User:RoyBoy/Template 5
VS
[edit]Are we doing these as original concepts also? IMHO, VSmith might a good candidate for a diamond certificate. KillerChihuahua 23:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
- We certainly could to some extent... wow good idea. - RoyBoy 08:10, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
First draft
[edit]
|
Started a draft. -- Ec5618 15:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Second draft
[edit]Here are my suggestions. - RoyBoy 01:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- moving to Final so G isn't all confused. KillerChihuahua 16:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Third Draft
[edit]Third design suggestion. This works more generally speaking, but if we wanted to stick with a infobox type concept, then draft two would still be my choice. - RoyBoy 20:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
- I like draft 2 unless we come up with another grading label which would work (for balance.) KillerChihuahua 14:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
| |||||||||||||||
| This wikipedian was graded by RoyBoy, Guettarda and KillerChihuahua. |
Final draft
[edit]
| ||||||||
Great call on the diamond Killa, only thing left to finalize is colours, are we absolutely happy with them? What colors suit the template/user best? - RoyBoy 18:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I personally like the colors as they are, and see no need to change. I'm not wedded to them, if anyone has an opposing view. KillerChihuahua 16:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- As per KC, but I liked the diamonds in the "graded by" - what, too unsubtle? is it hitting them over the head with a pun to put the diamonds there? or is that a double entendre Guettarda 16:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think there has been a little confusion, so I moved the final here so it would be clear which one we picked as final - draft 3 was rejected. KillerChihuahua 17:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, ok. Since the question was about colour, I thought it was 2 vs 3. But yeah, I prefer 1. Guettarda 20:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think there has been a little confusion, so I moved the final here so it would be clear which one we picked as final - draft 3 was rejected. KillerChihuahua 17:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- As per KC, but I liked the diamonds in the "graded by" - what, too unsubtle? is it hitting them over the head with a pun to put the diamonds there? or is that a double entendre Guettarda 16:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Gah! :+D ... well you've been voted down on that, but actually what I originally meant is the color (Green) with black borders etc. is what we want? Personally I'm unsure. - RoyBoy 00:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- I prefer the first draft aesthetically, but I see the appeal of the final draft. Perhaps the green (or any colour) could be repeated at the bottom, to engulf the gems and the diamondeers.
- Ideally, the template would contain the text of draft four, and the gems, and even the separator line between the body and the diamondeers, but would still be a single block of text, as per the first draft. Failing that, yes, the colours need to change. Mind that I am viewing this on a less than perfect LCD screen.
- I've tried switching the colours around, but the gems have a white background.
- Nevertheless, example 5:
- -- Ec5618 02:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- Shouldn't be a problem filling the background of the gems with any given colour. - Samsara 15:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed, but OTOH it seems wrong to create a new image (with only a color change) just for a specific template. I'd rather enclose the sig portion in its own black box and just make it white. Akin to a category box. - RoyBoy 18:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Which would look like this. Don't look at me, this is your baby. I hardly even know the guy/gal. Anything else? -- Ec5618 18:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hehe, I guess you're right, still didn't want to be too bold with what is your inspiration. I took out the row, looking pretty good. I'll let another day or two pass for any additional votes, then issue it. - RoyBoy 21:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- I like the white above and below - it balances, and I concur that altering the diamond image to have a green background might be less than desirable for a number of reasons. KillerChihuahua 23:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- Boy am I glad I missed the interior design discussion! The above thread would have made a great Monty Python sketch. :) Jim62sch 10:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Glad? You missed out. Don't you care about style? -- Ec5618 20:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
How did this end up with "Victor Stone"? I presume his last name is Smith and if his first name is Victor it is not something I've seen him reveal. I realize Stone is a nice play on geology, but as is, I didn't even realize who this was for when I first saw it. Also the name link was pointed at VS rather than VSmith, which I took the liberty of changing. Personally, I'd prefer to put VSmith in the name spot as it is certainly clearer and doesn't detract much from the analogy. Dragons flight 04:07, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Victor Stone is an alias to help keep the template process semi-secret, especially the "VS" for edit summaries, but mostly we do it for kicks as the nomination section specifies. As you know its hard to keep a secret around here. It's usually changed just prior to being issued. - RoyBoy 05:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- You almost ruined everything.
- So, is this template going to be issued? Both Natalinasmpf and Dragons flight have been issued a pretty barnstar.
- As an aside, should we really be cranking out barnstars by the dozens? FM was extatic; Natalinasmpf seemed lukewarm in comparison. Perhaps some moderation is in oder. -- Ec5618 20:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes and no. FM had no barnstars and was known well by the ppl who awarded him, Natalinasmpf had awards in the past and isn't as acquainted with us... however, I give award(s) according to merit, not according to how well I know them or if they will gush with thanks. Differing responses are to be expected. If by moderation you mean fewer awards, that will happen organically as the main people WMC, VS and Steinski are cleared. I have every intention of slowing down, but as the issuing of a main award approchoes there might be a surge of awards to others we want to bring in; but are also deserving of praise. I'd rather run the risk of giving out a few too many awards; rather than passing over deserving people because we are in a rush to award someone they are associated with. - RoyBoy 00:01, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
If there is no objection, I'll award this in a day or two. - RoyBoy 22:58, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've run into VS a few times now, and he seems decent enough, certainly dedicated. From what I can tell, I'm surprised he hasn't been 'officially' lauded. -- Ec5618 00:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)