File talk:Templateimage.svg

Please explain how using Comic Sans automatically makes the template image (which, mind you, is used in official templates on this wiki, in which we're supposed to look professional, hence why we use copyright logos and what not in licensing templates rather than, say, a hand-drawn version of the C logo) "cartoony". To me, it just looks like an excuse for an inappropriate use of a typeface, which looks jarring to any designer; the first revision's typeface was fine (I think it was Helvetica or Verdana, hard to tell), there wasn't any reason to change it at all, aside from spacing, which, by the way, is the best reason the image was reuploaded. Unlike, say, proposal header outcomes, this can easily be fixed with a single-reupload of this image, in which I will be willing to alter to better fit with notice templates' more "official" looking designs. Ray Trace^(T|C) 14:44, 13 March 2016 (EDT)

the comic sans looks particularly terrible here. --Glowsquid (talk) 14:49, 13 March 2016 (EDT)

Yeah. This... this is BAD. - Reboot (talk) 18:20, 13 March 2016 (EDT)

I think it's useful having contrast between the text in the cartoon template and the writing all around it, but I really don't care enough to waste time arguing about the specific font choice of a single image, so whatever. - Walkazo 19:10, 13 March 2016 (EDT)

That's not really the right approach for contrast; it doesn't contrast, the difference between professional workhorse typeface and tacky casual kiddy typeface clashes and would make the result simply bad overall. I think details are important to maintain a professional tone this wiki is striving for, so I recommend changing the typeface as soon as we can. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 20:43, 13 March 2016 (EDT)

I'm not sure if there's any reason for very low-res, sprite-based images to be in SVG format, as indexed .gifs essentially accomplish the same thing when it comes to resizing in say, image-editing programs but whatever. Ray Trace^(T|C) 21:17, 13 March 2016 (EDT)