Jump to: navigation, search

Talk:Pantheon of Crosswordery

4,358 bytes added, 06:43, 16 October 2018
Two questions, two suggestions: more
:::LOL, yeah I'm not very good with Wiki stuff, and I like the idea of the wikitable for sure. Concerning the rankings, I also suggested using a cutoff time to get the pantheon rankings, but people didn't really like that. I do have my own cutoff time an hour before the crossword ends, and someone usually gets me the last five people that miss my cutoff. If I don't get the names, then they can submit screenshot proof if they're that concerned about it (but I don't think anyone is haha). However, this is pretty much me just trying things out for a month and seeing how it goes. I like the idea of having the first 10, 20, 30 people etc. because it's less work for me, but we'll see how things go. -- [[User:Cassia Rainsonne|Cassia Rainsonne]] ([[User talk:Cassia Rainsonne|talk]]) 22:45, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
:::: I think the table looks good, it's definitely an improvement! I'm going to Be Bold™ and make a few more (small-''er'') changes, for the reasons I'll explain below (before making the edits).
:::: I'll also make each of these a separate edit, to keep them separated and self-contained. You should feel free to be equally bold and revert (via the undo link next to each edit, in the [ page history]) any of them you disagree with, in order to restore the previous state of the article. Then we can further discuss them here and hopefully reach some consensus on how to proceed.
:::: (I'll be changing the existing, accepted article content, so you changing it '''back''' if you feel it's necessary (and can provide an explanation why) would be ''every bit'' as not-wrong — our views on the article have equal weight. It would then be wrong for '''me''' to reinstate my reverted changes, without further discussing them with other editors (you). That's the point at which it becomes [[wikipedia:WP:EW|edit warring]]. To decide whether and how contested changes should be made, consensus needs to be reached among everyone involved.)
:::: The changes:
::::<ol><li><p>'''I'm going to get rid of the side-by-side thing.'''</p><p>To see why, just look at the article on a phone or other mobile device. Or use the mobile-display emulation of your desktop browser. (In either Chrome or Firefox, hit <kbd>F12</kbd> to launch the developer tools, then <kbd>Ctrl</kbd>+<kbd>Shift</kbd>+<kbd>M</kbd>. The page view will be reformatted for a mobile screen, you can choose your screen size at the top and then Reload the page to bring up the Godwiki mobile formatting.)</p><p>I don't know the stats for Godwiki, but currently on Wikipedia [ "Oct 2018: mobile traffic represents 55.8% of total traffic"]. I would probably expect Godwiki's percentage to be ''higher'', if anything, since a '''lot''' of the traffic here is driven by the game app's built-in browser. It's no longer "good enough" for articles to be formatted so they look OK in desktop browsers, as much of Godwiki was until quite recently. With more than half of web users browsing on a mobile device, content has to adapt to mobile screens.</p><p>A '''lot''' of work has actually gone into making Godwiki mobile-friendly over the past year, and at this point ''nearly'' all of the articles are, even tricky ones like the [[Main Page]]. The [[Omnibus List]] is really one of the only remaining holdouts, for reasons I won't go into.</p> <li><p>'''I'm going to get rid of the header.'''</p><p>I know why that header's there on the Omnibus List, and it makes sense in that context — it links to each of the different lists, which are otherwise hard to reach as they're long and scattered all over the page, and it acts as the color key for the list shading.</p> <p>But this article only has one table and one list, each of which has a heading or caption identifying it. The header serves no purpose here.</p></li> <li><p>'''By the same token, I'm going to get rid of the colored background on the Pantheon.'''</p><p>This one's actually a bigger thing, for accessibility reasons. It makes sense to color-code the different lists on the Omnibus List, since everything's crammed into one article and the color-coding is the only way of being sure which list you're even looking at. But with only ''one'' list, the color-coding again serves no purpose here.</p> <p>And more importantly, in the the Omnibus List all of the content is plain text — black on <code>$background_color</code> (teal, in this instance). But nearly all of the Pantheon list's content consists of '''hyperlinks''', so instead of {{nowrap|''black''-on-teal}}, it's {{nowrap|'''''blue'''''-on-teal}}. That's going to be a complete ''nightmare'' for people with certain types of color-vision deficiency.</p></li></ol>
:::: Anyway, I'll go make those three edits now so you can take a look, and if you have any thoughts on different approaches or ideas for further changes, feel free to build on it from there, or outline them here on the Talk page and I'll be happy to give what input I can. -- [[User:FeRDNYC|FeRDNYC]] ([[User talk:FeRDNYC|talk]]) 06:43, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Navigation menu