 12:53, May 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * I thought we decided the wiki wouldn't use spoiler templates for things that have been released for a while. 02:18, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * And...? Black Ops II releases in 5 months, we still use them. 02:35, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well he said they should take precedence, but we don't really use them that much. I always found them to be a waste of space as our spoiler policy basically states "Read at your own risk". 05:49, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

I have always believed that the templates are oversized, tasteless and needlessly use lame quotes. Though I haven't glanced at them recently, I feel that, as an editor and a reader, I don't need most of the initial page being a huge maintenance template. I like the smaller versions presented in this thread: they're smaller, neater and get the point across; whereas some of the templates we use are vague and confusing as to their actual purpose. In regards to attracting more attention, I disagree. A bigger template won't make the article improve any quicker. Those who can edit will see it because they look for it. Size doesn't have an impact on the speed or quality of edits. --Scottie theNerd 07:52, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

I still prefer the themed templates but if we were going to remove them Kat's template design is the one to use. I also think that part of the reason themed templates don't look very nice is because the solid black looks really, really well... bad, even if the theme of the wiki is dark. The original light green looks so much better. 11:07, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

Best of both worlds
Alright. Since people seem to like things both ways, here's exactly that; Neat small easy on-the-eyes templates with the themes still implemented!

Let me know what you think! 12:06, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

To me, the smaller images make the images themselves look useless. If you could increase image size a little bit, I imagine it would look much better. 14:05, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree, can you make the images slightly bigger? 15:40, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

I still don't like the quotes. I really feel that they have no place on our templates. Sgt. S.S. 16:39, May 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Why? 16:49, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * They look out of place and are completely unnecessary, that's why. A template is capable of getting its point across without some corny one-liner. Sgt. S.S. 17:00, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Today I Learned that every quote in Call of Duty is a corny one-liner. 17:10, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Not all of them, but most of the quotes used on the templates really are corny and awkward-looking. The templates would look much better without them. Sgt. S.S. 19:27, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Not that it matters, but I don't like the quotes. I don't see why we can't have straightforward templates. --Scottie theNerd 12:18, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * Per Scottie, the quotes are usually long and take up an amount of space. Simple templates still seem like the best choice, even if we leave the images in. Just rid of the quotes. 16:04, May 22, 2012 (UTC)

Not bad Kat, not bad. 18:25, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

I made the images as big as they can; any bigger and they make the template bigger then its supposed to be. let me know what you think (Again) 22:15, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm actually quite liking it. The smaller template just works.

23:52, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * I like it. 00:09, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks really nice now, just a suggestion, maybe put the logo on the opposite side of the logo? C: 23:29, May 22, 2012 (UTC)

Vote
Moving along; It seems that people are split on the themes for the templates. Everyone seems to like the smaller design for the templates, Now we just need to vote on wither we keep the themes:

Keep the themes

 * 1) I personally think the themes belong on the templates. They're clever and look fine on the smaller versions. 11:19, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) per Kat Twily Scratch-chan 11:23, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Because the themes are appropriate and look very nice when they're made smaller, like Kat has done. 11:26, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Per Kat. 11:34, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Nothing wrong with them. 19:24, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 6) Well I'd rather have no size change but whatever. To elaborate on my support of keeping the themes, I find them to be an entertaining way to encourage editing.  20:12, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) Per COD4. 20:21, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 8) I like how the themes in keep with the wiki. Without them they're basically just Wikipedia rip-offs. 21:56, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 9) Per Kat. 23:10, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * 10) I'd rather have not size change, but if there is one, there is no need to change the themes. Conqueror of all Zombies 19:17, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * 11) Per my own reasoning above. Joe Copp 19:47, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * 12) If it aint broke, don't fix it. 19:59, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * 13) Per Phillycj 22:56, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * 14) Per Phillycj -- 05:02, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * Except since editors are having a problem with the visual aspect of these templates supposedly focusing on the theme itself rather than getting the point across does make it "broke". I would appreciate it if you were to change your reasoning to something less arguable since, due to COD:CON your three votes (and possibly a few others) should be overlooked due to its refutability. -- 04:06, June 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Im fine with the standard templates, they look fine to me.... Necromancer 115 MW Pickup Benelli M4.png   06:49, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) I like themes, we're a Call of Duty wiki for a reason!AdvancedRookieSig2.png 19:50, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * We're a Call of Duty Wiki for themed templates? 22:41, June 18, 2012 (UTC)

Remove themes

 * 1) The thematic templates are not immediately recognisable at first glance, often making it difficult to ascertain what needs improving. Clarity and simplicity of editing should not be sacrificed for an irrelevant image and a silly quote. Who are these templates aimed towards anyway? The reader won't understand what they're for and the editor doesn't need something fancy. --Scottie theNerd 12:45, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * But why can't the editor have a light-hearted template. What is the big issue? Can the text not be read? 14:42, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * Similarly, why can't the editor have a straightforward template? I don't see the big issue. I don't particularly care either way, but if I had to choose, I'd go with a plain and simple "This article has been nominated for deletion". Templates aren't meant for decorative purposes and should be as minimalistic as possible. --Scottie theNerd 07:36, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * A few quotes to brighten up a template isn't going to hurt anyone. 06:00, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * They're still unnecessary and far from humorous. Being the creator of the original one-liners on these templates, the comedic value is only remotely funny the first time you see them. And since these are maintenance templates, they will be on a considerable number of articles. If the same message can be conveyed without a poor (and frequently "updated") attempt at a pun, then by all means we should simplify. 21:13, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) I see no need for as Scottie theNerd stated, "an irrelevant image and a silly quote." Get rid of them. 14:34, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yet you haven't explained why having them is bad in any way. 14:41, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * Equally, you haven't explained why having them is beneficial in any way. Sgt. S.S. 19:23, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * At least, it brings us some humour, and encourages us to follow the rule. This is not Wikipedia, where everything are straightforward and too much mainstream. Having them doesn't mean something bad. 03:37, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * So, you want to keep them because you think plain, functional and direct is too "mainstream", and you're amused by a quote and an image. I don't know about the "encouragement" (if anything, I have to do a double take to remember which template is which), but if this sort of aesthetic is the majority's cup of tea, then meh. I personally think "it's funny" is a piss-poor argument over cleanliness and clarity. --Scottie theNerd 03:43, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * I did, it's in my support vote above... 11:48, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * Erm, you said they were nice and appropriate. That doesn't really state any benefits or present an argument with point any more valid than any of the oppose votes you've scrutinised so far. DrRichtofen  (  Talk  ) 11:07, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) The quotes and images on the templates simply don't look right, and the templates can look a bit awkward as a result. Removing the themes would make the templates look much neater. Sgt. S.S. 19:08, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * Why don't they look right? 11:48, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * I told you above, I think that the quotes look corny and out of place. Sgt. S.S. 15:44, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) These have gotten way out of control since I created them, with incessant "updates" to template theme. Not only are the one-liners in an attempt to wiki-fy the quotes just plain terrible, these templates have become stickers that editors append to a page to make it look nicer. Are these templates even removed when the maintenance task is completed? Hardly is there any such discussion, and I fear that there is more done in the way of "improving" the visual style of these templates rather than heeding their intended warning/suggestion. 02:52, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Bovell, the themes are awkward and are an eyesore. 22:22, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) I believe the main focus of these templates is to get the point across - which, if users are having issues with the themed templates, doesn't seem to be working. I believe this or any other version of the templates that focus on what they are suppose to do while grabbing the attention of readers is much more beneficial for the wiki as an encyclopedia, rather than keeping the themes for no real benefit but rather for a personal choice for some users. -- 20:02, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Per all. 20:06, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) The majority of templates are for maintenance purposes. We don't need all that fluff that are quotes from various games. Form follows function. 03:00, June 16, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

 * No, he doesn't. It's stated quite clearly in his reasoning, but he was opposing to the Keep the Themes part. Just a little bit of confusion. 14:34, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * I find it funny someone put this comment at the bottom instead of leaving it with the comment it went with so now it's lost all precidence. 17:25, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

03:48, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * Not sure. Maybe we will vote about it (size, color) later. 04:13, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

--Scottie theNerd 22:41, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Should this forum close now? There hasn't been any activity for a while and the voting seems likes its over. 17:56, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Closed - Because this vote came down to a matter of opinion, it's a bit difficult to decide which side has the better argument. The majority of the reasoning behind the voters wanting to get rid of them consists primarily of "it doesn't look good," which I don't find to be sufficient for a consensus. Going off of the "if it aint broke, don't fix it" saying, I think that Kat's new templates should suffice. Joe Copp 03:54, June 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * Re-opened - I suppose I'm going to be protesting the reasoning behind this closure. :| Because there is no way to tell what people are supporting. There is no support consensus whether or not to use Kat's templates or whether to use the current templates. As per COD:CONSENSUS, any quantity of users supporting/opposing something is outweighed by the quality of reasoning behind their vote. And, as I stated above, "if it ain't broke; dont fix it" does not apply to this situation as clearly there is something "broke" as users are having a problem with the templates not performing their purpose of asking for maintenance. The use of Kat's templates could effectively not even fix the problem here, as they are arguably not performing as they should (and not even fixing the problem with the old templates - just making them smaller). -- 05:13, June 17, 2012 (UTC)

New vote
This is a new vote that stands to make things more clear. Please try to make sure your votes contain logic to them as opposesd to seeming to oppinated. 05:37, June 17, 2012 (UTC)

Keep as they are

 * 1) To be honest, I don't see a problem with the templates the way they are. I never thought they were an eyesore or anything like that. 18:16, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) It never came across to me that the old ones "got in the way" and thought they served their service well, per IW as well.18:19, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Per Argo and IW 20:31, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) The new templates aren't noticeable to me. In fact, I'd have to zoom in a few times to be able to read them. 18:09, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Monobook is not fully supported by Wikia, by using Monobook you choose to use an alternate platform which may or may not support features made on and for the Wikia skin. 21:25, June 23, 2012 (UTC)
 * Monobook's not the issue here. I've looked at them in Wikia and they're still too small to me. 14:06, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Use Kat's versions

 * 1) These versions make the templates take up less room, yet still keep them eye catching. Also "Are these templates even removed when the maintenance task is completed? Hardly is there any such discussion" can be argued as on the Attack Helicopter page there was a non-themed merge template, it had been there for a long period of time, so clearly removing the themes makes them less noticable and will just clutter more. 05:37, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) I like them, I believe they take up a middle ground for them not being too much of an "eye sore" and still there to get the point of what needs to be done across to users who will actually find them useful. Also Per Samuel. 05:59, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Sexy templates are sexy. and per all. 08:05, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * ARGH DONT VOTE YET IM TRYING TO MAKE A TEMPLATE WE CAN ALL AGREE ON D:< D:< D:< -- 06:03, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) They look nice, take the attention they need but aren't a huge eyesore. Per all. --MLGisNot4Me talk 09:55, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Because it allows us to keep the theming while also maintaining a small, noticeable, readable and understandable notice. 13:10, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) I like this idea. Per all. Joe Copp 14:06, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) I like KAT's templates, they are small and they do get the point across. 18:27, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Per all. 21:32, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 6) Adding some freshness while keeping the themes. 20:36, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) Per All, Kat's idea is a great idea and the freshness could work. I have always liked the templates anyway. 00:42, June 19, 2012 (UTC)

Remove themes altogether

 * 1) In the original format the titular templates are an eyesore, for Kat's compromise suggestion the images serve no purpose being there, and in general, bar perhaps the sdelete template, the themes are awkward and cheesy. Just because they can be themed doesn't mean they should. 19:48, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Please explain how they are awkward and cheesy. 15:11, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * "He will know deletion beyond his darkest fears. I have plans for you, article!" Say that out loud. 16:35, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay? It sounded fine to me. 16:40, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * I would concede to a few of the themes being rather reasonable, but there's others which flat out suck. The phrase above, for example, doesn't make sense; why does it describe an article in the masculine tense? Granted, I understand it's a twist on Operation 40, but by giving the phrase a theme it simply becomes grammatically flawed. The same goes for half the maintenance templates, just look at Source: "It's been too long, sources. We must make up for lost time." What the hell is that supposed to mean? It's barely relevant to the subject of said template. Both of those quotes materialized with the wiki's urge to Black Ops-ify the wiki on launch. It's not just Black Ops templates that are defunct, what does "resistance" have anything to do with Shorten, or why does Noncommercial have a quote about extermination? Is that quote even in Modern Warfare 2? (Quick nitpick which doesn't really matter, while the quote itself isn't that cheesy,Betterimage's quote is flat out wrong; most poor quality images become even more blurry when examined more closely.) This template's bold text tells me the page is a disambiguation. This template's bold text tells me nothing. 18:38, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * So your solution to this is to abolish the themes instead of finding new ones? 23:05, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Why find new ones? Are we going to go through the trouble of choosing a bland line from a cookie-cutter FPS and somehow relating it to the Wiki with a terrible play on words? 16:03, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Per Smuff and per my arguments above. Functionality > aesthetics. Sgt. S.S. 08:49, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Please explain how not having the themes makes these any more functional than they already are. 15:11, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright. Let's say you're putting an article on the improvement drive. Which of these do you honestly think gets the message across better: "This article is on the Improvement Drive", or "No-one will ever read this!"? Getting rid of themes and quotes means we can convey the message in a simpler, more concise manner. That's how they're more functional without themes. Sgt. S.S. 19:46, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * You are currently assuming that people cannot read an entire template and have a concentration span of one line of text. Please tell me you're kidding. 23:05, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * As stupid as it sounds, that actually is the case. Some people just couldn't be fucked to read any warning template longer than a sentence. 15:53, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * We shouldn't remove themes to appease some poor persons laziness. 15:57, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Shame, one contributor who could have assisted. 22:14, June 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) As per Smuff and Sgt. S.S. Our current templates are too big and the themes are too prevalent, while Kat's smaller templates make me squint. 22:38, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Please elaborate on "make me squint", I can see them just fine. 23:05, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Not everyone has 20/20 vision. If I recall correctly, when the Wikia skin first came out there were large numbers of users complaining about headaches. 00:42, June 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) The original design has gotten out of control with "thematic updates" every four months or so, with pitiful attempts to put a pun on a Call of Duty quote. These re-imaginings of maintenance templates every so often is not only distracting to their purpose, but also adds unneeded clutter; when you have the topleft icons and a bulky maintenance template (or two), the opening paragraph of an article is unnecessarily pushed down, which is even worse when done to a page with limited content in its own right. And I fear Kat's "compromise templates" don't solve the underlying problem that I have with template theme: they divert attention from the maintenance tasks that are supposed to be called attention to. Kat's templates, while overall of a appropriate size, are somewhat difficult to read. Remember that the message/text of these templates is the pivotal part of their functionality; maintenance templates are informational above everything else. Even if they were for entertainment, I think we would have to hire a comedian to rid us of these corny puns. 02:28, June 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * (I cleared one template off the linked page as it was no longer needed.) --MLGisNot4Me talk 22:23, June 23, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Per all, I never did like the quotes as they are quite senseless in my opinion.20PX_SIG.gif  Talk 19:53, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Comments
As sort of a way to have the best of both worlds, we could try to use templates like this one here (though definitely not this template itself because it sucks - fml) that has a thematic picture in the background as well as text that gets the point across. These would be attention-grabbing and not be occupied by stupid quotes. So somebody who's good with this shit go ahead and make a better one (for the love of God make a better one please) that we could use for our article templates (we can also use different pictures for each template - as long as that doesn't get out of control with users trying to change them). (more parenthesis) -- 06:55, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * While the thought is good.. I just don't see that working. The templates I created are.. alot better even if yours were more refined and perfected. It looks like they'd be bulky and take up even more space from what i see. 08:08, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * I like this concept but the issue here is that they are too big. I do like how it looks though. 13:10, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * You're misunderstanding the point of the templates - it's too get users to read them and perform maintenance tasks. And, while I know that these aren't the best (hence I asked for somebody who knows what their doing to make a better version of the template), I personally (since this is the matter of looks) do not prefer Kat's templates because they are small, compact, and able to be easily ignored. -- 17:52, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * I, myself, think Azuris' template looks really nice and is better than our current templates and Kat's miniature templates. It's very simplistic, has a nice design related to CoD, and the font is a good size. 03:52, June 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * http://i.imgur.com/6lvHI.png is what I mean. The templates are too small, the pictures look fairly stupid, and the templates look way too long in comparison to the size of the page. --  18:18, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yours you have shown on this forum are smaller then the ones seen above which were recommended. 20:22, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * They're the same size to me - that's as large as my monitor can make them. -- 04:02, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * And that's another thing. Not everyone has a 1920x1080p (just an example) monitor to display the template. I could see many users not being able to read them. 22:39, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * The original templates were optimized for Oasis only. Azuris uses Monobook, the only reason why they look stretched. Its his fault he wants to use an old skin with 0 support. they look fine on oasis which is the skin about 96% of all users use. 22:52, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * My point still stands, not everyone would be able to read them. I use a 1920x1080p screen and Oasis, and even I have a problem reading the templates. 22:53, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * So you want bigger and awful looking templates because your screen is to big? 22:55, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * As long as it's readable and it gets the point across; yeah, I do. 23:15, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * You can't base the size of the templates on any one monitor size. They need to be layed out in a way that the majority of readers will have no difficulty reading them. Joe Copp 03:43, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * I doubt the majority of users have gigantic iMacs. 03:45, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * :< 00:45, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

That is one of the benefits of Oasis is that the article size is the same (1000px) no matter what the monitor size is. 16:07, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * ^This 16:14, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * And since whatever ridiculous percentage of readers are using Oasis, we are pretty much obligated to conform our templates to that setup. Joe Copp 16:19, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * ^This X9001 16:23, June 19, 2012 (UTC)

Just wondering, but how do these templates look to you, Kat? To me the font size needs to be increased, because right now I can't read some of their second sentences. 01:54, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

This is what they look like for all oasis users on all pages. (sorry about the quality, I don't have my regular comp atm) or you can just click this link and see for yourself. 03:51, June 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh I see. I had been looking at the repost of them, which made the font worse. I still think the font size should be increased a bit to fit their purpose of informing a user as easily as possible, but they are legible if I look close enough. 23:54, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

How about we reverse the caption and the actual info part? That way the big, noticeable part is the information and the smaller, less important part is the caption? 21:59, June 23, 2012 (UTC)
 * Then what's the purpose of the caption even being there? 22:15, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Can't we just paraphrase in the templates a bit and increase the font size to a readable level? I like the minimalism of the templates provided, but the font is just too small. Joe Copp 23:47, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Trying to move on
In the intrest of wrapping this up with a reasonable conclusion, I'd like to speed things up by pointing out that the majority of users seemed to favor the templates that Kat proposed earlier. There were some other suggestions, but they didn't seem to pick up as much traction. I'm still in favor of using Kat's, and since the vote has already told us this is okay, we can go ahead and do that if nobody else has anything to say. Joe Copp 03:13, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * You're technically right, but if you're looking at it from that point of view then the count stands at 10-9, not to mention the fact that consensus hasn't really been reached. 05:24, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Per Poketape. I don't think a consensus has been formed yet. 05:26, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Main Vote
We cannot move forward without first choosing whether to keep the themes or not; the choices must be one or the other. We will decide whether to use Kat's proposed templates at a later point. Oppose votes will be forwarded from the previous vote.

Keep the themes

 * 1) Per my previous reasoning. Joe Copp 02:59, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) per my babbling above 19:40, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) I would enjoy it if someone could come up and explain why removing the themes makes these any more informational than they already are. 19:50, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) I see no problem with having themes. 19:54, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Remove the themes

 * 1) In the original format the titular templates are an eyesore, for Kat's compromise suggestion the images serve no purpose being there, and in general, bar perhaps the sdelete template, the themes are awkward and cheesy. Just because they can be themed doesn't mean they should. 19:48, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Smuff and per my arguments above. Functionality > aesthetics. Sgt. S.S. 08:49, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) As per Smuff and Sgt. S.S. Our current templates are too big and the themes are too prevalent, while Kat's smaller templates make me squint. 22:38, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) The original design has gotten out of control with "thematic updates" every four months or so, with pitiful attempts to put a pun on a Call of Duty quote. These re-imaginings of maintenance templates every so often is not only distracting to their purpose, but also adds unneeded clutter; when you have the topleft icons and a bulky maintenance template (or two), the opening paragraph of an article is unnecessarily pushed down, which is even worse when done to a page with limited content in its own right. And I fear Kat's "compromise templates" don't solve the underlying problem that I have with template theme: they divert attention from the maintenance tasks that are supposed to be called attention to. Kat's templates, while overall of a appropriate size, are somewhat difficult to read. Remember that the message/text of these templates is the pivotal part of their functionality; maintenance templates are informational above everything else. Even if they were for entertainment, I think we would have to hire a comedian to rid us of these corny puns. 02:28, June 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Per all, I never did like the quotes as they are quite senseless in my opinion.20PX_SIG.gif  Talk 19:53, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * 6) Per above. Themes add nothing to the utility of the templates. After all, they are for maintenance purposes. 05:51, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) I thought it over again, and here's what I think: as for the themes, per Bovell. The themes really got cheesier and cheesier as time goes on. However, I think that the templates should be bigger in order to get more attention to them. If there was any one template on this page that I think it would be sufficient, it would be the ones that Kat made before the "Best of Both Worlds" section. It gets attention to it, it's readable, and it gets to the point. 18:40, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * 8) With the templates going to get smaller and barely noticeable, overall per above.19:49, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Comments
Does theme here mean the CoD relation (quote and image), or the whole template there? --MLGisNot4Me talk 19:45, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * Considering the only things that have CoD relation are the quote and image, I would guess that means theme. 19:46, July 1, 2012 (UTC)