• Hey there! Idk if you are still tweaking, but is it possible for you to consider disable the special fonts on List of international publishers and publications and Publishers of The Lunar Chronicles? Hear me out! I actually do like how the fonts make the wiki look overall in general, but on those two pages, because it contains other languages, some of them are not supported by this font (if they aren't made of latin alphabets) and it just looks a bit messy when there's more than three different font faces (bold and italic when strictly speaking in typography terms are actually counted as different fonts) in a page. I think the h2/h3 header can stay different, but it's the content font I'm referring to. Please consider it?

      Loading editor
    • Disabling it just on just those two pages is a bit weird, so I disabled it everywhere for now.

        Loading editor
    • Awww I'm sorry you had to do that.... Dx

      Do you think perhaps you can set it as "everything else is using that font, just not the articles themselves"? Like on the WikiaRail panels, our profiles, message walls, etc.... They can all use that font, just not within the article? Or do you think even that would be too messy??

        Loading editor
    • Nah I think it would look weird if only the article has a different font from the rest....

      By the way, I'd made the Publishers article full width (refresh your browser), just temporarily(?) so it's easier for you to work with.

        Loading editor
    • Hey there! Sorry I got carried away (will explain that in a mo). Okay! I trust your judgement! (I'm also glad that it still stays as the font for the headings! It really works quite nice imo!)

      And thanks for the temporary change I guess? Though because I use source editor... It doesn't change the preview during editing xDDD. But I suppose it does make it easier to look at after publishing it. =]

      BTW, I kind of feel horrible... like... seriously... After you showed the HP on Wikipedia, that was when I realized I completely forgot that... by Korea, we actually meant South Korea, whose official name is Republic of Korea... (Meaning... I forgot to factor North Korea's existence... Orz) So here's the next question... for the country name, should I enter "Republic of Korea" (like how it's done on that pedia page), and rearrange it's order under "R", or keep it under "K" but still out of respect list the full name?

      Also, I don't want to offend anyone and I admit a lot of times I'm lacking common sense... but on most tables I'm seeing on Wikipedia, the Netherlands is mostly always labeled as just "Netherlands", not "The Netherlands"... I think it's similar to how although we always say "The United States", when being listed, it's just "United States"; so I was wondering if we can follow that and move The Netherlands under the alphabetical order of "N" instead of "T"?

      Other stuff... Apparently Winter is next month's book club at the Books Hub! And Ari might do the Book Cooks blog! Just thought I should let you know =D

      Lastly, so onto what I got carried away. My nosiness kicked in. is now updated lmao.

        Loading editor
    • Temporary, because I'm not sure whether it is allowed to just remove the wiki rail like that. For now it looks better this way, otherwise the content of the table looks crammed up. I guess that we have to figure out a way to make the table fit in the normal width (with the Wiki rail) without it looking crammed up.

      Yes, almost always it's South Korea. But I don't think we have to be so strict here. Using Korea is alright to me. And just Netherlands is fine.

      Oh thanks for telling me about Winter being next month's book club!! That's truly cool... means more traffic to this wiki (I hope).

      Good work at Beastly's wiki. Hope the next adopter of the wiki will improve the wiki even more.

        Loading editor
    • Okay now I'm a bit worried.... For the table, I set up the width as 1000px, so with the rail, a left and right scroll would appear to me and allow me to view the rest of the stuff that didn't make it within the usual 700px limit... Is it not like that with you? I mean, with the scroll, the table isn't crammed at all, it's the same with what we see without the rail, just that I'd have to scroll the see the other part of the content.

      Ur... Okay. I'll try not to let the specific bother me xDDDD BTW, I don't know if I'm being paranoid, but do you think you can consider making those two WIP pages semi-protected? I don't mind other people editing (in fact, I'd be glad to see other people helping out), just that I'd prefer it's people who know what they are doing; and generally speaking, beginners sometimes remove something accidentally without meaning to, and I guess it'll at least stop some malicious vandal attempt.

      And no problem! I wish we'd get some new great editors hehehe by December! Also, I know the majority of people probably hasn't read Winter (consider it's not really out yet lol) but it's nominated for "Best Young Adult Fantasy & Science Fiction" 2015 Goodreads Choice Awards: (I've already voted for it without reading it first, since I don't know the rest of the nominees bahaha) So perhaps highlight a thread about this?

      And yup, now it's just up to whether there's still Beastly fans out there willing to help out! xP

        Loading editor
    • Hmm I'm going to experiment a bit with the table and see if I'm able to make it fit without having to scroll.

      I protected the two pages. Now only registered user can edit the pages.

      Thanks for telling me about the Goodreads award. I voted too, despite that we all haven't read it yet haha. I don't know the other nominees either. I've created a forum thread about it and highlighted it.

        Loading editor
    • Ugh... if the translators were the same for every book, then it would be perfect to have the translators listed in the Publishers page, separated from the Editions page. Because the translator differ, I think it would be better to have them listed together with the books. But if we do that, the publishers page is kinda useless with only series title, country, language and publisher.....

      So I tried to create one big table to include everything again. This is my attempt: User:Ohmystars/Sandbox. Of course we don't have to use it. It's just for experimental purposes. The styling is also just default (can be changed later). What do you think?

        Loading editor
    • Ohmystars!!! I'm gonna be off-topic for a tiny bit, but I have to say this! I LOVE how open you are with discussing the format!!!! Like asking my input and stuff! Man, it's like... you made me feel important lmao. Okay that came off really freaking creepy, but I just want to let you know that a few months back, I said you are one of the (if not THE) nicest admins I've known, and I still super mean it! Like seriously... I swear a lot of wikis if you have too much ideas they'd think you are annoying and trying to interfere with what they are doing or something lol.

      Back to the actual topic. Hmmm, do you remember initially, I was like: "can we keep this "EVERYTHING-INCLUDED" article and then do split-pages", but afterwards after seeing your proposal, I went directly splitting the pages? Do you think that perhaps what's on your sandbox can now become the "EVERYTHING-INCLUDED" article for people who want to see everything at one go, but we still keep the split ones?

      It's not that I don't like what you come up with, I think it is as of now, looking very efficient in displaying most of the stuff we talked about, but I do think sometimes it is just impossible to be absolutely perfect when there's so many stuff to factor; the reason why I've grown fond of the currently split pages (not just because I've worked on them lol), is because for the heavily image-featured one, the TOC is surprisingly accurate and it allows people to jump straight to the country/region they're interested in viewing; whereas the table one there's manually inserted numbers to keep track of the amount, a long with the sortable aspect where one can have different listing ways to view the same information. It seems to me that the stuff that I think make them convenient would be lost if we switch to the "EVERYTHING-INCLUDED" method in order to compromise for a better layout, so I'm hoping we could simply have them all. lol

      K, so disregarding all that, if not wanting have three pages, I tried to work on the matter that caused the original problem: don't want any scrolls. I realized that the stuff I made "un-sortable", can actually be merged with the column prior to it, so here's the second try: User:Xxsammmsammmxx/experiments#Second_test

      My only but very big issue, is that, for the last two columns, what's being sorted is actually basing on the "Series title" and then the "Publishers" (the sortable table works fine); but the display made it look like it's the "Translator(s)" and "social media" that's being sorted; I have no idea if there's a way to make the sortable triangle thingy (the thing you click on to sort) to appear specifically WHERE you want it to appear. That is, like I said, my biggest issue for it, for now. The other minor thing is that I think the series title may be less obvious at first, so I'm thinking that besides italic, I'll add bold to pop it up? Lastly, I was wondering (and this can be really laughed at), if it's possible to create a conjoint icons/social media templates, something like w:c:syfyfaceoff:Template:Twitter, but instead of only for twitter, one can choose Facebook/instagram/pinterest etc. and it'll display the squarish icon and being linkable; it has been on my mind for a while, but now I really do think that on the long run, it will save byte size (like no need to receptively insert https://, etc.) and the three of those squarish icons takes up less space than seeing text (e.g.: the width is narrower than displaying them as ---> Facebook ▪ Twitter ▪ Instagram) And I suppose people can also use this if they are willing to share that kind of information on their profile (I know there's a "my website" option on the top, but I think that's something that if you choose to display, it will show on EVERY wiki you are on, and perhaps there's stuff people would only want to show on certain wikis)

      Let me know what you think!

      Edited: for the "EVERYTHING-INCLUDED" page, my opinion is the following tweak: User:Xxsammmsammmxx/experiments#Third_test I probably picked the worst examples to show, but the reason I think the publisher title should get a full-length column, is because if wanting to be thorough (which is what I personally prefer), some of the publishers' full names are pretty lengthy, and if they are not a system using roman numeral, I doubt the majority of English speakers would have a clue as to how to pronounce the company short of copy and pasting and see what you get in google search. I don't think It'll look nice when it's crammed to the side; plus, some of the translated book titles are long as well, for example, the Germany one on your sandbox, when being viewed on my screen, only the second book has its title within one line. If that makes any sense. Just an idea.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message