User talk:Renegade/Portal:Lonelygirl15

Shiori's happy nitpicks

1. The contrast on the vid template is still too low. Can we crank it up or something? The "no image available" image is especially making it look jarring with the low contrast.
   1. Playing around in Photoshop, #9FC6F0 looks nice for the bars.
   2. Could you make the image background the darker color? I liked that... (Speaking of the image, tone down the "no image available" one; it's crazy dark.)
2. Looks squished. Make layout width:100%, pwease.
3. I don't even know if this is even possible, but I'll throw it out there anyway. When the layout is changed to 100% width, and then I make my browser window smaller, the character images eat up the side nav. If you could, fix it on the left and maybe set the width in between the images to a variable width so they'd stretch across the whole top bar?

Looks really good, Ren! - Shiori 14:31, 27 March 2008 (CDT)

1. I can play around with the colors, but let's first hear other opinions. And the "no image available" one was actually made for the previous proposal, I just uploaded it 'cause it's the default filename if no image was set. I'll upload a new one once we know which color we go with.
2. It's designed for 1024px width; can't make it wider without some more photoshop love. So let's hear what others say, first.
3. Given that the character icons should stay away from the dark blue part, if possible, I'd be opposed to that. But then again, I don't know what exactly you did and didn't do to achieve width: 100%, so I can't even reproduce the problem.

More opinions, anyone?

~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 15:00, 27 March 2008 (CDT)

What happens if, at some point, we need to have more or less character icons? Does this require an entire redo in photoshop? --Zoey 17:36, 27 March 2008 (CDT)

The "edit character row" link is there for a reason, Z ;) User:Renegade/Portal:Lonelygirl15/Character Row

~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 22:21, 27 March 2008 (CDT)

Right, but what if we add a character, doesn't that throw the width of the character row off? Based on the width of the header? --Zoey 23:14, 27 March 2008 (CDT)

Well, depending on how you modify the row, it shrinks or grows...?

~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 12:39, 28 March 2008 (CDT)

Vid Template/Image Color(s)

We're basically agreeing that the colors look good in the vid template, but Ren and I are argue-discussing whether the darker color should be used for the image border or not. So please decide whether the top or bottom version looks better:
File:Compare.gif
- Shiori 20:34, 30 March 2008 (CDT)

I like the bottom one better.

--TimiN 19:45, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

Character Icons

One problem I have with the design now is that it is not clear that you can click on the individual character icons to view the main characters' pages. The icons simply look like part of the design at present. Perhaps putting the names back under the icons will help people understand that they can click those... or does anyone else have any ideas? --Zoey 22:52, 30 March 2008 (CDT)

You get the normal link hand icon over them, so those not familiar with mediawiki in general should get it by instinct. And even if they don't, Characters is the first link in the first content box. In a worst case scenario, a confused person just takes one click longer.

Not to mention that the names of the current character boxes don't look like links either. I click them because I know from experience they are links, not because it's actually obvious.

~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 11:40, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

The hand icon appears over every image, so the fact that they appear on the icons does not provide any real clue to the fact that the images actually take you to the characters' pages. The whole point of putting the icons on the front page like that is to give people an easy way to familiarize themselves with the characters. People won't just automatically click the Characters link. That's like saying we only need to put the stills from each new video, because people will click on them knowing they can get to the video transcript pages based on the fact that the hand icon is there... and if not, they'll be able to click the "List of Videos" link on the sidebar, which takes them to the list of videos anyways, so what's the point of listing the videos on the portal page anyways? The point is ease of access, which is why the character icons are there in the first place as well.

And I think there is a big difference between the character icon placement you proposed and the one we have now. Currently, they are in a separate column and each icon has a box with the name of the character underneath. It is much more obvious that you can click those images and/or the links to learn more about the characters than it is on your proposal, where there is no text and the images just look like part of the header design. I think it's important that people know to click these links, so we should find a way to make it obvious that they can. --Zoey 18:46, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

Random idea: Would overlaying a link-indicating icon or something work? I can't imagine it looking right with text, which is kind of a problem... - Shiori 18:49, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

I added alt text, I think that helps a little. Not sure it solves the problem entirely though... --Zoey 18:55, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

Hence why I said "those not familiar with mediawiki in general should get it by instinct". Those who are new to LGPedia should instinctively react to the cursor change, those who are familiar with LGPedia also know that the portal icons can be clicked.

Of course largely labeling them as links would make it clearer, but a caption box like on the current portal will definitely not work. An overlay with the name might work. But so far, you're the only one mentioning it, so let's hear what others say before we change the design in such a drastic way.

In addition, your analogy is wrong - the latest videos are changing almost daily and are on the front page as news, not as permanent content. We are not just providing a link, we are reporting the latest video - and that requires a date at least. In addition, a random still is by far not as clear as a frontal face shot. Some shot of the general LA area, or of Daniel in the rented house, could fit dozens of episodes, so the link wouldn't be clear without text. The List of Videos is also not a replacement, because it shows neither a date or posting, nor a description, nor a viewing link.

A link to Daniel's page on Characters is the same as a link to Daniel's page on the front page.

A link with poster on List of Videos is not the same as a full news post with posting date and watch links.

You cannot compare news posts that inform users of the latest information of a video to a static link.

~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 19:59, 31 March 2008 (CDT)