Template talk:Dome architecture

Style

I have changed the style to use the default. I see no reason why we need to be using a custom format. Frietjes (talk) 16:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It it a matter of taste, isn't it? I copied from Template:Celtic mythology and decided to use the color scheme from Portal:Architecture in part because I did not want it to be so bland. Thank you for discussing this, but doesn't WP:BRD suggest that the onus is on the one making the disputed change to establish a consensus for that change before reverting a revert? Unless there is a pressing reason beyond your personal preference to change it to the colorless scheme, I think it should go back the way it was. AmateurEditor (talk) 02:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

last time I checked no other templates in Category:Architecture templates used this color scheme, and per wp:deviations. Frietjes (talk) 17:37, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's the category you chose for this template (and I'm fine with that) but there's very little else in that category for comparison. I think a better set for comparison is the templates in Category:"Part of a series on" sidebar templates. I'm fine with following any standards, and I agree the color scheme I chose was unusual (and I'm not wedded to it) but I really don't like the total lack of color here. Use of color is common in other sidebar templates (including the Simpsons example given in wp:deviations) even if it is most often just the pale purple bars behind headers, but other colors are also used and photos contribute a lot, for example Template:History of Iraq, Template:Economics sidebar, Template:Zoroastrianism, and the most similar (and extreme) example I found: Template:Gnosticism. Maybe the black-and-white picture is the problem. I chose it because no one photo would be appropriate, but a collage might work. AmateurEditor (talk) 19:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]