Template talk:Big Brother housemates

src: static.pulse.ng

• Archive 1

Video Template talk:Big Brother housemates

Suggestion for sidebar occuring on BB10UK talk page

I've suggested that we stop using the Nominated/Up for eviction colouring on the sidebar as it breaks Wiki policy. As this would affect the BB articles worldwide, I've posted a link to this discussion here. Please don't discuss the issue here, please take it to the link posted in order to centralise the discussion. Thanks, DJ 22:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Maps Template talk:Big Brother housemates

Problems RE: the colourblind

As a colourblind person, I find it extremely hard to differentiate between the "Walked" and "Nominated" colourings. Therefore, I propose a change in the colour scheme for one, if not both, of these colours.

I feel that this would be benefitial for not only the colourblind, but other users also as there were comments on the Big Brother 2009 (UK) talk page that the current scheme is too similar and limited. Thoughts? DJ 17:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not totally against changing the infobox colors, but I would suggest muted pastel tones as the ones above are very jarring. Which colors specifically are difficult to differentiate? T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 18:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The current "Walked" and "Nominated" are VERY similar; there was a point a few weeks ago when I misread the table and thought somebody had left. Similar colours (i.e. Green/Brown/Red, Purple/Blue/Pink) cause the confusion. Maybe the primary colours (Light blue - Evicted, Ligth red - Ejected, Light yellow - walked) for the basics and then a lighter grey for those nominated? DJ 19:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion red should be reserved for "Evicted". "Ejected" perhaps a green and "Walked" maybe... yellow? And "Nominated" would then be left with a sort of darkish blue colour?  GARDEN  19:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Like this:

I like that^. DJ 19:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Those won't work, for Head of Household reasons:

And to be frank, I don't think we really need to change it. If anyone has a question about it, the nominations table (which is a small scroll away) will clearly spell everything out. -túrian^patois 19:57, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Well in which case, the American version needs to be changed too. We are writing for a large audience and we need to consider the needs of others, for the same reasons we include alttext on images. It DOES need to be changed. DJ 20:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. DJ 20:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

{edit conflict) No, it doesn't. You are the only person who has brought up anything and I don't see any rule declaring the "across the board" styling for color blind people. The real world doesn't do it, so why should we? For YOU? I don't think so. I wouldn't be against changing the Walk color (since you know, that is what you are confusing), rather than change every single color. I say we just change the Walk color to the tan one you have up there. But it is ridiculous to suggest we change all of them for confusing just one color.

And the one you posted looks awful. Just change the Walk color to tan. -túrian^patois 20:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

You've been warned about your conduct towards other users recently. As I stated, a discussion on Big Brother 2009 (UK) saw myself and one or two others agree with this. And there's no need to be pedantic - magazines don't include audiable articles, but Wikipedia does and I've mentioned the alttext issue. Based on your previous bursts of aggression, I imagine you'll be looking for an argument now. I won't be joining in, so don't bother replying. On with the discussion. DJ 20:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

If you are going to accuse me of something, make sure you back it up (I see no personal attack or incivility). I am just tired of you wanting to change everything for minute reasons (and sometimes trying to go behind the back of the American version). Wikipedia does not bend itself for the colorblind so why should we? I am fine with the tan, so stop trying to fight with me (you know, the discussing you continue to claim you want). -túrian^patois 20:33, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia does have guidlines RE colourblind users: here and at "Category:Articles with images not understandable by color blind users". Therefore, if we were to go through with your ignorance, we would be breaking WP rules. DJ 20:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't attack me. -túrian^patois 20:46, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

He's "attacking" you as much as you were him. Calm it down girls.  GARDEN  20:57, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I beg to differ, but that doesn't matter. I am fine with changing it to tan, why all of the belligerence? -túrian^patois 23:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand why so many discussions turn into fights but I think that the needs of colourblind users ought to be catered for. In this day and age I'm shocked that anyone can even argue against that. The problem seems to be with the pastel orange and pink. If the other colours work then concentrate on changing the problem ones. With 2²⁴ colours to choose from there ought to be a combination that suits everyone. Personally, I don't care what colours are used, as long as they are accessible to the largest group of users possible. MegaPedant (talk) 00:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

We've had this discussion in the past and the (everyone's favourite word here) consensus was that the template didn't pose a problem. Because the template acts redundantly, ambiguity is cleared up later in the article, thereby invalidating the need to make it fit for a rather small minority of people (no offence, just being honest). Geoking66_talk 01:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

We need a color scheme that works with the largest group of people, keep in mind key colors that are changed (i.e. Evicted, Expelled, Legend3/Exempt, etc.) will have to be changed in the tables as well. How about this:

??Alucard 16?? 07:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

The two greens look similar. Is that likely to be a problem? MegaPedant (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The look similar to viewers with normal vision but when I ran various color blind filters on this page with those colors they were easily distinguishable for people who are color blind. Maybe we can replace one of them with another color that is easily distinguishable for people with normal vision and visitors who are color blind. ??Alucard 16?? 06:34, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

How about these colors, when I ran various filters on these they seemed to be distinguishable from one another. With normal vision Walked/Legend5 may look a little similar but with filters they are distinguishable from one another.

??Alucard 16?? 07:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I also have an example in my sandbox where the new colors are applied to a nomination/voting history table. ??Alucard 16?? 07:28, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Change the HoH back to its less-harsh version and I'm game. -túrian^patois 12:02, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

:::I had to change the HoH to that color because with one of the color blind filters it was too similar with another color. ??Alucard 16?? 00:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, It works. ??Alucard 16?? 00:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

On the infoboxes on other pages (BBuk, BBus, etc). I fail to see a diffrence between Walked and Nominated? Has Nominated been changed at all? --BigOz22 (talk) 01:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, he messed it up. Please change the nominated color to what was agreed upon. -túrian^patois 01:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

So I rverted it and here is why. One, you used colors that we didn't agree upon. Also, why did you have to change the Expelled color? The new one you want is rather bad looking (and looks unappealing for the article). Just change the walk color. It is simple. -túrian^patois 02:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the reason of changing the colors is to make them more accessible to more readers. Several changes had to be made in order for the colors to work. Since you didn't like the new Expelled color (which you didn't object) I have to change the HoH color back to the darker green. If just changing the "Walked" color was the solution I would have done it already. Also you didn't have to revert all the changes I made, you could have pointed them out here. Modifying a template is a lot harder than just editing an regular article. One wrong edit and it messes up the whole template. Below is the color scheme I had to use:

??Alucard 16?? 05:15, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Note: Applied to Big Brother Endgame as well. If there are any other issues please discuss before reverting. Thanks. ??Alucard 16?? 05:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I know how to work/make/edit/tweak a template. And it isn't edit-keep-discuss. It's edit-revert-discuss. The Evicted and HoH are too harsh and are going to be changed back. There is something called aesthetics and with those harsh colors, don't expect any articles to get to FA status, at all. -túrian^patois 05:44, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

That is why the infoboxes had a lighter red for evicted and a lighter blue for nominations/up for eviction but those colors clashed when viewed by color blind filters. We are trying to make the boxes for all to read not just for aesthetics. Instead of saying "no that won't work, I am reverting until a new solution is suggested" is getting tired. Try suggesting colors, helping with this discussion because it seems like when you don't like a change you revert but you never suggest something to further the discussion. The key thing is we are trying to make this accessible to as many readers as possible, we can work on aesthetics second. ??Alucard 16?? 05:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Also another note, any article in progress will never become FA while the show is airing for the simple fact the by having "Nominated" breaks a rule. At least that is what I remember from a discussion. Look at a past series with the Endgame template and see how that works before you revert. I made the changes to both this time. ??Alucard 16?? 05:58, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

On second thought I am taking a break from the templates, it seems like I make a suggestion and no one has any major objections to it but when it is implemented various editors keep reverting me. Do what you want to the templates I don't care, make it all one color. I am tired of this discussion as it seems I am the only one contributing to it and everyone else is whining or reverting when they don't like the change. After a week I may try this again. I have been spending too much time on a template. ??Alucard 16?? 06:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I have given my suggestion: only the color of walk needs to be changed. To quote Geoking: We've had this discussion in the past and the (everyone's favourite word here) consensus was that the template didn't pose a problem. Because the template acts redundantly, ambiguity is cleared up later in the article, thereby invalidating the need to make it fit for a rather small minority of people (no offence, just being honest). There is no reason to go into a frenzy and change everything. -túrian^patois 06:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay I get it aesthetics over accessibility. That is the way it works. As long as it looks good to one group then it is okay. Fine what color would you like "walked" to be. I don't want to change it again and have you revert me again or say I didn't get a consensus on it as a reason for reverting. Keep in mind that the color must work with both the nomination/voting tables and the infobox as the colors need to match. But when dealing with anything BBUSA related I will remember aesthetics over accessibility. I get it now. ??Alucard 16?? 19:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Please, stop acting like a child. As I have said from the start, change the walk color to the tan. The need to change everything for the colorblind is outrageous when there is a table that clearly explains everything (the colors are just for ease of reading). For one last time:

That is perfectly fine. -túrian^patois 19:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The color for walked seems too similar to Expelled to me. Maybe a different color. ??Alucard 16?? 02:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

It can be the blue, but again, it doesn't matter because it is technically redundant info. -túrian^patois 02:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Color

After a minor glitch, I have successfully moved the color switch statements to {{Big Brother housemates/color}}, which is similar to the method used by {{infobox album}}. This dramatically reduced the size of the template, and means there is only one place where the colors need to be changed (if necessary). Note that the leading   is necessary before color specifications starting a # symbol. Otherwise, wikipedia renders these as enumerated list elements. Let me know if there are any problems. Thanks! 20:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

However, it messed up the colors themselves as they don't match the colors on the legend. Instead of gray, we see blue as the "none" color. You can see what I mean on the housemates infobox on Pinoy Big Brother: Double Up. - ???? (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 04:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I think this is a browser dependent bug. Could you tell me which browser you are using? There have been reports of people seeing strange colors: see here. In particular, this image was posted to explain the problem: [1]. If you tell me which browser you are using, I can try to debug the problem on that particular browser. Thanks. Plastikspork _-OE^(talk) 14:25, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I use IE7. So the bug must be fixed to support all browsers. And most of the computers I have used have IE instead of, say, Firefox as the main browser. I don't want to switch browsers at this time. - ???? (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 14:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Right, the solution is not to make you switch browsers, but to make things work in all common browsers. I will see if I can fix the problem. Plastikspork _-OE^(talk) 14:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done I fixed the problem (or at least it's fixed on IE 8). Let me know if there is still a problem. Plastikspork _-OE^(talk) 03:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia