More actions
→Comments on New Design: Not bad, but terrible for widescreen |
→Comments on New Design: reply |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
::Looks nice, but I'm gonna stick with bsgbook. Battlestar has the article/discussion/edit/history tabs underneath the page, which I find really annoying. But I guess taste differs. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope|e-mail me]])</sup> 07:57, 23 September 2007 (CDT) | ::Looks nice, but I'm gonna stick with bsgbook. Battlestar has the article/discussion/edit/history tabs underneath the page, which I find really annoying. But I guess taste differs. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope|e-mail me]])</sup> 07:57, 23 September 2007 (CDT) | ||
:::It's actually at the bottom ''and'' top. The design itself is nice (although it takes some getting used to), but it's terrible for widescreen. Only a small part of the screen in the middle is actually used for the article, leaving huge chunks of empty space at the sides. While that makes it easier to optimize an article's layout, it just looks bad. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 08:08, 23 September 2007 (CDT) | :::It's actually at the bottom ''and'' top. The design itself is nice (although it takes some getting used to), but it's terrible for widescreen. Only a small part of the screen in the middle is actually used for the article, leaving huge chunks of empty space at the sides. While that makes it easier to optimize an article's layout, it just looks bad. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 08:08, 23 September 2007 (CDT) | ||
::::I'd have to agree on the widescreen part, it does waste a lot of space. I wonder if we shouldn't make a version of this that has a varying width. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 09:21, 23 September 2007 (CDT) |
Revision as of 14:21, 23 September 2007
Archives: |
Comments on New Design[edit]
For those who have no clue, there is a new skin in town called "Battlestar". Based of the Eureka Wiki design, we migrated it over here to the BSG Wiki. To check it out change your skin preference to "Battlestar". Shane (T - C - E) 23:34, 22 September 2007 (CDT)
- Something for me to do... I'll have to add new add zones for this skin, since the sidebar column is wider than the monobook-based skins to make the ads look better. -- Joe Beaudoin So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New 01:05, 23 September 2007 (CDT)
- Looks nice, but I'm gonna stick with bsgbook. Battlestar has the article/discussion/edit/history tabs underneath the page, which I find really annoying. But I guess taste differs. --Catrope(Talk to me or e-mail me) 07:57, 23 September 2007 (CDT)
- It's actually at the bottom and top. The design itself is nice (although it takes some getting used to), but it's terrible for widescreen. Only a small part of the screen in the middle is actually used for the article, leaving huge chunks of empty space at the sides. While that makes it easier to optimize an article's layout, it just looks bad. --Serenity 08:08, 23 September 2007 (CDT)
- I'd have to agree on the widescreen part, it does waste a lot of space. I wonder if we shouldn't make a version of this that has a varying width. -- Joe Beaudoin So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New 09:21, 23 September 2007 (CDT)
- It's actually at the bottom and top. The design itself is nice (although it takes some getting used to), but it's terrible for widescreen. Only a small part of the screen in the middle is actually used for the article, leaving huge chunks of empty space at the sides. While that makes it easier to optimize an article's layout, it just looks bad. --Serenity 08:08, 23 September 2007 (CDT)
- Looks nice, but I'm gonna stick with bsgbook. Battlestar has the article/discussion/edit/history tabs underneath the page, which I find really annoying. But I guess taste differs. --Catrope(Talk to me or e-mail me) 07:57, 23 September 2007 (CDT)