Template talk:Wikipedia principles

Created per discussion at Wikipedia talk:Simplified Ruleset#Guidelines Box Template, and above. --Quiddity 21:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two-level header palettes

What do you think about two-level header palettes for tables like this? See test example. [1] They could be incorporated into color schemes with high-level pages like those shown at User:Rfrisbie/Palettes. Rfrisbie^talk 17:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subjectively, I like it. However, that medium blue might be too low contrast with the black text for some people to read the title? There's a "test this page for color blindness accessibility" link somewhere, but I can't find it right now. --Quiddity 18:34, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Color blindness, good morning! ;)

colorfilter.wickline.org Wow! Useful looking, will link.

The contrast seems fine, I'd say go for it. (Although, in a different mood, I might argue that it isnt minimalist enough, and that we shouldn't be promoting bold colour usage too much. :\ But I'm an overly-cautionary worrier ;) --Quiddity 23:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe let's try it out, and see what the response is. --Quiddity 04:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another approach [2] that uses the styles for Wikipedia:Contents. The advantage to going "lighter" for two-level headers is that the top header can remain the same as for one-level headers. A change probably needed for templates like this is the lighter level seems to need borders to set it off from the main background. What do you think? Rfrisbie^talk 17:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yah, even better, higher contrast and less visually arresting. :) --Quiddity 18:07, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it up to you all what you want to do with this group of templates. :-) Rfrisbie^talk 18:48, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links to confusing "Principles" page

The template links to the Principles page which, as a newcomer, I unfortunately find rather confusing and not providing much insight. I have left a more verbose description of my concerns on the corresponding talk page. Depending on the appropriate course of action, the link should be removed or replaced. I appreciate any feedback or guidance on how to proceed. CSMProject (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]