Would it be possible to set up a testing wiki so I can experiment on it with some ideas that I have? It would definitely be a lot safer as it's just a testing grounds for new implementations and suggestions for coding.
I've got a more streamlined version for multi-images for infoboxes that can be used in conjunction with the tabber to create less clutter. The only thing is that to have it, the MediaWiki:Common.js has to have additional coding for it, but I think the lack of clutter makes it look nice. What's your thoughts?
I'm not a fan of it. It's easy to get confused if you don't know how the switch template works. I get that it has the same functionality - but I think in the wrong situation it can be easily confusing. I prefer the tabber inside a tabber look because then you at least know visually what goes with what.
Personally I figured that this switch thing works like the tabber but doesn't shrink the image to fit in borders, thus being a graphical improvement. But Tim's right, this should have been discussed first, and if that auto-update thing was unintended, I'm going to have no choice but to revert the changes, since that would mean you copied over too much code from another wiki (and if it is from another wiki and not dev.wikia.com, then it should be credited) and I don't know what code does what.
That's fine. It was an experiment that was supposed to be removed or considered depending on your thoughts. Though, I agree that it's a bit jarring. The syntax for switch isn't exactly friendly compared to tabber which is relatively easier.
I was just exploring other alternatives to tabber infoboxes. The auto-refresh was also something I was looking into so I don't refresh the page as often.
I have rollbacked my additions to the Common.js because this alternative switch template only works on desktop browser versions. The mobile versions are completely unusable. Sorry for the inconvenience, won't do changes that might damage the wiki without consulting.
Is there a method of contacting you both relatively quicker than Wikia? Like through Skype?
Sorry to bring up these people again, but I figured you (and the other admins on here) should know that the people on Ultra Wiki are considering on copying the format of those scene on a Kamen Rider wiki (which I assume to be this one...)
Well, actually I am one of the admins of Ultraman Wiki but this guy anyway tried to replicate several of the toku hub's method to that wiki. I did tried to block him for three years but still, User Teridax122 told me not to do that.
Even if we are rivals but still, I do respect that informations cannot be plagiarized.
Those are minor cosmetic parameter changes and hardly plagiarism, considering sections like "appearances list", "voice actor" and "actor" are used on many television related wikis and certainly not the invention of the toku hub.
PS: I would hardly consider the Ultraseries wiki to be a rival. No insult intended there, but..
I am not going to allow discussion of, or get into, the intricacies of why Ultra Wiki is no longer in the hub. The removal was necessary and justified, and Ultraseries is its replacement in the hub, under our control. Given that they are no longer in the hub, Ultra Wiki can do whatever it wants provided it leaves us all alone. Its editors can even edit both wikis (if they wish), provided they abide by our rules on our wiki. That said, it is unwise for its leadership to allow plagiarism of our content when it is now explicitly forbidden, and absolutely so without our permission.
The question is, however - was what was used our creation, or is it simply a modification of generic code as Stephan mentions? Therein lies the difference. If it is the former, it needs to be removed as plagiarism as we will not authorize its use. If it is the latter, then it is allowed to exist.
I am not going to allow discussion of, or get into, the intricacies of why Ultra Wiki is no longer in the hub. The removal was necessary and justified, and Ultraseries is its replacement in the hub, under our control.
We're not going to invite the drama to KR Wiki, Thermo. Thus we're not going to discuss that.
Do you think we should keep Baron, Gridon, and Knuckle's Suika Arms in the Kamen Riders' Other Forms page or do you think they should be removed, considering Gaim's Suika Arms was removed from the Kamen Riders' Super Forms?
Definitely a good way to hide spoilers, so for the movie I certainly approve. But I don't think we need it for the series info. This should strictly be to hide spoilers for unsubbed material. Which would only be movies, as new episodes seem to be released by Over-time less than 24 hours after it airs in Japan.
We should focus on the content, not making it smaller. One thing that helps, especially with movies, is letting the movie page do its job. For instance,
"Kouta returns during the events of [[Kamen Rider Drive x Gaim]] where he has to deal with a new threat." And then add a brief sentence or two that covers the main points involving Kouta. What was he out to do? And then if readers want to know more, they can click the movie link and find out - that's why it has a Plot section (where appropriate). This would knock a chunk off the article page.
Otherwise, we're really beating a dead horse here. People need to learn not to dump every last detail on a rider's page. If we keep and trim the necessary stuff - and get rid of the stuff best suited elsewhere - the page will shrink as necessary.