User talk:NXTBoy

Welcomes

Welcome to the team. ^_^ --Blocco|^{Userpage-Talkpage} 21:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll have a crack at the templates in a day or two

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

21:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome NXTBoy. --Camoy

Welcome to the Wiki! Don't hesitate to send a message my way if you have a question! :) --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Wiki templates

Hey, I can't find any documentation on creating wiki templates. Any help, please? --Mattchewy (Profile | Talk) 00:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Have a look on the MediaWiki site. There are some good tutorials there. Main problem I'm experiencing at the moment is that MrDoomBringer hasn't installed enough plugins. So no conditional templates at the moment. Have a look at the source code for my signature for an example template.

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

08:11, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Signature

I also saw that you created a cool template for your signature. One of the cool features of a Wiki is auto signature. At the top left hand side of your screen, you will see a set of links. If you click on the "My preferences" tab and scroll down, you can enter a custom signature. With the "Raw signature" box checked, you can enter this code that I fixed up for you. I just removed the date part, as the software will add the date for you.

<small style="font-size: 75%; line-height: 1.33">— [[User:NXTBoy|NXTBoy]] ([[User talk:NXTBoy|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/NXTBoy|contribs]])</small>

So if you paste that into the bar you will, your new signature will look like this:

— NXTBoy (talk • contribs) 22:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Now, when leaving somebody a message, or posting on your talk page, all you will need to do is write four tildes like this ~~~~ and your signature will appear. Much easier than pasting your template in every time. Hope that helps!--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

At the moment, I just type three tildes(~~~), and that inserts my template with the current date. That means that If I change my sig, it'll update site-wide.

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

07:34, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

That, is very smart!--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 18:21, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

RobloxOverflow

Topic continued from userpage:
Have a look at my proposal for a StackOverflow style site for Roblox here! started by NXTBoy

What, kind of like this? (Don't spread it.) ---Mr Doom Bringer 19:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I won't spread it, but since when was that made? --Blocco|^{Userpage-Talkpage} 19:44, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Long time ago, you can see the dates that they've been posted. We have plans for that that I can't reveal, just letting you know before you go crazy with building a copycat system that we won't be able to use --Mr Doom Bringer 00:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not building a copycat system: said "Copy-cat" system is being given out for free. In many ways, StackExchange seems better than that, at least on the asking questions front. It has source-code highlighting too, which at the moment, your site seems not to. Although that site does allow things other than questions...

Also, it seems your site doesn't allow users to answer questions, only Roblox admins. Obviously, you'll get a much faster response if the entire usergroup can answer

Could you reveal why you wouldn't be able to use the StackExchange system?

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

15:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

MrDoom, you do know that in releasing community, you would be opening the floodgates to spam and off topic. Then nothing would ever get answered there. I think that it should be left a bit hidden. --Camoy 10:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks like there's a built-in anti-spam rating system to remove off-topic posts. I think that'd work better than the current forum system. --GoldenUrg 02:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

CSS

Tossed in your edits, I'll make the changes to the templates. The sizing you have may need some tweaking to work properly. ---Mr Doom Bringer 20:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Meh, never mind. Go ahead and do what you want to, don't be afraid to use the rollback button if the site explodes. ---User:Mr Doom Bringer (Talk) 20:39, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Yup, you're right, the size does need tweaking. The examples on my userpage are working now: Take a look. Thanks for the change

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

21:42, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

DIV verses Table

I've got an issue with your new templates. While they are well built they're built on top of DIV tags. In any other basic website this wouldn't be an issue, however MediaWiki is built on top of the concept of tables and that's how most of the plugins etc. installed on this wiki are built. Moreover tables are more uniformly interpreted across browsers, meaning that a DIV can act funny where a table will act as it should.

I'm working on your /Object2 subpage right now, attempting to tweak it a bit to fit into the other template that I've already set up utilizing the CSS.

As it stands I would rather use DIV tags where necessary, such as my use in the Template:Function template set as it's used to auto-align the boxes on a page. Outside of that I'd rather use tables. ---User:Mr Doom Bringer (Talk) 20:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I've modified your template to better align with the existing template and to use tables in favor of divs. It can be found at User:NXTBoy/Object3. This modification should allow for a hot drop replacement of the Template:ObjectList page without editing while preserving your modifications to the sub pages. ---User:Mr Doom Bringer (Talk) 21:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

And one last nitpick for the day. When making templates try to make the variables descriptive. "1" and "2" may be faster to type, but it's a heck of a lot easier to understand when they're named "name" and "image" instead. ---User:Mr Doom Bringer (Talk) 21:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Often, it is incorrect to use a table. Although admittedly, it's perfectly valid for the member list. But for single-box templates (like category up, and the LeftNoticeStart), it's just plain wrong. Also, divs are displayed better cross-browser than tables, unless you're using IE6, in which case all bets are off. Tables are only for tabular data. If you use 'em for layout, you're doin' it wrong.

Also, I'm fine with you changing the colors. Admittedly, my color-scheme wasn't very roblox oriented. Which template parameters did you feel were poorly named?

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

00:17, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Specifically the parameters you're leaving as "1" and "2". I realize after a bit of research that such a name allows you to insert the argument into a template without any variable declaration. In such cases though comments are most definitely appreciated.

Yes, I assumed that you were aware of the fact that numerical parameters allow short-hand notation. Although admittedly, I should explain on the template page what the parameters represent.

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

00:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

"Wrong" by who's standards? If you're listening to W3C you need to seriously reconsider who you consider to be experts on the web. Take a look at the reaction to CSS and CSS2 and you'll see what I mean.

The only single reason for using tables over divs is compatibility. Older browsers can misbehave when divs are used. In every other respect, they are wrong. Is it not the W3C's job to define how things should be done on the web? Can I have a link to an example of said reaction to CSS?

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

00:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Everyone's consensus when CSS came out and the W3C said to use it for layout was to laugh, and then yell. There have been many complaints by many people on CSS and it's use for layout on a page. You seem to be familiar with web programming so I'll assume you've at least heard of the packet reduction Nagle's Algorithm. Here's his take on the matter. CSS is great for laying out how things look. Colors, text, borders, etc. Layout? Organizing the page? Not so much.

Additionally the W3C kinda has lost credibility and people actually paying attention to them anymore. People work off of what works, such as people building to Internet Explorer standards for a long time now. ---User:Mr Doom Bringer (Talk) 20:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

IE6 is mandatory support, I run all of my page tests through a VM running WinXP and IE6 not updated for years. DIVs are fun stuff, but not the kind of fun I want to deal with supporting. ---User:Mr Doom Bringer (Talk) 00:25, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, that's a blow. IE6 is not fun. I have no way of testing in it unfortunately. "Mandatory" meaning "the company insists that I do it", or as in "in my opinion, it is mandatory"?

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

00:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

In that I was told by John and the VP that the Wiki had to work in at minimum 1024x768, and on IE6. Back compatibility and all that. ---User:Mr Doom Bringer (Talk) 20:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, StackOverflow is good for this kind of thing

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

00:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Dev work

Hey, I've got a developer that can do some work.

Add to this list of things you want done

• GeShi code syntax highlighting installed correctly
• Move Page permissions for Editors
• Fix image/page delete problems

Woohoo, finally! Thanks a bunch for telling me!

• Add "Object" as a real namespace (instructions)
• ParserFunctions extension
• Allow me (and or the original wiki editors) to edit the master css/js files, perhaps (if you feel it appropriate)
• Add jQuery to the pages, so that I can improve the js

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

15:24, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Methods Template

Umm... what are you doing? I see you are adding [[Category:Methods]] to some methods pages. I don't see why this is needed when you can put it in the template which I had done before. ^{Camoy • Contribs (August 30 2010)}

Because that means that the Object (RBX.lua.Part (Object), for example) pages are counted as Methods as well. Not a good thing

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

15:35, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Is there a way that we can do this without revising every single method? ^{Camoy • Contribs (August 30 2010)}

Unfortunately not. There's no way of specifying "allow only one level of inclusion".

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

15:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Well I guess we have to all pitch in and fix it. And the events too. ^{Camoy • Contribs (August 30 2010)}

I fixed all the method pages, now the events template has to be fixed (and revised on all pages), but as a writer we don't have privileged. We'll have to ask Doom. ^{Camoy • Contribs (August 30 2010)}

Thanks! I've already done that. It might be on his archive page. It's definitely in Category:Needs attention

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

16:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Editing My Personal Pages

I would rather you not edit my user or discussion pages.--MrNicNac 17:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. Although the point in a discussion page is for others to send you messages through. I was just trying to detablify your user page!

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

21:50, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

CatUp

We have the: {{CatUp|Properties}}

In all the properties. Should we get rid of this? I honestly don't use it often and it kind of gets in the way. Camoy • Contribs (December 25 2010)

I'm inclined to agree with you. However, it's not my decision to make. I can't really see any point in CatUp anywhere, as it spoils the category system. Ah, well.

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

08:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Should we just get rid of it from all the pages? Camoy • Contribs (December 26 2010)

New CatImage Template messing up Main Page

See for yourself.

^{Posted by blocco (talk) on Dec 28, 2010 (Tuesday) at 17:26 (UTC) [Discuss format]}

I know. That'll probably require a CSS fix. I've bodged it, for now. It has finally fixed the image links, though.

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

17:34, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, offsite links are being portrayed as onsite links.

^{Posted by blocco (talk) on Dec 28, 2010 (Tuesday) at 17:55 (UTC) [Discuss format]}

Yeah, I know that too. Can't be bothered to fix that right now: still better than the old template which linked to the images

NXTBoy (talk • contribs)

18:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Instance Pages

Personally, I like the first page best because it matches the home page and the floating titles make it look better to me.

Mattchewy (talk • contribs)

22:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)