User talk:Masked Turk

About this board

JRWR (talkcontribs)
Reply to "All Hail"
Andytizer (talkcontribs)

Basically I have used the anchor template to integrate into Template:Fixbox/fix header, and then added a link in so that people can link directly to each fix. The reason I want to do this is that 'linking' to individual sections is used a lot, and I'd like to encourage it as much as possible.

1) There is a problem where if the header is a link, it breaks the anchor template. Any idea on how to fix this? Example: - I would like to retain the ability to use links in headers.

I want it so that the Fixbox/fix only requires 1 text region for the title, to make things as simple as possible.

2) Secondly, I am wondering if I can put in a very similar feature for every level 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 header?

Thanks mate.

Masked Turk (talkcontribs)

Sorry I didn't see the notice for this in my inbox.

I'll take a look over the weekend if that's alright? Post a reply on sat/sun so I don't forget :P


Reply to "Anchors"
Andytizer (talkcontribs)

I've had a few comments about how the site doesn't font-scale properly in Chrome. When you zoom in Chrome, only images increase in size, not the fonts. Wheras on Wikipedia, everything scales uniformly. Has something gone wrong here?

Works fine on Firefox.

Andytizer (talkcontribs)

Okay I figured this one out. For some reason, this was in the Common.css: -webkit-text-size-adjust: none;

Masked Turk (talkcontribs)

Blimey, sorry. Didn't see the first notice at all. Glad you were able to get it fixed :)

Reply to "Zoom font scaling in Chrome"
Andytizer (talkcontribs)
Reply to "Game series template mockup"
Hungry eyes (talkcontribs)

Hey, just a quick note.

I noticed that the Recently Edited Games isn't displaying properly on the new Homepage. I've checked the code on the homepage and the box page, and it seems fine, but something isn't right.

Notice how it appears on the homepage

For some reason it lists 6 games for windows despite the box page only selecting 5: And the games it displays are not the same.

I am confused. -Tom

Reply to "Recently Edited Games"
Andytizer (talkcontribs)
Reply to "Tickross template"
Hungry eyes (talkcontribs)


Just thought I'd shove on here what I've done with the new homepage today.

Firstly, I reworded the header, changing the tagline and no. of articles line, as well as removing "Let's fix PC gaming!", after discussion with Andy. I replaced this line with icons for Facebook/Twitter/Steam group.

Also, I made a mockup for my idea for the Recently Edited Games box. The only issue I can see is if the game name is too long for the first line. Idk if we could implement an automatic "..." or the font could be made smaller to fit or whatever?

Reply to "Header, Mockup"
Andytizer (talkcontribs)

I've been working on putting more icons into the article pages, and I'd like to put them in the headers (examples are here:

However, this interferes with the anchors and the TOC -


Is there a clever way of adding an icon between the ==== Header 4 ==== tags so that the icon appears on the left? I was thinking of using a div with a non-repeating background, but I can't get it to work.

Masked Turk (talkcontribs)

It all looks like it's working to me (looks very nice btw), have you fixed it by now or am I just confused? :)

Andytizer (talkcontribs)
Andytizer (talkcontribs)

Let me know if you have any more questions- would love to get this sorted out first as I want to start reworking the sample article and other content pages :).

Andytizer (talkcontribs)
Masked Turk (talkcontribs)

(P.S. you can link #references with [[Article#reference]] :)

Hungry eyes (talkcontribs)

Do you not think the Notability section in the intro strays out of our remit a bit? Especially with the genre mention, but also with its sort of wikipedia style of information. Just a thought :P

Andytizer (talkcontribs)

I'm open to suggestion on putting in brief game reception/content info in the introduction - what do you think?

The problem with including game content and reception is that most of it is off-topic and often too long. However, I'm experimenting with a new writing format which uses icons, and reduces each point to one or two sentences.

Regarding genre categories.. this is really tricky- I'd prefer not to put them in at all because of the moderation work involved. I'm also kind of waiting on a implementing of Semantic MediaWiki which will make categorisation somewhat easier to manage.

Hungry eyes (talkcontribs)

The icons are really nice and I think they neaten everything up perfectly. I really don't like having content info in the intro though - that kind of stuff is summarised on the wikipedia page and I think we should retain steering clear of the genres to avoid over complicating things. At the end of the day, anyone who is visiting the page to look for bug fixes will already know what the game is like and its good and bad points, so we should be streamlining the process of finding fixes as much as possible by limiting unnecessary content.

If you decide you really want to put genres in, I think we should stick to a "follow what Wikipedia says" rule of thumb, whereby we stick with the genre(s) quoted in the wikipedia article, and if the game doesn't have a wikipedia article then we don't categorise it. After all, their site moderation and standards are much more advanced than our own, and in this way we can effectively allow wikipedia moderators to ensure that our own articles are correct and informative. However, I do think its unnecessary to the extent that people looking at the page will already be aware of the genre. I guess you could argue categorising by genre would help people find similar games, but is that really what PCGW is about?

I think we could do with clarifying and simplifying our mission statement so that we are always able to refer to it ourselves and can understand where the limits of our remit lie, otherwise we are in danger of becoming a bloated and incoherent service with no clear purpose or direction.

Andytizer (talkcontribs)

Hi, thanks for the input. I think you are right on all these counts, and I was getting a bit carried away thinking of a new article layout. We'll omit any 'content' or 'reception' information from the articles as they are not relevant. I'll try to make a start on a mission statement of some kind, which would guide the direction the site is taking.

I am hoping to complete a new sample article layout today with the new icons and fix box templates. Let me know if you think we need any changes (even as trivial as colours, spacing, etc.)

Hungry eyes (talkcontribs)

The only change I'd make is to perhaps ration the icons a bit more sparingly. Perhaps we could do with defining a specific purpose for each icon on the editing manual?

Reply to "Icons in the headers"

Figured out what was breaking one of my templates

Andytizer (talkcontribs)
Masked Turk (talkcontribs)

Oh yeah, I came across that in a few template I made... I always thought it was a glitch of some kind rather than a standard rule.

Reply to "Figured out what was breaking one of my templates"
Andytizer (talkcontribs)

I am hoping I can get your input on an idea for presenting game series.

So my basic idea is to present every game in a series, or every related game. For example, a Doom series would include Doom, Doom II: Hell on Earth, Doom 3, Doom 4. An example of a very long series would be Command and Conquer. It may or may not be a good policy to leave out expansion packs, not sure. A second column could be the year of first release.

Naming convention for transclusion? Maybe we could put everything in a series.. Series:Doom?

My thought is to put this floating on the right under the infobox, with the same kind of styling. What do you think? Then it'll have a consistent place on every game page.

My other thought is to adjust the infobox styling to make it look nicer, and more like the Wikipedia infobox? For example, left-aligned text, vertically aligned top, alternating background coloured rows (nice but not important).

Masked Turk (talkcontribs)
  • Sounds good. I'd include dependant expansions as a branch within game series episodes, and standalone expansions as separate episodes tbh, I think...
  • I'm unsure, really. Part of me would like to make use of namespaces like that, but another part of me recognises that most wikis keep encyclopaedic articles in the mainspace (i.e. no xxx:article name)
  • Style-wise, that's exactly how I'd imagine it being laid out.
  • I'm not sure exactly what you mean by more like the Wikipedia infoboxes, in that ours are an exact rip-off *of* the Wikipedia infoboxes. But I do understand the minor tweaks to the text, and I suppose they'd make sense. It'd give us a chance to reconsider the infobox code too :p
Reply to "Game series"