are currently (18 July 2010) indistinguishable.
Are these the best symbols to use to designate features,
and shouldn't they be distinguishable? --Fgrose 13:44, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think the idea was that we should be moving away from a 5-admonition-level model (note, tip, important, caution, warning) and rather using the 3-level model (note, important, warning) since it gets very hard to distinguish between what distinguishes "caution" vs. "warning". If one could redirect templates... not sure if that works, but if not I'd recommend rewriting all Template:Caution to Template:Warning. --pfrields 20:36, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- That would distinguish the two, but the first question is about whether the images are too harsh on the distributors (in comparison with the check mark symbol ) by implying, for example in the Warning symbol, , not to proceed? --Fgrose 21:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
The following metadata was found in MoinMoin that could not be converted to a useful value in MediaWiki:
- acl: DistributionGroup:read,write,delete,revert All:read