Template talk:Nanotechnology

This is a navbox for use in articles relating to Nanotechnology. The other nanotech navboxes are Template:Nanomat and Template:MolecNano. Antony-22 17:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

There is now a footer alternative to this sidebar, Template:Nanotech2. The sidebar should be used for direct subarticles of the main Nanotechnology article; for other articles either the sidebar or footer may be used. Antony-22 09:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

For a complete list of nanotech navboxes, see User:Antony-22/Navboxes. Antony-22 08:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Design change

This navbox had become quite cluttered and somewhat drab... I would like to replace it with the navbox at left. I think it would help to only list the top few articles in each subfield, and bring back the individual navboxes for each subfield. LEt me know what you think. Antony-22 (talk) 01:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It's been about a week, so I will make the change shortly. Antony-22 18:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The inherent direction of nanoscience and nanotechnology (nanoionics) was introduced. (Despotuli (talk) 07:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC))

With the recent publication of the Technology Roadmap for Productive Nanosystems, it makes sense to add "productive nanosystems" as a sub-topic under Molecular Nanotechnology. -- WillWare (talk) 16:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Recent move/update

Per the note at the top of the template page, I hope today's update isn't considered "major"! Sardanaphalus (talk) 23:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

PS For the record, the color lightness/contrast for the backgrounds used in this and similar templates in Category:Nanotechnology templates doesn't work too well here; the text can be difficult to read.

Colour update

The template said to make a note here before making changes, so here it is. I've modified the colours just a little bit, hope you guys don't mind. The previous darker green colour made the blue links hard to read for people with certain visual impairments. I've just lightened it up a little. _{TIM KLOSKE|TALK} 22:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Double column render

Please stop putting 2 of style="background:" at the beginning. This is causing double rendering problem which is not necessary. --75.154.186.241 (talk) 21:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

New Design

Hi All I've done this new design and hoping to replace the old one. Please have your say.. NëŧΜǒńğer^{Peace Talks} 13:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Part of a series on Nanotechnology Nanomaterials Fullerene · Carbon Nanotubes Nanoparticles Nanomedicine Nanotoxicology · Nanosensor Molecular self-assembly Self-assembled monolayer Supramolecular assembly DNA nanotechnology Nanoelectronics Molecular electronics · Nanocircuitry Nanolithography  · Nanoionics Scanning probe microscopy Atomic force microscope Scanning tunneling microscope Molecular nanotechnology Molecular assembler · Nanorobotics Mechanosynthesis See also History · Implications Applications · Regulation Organizations · Popular culture List of Topics Nanotechnology Portal

I've made some edits - the direct subarticles belong at the top, and I've made the links black instead of grey so that they don't seem washed-out against the dark green. I think the color scheme still needs some work; the white boxes in the dark green is a bit too stark a contrast. I also think that reducing the text size makes it harder to read and it should be increased back to what it is in the current navbox.

Lastly, and this is not something I'm an expert on, I notice you've constructed this as a table rather than starting from the generic navbox template. I'm not sure if this is an issue but you might want to look into the guidelines on that.

Antony-22 (talk) 02:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. Any particular reason why the subarticles belong in the top? I have no issues with it but like to know why top :-). I've seen few navboxes which are developed like this. I think this method is better as we dont have to depend on another template and should render much faster (anyway speed is insignificant and did not influence my decision). I've reduced the text size slightly so that it blends in with the articles without making the navbox so prominent. And also I have followed the font sizes on some of the more widely used navboxes and it is almost the size of the text on the article so I dont think that this is a issue. Since you seem to be the only person editing these articles these days I am going ahead with the change. Please feel free to discuss any changes required. Thanks again NëŧΜǒńğer^{Peace Talks} 11:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I've made some more tweaks and I think the new design has come out quite well. For consistency we should also redo the other nanotech navboxes (Template:ImpNano, Template:Nanomat, Template:Nanoelec, Template:MolecNano) to conform with the new design. It should be easy - we just need to take this navbox and change the colors and the text. Do you want to split up those navboxes so that each of us works on two? Thanks! Antony-22 (talk) 22:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I have some specimens here for your review. Antony-22 (talk) 04:41, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Antony sorry for not responding to your earlier request.. I never looked at this talk page after the last entry. Anyway the changes you have done look great. NëŧΜǒńğer^{Peace Talks} 19:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Footer template

As a result of discussion in a semi-related thread at WT:PHYS, I've put together a footer-style navigation template containing the same links as this template (template:nanotech footer). If you feel it would be useful, by all means use it. If not, don't. I'm not attempting to step on anyone's toes; just offering it as an additional tool. I've pointed the WT:PHYS crowd here for discussion re. templates; alternatively, nanotechnology editors can feel free to start a thread over there (or anywhere else appropriate; just leave a link so that interested editors can find it). --Christopher Thomas (talk) 07:56, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I just became aware of this recently. There was actually a footer template made a long time ago at Template:Nanotechnology subfields, as a result of this discussion. I rather like the new version, though, so I've redirected the old version to the new one. Antony-22 (talk) 04:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Font Change

The Serif Font on the table didn't fit with the traditional Wikipedia template. I used "Arial" as a replacement for the Palatino font. Questions and Concerns can be posted on my talk page. Rifasj123 (talk) 03:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)