Are you considering returning to Final Fantasy XI? Be sure to read "Returning to Vana'diel" - our community collaborative guide!

Seekers of Adoulin
Areas · Missions · Quests · Coalitions · Assignments
Reive · Skirmish · Delve · Incursion · Vagary · Sinister Reign
Rhapsodies of Vana'diel
Areas · Missions · Escha · Omen
March Update Items
Mog Garden · Monstrosity · Trust Magic · Unity · Ambuscade · Hard Mode Mission Battles · Master Trials March Login Campaign
Reforged Armor
Artifact: IL109 · IL119/+2/+3     Relic: IL109 · IL119     Empyrean: IL109 · IL119
Abjurations IL119
Ultimate Weapons
Escutcheons

User talk:Spicyryan

From BG FFXI Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Moderator

We have noticed your work over the last few days, and we would like to offer you Moderator status. Would you be interested? Funkworkz (talk) 15:27, 14 July 2014 (EDT)

Sure :D

Anything I should know besides keep trying to make this the best wiki for the game that has most every component people want? Spicy (talk)

You should be able to access a few more Special Pages now. To see everything moderators can do, check out User Group Rights. There is no administration panel per se. Also you can look at my sandbox for projects if you run out of things to do.Funkworkz (talk) 15:54, 14 July 2014 (EDT)

Another thing I forgot, most templates have Administrator locks on them. Let me know if there are any you need to edit. Funkworkz (talk) 16:11, 14 July 2014 (EDT)


Spicyryan is currently the super-duper-active when he can be, admin of BGwiki :P --Spicyryan (talk) 03:12, 22 October 2014 (EDT)

Recent Talk Activity (cleared old talk on Oct 2016):

Created you a little gift today for your page (among some others): https://www.bg-wiki.com/bg/Template:Almace.

And this one: https://www.bg-wiki.com/bg/Template:Tizona --Nikkije (talk) 22:03, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Aww, thanks :) --Spicyryan (talk) 22:16, 21 November 2016 (UTC) --- Good morning, most Spiciest Spicy Spice! I have been working on a single page Inventory collaboration guide, and it occurred to me that it would be useful/helpful if there was an easily accessible link on the left menu of BG-Wiki where new/returning players could find information. Perhaps under the Vanadiel section? There is already a nice Returning Player guide, but maybe we could add my Inventory 101 page as well as the Fame page, and any others that new players could quickly refer to? Have a great day! --Nikkije (talk) 16:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey there Nikkije, I have been watching you create this, and after a quick two line exchange between Funkworkz and I we decided to reference this in the new/returning players guide. We need to redo navigation at some point was the other line.

As a short term solution I will edit the guide section to expand it it a bit for this guide and reference it in the returning to vanadiel guide. In the future we will redo the navigation bar. Thank you for your work, and don't be afraid to join us on Discord. --Spicyryan (talk) 16:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC)


Hey Spicy can you teach me how to collapse a table (like what is done on the Nolan page)? I'd like to collapse the 3 tables on the Sinister Reign pages so people don't have to scroll across to look at stuff. --HitomeOfBismarck (talk) 10:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind I fixed it. Now is there a way to make Nolan's page more readable if our browser is zoomed in such as this? http://imgur.com/a/Eh1Vj --HitomeOfBismarck (talk) 12:25, 8 October 2016 (UTC)


Undid all the changes and redid the intended result you were looking for I think. Did we really need to collapse those tables though? Wasn't bad at all on length. --Spicyryan (talk) 21:05, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

What you have there is my original design intention but I can see it makes it even worse. I think stacked tables in a column would be better for that page like how it was when I finished my edits. For reference, this is the problem I am trying to remedy: http://imgur.com/a/cuHH1 --HitomeOfBismarck (talk) 11:35, 10 October 2016 (UTC)


Are you on mobile?

What is your resolution? --Spicyryan (talk) 14:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)


My main monitor uses 1080P (1920x1080). Off monitor is 1680x1050. Regardless, designing web pages with tables is pretty dangerous due to this issue. I would highly advise making the tables stack on top of each other in a row like I had it before. It was quite organized and actually was better for the augmentation section readability. --HitomeOfBismarck (talk) 23:07, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

  • Hi, Hitome! Glade to see you helping on the wiki. While I understand what you were trying to do and understand why. We feel the 3 tables next to each other while it may over hang looked the best we tried a different method for the 3 tables today and it wasn't usable at all for smaller monitors. While yours did clearly make it the clearest and no overhang it didn't seem as good.Darvamos{Chiaia} (talk) 00:44, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
  • I'd recommend removing the collapse feature that was added, then. This is absolutely horrendous. http://imgur.com/a/6bIPN While the old version caused spanning issues on different resolutions, this one cannot even be made manageable using CTRL+F for augmentations. --HitomeOfBismarck (talk) 04:37, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Agreed on not being able to CTRL+F is really annoying. Crevox (talk) 16:21, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Not as horrendous as using a 1680x1050 monitor!

I reopened the subject with the staff and also stated I don't wish to make it one 9 rows instead of one row for each wave. We will see what shakes, but I want to put this SR thing to bed.

As for the cntrl F, there is an expand all button (we just noticed this formats wrong, Chia is fixing it, but it still works and only appears as text). We are probably just going to remove the collapsible feature from the page as it isn't needed. I only did it as a result of this discussion. --Spicyryan (talk) 16:28, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I spent a bit of time working on various table designs to fit it all in better. Chia believes the correct answer for this is to have it resolved in the CSS so that the page shows differently based on resolution. --Spicyryan (talk) 15:22, 27 October 2016 (UTC)


This issue has been fixed. I hope you enjoy the new table and way it scales with the resolution :D

Thanks to Fae of course :P --Spicyryan (talk) 02:24, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

  • That is an awesome fix! I assume you were successful with the CSS changes. You both deserve an award. Or a sticker at the very least. --HitomeOfBismarck (talk) 02:58, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Err... it's actually supposed to be that way, I think. It's just supposed to be 104 instead of 105. --Byrthnoth (talk) 05:18, 3 February 2017 (EST)