FANDOM


m (Pics per row: re)
m (Pics per row: Thanks for the reply)
Line 77: Line 77:
 
Hi, Renegade. Just curious: Is four pics wide in a gallery still causing it to overflow off the page for you? I ask because a couple of weeks ago, I knocked a gallery down to three pics per row and someone upped it backed to four (I'm sorry, I don't remember what page that was on). So that's why I put it at four on the [[Mudd androids]] page. Anyway, four pics per row fit perfectly on my screen and I'm not aware of any strange resolution I'm using, but if that's still too wide for some people to view, I'll be glad to adjust any that I see to three pics per row from here on. I think most of the galleries on the site are set to four, however. Should we start using three as the standard? Thanks! -- [[User:Bridge|Bridge]] 19:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 
Hi, Renegade. Just curious: Is four pics wide in a gallery still causing it to overflow off the page for you? I ask because a couple of weeks ago, I knocked a gallery down to three pics per row and someone upped it backed to four (I'm sorry, I don't remember what page that was on). So that's why I put it at four on the [[Mudd androids]] page. Anyway, four pics per row fit perfectly on my screen and I'm not aware of any strange resolution I'm using, but if that's still too wide for some people to view, I'll be glad to adjust any that I see to three pics per row from here on. I think most of the galleries on the site are set to four, however. Should we start using three as the standard? Thanks! -- [[User:Bridge|Bridge]] 19:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 
:No, four is fine for all my screens... in fact, five is fine for all mine, and six or more is good for my home computer (wide-screen monitor). I switch them from the default of four when there are more than four images (and it's not an even multiple of four) just to even out the formatting a bit. If there are six, I set perrow to 3. If there are five or ten, I was setting perrow to 5, but apparently that doesn't fit on some screens, so setting it to 3 is a good compromise. -- [[User:Renegade54|Renegade54]] 19:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 
:No, four is fine for all my screens... in fact, five is fine for all mine, and six or more is good for my home computer (wide-screen monitor). I switch them from the default of four when there are more than four images (and it's not an even multiple of four) just to even out the formatting a bit. If there are six, I set perrow to 3. If there are five or ten, I was setting perrow to 5, but apparently that doesn't fit on some screens, so setting it to 3 is a good compromise. -- [[User:Renegade54|Renegade54]] 19:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  +
I agree three looks much better when there are more than four and not an even multiple of four. Like I mentioned, I would have set it at three to begin with if it hadn't been for someone changing it the last time I tried to do that on some other page. Strange, though, that five is OK for you. On my screen, the fifth picture ends up outside of the box in that empty void on the right side of the screen caused by the Wikia spotlights and Google ads. Must be that way for others, too. I seem to remember seeing someone else (Jorg, possibly) changing five pics to four as well. Thanks! - [[User:Bridge|Bridge]] 19:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:41, May 30, 2008


Sole Asylum

Btw... the Captain's log entry in "Sole Asylum, Part One" had highlighting intentionally... since the comic book itself highlighted the words that way. Just so that you know. -- Sulfur 02:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Now I know. :P Feel free to revert it, by all means. I kinda think it looks odd, and I take some liberties with formatting when I'm doing blurbs from novels and such, stripping off excess bolding and caps, etc. But that's just me... :) -- Renegade54 04:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Incite template

Hey, R. A couple of months back, you reverted an edit on Template:Incite, which was fixing a problem with line breaks. Cid says it was because that fix broke something else. Can you remember what it was? It's just I've come across the line break issue myself today. -- Michael Warren | Talk 13:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The line break issue isn't consistent, so it doesn't show up every time. By hard-coding a line break in the template, it ends up fixing the issue when a break is needed, but causing a problem when it isn't. So far, the best solution I've found is to manually add a break after an incite when it's not breaking as it should. The real fix would be to find out why it breaks properly sometimes, but not others. I worked on it a while, and it stumped me. -- Renegade54 14:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Done!

I'm done with my stardates page! --From TrekkyStar Peace and Long Life 19:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Conference Planet

Discussion moved to Talk:Conference Planet.

L&O wiki

Hey Renegade, I just wanted to let you know that I've requested a spotlight for the L&O wiki. We'll see how that turns out :). We sure could use some more users. See ya! --Patricia 19:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! Sorry I haven't spent more time there lately... I still need to reply to a message over there (from you, I think). I'll try to do better! :) -- Renegade54 19:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries :). About that previous message... I wanted to now if you have any ideas for the mainpage and/or other sections on the wiki. I've had the advantage of setting up most of the basics, without anyone nagging at me, but I'd like to know your opinion about the changes I've made... Oh, and good work on the recent help pages. They are very much appreciated :) --Patricia 20:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Everything looks nice, as far as I'm concerned. The only problem I've run across so far is that on the main page, there's a "Law & Order" banner at the very top of the page that looks fine on my screen at work, but on my home computer, which has a wide-screen monitor, it tiles. The result is three "Law & Order" graphics appearing, one in the center, and one at each side of the screen. The ones at the right and left interfere with the existing graphics and links there at the top. I don't know if there's anything we can do about it... perhaps widen the "Law & Order" graphic with more black on both the right and left? I haven't had a chance to play with it yet. -- Renegade54 20:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Eelco and I are leaving for our two week holiday to Germany. That pretty much leaves you to look after the wiki... Would you be so kind to keep an eye on it, while we're away? Thanks! See you later. :)
--Patricia 18:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Reverting Vandalism

I just wanted to say that you're very good at reverting vadalism. I was trying to revert it too, but everytime I tried I saw that you got there first. Once again good job. Long live the United Earth

Hehe... thanks, I appreciate the complement, but admins have a few tools available to them that non-admins don't have access to. One of those is the ability to do a rollback of an article to a previous version with one click. Makes it a lot easier (and quicker!) -- Renegade54 01:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I know I'm an admin on the SciFi Wiki but nobody ever comes (not even the vandals), so I don't ever get to use it. Long Live the UE

Oh, ok... well, I'll try to send a few vandals your way so you can practice, then! ;) -- Renegade54 01:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but I can live without them.--Long Live the United Earth 01:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

VHS pages

Can I ask why the formatting has been changed? 50px is far too small an image size for the covers - they are now barely visible on my screen. The 100% table width is supposed to allow ease of display at any resolution, as it eliminates blank space on the right of the article for large resolutions, and wraps cell contents in the event of small resolutions. -- Michael Warren | Talk 15:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

50px is probably too small... I was going to go back and change them to 100px. I'm attempting to make them more like the magazine listing pages. I do understand what the purpose of the width=100% is, but most of our tables aren't set for 100% page width, so I was, again, trying to make the tables conform more to what tables on other pages are formatted like. Please feel free to revert or tweak them more... I can't work on them more until later. -- Renegade54 18:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, actually, most of the magazine listing pages use 150px and width=100% as well, because I created them in that way as a result of my work on the VHS pages... :D -- Michael Warren | Talk 19:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Episode Summaries/Quotes/BG Information

Btw... the "accepted" layout on Episode pages is to call the quotes section "Memorable Quotes" and the background "Background Information" as opposed to "Memorable quotes" and simply "Background". Why? I'm not sure. But it looks a bit better, and separates those pages out a bit more, something that's generally not required on the other pages. Possibly due to their mixed POV. Idaknow. Either way... :) -- Sulfur 13:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know... we went through this kinda thing before, with the "External links" section. Early on, I had been changing them to "External link" or "External links" (depending on the number) because I had been informed that the section headings should only have the first letter capitalized and the rest in lower case, unless words were proper nouns. I was then informed that it was to be "External Links" in all cases, not "External links" or "External Link" or "External link" (in the case of a single link). So I started going back and changing everything *back* to "External Links". Then, somewhere along the way, the "accepted" style became "External link" or "External links", depending. I wish "someone" (whoever that mythical person/thing/inanimate object is) would make up his/her/its %$#@! mind. -- Renegade54 13:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

"External link/s" is good. So there. Otherwise, I think that we should leave the episode articles as is, but feel free to happily change the rest. So says me. POV and Layout boy.

How's that? :) -- Sulfur 14:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

IRC

Could you come to the IRC for a minute. Thanks :) ---- Willie LLAP 19:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Award

Kirks medal of honor 2267

I here by award you the Starfleet Medal of Honor for you efforts at eradicating bad spelling and grammar and fixing erroneous links. Your contributions to Memory Alpha are a credit to you and all of humanity. ---- Willie LLAP 16:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh... thanks! -- Renegade54 16:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Tense questions

Hi, just trying to figure out the correct rules on tense. In the Tumor article, Sulfur changed my tense from "is" to "was" back in March, but now youve changed it back. Just slightly confused, as I typically side with the admin changes. Are there "official" tense policies somewhere? Thanks. -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 20:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

My logic was simply that it read better as "was" with the rest of the article... but half of the "eternal ideas" like that can really go either way comfortably. -- Sulfur 20:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
The official policy on tense is at Memory Alpha:Point of view#Tense. Sorry for the confusion! -- Renegade54 20:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Alien Spotlight

Just a note to say that the TPB was in fact released yesterday - see http://www.diamondcomics.com/shipping/newreleaseskf.txt (under 'Comics'). The release date was brought forward, and Amazon apparently did not update its listing. -- Michael Warren | Talk 21:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, ok, thanks for the update. I should've checked some sources other than Amazon, obviously. ;) -- Renegade54 21:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

TREK & C.S.I.3

Just curious what the email response you got from him was. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll forward it to you when I get home. -- Renegade54 21:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Pics per row

Hi, Renegade. Just curious: Is four pics wide in a gallery still causing it to overflow off the page for you? I ask because a couple of weeks ago, I knocked a gallery down to three pics per row and someone upped it backed to four (I'm sorry, I don't remember what page that was on). So that's why I put it at four on the Mudd androids page. Anyway, four pics per row fit perfectly on my screen and I'm not aware of any strange resolution I'm using, but if that's still too wide for some people to view, I'll be glad to adjust any that I see to three pics per row from here on. I think most of the galleries on the site are set to four, however. Should we start using three as the standard? Thanks! -- Bridge 19:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

No, four is fine for all my screens... in fact, five is fine for all mine, and six or more is good for my home computer (wide-screen monitor). I switch them from the default of four when there are more than four images (and it's not an even multiple of four) just to even out the formatting a bit. If there are six, I set perrow to 3. If there are five or ten, I was setting perrow to 5, but apparently that doesn't fit on some screens, so setting it to 3 is a good compromise. -- Renegade54 19:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree three looks much better when there are more than four and not an even multiple of four. Like I mentioned, I would have set it at three to begin with if it hadn't been for someone changing it the last time I tried to do that on some other page. Strange, though, that five is OK for you. On my screen, the fifth picture ends up outside of the box in that empty void on the right side of the screen caused by the Wikia spotlights and Google ads. Must be that way for others, too. I seem to remember seeing someone else (Jorg, possibly) changing five pics to four as well. Thanks! - Bridge 19:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.