- 167,703
- 76,304
- Thread starter
- #41
Anyway, Tupka217 (the boss of the DC Comics wiki) told me that we can use multiple images in a portable infobox, either with <panel> or <gallery>, just in case anybody is unaware.
-
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.
We may need a standard portable infobox for our profile pages
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
- Status
- 31,297
- 27,526
Yeah, that is something we can do.
The Son Goku example linked up above has an example of that.
The Son Goku example linked up above has an example of that.
- 2,463
- 928
Aight. I'll help with the mobile adaptation anyways.
For the characters that take a lot of space in width, when cutting images, the focus should be directed to the face. This likely should be analyzed case-to-case as the "face" is not always seen with the machinery or non-standard monsters and co.
For the characters that take a lot of space in width, when cutting images, the focus should be directed to the face. This likely should be analyzed case-to-case as the "face" is not always seen with the machinery or non-standard monsters and co.
- 31,297
- 27,526
@Skalt711; the versus match-up section won't be in the new infobox.
- 31,297
- 27,526
We can do a few test infoboxes in a sandbox with those types of images to check how they'd look.
Bobsican
He/Him- 21,628
- 6,273
It would be funny if this was something that a bot could handle, but with all the different style pages can have on this... yeah, this will have to be slowly applied manually.
This seems fine, so long "Quotes" are also supported on this per picture, among other things that many are customized with currently.
This seems fine, so long "Quotes" are also supported on this per picture, among other things that many are customized with currently.
- 167,703
- 76,304
- Thread starter
- #54
One problem is how this would affect our Standard Format for Character Profiles and Standard Format for Weapon Profiles pages. Should keep the old layout instructions side by side with the new ones, or just suddenly replace them?
In addition, we would need to update the code for the "Standard layout" page, that is used as an option when our members create new profile pages.
In addition, we would need to update the code for the "Standard layout" page, that is used as an option when our members create new profile pages.
- 31,411
- 34,222
I think side by side works if a new one gets made, but I do agree that someone should create a new layout at some point.
- 3,074
- 676
What exactly is the code for the infobox thing?
- 31,297
- 27,526
Here is a quick example using a modified version of Prom's existing template. Obviously I think the styling can be improved a bit, probably with a smaller heading but this is just what's there so far.
(Minor Parahumans / Worm spoilers for anyone who doesn't want to look at Alexandria's page.)
(Minor Parahumans / Worm spoilers for anyone who doesn't want to look at Alexandria's page.)
- 8,675
- 5,560
Damage's infobox works perfectly fine with me.
- 167,703
- 76,304
- Thread starter
- #61
I am fine with it except that I do not think that we use "Affiliation" as standard information for our profile pages. I would also prefer to avoid making the "Personal Description" section collapsible (via an arrow).
- 31,297
- 27,526
The collapsible bit was just for people's convenience if they wanted to show less of the infobox. The full list of info is displayed by default.
But I don't mind removing it.
As for Affiliation, I think that in cases where we've categorized characters by a group or team they belong to, we could link that category in that row of the infobox so that people could more easily access other profiles that are linked to the profile they're on.
It is also an optional field, so if people don't put anything in there for affiliation, then the field won't be displayed on the infobox.
But I don't mind removing it.
As for Affiliation, I think that in cases where we've categorized characters by a group or team they belong to, we could link that category in that row of the infobox so that people could more easily access other profiles that are linked to the profile they're on.
It is also an optional field, so if people don't put anything in there for affiliation, then the field won't be displayed on the infobox.
- 167,703
- 76,304
- Thread starter
- #63
Okay. It is important information to display though, most other wikis don't seem to use collapsible infoboxes, and the arrow is aesthetically inappropriate in my opinion.
I suppose that the "Affiliation" section does not cause any harm then.
I suppose that the "Affiliation" section does not cause any harm then.
- 31,297
- 27,526
@KLOL506; the references system is already in place on several profiles and is completely optional. I just copied what was on an existing profile for the example.
The example is there to demonstrate how the infobox would look on a profile.
The example is there to demonstrate how the infobox would look on a profile.
- 8,675
- 5,560
"The collapsible bit was just for people's convenience if they wanted to show less of the infobox. The full list of info is displayed by default."
What's the harm in letting someone collapse it? That doesn't mean they're just gonna disregard it. It's fine.
What's the harm in letting someone collapse it? That doesn't mean they're just gonna disregard it. It's fine.
- 8,675
- 5,560
I have no idea what you mean by "aesthetically obnoxious", it's completely fine and just as many wikis use it.
- 167,703
- 76,304
- Thread starter
- #70
Are you sure? I haven't noticed it in major wikis and want any all-encompassing standard to be as simple and straightforward as possible.
In addition, as I mentioned, I find the arrow out of place/annoying, and the collapsible function pointless, and would much prefer to avoid applying such a standard to most of our profiles in the long run, as I constantly have to look at it otherwise. I would appreciate if you would drop this issue please.
In addition, as I mentioned, I find the arrow out of place/annoying, and the collapsible function pointless, and would much prefer to avoid applying such a standard to most of our profiles in the long run, as I constantly have to look at it otherwise. I would appreciate if you would drop this issue please.
- 31,297
- 27,526
I don't have any problem removing it. I don't have any issues with it being there either, but if you'd prefer it removed then that can be done.
EDIT: It has been removed now.
EDIT: It has been removed now.
- 8,675
- 5,560
I'm not going to drop some random, personal aesthetic issue you have just because you dislike looking at a useful function a page. Plenty of wikis (the Jojo and TYPE-MOON ones come to mind) use collapsible infoboxes.
- 167,703
- 76,304
- Thread starter
- #74
Well, by my experience it is more common for major wikis to not have an asymetrical out off place arrow that hides relevant information in their infoboxes. It doesn't serve any useful purpose, and it makes the infobox uglier to look at. I want any change on this scale to be aesthetically optimal/look as good as possible.
- 8,675
- 5,560
It doesn't make it uglier to look at. I think you're the only person that thinks that, and it's not like it hides anything by default. There's no harm in allowing someone to just click it away; that information listed is rarely relevant to versus matches anyways.
- 167,703
- 76,304
- Thread starter
- #76
Well, I much prefer everything to look neat and tidy, especially a standardised function such as this, and given that the arrow looks out of place/makes the infobox look asymetrical, and the function seems pointless to me, that makes it unnecessary/redundant in my view. My apologies.
- 8,675
- 5,560
It looks neat and tidy to me, and most of everyone else. I'm not gonna drop this. It's a completely harmless function. We can't determine the site's formatting based on what you find personally pleasing alone, and you can't just shush me over such a trivial matter.
- 31,297
- 27,526
@Antvasima; I feel like the Promestein does have a point. If you feel strongly about it, then we should get more staff input since it shouldn't be just one person's decision.
Also, it might be possible to customize the collapsible functionality to improve the aesthetics of it. I'll look into it.
Also, it might be possible to customize the collapsible functionality to improve the aesthetics of it. I'll look into it.
- 167,703
- 76,304
- Thread starter
- #80
I think that making the infobox as symmetrical and straightforward as possible seems like a better option for something that will eventually be shown in most of our pages, but do not think that the issue is worth getting upset about. In reverse, if you look at Damage's current version, is that really so horrible to you?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
