Template talk:SMRT infobox colour

Format changes

Hey @MiltonLibraryAssistant:, I noticed you have been tinkering around with the infobox colour template and would like to ask: why the new format? Personally, the infobox design looks out of place, given our Land Transport Authority signages look nothing like what you are doing, and the previous vertical formatting aligned to at least what LTA has done before. If you plan to make any further changes, at least make it similar to the new signages. I wished you have seeked consensus with a few other editors who regularly edits the station pages.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to change it back. I was just experimenting with a neater layout, given that the previous one felt a little too compact. You are right I should have gotten a consensus first. MiltonLibraryAssistant (talk) 22:25, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it. I personally find your new layout better than the previous one, it's always been due a refresh. ZKang123, you don't hold exclusivity over articles relating to the Singapore MRT. 113.147.90.71 (talk) 04:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't. But questions would be raised on the quality and format if I were to rewrite and submit articles on the Good Article or Featured Article stage.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

For me, both formats are fine. A consensus definitely should've been sought before the change though. I'll let it stay as it is for now, and if there's opposition we'll cross the bridge when we come to it. S5A-0043🚎^{(Leave a message here)} 05:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep the former or change?

I decided to open another discussion whether to keep the previous format, or change to the new style.

My thoughts are these: there's simply no reason for the new change. The new style looks out of place and doesn't resemble anything LTA does. However, some people might want the new style.

So thoughts? Keep the new one, revert to the old one, or make an entirely new one?--ZKang123 (talk) 12:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

The new one looks much more visually appealing in my opinion. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 15:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I'd lean toward restoring the old format, since I think putting the English name and the station code on different lines would help readability, as opposed to the current version. However, it seems like on some signage, the station code is to the left of the station name (e.g. File:Choa Chu Kang MRT concourse.jpg), while on other signage, the station code is to the right (e.g. File:NS4 BP1 Choa Chu Kang Exit A 1.jpg). – Epicgenius (talk) 15:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Station codes on the platform signages (the concourse file), as far as I recall, is always on the left of the station names, both the old format (same concourse file) and the new one (here). Exits do appear to be mixed, but newer stations like Orchard (TEL), Punggol Coast and Marine Parade all keep to the left, so maybe that's the new standard. I don't know how the older stations pick their left and right though (Sengkang's old signs are on the left too). S5A-0043🚎^{(Leave a message here)} 05:27, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

The newer format is a refreshing change thanks to the work by MiltonLibraryAssistant (talk · contribs) and as XtraJovial (talk · contribs) pointed out, it is much more visually appealing. I don't think whatever LTA does has any relevance on how station names, numbers or other similar things should be formatted on Wikipedia. LTA and Wikipedia has no official affiliation. Many other rapid transit systems around the world that are reflected on Wikipedia also does not conform to the "official" standards as used by their responsible transport government body and the Singapore MRT is no exception to this. It's also worth mentioning that LTA themselves are generally inconsistent with their "official" formatting as stated by other users here. 42.114.112.153 (talk) 04:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

FWIW, I like the new layout. I do not necessarily think it needs to resemble what LTA does, but I have no strong opinions if we should keep or revert. - DCvibes529 ^talk 00:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

The old layout has a higher readability, due to sequential order from top to bottom making reading easier instead of the new format while information is from left to right then top to bottom and then left to right again. The new format gives emphasis to the English name while if not mistaken, the 3 languages are all official names of the stations (as well as numerous government related buildings).

While the new format is cleaner in terms of the lines layout (3 colours in a single line), it does look sleeker. I am not familiar with the general infobox for train station but it seems to be a repetition of colours/information with the station code already encoded in the same colours. Maybe we can do the old format and remove the train lines below.

While there is no need to follow what the signs are shown in real life (especially due to copyrights issues), following closely will help in readers associate the article with the actual station. Due to different operators and their preferences, signage inside stations by different operator will differ but we will need to standardise here in Wikipedia. ~ JASWE (talk) 02:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

We should consider removing the lines at the bottom entirely, since, as you've mentioned, they're just a repetition of the station code colours. Any objections or other suggestions? MiltonLibraryAssistant (talk) 02:00, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

I think we can always find a middle ground or try to think of ways to improve, or optimise the design and readability of the current layout. The general consensus is that there is no need for the template to follow the design of the IRL station signs. If we use center alignment, we could put the station code to the left of the English name, and have the names in other languages below. MiltonLibraryAssistant (talk) 02:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

The current station signs above platform screen doors place both the Chinese and Tamil station names under the English name, however I don't think that that's feasible as it might compromise readability, + some stations also have separate Malay names. It might look ugly if a space is the only thing separating station names in different languages on the same line. So I suggest keeping them on different lines. Some signs at Mountbatten station display the English name to the right of the station code, with the Chinese and Tamil names aligned to the left edge of the English name. This means that there's a lot of empty space under the station code. I don't mind emulating the designs of "official" LTA signages but ultimately I'm more concerned with the neatness and readability of the template. MiltonLibraryAssistant (talk) 02:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Personally I still prefer the older version as JAWSE said about readability. The new style seems to me as an attempt to look more "visually appealing" but it's just change for change sake. Like there were no problems with the former format, so it's like: if it isn't broke don't fix it. Fundamentally, I don't appreciate attempts by railfans to play around with Wikipedia, as there are MOS standards to uphold. I might sound gatekeepy, but I'm ensuring some standards here so no other reviewer would come to me and ask why so and so is like that.

But if people do really want to change, I think shift the station code on the right and align it on the middle and/or make it larger, perhaps like this. Given the recent announcement of DE1, I think it makes sense to have the station code to be prominent.

P.S. @Epicgenius: On the station codes being on the left, it was due to a brief time when a batch of signages included the exit letter on the right side, and perhaps not to clutter all the icons on the right, they shifted the station code on the left. But a majority of signages have the station code on the right.--ZKang123 (talk) 10:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

"Fundamentally, I don't appreciate attempts by railfans to play around with Wikipedia" -- Come on, you don't see the irony in this statement? "but I'm ensuring some standards here" Really? That's quite disappointingly arrogant of you. 211.107.6.211 (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Personally, the new style looks pretty cool, so the new one brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 03:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)