Forum:Introducing Metabox

In the TS4 prep discussion, I mentioned the possibility of retiring Parthenon. I wanted everyone to know that I've carried on with that suggestion, and have built a new standard message template

Also, be sure to check out the small version of the same template:

Parthenon has been adopted as the standard "meta"-template for message boxes on The Sims Wiki. Even if you don't know Parthenon by name, you probably recognize its style:
 * Why replace Parthenon?

Parthenon allows a lot of customization to the template itself, but that comes at a cost of many required parameters. Parthenon requires at least four parameters to display correctly -,  ,   and. When using parthenon, the user has to decide, at that moment, what color the template should be and what the title of the template should be (the title is the bold line of text at the top of Parthenon). If background color is left empty, it will display the background color of the page, but if border color is empty, it will not display the borders correctly (thus, losing the distinctive "columns" of Parthenon). Other parameters for Parthenon allow the user to adjust the width of the template or to add an image (as I did in the example above).

Metabox, by comparison, requires one or two parameters to display correctly. is the only truly mandatory parameter, but  is ultimately the parameter that determines what color the template will appear as. The customizability of Parthenon has been retained and enhanced with Metabox, and the following parameters are currently accepted (with more to be added yet):
 * (compare to 'title' from Parthenon template)
 * (compare to 'title' from Parthenon template)




 * Key differences
 * Image display. Parthenon displays the image only if the [[File: ]] brackets are used by the editor; Metabox does not need the brackets in order to display the image. Metabox automatically sets the size of the image to 40px, but the size can be overridden by the editor; Parthenon has the image size set within the image link itself. The reason I opted to include an automatic image size in Metabox is to make it easier to make templates on-the-go, rather than needing to fiddle around with setting image sizes.
 * Template size. Parthenon has a default width of 65%; Metabox standard has a default width of 85%. Metabox also has adjusted the size of text and line spacing within the template, with the ultimate result being a template that takes up less vertical space than Parthenon. Both Parthenon and Metabox have optional  parameters to adjust the width further.
 * Template type. One major feature of Metabox is the establishment of "types" of templates, based on their intended usage. These types determine the border and background colors used within the template. Presently, there are five types and five color schemes: administrative (green), information (blue), notice (red), delete/move/merge (orange), and feature (yellow) - you can see the different schemes in action here.
 * Alternate versions. Parthenon always displays as a large, center-aligned box. Metabox can be set to display like this, but it can also be set to display as a smaller, left-aligned box (as demonstrated here). This is achieved by setting  when editing.
 * Visual differences. Aside from the changes mentioned above, metabox is also visually different from Parthenon. The most notable difference is the loss of the right-hand column and the widening of the left-hand column into a "bar". Ultimately, this bar displays the type color for the template.

The decision to replace Parthenon will be at least partly dependent on whether you prefer the style of Parthenon or Metabox; personally, I prefer Metabox, but this is obviously something that everyone decides for themselves. However, aside from the opinion, there are several pros and cons that can be weighed when deciding which template to use.
 * Pro/Con


 * Pros to Metabox


 * Adjustable size (standard and small-sized versions, in the same template)
 * Establishment of clear template types based on usage
 * Simpler code to add to pages


 * Cons to Metabox


 * All templates using Parthenon would have to be changed over
 * Templates would need to be "established" within a particular class
 * Color customizability is lost (i.e. you cannot set an alternate border and background color, it is set by the chosen type) - Metabox now has customizable border and background color parameters.

Metabox is still being developed. Specifically, I am looking to implement optional parameters for more advanced users, such as adjusting the width of the image space in the template, and making adjustable border and background colors independent of the type chosen.
 * Other points

However, for now I am pressing forward and proposing that we move towards adopting Metabox as the new standard message box on The Sims Wiki. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 14:24, September 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * Edit: New parameters to adjust border color, background color, and the width of the image area, have all be added to Metabox. If you have any suggestions for additional features in the template, please note them below. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 17:29, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
Seems easier to use and it looks nicer. I'm for it. 14:49, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * I am also supporting this. Like Lab said, it seems easier to use and indeed does look nicer. Beds (parlare - da leggere ) 15:10, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * I find this nicer as well. Support. 15:24, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. It does look nice, and I think it will be easier to use. Dharden (talk) 22:09, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * Per everyone above! It looks AMAZEBALLS! 10:35, September 7, 2013 (UTC)

Given the positive response here, it appears as though it's time to begin implementing Metabox! --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 01:36, September 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * I apologize for being involved late here. I'd like to share my opinions here.
 * I do not mind if Parthenon requires you to input border color and background color, since I like the idea if each template using Parthenon with different purpose (cleanup / property / stub) has unique color on their own. I find it okay with Metabox now, since it comes with predefined colors so you don't have to worry about picking colors. I hope this doesn't limit us from using custom colors though. I changed the Fanon-stub to use Metabox, using custom colors, for example.
 * Customizing the border and background color isn't very convenient in Metabox. Since the hash sign (#) is preplaced in the template, we can only input the colors as in FFD700 instead of #FFD700 or gold. It's more common that way.
 * Adding an image now omits the "File:" as well as the square brackets. It's like above, but I find it fine as is.
 * -  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  17:26, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * The idea of the types for metabox is to give a definition to each color... so blue is a 'general information' template, green is an 'official/administrative' template, etc. The customizable background/border parameters are there just to ensure that it could be customized if it needed to be but most of the time it should just use one of the predefined types. That's really the main reason I chose to implement types in the first place, as I stated above.
 * As for the other points, those changes are largely a minor issue. The biggest obstacle will be adaptation, not because one way of doing it is necessarily more correct than another, but simply because it is different. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 18:56, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: At present, Metabox is in the midst of being rolled out to the various message templates on the wiki. You can see which templates are based on Metabox by viewing Category:Templates using Metabox. As for Nikel's suggestions... it may still be worth considering changing the syntax of the template. The longer we wait, the more work-intensive it would be to make a change, as it would likely involve using a bot to tweak the coding on each individual template or page that uses Metabox. However, a change would still be possible. Ultimately, I chose to implement the code as written because I felt it would be easier in the long run, but I may have failed to appreciate the familiarity with the style used by other templates (including Parthenon). At this point, I would support changing the syntax if others supported that position as well. Otherwise, I feel we should leave it as-is, if for no other reason than to avoid unnecessary headaches. What do you all think? --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 22:40, September 24, 2013 (UTC)