Forum:Brickipedia: The reincarnation/Appearance

Forums - Brickipedia: The reincarnation/Appearance

This page is waiting to be archived by an administrator. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Default Skin This section is resolved, but preserved for record-keeping purposes. Please do not edit this area. Votes/comments made after 03:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC) will not be counted. We have a number of skins, the default is Refreshed. Do we want to stick with Refreshed as the default? uh yeah... unless we switch to Vector. None of the other skins are being developed for anymore. --ToaMeiko (talk) 01:45, 3 July 2014 (UTC) Yes. CJC95 (talk) 19:23, 3 July 2014 (UTC) Refreshed is the only skin I use, the rest I'm not bothered by. Besides, this skin looks less Wikia wiki like so I quite like it. SKP4472 (Admin) 17:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC) Appearance of skins Obviously, all skins can be customised. Currently the only customised ones are Refreshed and Deep Sea as far as I know. Do we want to customise the other skins, and do we want to change anything about the current look of the skins? Don't customise monobook or vector because most people who deliberately use those skins use it because its default and the "pure" MediaWiki look. --ToaMeiko (talk) 01:45, 3 July 2014 (UTC) I think I mentioned this before elsewhere, but I find that the dark blue used for Refreshed on En is, well, too dark, and contrasts too much with the white background behind the text. This is the main reason I don't use it, actually. Should a lighter blue be perhaps used, like the one for Deep Sea? BrickfilmNut (talk) 21:04, 3 July 2014 (UTC) In my opinion the bright blue on DeepSea is too bright which is why I don't use that (and because I develop for Refreshed of course). --ToaMeiko (talk) 06:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC) Many people did complement deep sea initially becuase of it's lighter colour (especially compared to oasis on wikia), so perhaps this may be a good idea. (Personally, I don't mind either way) UltrasonicNXT (talk) Example of a lighter Refreshed. Like NXT, I don't really mind either way, (but that's probably because I don't use Refreshed regularly enough to care) NovaHawk 23:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC) I also don't use Refreshed, so feel free to ignore my $0.02, but I do like that lighter shade better than the deep blue.^ Berrybrick (talk) 00:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC) I guess I can deal with that. Does it look good on the upcoming redesign of Refreshed though? --ToaMeiko (talk) 18:12, 11 July 2014 (UTC) Main Page Should anything on the main page need to be changed/added/removed? Could use a redesign with more modern design (basically what we have is a table with blocks of content all over it). --ToaMeiko (talk) 01:45, 3 July 2014 (UTC) It seems we are always looking to redesign our main page every few months. I say go for it, but I hope that whatever you do is something people can be happy with for a while. Berrybrick (talk) 02:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC) People are always looking for it, but its never been too much of an overhaul really - we add a thing or remove a thing but that's about it - the basic layout has always been the same :P CJC95 (talk) 19:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC) Not sure what would be redesigned, but yeah, it could look a bit more modern like Meiko was saying. BrickfilmNut (talk) 21:04, 3 July 2014 (UTC) The main page at lmow: is a nice example of a more modern design. Now of course I don't want to copy LMOW's main page because as you can tell we have a bad habit of copying main pages from our other projects, but we can go for something more like that with images that stand out and also highlight the content rather than just blocks of text in every table cell. --ToaMeiko (talk) 06:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC) Something like that would be nice, but I also think that it should be longer here. I'd say do whatever you want. Berrybrick (talk) 18:54, 7 July 2014 (UTC) I love the lmow: main page, something like that would look really nice (Though I agree we do not want to copy it as that has become a bad habit). -NBP3.0 (talk) 15:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC) Agree with most above, some more images and things would be nice. Also a bit of attention to the wikiforums to try and draw attention would be good (as discussed in the wikiforum section) NovaHawk 23:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC) I think the problem with the Wikiforums is that they are horrible to use :( --LK901 12:29, 27 October 2014 (UTC) So, there is a consensus for redesign, so how should we redesign? CJC95 (talk) 22:21, 25 July 2014 (UTC) Just an idea for the main page, take it, delete it, change it/improve it, whatever. Some points: The whole nav section buttons should link, at the moment, only the text does. I can't be bothered trying to get it to work if it's going to be thrown out, but I can do something with it if it's ever going to be used. The "latest news" links can be changed to black to match the rest The spacing in the "Recent forums" area is messed up. That's because the only way to get a list of forums is with a huge ugly table, but most of it is hidden with CSS. I can try to fix the spacing up if the idea's used It's not very compatible right now (doesn't work in Firefox, on smaller screens/mobile, etc). Which is why I linked to a screenshot, not the actual page. It's probably a bit bland, and could do with a main background image overlay with bricks or something, and maybe some background icons (like the BOTM icon as a background image for the BOTM div). But I can't get background images working on here for some reason. NovaHawk (talk) 12:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC) I might improve on that. It's a nice start. --ToaMeiko (talk) 17:26, 22 September 2014 (UTC) I like it a lot, definitely will work as a base template for a new main page. -NBP3.0 (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC) Ok, so what needs to be changed on the page to get it to a decent standard? NovaHawk (talk) 23:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC) Could the main page possibly in the news section advertise reviews? Soupperson1 Friends are Forever! <3 Monaco This section is resolved, but preserved for record-keeping purposes. Please do not edit this area. Votes/comments made after 03:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC) will not be counted. Wikia once released a skin, Monaco, then because people seemed to love it, took it away (personally I still preferred Monobook, but I know the majority of users who used Bricki during that period were using Monaco). However, there is a port of the skin here. Would people be interested in having that back? (I don't know if it's technically possible/hard/time consuming to install) NovaHawk 23:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC) Would rather not implement more skins that we'd have to cater to in desig and development. --ToaMeiko (talk) 16:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC) At the end of the day, I don't see many people using it - the few of us who experienced it are using other skins happily anyway. CJC95 (talk) 20:07, 9 July 2014 (UTC) Refreshed Redesign Many of you have heard that Refreshed is being redesigned in an upcoming version. You can see this upcoming version in its current state here. Through playing around with it, are there any features you would like to see implemented into the upcoming release that would be useful on this wiki? --ToaMeiko (talk) 18:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Suggestions Just leave any general suggestions/feedback on it here. If your comment is about the mobile version, please make it clear that the mobile version is what you're talking about. :) Category 2 could be featured pages links? Just a thought. Also, the gradient does not look with the logo having been moved --LK901 18:30, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Looks much better than the current Refreshed to me. Only thing I can see is that the logo could do with some padding on the left. And I'm guessing the toolbox is going underneath the nav? NovaHawk (talk) 23:21, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Toolbox links appear under "more" where you see links for edit, etc. --ToaMeiko (talk) 15:39, 27 October 2014 (UTC) Header Categories A new feature you'll see on the new version in the desktop mode of the skin is the category dropdowns in the header. These can be customised extensively. What ideas of categories and content do you think should be added on Brickipedia? There can be any number of categories, but the simpler the navigation the better. Recent Themes, <something else>, Community — Recent Themes of course would be links to new/recent theme pages. Community would have useful links for community members, such as Featured Articles, Forums, etc. I couldn't think of another category but there should probably be at least three total. Three is a good number. It will also take some testing, but depending on if MediaWiki accepts it, using SMW to generate parts of the list that the header categories run on could allow for some categories such as "Featured Articles" or "Recent News" without having to manually update it. This is something that will have to be tested once we deploy it here unless someone who wants to test it out ahead of time would like me to try setting SMW up on my test wiki. --ToaMeiko (talk) 18:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Two ideas for additional categories: "Editing", with things like the Manual of Style included, which could be quite convenient, and "Exploring LEGO" or something, which, unlike "Recent Themes", would allow some first-time readers to access some of the broader or interesting pages about LEGO itself, like LEGO. Then "News" should be included within another category, but I don't think it needs to be it's own. It could be under something like the "Exploring LEGO" idea, or we could broaden "Recent Themes" a bit. BrickfilmNut (talk) 18:29, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Recent pages? As in on the homepage with a picture Soupperson1 Friends are Forever! <3 That would also require SMW I believe, but would be a lot harder to make since it would probably have to get the titles from Special:NewPages, and we'd have to figure out how to make the function ignore things like redirects. --ToaMeiko (talk) 19:19, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Ill look into it next week :P Though I'm not sure where to start, I'll trySoupperson1 Friends are Forever! <3 Actually, it would be pretty easy to construct a SMW query without any need for NewPages. I just did some searching, and I came across a special property that wasn't around when I was first trying to set up reviews- "Creation date". This is disabled by default though, but if you could change the variable $smwgPageSpecialProperties to $smwgPageSpecialProperties = array( '_MDAT', '_CDAT' );, it should be able to be done all through SMW. NovaHawk (talk) 23:18, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Neat. I guess we'll have to see how SMW works in the MediaWiki page for the header categories then. The page works like MediaWiki:Sidebar if you didn't already figure that out. NovaHawk, would you want to test SMW on it on my test wiki? Go ahead and make an account there and I can try to set up SMW if you want. --ToaMeiko (talk) 00:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC) If we ever get a review team, recent reviews would be nice Soupperson1 Jeepers!