Template talk:Infobox Oxford college

This template was considered for deletion on 2014 November 15. The result of the discussion was "keep".

This template was considered for merging with Template:Infobox Cambridge college on 2014 November 29. The result of the discussion was "don't merge".

Shield

I must admit, I don't think the inclusion of the shield is an improvement across the board, the ones I've noticed also don't have transparency against the background colour of the box itself, which I find a minor irritation. In all cases I would prefer a section in the article with a picture of the shield and a note about why they are used. --Alf ^melmac 21:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. In a few cases where there isn't much said about the shield, the infobox is a fine place to tuck it away, but in other cases there's a bit of a story to go with it and it's a shame not to have the picture alongside.

And what exactly is the use of the "Latin Name" field? In all the cases I've seen the Latin name is simply a direct translation of the English - or it's not there at all and the effect is pretty ugly. What's worse, the fact that all fields are required means the template is unsuitable for some colleges (e.g. those that do not have both a JCR and an MCR or equivalent). Could some of the fields not be optional as in Template:Infobox School2, for example?

As a more radical solution, I'd suggest we switch Oxford college pages to use the more general Template:Oxbridge College Infobox as used on the Cambridge pages - this would cut out a little bit of "template bloat"! Of course, the Oxbridge infobox template might need some improvements first to make it suitable - at present it shares some of the problems with the Oxford one and brings in some of its own....

--Casper Gutman 07:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree about the shield. It's not a feature that adds to the infobox at all. Unless anyone rushes to its defence, therefore, I'll delete it. As to Latin names, I also feel they should be removed - they're not, by and large, of any interest.

As to combining it with the Oxbridge (i.e. - Cambridge) infobox, I'd be opposed. If we could make the MCR section optional, though, that would be an improvement.

--Lincolnite 20:21, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'd have to agree about the merge - I don't think it's a good idea but I will spring vigourously to the defence of the Shield and the Latin Name. College crests are a fundamental part of college identities (they're all over everything) and I think the purpose of an article's infobox should be to encapsulate the identity and potted description of the item referenced. As for the latin names well it's just a nice touch. Ok so you only hear them during matriculation and graduation but the proper, original latin names are often quite different to the common english names or even the full english names, see New College, Oxford for example. Just my two pence worth... AulaTPN 13:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom lines

I've adjusted the definition of the bottom two lines so that they line up in the middle properly. I *think* that this was the original intention. Please let me know if it breaks anything elsewhere. It makes Merton College, Oxford look better... Thruston 09:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map

There's been some discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject University of Oxford about the possibility of adding maps to the college pages. I wondered how people would feel about possibly adding these within the infobox as they I can't quite see how they'd fit elsewhere in the articles. I mocked up a view of one way it could look in my sandbox, for comments, but I'm not quite sure how the layout should look. Has anyone seen something similar in an infobox elsewhere? Casper Gutman 16:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tried adding a map; see Jesus for an example. I think the map looks pretty good, but I felt it needed some visual separation from the rest of the infobox so added some HRs either side. I realise that's a bit of a kludge -- perhaps a subdivided infobox like template:Infobox UK place might work better for colleges using all the map/coat of arms options.... Casper Gutman 16:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just added the map for SEH and I think it works excellently. Genius stuff Casper! AulaTPN 20:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

heading style

As it looked much better, I have lifted the styling of Template:Durham College Infobox and applied it to our one, obviously replacing the purple for Oxford navy. I'm fairly sure there are no syntax issues based on the pages I've checked, but feel free to revert it if there are any. DJR (T) 16:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The immediate issue can be eliminated by removing the automated "Oxford" section, which I shall do now. DJR (T) 17:03, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Many (most?)~~ A few of the colleges have been using the "Name" item for the usual common name of the college (e.g. "Jesus College") as used for the title of the infobox, and the "college_name" item for the full name of the college (e.g. "Jesus College in the University of Oxford of Queen Elizabeth's Foundation") which should not, I feel, be used for this purpose but should appear in the infobox where the college name is listed with the other info.

Before this edit should be reinstated I feel it will be necessary to ensure the college articles make consistent use of the items "name" and "college_name" which could be renamed to something more obvious (e.g. "common_name" and "full_name"). Casper Gutman 19:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, what was the particular issue that was solved by using the college_name in the heading? I'm all in favour of improving the look of the 'box, but unfortunately I don't have time to sort the name confusion right now.... Casper Gutman 19:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the template now has two name parameters. One, called simply "name" has the common name of the college and appears in the header of the infobox. The second, called "full_name" will be used in the body of the table if it exists. If not, the "name" parameter will be used.

Incidentally, I also got rid of some white space around the picture code in the infobox, as it was creating unsightly spaces in boxes with no picture (e.g. Campion Hall, Oxford). Casper Gutman 10:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good but the fonts smack you in the face a bit. I've tidied up the corners and reduced the header fonts - hopefully this looks better - and lightened the background of the infobox. I'll work on making the links underline in cream instead of blue and try to eliminate the erronious space at the top of the picturebox. AulaTPN 14:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the infobox is about the college, it makes sense for the college name to be larger, so I have changed that bit back. DJR (T) 19:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Complicated Titling

I have reverted User:Djr xi's removal of much of the linking in the infobox title. I think that's far too significant a change for someone to make unilaterally without some form of debate first. Can we discuss here the relative merits of the full title versus the proposed cut-down version? Personally I prefer the full title as I don't think it's overcomplicated from a visual sense and no more complicated code-wise than the rest of the template. Plus I think it provides links to valid, relevant information and highlights the important distinction between colleges and pph's. AulaTPN 08:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree there's much to be said for having the College and Hall links there, and I almost reverted this edit myself. As stated above it highlights the differences between the two and makes those articles visible. It's important people understand what the Colleges and Halls are and their roles within the university, as evidenced by parts of the extensive discussion here. These links seem to me a useful way of ensuring all the relevant articles have links to these at the top. Perhaps I should have chosen the link colour to be further from white, to make it more obvious they're links. Casper Gutman 08:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Must admit, after having to explain Oxford University Colleges and Oxford University to someone as to why that info was missing from the FA Oriel College, I think they have great value.--Alf ^melmac 12:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the colour used for the text of the three links to something a little less pale -- hopefully should be more obvious they're links now! I tried to model the colour on the gold used in the university logo (e.g. at http://www.ox.ac.uk/publicaffairs/crests/) but found that exact shade looked a bit dark so lightened it up a bit. Casper Gutman 15:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah reversion was fair enough. My thinking was that the title of the infobox should resemble the standard college title as much as possible, and colleges are known as Example College, Oxford. However, this is not that crucial, and with the links now coloured I'm quite happy with what has been done. DJR (T) 02:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additions

Visitor

As all colleges have a Visitor, can we please have a line for that? Andrew Yong (talk) 10:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that, as the Oxford use of the term "Visitor" is not one every reader will be familiar with, it would be good if there was an obvious place the word could be linked to that would describe what it meant. For example, an "Oxford College Visitors" subheading in the article Visitor, describing what the role is. I'd be interested to know how significant the visitors are now that their powers to resolve student complaints have been removed. Any thoughts? Casper Gutman (talk • contributions) 10:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article Visitor explains the role adequately, although there might be room for a table or a separate article listing who the various college visitors are. I imagine that visitors are still responsible for adjudicating disputes that do not involve students, e.g. ones involving staff. Andrew Yong (talk) 13:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Founder

Not always prominent in the lead and a number of articles have yet to have a coherent history section to check the lead lines for the person(s) concerned.--Alf ^melmac 22:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External Links - Boatclub?

I don't understand why the boatclub website is included in the external links part of the infobox. Is it really that important? More important than the JCR/MCR websites, which are not included in the infobox? Hadrian89 (talk) 17:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uniformly coloured headings

Over at the other place’s infobox talkpage, I suggested to style the top bits of all college infoboxes the same, perhaps using a dark blue background and white text. This would make the Oxbridge infoboxes more recognisable as their style would be more consistent, compared to the widely varying looks as for example in the Jesus, Merton and New College articles. Charlie A. suggested to ask here as well, as he modelled the Cambridge infobox after this one here. — Richie 21:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would not be opposed to such a change (my 2p) Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:12, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would. Seems like a change for change's sake to me? It doesn't improve the clarity, legibility or usability of the pages or the template and I don't see any pressing need for rigid uniformity across all the colleges? Let's not forget that Oxford, and I think moreso than Cambridge, is effectively a gestalt entity cobbled together from disparate institutions, each with its own identity which is still very strongly expressed within the university as a whole. When Cambridge was founded they already had a template to follow and were establishing a specific, collegiate university whereas Oxford was an organic process. I think it'd be a shame as we'd lose some of the individual character of each entity. Aula ^TPN 23:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note, there is an option to specify the 'link_colour' which can help with the readability of the text in the top section. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:59, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Like AulaTPN, I don't see a problem either with the different colleges having different colours for their infoboxes. You could always raise this at WP:OXFORD to see whether anyone else there has a view (a few more people might have that on their watchlist). Bencherlite ^Talk 08:02, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do realise that all colleges have their very own identity, but I think that the scarves and college crests in the infoboxes are sufficient to express this. Just taking away the colours of the top bit in the infobox is not going to deprive the colleges of their identity. I merely suggest a consistent look for the infobox template, just like the college articles that have a consistent style, using the very same fonts families and sizes. Template:Infobox settlement, for instance, is used in over 10,000 individual articles, without allowing any individual styles. This is the kind of consistency I was suggesting. — Richie 16:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with link colours

A revision in July 2015 changed the rendering of links from light orange to deep blue. This made the links hard to see when displayed against the dark colours as used in most of the college infobox headings (see example). The heading colours seem to be derived from the predominant colours of their scarves, and it's not for me to decide whether having custom heading colours is more important than maintaining standard link colours. As the status quo is generally illegible I've boldly set the heading and links colors back to their inherited values pending a consensus that is legible for all possible college primary colours. There's a similar issue with Template:Infobox Cambridge college. - Pointillist (talk) 00:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A possible compromise is to maintain the links in the standard colours but use the primary colour background for the college name. I've implemented this as a test (diff) and it seems to be working correctly for a variety of colleges (screenshots below). I propose to leave it in this state for others to review, improve or revert as the case may be. - Pointillist (talk) 11:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise solution

The change had no effect on the colour for me. As far as I can see this only changed the code to a html5 compatible format, the colour is still orange. I've gone and checked and it's fine for me in safari, Firefox and chrome. I'm not a html5 expert so am not sure why this effects you. Otherwise, the compromise looks ok Aloneinthewild (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's very interesting. As you say, there's nothing glaringly wrong with the July 2015 update. How do you feel about the contrasting link effects created by the Cambridge college template, e.g. at Selwyn, Clare Hall, St Catharine's, Robinson, and Christ's etc? I'm happy to be reverted if you think I acted too hastily: the compromise simply seemed safer than experimenting with so many different scarf colours across a range of browsers and wikipedia skins. - Pointillist (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't have this page "watched" so I only just have seen your reply. I think your solution is best and you're right that its safer, if it affects you then it probably affects other people. Maybe I can ping @WOSlinker: and see what he thinks is the cause Aloneinthewild (talk) 23:17, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've identified the most proximate cause: I had a reset in my css that forces spans to inherit their color, background-color and border-style. That's not normally an issue – it's a known technique for ensuring good contrast and this is the first time I've seen it fail since I set it up in October 2013 – but the Oxford and Cambridge templates had been overriding the background-colors and link colors at different CSS selector specificities. The wider question is whether it is desirable to render infobox wiki-links in different colors for different colleges, with the output determined by the college scarf colors e.g. like Selwyn College, Cambridge. I don't think it is, though I wouldn't claim any authority or missionary zeal in this area. - Pointillist (talk) 00:02, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]