Forum:Voting template changes

Okay so while this is a minor thing compared to what usually goes on here, I figured it was worth a mention.

Basically our current set of voting templates are quite bland and to some users they could be seen as difficult to use because VoteFor, Neutral and VoteAgainst only contain an image. With this in mind I've developed replacements for these templates.

The new templates, currently located at, and  already contain the vote parameter, with it being possible to change to reflect a user's opinion. For example:

would generate

would generate

The hyphen is there by default to allow for a greater emphasis on reasoning. For example:

hurr would generate hurr.

I am contemplating creating a Comment template that works in a similar manner to the above templates to allow comments to stand out more. Obviously if this is approved the templates will be moved out of my userspace.

So what do you all think? 20:42, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
As I am fairly new to the wiki, I think this is a great starter for those stuck with templates and it would probably make it really easy for them to revise. Jarred (talk) 21:14, January 28, 2013 (UTC) - typed from iPad.

I don't think the template itself should elaborate beyond 'support', 'oppose' or 'neutral.' This has to do with the way votes are interpreted... If someone says Strong Support and another says Support, it's implied that the strong support is stronger than the support, even if the strength of the arguments that are given don't match. The supporting explanation of the position is really what is necessary, and in fact a person could "vote" without ever saying whether they oppose or support in explicit terms, if the accompanying explanation is well worded. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 21:26, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * By default the template only contains "Support" and the "Strong Support" has to manually be applied by the user. My stance on this is that "Support" is a positive vote, "Strong Support" is a very positive vote and "Weak Support" is a positive vote that doesn't rule out an oppose and the same logic can be applied for Strong Oppose, Weak Oppose etc. I think if we are to talk about how "Strong/Weak x" work then that's probably worth another discussion in its own right. 08:19, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

I'm inclined to see it better if we use only one template for all voting purposes (support, neutral, oppose). So we could use  instead of one template  for either normal or strong support.  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  08:06, January 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * I can see where you're coming from and that could work. 08:19, January 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * I like this idea. Sounds better to use a catch-all template instead of three different ones.

To be honest I haven't had the time to make a new template and I've kinda shelved this for now. As such I'll mark this thread as closed and may revisit it later. 12:19, February 24, 2013 (UTC)