FANDOM


  • Here are the release notes for Fandom's code release scheduled for June 13, 2019:

    • NOTABLE: We have released updates for both the iOS and Android versions of the Fandom app - check out Apps Technical Updates for the details!
    • NOTABLE: We recently added a licensing note to the bottom of wiki pages (this previously lived on the global footer, but had been missing for a while).
    • FIXED: We recently fixed an issue that preventing image posts from being saved in Discussions.
    • KNOWN ISSUE: We are continuing to look into some situations where non-English Discussions incorrectly directs you to English-language pages, such as user profile links.
      Loading editor
    • Please update the read/unread drop menu UI for Discussions in a desktop browser. Telling the difference between light gray and light blue-gray icons is painful sometimes.

        Loading editor
    • Rappy 4187 wrote:

      • NOTABLE: We recently added a licensing note to the bottom of wiki pages (this previously lived on the global footer, but had been missing for a while).

      I just came to community corner to kind of complain about this, it's kind of annoying and an eye sore to the harmony of my wiki (and I wonder if other's agreed), can't it be moved to at least the fandom footer/banner?

      I'd like to think a community has say in what our wiki's look like and what it should display- Fandom header and footer aside.

        Loading editor
    • Fandyllic wrote:
      Please update the read/unread drop menu UI for Discussions in a desktop browser. Telling the difference between light gray and light blue-gray icons is painful sometimes.

      Fair point - I'll pass that on.

        Loading editor
    • Hollowness wrote:

      Rappy 4187 wrote:

      • NOTABLE: We recently added a licensing note to the bottom of wiki pages (this previously lived on the global footer, but had been missing for a while).

      I just came to community corner to kind of complain about this, it's kind of annoying and an eye sore to the harmony of my wiki (and I wonder if other's agreed), can't it be moved to at least the fandom footer/banner?

      I'd like to think a community has say in what our wiki's look like and what it should display- Fandom header and footer aside.

      Yeah, it kinda looks like it was just thrown in there tbh

        Loading editor
    • Sophiedp wrote: Yeah, it kinda looks like it was just thrown in there tbh

      Yeah, perfectly sandwiched between the article and comments. It's better advertised than the fan feed/fandom adverts, smh. If it was even after then fan feed it be better.

        Loading editor
    • A nice light gray line between it and the rest of the article might help.

        Loading editor
    • ^ let's say that the notice has a HTML class or ID. Basically, all you would need is a border-top: 1px solid #ccc.

        Loading editor
    • Or better yet let me just have the font match the page colour and I wont see it at all XD

        Loading editor
    • Most websites note legal notes and copyrights at the very bottom of a page (meaning the forest green area at the very bottom above the teal). It is a eyesore as it looks like it is part of the content itself.

        Loading editor
    • Sorry we haven't replied to this yet. Do you have some examples of pages where it looks particularly bad? I think it's more "odd" when on short pages than long ones?

        Loading editor
    • Sannse wrote: Sorry we haven't replied to this yet. Do you have some examples of pages where it looks particularly bad? I think it's more "odd" when on short pages than long ones?

      On a forum thread as you see it is fine at the bottom but on articles and blogs, it's dead center of article and comments:

      Snippet screenshot
        Loading editor
    • It really should fall after comments or after the fan feed (if applicable). Or better yet on the fandom footer.

        Loading editor
    • I don't think it looks that bad there. The categories module sort of provides a bit of a section break. Where I think it seems a but odd are short pages without content that provides a natural break. For example, my user page. It looks like the notice is part of the main content; especially since the right rail extends far further down.

        Loading editor
    • Hollowness
      Hollowness removed this reply because:
      meant to be reply to 14 not 10
      22:24, June 20, 2019
      This reply has been removed
    • Andrewds1021 wrote: I don't think it looks that bad there. The categories module sort of provides a bit of a section break. Where I think it seems a but odd are short pages without content that provides a natural break. For example, my user page. It looks like the notice is part of the main content; especially since the right rail extends far further down.

      But as stated here:

      Devilmanozzy wrote: Most websites note legal notes and copyrights at the very bottom of a page (meaning the forest green area at the very bottom above the teal). It is a eyesore as it looks like it is part of the content itself.

      So it- itself it not a natural location compared to other sites and pages.

      And that aside since when is a legal license note the center/meat of a webpage...

        Loading editor
    • Well, to play the devil's advocate here, I would argue that at the bottom of the article content is the most logical spot as that is what the licensing applies to. This way, rather than having to search the entire page or look through help pages for find the licensing, it is right there next to the content. I just think there should be a visual distinction to separate it from the actual content.

        Loading editor
    • Andrewds1021 wrote: Well, to play the devil's advocate here, I would argue that at the bottom of the article content is the most logical spot as that is what the licensing applies to. This way, rather than having to search the entire page or look through help pages for find the licensing, it is right there next to the content. I just think there should be a visual distinction to separate it from the actual content.

      Though that could be understandable in some cases, many wiki's have the comments section as a part of an article. I remember one wiki I was in almost the entire wiki activity including on content was posted in the comments because it was easier than them learning how to edit or get on a pc. Then I'd have to do the editing/updating of the article myself but if I was behind it be looked/viewed via comments (maybe as a first place for viewers). Comments was the content, just eventually (maybe) organized in article.

        Loading editor
    • I guess what I am saying it comments weren't enabled, I'd probably even agree with you, but can't in the case if they are since comments can play an important role in some wikis maybe as much as the article itself.

      Especially, how and not just in wiki's review comments are very important meat of a webpages for content, personal images, additional non-neutral bias opinions that may be still valid but do not have a place in an actual neutral / unbiase article - but can to an extent be considered content.

      Plus it says "Community content" and not "Wikia/Fandom/Article content" which if the community is mostly comments based applies to it even more.

        Loading editor
    • It could be put in the footer? Which is already what most sites do (see wikipedia and stackoverflow for example).

        Loading editor
    • Putting it in the footer would make it show on all pages, including (for example) /d/

      But putting it near the footer might be possible - I've added that to the feedback I passed over.

        Loading editor
    • Sannse wrote: Putting it in the footer would make it show on all pages, including (for example) /d/

      But putting it near the footer might be possible - I've added that to the feedback I passed over.

      It could be added like ImprovedFooter and put right above the footer?

        Loading editor
    • ^^^^^

      That was exactly my idea.

        Loading editor
    • Didn't know some people didn't like the placement of the licensing note. I love it. It's highly visible whereas it was buried at the very bottom before (in the footer), and it's important that visitors and editors know about licensing rights and terms. All websites almost entirely based on content creators should make sure they have easy access to this. Sadly, only a few do. I had to challenge two people about not respecting licensing terms as a wiki admin (and one on behalf of all editors who had worked on the wiki plus other related wikis) so I'm very happy this is here. Please consider keeping it in a place where nobody can miss it.

        Loading editor
    • Are you kidding, what next a dead center in a title FANCommunity content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.DOM. To me that is how displaced the note is (I see this note more than I see the fandom tag - and it is driving me crazy - since day one), and I am not sure if I can take your comment seriously - you are dealing with people who are confrontational on purpose, so where it is placed would be irrelevant.

      Disclaimers and license notes are not content- in fact you you are looking for those things you naturally go to the bottom. When I look and I have I do not look at the content or comments for it, I look at the footer first, or bottom of the page (above footer), then I look on the terms of use or terms of service , privacy policy, or contact on a site. Above the comments is not where I look, that's is not only an eye sore it is the incorrect placement of the note.

      We are not trying to overhaul a placement of a standard license note to an unusual place, we are asking it to be placed where most licencing notes are placed.

        Loading editor
    • @hollowness: are you criticizing my opinion? If so why? You're entitled to yours and I'm entitled to mine, and both are equally valuable and to be respected for what they are: just one person's opinion. If this isn't how you approach conversations, I don't understand what you're doing here.

      P.S. Also, you don't know anything about the people I talked about, what went on and what their reasoning was.

        Loading editor
    • Melicent wrote: @hollowness: are you criticizing my opinion? If so why? You're entitled to yours and I'm entitled to mine, and both are equally valuable and to be respected for what they are: just one person's opinion. If this isn't how you approach conversations, I don't understand what you're doing here.

      P.S. Also, you don't know anything about the people I talked about, what went on and what their reasoning was.

      Sorry, I am more or less pointing out we aren't asking for anything radical (and if anything saying or asking for it to stay is more out of the norm) and that sadly if you are having difficulty with people over the licensing issues already the placement of where it is most likely won't help much (and that may just be an inconvenience you wont get rid of just by license note placement).

      I have dealt with legal documentation in wording and placement in my past employment so- I figure I could point out, as we have mentioned before, the norms for licensing placement.

      If you read what I have been saying above, you'd see I would find the spot acceptable if 2 things: no comments enabled and if you noticed short pages actually have it in what looks like content of the page (Andrewds1021 user page example) was not displayed that way.

      In essence I am halfway with you (and those fine with it as it is currently)- but I actually truly was wondering if you were posting to be facetious or as a joke and if not just a rebuttal to your statement. I do believe friendly debates are welcome in such community forums. And since some of us have been here since the day it was enabled and followed it - shows we are truly concerned and ready to discuss and debate with those "against", "fine" or "liking" it.

      However, if you find me having a discussion in contrary to your opinion as criticism or an attack and you just like to openly state your feelings on the matter with zero rebuttal or questioning- I will be fine in terminating any sort of debate or conversation with you.

      I am here because this effects my Wiki experience and enjoyment and if this has increased the your wiki experience and enjoyment so much now you 'can't not have it there' then, by all means petition for it to remain. I am not here to belittle your opinion or you but I will remain passionate over my distaste over the issue.

        Loading editor
    • Hollowness wrote: In essence I am halfway with you (and those fine with it as it is currently)- but I actually truly was wondering if you were posting to be facetious or as a joke and if not just a rebuttal to your statement. I do believe friendly debates are welcome in such community forums.

      However, if you find me having a discussion in contrary to your opinion as criticism or an attack and you just like to openly state your feelings on the matter with zero rebuttal or questioning- I will be fine in terminating any sort of debate or conversation with you.

      I appreciate your "sorry" but, tbh, some things you've said in your reply made me wonder if you really mean it. I wasn't joking and assuming I was was, to me, offensive and belittling and didn't indicate any desire to have friendly debates. Do you make it a habit to assume people don't comment in good faith or are being facetious because someone somewhat disagrees with you? Your reply didn't make me, a new poster on this particular forum, feel welcome either. Moreover, I believe we all have the same goals and whether we're passionate about the issue or not, have been here for a while or are just newbies, doesn't make your opinion or arguments automatically more valid or more important than anybody else's.

      It's absolutely not your place to question my feelings because I know what I feel and you don't. And yes, I don't want you to discuss my opinion or feedback because I didn't want to make a point, I didn't comment on other people's opinions and arguments, I didn't try to convince anyone that I was right and they were wrong. There was really nothing to discuss there. It was simple feedback. Nothing more, nothing less. Not everything has to turn into a discussion...

        Loading editor
    • Melicent wrote:

      I appreciate your "sorry" but, tbh, some things you've said in your reply made me wonder if you really mean it.

      I did but I am not here to convince you.

      And yes, I don't want you to discuss my opinion or feedback because I didn't want to make a point, I didn't comment on other people's opinions and arguments, I didn't try to convince anyone that I was right and they were wrong. There was really nothing to discuss there. It was simple feedback. Nothing more, nothing less. Not everything has to turn into a discussion...

      Sadly, these forums you will get get feedback and discussions on your feedback (just forewarning and not just by me (and I only responded cause I thought you were directing your comment at me in the first place) assuming ok my bad, but stating you love the placement of a licencing note comes across as an insincere statement, if you just said like I may have not even responded).

      I don't know if you are going to like posting on the community fandom because I cannot post a simple feedback without response almost anywhere here (example if you don't want to look it's a person basically saying my opinion is irrelevant using the 'apples and orange' argument to belittle me). So I am use to a quick and sometimes cheeky response to (what I thought was equal snark).

      What I am saying people will respond and sometimes in manners you will not like and they will not always apologize. And I am only as this community has made me to survive (tbh, I wish more moderators were around to keep people more civil but they are usually busy with more serious bullying).

      BUT we both digress we are derailing this thread (and risk being deleted) and if you really want to take this further maybe respond to my wall instead. I would happily be sincere, if I don't think I am being trolled and/or only take a cheeky position when I think someone is being insincere in the first place.

      Edit: This is me just giving insight of my on and off 8 years in community central.

        Loading editor
    • Licensing note 001

      Since no update on this yet and it still is driving me nuts. Until it is moved I have adjusted it to be less annoying (an for other's interested in a temp fix). I made it the same font size and colour as it is under when editing and moved to the right for better page flow.

      div.license-description {
          color: #606060;
          font-size: 9px;
          line-height: 4px;
          position: relative;
          text-align: right;
          }
      .license-description {
          margin: 2px 1px;
          }
      
        Loading editor
    • Why is there a license note on the bottom of each wiki?

        Loading editor
    • JoJoMKWUTeam wrote: Why is there a license note on the bottom of each wiki?

      Because Wikia put it there

        Loading editor
    • Sophiedp wrote:

      JoJoMKWUTeam wrote: Why is there a license note on the bottom of each wiki?

      Because Wikia put it there

      lol

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.