Wikipedia:Trading card game/Action plan/Phase 2:Cards/Individual card proposals/Illustrated cards for approval

Downtime[edit]

Name of card: Internet's down!
Class: Discord
Text: Sorry. Your turn's over. Flip a coin. If it's tails, no instants for you until your next turn.
Quote: "Well, yes, the Internet never goes down. That's just what people say." -- Vchimpanzee
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Image suggestions

There we go. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 20:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A power on/off button? Uh..... Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you suggest? I was trying to convey the idea of the internet turning off without making it look too much like Unexpected Turnout. Maybe something closer to this, except with disconnected computers? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 17:55, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we could crop this? Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should I crop out the guy entirely, leaving just the Earth, wire and outlet? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 20:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm....nah....forget that idea. If it wasn't a political figure, we could probably work with it at least. After browsing the Commons for some time, I determined that we don't have any photos (surprisingly) of a LAN cable. I think I'll snap a photo once my batteries charge, and I'll upload it. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out I'm better at photos of bugs than of hardware. BUT--- I did find File:Network-offline.svg! Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How's it now? (Finally got around to this--busy week.) EW_{_i}kist^Talk 01:49, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

--Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...Ouch? Did I do something wrong? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 21:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps that wasn't hard enough.

Smash!

You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.

Have a close look at that card...the trout was supposed to provide a strong clue as to what was wrong with it.

Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:25, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah...yeah. I see that now. I appreciate your use of the necessary level of subtlety. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 02:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes...I just noticed another problem with the quote alignment; I'll go ahead and fix it. Other than that, I approve. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well-- I would fix it, except that the SVG version hasn't been made available to me.

The word "VChimpanzee" is aligned incorrectly; it ought to be right-aligned with the quote's rightmost boundary rather than with its rightmost text, if that makes any sense. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it. I thought you didn't want the SVG's because of the MediaWiki SVG renderer? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 19:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. The SVGs are what we're using to allow multiple people to work on an image, but when showing it off, make sure you are sharing the PNG. So upload both versions. Looks good.

Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:52, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's like saving a raster as a .PSD or .XCF for your own editing and then exporting as a .PNG or .JPG for internet use. We edit in .SVG but show off in .PNG. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 21:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The card looks good to me. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:26, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My first card review, and this one looks great! I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 01:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
Like. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 20:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Love. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] Wiki (like love, but 3 times better.) —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 04:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tennis[edit]

Name of card: Tennis
Class: Article (good)
Text: N/A - Tribute
Protected: No
Proposed by: -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 18:28, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments I illustrated the card, but I can't upload it!!!!! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 23:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any error message? Details on what you did? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:16, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The same thing happened to me for a period of time yesterday. I think the page said something about the servers getting too many requests, but I'm not completely sure. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 13:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it said the image was empty. Should I just upload it to my playground wiki (if it works) and link to it? —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 04:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me

I might be able to try to upload it for you if you can do that much with it. BOB THE WIKIPEDIAN ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:14, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, I can upload things without a problem now. It was only for a few minutes a couple days ago that it didn't seem to be working. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 16:38, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just gave up and used .PNG image —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 01:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The text is a little large...try working from the template if you haven't already: [1]. Also-- I'm glad you bolded "tennis"...I've been forgetting to bold the article subject! EWikist, so have you! Have you got time to bold some subjects on cards, EWikist? Also, someone pointed out earlier we need to be careful with dropping celebrity names on cards, as with an earlier proposal for a Michael Jackson card. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was just copying the article, bolding the pagename is WP standard. As for the celeb name, it was just the corresponding caption to the best image in the article. If you know a better one, link to it. Oh, and I grew the text because you said not to stretch it. If you want, I can see if I can upload it as an SVG on any other site. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 07:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For whatever it's worth, I tried loading your SVG's in Inkscape instead of Firefox and they look pretty good and workable. You can continue using the SVG format. I've posted a guide at the TCG wiki so that those editing the illustrations are all on the same page, so I'd suggest you check it out just to make sure you're following the same protocols: WPTCG:Designing cards]. It's a step-by-step guide to make sure we're all doing it the same way. I'm finding it even helps myself remember certain aspects if I follow it in sequence. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get on that bolding right now. It should only take a couple minutes. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 17:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a site I uploaded the file to link —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 18:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. The SVG's over 10 MB. Wikia won't permit uploads over 10 MB (which is why you couldn't upload it). You might try reducing the resolution of the image in it. Also, the article text should just be a short summary of the first bit, rather than word-for-word. Other than that, it looks great. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Tis a tribute card, dearest collaborators. However, I do like that you are using my idea for card format, Nicky! :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:24, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why? How was I supposed to do it? I thought I saw the conversation somewhere, but I don't remember it. —Airhogs777 (complaints • evidence • job) 14:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You did see said conversation, but we never actually came to a consensus. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 16:50, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read through the Zobel Network proposal. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 16:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then it's pretty obvious whose side I'm on. —Airhogs777 (complaints • evidence • job) 06:01, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

:) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 22:38, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content
{{{1}}}

Zobel network[edit]

Name of card: Zobel network
Class: Article (good)
Text: (Tribute card)
Protected: No
Proposed by: Certes (talk) 23:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

Image that needs making into a card

Card needing review. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'm not sure how many people need to approve the card before it is considered "approved", but I like it! The picture goes very well with the text. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 14:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If a week passes and no one rejects, I'd call it approved. We like to move quickly here...it keeps us alive. If we move too slowly, we kind of fall apart. That's what happened to the first 40 members of this project...they didn't keep the project in motion very often. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it did sort of screech to a halt, didn't it? I'm glad you and I got this thing going again, however (I feel so special!). As for the card, I have the same comment as for Mr. Mozart. Perhaps, for the caption, we could just have a caption for the picture, and then put the text that currently is being put as a caption between the caption and link? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad, too. Ummmmmm...I'd say yes, but that might confuse someone playing the game. When we draw a diagram of the card, the diagram will point to the area below the gray box and say "special text ability" and the text inside the box will have the label "quote or summary of the subject". Rather than moving the text, perhaps we should leave some blank space and include a fancy watermark or something in that blank space, such as the WPTCG logo. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We could, instead, say that the caption is a "quote or image caption" and underneath is "special text or a card description" depending on if it is an article or other. An article would be the second from each statement, and other cards would be the first. Does that seem smart? I am determined to get something between the box and link, as you can tell. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm determined not to remove the quote/summary from the box.

It disrupts the format of the card. So-- we've got two things to maintain-- structure and aesthetics. We need to put something there, though. Maybe one of our other contributors has a better idea we both like. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:47, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As long as something that involves text goes there, I'm happy. I don't really care what it is; I jsut hate having nothing there. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:50, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at this photo and tell me what you think about something along these lines. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Explanation, please. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to the fact that any card with no text in the box contains an image there. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was a very badly worded sentence, and I don't know what it means. It could also be that I am very tired, bu I would rather blame you. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read it after you wake up again...you're probably just sleep-deprived. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still don't get it. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that the cards in that photo that lacked text featured a solid-colored illustration in the "white space". Sorry for being confusing there. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't like that idea. I think it looks idiotic, and we don't want to copy other games too much, do we? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, especially games that look idiotic! *Awaits idea number 4...* Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I still like mine. Perhaps we need more input? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like idea #1, you like idea #2, neither of us like idea #3...Help! we need idea #4! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To which ideas might you be referring to? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 13:48, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put them all together.

The current layout for article cards, with a summary as the caption and nothing between that and the link.
Putting an image caption under the image, and then have an article summary and any special text under that, above the link, where text goes on other cards.
Having some sort of picture in the empty space, like in the picture above.

Hopefully, you'll have an idea that we all like, or you can pick mine and overrule Bob. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I like #1 the best. An image caption is not a bad idea, but it seems like there would be a lot of undivided text underneath that and it might look a bit cluttered. I think in most cases the article summary should explain the image well enough. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 16:55, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem that I brought up is that every other card in the entire deck is going to have a caption (quote) and then text underneath. If we just don't have the underneath, these will be different than the rest of the deck, which would drive me berserk, and I would no doubt gripe about it for all of eternity. :) To further mess this up, some articles have special text, so some articles would be freaks, and some would fit in, which would drive me even more berserk. I don't need my idea (#2) to be the exact one used, but I would like sometihng under the caption. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you are saying, but to be honest, I guess I don't really feel the same way about the whole "different card" thing. The fact that some cards just don't have text in a certain area doesn't really bother me. Ah, well. We'll have to come to some decision at some point. This is just my opinion EW_{_i}kist^Talk 01:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose most people won't care, but as you may have noticed, I am insane about details with these cards. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:18, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...Nicky made a cute little template...I'll use it to illustrate the proposals which have been offered. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:44, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article with an ability:

Article

Title

This is the article summary.

This is the card ability.

Link

Image credit: Somebody
© English Wikipedia Department of Fun

Idea # 1:

Article

Title

This is the article summary. It is longer since there is no special ability. This helps take up more space on the card, although stretching the image works, too.

Link

Image credit: Somebody
© English Wikipedia Department of Fun

Idea # 2:

Article

Title

This is a caption reflecting the image's contents.

This is the article summary.

Link

Image credit: Somebody
© English Wikipedia Department of Fun

Idea # 3:

Article

Title

This is a summary of the article's topic.

Link

Image credit: Somebody
© English Wikipedia Department of Fun

Yeah, seeing it visually definitely pushes me to stick with my comment before: The image caption is a good idea, but it would be kinda' confusing with the article summary and special instructions squished together undivided. I still like the current design the best. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 21:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Glad that proved useful, EWikist. I'm also restating my preference for the way we're doing it... BOB THE WIKIPEDIAN ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about we use Idea #2 for most cases, but then the "Article with Ability" one for articles with abilities? That is the most that I will settle for without prolonged kicking and screaming. By the way, I like the new signature, my dear Bob. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:14, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But wait... Doesn't that go against what you originally said about some cards being different? Then we're having some article summaries within the box, and some outside with a caption in the box, right? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 00:37, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. What I wanted was something in the caption box, and something below it; I don't care what it is, I just want text in both spots. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Your comments are more about the visual-spacial aspect than the actual content of those areas. Seeing as both of these things are important, we'll have to find some balance between them. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 20:19, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; I want them all to look uniform (with exceptions, of course, for special cards, but not for an entire class). It looks like, by what you just said, that you are now at the exact same point as Bob with what you are thinking. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:49, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to see we're making progress, then. :) I guess I'll keep making the cards with the current format, and if we revise it, it won't be that big of a deal to go back and change them a bit. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 01:12, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hooray, I have pulled EWikist down with me! Ah, I've got the perfect solution, Hi! Check this out:

Article

Title

This is a summary of the article's topic.

In honor of Hi878:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

Link

Image credit: Somebody
© English Wikipedia Department of Fun

No, but seriously...how about this:

Article

Title

This is a summary of the article's topic.

This card has no special ability.

Link

Image credit: Somebody
© English Wikipedia Department of Fun

By the way, thanks for the sig compliment! I got the motivation from seeing all y'all's special sigs on this project... My sig looks better if you get the special Wikipedia release of the Linux Libertine O font: [2] - BOB THE WIKIPEDIAN ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think saying that it has no special text is rather stupid, actually. Think about it. You draw a card, and it says that. What would you think (other than "There's obviously some weirdo that needed there to be text there, so they put this stupid thing there to appease him.") when you saw that? I do like the first idea, however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, proposal #4 is the winner then. EWikist, be sure to update the current proposals with the lorem ipsum thing.

BOB THE WIKIPEDIAN ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic. :) By the way, could you explain, as clearly (and perhaps persuasively?) as you can, why you like Idea #1 so much? I am curious, as I have explained my reasoning, but I can't recall any from you. Also, what am I going to do about you all being stacked against me? Have you corrupted Nicky yet? :P One other thing... I fixed your extremely large string of line breaks above, right below the row of four proposals. You will feel immensely foolish when you realize what I did. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:29, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right. I think now would be an appropriate time to break out the ol'

Facepalm. You are indeed correct that I feel quite foolish. But wait... Are we using the version with the "This card has no special ability" text, or are we figuring out a different phrase? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 16:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We haven't decided on a version. :) #4 is the "In honor of Hi878:" one. IF you look up a little ways, to my initial reactions to the serious proposal, you will see that I don't really like saying "This card has no special text." Bob, I still would love an explanation, so hurry up on that! :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:53, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EWikist, try using {{-}} next time instead of lots of <br /> tags.

Hi, it's for the simple sake of localization. That means that when I pick up a card, I couldn't care less about the quote on it or the article summary, all I want to know is what's pertinent to the gameplay. When I look at the card, general knowledge of the anatomy of a card tells me that the text inside the box is of no interest and the text below the box is crucial for gameplay. Therefore, I'll read any text that's below the box. If there's no text below the box, that saves me the mental strain of realizing that what I'm reading is useless. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:50, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stop the press! This was a tribute card! Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:14, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good lord... Well, at least this discussion is happening somewhere... :P By the way, all of you people here, I'm not coming back yet, I just couldn't pass up commenting on this. However, I shall be coming back within a week or two, and if I don't, I encourage you all to bombard me with e-mails reminding me to. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:10, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone going to fix the card? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:18, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

The words aren't mine but I have happy memories of learning SVG by adding the diagrams. Please feel free to leave this one out: all I did was to propose a rule set that wasn't even collectable. Certes (talk) 23:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooo...radio stuff? Cool suggestion! And proposing an entire ruleset was a major contribution, even if it wasn't ultimately adopted...it takes time to actually think out a cohesive set of rules, so (at least in my eyes) you've helped significantly. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Bob, it was still an important contribution. Also, the card seems fine to me. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:06, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Panzerfaust 3[edit]

Name of card: Panzerfaust 3
Class: Article (good)
Text: My NEW FINAL, I MEAN IT, tribute. Modern German antitank weapon.
Protected: NO
Proposed by: CanvasHat 01:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How's this? I also tried a version with this image, but I thought it looked a bit empty. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 02:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm....perhaps you could superimpose it on something like this? BOB THE WIKIPEDIAN ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean like it is now? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 16:32, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks wonderful to me, but I'll wait for our resident God to OK it, as he knows more about this image design stuff than me. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:54, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect! I had no idea that background would complement it so nicely! Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait! It's a tribute card! Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:00, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great to me. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:14, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
What i learned in math:small child +Panzerfaust 3 is less than three Seems fine as a tribute. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Support as tribute. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:21, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Earth[edit]

Name of card: Earth
Class: Article (good)
Text: Place to live
Protected: semi
Proposed by: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs · count)

Image suggestions

http://wptcg.wikia.com/wiki/File:Earth.png

Now, I realize the suggestion below may have been a joke, but I think it has a nice ring... Plus, it leaves room for a larger picture. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 21:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Love it! I was going to ask if there was a better image, but you seem to have read my mind and found an outstanding one! By the way, link to the PNG, not the SVG. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the format of the Durian proposal. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:09, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it has captions, i would say "mostly harmless" or "home advantage" Leomk0403 (talk) 04:52, 4 November 2021 (UTC) Comments[reply]

Lol...I'm tempted to put "Mostly harmless" on this one... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to site your source. It would be "Mostly harmless" --Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, p. ##

—Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 15:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, I was kidding about the text. We're borderlining there with that trademark. A summary of the planet would be appropriate, since the other articles include a summary. I don't see any other issues with it. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:17, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, fine. If you insist

. I wouldn't think it would be much of a copyright issue since it's only an indistinct two-word phrase and we aren't referring to the book Mostly Harmless, but I've changed the card nonetheless. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 20:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see Mostly Harmless put back on the card. I think using a two-word phrase from a book could be justified as fair use. Voyager640 (talk) 02:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um...no, that doesn't come close to qualifying for fair use. Anyway, looks good. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:08, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say since there's a book named it, a line from a separate book and an econometrics company, I think it's ~~eligible for illegal use~~ probably okay. But since the Hitchhiker's Guide was originally broadcast on BBC radio and is now published by Pan Books, either one would be the ones to contact, dare we do such a thing. —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 04:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why not make the text "Humorous references to Douglas Adams' The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy are inappropriate content for this article.", or possibly a quote from one of its AfDs? 143.92.1.33 (talk) 04:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content
Support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Yes. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pet skunk[edit]

Name of card: Pet skunk
Class: Article (good)
Text:
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image suggestions

http://wptcg.wikia.com/wiki/File:Pet_skunk.png EW_{_i}kist^Talk 23:46, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome photo. The text seems unbalanced. Does "complexity" not fit on the previous line? If not, is there an alternate summary you can provide that is less off-centered? Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, complexity doesn't fit, but I've added a couple more words--better? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 20:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Much :) Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:18, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the format of the Durian proposal. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:05, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content
Comments Believe it or not, this is a former featured article. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Haha, really? Wow! Support simply because it's so funny... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:09, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Wow. Support for the same reason as Bob. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:08, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Durian[edit]

Name of card: Durian
Class: Article (good)
Text: ~~You may not edit this card if you live in Singapore.~~
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You know the drill. —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 21:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget to upload the PNG and link to that-- not everyone here knows what to do with the SVG version. Looks good, actually, even if that was the layout Hi liked and I fought against...and I think you've just convinced me, too! I don't like the hyphen, though. Hyphens on short lines look sloppy (that's just me, though-- see if anyone else agrees).

Let it be known that we must summon Hi to end the discussion on what to do with nonspecial articles... Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PNG version, as requested. —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 19:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT‽‽‽ Does this mean that I have won? I give my absolute, 110% support for this card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, my dear Bob, the approved Lojban card was a tribute card, so obviously, the approved card design doesn't work. I should probably say this somewhere else, but I don't really care. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:05, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I do not support this card as it is. I think that the font is far too large for the text; I would much prefer something the size of the text used in article proposals by our other two card-designers. Otherwise, though, I love it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 20:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, you're right, the text looks like an h2. But f I made the text smaller, wouldn't the card look kind of... bald? —Airhogs777 (complaints • evidence • job) @WikiShrek 18:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not if you increase the image size. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not what? It doesn't look like an H2, or it doesn't look bald? —Airhogs777 (complaints • evidence • job) @WikiShrek 00:18, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It'll take up the "bald" white space. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content
{{{1}}}

Page blanking[edit]

I think a blank Wikipedia logo is the best way of illustrating page blanking.

Name of card: Page blanking
Class: Vandalism
Text: None.
Proposed by: ♠TomasBat

Image for review —Airhogs777 (complaints • evidence • job) 17:30, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Looks good, except the image looks a bit sloppy. Zoom out and add a background with a border to the image, perhaps? Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:29, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Sorry, I had used the .PNG. —Airhogs777 (complaints • evidence • job) 23:56, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it looks perfect. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved, everyone? —Airhogs777 (complaints • evidence • job) 14:51, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quote: (-40,909) . . (Tag: blanking)
Image: File:Wikipedia-logo-blank.png

♠TomasBat 22:47, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism Page blanking Image credit: © English Wikipedia Department of Fun

CAT:ESP[edit]

Name of card: Malformed semi-protected edit request
Class: Discord
Quote:

hello i would like to change wikipedia thankyou bye byeAnonymous User[3]

Text: This bad edit request must be denied with a sacrificial edit before it may be discarded.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Image

[4] Image for review. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:12, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seems good, except for the title being too long. Could we use an ellipses, or just let it get cut off at the edge of the card, instead of having it take up two lines with an über-tiny font?? —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 15:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No one would know the name of the card, then. Maybe "Poor edit request" is better? Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 22:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing a difference. —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 00:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird. I know I changed it and uploaded it. I'll do it again later...gotta run. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Failure on Wikia's part, once again, not mine. The image cache isn't refreshed on their servers, force-feeding us the old versions. We'll simply have to wait for their servers to catch up. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I waited a couple weeks for the Shrek wiki's logo to actually change after I updated it. —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The wait is over! Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Preceding signed comment added by Airhogs777 (talk • contribs • wikia) 18:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My dear Bob, illustrated proposals go on the illustrated proposals page. :) I like the card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:31, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

:Wonderful! I think that we should attribute it as "Anonymous User" instead of "Anonymous", however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can do :) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like, but the text is a bit vague. Do you mean that a sacrificial edit must be made immediately? Or, if it stays in play, what is the incentive to play the sacrificial edit to take it out of play? Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 20:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The latter. It sort of functions like a vandalism that doesn't prevent an edit; a vandal that doesn't vandalize; a bad policy with no effect. It's just a bad card cluttering up one of the five bad card slots. That's the only incentive to remove it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Five bad card slots? Where did that come from? I've never heard anything about that. By the way, if it doesn't do anything, wouldn't it be good to have it filling a bad card slot (pretending that said slots have been proposed and accepted)? Wouldn't it make it so that you wouldn't have as many bad card slots open for cards that will actually do something? This seems, so far, like a helpful card with an explanation utilizing something never proposed or discussed, unless I am mistaken. By the way, my original support was based on me accidentally thinking of this as a vandalism card, not a whatever-this-is card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is discord, meaning it's not applied to an article, it's just put out there...sort of like a Wikipedia card except it doesn't represent any sort of policy. Remember, we created the class for all those strange things that weren't vandals or vandalism or Wikipedia-space or articles? Yeah, this is one of those. And the "slots" I'm speaking of are mental. All in your head. No physical slots to speak of, unless you want to get to work molding some plastic trays for us. Remember that five (or whatever the number was) bad cards in play at the beginning of a turn ends the game...this card just contributes to that deadly number. That's all it does. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right! I guess I did forget something while writing my response. :P ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]