Template:Cautionbox
[edit]
- Don't we already have the Warning box for these kind of messages? --(WT-en) globe-trotter 14:44, 25 July 2011 (EDT)
- Warningbox is for dangers to life and limb; it's been felt that it should be reserved for those uses due to the bright red coloring and forceful stop sign. (WT-en) LtPowers 21:00, 25 July 2011 (EDT)
Header
[edit]- Maybe consider using the Header "Caution" rather than "NOTE". (WT-en) felix 01:54, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
 Caution: {{{1}}} |
- Hi, Felix, I moved your comment because where you had it placed, your comment would show up every time this template was transcluded! I appreciate your suggestion, but I think "Note" is more flexible, allowing this template to be used for more purposes than a "Caution" message would. That said, it would be simple to include a parameter that would allow someone to change the bolded text to "Caution" or anything else. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:49, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
- I remember a discussion ages ago where the expression "Note:" was highly frowned upon. I think the leader in the frowniness stakes was Jani. In this case though it seems appropriate enough. However, do we really need this box at all when we have infobox for information and warning for warnings? --(WT-en) Burmesedays 09:27, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
- Thanks for moving my comment across, to be honest I did not even notice I was writing on the template page, must have been a bit sleepy. I am concerned that "Note' will encourage an outbreak of subjective commentary in an article, where as "Caution" is more direct to the point and qualifies the potential content. We must also consider if a perceived requirement is drawn more from an inappropriate use of the Warning template for content that is more appropriate to an {{infobox}}. I have edited more than a few {{Warningbox}} that are describing things entirely non-life threatening or are in the realm of Kapitan very Obvious. There may be a place n some article for something that is not as profound as a {{Warningbox}}, but still requires some strength in emphasis. I think it needs some more discussion and input and that possibly should include a review of the overuse or inappropriate use of the {{Warningbox}} template, maybe the flexible parameter proposed above is a good idea. -- (WT-en) felix 12:12, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
- I think most people have learned not to overuse Warningbox, but a lot of people have taken to Disclaimerbox as an alternative. Infoboxes are fine, but they are quite properly sidebars -- they shouldn't be used for important information, more for tangential information that is interesting but not critical. (WT-en) LtPowers 13:00, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
- Thanks for moving my comment across, to be honest I did not even notice I was writing on the template page, must have been a bit sleepy. I am concerned that "Note' will encourage an outbreak of subjective commentary in an article, where as "Caution" is more direct to the point and qualifies the potential content. We must also consider if a perceived requirement is drawn more from an inappropriate use of the Warning template for content that is more appropriate to an {{infobox}}. I have edited more than a few {{Warningbox}} that are describing things entirely non-life threatening or are in the realm of Kapitan very Obvious. There may be a place n some article for something that is not as profound as a {{Warningbox}}, but still requires some strength in emphasis. I think it needs some more discussion and input and that possibly should include a review of the overuse or inappropriate use of the {{Warningbox}} template, maybe the flexible parameter proposed above is a good idea. -- (WT-en) felix 12:12, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
- Agree with LtPowers that we have been missing a box that could be used for this kind of information. The infobox has mostly been used for "fun facts", using them for this kind of caution would be confusing. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:47, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
Updates
[edit]I've parametrized the bolded text so you can change it (but if you don't specify it, it'll default to "NOTE"):
|
Achtung!: Alles turisten und nonteknischen Lookenpeepers! |
|
|
Note: This is a notice that uses the default boldtext. |
I've also updated the instructional text to clarify desired and undesired uses.
Thoughts? (WT-en) LtPowers 11:18, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
PDF rendering ... cautionbox missing
[edit]Hi there, I don't know if this was intended, but when downloading an article as PDF, the cautionbox content is gone. This is probably not intended because also as part of a pdf, the cautionbox should be visible, shouldn't it? Can we correct this somehow, also for the other boxes? Ceever (talk) 18:18, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
HEADING
[edit]ISN'T IT TIME WE CHANGE THE HEADING IN THE BOX FROM NOTE TO Note?
WV:Capitalization asks us not to type all in caps because it is annoying and unnecessary. "Note" is already in boldface and will get the readers' attention; putting it all on caps is overkill. Ground Zero (talk) 14:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
- In favour. Ceever (talk) 16:46, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Date last updated
[edit]I propose that the date last updated be added to the caution box template like on the Template:Warningbox. This will help us know when to check to see if the caution still applies. Any objections? Ground Zero (talk) 11:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Seems a no-brainer to me.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Id been unofficially adding lasedit params on stuff related to a certain matter in the news.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:25, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support, definitely! Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
I've tried to fix this by copying code from the warning box template, but I keep getting errors. Does anyone have have the programming skills for this? Ground Zero (talk) 12:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- I've made this change. I followed the same pattern used for Template:Warningbox to create maintenance categories, but that code can be removed if people don't feel it makes sense for this template. If that's something to be kept, the following categories should be created and modeled after the corresponding warningbox categories:
- Category:Has caution box (I plunged forward and created this already).
- Category:Has caution box with no date
- Category:Has caution box with out of date warning
- -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Links to sources for more information
[edit]Template:warningbox allows external links to be added to the box to link to government travel advisories. This helps the reader access more detailed information, and it assists editors in updating the warning boxes.
As cautionboxes are being used in many articles for information about COVID-19, it would be useful to have links displayed to local or national health agencies. Are there any objections to adding this to the template? (And is anyone able to do so? Ground Zero (talk) 17:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- I wonder if it would be worth creating a designated Template:COVID-19 box. That would probably make it easier to keep track of which articles have COVID-19 information and keep the information up to date. —Granger (talk · contribs) 07:57, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
- I would agree with that. Ground Zero (talk) 15:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
I will ask my original question again. Is there support for allowing external links so that readers can get detailed information? For example, I downgraded the warning at Cabinda to a caution because the danger there is not as great, but now the links are gone. Ground Zero (talk) 16:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- To be clear, warningboxes allow external links but cautionboxes don't. I am proposing to allow external links in cautionboxes. Ground Zero (talk) 19:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- I think that links should be allowed, but probably not just the government travel advisories. If the local authorities provide reliable and updated information in English, then that is often preferable to something written by civil servants in a country 1000 miles away. External links were often used in Covid-19 boxes, butt were just added as links in the paragraph text. AlasdairW (talk) 08:10, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Links should be allowed and in the same format as the warningbox. Also support links beyond just travel advisories. This template is underused. Strongly support. Brycehughes (talk) 15:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- I think that links should be allowed, but probably not just the government travel advisories. If the local authorities provide reliable and updated information in English, then that is often preferable to something written by civil servants in a country 1000 miles away. External links were often used in Covid-19 boxes, butt were just added as links in the paragraph text. AlasdairW (talk) 08:10, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
I have added this to the template. Michoacan is an example of an article where this is in use. Per the comments above, the template documentation refers to "Travel advisories", rather than "Government travel advisories" as in the Warningbox template. Ground Zero (talk) 20:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Use precise dates in lastupdated field
[edit]On these boxes and on warningboxes, the last updated field only shows the month and the year. For most stuff on our website, this is sufficient to demonstrate something is up-to-date, but hazards and transport disruption can change very fast. I propose modifying the template to display the full lastedit date, e.g. 1 Apr 2022.
Please leave your thoughts on Template talk:Warningbox#Use precise dates in lastupdated field. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Support Ground Zero (talk) 12:07, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Done.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
park shutdowns
[edit]
Is there a template available to add to public locations that may be shut down and closed to the public due to exceeding their visitor capacity for the upcoming October 2023 Annular Solar Eclipse? I just heard back from Chaco Culture National Historical Park and there is a possibility that the park will be closed to visitors due to the extreme number of vehicles that are expected to arrive on the day of the eclipse (much more than the park can handle). I remember reading about similar problems for the August 2017 Total Solar Eclipse (see links below). October 2023 might be even worse as what are likely going to be millions of people from Los Angeles to New York City all traveling to the eclipse path in order to witness the Annular Solar Eclipse. Nicole Sharp (talk) 00:15, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- "
w:Solar eclipse of August 21, 2017#Planning" - "
w:Solar eclipse of August 21, 2017#Post-eclipse traffic problems" - Nicole Sharp (talk) 01:38, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- No, I'd typically use {{cautionbox}} to each destination affected. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 02:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- Done. However, it might be good to make some eclipse-specific templates since this will happen again for the USA in April 2024. Nicole Sharp (talk) 02:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- I would be surprised if the October annular eclipse draws a very large travelling audience, for the reasons stated on the solar eclipse page, but that will need to be re-thought if it does so. All 550-some city pages for the 2024 total eclipse in North America have already been populated. But the choke points are highly specific, so a template isn't the answer. For Exmouth in 2023 that choke was 1200 km long, as a single coast highway funneled everyone into the tiny corner of Australia that had totality. For 2024 there is a 7000 km viewing corridor with access and amenities all along the way, and at best 50-50 viewing prospects, so over-crowding is unlikely. Grahamsands (talk) 08:03, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
- I live in central Texas, smack dab in the path for the October annular eclipse, so I'm definitely doing some planning: I'm gonna check to make sure I paid the electric bill so if it gets dark in my house, I can switch on the lights. Mrkstvns (talk) 15:45, 27 September 2023 (UTC)