Forum:Wiki Talk

I view the site in dark mode with the default skin, and find the darkish red text on Heartwarming pages doesn't provide enough contrast against black. It is readable, but uncomfortable enough that I usually end up highlighting the whole page (spoilers an' all).

I like the idea of using reddish text on those pages, but could the colour be brightened for users in Dark mode? Red links show up well, so a (pinkish?) colour with similar luminosity to that should work for everyone if it isn't practical to have a per-mode text colour.

@Labster and @GethN7 know more about this than I do, so... kicking it over to them.

Accessibility issue. No need for a discussion, just fix it, please.

I'll take a look at it. Should be a simple fix, just need to experiment with color values a bit.

Thanks.

I just added some specific Dark Mode rules the CSS for the Heartwarming template. CTRL+F5 on a Heartwarming page and let me know if red links are more visible with less eye sore after. Wanted to fix the white bar to the side, but that's proving a little more hassle, but the links should be easier to see now.

Looks like it turned off the extra formatting altogether in Firefox - we're down to the default page formatting now.

EDIT: No, wait, that's just on one page. Trying a different heartwarming page looks good to me - again, in firefox.

Plenty of pages not being displayed with the extra formatting now. See here.

This is something that got me thinking after seeing this site for a bit. From my understanding, ATT is more "open" compared to Tvtropes, right? Then I remembered the Auto-Erotic Troping thing Tvtropes has (basically for those who don't know what that is, the tl;dr on it is creating and/or editing articles about yourself or your work), and thought "Does this site also have that?" So uh, if anyone can tell me if this is true or not, I would greatly appreciate it.

See our FAQ for Creators which in its second section explicitly says it's okay. Now beyond that we do have some more detailed rules about it, but I can't remember where they are. I'll search through the project namespace and when I find where they're specifically written down I'll share them with you.

Until then, what matters above and beyond the basic OK is how obnoxious you get about it. We had one guy who wrote a whole sheaf of pages for his fanfics for a particular cartoon, but after a while it became very obvious that he was something of a fetishist who was using pages allegedly about his works to get off on describing just how disgusting they were. When he wouldn't tone things down or scale back his language, we were forced to ban him and eventually deleted the works pages because none of us knew enough about the fics in question (nor did we want to) to clean them up ourselves. (Not to mention we weren't sure they could be cleaned up.) We had another guy who was a very minor voice actor with a YouTube channel who did up a creator page for himself. Other than bad cases of Small Name, Big Ego and Small Reference Pools (he was apparently ignorant of any major film from before about 2010 and routinely credited his 3000-member channel with "rescuing" movies like Alien from obscurity) his page was relatively inoffensive although it was clear he was more a wannabe-celebrity than a real one. He eventually got banned, too, for basically ignoring trope definitions and creating "examples" that had nothing to do with tropes they allegedly demonstrated, but we left his creator page in place for years, until it came to our attention that his status as a creator had been dubious to begin with.

Meanwhile there are more than a few creators here -- including a goodly chunk of the mod staff -- who have frequently added their own comments and trope entries to pages other people wrote about their works. (That was once very welcome on TVT -- SF author Diane Duane used to trope her own stuff for example, back before the staff got very hostile toward creators who didn't like censorship. We like to think we're preserving the open and welcoming atmosphere that TVT threw away when it decided money was more important than anything else.)

Teal Deer: We're relaxed about it. But we have limits. Be cool and we will be, too.

So go ahead. Be aware that any page for yourself or your works that is solely by you is probably going to get a {{DOTA}} template put on it until other people start contributing to it. The DOTA template ("DOTA" = Death of the Author) puts a box at the top of the page that reads "The original version of this article was written by the creator(s) of the work being discussed. Other viewpoints are requested."

And yeah, we're more open than TVT. We go into a bit more detail how and why on All The Tropes:Why Fork TV Tropes and All The Tropes:So You're a TV Tropes Refugee, but basically we only have the absolute minimum of legally-required censorship here, and we have no ads, so we don't have the need to protect our revenue stream that drives so much of TVT's control freakery and "moral superiority".

Anyway, I hope that answers your questions. If it doesn't, or you have more queries, feel free to ping any of the admin staff just by adding {{admins}} to the end of any post on any talk page. It'll produce the line of "@" pings you'll see below my signature.

-- Looney Toons, admin

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

Thanks, was not expecting an answer with this level of information on, like wow. But, again, thanks.

You're welcome. We like to think we're friendlier than, say, Fighteer. (Then again, outside of certain venomous species and aggressive predators, who isn't?) Being nasty to users gains us nothing; being helpful makes for happy users and a better wiki community.

And because I didn't say it before, welcome to All The Tropes! We look forward to seeing what you have to contribute!

So go ahead. Be aware that any page for yourself or your works that is solely by you is probably going to get a {{DOTA}} template put on it until other people start contributing to it. The DOTA template ("DOTA" = Death of the Author) puts a box at the top of the page that reads "The original version of this article was written by the creator(s) of the work being discussed. Other viewpoints are requested."

I've done this myself, on occasion -- see My Apartment Manager is not an Isekai Character for an example -- so I'd be a hypocrite if I was to say that other people couldn't make pages for their own works. The idea here, as far as I'm concerned (speaking as a troper, not as a mod), is to do your best to make the page look like any other work page on the wiki: no unwarranted disparaging, no shameless self-promotion.

Oh, and because I forgot to point you at them last night, a few references to help you get your new pages right on the first try:

• All The Tropes:Style Guide
• All The Tropes:Works Page Guidelines
• All The Tropes:Creator Page Guidelines
• Help:Formatting

When you're ready to create your new pages, use the ATT Page Creator, which you can reach either through that link or as the first item under "Troping Utilities" in the menu that runs along the left edge of every page in most skins. It will set you up in editor that is prepopulated with a skeleton page that has all the markup that's required to integrate a new page stylistically and functionally with the rest of the wiki. You'll need to use the third prompt to make a creator page; that'll put you in an empty editor with a "Select boilerplate" dropdown, and you'll need to select "Creators page" from the dropdown and click "load" to get the right template.

And in case you glossed over it in the top-of-page system message, until you establish your bonafides with the wiki -- anywhere from a couple weeks to a few months depending on your contribution rate, your edits go into a moderation queue where they need to get approved by one of the admins before they're applied to the wiki. This is because we had (and continue to have) problems with spammers and vandals, and Moderation stops them cold.

I've been browsing some character pages on Wikipedia, and I loved how characters have an infobox that displays their basic information. It's simple stuff like "age", "height", and "name", along with a character image. It's a subtle way to spice pages up.

Wikipedia already has w:Template:Infobox character. It shouldn't be that hard to adapt something for ATT.

As for what to include in the infobox, we can do something like:

• Name (along with foreign forms, if a work is from a non-English country)
• Image
• Alternative Images (e.g. character as a child, character after transformation)
• Central Archetype (e.g. Magical Girl, The Heart)
• Height (optional)
• Age (optional)
• Blood Type (optional)
• Nickname (optional)
• First Appearance (optional)
• Fighting Style (optional)
• Birthdate (optional)
• Family Relationships (e.g. mother, father)
• Friends (optional)

Sorry for bothering the admins so soon after your vacation. I hope you all had a good vacation.

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

Funny you should ask... If this is good, I can simply copy it from a different wiki that I wrote it for. ("title" is what you called "Name", and "subtitle" is what you called "foreign forms".) Or we can discuss what we want and come up with something better-suited for this wiki.

Infobox Character
| title = 
| subtitle =
| image = 
| caption = 
| Other Names = 
| Source Fiction = 
| Birthday = 
| Age = 
| Gender = 
| Height = 
| Hair Color = 
| Eye Color = 
| Blood Type = 
| Three Sizes = 
| Actor = 

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

There are some things to tweak. "source fiction" is an iffy field... most character pages are a subpage of a work the characters are from. If I go to Akira/Characters (a random page I pulled up), I expect all characters to be from Akira, so the field is a bit redundant. The only time when we need it (that I can think of) is if one character originated in a fairy tale or folktale. For example, In The Tale of the Princess Kaguya, Princess Kaguya did not originate from the film, rather she originated from The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter. It may cause some confusion.

We should include a "Central Trope" entry (the trope that best describes a character). After all, this is a troping wiki. It's a nice way to quickly tell what a character's role in the story is (The Hero does not count as a Central Trope; it is too vague).

What do you mean by "Three Sizes"?

Everything else looks good, and it's nice to see you remembered the "Actor" field (I don't know how I forgot something that important).

"Source fiction" is rather specific to the needs of the wiki for which it was created and certainly can be removed/re-engineered as needed.

"Three Sizes" is for female characters: Bust-Waist-Hips.

"source fiction" is an iffy field... most character pages are a subpage of a work the characters are from.

Most, but not all, as John Munch, Superman, and Tarzan show us. I'd rather make the field optional than remove it altogether.

"Central Trope"... I'm worried about edit wars there. For example, what is the central trope of the title character of Kiki's Delivery Service? Determinator? Plucky Girl? Cute Witch? And if we allow more than one, somebody's going to misunderstand and copy the entire trope list into the infobox. Your earlier suggestion "Central Archetype" seems like a better name to me.

Another thought: Should we make this sufficiently generic that it can also be used on Creator pages? Or would it make more sense to do two infoboxes for people -- "character" for the fictional people and "creator" for the real life people?

Second draft, for comments.

This is the information sidebar template for characters.

The Template

{{Infobox character
 | title = 
 | subtitle =
 | image = 
 | caption = 
 | Central Archetype = 
 | Source Fiction = 
 | First Appearance = 
 | Actor = 
 | Age = 
 | Birthday = 
 | Gender = 
 | Height = 
 | Hair Color = 
 | Eye Color = 
 | Blood Type = 
 | Three Sizes = 
}}

Notes

title is the character's name. This is the only required field.

subtitle could be the character's name in the original language, or a noble title, or a sobriquet.

image is the name of the picture you uploaded to illustrate the character, without the "File:" prefix. Note: The image will display at 200 pixels wide in this infobox, so please choose something that looks good at that size. If no image is listed, a placeholder will be displayed.

caption is a caption for the image, and is optional. If you don't add an image, the caption will not display.

Central Archetype is the character's main role in the story.

Source Fiction is the body of fiction – the "ficton", to use Robert A. Heinlein's term – that the character originally comes from. (No, please don't list every single work that John Munch has appeared in; just list the first one.) If you're using this infobox on a Characters subpage and the work isn't a crossover, it's safe to leave this field blank unless the character comes from a different work.

First Appearance is the name of the work where the character first appeared (for example, "Detective Comics #27")

Actor is the character's actor or voice actor (or both, for live-action works dubbed into other languages).

Age, Birthday, Gender, Height, Hair Color, Eye Color, Blood Type, and Three Sizes are all as of the character's first appearance.

• Birthday should be day and month. (For example, original-anime Sailor Moon's birthday should be listed as "June 30", not "June 30, 1978".) Write it out long-form, please; "2-5" is May 2 in most of the world, but many people in the USA read that as February 5.
• Gender is the gender that the character presents as, not the character's birth gender.
• Three Sizes is for females only, and if included should be listed in the order bust-waist-hips.

And an example:

Emily Pollifax

Story Role	Sweet old lady who happens to be a competent spy
Source Fiction	Mrs. Pollifax novels by Dorothy Gilman
Debut	The Unexpected Mrs. Pollifax (1966)
Actor or Voice Actor	Rosalind Russell (Mrs. Pollifax—Spy, 1971), Angela Lansbury (The Unexpected Mrs. Pollifax, 1999)
Demographic Information (as of the character's first appearance)
Gender	Female
Hair Color	White

Using the template on a live page: Isekai by Moonlight/Characters. (Yeah, shameless self-promotion. <g>)

Cool! Looking at the template on Puella Magi Madoka Magica, it would be nice to have a "weapon of choice" field.

Remember to update the "If the page has an infobox" section of All The Tropes:Uploading and Adding an Image to a Page once we get the final design in.

If we were to include "Weapon of Choice" it would follow we should also include some of the other Signature Tropes, such as Trademark Favorite Food, Signature Device, Catch Phrase, and maybe even Signature Colors. Catch phrase in particular may be more universal than Weapon of Choice, as it doesn't just apply to warrior characters. I guess it boils down to how many fields we'd like the infobox to have?

That's why I put the template onto a live page - so we could see how many lines it takes before we start getting large patches of whitespace in the page text. It turns out that using three or four demographic lines are already creating large patches of whitespace.

I'd be hesitant to add more lines to the infobox unless I had some evidence that we're actually going to write both long descriptions and long trope lists for all characters. (Although I can be convinced otherwise, and the infobox can always be edited later.)

I think you might be able to argue that, on pages where there are more information provided by demographic lines, characters are more developed and you have more information about the characters, so you can write a longer description with more tropes. Therefore, if a character has a large demographic listing it should have a large description.

However, I think this is going to be a "reality does not match expectations" thing. I wouldn't rely on this coming true on every page. Even if some cool information isn't included on the infobox, you can always include it in the description.

That said, "freezing" the demographic information isn't the only solution to this. We might come up with some sort of "editing" page policy and put it in some adminstrivia page, which states that you should not add demographic information to a character until you are sure it will not create excessive whitespace. For example, I can comfortably fit 20-30 lines in Puella Magi Madoka Magica/Characters, but you can't do so on other pages.

It does. My logic is that it's better to have a field and don't use it, than wanting to use a field that doesn't exist. All of these are nice bits of information that help add flavour to the page. Ultimately, it depends on what the admins think, and on how many fields we can fit before MediaWiki starts to have issues.

Mind changed, please see message above.

I should get other tropers involved in this discussion. After all, it does radicalise the way we do character pages.

@GentlemensDame883 @Haggishunter @HeneryVII @Jlaw @Lequinni‎ @RivetVermin @Utini501

Well, it's been a week. I'm declaring this "done" (as much as any wiki page or template is ever "done") and I've updated All The Tropes:Uploading and Adding an Image to a Page.

Thank you for your work!

Apparently, Miraheze was supposed to shut down later this year and now some people have decided to take it over. However, I don’t know how well they’ll be able to handle a project as big as Miraheze. Do the staff here have any kind of plan in place in the event that Miraheze actually shuts down?

Subpoint 2, point 9 under "New Trope Checklist" is "At least five examples (hopefully ten or more, though - the Mods won't launch their own trope candidates without at least ten), each one with context"

Shouldn't it be "At least five examples (hopefully ten or more, though - the Mods won't launch their own trope candidates without at least ten), each one with context."

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

I suppose it should. Fixed.

MediaWiki:Sitenotice contains the absolute banger of a word progression, "this moderation can a week to happen". This error was introduced with this edit, which changed "take up to a day" to "can a week".

We don't leave the best first impression when the first thing a new user will see is something with a grammatical error...

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

And it's been there since March 21... <sigh> Thanks.

Fixed and regenerated.

Basically I've got a work I want to move over here.

@Labster This is more up your alley on the technical side.

That said, if you wish to port anything, we will need to be sure your are porting only your own edits and nothing else if the pages was created after July 2012. This is for legal reasons due to the fact we and TV Tropes use different Creative Commons licenses.

That won't be an issue. Even the edits I didn't make I can get permissions from the creator who did make them.

Glad to hear. If you can snag a copy of the source of the page and provide it to us somehow (like as a Pastebin document), we may be able to convert the markup to MW format with a batch conversion script. Otherwise, you'll have to do so yourself manually.

Since you claim this is your own work and you can secure the permission of others to move it, please mention where the original was found and your TV Tropes name so we can affirm as much in your edit reasons when we import it, or otherwise link somewhere where those permissions were given by you and others. We ask this just to cover our legal backsides, yours included.

Will a screenshot of a Discord conversation suffice?

Question though. I saw on the Wikia mirror that you're legally allowed to copy from Wikipedia, but that's discouraged, since it looks tacky and doesn't fit this site's style.

Is that the same for this fork?

Yes. If you need to use some basic information from Wikipedia, you may, but wholesale copying is definitely discouraged since we have a manual of style that is far different and much more informal. At most, gleaning some basic details about a work or an actor from there as a base and then writing the rest on your own is what most of us do. For attribution reasons, we cite where the took content from Wikipedia in the edit reasons.

Okay. I'll still get you the screenshots. But looking at the licenses. Legally, even if we copy things over wholesale without that. I really doubt that Fast Eddie can legally ENFORCE his complaints.

Yes, he can kick up a fuss. He can say: "I own everything! See! See, I said it right here!" But the fact that he is ultimately using a wiki under Creative Commons means I doubt that will ever hold up in court and it's just his way of trying to maintain his slipping control.

Fast Eddie quit running things several years back, they have new owners, and so long as we observe Creative Commons licensing policy, we avoid legal hassle we both wish to avoid. We are currently cordial with our TV Tropes counterparts, and observing the above is our intent to remain that way.

Right. But Creative Commons does not recquire permission.

For example, I don't legally have the right to say you can't copy what I write under Creative Commons. The very first thing it says is:

"You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format."

So they can't use Creative Commons, and then withdraw that permission just because they feel like it. Legally, they have no leg to stand on.

EDIT: Found it "Must be under the same license".

And it looks like that comment got a "Thanks". Is that this wiki's version of a like?

More or less.

If proof is provided all the original authors consented to allow it be reposted here, yes, in regards to the Discord screenshot.

Okay. Now how DO I upload the screenshot?

Upload the image via Upload file (note it was uploaded by the author in the licensing drop down when you do), then post the link here.

I uploaded it:

Seems legit. If possible, you may wish to extract all edits from the page edit history from you and the other authors who consented to port it over here manually, compile into a text document, then stick it somewhere like pastebin or an upload service (OneDrive, Mega.nz, etc), then link it here.

Once that's done, we can then use the same converter we used for our initial page dump to convert it to MediaWiki format (@Labster is the one who created it) here, then you are free to edit that as much as you deem fit,

We apologize if this seems utterly byzantine and complicated, but we want to make sure they cannot complain we took a single word that others did not consent to being resharable elsewhere, because we are sticklers for respecting the copyright of others, and we don't want it said we were callous about respecting said copyright.

Would a Google Doc work?

Also. Is it possible to learn how to use a converter myself so I don't have to keep coming here whenever I want to port over one of my edits?

Well, the converter is a customized Perl script that isn't exactly user friendly and requires a bit of manual tweaking if I remember right, and yes, a Google Document is just fine.

Once we have the source code text, just link it here, we'll handle the rest.

Please include a link to the original TV Tropes page so we can properly source it in the page creation edit reason when we convert it.

Will do. Here's the main page for start:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/WebVideo/BronyDAndD

https://docs.google.com/document/d/17_iska9mZlh2bAyfbSQ7FOWK6Ko7YnXnD_tPsJgSTJM/edit?usp=sharing

Also, curious: Is there a long term restoration project to ask editors on tv tropes:

"Hey, do you mind if we put your stuff on AllTheTropes as well?"

Just so we can actually have articles for things that were made AFTER 2012?

No such project has ever been proposed, let alone enacted. We simply don't have the time; we don't have enough staff to take on another major task.

I've been troping what I've troped thus far to that end, actually (couple of samples right there). Gives me a change to flex my creative muscles and see how well I can communicate the same basic info in a different way, then expound from there.

I'm a brand new user, so I don't have permission to upload file

I've marked you as a confirmed user; you should be able to upload. I think.

I do have a converter but I'm not sure I want to dust off that code -- honestly I'm okay with just fixing it up manually. Just, with your edit message on creating the page, say something like "copied from TVT with permission of all authors" so none of the other admins spot a bogey.

So, what exactly happened with converting that page?

Seems we got collectively sidetracked. I'll ping the admins in and then see if I can't lend a hand to th' process myself.

@Labster @GethN7 @Looney Toons @Robkelk

Thank you.

So I heard mention a couple of times that the Analysis pages are one of the things that makes AllTheTropes stand out from Tv Tropes. I'm curious: What is it about ATT's Analysis pages that make them different from Tv Tropes?

I'm curious as to where you saw those mentions myself.

Anyhow, I'm not the most knowledgable so I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I think one way to further differentiate it from TVT - beyond ATT's generally more informal tone - would be to have a more rigorous means of sorting them.

I say rigorous, but ultimately it'd be little more than a simple matter of having the ability to sort by author, date, subject matter, etc.

In Long-Term Projects, there was this:

SelfCloak (talkcontribs) This has been discussed in the old forums back in 2014 (they are more suggestions than actual plans): What can ATT do to distinguish itself from TVT? Reply Thank3 years ago

Jade Shauni (talkcontribs) Hmmm, it looks like we're kinda doing those suggestions, like the analysis (This will be tricky to not fall into the "let's list all da tropes"), useful notes, and a few aspects that does need tweaking. Would having something like the badges that wikia help? I don't know if that'll be a good idea, 'cause I already like the userboxes and whatever is already implemented. Seeing that awards was suggested. Reply Thank3 years ago

Ah, I see - it was just a discussion of how to differentiate ATT in general from TVT, the Analysis page was just listed as an example.

To that end, I think curation of Analysis subpages as "proper" essay repositories that aren't just YMMV/Fridge/Headscratchers 2 like I alluded to previously is the way to go for that.

To answer the original question, the analysis pages are intended for in-depth examinations of their topics -- not just "what this is" but "how it works/why it works/how it should be employed in your own creations" for tropes and some useful notes, extensive history or context for other useful notes, or in the case of works something akin to a term paper exploring underlying themes and mechanics and how it all goes together.

A couple good examples might be Willing Suspension of Disbelief/Analysis and Satan/Analysis; you might also look at Wizards of Waverly Place/Analysis, where we use the page to explore the Incest Subtext that developed in the show.

MAJOR EDIT: Third version logos and all their variations are here!

• Error creating thumbnail: File missing

  Main Page Logo, 1x

• Error creating thumbnail: File missing

  Main Page Logo, 2x

• Error creating thumbnail: File missing

  Main Page Logo, 4x

• 

  Top Left Logo, 1x

• Error creating thumbnail: File missing

  Top Left Logo, 2x

• Error creating thumbnail: File missing

  Top Left Logo, 7x

It needs to fit inside a 135 x 135px box, but otherwise, me like.

Well, unless you want it to replace the image currently on the front pag, not the actual logo.

Actually, I did want to replace the image on the front page.

Still, here's a 135px version.

Awesome. If you can make a version of the first image without the subtitling, I'll be happy to replace the current version.

Isn't there some sort of tagline you want for the website, though? Something which says to people, "Hey, we've got a site mission, we're more focused than TV Tropes, and we have much more promise for quality content!" ?

Well, our default is "the wiki with all the tropes", because we basically aren't throwing anything out for censorship reasons, since TV Tropes had to get rid of several long established tropes simply for offending Google Ads.

Alright, how about this?

If you don't like that, here's one without the tagline. (Although you totally could have just taken the image, gone into Paint, cropped it, and reuploaded it yourself. :P)

I love the one with new tagline, will be using it.

Also, thanks for the alt version as well.

:D

Here's some more graphics for the front page.

Thanks, have added those as well.

Actually, those need to be in full size. I purposely made them the exact same dimensions as the original red, green, and blue headers they replace. If they're not at full size, then it doesn't look good.

The problem is that they don't scale well at all to the section dividers, hence my resizing.

Hm. In that case, can you revert the change? I don't think it looks very good.

Ew, no. The graphic design is good, but I spend way too much time making fun of people who think "tropes == story legos".

This is on the front page already? I think... I'm gonna leave the wiki for a while.

Well I wish other people would give me suggestions for what graphics to use, rather than simply complain and leave. Because I can design something else.

Okay, I've got a better idea then. Replace the lego block with an infinity symbol.

Represents our goal (no limits on what we can talk about), and avoids the Unfortunate Implications brought up by Vorticity.

I'll get it done when I have time. Promise.

Oh, and when you get a chance, please replace the sections of code where you inserted my graphics with the following.

About This Wiki

Differences From the Competition

Other Sites We Recommend

It roughly matches the color scheme of my header graphics.

Sorry if it made it look like that was targeted at you, QS. It was targeted at Geth who should have known better. LEGOs are a trigger warning for me with regards to tropes, since so much of the criticism about troping wikis in general is that the storytelling coming out of our wikizens tends to be formulaic and disjointed. And that simply assembling tropes together does not make for good storytelling. The Mechanics of Writing section is supposed to address a lot of that, once it gets going.

Anyway, yeah, our current logo is not amazing, if for no other reason than both of our early contributors made draft logos, and then never found the time/interest to revive them.

@Geth: For some reason, I think we should have an infinity symbol in a black star. That is to say, different Unfortunate Implications, because it totally seems like a villain thing to do. Maybe we are the villains -- Fighteer seems to think so.

I think the only ideas we had in the the old thread centered around skeuomorphism around media types -- books, film reels, projectors, boob tubes, comic paperbacks, anime magical girl wands, tabletop gaming swords, etc. The only other idea is to choose something more abstract, like the bike circle logo of Davis Wiki, or the multiple crescent moons of JQuery. Sorry, but I'm not much help on those ideas.

"Maybe we are the villains -- Fighteer seems to think so."

To that end, I've been designing all my graphics with a orange-and-blue color scheme. TV Tropes has something like that here and there, but it hardly stands out. On the other hand, I think giving the wiki this color scheme throughout...

Like this

...would not only give it some personality, but also be more soothing to the eyes, like parchment.

One, I apologize. I had a total derp moment and totally forgot about the lego thing. It's my Berserk Button too.

In that case, I went full retard and have no excuse for it. My apologies to everyone for that.

As for the color scheme, interesting idea. It's a soft color that won't clash with too much and looks really nice. QS, I also added those dividers to the front page.

As for us being villains, Fighteer has no idea how many LOLs I've gotten over his belief we're evil incarnate, so yeah, it might be lulzy to have the most evil looking logo ever.

Hey, remember when I said I was going to make a second new logo, and then I never got around to doing it?

Well I finally did it.

That is totes cool.

However, I'll wait for other people to chip in their two cent, lest I go full retard again. ~.~

Okay I like that more than I thought I would. It's too Art Deco to look like it's from Supervillain Heavy Industries. And I like Art Deco.

Will that fit in the right spot (@Geth) -- and can we have a 2x resolution (therefore 4x size) image for highres displays (@QS)?

Yeah, it'll fit the main page, too large for the upper left site logo.

I'll have to make the logo from scratch if you want 4x size. Which will probably take a whole 'nother month, knowing my work ethic. :/

But I can make an upper left logo easily.

Really, 2x. I just meant the file's size would be 4x, due to the number of pixels. And just 2x of the upper left logo's size.

Check the top post of this thread for all logo variations.

Cool. But at 1x the H and E in THE run together a bit too close. Could you try kerning the last letter to the right, enough to get a sliver of white between them?

Maybe just a problem to my eye, use your own judgement.

Overwriting the file should update the logo automatically so overwrite it; do what you want and be nice by avoiding extra work for me :)

I can see the spacing between the H and the E easily. If anything, the T and H seem too close.

Not that it matters, since I keep trying to upload new versions, and they end up looking identical once uploaded.

oh yeah... the image cache. damn.

What's the original file format in, anyway? The edges look a bit too sharp, and we were wondering if we could play around with the export a bit.

I made this entirely in GIMP. Unfortunately, I don't know how to vector. But the next-best thing I can provide is a super large version of both icons, which you can find a way to shrink down properly.

Alternatively, is there some way I could send you .xcf files?

Um, by sending me an .xcf file? If you can't upload it on the site, my contact info is on ATT:Contact us. Email works.

By the way, your logo has basically been inspiring my other site design. I was thinking about lightening the blue of the {{trope}}/{{work}} templates, but then I saw that what we already have matches the logo (which may be by design?). Now I'm thinking about incorporating more Orange-Blue Contrast into the site design because hey, it's a trope that works.

Also, try Inkscape, which is the vector equivalent of GIMP. I've done a bit of work in it, it doesn't seem too bad.

I see that somebody who isn't the image creator has uploaded the logo to Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:All_The_Tropes_logo.png

@QuestionableSanity, is the license correct?

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Derivative @SelfCloak

Yes, that's fine. I don't have any strong attachment to that logo anymore.

Now we need a new favicon to override the miraheze one

We should be able to shrink the infinity symbol down to one... I wonder if we could put a legible "ATT" above or over it.

TIL that TV Tropes has posted a "Revitalization Project" on the Kickstarter crowdfunding service. Do we need to do anything about this? Such as "Report this project to Kickstarter" mentioning the project's copyright problems?

No need. Brent (Vorticity), Geth and I are on top of it. Brent is in fact having a face-to-face with the new owner of TVT (yes, Fast Eddie is no longer in charge there) later this week.

That's really odd. "Why would we lose jark?" Except this one brought this on himself. Despite early warnings by certain chthonic creature.