Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Magic: The Gathering/Userbox

Image choice

Shouldn't this box include the five-color pentagon graphic instead of a tiny, impossible-to-read photo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesLucas (talk • contribs) 20:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking so for a while myself. It'd look much better. I'll go make a note there's a discussion here on WT:MTG, but given the activity there we'll likely have a silent consensus here in a few days. Cheers. lifebaka (talk - contribs) 02:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Now, just checking, but we are talking about using Image:Magic the gathering pentagon.svg instead, right? lifebaka (talk - contribs) 02:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably that. Could try it with Image:Magic the gathering small pentagon.svg, just in case, but I think the "large" version will probably be the right fit. (I designed the small version specifically with in-line use in mind.) JamesLucas (" " / +) 13:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tested both in my sandbox. I think Image:Magic the gathering pentagon.svg looks better. It's easier to see the white circle if we use Image:Magic the gathering small pentagon.svg, though. lifebaka (talk - contribs) 14:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I was never that pleased with the outlining, so I took this as an opportunity for improvement. You can see the new effect in use above. For some reason, your image instances in your sandbox don't refresh for me. I don't know if this is something to do with it being a sandbox, but I sure don't understand why. JamesLucas (" " / +) 19:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Wiki saves rasterized versions of specific sizes as they are used. If you try 43px, it works fine. I don't know why 42px won't update. JamesLucas (" " / +) 20:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, would it be kosher to tint the background of the userbox? JamesLucas (" " / +) 19:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used 42px 'cuz the box appears to be at 45px and it's better than 43px (I mean, 42!), we could leave it at 40px without any problem. Tinting is cool with me, though I'm curious what color you're thinking of using. A brown might work—it's the same color as the back of actual MTG cards—or it could be really ugly. I'll go test it a bit. lifebaka (talk - contribs) 21:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a not-bad one. #997733 in RGB color. If you put brown into them you get this weird maroon, though, which is odd (and doesn't look good). Could be weird monitor settings on my side, though. Didn't test any other colors, but I'm fully open to suggestions. Cheers. lifebaka (talk - contribs) 21:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really like that brown you chose against the image, less so against the blue hyperlink though...I'll ponder it more within the next day. As for 42px, the size (and the reference) is good, so long as we can find a way to force-refresh the rasterization of the SVG. Do you know anyone who would know about that stuff? JamesLucas (" " / +) 23:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If "background: ;" isn't specified for the whole table it can be specified per cell, so that's simple enough to fix. I've got another possible color for against the image, #AA8033, which is lighter and still looks pretty good, and #E0B060 looks OK against both purple (visited) and blue links (didn't test against red links, as I think it's moot), but is a little more red than brown I think. #D0B060 is another good choice, but it's a little green. I've got both at User:Lifebaka/Sandbox#Color testing. Also experimenting with other colors. lifebaka (talk - contribs) 13:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*smacks forehead* Grey looks good. Man I feel kinda' dumb for not thinking of that sooner. Purple would be fine except for purple links. Any other colors we should test? lifebaka (talk - contribs) 13:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are right; the grey looks good. My favorite, though, is the second of the two-tone browns. I think the 5 colors stand out well, and it very directly references the card back. I tried to mix and match for the best of both worlds, but I liked the result less than either of the two of yours that I've just mentioned. If we don't here back from anyone else, I think this should be your call. JamesLucas (" " / +) 20:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent)

Done, replaced it with the preferred version. Also added some usage. Cheers. lifebaka++ 14:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]