Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elements/PTG

PTG (talk)
Periodic Table Graphics

Themes
(the sciences)
WT:ELEM

Graphics
(the presentations)

Blocks
(BLOCK) (talk)

State of Matter
(SOM) (talk)

Micro-PT
(MICRO) (talk)

Metal-Nonmetal
(M-nonM) (talk)

Resources
(sets, more)

• Central talkpage for PTG

Design considerations

Some thoughts that might be used later in the process:

• Rainbow or checkered?

The categories are a trend in the PT: from left to right, the metallishness changes equally in every period.

That would call for a "rainbow order of colors": left-to-right generally follows the color sequence of the rainbow.

However, since continuous colors look alike (eg in orange-red-purple), this may cause problems wihen recognising a category (color area). Also, going from map area color to legend color, to get the (color) category name, may cause mistakes. Also in the other direction: given a color in the legend, find the right map area (=elements in that category). This is more difficult when neighbouring colors look alike. Also, area-borders are more difficult to see.

So, we can apply "checkered order of colors": the same nine colors, alternate the hues left-to-right. Say, red-green-orange-blue.

In the 2020 set, the reds are ~rainbow ordered (together), and the yellow/green/blue are checkered. -DePiep (talk) 22:02, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

• Forget SoM fontcolors

We must satisfy the contrast rules (w3c rules) for fontcolor-on-backgroundcolor. For sure, these fonts are black, and wl-blue (wikilik).

When we add extra fontcolors, (as we do with the State-of-Matter fontcolors), there appear extra limitations to fulfil contrast rules (see /PTG/categories/2020#Font_contrast, green, grey, red font checks).

We should consider dropping the SoM fontcolors altogether. -DePiep (talk) 22:02, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

re by LP03

I have some points:

• I agree that the SoM colors should be dropped in favor of pictograms, like how Timeline of the far future uses pictograms by subject area.
• AN should be a darker shade similar to LN, since they are the heavier homolog
• Disparate lightnesses make an aesthetically
• Another possibility could be a scheme derived from the CPK coloring: AM purple; AEM green; HAL yellow; NG cyan.
• Wikilinks contrast rather poorly against hues from roughly sky-blue to orange, except. Hence we will have to choose a pastel-like scheme unless we use only colors from approximately gold to cyan.

Here's a protoype of what each scheme might look like when we take the minimum AAA for blue and approximately matching that lighness:

Caption text

CAT	Rainbow	Checkered	CPK-like
AM
AEM
LN
AN
TM
OM
MOID
ONM
HAL
NG
UNK
(SA)

Conclusion: I prefer a checkered coloring scheme. I wonder if the background for {{Periodic table}} and the large version should be changed to white. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

My replies, DePiep Jan 7

- Tension building: how end the sentence "Disparate lightnesses make an aesthetically ... "? ;-)

- CPK coloring: they color elements (OK), and don't have to check text contrast. Sure then one can pick tough colors! We have a bigger fish to fry. IF I see your table right, it does not give extra solutions.

Introducing outside 'cultural' color sets does not help, is my string experience. This is why we got the dark red for alkali metals: "associates with fire" (true history). INstead, the required 10 colors between themselves (by visual effect only) are tough enough to solve.

- Yep, checkered has my preference too. This point is even stronger when checking CB filters. I also agree that the LN and AN colors can be near similar hue but play with tones (S, V in HSV). Actually, in private I already employed & published this idea ;-) later more.

- SoM font coloring (SoM or anything else): yes, to be dropped. Better in dedicated article (webelements.com idea). In a generic PT, phase info does not help or add much (and indeed, in my private PT I used symbols. Even better recognition in the overview).

WT:ELEM is a bit battered recently, so we cannot proceed at full speed (discussion proposals). I don't mind patience, I want this taslforce to be solid based.

All the best. -DePiep (talk) 21:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Blocks

Since we are now using blocks in the miniature PTs, I'll provide a palette that preserves hue but meets AAA guidelines:

Caption text

Block	Current	Proposed	Contrast against WL
s	ff9999	ffe3e3	7.045
g	fd99ff	fee0ff	7.034
f	9bff99	daffd9	7.833
d	99ccff	d8ebff	7.004
p	fdff8c	feffbf	8.232

Also, I believe the current scheme was adopted in 2014. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The lighter colors are more difficult to tell apart from each other, though. And some of the colors are indistinguishable (f and p; g and d) in both the current and proposed sets for colorblind readers. I think it's possible to satisfy a lower threshold (contrast of 3 or 4.5) to account for colorblindness and contrast between adjacent hues (so the boundaries between blocks are more prominent). ComplexRational (talk) 17:47, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Agree, hard to distinguish. What I described as § Recognition and distinction. Will try some more. -DePiep (talk) 17:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Created set "LP03-blocks1" and section. (This WP:PTG page setup is a bit clumsy, needs improvement. Until then, I will jump in ;-) .) -DePiep (talk) 18:17, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

re ComplexRational I have this argument to allow lesser-than-AAA contrast:

The texts are in a tabular form, with names & symbols & numbers showing in regular places, in regular format, and in a fixed (relative to cell) place. Recognition of these letters & numbers is way more easy for the human eye.

I am not sure how w3c would weigh this though. -DePiep (talk) 20:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, if we, then only the s-block and g-block will need lightening, to an AA-compliant minimum of   #ffb3b3 and   #ffa9ff. I wonder if WP:COLOR should be revised with regards to structured bgcolor. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm playing around with other colors. In HSL, we can change S, L that's two variables. Also, I think: maybe lighter ones are good overall, because block colors are not the one-and-only feature of the PT, so some reduced flashlighting might be OK. Even stronger: blocks are already there in any black/white PT: it's in the structure! So coloring blocks is not needed. Distracts from principal coluns & rows even. -DePiep (talk) 21:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

But they're not completely in the structure because of helium, right? Double sharp (talk) 05:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I've build a set, demo/test here. -DePiep (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, but note that most sources use red, yellow, green, and blue for the four currently known blocks. That's why the current scheme was adopted. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

By 'other colors' I meant same Hue, different S, L. ;-) -DePiep (talk) 11:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Extended periodic table

Several templates used in Extended periodic table to represent the layout of period 8 have been replaced by images, and now the formats are all different.

• Aufbau: Template:Extended periodic table (by Aufbau, 50 columns, period 8): Period 8 only. Colors used are the same as in the main PT.
• Pyykkö 2011: File:Pyykko periodic table 172.svg (replaced Template:Extended periodic table (by Pyykkö, 50 columns, periods 8–9)). Transparent SVG image with unfilled cells; has annotated lists of subshells. The atomic numbers 139 and 140 are colored red, but otherwise the diagram is entirely black and white. A version for the Fricke 1975 layout also exists at Commons.
• Fricke 1975: File:Fricke periodic table 172.png (replaced Template:Extended periodic table (by Fricke, 52 columns, periods 8–9)). Tall and skinny listing atomic numbers in their positions, plus shading representing the number and type of valence electrons. Brought to FfD here due to questionable licensing.
• Nefedov 2006; Kulsha 2011, 2016: File:Pt172.png and File:Pt172expanded.png (no preexisting template). Colored by block, but somewhat differently from main PT. Needs to be converted to SVG. A template Template:Extended periodic table (by Nefedov, 54 columns, compact cells) exists, but unlike the others it includes the known periods 1–7 as well.

Relevant TfD: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_7#Template:Extended_periodic_table_(by_Pyykkö,_50_columns,_periods_8–9). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:34, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

I can replace the Fricke image with a Wikitable (sacrificing the subshell fillings, where Fricke et al.'s calculations are not agreed on among all researchers). I am not really happy with colouring in Fricke and Pyykkö by blocks because they did not do it by themselves, but at least it's clear from their papers how it'd work. I do think, that the first 7 periods are necessary because they both follow different group 3 principles from us.

BTW Nefedov et al.'s paper contains a fragmentary short PT (the old Russian style with 8 columns) up to 164 only. Also, Rg is disaligned to reflect that its configuration does not match Au (rather a pointless distinction if you ask me, but it's in the source). That also I think needs showing. Double sharp (talk) 05:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03: OK, replaced Fricke picture with a Wikitable. And added Nefedov's picture. Double sharp (talk) 06:18, 8 March 2021 (UTC)