• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Powers & Abilities Formatting [Staff Only]

Damage3245

He/Him
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
29,679
24,577
This is a thread for staff members to discuss the formatting of Powers & Abilities sections, recent changes to some pages, and what we could do going forwards.

To give an example of previous general formatting and the issues with it, here is a screenshot of what Garou's page used to look like:


Powers_list.PNG


I think that people can see the issues with it at first place. It's a huge wall of text; mostly blue thanks to the heavy use of links with the abilities and the justifications sort of blending together making it difficult and annoying to read.

It was agreed upon unanimously in this thread to change it, and my suggested formatting was accepted so that the page looks like this:

FBF5KYT.png


There are three main changes:

1) Abilities are bolded. This makes them stand out, they're the first thing you see and the unbolded justification follows them. It is essentially no different to how we bold ratings further down the page.

2) Abilities are bullet-pointed. Instead of a colossal wall of text where each abilities and justification carries on straight into the next, each ability and its justification is on their own line. We already do this for Notable Attacks/Techniques where these attacks are listed individually. If we can do it there, we can do it for abilities as well.

3) A scrollbox is used to contain the extended list of abilities. Yes, I know that bullet-pointing the list makes the overall Power & Abilities section longer, but this solution takes care of that. It is now optional to choose whether to scroll through Garou's abilities or scroll down the rest of the page instead. Obviously not every profile, whether they're using bullet points or not, is going to need this solution as it should only be used for excessively large sections. So this is optional.


I'd be happy for discussions to go ahead on what people think of these changes overall but I'd like to pre-emptively address some possible objections by providing a few other suggested guidelines for Power & Abilities sections.

1) Brevity; not all abilities need a paragraph of justifications after them. Just enough of a description to justify the ability, a source link or reference to go along with it. Additional information could be placed in the "Notable Attacks/Techniques" section if appropriate.

2) Tabbers; information on abilities can be split along multiple tabs as it is done on Garou's page now, so that all of the abilities aren't in one huge list but multiple (usually going by keys or transformations). Sometimes splitting up Resistances from Abilities can be done this way too, like is currently used on Superman's Post-Crisis page.

3) Compactness. Sometimes a single justification can be used for multiple abilities. In that case, the abilities don't necessarily need to be on distinct bullet-points if they fit better together. For example a bullet point can look like this:

  • Teleportation and Interdimensional Travel (X's magical ability allows him to teleport, even across dimensions)

All of these general guidelines can further reduce the bloat on pages whether or not it is for a bullet-pointed list or a wall of text.


Lastly one other thing:

4) Not mandatory: I am not suggested that these highly beneficial changes be mandatory. I don't have the time or patience to go through nearly 30,000 profiles and change them to this format. If a page benefits from this new format, then it can be updated and gradually I suspect a large portion of the wiki's will change over time to this. But it's not something we need to spend countless hours implementing for the sake of implementing everywhere.
 
I mean as an optional thing sure ig?
Likely won't use it myself but looks fine
 
Yes, we'll need to word something that tells them to put this code at the beginning of the list of abilities:

<div class="scrollable" style="overflow:auto; max-height:600px; width:{{{width|100%}}}; -moz-border-radius-topleft:0.5em; border:1px solid #AAAAAA; padding-left:0.5em; background:transparent;">

And this code at the end:


And that will make the scrollbox.
 
Yeah, as OP says it should be definitely optional and case-by-case. Even my long pages would not profit from it, since I generally format my P&A sections differently to begin with.

One suggestion: If we do bulletpoints then IMO the justifications shouldn't be in brackets behind the abliities. Instead, just do a ":" Like for the Notable Attack&Techniques section. I mean, really, this is basically just moving the Notable A/T section upwards.
 
Yeah, as OP says it should be definitely optional and case-by-case. Even my long pages would not profit from it, since I generally format my P&A sections differently to begin with.

One suggestion: If we do bulletpoints then IMO the justifications shouldn't be in brackets behind the abliities. Instead, just do a ":" Like for the Notable Attack&Techniques section. I mean, really, this is basically just moving the Notable A/T section upwards.
Main reason I've avoided that is just because it is a slight amount more extra work to delete all the brackets and add in the ":" whereas keeping it in brackets is a bit easier for transforming the current format into the bullet-pointed list.

It's also a bit more consistent with those pages that don't use the new format and still have brackets.
 
This seems good, I like it with a scrollbox, since that was one of the main hurdles that being too long just looks bad. I also like them being bolded that's a great aesthetical addition. Of course it would be option since it's really unrealistic to update 30k profiles.

The only thing I would add is that we seriously need to stop linking scans by highlighting the whole damn text, it looks horrible. You can just highlight one or two words, it looks much better (like Paul Atreides's profile) than just a sea of blue not telling where the ability is verses the text (although here the ability is bolded that helps alleviate this.
 
Main reason I've avoided that is just because it is a slight amount more extra work to delete all the brackets and add in the ":" whereas keeping it in brackets is a bit easier for transforming the current format into the bullet-pointed list.

It's also a bit more consistent with those pages that don't use the new format and still have brackets.
I mean, we're not doing mass-editing for this, so the slightly bigger workload shouldn't matter.
And, IMO, it just looks much better. It's proper punctuation and all that. Given that it will be very inconsistent with the non-bullet-point pages anyway, we might as will go for the better looking option.
 
I mean, we're not doing mass-editing for this, so the slightly bigger workload shouldn't matter.
And, IMO, it just looks much better. It's proper punctuation and all that. Given that it will be very inconsistent with the non-bullet-point pages anyway, we might as will go for the better looking option.
Well, I don't have a problem with that.
 
I agree with this, it's definitely easier on the eyes that's for sure.

The only thing I would add is that we seriously need to stop linking scans by highlighting the whole damn text, it looks horrible. You can just highlight one or two words, it looks much better (like Paul Atreides's profile) than just a sea of blue not telling where the ability is verses the text (although here the ability is bolded that helps alleviate this.
The sea of blue is an issue, though I will admit that I do this but out of habit.
 
Not staff but wanna mention something. For abilities that go together, like

"Teleportation and Interdimensional Travel (X's magical ability allows him to teleport, even across dimensions)"
For example, like in the OP, instead I would've done,
"Teleportation & Interdimensional Travel (X's magical ability allows him to teleport, even across dimensions)"

For combo listings or one in the same listings like that, swap "and" with an ampersand "&", that is all.
I think it looks nicer plus is slightly more compact 🗿

Or don't, I just thought I'd mention it.
 
Looks a lot better than just a wall of text for sure
 
Proposals overall look good and they are optional which is cool; I think Ogbunabali's suggestions of limiting the blue highlighting would improve them also; I think the changes are overall fine.
 
I think this format is a good idea, but I am not looking forward to any like mass staff wide revision project to go through every page. And it would make it easier to separate resistances from main abilities too.
 
I think this is actually not as good an idea as one might think. In general, I am extremely in favor of uniformity in our profiles. Allowing some profiles to look colossally different from others is counter-intuitive to this symmetry I prefer. So I'd rather not, really, since moving to change all profiles to fit this format is obviously a huge workload for no good purpose.

I don't think the textwalls are insane anyways.

Pass.
 
@Mr. Bambu; thanks for the input.

In this case, I think that improving the pages takes priority over perfect uniformity (since we don't have perfect uniformity anyway; some profiles have images, some don't. Some profiles have references, some don't. Some profiles have Notable Attacks, some don't. Etc.)

I think this format is a good idea, but I am not looking forward to any like mass staff wide revision project to go through every page. And it would make it easier to separate resistances from main abilities too.

Don't worry. No mass staff, site-wide revisions will be necessary for this.
 
@Mr. Bambu; thanks for the input.

In this case, I think that improving the pages takes priority over perfect uniformity (since we don't have perfect uniformity anyway; some profiles have images, some don't. Some profiles have references, some don't. Some profiles have Notable Attacks, some don't. Etc.)



Don't worry. No mass staff, site-wide revisions will be necessary for this.
If it were a major improvement, I would agree. A minor, purely aesthetic perceived upgrade, however, isn't that. Just my opinion, obviously my vote alone does not overturn that of the wiki at large, but it is an opinion I keep. Also, I would like to point out a core difference with the examples you use- the suggested change is an alternative format to an existing section, rather than an optional section.
 
I mean it's purely a visual thing, I can't say I'd consider it major too
 
I mean it's purely a visual thing, I can't say I'd consider it major too
I mean in terms of the difference between the initial presentation of Garou's abilities to how it's structured now. May be quite subjective, but for me personally the readability is a major improvement.
 
It's a visual thing either way, I don't really like how it looks personally so
 
I'd recommend references over links in most cases. Makes things way more readable; a block of text with references is way better than a block of text with a shitload of links and I think is also an acceptable alternative. Personally I think that would be preferable to this change. People can simply learn how to format what we have better.
 
I'd recommend references over links in most cases. Makes things way more readable; a block of text with references is way better than a block of text with a shitload of links and I think is also an acceptable alternative. Personally I think that would be preferable to this change. People can simply learn how to format what we have better.
I agree that promoting references should be done more in general.
 
I greatly love the format. I have trouble reading the P&A and did't think there was an easier way to read them for the longest time.

Agree with the promotion of references, disagree with removing links tho
 
The formatting seems much more readable with this suggestion rather than to squint trying to look for any abilities they might have, so I agree with replacing the current format with this.
 
I'd recommend references over links in most cases. Makes things way more readable; a block of text with references is way better than a block of text with a shitload of links and I think is also an acceptable alternative. Personally I think that would be preferable to this change. People can simply learn how to format what we have better.
Well, we already have a rule about that our pages should contain references, and I don't think that this revision interferes with that. It is just intended as an option to make our pages more easily overviewed that can be used when necessary.
 
What I was saying is that I think properly adding references is better than this.
 
Okay, no problem. So you do not have a problem with this revision then?
 
Back
Top