User talk:It's dot com/STUFF reform
From Homestar Runner Wiki
I think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's perfect. How can we improve it? I welcome your suggestions below. On the other hand, maybe you think this is a bad idea, or maybe you have a better one. Your criticisms are welcome, as well.
Contents |
This format is complicated
The code just to list a fact is so complicated. It will be difficult to make this work.
- I tried to simplify the process as much as possible. I even created a template to help streamline matters. Sure, it will take some getting used to, but there are enough technically savvy people on the wiki to make this run smoothly. If worse came to worst, a user could post a fact in the old style, and someone else could clean it up, much like on the WikiTroll page. — It's dot com 04:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
- P.S. While creating the main page, I discovered that the general setup really wasn't too hard at all.
But this business about the alternating colors and so on... somebody's going to mess it up.
- I intended the alternating colors to be an aid, not a stumbling block. If two adjacent facts had the same color, that wouldn't be so bad. And again, there are always Gnomes willing to fix what needs fixin'. — It's dot com 04:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Specialized signatures do not work
Fancy signatures (such as those used by Jay (Talk), ⇔Thunderbird⇔, and 
Joey (talk·edits), just to name a few) cause the table of votes to be rendered incorrectly. (Also, external links in the fun fact cause a similar problem.)
- I don't know what the precise technical problem is here, but anything other than the regular "
[[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]]" wreaks havoc on the template. A possible solution for those with special sigs would be simply to type their names in plain text (without a link). — It's dot com 04:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Votes to Revise
Currently, we have a choice to vote Revise. Where is the provision for this in the new format?
- I don't have a good answer for this, other than to point out that we currently have no good policy toward Revise votes. — It's dot com 04:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Delteated
Some of my favorite decline votes are Delteated, This Decline is part of a balanced breakfast, and And I really don't like him at all (quoting the song by Marzipan). What will happen to these?
- Well, they'll be gone. Sometimes you have to make sacrifices in the name of progress. (As a side note, however, when I was doing research for this item, I noticed that some people really aren't as clever as they think they are... and some people's decline votes are just weird and long.) — It's dot com 04:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Comments About The Page
Let me be the first to say thank you to Dot Com, for all the work and thought he's put into this. I for one, think it's excellent. It is a bit complicated to add a vote, which could be a problem, but if all users can become adept at using this format, I think it'll be a vast improvment. I'm kinda bummed that the specialized siggies don't work, maybe try asking our resident coder for any ideas on how to fix this, but all in all I'm very impressed with Dot Com and what he's put together here. Here's a vote for putting Dot Com at the helm of the page, he seems to have his course set right. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 05:10, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
I think I has the solution!
Well, sort of. It fixes the "specialized sig" problem, and the "Revise" problem. But then it adds the problem of "no fact-specific edit button." And, although it's actually just as complicated, maybe even more so, it's a bit easier to read (no need for comments... so long as all the little templates are in the right order, it will work fine and it'll be pretty easy to tell what's going on.) It is here. --Jay (Talk) 09:33, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Name Signing
If this new format is used, I'm not going to make my points be anonymous. I'ld sign my name right after my comment. Just wanting you to know that, because with the way you made it, there's no nametags after the comments and stuff. -- Joshua 11:45, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
