Template talk:Eons graphical timeline

Untitled post

Scale is broken. It is offset down beginning between -500 and -1000. Please fix anybody that

Fixed in {{Scalemarkers}} just added 'white-space:nowrap' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.218.166.31 (talk) 17:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Sources, explaination

This timeline would require sources, and an explaination of the meaning of the two columns. I am concerned that it will be used in articles without adequate explaination or sources. --Jc3s5h (talk) 02:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Template scaling

@Hike395: Seems your sqrt scaling version may work better here than the original version - ( and better here than for the earlier effort at { {Life timeline}} ) - nonetheless - seems the "uncrunch" in this graph at recent time periods (graph top) may be associated instead with a "crunch" of sorts at the later time periods (graph bottom) - wondering if your newer sqrt scaling version and the original linear scaling version could both be available to Wikipedia editors (rather than one or the other exclusively) so that editors may choose between the two versions in order to best support the particular content in their article(s) - this may require one template name for the linear version and a separate different name for the other (sqrt) version - if so, this may first require some discussion and agreement among editors I would think - in any case - thank you for your efforts with this - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

@Drbogdan: Both versions are available to Wikipedia editors: there is a parameter |scaling= to {{Graphical timeline}} that I haven't yet documented. When |scaling=linear, you get the original graphical timeline with linear time steps. When |scaling=sqrt, you get this sqrt scaling that seems to work well for the entire geological time span (IMO). If the consensus is to not use sqrt, we can simply drop the |scaling=sqrt and it will return to normal.

If you're finding that sqrt squashes old thing too much and stretches new things too much, I can make the mapping have a parameter .. something like "pow:0.5", and we can try out "pow:0.7" and see if it's better.

Re: Reverting {{Life timeline}}, I'll respond there. I've suddenly become quite busy IRL, so I wanted to wait a few days to respond. My goal was to satisfy the multiple editors who objected to the small fonts, while retaining all of the good material in that template. But let's discuss how to do that in a few days, since I don't think it's easy to accomplish. — hike395 (talk) 04:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Later: Drbogdan, please see Template:Eons graphical timeline/sandbox. That has a x^0.75 scaling. Do you think that is better (less squashed at the bottom) ? — hike395 (talk) 04:44, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

@Hike395: Thank you for your reply and comments - yes - seems the "0.75" scaling may present a better display image for this particular {{Eons graphical timeline}} template imo atm - nonetheless - my main concern at the moment with scaling, other than linear, is one of presenting material with the best understanding for most viewers - with this template and, especially, with the {{Life timeline}} template as well - to me, the less technical the presentation, the better the understanding of the material for most viewers - in "wording" - and in "scaling" (linear is much better understood by most imo) as well - non-linear time scaling, besides being a somewhat distorted view of things, is not easily understood even by technical students (including engineer-types) based on my university lecturing experiences - linear scaling is much, much better understood by most - also - as I've noted earlier with a similar consideration => IF Possible, the best wording(s) for the "{{Nature timeline}}" (as well as the "{{Life timeline}}" and the "{{Human timeline}}") may be wordings as non-technical and as brief as possible - more detail re the event may be found at associated wikilinks - this may make the "{{Nature timeline}}" more accessible and useful to the average reader - after all => "Readability of Wikipedia Articles" (BEST? => Score of 60/"9th grade/14yo" level) - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

References