Recent coulour change.
Hmmm... I was kinda surprised to see that the swots wiki doesn't have a "wiki talk page". You know, where people discuss the changes not related to particular theme or page. Anyway, to get to the actual wiki talking... Let's talk about the newest colour change. Anybody likes it? Anybody hates it? Anybody even noticed it?
Imho, the colour sheme looks nice, but the previous one was... how shall i put it... more "eye-friendly" i guess. This one is a bit too bright, which strains the eyes somewhat. What do others think?
22.214.171.124 19:48, August 1, 2013 (UTC)
I think it can take a bit of time to get used to, but after a few seconds your eyes adapt to it, like in the dark =) The font color creates a nice contrast. I suppose it depends on wheter you're more of an auditive or visual person.
We are very much experimenting to be honest, anything but the old "every-wiki-and-their-moms" grey theme has got to be better though =P
As for organised discussion areas, I am working on it. You can find the forums using the Navigation > Community tab at the top (it's not the most convenient area to put it, I know). The "Watercooler" board should accodomate any kind of wiki talk for now, it's also easier to track multiple discussion since they're organised in separated topics instead of one big page.
Lastly, it would be really nice if anybody creating a discussion or participating in a big one would make an account, so we can keep track of who's following up to who's comment. There isn't really any downside, you're not going to get judged by your number of edits or anything.
Thanks for your interest !
Vaneesh (talk) 21:02, August 1, 2013 (UTC)
You know, to organise discussion into topics on the talk page we keep one topic within one topic. ;p
"In the dark" was the whole point. Darker colours and contrast are "nice to look at" but not in an "easy to look at" way. Beisdes, the "every-wiki-and-their-moms" is classic ;p. Well, I'm not against changing it, just as long as it doesn't make me want to turn on more light.
I like the more recent background, but the recent tables theme... LIGHT! GIVE ME MORE LIGHT, LIGHT FOR THE LIG... ahem... you get the point...
And sorry about being undercarpet, but there IS a downside to registering - people tend to gather pre-concived notions and associate these with names. No name, no notion, and I prefer to have my points judged on individual basis unless I'm the one putting them on the same plate. Though with all the time I'm spending here, and the ocassional "too bad I can't upload a pic", It has already crossed my mind several times. Still, I like my carpet where it is.
126.96.36.199 08:53, August 2, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, my bad for the talk page separation. I merged both topics. I will admit I tend to prefer the structure of forums over talk pages, but I'm not sure anyone even knows wikias have forums at the moment.
The registration choice is, of course, yours. As I've said before there won't be power trips or drama on this wiki so long as I'm around, but we don't live in an ideal world. If another anonymous user decides to join the conversation though, following this discussion will become very confusing, with the IP address signature and all.
I'm surprised and glad you like the split Kerberos logo. Theme contrast is something that will be difficult to settle on, perphaps you can get in touch with Luveluen.
Vaneesh (talk) 10:57, August 2, 2013 (UTC)
I was actually talking about the grey background around the functional parts. In other words what's between the split logo. But the logo suits me fine.
188.8.131.52 10:21, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
Link to Messages
Heya. A direct link from quick-nav to Messages would be nice. Thanks.
-- 184.108.40.206 17:09, August 11, 2013 (UTC)