Template talk:Oasis

Wording
I'd go all the way, and write "This page looks better with [ Monobook]. It needs to be edited to look good with the default skin as well."

I don't think we should claim that "key editors are aware of this issue"; this might not be true, and it discourages people from helping out themselves. -- ◄mendel► 18:23, October 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't love the current phrasing. However, I think that the suggested alternative makes the tag less useful.


 * This tag isn't specific to Monobook/Oasis: (a) there's no monobook available for IPs (so not helpful to mention it to them) and (b) as written, it can be used if something happens to screw up monobook, too.
 * The tag, as written, isn't even specific to a skin issue.
 * If the problem can be resolved by anyone, then anyone will fix it; no tag will be applied.
 * If the problem needs a more technical eye, then putting the tag on it alerts key editors by definition.
 * If the problem is an Oasis/Monobook disparity one, I doubt many people would be able to fix it &mdash; I honestly have no idea how to go about making the page look good in Oasis and Monobook both without changes to the style sheets. So, in many cases, the average person should be discouraged from attempting to repair.


 * If the problem is specific to a page, I would use instead of . This tag is meant to be a completely neutral way of identifying pages that look bad b/c of systemic issues and asking for patience. &mdash;Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 18:40, October 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think this should be specific to Oasis. What else would it be used for?  And the Oasis problem is widespread enough that it deserves its own notice.
 * Of course IPs can't use Monobook directly, but mendel's link takes care of that. Also, the notice should mention that "If you register, then you can select Monobook as your default skin for all pages and you won't see any more of these display issues."  We should want to inform users about their options for working around the issue, instead of saying "Yeah, this is borked and there's nothing you can do about it, so just have a nice day."  &mdash;Dr Ishmael Diablo_the_chicken.gif 19:35, October 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * TEF, the current wording is "due to recent technical changes." I thought you were referring to the fixed-width right-sidebar issues of Oasis; I understood the tag to specifically be for that. "Including and especially, the upcoming Oasis", you described it on the CP talk.
 * My version is helpful because anyone (even anons) can click the link and see the page in a layout that's likely to be better (not squished, not obscured by the sidebar etc.).
 * "If the problem can be resolved by anyone, then anyone will fix it" -- all of these problems can be resolved by anyone. I wouldn't presume the wikicode skills our "non-key" contributors have; I know thatit's easier to tag a page so I can get to it later (or not at all) than to actually fix, and it's also easier to work my way through a category than it is to hunt these pages down, so I don't assume that the people who notice teh problem are going to be the ones who fix it even if they could.
 * We have no "key" editors. There are no keys. All editors are equal, barring ability. Please don't suggest otherwise.
 * There's an easy way to find out if a problem is specific to a page with the link: you click on it, and if the layout still sucks, use a cleanup tag instead. -- ◄mendel► 21:18, October 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Mendel's last sentence is the key: if this template ""isn't even specific to a skin issue"", then it's redundant with the cleanup tag. This template needs to be more specific than that in order for its usage to be meaningful.
 * In fact, given its current "generic" state, and assuming I'm a registered user browsing with Monobook, I would be confused if I saw this on a page. "The layout looks fine to me, what's that tag doing here?  De-tagging, no problem with layout."  Another reason why it needs to be more specific.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael Diablo_the_chicken.gif 21:35, October 18, 2010 (UTC)