Brickipedia

READ MORE

Brickipedia
Brickipedia
Brickipedia
41,394
pages
in: Administration

Forum:Major Revamp

Sign in to edit
Forums: Index →
Administration
→ Major Revamp

I've been looking around the site, the templates, MP, articles, etc., and I noticed we need a major revamp in a lot of things. New set templates, mainpage, header templates and lots of other stuff. I know I may sound weird, but it's the truth. Some stuff here needs to be updated. I don't care if you like this proposal, but Im making use of my time to fix these issues.(Or whatever you call them.)

Proposal
  • New Set, Part, Minifigure ,Header Templates.
  • Sleek Mainpage.
  • New IRC. (Were still voting on that forum.:P)
  • Fix up the policy pages.

Ill post possible examples on templates etc. When I find spare time. Feel free to leave comments.:) Skdhjf(Talk!) 19:00, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Examples[]

New Set template

Comments[]

General comments[]

All the conservatives will hate us for this because we're inflicting change, and all change is bad :P FB100Z • talk • contribs 04:23, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

Improving templates[]

I 100% agree with you that Brickipedia templates are currently a mess. Some are documented, some are not, some are shaped like this, some are not, some are colored like this, some are... I have a few suggestions:

  1. Make a very systematic and organized hierarchy of box templates. This helps consistency and invokes the DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle. For more information, see the system I made on HEWiki. </shameless self-promotion>
  2. Get rid of templates that have text that could be easily embedded into the page text, like Template:NonLEGOminifigure.
  3. Update Template:Documentation and document all possible templates.

FB100Z • talk • contribs 19:45, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Like I said for the main page, these could also be far more sleek. What about having a centralized design, with only the background of the title changing colour dependant on the theme? ajr 21:59, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
  • @FB100Z- about the lack of consistency, I'm guessing you mean all templates, not specifically the infoboxes? Becuase as far as I know, all infoboxes have exactly the same look. If you mean all templates though, I completely agree. Not really sure what you mean about point 2 though. And Template:Documentation was created well after many of the templates here, so that's why a lot don't have them. But I agree that should all have documentation of some sort. If we do change infoboxes (which personally I don't see any real need to, but hey I'm open to seeing alternate designs) and we choose to still use the bkg colours dependent on the themes, I really think we should have the bkg colors fixed before we implement the new template. NightblazeSaber 04:30, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
    Yes, I wasn't talking about the infoboxes :P Sorry about the confusion. I've changed the title of this section appropriately.
    Point 2 is basically saying that big boxes at the top of an article should discuss information on the article itself (this article needs improvement in blah areas), not the topic of the article (this article is about blah, which is blah.) The latter could be embedded into the page text easily enough. FB100Z • talk • contribs 05:00, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • Agree in point one, disagree in point two (I can't see what's wrong in having a general notice on the top of a page, a visitor does not have to read the full article), agree in point three.  Samdo994 talk contribs  12:20, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
    • Per Samdo. I think all we have is the VG template and the "future" templates like this, and I think they're important enough that the reader should know straight away "hey, all the info we've got is based on prototypes, prelims, etc, don't trust us 100%, the final product could change, or not even be released (eg Quinlan Vos in the T6 shuttle)". And I don't really have an argument for the VG/movie template I guess, except I just think that's an important enough fact as well. NightblazeSaber 13:47, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
    • If that's what the "future" template is about, I suggest we change it to something like "This article is about a minifigure, theme, or set that has scheduled for a future date. It is subject to change as more information is released to the general public." The video game box, on the other hand, is pretty much useless. We might as well have another box that says, "This article is about a theme." FB100Z • talk • contribs 15:41, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
    • I think having a template for a video game-only minifigure is fine, we just need to scrap the box outline, making it just text (+ pehaps a symbol). ie. make it as though it is just normal text. this way it would be the same throught all articles. - nxt 16:07, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
    • @FB100Z: Yes, but minifigures are something else. If a visitor sees a minifigure which only appears in a videogame he might say "Oh, a minifigure of (for example) Davy Jones! I need that one!", but without reading the whole article he will never know that that minifigure only appears in videogames. The templates are used to inform a visitor right away about a special, major fact. Using such messages is common, such messages like "This name is not official" exist on several good wikis, for which we have {{Conjecture}}. Same applies for minifigures.  Samdo994 talk contribs  16:51, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
      • I'll restate this: the purpose of big banner boxes is for meta-information about the article, not its topic. (The bolding is for emphasis, not frustration, BTW.) Plus, if someone really wanted the minifigure that badly, they would probably at least read the introduction or what sets it is in :P FB100Z • talk • contribs 22:12, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • @ Example infoboxes, sorry, I'm really not a fan of this, it looks like something taken straight from Wookieepedia. The main things I really don't like are the yellowish colour for "minifigure information", it just seems random, and also the [source] link, I just don't get the point of it (I know there are infoboxes on other wikis that do this though). Sorry again if the criticism sounds harsh :S Also, I can't see this being brought up anywhere else here, but there is an obvious alternative to users who have been around a while- User:LegOtaku/Experiments/Set_template-new- the infoboxes LegOtaku (which is now apparently not a registered account anymore ); ) created a long time ago, but at the time, pretty much everyone was neutral because they liked both templates. However, on review, if the width was set to 300px as opposed to the currentt 260, I could see this being a better option- there's an inventory link which we can re-code using pretty much the same code as the Oasis inventory tab (wherever that is- if anyone does know, please leave a message on my talk page, been looking for it for ages) and the infobox colours are less dominating to me and bring more focus to the content. I don't know if I'd prefer the "details" and "content" bits left-aligned or not though. Also, if we are thinking of a new infobox, I was wondering if we should maybe expand the price section to accomodate for more countries, like every on shop.lego.com? Since we have colapsible appearances, we could have a collapsible price section, which lists the four prices we have by default, but you can hit "show" to bring up more prices? (I think it should only be the four main prices for the MoS, but the others are just optional extras) Just thought it might make the info more international friendly. Anyway, I'd better stop now, post is getting too long. NightblazeSaber 23:53, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
  • So you don't like the Set infobox templates formulated by me. Yeah they look like Wookieepedia's, but hey; they're sleek. LegOTaku's Set Infoboxes look like a... "Taken from one of Wikia's example templates" infobox.:P Our current templates have an old look to them; that's why I suggested new ones. Maybe we should bring this up to a non official vote and see what the community (not us.;)) likes best. Then we can make a compromise. Skdhjf(Talk!) 00:20, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  • ?? The forum is opem to the entire community. NightblazeSaber 01:52, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  • So why isn't voting open to the entire community? :/ FB100Z • talk • contribs 03:17, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  • All templates at tops of articles should be kept to 100% wide. - nxt 18:07, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • Added option to keep existing infobox. Can you vote for more than one entry, or is it one vote only? NightblazeSaber 04:15, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

If we use a new template, where an Inventory link is available, we should add a new command to the set template (which can be activated with |Inventory = yes, just as in the Template:External info. The code for this could be something like this: 

{{#ifeq:{{{Inventory}}}|yes| <small>[[Inventory:{{PAGENAME}}|(view inventory)]]</small>|}}

I can't find out how this can be done automaticly (a command that says: "Is there a page called Inventory:{{PAGENAME}}, and if yes, display (view inventory)"), though.  Samdo994 talk contribs  12:28, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

  • Just put {{{Item №}}} {{{Title}}} instead of {{PAGENAME}}. Skdhjf(Talk!) 05:40, June 3, 2011 (UTC)
    • I'd rather like to have PAGENAME, since it automaticly changes when the page is moved. And that still doesn't solve the problem of needing a piece of code that can automaticly find the inventory the the article.  Samdo994 talk contribs  11:29, June 3, 2011 (UTC)
  • How about this? {{#ifexist:Inventory:{{PAGENAME}}| <small>([[Inventory:{{PAGENAME}}|view inventory]])</small>|}} FB100Z • talk • contribs 23:35, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

Improving the main page[]

Sleek ftw. -- stercus accidit -- cjc 20:19, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the main page needs to be more inviting and radiant. FB100Z • talk • contribs 20:49, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
Definitely more sleek and flowing (both things that are rather hard to define, but you know when you see them). Also, more links for community-oriented things, please! ajr 21:58, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
  • I really don't have a problem with the main page. But, as above, if someone comes up with something new, I'm happy to see it. Strong oppose community junk on the main page though- people are here to read about lego, not us. That's what the community portal is for. NightblazeSaber
  • Nighthawk leader: I'll try to come up with a rough example either tomorrow, or the next few days. Skdhjf(Talk!) 04:29, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
  • Ah don't worry, well put possible "community stuff" on the Community Portal.:D Skdhjf(Talk!) 06:06, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • I have made a proposal for something new on the page, see Forum:New Pages.  Samdo994 talk contribs  12:25, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't see anything particularly wrong with having community activity on the Main Page. The editors are just as important as the content, although keeping the two separate is probably a good idea. FB100Z • talk • contribs 22:13, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • Although it probably cannot be fixed, I would love to see the main page being devoid of all ads. Even when I'm logged on, I still see ads on the main page, which irritates me... =P Anyway, I personally agree with how the community stuff should be separate from the Lego stuff. It focuses more on the subject which is of interest to the Lego enthusiast.
    However, I personally feel that the main page might need a bit of re-organization. For example, the lists of 2011 sets and products is exceedingly long. Is it possible to make it collapsible with sets under their respective themes? Would be more useful for people who just happen to want to know when some random products like a Lego Brickmaster set would be released without having to scroll to the bottom of the page...

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 03:55, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

    • Fix for ads- switch to Monobook (no ads) :D I'm pretty sure there's some rule in place against blocking ads for the whole wiki. You can edit your own css file to hide the ads, but it will only apply to you. Also, this probably isn't a solution or anything, but removed the January content from the upcoming template since it's been about four months, and the column is now slightly shorter than the other one. NightblazeSaber 04:17, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
    • You can edit the .css (my one I copied from someone is quite good, hides a lot of thinks I don't want to see) or download an ad-blocker extension for your browser. (Or both) -- Join the club -- Kingcjc 15:40, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • I was looking at the main page like I do about once a year, and remembered people were saying about how long the upcoming template. I thought perhaps a small image slide-show (with links to the pages) of the images of new sets, updated every-so often. However, I'm not sure if it works on Monobook and stuff, and not sure how it would work in practise as I haven't tried, but still, might as well through an idea out. -- Join the club -- Kingcjc 15:40, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • Good idea. Anyone else have any suggestions so I can start working on a sample? Skdhjf(Talk!) 15:32, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

New IRC[]

  • Er, I think the person who created the header meant a new IRC.:P Skdhjf(Talk!) 06:04, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • Whoever made it nost likely means this. -- stercus accidit -- cjc 07:33, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • Whoever made it was me :P FB100Z • talk • contribs 22:17, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
    • Then did you mean that? :P -- stercus accidit -- cjc 18:13, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

Improving policy/guideline pages[]

Wording. I think wording needs to be important. I don't care what words, it just has to be worded right :P -- stercus accidit -- cjc 20:19, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

BP:NOT needs more extension and improvement. I would suggest adding points like "Brickipedia is not a place to post your MOC" and "Brickipedia is not a crystal brick." FB100Z • talk • contribs 20:51, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Brickipedia is not a place to hold a dwarf's birthday party. -- stercus accidit -- cjc 20:53, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
Well, couldn't you post a MOC that is something more on a blog like this? But I agree with practically everything here. Lots of stuff needs to be changed, like the Brickify template. Personally, I feel it doesn't fit in as well with our new rating system...

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 03:46, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

I would like to point out that we could strive to have policy pages formatted like those on Biosector01 and Herosector01. I know, I know, "we're not BS01/HS01, we're Brickipedia", but I must admit, their policy pages are very well structured. A general policy page is helpful, and then creating the sub-policies. Explenations are good too.  Samdo994 talk contribs  12:17, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

bs01 sux cuz they has admin cabal D: FB100Z • talk • contribs 18:07, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
I like how they ban edit sprees :P -- "Well, you've made 10 edits in the last 15 minutes. I don't care how good they were, your banned!" -- stercus accidit -- cjc 18:14, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
admin00bs ftw FB100Z • talk • contribs 20:06, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm...I wonder what they're smoking... FB100Z • talk • contribs 20:08, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
  • We should come to a consensus here, rather than let this forum slip by. •myk 23:38, July 4, 2011 (UTC)
Infobox Voting

Use LegOtaku's infobox (+5) (Req. 04:18, May 31, 2011 (UTC))[]

#No offense tatooine, but I really like this one. ajr 04:18, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

  1. My vote's for this one or to keep the old one, guess we could do with a change though NightblazeSaber 04:28, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
    # I like what your doing Tat, but I like LegOtakus -- stercus accidit -- cjc 07:38, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  2. I liked this one from the start. Jag 07:49, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  3. I tried to get this through a forum some time ago, but nobody really cared. :/ Vote counts for the second one.  Samdo994 talk contribs  11:30, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
    #I like both of these, but this one's sleeker. FB100Z • talk • contribs 17:44, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
    # This one is awesome. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
    • Comment: I know you people may win this vote, but can we make a few minor changes to that infobox so it doesn't look too messed up. (Like round the edges a bit.:S) Skdhjf(Talk!) 20:40, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
      • Rounded corners! YEAH! And box shadows and text shadows and awesome glossy effects! FB100Z • talk • contribs
        • No, make them glow! Neon and fluorescent and super-mega cool! -- stercus accidit -- cjc 22:51, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
          • How 'bout this? (Looks best in Chrome; I'll add Firefox support later.) FB100Z • talk • contribs 23:28, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
            • Breath-taking! FB100Z, that looks soooo sleek. Awesome...

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 23:54, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

            • Whoah. So awesome. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
              • I must be seeing something completely different in my browser... Anyway, set up another voting section for this infobox. NightblazeSaber 00:12, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
                • Are you viewing it through Monobook? I Believe FB100Z's infobox only works in the new wikia look.

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 03:56, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

                  • Guess we'll need to add monobook compatibility too.... but it looks awesome! ajr 03:59, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
                • I just switched back to Monobook, the tables have an ugly white background. I'll fix them. FB100Z • talk • contribs 04:32, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
    • I'll stick to that of LegOtaku, however, FB100Z, can everything below the image be made smaller (as small as the current set template has it? Might look better.  Samdo994 talk contribs  12:11, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
      • I shrunk down the subheaders a bit; how does it look?
    *Oppose I prefer the current one. - nxt 18:32, June 4, 2011 (UTC) (You cannot oppose on this forum - please vote below for "keep current infobox")

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 18:57, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

  1. I guess this Infobox doesn't look too bad.:S Skdhjf(Talk!) 19:23, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

Use Use Tatooine's infobox (0) (Req. 04:08, May 31, 2011 (UTC))[]

  1. Skdhjf(Talk!) 04:08, May 31, 2011 (UTC) (No use - Might as well go for FB100Z's)

Use FB100Z's infobox (+8, Failed Nomination) (Reason: Does not work on all browsers. (I.e Mobile and some IE browsers)(Req. 04:00, June 1, 2011 (UTC))[]

  1. Yes please! ajr 04:00, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Love the look. So sleek and shiny. Also, would there be a link to see the set inventory? That would be nice.

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 04:04, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

  1. •myk 04:22, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  2. I'm flattered :P FB100Z • talk • contribs 04:29, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Shiny... -- stercus accidit -- cjc 09:02, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Amazing. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  5. Just magnificent.

The Legend of Swipe Talk Alien Conquest! 18:21, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

    • Just as a note- if this one is going to be used, there are going to be a fair few weird looking prices out there, as it could potentially go US $xxx.xx / £xxx.xx / €xxx.xx / AU <new line> $xxx.xx. 23:41, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
      • There's something called the CSS white-space property. All the other infoboxes have the same problem, too. FB100Z • talk • contribs 19:22, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Not that I can say I know alot about all this, but if it helps the site, why not? haha, that's a good basis for an argument. :P -NBP
    • Comment: We must add TableCells in this Box. It looks too "soft".:P Skdhjf(Talk!) 05:52, June 3, 2011 (UTC)
      • Of course we'll have tables. Otherwise it's not really an infobox. FB100Z • talk • contribs 18:31, June 3, 2011 (UTC)
        • Did you fix the issue - because if you don't, I'll just remove it from the voting section.:P Skdhjf(Talk!) 17:33, June 21, 2011 (UTC)

Keep existing infobox (+1)[]

  1. This one's just fine. - nxt 15:48, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

A few comments on FB100Z's infobox[]

One thing that seems a bit strange is having a large band of colour, followed by a light band of colour with text in it, followed by another large band of colour. I realize that this won't be a problem for some themes because they have a light colour, but for some it might look strange. Another issue is that the image has to have the full text put in (i.e. [[File:Wiki.png]] instead of just Wiki.png). The image and text also looks strange aligned to the left with the subheader text aligned to the right. The page (User:FB100Z/Set template) also states that "Only three subsections are supported; if you need more, consider merging your sections and/or moving some content to the article text." Wow, looks like I did the seven-line oppose for this. :D Jag 19:37, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

  • Wait, so we can have more then three subsections? The template can't be modified to accomodate for any more? If so, you people are absolutely mad if you support this. Personally, I hate the look of the template much more than any of the other suggestions with its super-rounded corners and unecessary text effects, but I wasn't going to say anything because I'm obviously the odd one out here. But to have only three possible fields? Strong oppose. NightblazeSaber 01:49, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • That temlate is just an example on how the real deal's going to look like. Look at the source. It's easily recognizable that the infobox can be altered to accommodate more than three subsections. I can create the "real deal" if you want; but I am terribly busy at the current time. Skdhjf(Talk!) 02:10, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • Ok, but Only three subsections are supported; if you need more, consider merging your sections and/or moving some content to the article text. really doesn't sound like it can be, that's all. NightblazeSaber 02:40, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • I guess FB100Z just made a technical misunderstanding while typing those lines. I tend to do that too.:D Skdhjf(Talk!) 03:13, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • By the way, Captain Jag, I've tested it and you also have to make sure the picture is 250px or less. I tried inserting an image without making sure it was 250px, and boy was that image huge. =P Also, I've tried adding more subsections, and it doesn't seem to work...

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 03:41, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

  • Do you mean coping the source and adding more subsections there, or just adding "Section header 4"? Jag 04:15, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • The former.

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 17:09, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

  • Alright, There can be more than three sub sections, FB100Z merely meant to say that he doesn't understand why more than three are needed, and as such only put three into the current example. Of course the template can be made to have more than three sections... ajr 23:31, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • Come on, peoples, it's an effing demo. Give me a break :P And yes, I don't think more than three sections would be necessary. Can you present an example that needs more? FB100Z • talk • contribs 23:37, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
    • Hmm.. what about every single infobox we have? NightblazeSaber 23:46, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
      • Subsections categorize the tabular data, repeat, subsections categorize the tabular data. For example, the subsection that says "details" would contain the set number and the release date and the theme name(s). Of course we wouldn't create a new subsections for each of those entries; that would take up too much space and look pretty ridiculous. FB100Z • talk • contribs 23:52, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose: I don't know whether you have noticed but for those using an Operating System like Windows XP or lower cannot see these sleek, chrome like, glossy effects, instead it turns out in white and black. This makes the template look worse than the one we currently use. I use Internet Explorer 8 and I believe that Internet Explorer 9 is only available for Windows 7 for some reason. By using this template we will be making this Wiki look un-appealing to our viewers as many people don't own Windows 7. By sticking with simple codes that will produce a template visible on all types of browsers will appeal to more people. Please, please, please re-think your decision here. Thanks, kind regards.

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 18:27, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

I think you have a point. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  • Per SKP. We need a Twmplate that works universally on all browsers. Even if the Infobox has lots of votes, they'll all be bogus if it's ruin the look of the Wiki - I'll try to make another Infobox later that hopefully we will all come to agree on. Skdhjf(Talk!) 18:43, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for seeing my point. :)

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 19:09, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

I see your point. (By the way, you have a technical misunderstanding: it's the browser, not the OS.) At any rate, yes, people forced with using older browsers will have to go without the effects. However, does the template actually disappear in these browsers? Or, even worse, does it look ugly? Did you even try it out in an older browser? Give me a screenshot and I'll be convinced (and I'll fix it if I can.) FB100Z • talk • contribs 20:31, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and from the template docs: "Unfortunately, only new browsers support these effects; although it still works in old ones, it will be less interesting." I don't necessarily favor the new browsers; it's just that the old dogs don't know the new tricks and will have to settle for a rather ordinary-looking box. FB100Z • talk • contribs 20:36, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm...the colors are a little funny in IE. I'll fix that ASAP. FB100Z • talk • contribs 20:40, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply (I forget about this). I used it using Windows Internet Explorer 7 or 8 and it appeared in white and black, it was still visible. However I now have a Windows 7, not a Windows XP anymore and therefore I may have Windows Internet Explorer 9.

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 19:48, June 22, 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm...seems like a bug to me. I think my recent adjustments fixed that. In the future, please inform me directly about issues before voting it down, thanks :) FB100Z • talk • contribs 21:29, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
Templates

Use Tatooine's Future Set/Minifigure Etc. Templates (+3) (Req. 20:47, May 31, 2011 (UTC))[]

  1. This will be the new style for the Future set, minifigure, etc templates. Please comment if you wish to make a suggestion about the color, or other issues. (This style of the template only applies to the future Set, Minifigure, Books templates. Not Brickify, etc.) Skdhjf(Talk!) 20:47, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  2. I like it, but it could use a more visible border. :) -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  3. Looks good. •myk 04:23, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  • The "or" part needs to be fixed. •myk 03:33, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

Keep existing Future set/Minifigure etc Templates (+3) (Req. 00:12, June 1, 2011 (UTC))[]

  1. It's more compact, and the line break between "or" and "expected" on the new one looks a bit weird NightblazeSaber 00:12, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
    • On my browser it looks different. Do you use Firefox? Skdhjf(Talk!) 18:19, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  2. - nxt 18:33, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 19:12, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Fixes and Add ons for Nominee Templates

Tatooine's infobox[]

FB100Z's infobox[]

{{#ifexist:Inventory:{{PAGENAME}}| <small>([[Inventory:{{PAGENAME}}|view inventory]])</small>|}}
Add Inventory Code (+4)
  1. Skdhjf(Talk!) 22:24, June 9, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Oh yeah!

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 03:26, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

  1. - nxt 18:15, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Glow effect, shadow! •myk 01:24, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
Don't Add Inventory Code (+0)

LegOtaku's infobox[]

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
More Fandoms