Template talk:Services

How is this intended to be used? —Dcn. David ^{talk contribs} 23:32, December 13, 2005 (CST)

It was intended to be a quick way to navigate from one kind of service of the church to the next. It still needs a little work, so is not in use yet. Joe

Feedback

Is there a better way to phrase "Great Blessing of Water"? Also, I think that link should go to a more general "Blessing of Water" kind of link, as there is the Great Blessing of the Waters which takes place at Theophany, and a Lesser one—I think. I don't think I know enough about these. I moved the paraklesis link next to the akathist, as they seem to go together, and the blessings of the water and the bread go together, too. Should the link to Divine Liturgy be more prominent somehow? —magda (talk) 11:46, December 14, 2005 (CST)

My husband has reminded me that the water-blessing service is called agiasmo. —magda (talk) 08:39, December 19, 2005 (CST)

The only place I've seen that term is in Greek sources. Methinks we should have a Blessing of Water article with sections on the Greater and Lesser blessings. Or perhaps simply have an article for holy water with redirects pointing to it. —Fr. Andrew ^talk contribs (THINK!) 08:50, December 19, 2005 (CST)

Hours

The template now links each hour: First, Third, Sixth, and Ninth. However, these all redirect to Hours. Is that expected to change, or should we consolidate the links in this template, or leave it as is? —magda (talk) 10:08, March 12, 2008 (PDT)

Magda, that is a good point, I do not like when navigation boxes, such as this, link to redirect pages, but this box is not being used anywhere at this time. Having the box show the Hours as First, Third, Sixth, and Ninth, emphasizes that they are not the same. Also, I do believe that there is adequate interesting information on each of the Hours to be its own article. - Andrew 05:59, March 13, 2008 (PDT)

Okay. I like the change, but I wanted to make sure that the redirect had been noted. —magda (talk) 09:19, March 13, 2008 (PDT)

Magda, I changed Hours back to the one link. - Andrew 13:16, July 10, 2008 (UTC)

Background Colour

Andrew, the colour you have selected is good. On my screen all I could see was "Black on black" for the heading texts.

ASDamic, "rv" back the article to the original is typical response by you to me. Can you give a fair reason why you did so? I can explain why I changed it, you need to know that I changed the background colour not to be 'arrogant' but because it was not visible on my end ... it was "Black on Black" literally! I assumed that if I was seeing black on black so where other people. I did not know that the colour I chose would be a visible problem for other peoples computers!

Nonetheless, Andrew I think realised the problem and also selected a great colour to put in place. - Vasiliki 22:49, July 9, 2008 (UTC)

Vasiliki, I can’t take credit for the color choice. All I did was change the code behind the box to the way other boxes had it. I, also, was confused when you changed the color and Fr Andrew changed it back. On the browser that I use, Firefox 2, it looked fine as it originally was, it was hard to it read after your change, and OK again after Fr Andrew’s change. I don’t know what browser that you use, but I suspected that you might use another. I also have Internet Explorer 6 on this computer, so I brought up the page with it and saw that the lines with background color where blacked out. I look at other boxes with EI 6 and they were OK, so I changed the syntax of the code behind this box to conform to the others, and it displayed as intended on both browsers. This just goes to show that we all do not see things the same way. - Andrew 13:16, July 10, 2008 (UTC)

I reverted the change Vasiliki made because on both browsers I checked it on (Firefox 3 and IE), it lowered the contrast and made it harder to read, darkening the text's background. (This is what I noted in the edit summary when I made the reversion.) Andrew's adjustment looks identical to me as the original version. (Of course, IE often seems to ignore web-wide standards...) —Fr. Andrew ^talk contribs (THINK!) 13:32, July 10, 2008 (UTC)

Hi Fathers ... is this background colour also a visibility issue on OrthodoxSource? You see, I dont have someone to tutor me on the various browsers and I dont know if I can access Firefox (??) to check little things like this. Can either of you just take a moment to observe the colours on the different browsers and advise me if it is a problem? Thanks. - Vasiliki

Firefox can be downloaded for free here. —Fr. Andrew ^talk contribs (THINK!) 00:28, July 11, 2008 (UTC)