Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH Archive/Wikia's ideas...
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:42, October 27, 2010 (UTC)
Hello, fellow Wookieepedians,
as you probably know, Wikia is launching a new skin sometime soon. Yesterday, a new blog entry appeared on the Wikia staff blog in Community Central, which contained a schedule about the skin. I didn't really caer about it, as I use Monobook, but then I saw something horrifying. "Update to Wikia's Terms of Use." Wikia decided that having css/js that prevents core features from appearing is forbidden. Also, as far as I know, every Wikia wiki will have blogs, article comments and achievements enabled. What are we going to do? We do have a [[Wookieepedia:Site feature policy|Site feature policy]], but I doubt that Wikia will care. So, what are we going to do? God help us. 1358 (Talk) 12:31, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- We go on strike :P QuiGonJinn
(Talk) 13:23, September 29, 2010 (UTC) - I can't see anyway around it. Disabling the new features is allowed in personal user js/css files, apparently. Just make it a policy (put it in the welcome message! :P) that people create and use those. Technically it's not breaking the Terms of Use... :P NAYAYEN 13:26, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- I don't really mind the CSS/JS stuff, but the blogs and the achievements are inevitable… 1358 (Talk) 13:29, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Then how do we not see the blogs and achievements now? Is there a sysop-accessible menu that has these features turned off server side? The new TOU will now mean that there will be no option to turn those off then? NAYAYEN 13:35, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Those have not yet been enabled as far as I know. And no, if I have understood this thing correctly, sysops won't be able to turn off blogs and stuff. :( 1358 (Talk) 13:38, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- If that's the case, and if it's really that big of a concern, couldn't we just make a site policy to not let anyone use them? Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 13:41, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- That is a possible solution, but I'm not sure Wikia will allow it. They don't care about our [[Wookieepedia:Site feature policy|Site feature policy]]. 1358 (Talk) 13:43, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- I know they don't care. What I'm asking is: couldn't we just tell all of our users to not use the blogs etc. at all; and make it a blockable offense if need be? Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 13:50, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- That is a possible solution, but I'm not sure Wikia will allow it. They don't care about our [[Wookieepedia:Site feature policy|Site feature policy]]. 1358 (Talk) 13:43, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- If that's the case, and if it's really that big of a concern, couldn't we just make a site policy to not let anyone use them? Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 13:41, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Those have not yet been enabled as far as I know. And no, if I have understood this thing correctly, sysops won't be able to turn off blogs and stuff. :( 1358 (Talk) 13:38, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Then how do we not see the blogs and achievements now? Is there a sysop-accessible menu that has these features turned off server side? The new TOU will now mean that there will be no option to turn those off then? NAYAYEN 13:35, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- I don't really mind the CSS/JS stuff, but the blogs and the achievements are inevitable… 1358 (Talk) 13:29, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- And so begins the search for new hosting... Xicer9
(Combadge) 13:42, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
For the record, Shoutwiki is being slow at the moment because of many Wikia users…as well as an import of a pretty big Wikia wiki. 1358 (Talk) 19:28, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
It seems that blogs, article comments and achievements will not be enabled. However, the css and js restrictions still exist. 1358 (Talk) 19:28, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Where was that announced? NAYAYEN 19:40, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it seems that the staff blog was incorrect—staff member Uberfuzzy said on IRC that those features will not be forced upon wikis. Only new wikis will have them enabled as far as I know. 1358 (Talk) 19:43, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Do we still have to have image attribution enabled though? Darth Karikawill destroy your planet! 19:59, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- The Staff blog post explicitly says: "It’s not permitted to remove the right sidebar modules, blogs, and image attribution." The blogs should stay disabled for us if I'm correctly understanding what Xd relayed from Uberfuzzy. NAYAYEN 20:04, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, blogs will stay disabled if uberfuzzy was correct. I don't know about the image attribution, though—another staff member, Sannse said it does not violate copyright laws. 1358 (Talk) 15:06, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
- We've done a heck of a lot of work to properly source all of our images, so I hope we don't have to show the image attribution thing. —Xwing328(Talk) 01:58, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Okay so as of right now, we're not under any threat? -- Riffsyphon1024 21:10, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, depends on how you define threat. We're being threatened by the CSS and JS restrictions, as Wikia regularly launches new stupid features. That'd mean that we can't disable them. Just hope that the Facebookish "like" feature isn't introduced here… 1358 (Talk) 21:21, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- What's this "like" thing you speak of? Master Fredcerique Begun the Clone Wars has † 21:25, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure, but I think you can "like" or "dislike" users (possibly user blogs and stuff as well). I also heard there's a feature called "poke". Ala Facebook. 1358 (Talk) 21:33, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I have a Facebook, so I'm familiar with those things. But liking and disliking users? That seems to me like it could cause some real division in wiki communities. IMO at least. Maybe keep the "like", but not the "dislike". If you dislike something, than just don't "like" it. duh Master Fredcerique Begun the Clone Wars has † 12:39, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure, but I think you can "like" or "dislike" users (possibly user blogs and stuff as well). I also heard there's a feature called "poke". Ala Facebook. 1358 (Talk) 21:33, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- What's this "like" thing you speak of? Master Fredcerique Begun the Clone Wars has † 21:25, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, depends on how you define threat. We're being threatened by the CSS and JS restrictions, as Wikia regularly launches new stupid features. That'd mean that we can't disable them. Just hope that the Facebookish "like" feature isn't introduced here… 1358 (Talk) 21:21, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Okay so as of right now, we're not under any threat? -- Riffsyphon1024 21:10, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- We've done a heck of a lot of work to properly source all of our images, so I hope we don't have to show the image attribution thing. —Xwing328(Talk) 01:58, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, blogs will stay disabled if uberfuzzy was correct. I don't know about the image attribution, though—another staff member, Sannse said it does not violate copyright laws. 1358 (Talk) 15:06, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
- The Staff blog post explicitly says: "It’s not permitted to remove the right sidebar modules, blogs, and image attribution." The blogs should stay disabled for us if I'm correctly understanding what Xd relayed from Uberfuzzy. NAYAYEN 20:04, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Do we still have to have image attribution enabled though? Darth Karikawill destroy your planet! 19:59, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it seems that the staff blog was incorrect—staff member Uberfuzzy said on IRC that those features will not be forced upon wikis. Only new wikis will have them enabled as far as I know. 1358 (Talk) 19:43, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- The features CAN be disabled, just not through css/js: you have to do it through Special:Contact, something I think Grunny may already have done for some features. NAYAYEN 21:26, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Everyone is only discussing about the new features, which I think can be disabled through Special:Contact, as Nayaven said above, but isn't the new skin itself more of a problem right now, Monaco is going to go away on Nov 3rd, and the new skin called Oasis is going to become the default for all Anonymous users. Registered users will be able to use Monobook for some more time, but Wikia has so far not given any deadline for Monobook. The new Oasis skin, reduces content space my making the pages fixed width, and has a huge 300px wide sidebar. All our content pages with info boxes will may have to be reformatted. -- Sith Jedi
02:13, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
- If they remove MonoBook...well, heads will roll. Chack Jadson (Talk) 16:44, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
- From "The new look 3": "We will also continue, for now, to support [Monobook] as a personal (viewing) choice for those readers that have a strong preference. However, many of the new features we will be creating for the new design will not work in Monobook." They sound as if they might remove it in future, although I think that is quite unlikely. At any rate, it is staying for now. NAYAYEN 17:55, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, Wookieepedia has a "strong preference" for Monobook as it allows us to run our wiki the way we prefer. Should we, being one of their largest wikis, request that we don't want the new features, which would only work on a skin that we don't even want, then they should understand that Monobook is still useful to at least some proportion of Wikia. [EDIT: Also curious to me why Wikia refers to Uncyclopedia using Monobook and not Wookieepedia.] -- Riffsyphon1024 20:28, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Uncyclopedia has Monobook and will not get the skin (same seems to apply for Memory Alpha; not sure) because the wiki was bought by Wikia, and because Uncyclopedia is trying to be a parody version of Wikipedia. 1358 (Talk) 05:50, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
- From what I understand after reading all the stuff on Community Central is that Monobook will stay, but just as a personal preference not as the basic look of the pages (everybody not locked in to wikia will see Oasis). And talking about big wikis which are not happy with Oasis (the new skin), the WoWWiki (which has more articles than the Wookieepedia) is considering moving away from wikia. - Drudenfusz(Talk) 04:04, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- To alleviate any fears, I just wanted to let you all know that there are no plans to remove Monobook as a personal preference. -Brandon Rhea
(talk) 18:26, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- Then what on Earth is the point in abolishing Monaco?!?!?! I love the way Monaco looks. I only use Monobook to print off articles (which I do frequently). But I prefer Monaco. Why take it away? Why not just leave the switch optional? "sighs heavily" :( Master Fredcerique Begun the Clone Wars has † 18:31, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- It's because of what the FAQ on Central says. It has to do with how complex a skin Monaco is, so having to support a third skin that's very complex costs more money than what's affordable. Monobook, on the other hand, is a much simpler skin, so it's affordable to continue supporting that as a personal option. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 18:57, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- That makes sense. But then why not just forget the new skin, or at least make it to where most users approve before forcing it. And I know the answer will be, "That's what the beta testing is for." Then why is there a set date to enforce it? Why not leave it alone until the beta testers approve by majority? btw, I'm not upset at you. This is not personal. It's frustration aimed at Wikia. Master Fredcerique Begun the Clone Wars has † 22:14, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- Those questions are above my pay grade, unfortunately. You'd have to ask on the Central blog. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 15:59, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Those questions are above my pay grade, unfortunately. You'd have to ask on the Central blog. - Brandon Rhea
- That makes sense. But then why not just forget the new skin, or at least make it to where most users approve before forcing it. And I know the answer will be, "That's what the beta testing is for." Then why is there a set date to enforce it? Why not leave it alone until the beta testers approve by majority? btw, I'm not upset at you. This is not personal. It's frustration aimed at Wikia. Master Fredcerique Begun the Clone Wars has † 22:14, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- It's because of what the FAQ on Central says. It has to do with how complex a skin Monaco is, so having to support a third skin that's very complex costs more money than what's affordable. Monobook, on the other hand, is a much simpler skin, so it's affordable to continue supporting that as a personal option. - Brandon Rhea
- Then what on Earth is the point in abolishing Monaco?!?!?! I love the way Monaco looks. I only use Monobook to print off articles (which I do frequently). But I prefer Monaco. Why take it away? Why not just leave the switch optional? "sighs heavily" :( Master Fredcerique Begun the Clone Wars has † 18:31, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- To alleviate any fears, I just wanted to let you all know that there are no plans to remove Monobook as a personal preference. -Brandon Rhea
- From what I understand after reading all the stuff on Community Central is that Monobook will stay, but just as a personal preference not as the basic look of the pages (everybody not locked in to wikia will see Oasis). And talking about big wikis which are not happy with Oasis (the new skin), the WoWWiki (which has more articles than the Wookieepedia) is considering moving away from wikia. - Drudenfusz(Talk) 04:04, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- Uncyclopedia has Monobook and will not get the skin (same seems to apply for Memory Alpha; not sure) because the wiki was bought by Wikia, and because Uncyclopedia is trying to be a parody version of Wikipedia. 1358 (Talk) 05:50, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, Wookieepedia has a "strong preference" for Monobook as it allows us to run our wiki the way we prefer. Should we, being one of their largest wikis, request that we don't want the new features, which would only work on a skin that we don't even want, then they should understand that Monobook is still useful to at least some proportion of Wikia. [EDIT: Also curious to me why Wikia refers to Uncyclopedia using Monobook and not Wookieepedia.] -- Riffsyphon1024 20:28, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
- From "The new look 3": "We will also continue, for now, to support [Monobook] as a personal (viewing) choice for those readers that have a strong preference. However, many of the new features we will be creating for the new design will not work in Monobook." They sound as if they might remove it in future, although I think that is quite unlikely. At any rate, it is staying for now. NAYAYEN 17:55, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
- If they remove MonoBook...well, heads will roll. Chack Jadson (Talk) 16:44, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Everyone is only discussing about the new features, which I think can be disabled through Special:Contact, as Nayaven said above, but isn't the new skin itself more of a problem right now, Monaco is going to go away on Nov 3rd, and the new skin called Oasis is going to become the default for all Anonymous users. Registered users will be able to use Monobook for some more time, but Wikia has so far not given any deadline for Monobook. The new Oasis skin, reduces content space my making the pages fixed width, and has a huge 300px wide sidebar. All our content pages with info boxes will may have to be reformatted. -- Sith Jedi
- It appears that we can escape the blogs, but not the image attribution.
- Nayayen, 2 days ago: I've asked a few times now and I haven't had any sort of answer: Can the photo attribution be disabled through Special:Contact? I know you can't do it through css, I want to know if it can be turned off for a wiki by the Wikia staff in the same way that blogs can.
- Susan Taylor (@Wikia), 39 minutes ago: Nayayen - At the moment, no, it can't be removed as some features can via Special:Contact. I wrote some reasoning earlier, but the main point is that we'd like to see how the entire user base uses the feature which means it needs to be compulsory at first.
NAYAYEN 20:27, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
Section break
- Talking about pictures... I guess the Wookieepedia Logo will also be gone with the new skin or is there a chance to keep the deathstar? - Drudenfusz(Talk) 04:01 (UTC), October 4, 2010
- Why would it be removed? 1358 (Talk) 12:26, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Not removed, but the new skin has no place for it as it is now, I'll try to come with some example/suggestion what can be used with the new wikia skin when I'm on my PC. --Tm_T (Talk) 13:30, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- The logo for the new look is now a word mark, which would be uploaded to File:Wiki-wordmark.png. Here is the wordmark Star Wars Fanon is using for the new look. The dimensions of that image are the maximum dimensions for the wordmark, 250x65. I would imagine you can incorporate the current Wookieepedia logo into that. File:Wiki.png would also remain as the logo for Monobook users. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 15:59, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed you expressed my intentions very well, I'm quite sure that our logo can be fitted to wordmark format reasonably well. --Tm_T (Talk) 16:16, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I guess this image [[:File:Wiki logo.png]], if converted from 266×75 px to 200x65 px, can become the new wordmark - Sith Jedi 16:46, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- That would be a good place to start from, at least as a template to use as an idea to make a new one (if that's where Tm T wanted to go with it). - Brandon Rhea (talk) 17:31, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- That would be a good place to start from, at least as a template to use as an idea to make a new one (if that's where Tm T wanted to go with it). - Brandon Rhea
- And now I have done some work for it, not ready for mass use but... [[:File:Wordmark-logo.png]] can be enabled in ugly user css level, by setting a background to wordmark area and then making that current text link transparent:
- I guess this image [[:File:Wiki logo.png]], if converted from 266×75 px to 200x65 px, can become the new wordmark - Sith Jedi
- Indeed you expressed my intentions very well, I'm quite sure that our logo can be fitted to wordmark format reasonably well. --Tm_T (Talk) 16:16, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- The logo for the new look is now a word mark, which would be uploaded to File:Wiki-wordmark.png. Here is the wordmark Star Wars Fanon is using for the new look. The dimensions of that image are the maximum dimensions for the wordmark, 250x65. I would imagine you can incorporate the current Wookieepedia logo into that. File:Wiki.png would also remain as the logo for Monobook users. - Brandon Rhea
- Not removed, but the new skin has no place for it as it is now, I'll try to come with some example/suggestion what can be used with the new wikia skin when I'm on my PC. --Tm_T (Talk) 13:30, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Why would it be removed? 1358 (Talk) 12:26, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Talking about pictures... I guess the Wookieepedia Logo will also be gone with the new skin or is there a chance to keep the deathstar? - Drudenfusz(Talk) 04:01 (UTC), October 4, 2010
.wordmark {
width: 215px;
height: 50px;
background: url(http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/7/72/Wordmark-logo.png) center left no-repeat !important;
}
.wordmark.medium.text a { color: transparent; }
--Tm_T (Talk) 12:16, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
Hello all, of course many of you would hate Wikia's new skin. WoWWiki and Runescape wiki are in discussions with their communities about a possible move away from Wikia. Being another of the biggest Wikia wikis, I thought I would tell you. The Anti-Wikia Alliance has got a list of wikis moving away or in discussions about moving. There are some useful links there if any of you are interested about moving from Wikia. Thanks, ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 20:48, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
FYI for everyone: I havesome rough example css with comments for the new skin to get rid of possibly unwanted stuff + fix for fixed width-issue in User:Tm_T/wikia.css. I will create more proper howto at some point, but atleast there's some now. --Tm_T (Talk) 13:30, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
- First off, hats off to Tm for collecting those snippets of code, they're very effective at killing most of unwanted stuff in the new skin. You can now try the new skin right here on Wookieepedia, just change it in your preferences ("?useskin=wikia" won't do it). Even after all those fixes that Tm listed, it isn't too bad visually now (it looks like a cross between Monaco and Monobook but with sidebars replaced by toolbars top and bottom. Functionally, well, where do I start (and this is all in Firefox and Opera)? None of the AJAX we have to auto-update the watchlist and RCs work, the n00b-friendly boxed upload form doesn't show (you get the normal "advanced user" one instead), previewing on the user css file doesn't work, you HAVE to set a maximum width suitable for your portal size (there's no horizontal scroll bar, ever) and finally, you can't find most tools. History, for example, has to be put into your "My tools" floating monstrosity. Fortunately (and probably by accident), the sidebar we are used to on Monobook is moved across as 4 dropdowns below the Wikia spotlight bar (the big black empty one if you've applied Tm's snippets). I also find that the dark grey (as opposed to black) text is hard to read and the links are VERY hard to read (and I kinda failed at fixing that for me). For reference, here is a screenshot as seen using my [[User:Nayayen/wikia.css|wikia.css file]] and including my taskbar for scale. If you wonder, the blue/purple links on the toolbars and over the Wookieepedia logo are the results of my failing at fixing the link colors :P Needless to say, I've returned to Monobook. NAYAYEN 16:21, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I can't speak to everything in there, but I just wanted to say that you can also access the history page outside of your "My Tools." If you go to the top of the page, you'll notice that it says who the page was last edited by underneath the title. If you hover over that, a dropdown menu will appear where it'll show the last few users who edited. Beneath those names will be a button to view the full history. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 16:36, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure, Rhea, but I heard that watching the page history like that doesn't work in some namespaces. 1358 (Talk) 16:39, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, I didn't know about that. And Xd is right, the "last edited by" bar doesn't show up in the user namespace :P. I've also managed (pretty much) to get my Monobook style links. I do notice however that galleries have a hideous blue background to the images (see Special:NewFiles or User:Nayayen/Vector). TOCs also don't have any sort of outline (unless I'm messing up some css).NAYAYEN 16:41, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's not all namespaces, just the mainspace. Sorry, forgot to mention that. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 21:32, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's not all namespaces, just the mainspace. Sorry, forgot to mention that. - Brandon Rhea
- Thanks, I didn't know about that. And Xd is right, the "last edited by" bar doesn't show up in the user namespace :P. I've also managed (pretty much) to get my Monobook style links. I do notice however that galleries have a hideous blue background to the images (see Special:NewFiles or User:Nayayen/Vector). TOCs also don't have any sort of outline (unless I'm messing up some css).NAYAYEN 16:41, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure, Rhea, but I heard that watching the page history like that doesn't work in some namespaces. 1358 (Talk) 16:39, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- My two big complaints (for now) are (1) the "hidable content" (class "hideable-button" and "hideable-content") aren't working (another js or ajax functionality), and (2) my user page appears all "squished". - Esjs(Talk) 16:46, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Hiding content is just a matter of making sure the wiki's .js works with the new skin. It can be done. Someone who knows how to do that just needs to do it. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 21:32, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Hiding content is just a matter of making sure the wiki's .js works with the new skin. It can be done. Someone who knows how to do that just needs to do it. - Brandon Rhea
- I can't speak to everything in there, but I just wanted to say that you can also access the history page outside of your "My Tools." If you go to the top of the page, you'll notice that it says who the page was last edited by underneath the title. If you hover over that, a dropdown menu will appear where it'll show the last few users who edited. Beneath those names will be a button to view the full history. - Brandon Rhea
- The JS including the Auto-refresh will be fixed shortly. Most of it is because our Common.js is currently breaking/not loading properly in the new skin since they haven't defined the importScriptPage function (which is also why the upload form isn't loading since we import that), which will be fixed on Wednesday the 13th, so I thought I'd wait rather than making a temp fix for a skin few of us use yet. The AJAX auto-refresh will be updated to work in the new skin, and I'll be going through fixing the rest of the JS issues with the new skin that will pop-up over the next week or so. So feel free to point out any I miss. Grunny (talk) 08:52, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- I've updated the AJAX auto-refresh so it will work in the new skin, and the title rewrite (i.e. {{title}}) also works, along with a few others. Please report any issues you see with these features. Our custom upload form is also working in the new skin now. I'll be working on the rest soon. Grunny (talk) 06:27, October 10, 2010 (UTC)