As an Admin of this site, I have to ask you to undo this infobox change. Only ones who responded were members without single admin (aside one who commented after you decided to go ahead with it), so as ones responsible for this site we'd like to voice our opinion to it and say it's ugly and we want our old version back.
Yes, being able to change imagewidth is important, quite aside the fact that the shape of images isn't same. Consider how pic that is "low" compared to its width and how it would show for example. --Kuopiofi (talk) 04:44, August 13, 2016 (UTC)
I'm not saying that there shouldn't be some basic width and for that 300px works fine as the base-line, we also have rule that 400px is the maximum width allowed as more than that takes too much space of the page. I'm just saying that there should be option to change the size of the pic if needed.
On the other way, some pics are so high that using 300px takes too much of space, 290px (smaller than that and white edges start to show) may not sound that much difference but it can shave off surprisingly much space. If the pic has white background, you can make it even smaller. --Kuopiofi (talk) 10:21, August 13, 2016 (UTC)
Please be careful
Hopefully your making to many drastic changes to this wiki by changing the CSS coding. As I am happy with the way the wiki looks and works right now, and if things are changed to much it will make things harder for the admins to fix things in the long run.
So try to keep any wikia formatting from changing things to much, as I don't want it to ruin the overall look of pages I worked so hard to make, and the same could be said of the other users pages as well.
Can we approve the current version of the portable infobox?
I'm using chrome and I noticed a difference compared to the original, the words are much smaller and take up much less space then the original does. Even in the 400px box theres a noticeable difference between the two. Not to mention it looks more compact then the original as well.SageM (talk) 04:39, August 15, 2016 (UTC)SageM
Even in that picture the font is smaller then the current infobox, as its much larger in the current infobox. In fact I would say its at least twice what the new design is. and not just the caption, the size of power/ability to in that box looks like 10px at least, while the original looks like its about 20px
No. I am talking about all of it, all the writing is smaller and more compact then the original it looks to be about 10px instead of what the original is.
As far as I can see, it does what we've have to do by hand (copy-paste) already, so this works fine.
Something I need to ask right ow: is there something in the new infobox coding which centers all text on the center of the infobox instead of letting extend to the width of the box? Because right now it does that and leaves quite a bit of empty space while lengthening scrollbox downwards pointlessly.
Also, why does it change all colorbands into theme and overrides the chosen colors that colors fitting to the pics? You can change it by writing whole thing in small letter, but codes are absolutely worthless. Please change that back. It seriously doesn't work at all.
It looks like the new infobox actually ruined the design of the pages....
Well I just saw the new design and....unfortunately it made things much worse then before. As now the captions are no longer spaced out like they were before. So now its impossible to even read the captions.
To give you an example of what I mean, in the original infobox design a caption that was only 4 lines long is now 7 lines or more making them totally unreadable.
I hate to say it but this just made things worse overall, not better for the wiki. Maybe it looks better on mobile devices but if your using a PC or laptop to view the wikia then it just makes things look wrong and completely ruins the flow of the page that it had before.
Here is example of what I mean-
The original infobox caption
There are only 4 lines of text in the original design for the caption.
and now the new design
There are now 8 lines of text in the caption for the new design which completely ruins the overall look of the infobox.
Thats why I said before that the original design was actually better for the site then the new one. Since this is going to be a problem for images with larger captions I suggest you fix this problem as soon as possible. Not to mention it pretty much made all the work I did on the pages I created look terrible in comparison to how they were before.
Apparently you didn't consider spacing to be an issue when you designed the infobox, which unfortunately is actually a big issue for this wiki when designing pages.
Well, no matter what is the cause, if colorband has capital on front it changes the color into something else and codes do absolutely nothing. For example Oil Mimicry should have charcoal black band, it's yellowish, Magic had code and it too changes to yellowish before I changed it to written color. Same goes to all Cryptic Physiology.
Please see Musical Healing what that centering and limited width does in practice, it really clusters on center and leaves the sides empty like on some poetry. And extending the infobox is really annoying.
Is the current font-size reason why it always folds
Related to this, infobox without pic looks like this:
For me at least it reads
- y to:
Imouto is Chat moderator, so running that one past either me or Gabriel could have been nice. Don't know about HEX at all, I'm not really that good with computers. --Kuopiofi (talk) 17:48, August 15, 2016 (UTC)
I think this version has still too many teething problems right now, as was proven in moments after taking it into use. Could you return the previous version at least until you've had time to work the problems over? We already have one member Editing pages just so the colorband is back to what it should be... --Kuopiofi (talk) 18:02, August 15, 2016 (UTC)
Its actually effected every single page with a caption with at least 3 or more lines of text. And it actually didn't grow beyond the image-width before, as that was the way it was actually designed to look from the beginning.
With text spread out alone 7 or more lines now, its actually impossible to read captions anymore. and it kind of makes it difficult to design new pages now since nobody can read caption unless there using a mobile device to visit the wiki.
Captions are the main focus of the infobox, as they tell who the user is and what they are doing and how they do.
if nobody is able to read the caption anymore then the pages should pretty much stop being made. or will at least slow down until this problem is resolved.
I understand the the portable infobox code is different, but with a wiki thats this large and requires this much detail to make it work it may have actually been a bad idea to switch the design.
I know the portable infobox design is mainly to help users who use mobile devices to visit the wiki view it better, but sadly that isn't really the case for this wikia. As most of the work on this wikia can actually only be done properly on laptops or PCs. So the new design wasn't actually necessary from the start...
Well hopefully you can offer a solution to please both the various users and admins, though if not we may end up having to go back to the old design if this doesn't pan out in the long run..... I will give it some time, but I probably won't design any new pages until at least something is done about the captions.SageM (talk) 18:11, August 15, 2016 (UTC)SageM
Do you know page that would give names instead of codes to colors, there are few colors that I don't know names and have to use codes which is really annoying me now as those don't work anymore. And this really doesn't explain why capital letter causes the given color to be ignored, seriously take a look at this.
Every time there's something new it runs into unseen problems, so no worries there. Tho I don't really understand why you want to keep the unfinished/faulty version instead of returning the working older one while you fix things.
Maximum and minimum widths are something I've never needed to know, I know from few accidental wrong numbers that maximum goes to thousands of pixels, smallest pics have been somewhere around 220px I think. Newer gone smaller than that. --Kuopiofi (talk) 20:20, August 15, 2016 (UTC)
I don't believe that its quite that simple to fix all the problems. The amount of detail this wiki requires to work is huge(in fact the only other wikias I know of that require the amount of detail that this wiki uses is the Community wikia and VS Battles wikia) also there simply some wikias that portable infoboxes simply won't work for no matter how you change them to try and fit.
Based on the number of problems that have shown up since the new template was introduced, it may be that this is one of those wikias that the portable infoboxes won't work well on. I am not saying there a bad idea, I am just saying that so far it doesn't seem to be a good match for this wikia at the moment.
Perhaps when the community creates a new infobox format to use that can address all these concerns that also doesn't require a massive amount of coding to solve the problems for, then we could use it.
As of now, I have to agree with Kuo on this. We need to switch back to the old format.
no more drastic wikia wide changes until Kuo responds.
Before you go around and mess with the colors, I suggest waiting until Kuo responds. We don't need another problem that takes hours to fix.
Another problem has just started....
Seriously man, just stop already. I know you want to use the new portable infobox format and are trying to fix all the problems but its just not going to work in the long run.
I really suggest you quit while your ahead. No matter what you say or do your not going to be able to fix all the problems. And it doesn't matter if I give you a day or a week. its just not going to work for this wikia in the end. You may believe your fixing the problems but new ones have been found a by the users after every solution.
the users aren't happy with it, and neither are the admins. I know your one of the staff and you believe your making this wikia better by changing to the new format but its just not worth it.
I don't have to wait for you to try it work it out, as I already know how its going to end.
Not all wikias need portable infoboxes, regardless of the community's idea on the matter. And in the long run, portable infoboxes are really only great for wikias that have lots of mobile traffic, wikis that have none of very little don't really need them.
Despite this wikia having a large influx of mobile users, there really hasn't been any complaints about the old design so there really was no valid justifiable reason to change it in the first place.SageM (talk) 22:32, August 15, 2016 (UTC)SageM
If you recall Kuo actually did complain about it after it went live.
And new isn't always better, sometimes the older models actually work better then the newer stuff regardless of how people overhype newer things.
Also, it seems to me your really one of only 2 users here that actually wanted to switch to the portable infobox. As none of the other users have here asked for the change.
Basically you assumed that we would all want the new design and that we simply hadn't decided to accept it yet.
You really need to consider that if something isn't broken, then don't fix it. We didn't need the new infobox, and Kuo actually shot down the idea several times before, even when other staff members wanted us to make the switch.
When the idea first came out for the new portable infobox and I saw how it looked compared to the original design I already knew that it wasn't going to work with this wikia simply based on the fact that everything about it went against how the wikia itself works. And both the admins and several of the older members actually agreed with me on this.
I know your trying to make it work and think you can make everybody happy. But unfortunately this wikia simply wasn't designed for the portable infobox when it was first made. Its just too different to work correctly no matter how many changes you make, while the standard format worked immensely better.
Honestly, I have to agree with SageM and Tsubasa on this. Until we can be absolutely sure that we won't encounter these problems again, we should go back to what we had. Gabriel456 (talk) 23:40, August 15, 2016 (UTC)
Yup, colors starting with capital letter aren't recognized at all (capital in random place didn't work before either, ThisCase did), if you check mine and Dragon-Fox 7 Edits around the time I last Talked to you you see exactly what I mean. It also doesn't recognize grey as color, has to be gray. Also powderblue is one I run into by now, but there may be more.
On the subject of colors, is the default color still blue or has the off-yellow current one? If it isn't blue, could you return it?
Any ideas where to find names for various colors? Oil Mimicry had near black that was used quite a bit and I'd like to be able to use that color again.
Caption seems to be working, so that's one problem fixed. "Row 1 info = " however is still of the fixed width, it folds even if there's space to go one.
How about those other points I mentioned?
Well, so far, on my side anyways, whenever I insert a Infobox template, or edit a existing page's Infobox, the only thing I can edit is the Imagewidth portion. In fact, that is the only thing that appears and nothing else whenever I want to edit a Infobox. It even happens when I want to edit a existing page, as if it switches on the fly, appearing to delete the picture and its relevant data. SDPanthera (talk) 16:11, August 16, 2016 (UTC)
Using Firefox 48/newest, but happens on chrome too. It happens on this site and at least on killsixbilliondemons but not on Girl Genius.
Tried private browser, happens there.
I purge my cache quite often and no difference.
Mentioned above, used two browsers, nada.
Posted a note to Undead.exe who made the global.css I'm using on public use.
I see the normal wikia every time I log out, it really doesn't work for me. I did do quite a bit work to find how to see it the original way after all.
That worked, thanks! Don't know how hard things like this are for someone who actually knows what they do with computers, but for me this is seriously big thing.
Ok, something new about the colorband: when you load page with code, it flicks for a moment to the default/off-yellow color before turning to the coded color. Some sort of crossover still?
Also, if you check Color Chart you notice that lighslategray and powederblue (it's spelled that way in codes too) are on that off-yellow color.
Row 1 info folds still far sooner than the infobox, check Mind Melding: there's enough room for the whole sentence but it folds into two halfway through. --Kuopiofi (talk) 19:37, August 16, 2016 (UTC)
This is the problem he is talking about....
This is what he is talking about with the Infobox-
All the fields except image-width are missing, as well as the picture. It also happens with new pages as well when trying to add the infobox, not just older pages.SageM (talk) 22:58, August 16, 2016 (UTC)SageM
It doesn't seem to matter which editor I use when make pages, as it always shows up as this regardless (Source, Visual and Original). I literally can't add the infobox anymore unless I do it by hand.SageM (talk) 23:03, August 16, 2016 (UTC)SageM
Having to fill out the infobox in source mode is really annoying and time consuming, since it simply doesn't work anymore in either visual or classic editor for me. While it seems pages are still able to be made, it takes more effort now to do so because of this change.SageM (talk) 23:23, August 16, 2016 (UTC)SageM
Hi CzechOut. No problem that it took so long. I'm not the type that has impatience easily. As for your questions, here's what I have for you in answers:
1. It happens on any page I try to edit, whether its my page or someone else's. Heck even my profile page is effected.
2. I always use the Visual editor as its easier for me. Source Mode is too complex for me to use.
3. I could give you a picture, but SageM pretty much covered that. The problems I have right now, is exactly depicted in the picture that SageM shows you.
4. When this happens, I just don't edit and just hit my browser's "Back" button or leave the page entirely. Afterwards the page is normal.
5. I use Firefox as my main internet browser all the time. Nothing else.
6. My PC is a Windows 7 PC originally, but has been upgraded to Windows 10.
In short, however, the picture that SageM shows is pretty much the thing I'm dealing with now. Thanks for your time.
hi, i wanted to say that some images (i don't know if it is all of themm but i think it is) on some pages's infobox are with slightly lower resolution than they actually have. Tsubasa16 (talk) 00:23, August 17, 2016 (UTC)
Its not working with the visual editor either, thats the point we have been trying to make. that was just a sample since most people here use the classic editor.SageM (talk) 04:38, August 17, 2016 (UTC)SageM
Also the visual editor doesn't work for every user, as there are some users who can only use the classic editor as there computer or browser simply can't handle it.
I usually use the source editor since the visual editor doesn't work well for me, and tends to mess up my edits most of the time.
It doesn't let us check the infobox in visual editor. We can only check things via the source editor. Its happened with at least 4 users besides SDPanthera and Me.SageM (talk) 04:50, August 17, 2016 (UTC)SageM
I am not getting even that. I just get the same nearly empty page as the classic editor. No matter what, it won't let me add the infobox data unless I use Source editor.SageM (talk) 04:54, August 17, 2016 (UTC)SageM
I already tried that, it won't work for me.
Like I said before, I already tried that and the panel is still only listed the image width and not any of the other options.
I am simply not getting anything usable. and like I also said, visual simply doesn't work for everyone. I tried visual editor before and it just completely ruined my editing so I switched to source as its the only thing that works for me.
Basically it doesn't matter what I do or what you show me, there is simply no way for me to use the infoboxes anymore unless I add them through source.
And trust me I tried visual on at least 30 different pages when this problem started and still nadda. Either my computer simply can't handle it because of the update, or something else is going on that can't be so easily fixed...Kuopiofi (talk) 05:09, August 17, 2016 (UTC)
The point I am trying to make is, I am pretty much stuck with Source Editor. Visual just doesn't work for me.(even on wikias were there is no other available editor to use including source) and I only used classic editor to show you an example of the problem.
Visual just mangles my edits whenever I use it. so telling me to use it anyway because it works doesn't help. And this is the 3rd computer I have gone through over the years of being a member of the wikia, and visual has never worked correctly even once for me....SageM (talk) 05:14, August 17, 2016 (UTC)SageM
Sigh. I see. Well, just so you know, my preferences were already put on the default "Wikia's New Visual Editor", but again, editing my pages just keeps up coming in the same way I already explained last time. So even if I could use it, I don't know how to activate it (if its not already activated, and if so, it still doesn't work, just like I said).
Also, looking at SageM's post before this one, it looks like this New Visual Editor sounds like a total nightmare. Of course I have yet to try it myself to give it a fair opinion.
Edit: Nevermind my issue. I see now that I just have to click on the Edit button straight away instead of going to the option of the Classic Editor. Thanks for your help. It seems to be working. If I have any other problems, I will report as soon as possible. SDPanthera (talk) 07:08, August 17, 2016 (UTC)
Edit 2: Got another error. Everytime I want to make a new page and insert a new Infobox via the Visual Editor, I can't change the color of the Box title, as there is no option for BG color like it normally does, nor I can write down a caption. Is this normal? If not, how do I change it, so I can? SDPanthera (talk) 07:53, August 17, 2016 (UTC)
Hey. I already did all of the above a good time ago. That just works fine. However, there is no Caption nor a BG Color option within a Info Box whenever I want to make a new page/article. For existing pages it already works good and I have no issue with that. SDPanthera (talk) 14:39, August 17, 2016 (UTC)
Info Box Response
Cosmic Water Page
Thanks for your advice. i will see what I can do and hopefully it works. Anyways, now I got a brand new problem. I wanted to test your advice using my Cosmic Water power page, but when I go to that page, logged in or not, the profile picture used for that page has overtaken most of the original page. As in, the gif has become extremely enlarged, even though it says 320px, and I haven't even touched it in months. How is this happening?
Here's the page I speak of: Cosmic Water Manipulation
Is it just me, or has the main pic (in infobox) definition/quality bit gone down? Compare for example Platinum Mimicrys pic on how it's on page and the full size. It has the same fuzziness as pic that's been expanded bit too much...
Hey CzechOut, just wanted to inform you that I followed your advice this time regarding the infoboxes. Although its a lot to do (I made the skeletal outline and such), it appears to work as how you described, so thanks for your assistance! If there's other problems I will be around to tell em. SDPanthera (talk) 06:33, August 18, 2016 (UTC)
Hey CzechOut, just wanted to inform that my page's problem was solved. I just needed to remove the "px" from the number. Like "320px" ----> to "320". That brought the page back to normal. Thing is, that a lot of the pages on the wiki, especially ones I have never worked on, have the same problem, such as the page of Mental Manipulation. This is likely because of the new features that have been recently implenmented. But that is just a guess. SDPanthera (talk) 18:32, August 18, 2016 (UTC)
Could you check if it's just serious trick of the eye, or has the main pic (in infobox) definition/quality bit gone down? Compare for example Platinum Mimicrys pic on how it's on page and the full size. It has the same fuzziness as pic that's been expanded bit too much...
It seems to affect even pics that are on the original size, for example Self-Aura Manipulation is bit fuzzier on the page as it is when viewed full size/on itself. --Kuopiofi (talk) 19:34, August 18, 2016 (UTC)
Okay then, good to know, but I have always used px with all my pages since the moment I joined this wiki and never had this problem. Also, it only appears on some pages for so far I know. More, I never knew people weren't allowed to use PX in their resizing of profile pictures for powers. I always followed the common template. But anyways, now that I know this, I will not make the same mistake again with PX, and instead I will leave it out from any future additional powers if I make them. SDPanthera (talk) 20:43, August 18, 2016 (UTC)
We've been removing those px by hand since that problem was realized, so go ahead and get rid of that problem. Now we only need to keep chancing those capitals to get colors work...
I haven't changed my computer since the infobox was changed, so that isn't the problem and it's perfectly normal screen. It simply been looking blurrier to me for few days now, and appears so both logged in and out, in Firefox and chrome. --Kuopiofi (talk) 04:18, August 19, 2016 (UTC)
I'll keep eye on it, have to do it any way as those colors are still problem. You'll go after that next?
Few things I've noticed: if there's no number on imagewidth, it is treated as if there was no pic at all and infobox size is defined by caption length.
If there's empty space between infobox and text/description, the line gets boxed the same way you'd get if you leave empty space first before text, as demonstrated on this.
Could be 250, I didn't really note much more than that the pic size didn't keep infobox wider like the earlier version. Good to know it's known thing.
There might be something more than just empty space between infobox and description, but since moving the description on it's own line removes the box I haven't really looked into details. It's happened few times by now, but it's not big problem.
Not the same spacing thing I'm talking about and now I can't even find the last one I changed.
WHY are pink, silver, etc. light colors' pagenames again black in color bar when I spend good deal of time to change them white? If that's your doing, please return them back. --Kuopiofi (talk) 04:46, August 20, 2016 (UTC)
Black/White page-name in colorband is done, please at least ask before chancing it next time.
That empty space/box problem I talked about was either fixed by the changes done between me reporting it and this or there is something else connected to it as I couldn't replicate the problem to show it to you. Consider it fixed. --Kuopiofi (talk) 09:20, August 20, 2016 (UTC)
It isn't that big thing, so no worries.
At least it confirmed my long held suspicions that light level and direction affect quite a bit how you see colors on screen, some colors that can be used with white text in certain light and in other the white doesn't show at all. --Kuopiofi (talk) 15:33, August 20, 2016 (UTC)