User talk:Cerulean Seal/Archive 1

Signature recreate.--Ceru talk 17:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletions

We don't delete items in user spaces without the user's request unless that user has been banned and the content is in violation of a policy. Shadow's userboxes do not fit those criteria. -- Wyn talk 03:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Good to know. Should I take them out of the User box templates category? They just seem to clutter and no one is using them.--Ceru talk contribs 13:09, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Userboxes

What's up with touching things in my userspace without my permission? I'm ok with reformatting and categorizing those - my beef was that I wasn't notified. For clarification's sake, I'm not angry or anything. Just curious why I wasn't asked in the first place since it's my understanding userspace are off limit to other ppl's editings unless perhaps the admin. – Barinthus 22:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I was simply doing a cleaning up of the whole User box template category. Since I was just moving things into the template and shuffling things around within the category and making (attempting to, anyway) no visible changes, I didn't think anyone would mind.--Ceru talk contribs 22:09, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Whoa someone messing with userboxes not named Seru — Seru Talk 23:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I just finished a first run-through. There shouldn't be any more user pages, boxes that could be easily categorized are, most have been moved into the standard userbox template, and there's a semi-intuitive organization within the category.--Ceru talk contribs 23:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Did you get all of them ? — Seru Talk 15:19, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh... my. @_@ Why weren't some of those in the category?--Ceru talk contribs 15:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I dunno. Check here — Seru Talk 23:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, now I've touched all of them at least once to review.--Ceru talk contribs 02:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

You recategorized some but not all =\ trying to understand your categorizing — Seru Talk 03:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

(Indent reset) Which ones in particular were you curious about?--Ceru talk contribs 04:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The one i linked to. Why is it not just a normal Userbox — Seru Talk 00:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Divine Aura is part of Prophecies CE and made sense to be with the other campaign-related user boxes. While I thought that when I first touched it, I was still new enough that I had some hesitation in moving it. What finally made me shift it was that I saw it categorized with campaign user boxes on your page; if it made sense to someone else who took an interest in user boxes that it should go there, it seemed reason enough to move it.--Ceru talk contribs 02:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Ohh I tried to group the userboxes so people could find what they are looking for easier. They are all still in the "userbox" category they just are different subtypes. So maybe put them all in userbox but then make a subcategory within userboxes for the different groups? (if you understand that) — Seru Talk 02:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I like the thought; if there were fewer boxes, I'd adopt it immediately. Ignoring the guild user box templates, there are currently 428 user boxes. That's three pages at two hundred boxes per page. Without some organization and breaking things into smaller sections, it's a little much for someone to wander in and try to process which ones would be of interest and which ones aren't. Before I started working, someone began to separate some of the user boxes into subcategories to make it both easier to find boxes related a specific subject and lessen the hodgepodge effect of the main page for the category. It's not the perfect solution but it was the better than any I could think of. Does that make sense?

Also, looking at our sigs, I keep having to fight off this feeling that I'm talking to myself.--Ceru talk contribs 02:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

My Sandbox

thanks for taking care of it. I actually wanted to revert it immediately after changing the miniature template, but i forgot about that one, therefore i didn't remove the category. —ZerphaThe Improver 15:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

It happens. You live up to your name.--Ceru talk contribs 03:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

hehe, i hope so^^ —ZerphaThe Improver 19:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Noinclude Usage

→ moved from Template talk:User RP

Um, no it won't. Hasn't on other userboxes that includes this. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 20:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I've touched all the templates, they all have a noinclude (or the code is wrapped in an onlyinclude). It's what tells the call not to paste the clear and the rest of the code on the template page. If you don't believe me, copy/paste to your sandbox and call that to test it. Prove me wrong and I'll apologize.--Ceru talk contribs 21:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't you need the clear code for that template to work with others and not be a screw up? one of them I'm talking of is the profession templates (users belonging to monk, or necro, or mesmer, etc.) Not wording there for verbatim, but giving an idea. I have seen a few codes with out it take the next line like ==temp work== and place it next to the template, not just on my userpage, but in the category as well. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 06:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

First, I've read over my last and I want to apologize for sounding confrontational; never post after a long day without taking time to relax. The idea is that a call to this would just provide the user box itself with nothing additional; the user would get to organize the page however desired. I've seen plenty of user pages that have them lined up side-by-side and a few that have clears in between so they are stacked vertically. The noinclude before the clear here ensures that this page is formatted correctly here and only the user box with no additional formatting shows up when actually called.--Ceru talk contribs 22:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Moved to my talk page because this string of conversation had moved out of direct bearing on the User RP user box.--Ceru talk contribs 03:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Try viewing those templates over in the categories without the double {} and clear it would mess up. Adding clear solves that for not just in the user who type categories, but user pages as well. There's no overlap with the clear. Thanks. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 03:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

here's an example of removing clear does -> http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_Wiki_talk:Projects/User_birthdays

That's because you're SUPPOSED to have to include the clear if you're using it like that. Otherwise it messes up when used like this:

This user would like to wish you a Happy Birthday!

This user would like to wish you a Happy Birthday!

This user would like to wish you a Happy Birthday!

There should be three lined up all in a row. This works with any of the user boxes. Try it. If you force the clear into the template, then it is impossible to include it in a lineup like that, which defeats the purpose.--Ceru talk contribs 04:07, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the easiest way to explain why I keep removing the clear from the user box is this: If you do not include it in the template, it means that users will have to add it themselves if it is used on a talk page or somewhere else where the user box's native formatting will mess things up. On the other hand, if include the clear in the template, it becomes impossible to use the user box in the above format, which is favored by most when using multiple user boxes.

The first way requires the user to make minor effort if used in certain places, the second way restricts usage to places where that rule would work. Additionally, the question of why that user box is special and must be so while all the others are comes up.--Ceru talk contribs 04:30, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I use templates in a table/cell. which helps to not cause overlap, but if the < arrows and br > are used between templates (leaving clear in). There would be no problems of 'overlapping'. Doing this your way, defeats the purpose of clear and br . The abilities of simplest html,probably causing people to research , etc. giving them the troubles to add in other code, just so the template would look right. I didn't take computer classes, such as web building, language, etc. for nothing. :-) Not to mention, if you had noticed. Many used clear, not me, that you 'removed' from a lot of templates. So I am curious what makes you think your way works? I've shown you proof of leaving clear in - what it does. Also had shown what happens without it. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 05:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Most don't put them in tables. Almost all the templates do use clear, just within the noinclude because they are not supposed to carry over. I only have to change a few. Your argument is that the special case of a user box being used in a talk page should define the rule and mess up the usage for all the other cases.--Ceru talk contribs 05:30, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

When I had put them (done this in preview) in noinclude It screws up over in the Category where I had done the template at. when I had it shown. It works. I'm saying this if someone uses == or writes after this template. it will add the words next to the template and not below. Whereas with clear, it would add that stuff below. Not just talk page, but other pages. Perhaps if you follow the links, you'd see. Thanks. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 05:39, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

If you had noticed, which you didn't. I did add the clear in the noinclude area. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 05:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I've sent an email to an asking for some help in establishing a consensus. It seems like the two of us could go back and forth ad nauseam about this. I see your point and have to point out it assumes a special case. You may or may not see my point of it makes templates unusable in so many other situations. Can we agree to not touch it until some greater consensus is arrived at?--Ceru talk contribs 05:54, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

As one last attempt to show why I removed the clear, Please look at this page. Please note, I copied the last edit on Happy Birthday that was definitely yours that had the clear outside the noinclude; the only change I made was to remove the category links.

The clear function has side effects that are context dependent. Because of what clear does, it clearly breaks that page.

My question is, "why should we assume that a template, any template, user box or not, will be used in only one way?" Sure, if it's used only in tables or on talk pages in the way you showed, it will work with clear included. Unless the talk page has a sidebar and it falls into that space. What about those cases where it's not used like that? The reason I started work cleaning up the user boxes is because, when I started, I couldn't get 6 of them to line up without an extra br or clear that got included messing up how they were arranged.

By having the user place clears or brs manually within a context, we avoid that situation. My impression was that the goal of a template is to make something usable by everyone. It's why you don't need to understand the HTML that makes clear work or that sets up a user box. If you remove that usability by everyone, doesn't that negate the purpose?--Ceru talk contribs 06:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

To make it work for both. I suggest adding it after noinclude then. Might help in several areas and solve some problems. What you think of this? ♥ Ariyen ♀ 06:50, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh on this one User watching through hand... I was wondering if there should be a category for it, like many of the others have. like Users watching through hand or something... *puzzled look* wasn't sure. :-) Just wondering your opinion on it. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 20:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why not. To all appearances, the key to category creation is someone taking enough interest to make them. My thought would be that, if you make one for it, make sure to add that category as a subcategory of Users with frivolous categories.