Difference between revisions of "User talk:Svengali"
From Elite Wiki
(→A plea!: response added) |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | [[:Image:OXPConfig compatible.png]] is a pretty good example of how not to use images on a MediaWiki. Instead of using a small picture with a white border, you should use a higher-resolution image and use syntax like <code><nowiki>[[Image:OXPConfig compatible.png|80px]]</nowiki></code> to show it at a particular size. This would also make [[:Image:OXPConfig compatible60px.png]] and [[:Image:OXPConfig compatible80px.png]] redundant. -[[User:Ahruman|Ahruman]] 21:49, 3 October 2008 (BST) |
||
| − | |||
| − | I've uploaded a new version with a higher resolution (and without borders) and muchas gracias for the Category for OXPConfig. |
||
| − | BTW: Are imagemaps working? I've tried to use them on my user page without a working result. [[User:Svengali|Svengali]] 20:04, 10 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
== A plea! == |
== A plea! == |
||
| Line 11: | Line 6: | ||
::Yes that would be fine. Have also asked the same of [[User:Smivs|Smivs]] who has made a few edits without summaries recently. [[User:JazHaz|JazHaz]] 12:08, 9 July 2010 (UTC) |
::Yes that would be fine. Have also asked the same of [[User:Smivs|Smivs]] who has made a few edits without summaries recently. [[User:JazHaz|JazHaz]] 12:08, 9 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| + | |||
| + | :::Would be? Changes (like typo fixes) are pretty, but shouldn't produce unnecessary overhead for the database. Maybe I'm wrong, but describing every tiny bit will likely blow up everything. And if necessary there's still the history. [[User:Svengali|Svengali]] 12:35, 9 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 13:35, 9 July 2010
A plea!
I've seen that you have made lots of edits recently. Please, please, can you always use the Summary field when making the edits?? Without, it is difficult to see what has changed when viewing the Recent Changes page. JazHaz 06:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- For important bits, sure - I'm already doing it (like ISO8601). But for fixing a typo, templates (self explaining) or talk/user pages it's just a waiste of ressources. btw: some talk pages could need a cleanup (e.g. Talk:OXP ), no need to carry 3 years old discussions. A short summary and a list of past contributors will be enough, what do you think?
- Would be? Changes (like typo fixes) are pretty, but shouldn't produce unnecessary overhead for the database. Maybe I'm wrong, but describing every tiny bit will likely blow up everything. And if necessary there's still the history. Svengali 12:35, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
