WTF I can't delete/access WP:QIF or WP:IF. It keeps redirecting to the Star Wars wiki. Even when I go to http://acadecscores.gilslotd.com/w/index.php?title=WP:IF&action=delete it takes me to the stupid Star Wars page. /me wishes I had never created them in the first place.
- Adam 13:12, 6 March 2008 (PST)
Hey, I am having trouble with the table programming. I have and in.txt, but I double click on the original script, and no out.txt is coming. Am I donig it horribly wrong? --User:Stanley Tree
Could you let me edit my page now? --KelvinLam 06:14, 22 February 2008 (PST)
WHY DO PEOPLE EDIT THE WIKI REALLY EARLY IN THE MORNING ON A SATURDAY NIGHT
SRSLY GUYS SRSLY
WHY WOULD YOU DO SUCH A THING
==How does that remove scores?==
I was under the impression that since every person I removed from the Scorers/Historic page had already achieved a score of at least 9,000, and therefore already had their score(s) listed under Scorers (and that removal from the Historic section would not remove their score). Sorry for the confusion...Collegebookworm
New Mobile Skin
Thanks for implementing the new mobile skin!! I'm not too sure how I feel about it, though... maybe it's just because it's different than I'm used to, but everything seems smushed together and harder to read. It is cool you don't have to zoom in and out continually, but personally I think I'd rather have that than this type of text formatting. That is just me though! Regardless of what I and others think, thanks for doing this and trying it out. :) TinDefacto (talk) 02:56, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
A couple of thoughts here:
- Having a mobile interface is a big win by itself. Google does penalize you for mobile searchers if you don't have a mobile-compatible layout. Even if the layout sucks it's important to have something available just for that. And people can always switch back to the desktop mode in a pinch anyway, right? (there's a link at the bottom of the page).
- I freaking hate CSS. I'm awful at it. I hate working on it on my own projects, but for something as sophisticated as MediaWiki I have very little desire to haggle over CSS details and the headaches around that.
- That being said, there are three mobile compatible skins in the MediaWiki project. [Minerva (what we have now, also the default on Wikipedia], [Vector, which supposedly has a reactive mobile mode] and [Timeless]. If you are willing to experiment with those and give feedback on what's good, what you like, what you don't like I am willing to make changes there. If you don't have the means to install MediaWiki send me an email and I can make a test site for you. And if you want to try hacking at CSS directly I can certainly incorporate that into the website.
- Over on my other website, pro-football-history.com we had a really big table for each team's complete coaching history. The X axis was coaching positions and the Y axis was seasons. It was huge, even on desktop it required massive scrolling and it was a little bit painful to read. With the new site design we had to tackle this and make it mobile friendly. After dealing with that thing I am of the opinion that tables are just not very compatible with mobile layouts. Unless you keep it small and disciplined a table becomes both too dense for readability and too wide for the mobile aspect ratio. Our solution to the big table problem was the texty Franchise History table you'll see on a page like []. It's lots of text, it's responsive and it doesn't require any horizontal scrolling.
So what I'm trying to get at there is that if you can think outside of the box and find a new, better way to present that data I'm all ears. Otherwise I think we might be stuck in a perpetual local minimum of "dense tables suck for mobile design" and "all our data is tabular so we have to display it as tables".
New wiki software
I think Wikipedia rolled out an update for its software. I was wondering if you could explore a possibility of upgrading ADSIC's software to that? -RiceBoson