- 10,758
- 6,491
Guys. Drop this for now
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Okay. I will do so.Guys. Drop this for now
Well, I wouldn't particularly mind if we pushed a button so the powers and abilities sections for all of our profile pages suddenly switch to using bolded text. My main issues here have been that we either need clearly defined standards for exactly in what types of situations that bolded text should be used, or to switch to them to heavily encourage only using it, in which case it would require a lot of continuous work for me and others.This thread has gotten a bit weird since I looked away.
To be honest I can see both sides.
My original proposal for changing the P&A section was simply for the intended purpose of making the profiles look better.
This comes with the caveat that the profiles that look better will look inconsistent with the profiles that haven't been improved.
And realistically not all profiles can be improved in a short span of time without creating a huge amount of work.
But new standards can be set so that newly created profiles are changed to the new scheme and slowly older profiles can be updated over time.
I don't think the profiles look worse by having bolded abilities, and this is not comparable to bolding random letters or words in a profile.
If it were up to me alone, all named powers in that section would be bolded whether they're in the list format or the wall of text format. Preferably more profiles would use the list format than not, but I also want to respect people's choices when it comes to this and not enforce it uniformly on all fandoms.
I think that's fine but I'll note that standards will always have a level of subjectiveness to them, we can encourage using formats for specific kinds of profiles but it's never going to be a hard science.Anyway, we would likely need to rewrite the standards in our standard format for character profile page, both regarding bolded powers in large text blocks and when to use bullet point lists.
I don't know if that's an unquestionable upgrade, on my browser at least it takes a second for the referenced test to be highlighted when I hover over it and the process is a bit annoying, I can see it being even worse on mobile. There's also issues of references applying to multiple links sometimes, I've done that a lot for my comic book profiles. Won't work for all profiles IMO.We should probably also consider DontTalk's suggestion to gradually begin to use reference sections for Imgur links, but I am not certain, as that would be even more work, and our present formatting has worked quite well until now.
Well, we still either need to instruct our members to gradually switch standards, or specify roughly when they should use each option.I think that's fine but I'll note that standards will always have a level of subjectiveness to them, we can encourage using formats for specific kinds of profiles but it's never going to be a hard science.
Okay. Never mind then.I don't know if that's an unquestionable upgrade, on my browser at least it takes a second for the referenced test to be highlighted when I hover over it and the process is a bit annoying, I can see it being even worse on mobile. There's also issues of references applying to multiple links sometimes, I've done that a lot for my comic book profiles. Won't work for all profiles IMO.
I don't think a full switch is a good idea, we should just recommend situations where a format may or may not fit, but ultimately every profile is different and no matter what it will come down to the profile-maker's judgement. If it's a niche verse, they'll be happier with the profile and no one else will really mind unless it's a blatantly ugly profile, and if it's a popular one it will eventually be corrected by the greater opinion of the community if "wrong".Well, we still either need to instruct our members to gradually switch standards, or specify roughly when they should use each option.
Definitely.Okay then, but we still need to give some sort of instruction at least, even if it is just to try to distinguish between your two example types from earlier.
Something like this should work, no?* For profiles that make extensive use of justifications, such as for nearly every ability in the Powers & Abilities section, it is recommended that the abilities be bolded to make them distinct from the rest of the explanatory text of that section. Bolded abilities will generally be clearer to the reader especially when larger amounts of text are involved. See example here: , etc.
No, it's to make P&A more immediately readable, separating it from all the remaining text, not just links.The reason for this format change seems to be to draw more of a distinction between linked abilities, and linked scans in a profile. If all of the scans are in references, that distinction gets made easily, since there are no linked scans in the main text of the P&A.
Bigger P&A sections incur into this more, and it doesn't look good on ones with less text between powers. I think not wanting it to be mandatory is perfectly rational.It's hard for me to square this with you not wanting it to be mandatory.
If you're saying that, even without scans occupying the same type of text, that P&As aren't readable enough, that sounds like something that you'd want applied to every profile. Every single profile would have that issue with readability.
Subjectively, you think it's better. Have you checked what that's like on all browsers? And on mobile? I think it's quite a pain to have to move up and down, it's three clicks compared to one, there's a ton of objective "losses" just for something you perceive as better.If you hover over it instead of clicking it, yeah. There are some losses, but on net, I think it's better.
Ah, yes, two identical references that reference the exact same piece of text, that seems stupid as hell. Just put the links where they belong.I don't really understand what you mean by this. If you mean a single reference containing multiple links, you could do that, or you could not do that and instead have two different references.
Don't care, make your own thread. You're pushing your own thing on an unrelated thread, be more respectful of OP and those that have debated it before.Either way I don't see it as enough of an issue, or something that is substantially worse for certain profiles than the status quo of having an arbitrary-length sea of blue text that arbitrarily switches between links at certain points.
That isn't a counter to what's being proposed, you claiming this one option is better than the other isn't an argument against letting this option through, that's dookie ass reasoning, actually counter the argument.It isn't unrelated. I said "I disagree with the OP because I think this other solution is better." You did not have to debate me on the merits of the other solution. Just treat it as me disagreeing and move on if you don't want to talk about it.
And it is extremely common in threads to disagree with the OP's solution to a problem and then propose an alternate solution. People don't start entirely new CRTs every single time they interpret a scan as "Status Effect Inducement" instead of "Paralysis Inducement".
No, I would consider it an objective loss given the time required to check the scan is, objectively, higher.Yep, this is a subjective topic. I wouldn't call you feeling like it's a pain an "objective loss". I don't think there's much point in me regaling the reasons I think it's better since it is subjective, after all.
Say a character in a comic book issue performs a Stealth Mastery feat, then showcases Fire Manipulation. There would be two different Imgur links to the two feats, but the reference would be "Captain Superdude Vol 1 233" for both.I still don't understand what you're talking about. If they're identical references for the same thing they'd use the <ref name> system.
You're right, third disagreement versus what, fifteen agreements?It isn't unrelated. I said "I disagree with the OP because I think this other solution is better." You did not have to debate me on the merits of the other solution. Just treat it as me disagreeing and move on if you don't want to talk about it.
There's a difference between "this is wrong, it's actually this" and "I think this is wrong because this unrelated, unaccepted thing does a similar job". We have over a dozen people agreeing with bolded P&A while you couldn't prove that more than three do yours. So no, it's not an "alternate solution".And it is extremely common in threads to disagree with the OP's solution to a problem and then propose an alternate solution. People don't start entirely new CRTs every single time they interpret a scan as "Status Effect Inducement" instead of "Paralysis Inducement".
Thank you!About the links in the references and mobile, as someone who the last months was visiting the wiki only with a mobile and tablet I can confidently say that see references is actually hard in those, so I generally believe would be better to not put the scans in inside them.
* For profiles that make extensive use of justifications, such as for nearly every ability in the Powers & Abilities section, it is recommended that the abilities be bolded to make them distinct from the rest of the explanatory text of that section. Bolded abilities will generally be clearer to the reader especially when larger amounts of text are involved. See example here: , etc.
I tried doing it, this is a modification of what the page currently has for bullet point + list things
4) Bullet Points and Bolding Formats (Optional: Abilities can be listed in paragraph format as above, but for more than just a small number of abilities, it may be clearer if the abilities are displayed in a list which displays the abilities in an organized fashion. See examples of pages that have incorporated bullet points successfully here and here. Abilities in this format should be bolded to help distinguish them from the rest of the text. It's also possible to bold abilities while maintaining a paragraph format, which may work particularly well in profiles with larger amounts of text between abilities. See successful examples of this here and here)
Yes, I also think that seems fine to apply, but we should preferably wait for @DontTalkDT and @AKM sama .That looks fine to me.
That looks good to me. For the examples, I think you could use this profile, which already shows how the format works, and this profile, which doesn’t have the bolded format yet, but would benefit from it.I tried doing it, this is a modification of what the page currently has for bullet point + list things
4) Bullet Points and Bolding Formats (Optional: Abilities can be listed in paragraph format as above, but for more than just a small number of abilities, it may be clearer if the abilities are displayed in a list which displays the abilities in an organized fashion. See examples of pages that have incorporated bullet points successfully here and here. Abilities in this format should be bolded to help distinguish them from the rest of the text. It's also possible to bold abilities while maintaining a paragraph format, which may work particularly well in profiles with larger amounts of text between abilities. See successful examples of this here and here)