Forum:Names of Admins in various lists

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Names of Admins in various lists

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4097 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

See also User talk:PuppyOnTheRadio#MediaWiki:Common.css

Having just gotten my name added to the above MediaWiki file, I observed that the desired effect--rendering Admins' names in boldface in Special:RecentChanges--is not working. Puppy verifies this but adds that he doesn't like boldfacing anyway, as there is another useful use of bold in this report. I seem to recall that my initial reaction to this was the same.

I think I know the cause of this, and have a recoding that is working at home, and extends to the Watchlist and even listings of differences between versions of pages. If youse want to call out the names of Admins, what I would do is (with side-padding and a non-repeating background image) add a tiny image file to one side; probably a star-shaped Sheriff's badge. (Not, please, a swastika, nor an animated Mordillo Jew-ninja.)

I am not sure this issue is ready for a vote, but there are four possible directions:

1. Sure; the image sounds cool. (Such as Romartus.)
2. Just get the frickin' boldfacing to work right.
3. I think Admins suck and I don't want to see any special treatment of their names in lists.

   (Or perhaps: I am a cheap bastard with metered Internet and resent having to reload a list including every fallen-away Admin every time I clear my cache.)

4. "I don't care" seems like a very valid response as well.

Also, I welcome comments on whether the same policy should extend beyond RecentChanges to pages that normal people actually view. Spıke Ѧ 13:34 14-Feb-13

• I'm happier without admins name in bold, as Spike points out. Although I'd happily create a .js or .css that anyone could access if they wanted it. Having said that, Spike already has. And the site .css is a bloated mess as it is. But if anyone can point out the original vote to implement this I'd happily go with that rather than re-vote and just get the stupid thing working. In other words, 4, with a hint of 3, followed by 2, but 1 also sounds cool.                                • Puppy's talk page • 01:53 14 Feb

Spike can't see this, so I will describe it as a pic of a very handsome sherrif, with a nice horse and a saloon woman on each arm.

You mean a vote on if when admins make an edit that it would show up in recent changes with a sherriff's badge next to it? hahahahahahah chokechoke hahahahahah hehehehehehehehehhahaheheh, huh? Aleister 21:17 (can't Spike just add the badge at the end of his signature, which would solve the problem of not having a star?)

For what I see at home, see the illustration on Puppy's page. I take your response as a No to the star. Do you have an opinion on the other issues? Spıke Ѧ 21:24 14-Feb-13

hahahahahahahaha oh, if I chose one, it would be four "I don't care", or, if pushed, I'd make sure admins had trumpet music playing throughout the site every time they made an edit. Not a long song, but just a few notes of a trumpet, like when the prince of Wales enters the ballroom and each and all stop what they're doing and look at him. Puppy can probably set that up as a sound-file, and connect it through the internet tubes into the sound systems on these computer machines, and maybe that would be my choice but since it's not an option, number seven above would work. Aleister a little bit of background, as you earlier asked me in this interview, in the middle '90s I decided I could solve some of these problems, and was led to a West African dirigible.

p.s. I just looked at the illustration on Puppy's page. hahahahahahahahahaha Anyway, I'm a blogger here, so I have no opinions except it would be a god holy mess looking at recent changes if those huge blocks were splattered all over the place. I've had Mordillo tied-up in my basement for a couple of years now, and he still is spinning like a star. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unknown (talk • contribs)

Wow. An real picture of Mordillo. That proves you have him. If you return him to us we will pay you £1.37. - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CouldHaveBeenAnyone (talk • contribs) 01:31, February 15, 2013 (UTC)

• While again giving a nod to the validity of option 4 ("I don't care"), my preference is option 3 (no mandatory highlighting in any report). At home, I now have sheriff's stars for every Admin, old Nipper beside Puppy's name just for helping out, something too for Aleister's name just for doing whatever it is that he does, and garish highway signs to call out my own edits. I don't care that anyone else have any of the above, and no one (metered Internet or not) should have to repeatedly download a list of us because someone (we) wants us to be shown in boldface. For anyone who wants this, the code should be moved to a separate file here and UN:HAX should tell users how to invoke it. Spıke Ѧ 12:30 15-Feb-13

A little test

I see that this topic has dropped on the floor with a clang.

I just got a listing that actually shows Admins' names in bold (by specifying Hide grouped recent changes) which produces a "list." Normally I see a "table" and they don't.

Am going to edit MediaWiki:Common.css to change "Mnbvcxz" so it is in bold everywhere that MediaWiki knows it's a link to his user page. (If I picked Puppy, all hell would break loose.) This is just a little test which, in a couple days without howls of protest, I'll generalize. Again, I am equally happy deleting these formatting commands entirely, but it seems nobody cares. Spıke Ѧ 11:45 23-Feb-13

I'm still of the opinion delete it but create a script that can be imported into a personal css to have the same impact. Given UN:N, I don't see a point.                                • Puppy's talk page • 01:32 23 Feb 2013

Implemented

It strikes me that, after 9 days, we have a unanimous (except for Aleister shouting "present" at the top of his lungs) vote. The current boldfacing is described in UN:HAX and I'll update it. (Why am I seeing no section-numbering in this article?) I'll apply the same edit to all the Admin names, "de-opp" Mnbvcxz, and move the result into a new file. (Puppy: Into which namespace should the code be moved?) Spıke Ѧ 15:29 23-Feb-13

I'd pop it into MediaWiki:BoldAdmin.css or something similar. (I have no idea on the section numbering there.)                                • Puppy's talk page • 09:58 23 Feb 2013

Done; at MediaWiki:Admin names in bold.css. I'll document it in the HAX. Spıke Ѧ 22:20 23-Feb-13

Actually - now that you've done that, did you want to instead:

1. Rename MediaWiki:Admin names in bold.css to MediaWiki:Gadget-Admin_names_in_bold.css
2. Create MediaWiki:Gadget-Admin_names_in_bold with the text:

   Display [[Uncyclopedia:Hacks#Administrators_listed_in_boldface_in_reports|administrators names in bold]] on special pages

3. Add Admin_names_in_bold|Admin_names_in_bold.css to MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition#interface-gadgets?

That may be an easier way for non-code savvy people to access this gadget, as that will add it to Special:Preferences.                                • Puppy's talk page • 10:57 23 Feb 2013

I am all in favor of such people having an easier alternative to copying CSS code. Adding it to My preferences is great, provided that unchecking the box deletes the code, which it doesn't sound like. For starters, can we tell people to include the file by name rather than by physical copy? Can someone put @import at the start of his user CSS? Spıke Ѧ 23:38 23-Feb-13