Forums > Consensus track archive > CT Archive/New ship and vehicle infobox templates

I think we may be done hereEdit

I just edited {{Individual_ship}} to include all the fields people thought up on the test articles like A-wing. It works beautifully. I think we may be pretty much done, except for some aesthetic details, or any additional fields anyone wants to add. —Darth Culator (talk) 06:28, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

  • OK, here's another puzzler. Look at Executor-class Star Dreadnought and see if you can figure out why some boxes have a different style of bullets. "Complement" and "Crew" are right next to each other, and as far as I can tell they're formatted the same, but one has square bullets and one has round ones. Same with "Role(s)" and "Era(s)". —Darth Culator (talk) 14:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Hmm, now that's interesting... The items don't get properly enclosed in ul tags, looks like a MediaWiki bug... I'll try substing the template and seeing what's the problem. - Sikon [Talk] 16:29, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
      • I fixed the bullets, but unfortunately the rows grew a bit higher. - Sikon [Talk] 16:41, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
        • I was playing with raw HTML in a preview page again to try to force the CSS to obey me, and it wasn't working at all. I think the site just likes you more. :-) Anyway, I don't think the spacing is a problem. I like it. I think VT-16 already liked it even with broken bullets. I'm not entirely sure how a "Consensus track" works, but I think we really are just about done here. —Darth Culator (talk) 16:52, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
          • Well, all I did was added a linebreak before the right column content (so that the first bullet isn't an asterisk) and later a linebreak after (to comply with MediaWiki quirks for closing li/ul tags). I don't mind closing the discussion, I think we ended up having a functional template. - Sikon [Talk] 17:15, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Use the source, Luke!Edit

You do realize that by omitting the source code for {{tl|infobox/DCTemp}} you have made the template unmaintainable?

To clarify:

  • any formatting changes should go to the {{slh}}, {{sls}}, {{sld}} and {{sll}} meta-templates, which specify individual rows;
  • a source code (see {{Individual_ship}}) should be provided so that the infobox can be regenerated from these templates.

By the way, I fixed bullets on the current ship template. For DCTemp, bullets should also work provided they are preceded with a single linebreak (immediately after the = sign). Also updated the meta-templates so that they will now include borderlines. - Sikon [Talk] 04:36, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Okey-dokey. I was just using it as a sandbox to see what fields should be included and how it would look with and without lines. For that particular purpose, it's easier for me to edit the code manually rather than using all those subst's. I'm still not quite comfortable with wiki programming. —Darth Culator (talk) 04:47, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, just be sure to remember all those edits when you will be incorporating the changes into the main template. - Sikon [Talk] 04:51, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
    • I get it. I get it! Ha! (Sorry, I'm playing with Template:Individual_ship in another tab and I see how it works now.) I'm going to try adding more fields by the proper method. Of course, then I will have to edit the pages that are already using the template. Oh well. —Darth Culator (talk) 04:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Consolidating effortsEdit

Some significant movement has been made toward creating a new uniform template for infoboxes for starships and vehicles. The discussion has thus far occurred in multiple places across Wookieepedia, and I think it would be best to consolidate it here.

The primary users involved in this effort thus far include: RMF (talk), Shadowtrooper (talk), VT-16 (talk), and myself (talk). (I apologize if I've missed anyone.) Everyone on Wookieepedia is welcome to join in!

Discussions on this topic so far:

Now let's put our heads together and hammer out the rest of the details! —Darth Culator (talk) 13:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I must say, the latest infobox style is the most eye-pleasing yet. Looking back at the original bright pink, I realise what an eye-sore that was. The style that followed, and has been spread lately, it an improvement, but the light grey is almost indistinguishable from the rest of the page, and just doesn't seem effective. This last version, with "calmer" colors that don't stick out, is definitly the best. :) VT-16 14:05, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
    • To clarify: the wikiprogramming isn't mine, the autohiding hacks are plagiarized from Uncyclopedia, I only adopted them for infoboxes. I can explain the technical details, should someone desire. Provided that we convert all infoboxes to this format (by the way, I'm all for the latest design), I think the more fields there will be in the infobox, the better. - Sikon [Talk] 14:29, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Wherever the auto-hiding bit came from, it's very cool. But does it preserve the alternating field colors? Anyway, I've created a template for all the fields I can think of. —Darth Culator (talk) 14:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

(temp template removed for further experimentation)

Please don't forget to check out the project page as well. RMF and I have been doing more stuff everyday, so if you're aware of what's going on there, you can better spot things that need to be fixed or tewaked. Thanks muchly for your help all! Shadowtrooper talk 15:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Unfortunately, it doesn't preserve the alternating colors. - Sikon [Talk] 15:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Then could we maybe make all the fields one color and put faint lines between them? I just changed my sample to show what I mean. —Darth Culator (talk) 16:04, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Why not? I just changed it so it does have alternating colors, though I might have accidentaly disabled the auto-hide functionality. Also, are the lines between fields necessary for it to work? If not, and we can maintain the alternating colors, I think it looks better without them. RMF 16:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
    • You didn't disable auto-hide, it isn't enabled on this version of the template, only on Template:Individual_ship. - Sikon [Talk] 17:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
      • What I'm trying to say is, if the auto-hiding template doesn't automatically alternate the colors, we should make it all one color with faint borders rather than having some boxes appear to run together. —Darth Culator (talk) 17:11, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
        • Oh, I see what you're saying. It would be cool if we got it to auto-alternate though, I'll look into it. RMF 18:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
          • No luck. Though I did find a way to auto-hide null fields using a CSS trick called "hiddenStructure." Look here for more details. I don't have time right now to play around with it, though I might later. RMF 21:10, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
            • I too would like to keep the colors alternating, but if it won't work with autohide, perhaps faint lines will work. I don't much like the look of the lines, but I honestly can't think of anything better (other than the individual templates). Thoughts? Shadowtrooper talk 23:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
              • I think you're right. I tried a number of different formats and experiments and couldn't manage to get the "hiddenStructure" command to work. It may be because I'm using an abnormal browser (Apple's Safari), but I've never had problems with CSS before. Anybody else want to try? The current implementation (using template substitution) seems solid except for the fact that we must include a list of all available fields on every article. Also, we lose alternating colors (they're not that important) and the wikicode is a mess. Still, I think at this point it's our best option. RMF 00:10, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
              • Individual templates would look nice, but it would be incredibly hard to manage. Especially if we ever decide to change the format again. —Darth Culator (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
              • The wikicode isn't supposed to be edited directly. If you need to change the template, replace the entire table with the text from the source section. - Sikon [Talk] 01:15, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Why do some of the below infoboxes have alternating colors but the ship template is all grey? Shadowtrooper talk 02:04, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Because the self-hiding code doesn't automatically alternate the colors, and it looks silly to have semi-alternating colors. —Darth Culator (talk) 02:15, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


What can we write into era in ship infobox??? is there any list??? if not than someone should make something like that - it would make life easier ;) SkywalkerPL 15:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

  • What I have been doing is "Old Sith Wars," "Pre-Clone Wars," "Clone Wars," "Galactic Civil War," and "Yuuzhan Vong War," though this list is by no means exhaustive. Category:Conflicts and Category:Civil wars could probably be good guides, though don't use obscure, minor events. When in doubt, just use your best judgement; or simply leave it blank. RMF 22:03, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I think that we should use for era in infobox Eras form Category. SkywalkerPL 13:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)


Now that we have auto-hide capability, I think we should expand the planet infobox template. There was a discussion over at Wookieepedia:Consensus track/New planet infobox template about this but it kind of got stalled. Now that we can auto-hide, there's no reason we shouldn't expand it a bit. Also, MyNz brought up the point that we should create/update templates for moons, cities, space stations, etc. Thoughts? RMF 00:39, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I agree with expanding the planet template, among others, but I don't know how far we want to go before everything is worked out (such as alternating colors). It would be a mess to have to change all the coding twice. --Xwing328 01:21, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Yeah, but I don't think it's possible to have both auto-hide and alternating colors, unfortunately. You're right though, we should probably hold off on changes until we iron this out. Until then, we can still discuss additions—how about fields for a city template? RMF 01:39, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Anybody mind if I create a Template:TestA and Template:TestB to experiment with some ideas. I'm still kinda new here so I dont know if I can temporarily create random things like that. --Xwing328 01:44, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I created something that works. I don't know if it's worth it though. Check it out please—User:Xwing328/Template:TestB --Xwing328 03:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • This is more complicated than I expected. But it will be worth it. —Darth Culator (talk) 03:15, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • It would be easier for smaller infoboxes like weapons, but I'll admit its kinda difficult for big boxes like ships and planets. --Xwing328 03:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, I just finished my latest iteration. It's not as daunting as it looked, but I still can't get multi-line entries to work quite right. The first bullet always comes out as a plain asterisk. But the self-collapsing stuff works nicely, and fields are easy to add. Check the examples below. —Darth Culator (talk) 04:33, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Colors are pretty. CooperTFN 04:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
    • "Self-collapsing". That means if there's an empty field, it just automatically hides this in the article? VT-16 08:19, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Right. Just like the new planet infobox, you put all the fields in the page, but leave the empty ones blank, like in the examples below. If you don't put in all the fields, it looks really silly. I put the same instructions below as I have just placed on the template page. —Darth Culator (talk) 14:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I think I'd prefer doing away with the lines and going with a strictly solid gray format. If you look at the Droid tri-fighter article, this actually looks pretty nice. The lines don't really help that much with separation, I don't think. Opinions? RMF 22:03, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I've tried it both ways, and I greatly prefer the lines. But I'm more concerned about the malfunctioning bullets. —Darth Culator (talk) 22:25, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Really? I think the lines break it up too much, but it's not a big deal. And yes, the bullet thing is definitely a problem. Commas will work, but bullets would be much better, especially for things like armament. RMF 22:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
      • We can at least force the items onto separate lines with <br> tags, but that's an ugly hack, and the first bullet still comes out as an asterisk. I'd rather use commas or forced linebreaks than scrap the whole deal, though. I like this new format, even without lines or alternating colors. —Darth Culator (talk) 23:07, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
        • Yeah, I agree, it's not a deal-breaker. I updated Droid Tri-fighter to reflect the commas—doesn't look as good as bullets but not terrible either. RMF 23:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
          • Hmm...Bullets worked fine on my template. I don't see why they don't work on this one too. Weird. --Xwing328 23:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • The lines don't really help that much with separation, I don't think. Opinions?
I like having alternating light and dark grey lines. It helps tell the difference between pieces of information. VT-16 00:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Are the lines necessary--no. But I think they help some and make it look better. I put an example of mine with alternating colors and working bullets in the sandbox below.--Xwing328 01:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Ok, is everything in order then? Can I begin to use the template? :) VT-16 12:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Seems there's still some bugs in the template. I tried to add the 'role' section to the Executor and it didn't show up. I tried to use the template below, but it has some errors with parts that I left blank (showed the category-names above the template itself). What should I do, to get it to show up? =/ VT-16 12:37, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
        • If you use the temp template, you need to leave the fields there even if they're blank. I put an example for the Executor below. —Darth Culator (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Vehicles Edit

Now that the ship-template seems to be in order, what will be done about the vehicle one? There seems to still be some bugs in that, with regards to bullets. VT-16 13:51, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I asked Sikon to take a look at it to see if he could fix the bullet issue. RMF 23:33, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Instructions for new templateEdit

To use the new ship infobox, copy and paste the following code at the top of your article, then replace the text in parentheses (as shown in bold below) with the information for your article. All fields must be present for the box to function, but leave the value for a field blank if the information is unknown. (Example: "height=|" if the height is unknown.)

image=[[File:(put image filename here)|300px(exclude size if image already less than 300 pixels)]]|
name=(Put ship name for individual ship or class name for class)|
manufacturer=(Put the manufacturer name here)|
line=(Put the product line or series here)|
model=(Put the class name here, usually restating the "name=" field)|
class=(Put the official class designation here)|
length=(Put the length here)|
width=(Put the width here)|
height=(Put the height here)|
acceleration=(Put the acceleration in "G"s here)|
mglt=(Put speed in MGLT here only if acceleration in "G"s is unknown)|
airspeed=(Put the atmospheric speed here)|
engine=(Put the types of engine units here)|
hyperdrive=(Put hyperdrive class and backup class here, or none if no hyperdrive)|
hdsystem=(Put the type of hyperdrive system here)|
shields=(Put the type of shield system here, with rating if desired, or none if no combat shields)|
hull=(Put the type of hull material here, with rating if desired)|
poweroutput=(Put the power output in watts here)|
powerplant=(Put the type of main reactor here)|
armament=(List the various armaments here)|
complement=(Put the numbers and types of smaller embarked craft here)|
crew=(Put the total crew here and the crew breakdown if desired)|
skeleton=(Put the minimum required crew here)|
passengers=(Put the passenger capacity here)|
capacity=(Put the cargo capacity here)|
consumables=(Put the duration of consumables here)|
othersystems=(Put any other onboard systems here)|
role=(List what the ship is used for here)|
era=(List the eras in which the ship is used here)|
affiliation=(List the governments and major organizations that use the ship here)|