Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Code to highlight admins on Recent Changes
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was no consensus, scheduled for discussion during the 6 January 2008 mofference. jSarek 03:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that SW Fanon has the ability to highlight their admins in green on the recent changes. Would that be helpful here? Squishy Vic has access to the code for transferral if the community agrees with the idea. -- Riffsyphon1024 11:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not opposed to the idea. Most of us who've been here for any length of time know who ya'll are. But for the newbies, would be good if they could see who it is they shuld go to if they have a question, or who it is they need to be listening to when they get corrected. - JMAS 12:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Also not opposed. Which is not exactly an enthusiastic "PLEASE DO THIS!" or anything. Mostly indifferent per JMAS. And I just have a question out of curiosity. My opinion will still be indifferent-leaning-towards-good-idea either way. But would this be a permanent change or something we could toggle like Advanced Recent Changes? Wildyoda 17:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Advanced Recent Changes toggles it on or off. It can also be changed by editing your personal monobook and nullifying the code. PinkyTalk
- Note: I originally thought you meant "highlight... in green" as in the same way that things in your watch list tell you "Updated since my last visit" with a green background on a page history, but this doesn't look quite so obnoxious as that. Complete indifference from me. Wildyoda 17:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm happy with it, I'm happy without it. I'm more interested in the way they have positive byte changes in green and negative byte changes in red. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 17:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- As with Culator, I'd definitely like to have the color coded addition/deletion thing, as I have for some time. The admin thing, I could take or leave, but I wouldn't mind it. -- Ozzel 19:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- I can provide both the code for the Administrator colors in the RC, as well as the positive/negative color notifications. As soon as Riffsyphon lets me know the final decision, I will can do so. Victor (talk) 21:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Count me among the indifferent-leaning-slightly-positive crowd. jSarek 22:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- I forgot about the colored positive/negative numbers. I would like those implimented as well. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes to the coloured numbers and per jSarek on the coloured admins bit. Green Tentacle (Talk) 13:09, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- If you guys really feel like going crazy, you could add this to your monobook.css. It makes a black background with yellow text, lol. Its hard to read templates though. PinkyTalk 21:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
By Riffsyphon1024's request, I will post the code for the positive/negative colors for changes in the recent changes below:
THE USERGROUP COLOR CHANGE CODE BELOW: (Note, this text in this line isn't needed for code to work)
Bureaucrats can be, for example, red:
ul.special li a[title="User:Riffsyphon1024"],
ul.special li a[title="User:WhiteBoy"],
ul.special li a[title="User:Imperialles"] { font-weight: bold;color:#cc0000; font-style: italic }
Administrators can be, for example, green:
ul.special li a[title="User:Atarumaster88"],
ul.special li a[title="User:Darth Culator"],
ul.special li a[title="User:jSarek"] { font-weight: bold;color:#009900; font-style: italic }
THE PLUS/MINUS CODE BELOW: (Note, this text in this line isn't needed for code to work)
span.mw-plusminus-pos {color: #006400;}
span.mw-plusminus-neg {color: #FF0000;}
Victor (talk) 06:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Rant
Sorry for noticing this too late, but I'm against this idea. In my opinion, it emphasizes the completely wrong idea that administrators are sufficiently different from regular users to warrant such "honoring". In my opinion, adminship is, for all intents and purposes, just a set of buttons, not a way to designate that certain users are "more equal than others". - Sikon 10:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Think of it as a pictorial, dumbed-down version of "Find Admin!" for new users who wouldn't necessarily read that box and click that link. That's all it is. Atarumaster88
(Talk page) 13:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- It also has the added advantage of showing which admins are around at the moment. Though the choice of colours leaves a lot to be desired. Green Tentacle (Talk) 13:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- I think it would be better if we left off the colours and italics and just had it in bold. Also, it's having the unwanted side effect of making edits to the admin's userpages in recent changes look coloured and whatnot. Also, the red for negative edits should probably be changed to #cc2200, so it fits in better with the other colours. -- I need a name (Complain here) 13:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- It also has the added advantage of showing which admins are around at the moment. Though the choice of colours leaves a lot to be desired. Green Tentacle (Talk) 13:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- And I am sorry that you did not see this thread, Sikon. It's not so much honoring as it simply is identification to help out those other users. Noone's more equal than another person. It was decided after some stagnation on the issue to try it out and see the reaction. I actually didn't go for the italics, but they must have slipped into the code. -- Riffsyphon1024 16:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, because showing admin usernames in green, bold, italic letters is definitely not glorifying them. Why can't we settle on something more subtle... dotted underline, maybe? Not that I'm happy with this idea to begin with, but since everyone else is advocating it, I guess I have no choice. - Sikon 17:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed the italics at least. Green seems settling on the eyes but stands out enough to grab the attention of one browsing through. Whether or not you like your name in red as bureaucrat is another question. -- Riffsyphon1024 17:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, what's the point of coloring BCs differently? Will the ordinary users know the difference anyway? And even if they do, is it relevant? - Sikon 02:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, Sikon brings up some valid points. For the purpose of someone needing the help of an admin, it doesn't matter whether or not they are a bureaucrat, so I say drop the separate color. (Besides, red was bad anyway). And I agree that bold and colored are too much; either one would be sufficient. -- Ozzel 03:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have now dropped the red in favor of all green bolding. I agree that bureaucrat distinction isn't nearly as important. Using all green was the original proposal anyway. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, Sikon brings up some valid points. For the purpose of someone needing the help of an admin, it doesn't matter whether or not they are a bureaucrat, so I say drop the separate color. (Besides, red was bad anyway). And I agree that bold and colored are too much; either one would be sufficient. -- Ozzel 03:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, what's the point of coloring BCs differently? Will the ordinary users know the difference anyway? And even if they do, is it relevant? - Sikon 02:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed the italics at least. Green seems settling on the eyes but stands out enough to grab the attention of one browsing through. Whether or not you like your name in red as bureaucrat is another question. -- Riffsyphon1024 17:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, because showing admin usernames in green, bold, italic letters is definitely not glorifying them. Why can't we settle on something more subtle... dotted underline, maybe? Not that I'm happy with this idea to begin with, but since everyone else is advocating it, I guess I have no choice. - Sikon 17:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- For some reason I'm not seeing myself bolded. --Imperialles 07:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Try holding shift and pressing reload. -- Riffsyphon1024 08:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see Imp bold either. Green Tentacle (Talk) 08:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Missing comma in the css. Should be fixed. Green Tentacle (Talk) 08:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see Imp bold either. Green Tentacle (Talk) 08:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Try holding shift and pressing reload. -- Riffsyphon1024 08:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I still think we only need either the bold or the green, not both. I'm almost leaning towards just the green at the moment. Anyone else? -- Ozzel 17:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'd be happier with just bold too. Green Tentacle (Talk) 17:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Crazy how much one comma can change everything. I don't see what is wrong with both bold and green. One says bold, one says green. If we can't decide, can't we compromise? -- Riffsyphon1024 04:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- If you go to one, go to bold. Green is already used for added bytes, so I don't see the point of double-tasking the color on the page. Havac 21:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I think Bold and Green looks good, don't forget, the pages on your watchlist also appear in bold. Showing admins in just bold might make it a bit confusing. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 21:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- We could go with another color in non-bold. Like orange. Or hot pink. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Crazy how much one comma can change everything. I don't see what is wrong with both bold and green. One says bold, one says green. If we can't decide, can't we compromise? -- Riffsyphon1024 04:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'd be happier with just bold too. Green Tentacle (Talk) 17:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
