Template talk:Description

Style

I'm not sure whether I like this or not. It's quite a departure from the normal WS style, which makes it eye catching -- maybe good if the description is worthy of the extra attention. I feel like there's room for improvement. Robin (talk) 15:41, 3 January 2014 (GMT)

Same here. As a general rule I prefer left justification for article content, banners, headings and sub heading - consistency. I think a banner type box is OK for 'description' but am not so sure about colour, and both box and text centred. I'll have a play too. --Peter P (talk) 17:44, 3 January 2014 (GMT)

I've still got mixed feelings about this descriptions box. It overlaps the functionality of the lede paragraph (but as plaintext). Overall, I think I like it, and we can't use lede paragraphs as links in the SMWDocs sections - some of them are huge, and they're not available to SMW anyway. Robin (talk) 05:50, 12 August 2014 (IST)

Spacing

What could do with improvement is the spacing! All the pages with infoboxes (i.e. most of the pages) have an empty space in the top right. I suggest, either

• Making the description wider to fill it or
• Arranging for the infobox to start from the top of the page, not below the description

As I write this, I see a third option,

• Do a mix of the two, depending on box length (might be difficult to measure, but still)

I think it's worth looking at a variety of boxes (long and short) before choosing how best to use the space.

Robin (talk) 05:50, 12 August 2014 (IST)

On balance I too think the description box is beneficial particularly so for Documents because of SMWDocs, but elsewhere too. On it's formatting vis-a-vis infoboxes etc., experiment away and I'll chip in with the odd tweek if it seems useful --Peter P (talk) 06:28, 12 August 2014 (IST)