FANDOM


  • Hello! I'm Isaac, and I'm representing FANDOM's Community Technical team. We help communities adopt to new technologies and features, like content portability. Narutopedia is a high priority for introducing Portable Infobox templates, which have a lot of benefits for your community; we've recently taken some time to develop some infrastructure (namely bridging high-performance Lua with SemanticMediaWiki) to make a serious performance upgrade that's also more simple to manage.

    Narutopedia experiences millions of pageviews per week, with 75% of those visits from mobile devices. Portable Infoboxes help your articles to be accessed from any device and the flow of your traffic is as important as it ever was. I'd like to reproduce as much as possible the look and feel of your desktop infoboxes in global CSS, and will update the Infobox templates themselves (initially as Drafts for you to approve or ask for changes to) so that they can be accessible on any current and future platform. Maintaining them if you want to make changes should be very simple, and we have extensive documentation on how to modify Portable Infoboxes in the help pages or on the Portability Hub. Whether you choose to go with Portable Infoboxes or not, the Lua functions will still improve your page performance without lots of nesting template code and functions; they are designed to eliminate calls to helper templates, so you'll see less reliance on calling the server for incremental processing.

    Improved mobile clarity is not the only reason why we'd like to introduce these; we're looking at all kinds of emerging devices. The Mercury skin and engine let us target all these devices, and the experience is centered around PIs as the focal point. The PIs also improve desktop performance, as the language is built for the server to produce them lightning fast. On mobile, the experience of infoboxes (when they aren't interpreted and stripped of other styling, as with non-portable code) goes from "looks fine" to "looks good". Mercury is another example of FANDOM tech that's going to be around for a while. It's constantly evolving, but the best benefits of new Mercury features will go to communities with portable code. Before you ask, customization of the Mercury skin is not something we're offering at this time, but if and when we do it will be first available for portable communities.

    Screenshot-naruto.wikia.com-2018.10.01-18-08-34.png Screenshot-naruto.wikia.com-2018.10.01-18-13-45.png Screenshot-naruto.wikia.com-2018.10.01-18-41-36.png Screenshot-naruto.wikia.com-2018.10.01-18-43-00.png

    For your review, I've created these first few templates and corresponding CSS (and of course, the Lua Modules). I did make some changes for readability and clarity, and easily visible data. I resized the width to be more in line with typical infoboxes encountered elsewhere, as we've researched and found it to be ideal. I am also working out some issues with {{Infobox/Naruto/Character}}, {{Infobox/Jutsu}}, and {{Infobox/Naruto/Team}}. That's why we've extensively tested these, after all: I want them to function perfectly both visibly and invisibly (with SMW). I intend to keep working on the remainder, but wanted to get your eyes on these to start with.

    My hope is to present additional proofs of concept for you to see that there's no loss of form or function, including your remaining infobox templates. Would your community consider approving them? I can do the coding and styling work myself, and save you from spending your valuable time. We would appreciate your go-ahead, but it is an incremental process and there are multiple stages where you can ask questions or for changes. We're expecting it may take a month or more to get full consensus. Please let me know. Thanks!

      Loading editor
    • >_>

      <_<

      I'm not very well versed in this part of the wiki (coding and display), but it looks good to me.

      And that kind makes me nervous lol. I'll hold off on my vote until someone more experienced with this takes a look. Looks promising though

        Loading editor
    • @FishTank, sorry to edit your post, but one of your images was linking to the wrong one, so I changed it to what was intended so users who had wanted to see larger versions of each image were not confused.

      As FANDOM already knows, we've been steadfast in wanting to maintain our SMW infoboxes over the portable infoboxes that FANDOM released years ago. We felt that, to be quite blunt, changing from SMW to portable infoboxes at the time would be a total degradation from what we currently had in nearly every way possible.

      However, this proposed amalgamation between SMW and Lua, from first glance, seems like a very nice compromise between maintaining the SMW functionality that we stand by, and the portability on the Mercury skin that FANDOM has been pushing on communities for a while.

      Again, given how stern we've been with keeping SMW here, I think the best case scenario in this would be us being able to preserve every function we currently have from SMW with little to no sacrifices, with it also being portable and upgraded by Lua. Nevertheless, I will admit, while I have experience in this area of the wiki, I am not a renown expert on it like say, User:UltimateSupreme. I'll observe from afar and hear opinions from him and others here who have similar experience and skill in this area more so than I after their inspections.

        Loading editor
    • WindStar7125 wrote: @FishTank, sorry to edit your post, but one of your images was linking to the wrong one, so I changed it to what was intended so users who had wanted to see larger versions of each image were not confused.

      No problem. Glad you caught it! 😀

      As FANDOM already knows, we've been steadfast in wanting to maintain our SMW infoboxes over the portable infoboxes that FANDOM released years ago. We felt that, to be quite blunt, changing from SMW to portable infoboxes at the time would be a total degradation from what we currently had in nearly every way possible.

      Understandable. And that's why we took our time making sure we got things right.

      However, this proposed amalgamation between SMW and Lua, from first glance, seems like a very nice compromise between maintaining the SMW functionality that we stand by, and the portability on the Mercury skin that FANDOM has been pushing on communities for a while.

      You can try the Drafts that are already developed on live articles and compare the SMW properties. I've tested on a variety of articles, so I'm eager to have you find any faults (though I don't think you will).

      Again, given how stern we've been with keeping SMW here, I think the best case scenario in this would be us being able to preserve every function we currently have from SMW with little to no sacrifices, with it also being portable and upgraded by Lua. Nevertheless, I will admit, while I have experience in this area of the wiki, I am not a renown expert on it like say, User:UltimateSupreme. I'll observe from afar and hear opinions from him and others here who have similar experience and skill in this area more so than I after their inspections.

      That's our best case scenario, too. While I did make some design changes for readability and usability, there should not be any SMW functions sacrificed.

        Loading editor
    • I have no issue viewing the infoboxes on mobile, and the current infoboxes are fine tbh. I don't see the reason to change them, and while there might be millions of page views on the wiki, the series as a whole is winding down (with only Boruto to keep it going). We don't see that many edits here so I don't think there's much reason to go around changing the entire wiki's infoboxes, since little gets edited.

      Looking at one of the example infoboxes via diffs on one of the articles, the new infoboxes extend down much further than our current ones (for clarity, I checked it on Hate Among the Uchihas: The Last of the Clan!). The current infobox stops just at the end of the "Trivia" section, but the new one leaves a large white space for no reason after Trivia, presumably because of the arbitrarily decided "width" based on supposed "research", which leaves little space for things to fit in a single line.

      If this was being proposed, say 5 years ago when the series was still going strong and the wiki getting daily editors, I would agree with the change, but right now, with the wiki mostly dead and most activity in the forums, I don't think updating infoboxes really has any benefit to the wiki as a whole: it only really benefits Wikia/Fandom in the end.

        Loading editor
    • The community receives a very healthy amount of traffic, and even if the original subject ends we expect it will still be an active community for years to come. Many of our communities experience active editing long past their expected expiry dates, and plenty of reading besides. Further, you do have daily editors, so we would disagree that the wiki is "mostly dead".

      "The current infoboxes are fine" is not a strong reason not to change. There are performance reasons, unrelated to mobile display, that are involved. Communities with features like Portable Infoboxes get the best of FANDOM's infrastructure and are the first to be able to try out new products that you may want. While it does benefit FANDOM, it doesn't only benefit FANDOM.

      Additionally, simplifying the templates to a FANDOM standard tech makes maintenance easier for changes even after this generation of leaders. Untangling the iBox system and all of the helper templates that have been set up drastically improves the comprehension of code, on this community and for anyone that wants to learn from it to replicate experiences elsewhere.

      The real question is: "If FANDOM is doing all the work of migration, what's the downside of switching over?"

      SuperSajuuk wrote: Looking at one of the example infoboxes via diffs on one of the articles, the new infoboxes extend down much further than our current ones (for clarity, I checked it on Hate Among the Uchihas: The Last of the Clan!). The current infobox stops just at the end of the "Trivia" section, but the new one leaves a large white space for no reason after Trivia, presumably because of the arbitrarily decided "width" based on supposed "research", which leaves little space for things to fit in a single line.

      The design can be altered via CSS, of course. They do extend further down as a result of a narrower box, which is indeed the recommended width based on UX research from our network and beyond. Plenty still fits on single lines, and is not cramped when it does not. The whitespace you mentioned is quite minimal for me, but your experience may vary based on any number of factors.

        Loading editor
    • FishTank
      FishTank removed this reply because:
      02:22, October 5, 2018
      This reply has been removed
    • Do we have any sort of consensus?

        Loading editor
    • AsianReaper wrote: Do we have any sort of consensus?

      You say it like we'll have a choice >___< Need I remind you this?

      That being said, I don't really mind these changes, though I do think that the actual look of the infoboxes could use a bit of refining, but maybe it's just me appreciating our more sleek and minimalistic approach a bit too much.

        Loading editor
    • AsianReaper wrote: Do we have any sort of consensus?

      Not yet. It's far too soon to have one, given these infoboxes need to be rigorously tested on live articles. Not to mention:

      FishTank wrote: We would appreciate your go-ahead, but it is an incremental process and there are multiple stages where you can ask questions or for changes. We're expecting it may take a month or more to get full consensus. Please let me know. Thanks!

      This is something that'll take time.

      BerserkerPhantom wrote: You say it like we'll have a choice >___< Need I remind you this?

      We do. If it's one thing FANDOM hasn't been forceful with, it's their portable infoboxes. Otherwise, they'd have changed our SMW ones years ago irrespective of the complaints we'd have thrown at them. Trust me, they've tried to add portable infoboxes to another wiki I've worked on, but they never got implemented there because of the reasons I provided as to why they wouldn't help much (btw, I like your Nightwing avatar, BerserkerPhantom).

      Just to be clear: if everything (or mostly everything) works on the SMW end, I'll say yes to the changes. But they still need to be tested on articles. Currently, I'm finding issues with the volume pages.

        Loading editor
    • WindStar7125 wrote: Currently, I'm finding issues with the volume pages.

      Excellent! I'm glad you found a potential bug. Feel free to mention these on my talk page, and I am happy to squash the bugs. I'll look into that one.

        Loading editor
    • FishTank wrote: Excellent! I'm glad you found a potential bug. Feel free to mention these on my talk page, and I am happy to squash the bugs. I'll look into that one.

      No problem. I'll test more and let you know. And I found a weird form issue as well.

      EDIT: Never mind, that "form issue" is related to the current SMW infobox, not the draft.

        Loading editor
    • It's been a couple weeks, and I feel like there's an agreement in principle that I can continue putting up some more drafts for testing, so long as they're feature-complete. In that respect, have you found any SMW issues with the Drafts, WindStar?

      Also, I'm reluctant to wait on UltimateSupreme to move forward (even if moving forward is in baby steps). His editing is fairly sporadic for the last year, and so I'd like to see other opinions as well. Perhaps this sort of change can help simplify things for the less technically-oriented.

        Loading editor
    • FishTank wrote: It's been a couple weeks, and I feel like there's an agreement in principle that I can continue putting up some more drafts for testing, so long as they're feature-complete. In that respect, have you found any SMW issues with the Drafts, WindStar?

      Also, I'm reluctant to wait on UltimateSupreme to move forward (even if moving forward is in baby steps). His editing is fairly sporadic for the last year, and so I'd like to see other opinions as well. Perhaps this sort of change can help simplify things for the less technically-oriented.

      UltimateSupreme, plus Dantman, are the two main editors of this wiki who know how to use the SMW templates and have the most knowledge with using them. He responds when he can, he shouldn't just be sidelined because he doesn't edit as much. Post on his talkpage (as well as Dantman's) and they'll step into the discussion when they're able to.

      Our wiki has always been technically orientated with the information displays. It should not be a goal of this change to make it easier for people to add false or unverified information to wiki articles and infoboxes.

        Loading editor
    • SuperSajuuk wrote:

      FishTank wrote: Perhaps this sort of change can help simplify things for the less technically-oriented.

      It should not be a goal of this change to make it easier for people to add false or unverified information to wiki articles and infoboxes.

      I believe you misunderstood what I meant: both the PIs and the existing classic infoboxes use the same methods for information entry in articles. The template coding itself would be simplified with PIs + Lua, and PIs are indeed simpler to understand (rather than the iBox system) for the less technically-oriented should changes or maintenance be required.

        Loading editor
    • FishTank wrote: It's been a couple weeks, and I feel like there's an agreement in principle that I can continue putting up some more drafts for testing, so long as they're feature-complete. In that respect, have you found any SMW issues with the Drafts, WindStar?

      Yes, I have. The proposed draft infobox for Tools removes the slideshow in the infobox. Ideally we'd like to keep those in the infoboxes that use slideshows along with maintaining tabbers in infoboxes that use them (such as character infoboxes). Not to mention in the draft, the "Name" sub-infobox listing the different names of the subject looks different from the current infoboxes, particularly the lack of appearance of the words "Kanji", "Rōmaji" and "Alternative names" in their respective parameters. I would think we'd like those to be formatted the same way you format the "Literal English" and "English anime" parameters in your draft for Tools.

      FishTank wrote: Also, I'm reluctant to wait on UltimateSupreme to move forward (even if moving forward is in baby steps). His editing is fairly sporadic for the last year, and so I'd like to see other opinions as well. Perhaps this sort of change can help simplify things for the less technically-oriented.

      I was aware that UltimateSupreme is busy and may not give a timely response, so my contingency plan for that from the beginning was to contact Dantman by email. Though UltimateSupreme did test the draft on a page here so I presumed he'd have responded by now. So I'll get Dantman, as he usually appears when he's contacted by email. Both of them have a more in-depth understanding of the infoboxes than I do. Even if I agree to them being implemented here given everything goes smoothly, either one of them can ensure that everything works more proficiently than I.

        Loading editor
    • WindStar7125 wrote:

      The proposed draft infobox for Tools removes the slideshow in the infobox. Ideally we'd like to keep those in the infoboxes that use slideshows along with maintaining tabbers in infoboxes that use them (such as character infoboxes). Not to mention in the draft, the "Name" sub-infobox listing the different names of the subject looks different from the current infoboxes, particularly the lack of appearance of the words "Kanji", "Rōmaji" and "Alternative names" in their respective parameters. I would think we'd like those to be formatted the same way you format the "Literal English" and "English anime" parameters in your draft for Tools.

      Those were intentional alterations.

      The elimination of the Infobox/Slideshow helper template is by design, as that's handled by Lua now and creates a tabber where appropriate. An actual slideshow that changes images is actually a readability and usability issue, and is not possible on mobile, regardless. Being able to focus on one image at a time and select an alternative is the preferred data thinking, and timed transitions between images were intentionally omitted from PI capabilities.

      The alternate showing of names also is clear data-delineation, as it is fairly apparent what the differences are in kanji and romaji and making labels for them is both redundant and considered oversimplified bad design. Marking them as Japanese is also unnecessary, as that's assumed. From a data-first and readability / usability perspective, placing them at the same level as the English title is both more appropriate and reads better. I understand that it's a change, but I hope that you will consider it is a change for good reason. I'd also like to consider consolidating both the English and Japanese titles above the image, for consistency.

        Loading editor
    • Note: as some of the templates with drafts were altered today, they may not have direct correlation until the drafts are also altered. I'll do that tomorrow.

        Loading editor
    • Dantman replied to me via email. In his words, he said he "[doesn't] really have any input. [He] made the base infobox system, but to [his] memory others expanded it beyond [his] knowledge. [He doesn't] know all the intricate details that need to be covered by a new implementation."

      He also noted that we should ensure that things like auto-populating of SMW data for other infoboxes still works.

      I'll try pinging UltimateSupreme again on his page, as I don't have his email address.

        Loading editor
    • It's been over a month since this post launched, and about two weeks since the last reply. I'm interpreting Dantman's response as "yes, so long as SMW works". UltimateSupreme gave a go-ahead in other internal communications when he was a part of Vanguard. Can we move ahead at this point?

        Loading editor
    • FishTank wrote: UltimateSupreme gave a go-ahead in other internal communications when he was a part of Vanguard.

      How recently was this?

        Loading editor
    • I haven't talked to UltimateSupreme directly in several months, but PIs have been part of the plan for over a year.

        Loading editor
    • I don't currently have the time to take a thorough look but they look good at a glance. As long as we can replicate all of the current features (mainly smw and forms related), I think we can move ahead with this

        Loading editor
    • Seelentau
      Seelentau removed this reply because:
      .
      16:21, November 13, 2018
      This reply has been removed
    • looks good to me

        Loading editor
    • At first glance, they look amazing, but when you pay attention, you can see the mess-ups and I understand it. I'll ask before editing now, so I don't mess anything up :)

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message