Forums - Customs and Reviews
This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page.

No reason for archiving given.

Older (but still active) parts: 1

Can an administrator please move this to Forum:Customs and Reviews? Thanks. FB100Ztalkcontribs 04:58, December 2, 2011 (UTC)
Made a mess of it, but got there in the end :) (didn't read this first) NightblazeSaber 07:15, December 2, 2011 (UTC)

Brickipedia:Featured Custom.
I didn't even realise this existed. Did we talk about it?

Anyway, I've just made "Template:Featured Custom":

<template since integrated into {{Rating}}>

Do you like it? I tried to make it a bit like the ratings template, which made me think, d we want a "Good Custom" or "Complete Custom"? And also, what about "Featured Review"? - nxt

Heh. You can thank me for setting it up without telling anyone. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
Kind of my fault too- I think I had the section on the custom main page- I needed to put some content there :) NightblazeSaber 23:40, December 1, 2011 (UTC)
  • Let's have a featured custom and a featured review, no other grades. Too complicated at our current stage of development, maybe someday we could introduce other grades. ajr 18:56, December 1, 2011 (UTC)

<template since integrated into {{Rating}}>

  • "Template:Featured Review"- nxt
    • I'll Monobook it when I get around to it :) Although the reviews one may not need it since it would go inside the actual review... Also, would it be ok if I tinted the FA star red/green? Just worried about possible confusion between wiki FA. NightblazeSaber 23:40, December 1, 2011 (UTC)
      • I was just about to post that :D I'll make it. FB100Ztalkcontribs 03:20, December 2, 2011 (UTC)
        • Looking good :) NightblazeSaber 03:48, December 2, 2011 (UTC)
          • Yup, like the tints. I'm going to revert the length changing edit, as it was meant to correspond with the infobox. If you have another reason, say, I don't especially mind. - nxt
  • Quality Custom Epicness Group!! QCEG. --User:Crazed Penguin/PossibleXmasSig 03:50, December 2, 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't think we need any review groups for these namespaces- I think a simple support/oppose vote works fine for these, since we don't really have any set MoS for them, only some minumum requirements. About "Template:Featured Review"- I've quoted out the cat for now, because if you stick that on a page, the cat will bleed through to the central review page as well... I'll try to think of something :S NightblazeSaber 03:57, December 2, 2011 (UTC)

Colors for meta pages

One problem I've been noticing is that meta-pages about reviews and customs (e.g. Brickipedia:Featured Review) are still colored blue, since they aren't in the appropriate namespaces. There are three plausible ways around this:

  1. Manually add every review/custom meta page in the CSS. This is nasty.
  2. Put meta pages in their appropriate namespaces (e.g., Brickipedia:Featured Review could become Review:Featured Review.)
  3. Create two new namespaces, Review meta and Custom meta (or Brickipedia review/Brickipedia custom) and put the meta pages under that.

I'm thinking that #3 would be the cleanest. Thoughts? FB100Ztalkcontribs 04:49, December 2, 2011 (UTC)

  • 1 would be my first preference, then 2, then 3 a distant 3rd- don't think we need two whole namespaces, which would hold about 5 articles each. #1- so what? A few extra lines of CSS- it may not look very elegant, but who cares? NightblazeSaber 07:11, December 2, 2011 (UTC)
    • 2 would be my preference. ajr 17:25, December 2, 2011 (UTC)
      • If we manually add Brickipedia:Reviews and Brickipedia:Customs to the title, won't it add them then? That's why they're in subpages... (one reason, anyway). Jag 17:29, December 2, 2011 (UTC)
        • Not sure whether CSS can detect subpages; I don't think it can without some help from (ugh) JavaScript. (I don't have anything against JS, but there are many cases where it's not worth using.) FB100Ztalkcontribs 20:40, December 2, 2011 (UTC)


  • Does anyone actually have contrast issues with the following? It looks completely fine for my screen, and any sort of background for the stars still looks really... odd to me :S

(normal text to see what it looks like on the background)

Star yellow.svg Star yellow.svg Star yellow.svg Star gray.svg Star gray.svg 3 / 5

NightblazeSaber 04:35, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

The yellow stars look a little funny. I have weak eyes, though. FB100Ztalkcontribs 06:27, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, when I look at it from a certain angle, I can see what you're saying... how does it look now? NightblazeSaber 06:57, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
No offense, but...eww... FB100Ztalkcontribs 22:20, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I kinda thought so too. But is it ok contast-wise? (don't worry, I wasn't planning on using that colour, changed to something a bit better) NightblazeSaber 22:54, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
The borders of the yellow stars still look kinda funny :/ Maybe I should change the stars themselves...lighter colors work best for backgrounds, though. FB100Ztalkcontribs 23:06, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

Set numbers for customs

Should customs ever be given fictional set numbers? FB100Ztalkcontribs 01:50, December 9, 2011 (UTC)

  • I would vote for no, at least not in the title- it leads people to believe that it's official. NightblazeSaber 01:54, December 9, 2011 (UTC)
    Agreed with NHL. ajr 02:24, December 9, 2011 (UTC)
    Having the number on the article I think would be fine, but in the title, no per NHL's reasons.

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] -3590 days left until Christmas! 07:30, December 9, 2011 (UTC)


  • Reviews wiki reviews have now all been imported. NightblazeSaber 00:14, December 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • {{ReviewerProfile}} finally works! Note- if you ever do semantic, never use has type::Text if you want to perform an #ask on that data. NightblazeSaber 22:38, December 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • Will be working now on getting all reviews for a certain reviews page to show up automatically, but I may not have enough time to do that right now. NightblazeSaber 22:38, December 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • Can now put {{ReviewerProfile|list=1}} to show a list of reviews instead of just the number of reviews. Thought it could be nice if you wanted to put it on a userpage or whatever to show an actual list of reviews that you've done, but I think we should just keep it to the number of reviews in the actual review namespace. NightblazeSaber 22:50, December 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • Let me think about that one... obviously you need it at {{User:<username>/ReviewerProfile|list=1}}, not {{ReviewerProfile|list=1}} NightblazeSaber 08:05, December 12, 2011 (UTC)
      • Fixed that with a double-pass. I know it looks pretty weird, but I can't think of any other way to do it :S NightblazeSaber 02:52, December 16, 2011 (UTC)
  • Ok, I've made {{User review}}. This adds the profile to the page, along with Category:User reviews and some semantic stuff, so no categories should be manually added to reviews pages now. To use to template, you have to use {{subst:User review}} as opposed to just {{user review}}, or just click the "review" createplate and it's all automatically added NightblazeSaber 23:36, December 11, 2011 (UTC)
    Why can't we transclude it? - nxt
    If you transclude it, the noinclude tags come up as unparsed text- the only way I could up up with onlyincluding noinclude tags was to split the tags into two parts (eg "<noinc" and "lude>") and surrounding each part of the tag with onlyinclude tags. Simply subbing the template means the text is still split up, so it has to be subbed for the tag to become a tag (most likely, this doesn't make sense :P just try using it without a subst and you'll see what happens. NightblazeSaber 11:10, December 12, 2011 (UTC)
    Use the simple way - scrap all the noincludes, includeonlys and that lot? I don't even see why we need them (though I may be being stupid). (Sorry if I'm being a hassle). - nxt
    Category:User reviews is for user reviews, Category:Review pages is for the central pages, and the pages obviously have to be in one or the other. Review pages transclude user reviews, so if there were no noincludes, the review pages would be put it both categories :S NightblazeSaber 21:58, December 14, 2011 (UTC)
    Uh-hu. I'll just leave it to you... - nxt
  • So... Should we create profiles for all reviewers now? -Cligra Join the redlink war!

User Categories?

Should we have things like this? Berrybrick 00:40, December 13, 2011 (UTC)

  • Oops, just deleted that :S (it had a deletion notice, and we never said we were going to do user categories). Jag's been working on a semantic thing, I'm just about to finish it off. NightblazeSaber 01:29, December 13, 2011 (UTC)
    • Ok, I've realised this isn't going to be straightforward- obviously when people fill out the "creator" field, they're going to link to their userpage, and the result of the semantic stuff would be [[Creator::[[User:<username>|<username>]]]] or [[Creator::{{u|<username>}}]], instead of [[Creator::<username>]]. So, what I can do is change the custom set/minifig/theme templates so that
will produce a field that appears with the output text as:
That way the semantic stuff will work as well. I don't know, it's up to people running the customs stuff I guess as to what you want to do, as long as the cats don't interfere with the wiki's cat structure it shouldn't be a problem, but displaying the results really isn't very good with categories, and semantic saves creating categories for every user. NightblazeSaber 03:28, December 13, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, do that. I'll get the bot clearing all that up. - nxt
Had a go, but had some errors. I'll keep trying. - nxt

Creating Review pages that don't have reviews

  • Should we do it? I can understand doing to make sure that the page is right, etc, but when people click on a review page, they expect to see a review... NightblazeSaber 08:42, December 21, 2011 (UTC)
    • I think we should otherwise some of our viewers won't understand what they did wrong when they get taken to an article creation page. Perhaps stick a template like Template:Reviewless at the top of review articles that don't have any reviews. That way they know that there are no reviews on this product available.

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] -3590 days left until Christmas! 08:52, December 21, 2011 (UTC)

      • That works ok for me :) NightblazeSaber 09:06, December 21, 2011 (UTC)
        • Cool, I shall go and add the template to all the Review articles with no reviews that I created last night. :)

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] -3590 days left until Christmas! 09:14, December 21, 2011 (UTC)

          • Um... it appears on Review:Main Page that there are 124 reviews... maybe add the category in the Review template? Jag 03:31, December 27, 2011 (UTC)
            • Yeah, we need to do something about that. - nxt 10:09, December 27, 2011 (UTC)
              • Fixed (subtracted number of review articles from number of articles in category:Reviewless) NightblazeSaber 22:43, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
  • Personally I am not a fan of this idea for the following reason: Users have figured out they can get rewards for practically doing nothing. Esspecially with the pictures and categories. Please stop this nonsense. klagoerRollinglaughingsmiley.gifname that user 13:54, January 5, 2012 (UTC)
    • Hey Mr.M, you're an admin now, you can do something about it :P But I'm not that bothered, they're the ones spending a long time not achiveing much. - nxt
      • They're definately getting the wrong idea about what is useful to create and what isn't. -KoN Talk 18:43, January 5, 2012 (UTC)
        • I am formulating a plan for something that will have more functionality, and replace that, so it may not be alot of use anyway. - nxt
          • Per Mr. Minifigure- it was defintitely very annoying over the last week or so. However, the user running an "army" is no longer giving points to the creation of review articles, amazingly, the creation of blank review articles has stopped :/ Definitely not a fan of blank review pages at all. NightblazeSaber 22:43, January 6, 2012 (UTC)


What should we do when there is a tie for the month's featured custom/review? --Berrybrick (Talk) It's a Christmas miracle, Mr. Freeze! XMAS.PNG 21:16, December 21, 2011 (UTC)

  • I think when there was a tie at BOTM once (which has the same voting system), we just kept it running until there was a winner. Probably not the best solution since it should be changed on the first of the month though NightblazeSaber 23:59, December 21, 2011 (UTC)
  • Could we just have two? - nxt
  • I'd support that NightblazeSaber 05:43, December 28, 2011 (UTC)
  • What if whoever puts the review/custom on the front page could do a sort of tie-breaking vote, as long as they didn't vote earlier. --Berrybrick (Talk) 00:42, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic Lists on Review Pages

  • Take a look here, let me know what you think (click edit on the page to see the code). I'll be trying to get it sorted by date created instead of alphabetically, not sure if that's possible though. NightblazeSaber 23:06, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
    • I would prefer to have it by date, if possible. But my name comes relativley early alphabetically so, whatever. :p --Berrybrick (Talk) 23:08, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
      • Per BB, have it by date, if possible. But then again, per BB again... Jag 23:10, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
        • See link now- ordered by date. However, I had to add the dates manually. Will have to make a big string splitting function sometime, because the time given by five tildes conveniently isn't one of Semantic Mediawiki's supported date types :/ NightblazeSaber 23:43, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
          • Ok, splitter all done, {{ConvertToSemanticDate|~~~~~}} produces Jan 7 2012 00:47, which is in Semantic form. So, I can set it up so that this is added along with the reviewerprofile and appropriate cats from now on, but the others will have to be added manually. NightblazeSaber 00:47, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
            • So... Ok to go ahead with this? Although, would probably be better to get the button mentioned below working first... NightblazeSaber 01:42, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
  • Please see Review:7913_Clone_Trooper_Battle_Pack again, noting my review (I chose mine so I wasn't messing around with anyone else's reviews, not because I think it's the best or anything). Just thought it might be good to highlight featured reviews. I think I can also sort the reviews so that featured reviews go at the top, then the rest are sorted by date, but I'm not sure. Let me know what you think about whether to highlight reviews with different template and sorting them to be at the top. NightblazeSaber 01:29, January 9, 2012 (UTC)

What do we have left to do?

Submit Review Button (complete)

  • All I can see is getting some "submit your review" button in under the "reviews" heading on the review pages which would link to the page:{{PAGENAME}}/{{USERNAME}}&action=edit&preload=MediaWiki:Createplate-Review NightblazeSaber 01:00, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
    Don't use the USERNAME template for any serious reasons. It won't work in links, anyway; try it. JavaScript would work great here; I'll see what I can do. FB100Ztalkcontribs 01:31, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
    I know it doesn't work in links- that's why I didn't do it months ago :P Then I tried {{Special:Mypage}} in the hopes it'd magically return the user's username :) Only thing I could find was some reference to a $wgusername which was meant to be used in PHP files for setup :S NightblazeSaber 01:40, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
    There's the JavaScript global variable wgUserName. (The MediaWiki devs made a really dumb move by making hundreds of such variables instead of namespacing them, e.g. wg.UserName.) FB100Ztalkcontribs 02:40, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
    So, how would you go about doing it? Make a button with a specific div and change the innerHTML? Although, I don't really know how to get the returned text from a js variable then stick the returned text in HTML :S think we need you or another genius to figure it out ;) (my js skills aren't really too great when it comes to situations like this) NightblazeSaber 08:47, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
    I could do it, but I'll let one of you guys unless you say. Those variables really are handy. - nxt
    I wouldn't really know what I was doing, I think I've seen FB doing some tests with it though. Might try some tests to try and do something, but you're more than welcome to just do it :P NightblazeSaber 00:46, January 11, 2012 (UTC)
  • (undent)- evidence that I don't know what I'm doing:
function submitReviewButton(){
  btn.innerHTML="<a href=\""+wgPageName+"/"+wgUserName+"&action=edit&preload=MediaWiki:Createplate-Review\">Submit a review</a>"

I think I give up on JS on wikis :) NightblazeSaber 01:01, January 11, 2012 (UTC)
At work on the create button. A nasty flaw in MediaWiki required me to hardcode the preloaded content (by using <tt>$("#wpTextbox1").val("\n\n\n\n\n<!-- Write your review above, then press Publish. -->\n<noinclude>[[Category:User reviews]]</noinclude>");</tt>), since the noincludes didn't work :( FB100Ztalkcontribs 01:10, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Aaaaggh, screw it. Preload does work, I'm just stupid... FB100Ztalkcontribs 01:42, January 11, 2012 (UTC)
/* "Submit review" button */
function btnSubmitReview(){
var inv = '<center><div style="background-color:#ddddee;border:2px outset #9999bb;text-align:center;padding:2px 5px" id="sb-rev"><a href="/index.php?title=Review:'+wgTitle+'/'+wgUserName+'&action=edit&preload=MediaWiki:Createplate-Review&redlink=1">Submit a review</a></div></center>';

:D Does this work ok for everyone? (put the code in your personal JS file, and test it somewhere by using <div id="reviewBtn"></div> somewhere) NightblazeSaber 07:21, January 25, 2012 (UTC)

  • Added to Monobook due to lack of response. Trying to get other skin working too- it was working a few days ago when I originally wrote this, but now it's not showing up... NightblazeSaber 22:37, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

Idea for Recent Edits on Reviews

  • I'm having an ideafor all main pages, A thing with the most recent edit on review pages. Anyone? --Czech 01:42, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
    Maybe for the review pages, but not the rest. Also, not really a fan of recent edits showing up on main pages- there's a good chance of vandalism showing up on the main page NightblazeSaber 01:49, January 7, 2012 (UTC)

Featured Review icons (complete)

  • Also need to get the "featured review" icons and cats working. Don't know about the customs- anyone know if there are featured custom icons working over in custom land? NightblazeSaber 01:51, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
    • Seems good, I guess. I don't know what the problems would be though. If you just mean that they show up, they are good. --Berrybrick (Talk) 01:55, January 7, 2012 (UTC)
      • All featured stuff now complete. NightblazeSaber 00:46, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Review and Inventory Tabs for Monobook (complete)

  • Extra review and inventory tabs for Monobook (just putting it down on the list, not saying anyone has to do anything about it... still trying to think of a way to get it to work) NightblazeSaber 00:46, January 11, 2012 (UTC)
    I could have a go, but I would suggest (but might need FB's backing as to whether it would work) getting the ul that holds the buttons though jQuery selectors, then changing it's innerHTML. - nxt
    That's actually sort of what I tried :)

(Code removed, no longer necessary)

But of course, it didn't work :P If you did want to have a quick go at it, you're more than welcome to (although you've probably got other things to worry about than fixing a skin you don't even use :) ) NightblazeSaber 21:49, January 11, 2012 (UTC)
As far as I know, getElementsByClassName doesn't exist...But I may be wrong. - nxt
It was added to the JS API in HTML5. Some older browsers may not support it; consider using jQuery (I'm personally a MooTools fan, but jq is default on Wikia). FB100Ztalkcontribs 03:26, January 13, 2012 (UTC)
Brill. - nxt
I've got 0 experience with JQuery, and if I can't get the JS working, I'd probably have a lesser chance of getting it working by using a language I don't know anything about (not saying it isn't a good idea to use it though) NightblazeSaber 05:17, January 13, 2012 (UTC)
  • Ok, took some time to have a good look at this, the following code works completely fine in my personal JS (monobook users, feel free to use, let me know if there are any bugs, etc):
/* Add inventory, review and wiki buttons where needed */
function extraButtons(){
if (document.getElementById("switchtabs")){
var inv = '<li id="ca-inv"><a href="/index.php?title=Inventory:'+wgTitle+'" title="An inventory of the topic" accesskey="i">Inventory</a></li>';
var rev = '<li id="ca-rev"><a href="/index.php?title=Review:'+wgTitle+'" title="The article\'s reviews" accesskey="r">Reviews</a></li>';
var wiki = '<li id="ca-wiki"><a href="/index.php?title='+wgTitle+'" title="The topic\'s wiki entry" accesskey="w">Article</a></li>';
      case 0:
        case 114:
        case 118:
But when I put it into Mediawiki:Monobook.js and/or Mediawiki:Common.js, nothing happens. Any ideas why? NightblazeSaber 06:22, January 22, 2012 (UTC)
Something to do with the order that the page loads? - nxt
Must have been- I put the function at the top and it all works fine now, thanks for that (no idea why it mattered though) NightblazeSaber 06:38, January 25, 2012 (UTC)

? (complete)

Please see here and here. Anybody know why? --Berrybrick (Talk) 21:26, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

  • 6862's because it works off certain properties which should be in reviews as per the preload template and every possible guideline, but aren't in this review. NightblazeSaber 02:14, January 13, 2012 (UTC)
    • Everything else should be ok(ish). Some things are getting changed over right now, might be a few errors here and there for a while. NightblazeSaber 02:29, January 13, 2012 (UTC)
    • If you do come across any problems like that again, please let me know though, and I'll fix them as soon as I can (I hate pages with coding errors on them :D) NightblazeSaber 05:10, January 13, 2012 (UTC)
  • Review:6863_Batwing_Battle_Over_Gotham_City is trying to have two 6863's when it links back to the page... Jag 20:39, January 13, 2012 (UTC)
    • ^ Just solved that, on the base page, the title included the number. Jag 20:42, January 13, 2012 (UTC)


  • I had an idea last night for templates for reviews and customs which are WIPs, so pretty much respective versions of Template:WIP. Except the WIP would be different from articles, it would simply mean that they are still being written/modified/whatever. It would make it easier for a reader to tell that a review is not yet finished and that a custom is still in progress and should be updated. --Berrybrick (Talk) 02:20, January 15, 2012 (UTC)
    • Made some rough versions in my testspace. --Berrybrick (Talk) 02:42, January 15, 2012 (UTC)
      • Seems like a good idea to me, although maybe the red should be a bit lighter for the custom template? Also, the customWIP template really shouldn't be used solely as an excuse to not upload images for the theme- I still think {{CustomNoImage}} should still apply even if it's marked as a WIP. NightblazeSaber 23:46, January 15, 2012 (UTC)
        • I only used what was on my custom nav template, if it needs to be changed, not a big deal. I agree about the no image thing, this is more if the MOC is a work in progress. For example: on Monday, there is a picture of a foundation. On Wednesday, there is a picture of a complete building. The template would go on that in the time lapse (or whatever that word is :P) --Berrybrick (Talk) 01:35, January 16, 2012 (UTC)
          • Is customNoImage done automatically? Cause it could (and should) be. - nxt
            • How? Detect whether something's in the infobox? Because sometimes images aren't put into the infoboxes NightblazeSaber 21:21, January 16, 2012 (UTC)
              • Yes. I was assuming they always are. Are they not...? - nxt
                • No. I usually fix it when I see it though. --Berrybrick (Talk) 12:32, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
  • I've lightend the color of the Custom one. You can see it on the link above (the one that says rough versions) or here in use. --Berrybrick (Talk) 15:39, January 22, 2012 (UTC)
    • Can we have it the same colour as the "this article describes a custom..." one? I think that would look nice together. - nxt
      • I didn't think of that. I'll probably change it, if I remember. --Berrybrick (Talk) 19:49, January 23, 2012 (UTC)
        • Okay, how about now? You'd probably want the border changed to red, but I'm not sure how to do that --Berrybrick (Talk) 20:47, January 23, 2012 (UTC)
          • I've updated the version in your userspace, copying the code from the the "this article describes a custom..." one. - nxt
            • Okay. Thank you. --Berrybrick (Talk) 19:59, January 24, 2012 (UTC)
              • Just a suggestion- maybe we could use the green from the current WIP template, and have a light blue for wiki WIP templates? I honestly don't mind either way though. NightblazeSaber 07:30, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
                • Assuming you mean reviews by that? - nxt
  • When can these be enabled? I've seen Template:WIP used on a few custom pages recently, and the people who add them seem to think they are an excuse for not having two valid pages to link to or no image. --Berrybrick (Talk) 23:53, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
    • Added to {{WIP}} (uses namespace to detect which notice to use, examples- customs, reviews, and the normal one's still normal). Let me know if any changes need to be made, I had to change the custom one slightly due to {{NotificationBox}} causing problems with the code. NightblazeSaber 00:24, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

User categories for customs

  • Allow them, don't allow them, or work on a semantic thing so they can generate lists without a category?
    • I would go for the Semantic option- it's much cleaner, and we won't have hundreds of categories just so each user is happy. NightblazeSaber 05:20, January 22, 2012 (UTC)
      • Yeah, semantic for that reason. -King of Nynrah Talk 07:45, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
        • Bit of a coincidence getting a comment here since I just made the template ;) I've made {{CustomsProfile}}- it's a profile which shows your list of customs. It addresses the issues at #User_Categories.3F by using wildcards, so you can even say "King of Nynrah and Berrybrick" in a template (for a combined theme or whatever) and it will come up in both their profiles (note that semantic takes it as "[[User:King of Nynrah|King of Nynrah]] and [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]]"). See here as an example (using Berrybrick because he was the first person with customs I came across). If you want to test your own username right now, you'll probably have to save each of your customs pages without any changes or wait, as it usually takes the servers a few hours to update. So... ok to use this and delete any individual user cats we have? NightblazeSaber 07:57, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
          • Is there (going to be) one of these for reviews? And could we make featured customs/reviews bold? (I could do these but seeing as you're doing more customy stuff I'll let you. - nxt
            • {{ReviewerProfile}} (you can do {{User:<username>/ReviewerProfile|list=1}} to bring up the list of reviews (and bolded FR/FC count) NightblazeSaber 22:11, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
              • I'd be in favouf of this mandatorily replacing custom user templates, my I don't mind that much. - nxt