User talk:WikiPim/Archive

Welcome
Hi, welcome to Community Central! Thanks for your edit to the Community Central:Adoption requests page.

If you're looking for help and have questions about Wikia, you are encouraged to visit the community help forums here for help and advice. —Meighan (help forum | blog)

Signature
Please could your signature to one line, it's currently using 6 --  Random Time  11:39, September 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Erm? It's showing to me as a drop down menu, using a single line. What skin/ browser you use?


 * Wow, that is odd - I'm on monobook, I see a dropdown on oasis. I'll investigate that a little further and see if I can fix --  Random Time  11:42, September 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Other than that, can you re-configure it to allow it to be in-line rather than forcing it to a new line? As you can see above, it throws off the normal wrapping and RT's response flows under your timestamp rather than appearing to be indented. I offer to fix it for you if you wish. Rappy 23:51, October 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * Only if the drop down menu stays as it is in oasis. I am interested to find out how to make that appear the same in monobook and oasis.


 * As far as Monobook is concerned, it's more than likely an issue of Monobook not having the same classes as Oasis to hide/show the menu when clicked. RT could probably add the CSS to Monobook.css here with no issues or personally. Rappy 20:09, October 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * I haven't heard back from RandomTime so i assume he doesn't know a fix either. Will check on that. So the issue still remains while it doesn't bother me. If you know a trick, feel free to share! You can check out my user:WikiPim/SigReal for more information.


 * I've already fixed the signature. You shouldn't ever have to place it on a new line anymore. Rappy 20:19, October 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks

Fixed your blunder. Code like this can't have line-breaks or it breaks formatting. Rappy 20:48, October 9, 2011 (UTC)

Following up!
Hi there WikiPim!

I'm just following up from when you posted in Founder & Admin Central that your wiki could use some editors. How did that work out? Where you able to get more editors? If you could just take a quick second to my out my super short survey, it would be greatly appreciated! Pretty, pretty please??

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/EditorFeedback

Thanks! ^^ Trellar http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 23:34, October 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * Good call to follow up on that Trella. I must say that i am not happy with the fact that as far as i can tell nobody did follow up to editing except at max two not logged in users for max. 1 edit (if there have been others, i haven't been able to tell).


 * Have given my idea about a one stop shop for admins on how to make many things on their wikia better. I have given a start to that on http://wikixp.wikia.com/wiki/Wiki_Experience_Wiki.


 * Greetz



Scavenger hunt
Alas, I no longer work at Wikia. Ausir(talk) 10:17, October 20, 2011 (UTC)

Signature
Hi. Nice signature! The fact that it uses the wiki button background and has so many links in a dropdown is just genius!!


 * You can see how it is working code wise at User:WikiPim/SigReal It also requires me to use three tildes ( ~ ) instead of four. Don't forget to update your /Sig page when done with a SigReal.




 * Thanks! I might use it in the future, thanks for the info! :)

Messages
I reply to messages on my own talk page, please head there. Thanks, 10:51, November 6, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Sig
I didn't realize it was a little difficult to read to others. I'll get to changing the color of the text. Thank you for informing me! --

Hi Wikipim, as long as you are talking about signatures, did you know that your signature is not viewable in monobook? The wikia button class is an oasis only class, thus your signature appears as many lines of links.--


 * I am aware of that but haven't been able to find a solution to this issue and RandomTime, as shown in the comments above, has mentioned it before but never gotten back, ever after request, to helping me out. I am not THAT good at wikia coding (hence, only 4,5 months editing) to know how to fix it without hurting the signature. So if you know how, please do tell.




 * I know how to fix it: you use a basic signature. And if you're feeling really obnoxious, you link to each wiki with every letter, which I do not recommend. –  Jä zz  i  18:29, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jazzi, but i do not see that as a fix. Thanks for your opinion tough.
 * And I don't see how a six line signature that is only viewable in one skin is a smart idea. It's best to go with a simple signature that is easily viewable in both skins and isn't obnoxious, no offense. Also, I keep conversations on the same talk page as it is, so the talkback message isn't really necessary. –  Jä zz  i  18:37, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Calm down mate. No need to get all fuzzed up. At the standard used skin it shows up as a single line signature. If the same would apply on monobook, no harm would be done to anyone. That you don't like extended signatures does not make other people unable to use them. Live and let live. Chill, take a beer and relax. At a saterday evening you can let go of all sorrow ;)
 * I'm simply making a recommendation. In short, your signature is a tad obnoxious, in both skins. Not to mention the fact it's a bit hard on the eyes. I'm kindly asking that you take this into consideration. And if you find that I'm getting "fuzzed up" then you must not have to kill things through css. –  Jä zz  i  18:44, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Per Jazzi. Your sig is, simply put, crappy in Monobook. Please adjust it. 1358  (Talk)  19:41, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm simply making a recommendation. In short, your signature is a tad obnoxious, in both skins. Not to mention the fact it's a bit hard on the eyes. I'm kindly asking that you take this into consideration. And if you find that I'm getting "fuzzed up" then you must not have to kill things through css. –  Jä zz  i  18:44, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Per Jazzi. Your sig is, simply put, crappy in Monobook. Please adjust it. 1358  (Talk)  19:41, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

(Unindent) On a simpler tack: You signature currently contains several extra linebreaks at the beginning. This causes it to always show in a new, unindented paragraph separate from your comments. If you removed the linebreaks, your comments would appear much more orderly and would be easier to read.

Also, regarding the dropdown portion of your signature, it has disadvantages even in the Wikia skin. You may notice that when your signature appears at the bottom of a page, the dropdown is overlapped by the floating toolbar and by the "Around Wikia's Network" sections. Having a complicated signature is neat, but please take into account the advice of your fellow community members. Functionality should always trump gimicks in design. --Gardimuer { ʈalk } 19:54, November 12, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks Gardimuer, will fix it. And 1358, i would love to but keep my current signature as it is. However, as stated above, i am not sure how. I do hope someone with extended knowledge will help me on that.
 * On the note regaring opacity at the bottom: Yes, i have seen that too, it's automated opacity which i have no control over. Not something hurting the way the dropdown or other code works in my opinion. Thanks for the concern tough.



You seem to have a lot to say
Perhaps if you tried thinking a bit more before expressing yourself, you'd come off as a bit less obnoxiousand judgmental. Maybe just stick to the swords and potions wiki for a while. 19:24, November 12, 2011 (UTC)


 * And your comment is helpfull in what perspective? If you have a specific comment you like to adress, please let me know. If not, then be a bit more elaborate on what exactly you like to adress. I do fail to see your helpfull point here.




 * It was not meant to be helpful. Apparently niether was your pointless comment to my suggestion that vandals be reported to wiki admins so that they may be dealt with personally, and not just their edits. Rather than think for 2 seconds about the purpose of this, you offered up a useless response that had a derisive and sarcastic tone. You've left several comments critiquing the suggestions of other users. Hence my advice to think a bit before your fingers hit the keys. 19:43, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Jarrad, You may think that it's helpfull to have everone report vandals to an admin. However Wikia is based on the fact that everone can edit and that everyone can revert edits. I have not seen a vandal frequenting a wiki that often that an admin isn't soon enough aware of it. Most wikis have admins which patrol the activity feed. And since a lot of actual vandalism isn't more then 1 or 2 pages it's not worth going to an admin for that. Revert it, continue editing. And it's pretty obvious that one would go to an admin in case of extended vandalism (or VSTF). Thanks for being more elaborate on your reasons for contacting me ;), even if we do not agree with eachother. And yes, i am thinking my actions through before i do them.


 * I never suggested that RCs or even UCs couldn't or shouldn't just revert vandalism themselves. That was a concoction of your own mind. Many wikias get so busy that the activity feed moves very quickly, and an admin who isn't present for even an hour or two may not catch even repeated acts of vandalism. This is why many wikis have a vandalism log page that admins can check to investigate reported incidents, allowing them to determine if the edit was made in good faith and just misunderstood, or if a particular user is causing trouble on a frequent basis.
 * But that doesn't really matter, because you didn't speak to that. You assumed that what I was saying was that editors should alert an admin of any vandalism so that the admins themselves may revert it, or at least that is what is heavily implied by your comment. It seems you saw a chance to be a know-it-all, and again, rather than take a moment to consider the validity of the suggestion of someone else, attemepted to devalue it with an irrelevant comment that lacked understanding.
 * Also, I do not need you to explain how wikia operates. I'm a regular contributor on several large and active wikis. And all of them have a vandalism report page that the communtiy finds rather helpful and is used regularly. I was merely attempting to share that with the readers of the blog/article, and while my advice might have been helpful, yours was obvious and somewhat pointless. 20:16, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Have you considered your own tone of voice in your comments? To me it's rather agressive. How can i know that you are a 'regular contributor to several large wiki's when you stumble into my talk page ranting like this? And does that actually matter much?
 * Seeing that you assumed that i took your advice the wrong way, you could also have elaborated like you yust did after accusing me of about 4 things which aren't related to the issue at hand and are assumptions.
 * Usually it's helpfull too to add examples with links too, and especially in a blog explaining basics to be more elaborate then normal. And the content of the whole blog post is actually to point out what you may find obvious and thus pointless to share. Others their view may be different on the subject. You can get a glimpse on that from the many comments stating that the blog post is helpfull to them.


 * while I am admittedly and intentionally coming across as somewhat "agressive," I would hardly consider myself to be "ranting." I am just observing your comments, not only to me but others that you have made, and you seem to just have a desire to be contrarian rather than helpful. (i.e. claiming that someone who suggests banning to be a "troll.") Apparently I am not the only one who has recognized this. Thus, I've brought it to your attention. Do what you wish with it. Good day. And remember, a little preemptive thinking can go a long way for the way others percieve you. 20:36, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Have you even realised that he is saying that people who aren't editing like they are supposed to are instantly blocked out? That with people making a bad edit get instantly banned.
 * Well, perhaps it's yust a different perspective from the way i have been treating people in reallife as social worker but i always tend to give people a welcome feeling rather then blocking them because of an (intentional or not) mistake they make. I know, it's far easier to block someone then to communicate. But i also think it's working counter productive if you block users on first sight. I wanted to reflect that to him (make him think about his actions, his comment, while very short could be seen by someone as trolling and thus could get himself banned without real cause. Because trolling is mostly to the eye of the beholder.
 * Anyways, it's going more and more offtopic. You don't agree with me, which is fine.