The question mark icon is unclear and unnecessary, and the color scheme is bizarre. I don't see how this would fit in with the improved version of the other template, and it would seem to be rather redundant. —Centrx→talk • 03:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see some redundancy between this and the other template we've been working on. Honestly, I would completely drop the Article policies box on the right. It's already on the talk template, and you could then use this box in tandem with the new talk box once it's finished. I do like the icon. Icons have a way of grabbing our attention when plain text doesn't. About the icon, could you remove the white box surrounding the main image, and remove the rest of the white coloring next to the green circle, replacing it with the tan color from the main box. This would look more professional. I do like this template as a concept, but it needs some brushing up. Let me know if I can help. Veracious Reytalk • contribs • review me23:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, once you polish this baby up, I could introduce it on the Spider-Man 3 talk page as a test run. I think this template would work well there, as well as other films coming out soon. Heck, pick any number of action flicks this summer, then visit the Wiki articles, usually you find alot of conjecture and rumour mill type writing. This template might help stop some of that from the well intentioned Wikipedians. Veracious Reytalk • contribs • review me23:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good point on the redundency; I've removed the article policy box. The icon was intended to be a counter-point to {{Original research}}, but in the spirit of WP:BEANS, I've changed it to be a nice researchy-looking book. My only concern now is that the box has a lot of horizontal space on wide screens, but that's a universal problem with most talk boxes, and likely not an easily solvable one.
