Forum:New Era and Appearance Proposal

I pretty much explained in-detail what this was all about in an Admin letter a few weeks ago, and it worked then...here's my super copy & paste of this new proposal:

Before a single vote is even given on this matter, I would love to hear any and all opinions & suggestions on this proposal! Thank you for reading this, and have a great day! Oh...and remember the Featured Article revival project is still in effect!

Rawr,

Support (19/3)
All users in agreement of this proposal please vote here with   followed by a short message why and your signature.


 * - As per my statements above and in the comments section.
 * - Finally, something for me to edit whore do to better the wiki considering my recent inactivity . Ghost sangheili
 * - Sounds like a good idea. - Halopediaman 03:01, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * - ...And yet another solid plan for me to proudly support. =] --
 * - No objections. - Nìcmávr  ( Tálk  ) 10:14, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * - Sounds good.--Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 12:05, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * . When updating Template:Eraicon, please use the link parameter to the standard image syntax (see example), because the current way is flooding Special:LinkSearch. :-) --Jack Phoenix (Contact) 13:47, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * - Very VERY good idea.  7h3 Ma573r Chi3f   (5par7an 117)   (J0hn)   (Ma573r Chi3f P377y 0ffic3r)  15:37, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * - As per above. -- Lord Hyren 19:11, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * - Makes sense. With reference cleanups all the info given in the era boxes now should be found in the sources section anyway.--  Rusty  -   112  19:20, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * - As per above. --Kronos101 20:12, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * [[Image:DavidJCobb Emblem.svg|16px]] DavidJCobb  20:32, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * - Has my continued support. Field   Master   Spartansniper  4  50  04:25, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * - Makes sense. 15:35, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * - As per above. - Scot 113 15:45, April 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * - As above. --Dragonc laws (talk ) 01:57, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * - Great idea. And I'm at a loss as to why I didn't see this proposal before. -  Halo-343   ( Talk )   ( Contribs )   ( Edits )  23:17, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * - As per above --Staff Sergeant Darrell Mac, UNSC Air Force 02:42, April 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * - This is a brilliant idea. It will really clear up an article and help new users and halo researchers to navigate their way around the different events in the Halo universe/time-line. The Parkster  - (Chat Page |Contributions |Fan Fiction ) - 09:08, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * - Very good idea, as per above, although do we really have to show all levels in games which things appear??--Bottletopman 09:14, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * - I love it! It's great to see that features that work so well in other wikis are being implemented here. My support all the way. The Uberlite


 * - Can't do any harm, and seems like it makes sense and is very straightforward. I wholeheartedly accept this plan, so long as they are protected from vandalism (protected pages and the like) . Master Chump 22:30, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * User does not have over 50 edits. > Master   Chief   Petty   Officer   John-117  ( Personal Favorite ). 18:42, April 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * - This is a great idea that would greatly help organize pages and timelines. MrMarine
 * Has only three edits. > Master   Chief   Petty   Officer   John-117  ( Personal Favorite ). 11:38, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral (3/0)
All users in confusion/apathy/etc. of this proposal please vote here with   followed by a short message why and your signature.


 * - I'm not entirely sure. While I do agree that it would be a much better choice than leaving something like the ODST article as it is, I would like to see it properly being used before giving my support. Could you perhaps make a test page to set it out, just for a better understanding of what the new set up would be like? B'L'AD E BANE Anti-Vandal 12:22, March 29, 2010 (UTC)Blade bane
 * - Whatevs -  S.B.44    [T] |undefined 03:38, April 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * - Confused and apathetic.  Kougermasters   ( Talk )   ( Contribs )   ( Edits )  00:45, April 16, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose (0/0)
All users in opposition of this proposal please vote here with   followed by a short message why and your signature.

Comments
''' Please keep your comments civil, short (five-word minimum), to the point, and good. Thank you! '''


 * It sounds reasonable enough, for example the ODST article has so many era templates that the title is being crushed into the left side of the page. I am wondering though, how would you order the actual era categories? Alphabetically, chronologically, or something else? Just a bit of information I would like to know before voicing any more opinions. <font color="#7F007F">B'L'A<font color="#000000">D <font color="#B0E0E6">E BANE <font color="#FFA500">Anti-Vandal 04:15, March 22, 2010 (UTC)Blade bane


 * It would be chronologically.- <font face="Century Gothic"> <font color="#FF4F00">5 əb<font color="#FF4F00">'7 aŋk (<font color="#FF4F00">7alk ) 19:41, March 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * I would like to say that I agree with this proposal, the only question I have is how would we handle an appearance section on stub articles and things that have only made a single appearance in the franchise. Using a scroll box would actually be unneeded on smaller articles and single appearance items, as it would take up too much space. That is just something I think may need to be discussed. Placement I also believe is important to any article that you want to make presentable, the placement of the appearance section on the ODST article for example, was in my opinion not placed right and looked off. I would like to express that if this passes that the placement of an appearance section be above the trivia section, so that it looks like it belongs and doesn't look out of place. Other than that I believe a proper era template is needed. Durandal-217 04:38, March 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Regarding stubbed/short articles: I would suggest avoid having such sections if that's the case. The "Sources" section would be sufficient to inform where they appear, provided they are sourced properly.- <font face="Century Gothic"> <font color="#FF4F00">5 əb<font color="#FF4F00">'7 aŋk (<font color="#FF4F00">7alk ) 19:41, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Kai on this one, though as we will put ALL apperance sections into a scroll box, even the smallest of pages will get slightly larger. But either way works.


 * I fully agree, I've seen this on other wikis and it seems to work better, the only thing is the images for them, but that can be easily solved. Field   Master   Spartansniper  4  50  14:18, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * For the images, I'd recommend: The Librarian's icon (Forerunner); the Mark of Shame (Covenant); a picture of Earth (Globalization); Da Bomb (Halo 3 Emblem) (Colonization); a MJOLNIR Mark VI helmet (Great War); and a heart in a circle (Post-War). All of those can be done with a single color and transparency, and all (except for Da Bomb) have a roughly circular appearance. <span style="background:#ADA;display:inline-block;height:16px;padding-right:4px;line-height:1em;position:relative;top:-3px;-moz-border-radius:0 50% 50%">[[Image:DavidJCobb Emblem.svg|16px]] DavidJCobb  04:58, March 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it's a good idea. If it works in other wikis, why not here. However, we should still keep the Realworld and such era icons so we don't need to return to those cumbersome box templates. It should also be made clearer where the Realworld icon is to be used: In articles that do not exist in the Halo universe, or ones that exist both in the real world and Halo as well. I've seen it being used both ways, so it should be clarified. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Jugus (<font color="Gray">Talk  | <font color="Gray">Contribs ) 14:40, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh don't worry, we'll still keep the Era icons for the Real World and Bungie staff.
 * The realworld era is to be used on articles that take place from the real world perspective. These may include subjects that exist in both worlds, but should generally be on subjects that only exist in the real world. A strength of the box templates was that it said explicitly "This article is from the real world perspective". Unfortunately, now people add the realworld era to articles describing all sorts of fictional things because some part of it (e.g. Mars) exists in the real world. Maybe something else entirely should be used to indicate perspective, like coloring the frame if such a thing is even possible. --<font color="#4D56B1">Dragon<font color="#F28500">c laws (<font color="#4D56B1">talk ) 02:03, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is exactly what I've been taking note of. People add the RW era to articles where it doesn't belong. However, it was sort of the same thing with the realworld template sometimes. It should be clarified somewhere that the RW era is only for articles that describe explicitly real-world topics, not things that also exist in the fiction.--<font color="MidnightBlue">Jugus (<font color="Gray">Talk  | <font color="Gray">Contribs ) 06:51, April 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Why are Games, Books, and comics eras when something like 2552 and the Human-Covenant War are proper eras. -- 7h3 Ma573r Chi3f   (5par7an 117)   (J0hn)   (Ma573r Chi3f P377y 0ffic3r)  15:52, March 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * This is a good idea, but if the Standards Council wasn't disband, this would be a great thing to discuss there. - Scot 113 15:44, April 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * When is the deadline?  Master   Chief   Petty   Officer   John-117  ( Personal Favorite ) . 16:43, April 10, 2010 (UTC)