FANDOM


Forums: Yew Grove > Skin
Replacement filing cabinet
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 20 September 2008 by Azaz129.

Hi, well I've been talking to Richard and we decided we need a Runescapey skin. So, this is my ruff copy, what do you think? I'm very open to ideas and I do create images, so please, I want you opinion! If you don't like it say, what do you want me to change!  Master wand Phoenix Talk   20:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC) [[File:Safari007.jpg|thumb]]

Aside from the bloated screenie, it looks really nice. =) Rollback crownearth(t)
Yes we do, which is what RuneScape:Theme is for...--Richard 19:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
It seems to fit the wiki a little better, I think it looks nice. =D Karlis (talk) (contribs)
19:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

There are number of things I'd like to point out:

  1. The skin seems to a copy of the RuneScape website skin. We shouldn't be copying their skin, but creating our own.
  2. The skill images/icons at the header is too large, and cannot be seen beyond the 5th skill image/icon. Could be reduced in size.
  3. The font colour for the header ("My talk", "Watchlist", "Log out", etc.) should be white. Now, it can barely be seen.
  4. The titles for the items in the Sidebar ("Bookmarks", "Community", etc.) should also be white.

  az talk   02:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for the resemblance to the site, I kind of did that on purpose, but, you are right I should be more unique I will try again. Thanks for noticing the the skill image, I will edit that. I will change the color, thanks for noticing, I've got bad eyes. Thanks for your contribution.  Master wand Phoenix Talk   20:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Featured article template

I've "made" some changes to the [[:Template:Featured article|template]], and the new version coding and changes are located at the [[Template_talk:Featured article|talk page]].

Mr Mordaut   Featured Article
January 2008
Mr. Mordaut thinks that many things are dumb. However, the editors who wrote this article clearly were not. In fact, it was written so well that it had been featured on the Main page.

  az talk   08:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.