Jump to content

User talk:Xolatron/Archive

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This Archive is for old messages, so that my talk page doesn't get clogged up. Nut if you'd like to reply to something here, feel free to, I watch this page. -Xol 01:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Welcome

[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Xolatron/Archive, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Nufy8 20:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Time saving

[edit]

I've found using templates as much as possible to be both a time saver, and more pleasing to the eye; a useful template to use on Lists of... pages is the "main article" template. It works like this: {{main|The Main Article's Title}}. Simpler to read the source of, less laborious to read, and this way if the house style for Wikipedia ever changes, all the "See main articles.." can be changed in a stroke. Not to mention it's easier to use than tediously typing the full form again and again. --maru (talk) Contribs 23:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both very much. The {{main|The Main Article's Title}} is great. I've looked through most of the Wikipedia introduction pages. -Xol 01:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


{{User game| APBR| Full Game Title| color=green| fav=yes}}

[edit]

I'm not sure I get your thinking behind this template. Yes, it is a good idea to have a general template that a user can fill in to meet your needs - but as this template gives you the option of colour, title, if it's your favorite or not - isn't it just the same as a user making a game userbox themselves? Morgan695 02:46, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the theory behind it is that instead of having 100 userboxes for each different game out there, there can be a few simple outlines that canbe fully customizable, but can still "sense" themes by themselves. If you look at the code, it's very simple to add more games to the list of one's that it pre-knows. Sure, it could use a few more options (sucha s an image or fint-size), but I haven't had the time for thoise yet. And of course, it's kind of silly having two userboxes just because to some people, it's the greatest game in the world, while to others it is just another good game. -Xol 19:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I created Template:User game-0, Template:User game-1, Template:User game-2 amd Template:User game-3. Is there a point to this template anymore? Morgan695 21:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Color schemes. I find it's nicer to have more options in 1 userbox rather than taking advantage of the name as a parameter. Sure, there's more coding, but it's worth it to standardize things. Besides, having complex color schemes etc. is simpler for one template than 3.


Userboxes

[edit]

I just wanted to say I agrree with you that iserboxes should just been seen as the opinion of the person whose page they appear on. Honestly, it's really kind of amusing to me that this issue is being debated period. I suppose tho that if we are forced to get rid of "POV" userboxes, then I'll just write it all out out. --Brian1979 23:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I too am surprised that so many people oppose viewpoints in the form of boxes. Perhaps they need {{User ubx-0}} :). -Xol 23:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks

[edit]

Thanks for the userbox update... I should have fixed it myself. Y0u | Y0ur talk page 21:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; you're welcome. -Xol 19:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


metric

[edit]

Couldn't the userbox project save a lot of time by using WP:AWB? Cynical 20:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks neat, thanks. -Xol 23:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]