Forum:Obnoxiously large Signatures

Forums: Index > Rin's Travel Agency > Archive > Obnoxiously large Signatures

I'm going to go ahead and be a spoilsport, but I believe that this is something that needs to be addressed.

There needs to be some guidelines in signatures. In particular people who put images in their signatures. I don't have a problem with images in signatures, but some of them are so large they increase the size of the line they inhibit, making it look horrible. Also, I'm getting fed up of people of not using their username (not even a shortened version of it) in their signature or typing it in a foreign language that very few understand. I hate to use somebody's signature as an example, but this seems to be one of the worst offenders in both cases. I mean how are you supposed to know who that is at a glance? I, for one, want to know exactly who that is just by looking at it, instead of having to hover my mouse over the signature and looking at the URL address.

Therefore I propose that we should follow these guidelines:-

• Signature should include your username, in English. It may be shortened, but should be obvious that it is you who written it. (e.g. 8bit instead of 8bit BlackMage)
• Images in signatures should be no more than 15 pixels high.

What do you guys think? Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 15:35, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Jeppo here. That can really mess up some things in coding/style, and I'm gonna go ahead and make my sig legible again. ;_; --ShirubaKurono  15:47, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

EDIT: I don't agree with the foreign name stuff, though. It should point something to who you are (Having your known color scheme, something that looks like your name), but I don't think it should be in English. an example is here: See? It has my color scheme and at least you can tell it's my name. --ShirubaKurono  15:54, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

I agree. You wouldn't print a 50px Chocobo, nor write your name in arabic on a normal signing, would you? Sigs aren't tuning cars. They're meant to identify you. I think a two-colored nick with some additional short upperline text or a random special char doesn't harm anyone and can look cool. - Henryacores^ 16:00, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) From what I can gather, SC, your sig and sig2 signatures were okay before. I'm not stopping you from using different colours. In fact, I encourage it. It promotes diversity. As for your sig3, what I am saying is that even though you still use the same colour scheme as your other signatures, it is still not obvious that it is you. That's just my opinion.

Also these guidelines aren't concrete. They're still just proposals. You don't have to follow them unless if they are made concrete in the future. I'm just seeing if people agree with me. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 16:06, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

I agree. KujaRhapsodos 16:31, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii319/THE_faethin/kainfinal.png

		FëasindëTalk "Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." {{{time}}}
		To tell you guys the truth, it annoys me very much as well that users think they're TOTALLY AWESOME by coming up with illegible or at best disruptive sigs. I like Jeppo's suggestion for a policy just fine. Since sigs are supposed to be all proper names I don't see how using a sig in a different language affects its comprehension. What I am against as well, though, is the use of non-Latin writing systems in sigs. I guess that lots of people use a distinctive colouring motif that may render their sig immediately recognisable but that does not stop lots of users, myself included, from being unable to recognise the speaker at first glance. I wish that not all problems we run into had to be dealt with policies and more policies, but really, this is our fault (that is, the user base's fault), and nobody else's.

Okay. Firstly, "you wouldn't write your signature in a foreign language, they're meant to identify you", disagwees? My dad's signature is unreadable, as is my brother's. My signature is turning that way, and while it is still a bit legible (the "r" disappears", and the "J" isn't really a J, more a close square bracket), if I write my name like I normally would, I just don't care and write it and it becomes unidentifiable to anyone but me. Secondly, the "B" in my surname in my signature has morphed into a heart-shape. So, yeah, why not foreign languages, and also extremely fancy font types?

Although I agree the height of the image should not effect the height of the signature, maybe 1.5 line height at max. Which is still a lot actually.

As for names, the name should be representative of your username. I don't really care if it's in katakana, Al Bhed, or 1337. I just hover my mouse over the username one time, and remember on all succeeding sightings. But when it comes to "Mysidian Resident", why? If you really want to use that name, make a new account. Of course, abbreviations are fine.

Wow, I just read the tone of my comment. I'm just sayin', that's what I think. 88.108.106.244 21:46, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

Do we REALLY need more regulations? I mean honestly, we keep passing them left and right...Anyway, it does not seem to be such a big deal to me, if you cannot read the sig, just move your cursor over it and the page it links to (IE their userpage) should pop up in a small box. (Known to work for Windows only) Exdeath64 22:47, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and regarding the size problem, what makes them any worse then using out user template? The templates are pretty large as well, and I don't hear any complaints about them. Exdeath64 22:50, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, they aren't regulations, they're guidelines (For once I picked my words very carefully). I'm just asking people to make their sigs less disruptive, not force them to. It's up to the admins on whether that want to make it a policy or not.

And I do think size is a problem. You see how this image ruins the look of this line? it increases the size of the line and it just looks horrible to look.

If I knock the the image down to 15 pixels high...

You get something like this and as you can see, it hasn't increased the size of the line.

So after a bit of playing around a line is about 15 pixels in height, so that can be used as a guideline. Again, you don't have to follow it (yet).

And Exdeath, there actually is a policy regarding the height of images on talk bubbles (I assume that's what you mean). It's just that nobody has ever been bothered to enforce it. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 23:07, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, Okay, I just don't want this place ending up with more rules and regs then China, you know they half your EXP gain in World of Warcraft after a period of three hours? If that's not oppression, I do not know what is...Exdeath64 05:52, July 5, 2010 (UTC)

Definitely agree with the image size restriction. And with the other languages, there should be at least some form of English that identifies the user. Look at the signatures of Yuan, Fae, or Bluer; all of them use another language as the end of their sig, but their usernames are first clearly spelled out. I think having a two-part signature like those allows for ample creativity. 8bit 22:02, July 5, 2010 (UTC)

TacticAngel TALK 22:52, July 8, 2010 (UTC) I agree on all counts. I have thought about disqualifying anyone from the Dragon's Neck Colluseum based on their inadherence with the rules for signing their votes with something other than their name, but that would seem somewhat hypocritical. Of course, my signature is T·A·C·T·I·C·A·N·G·E·L ... Pretty obvious who that is.

I like Wikipedia's rule that signatures must be inputted using the four tildes code. This restricts the use of substituted templates, and limits excessively complex signatures. Agreeing with the limitations on image size, but I think having foreign languages in one's signature is acceptable. It would, however, be preferred if the signature still incorporated your actual user name in it. — Yuan^Salve!_Acta 23:58, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

While I don't see the problem of identification, considering that all signatures link to the userpage and we can always hover over the link to see who the user is - although this can be bypassed - I support a policy on signatures. This is also inline with the old "timestamp" policy I raised some time before. People've been disregarding the timestamp so much, it hurts ><.

Therefore, encouraged signatures should have:

1. the username clearly in display,
2. a link to the userpage, not other users. BAN for impersonations!
3. only links to the userpage, user talk page and/or user contributions page,
4. as little contrasting colors as possible, one color should do it,
5. the timestamp, that means sign it with four tildes!
6. avoid line breaks and any other excessive wiki markups, subscript and superscript included (yikes!)
7. be so lengthy - probably less than 10 characters both in display and markup,
8. the font size of a normal wiki text, as size can also affect the spacing,
9. use a clearly legible latin font, especially if the user wants to use non-latin font.

Since users love to put images so much, the image should:

1. not be an animated gif,
2. be less than 15px in height,
3. not be a fair use image,
4. not be more than one,
5. count in our restriction for one user, one user image.

And since users have been using signature templates aka {{User:user/sig}}, the markup should:... no wait, Wikipedia considers sign temps a drain to resources, because for one, the server has to re-cache whenever a user changes their transcluded signature. Substituting the signatures would also make it lengthy, and redundant to using raw signatures. I agree on this, but I'm not sure what you guys think.

I'm guilty in some accounts and I'm ready to change them accordingly. What do all of you think? ^BLUER一番 07:34, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

While I agree with restrictions on images used in sigs, I greatly disagree with any other superfluous forced policy on signatures. The point of custom sigs is for them to be somewhat unique and customized to the individual user. I do not agree in this particular case with the rest of the users here losing a privilege because of the worst examples needing to be dealt with. And yes, I am also an offender, as, while the text of my sig is similar in theme, it is by no means my username.  Armageddon11!  11:01, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

In short, you feel that it is more important for you to express yourself than to accomplish the one and only thing a signature is supposed to do; identify the individual who made the post. Your user page, if anywhere, is your place to express yourself. Your signature should identify you to others. Since this is an English wiki, English is a logical requirement. Yuan does make a good point though, 10 characters is arbitrary, considering my name is longer than 10. T·A·C·T·I·C·A·N·G·E·L 21:01, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

If the only purpose of custom signatures was to indentify the user and nothing more, they wouldn't be in use at all. The default ~~~~ does that. And is easier to type than '{{User:URUSERNAME/Sig}} ~~~~~' (baring of course that someone is using the Sig1 Sig2 trick, but I digress).  Armageddon11!  21:47, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

Less than 10 display characters seems too restrictive: many users have names longer than that. — Yuan^Salve!_Acta 11:06, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

What I used to do, and then Master Conjurer did, and I remember people asking, or people telling, how it was possible, was to trick the subst: function in the menu. Basically, you make two userspace pages, one with your signature, let's call it "User:Mee/sig", and the other page would have the content "{{User:Mee/sig}}" at a page called "User:Mee/sig2". You'd then put the sig2 page as your signature, it will then subst and appear on a page as "{{User:Mee/sig}}".

To get to some points I wanted to make, my old signature was eight characters long, then plus a timestamp. Eight characters looks neater than 83. And note, that signature used as little characters as possible through {{SL}}, but if you then substed the SL's you'll find it to be far longer.

And also, it means I can update my signature on all pages, just like I can do with my talkbox. I can't see anything wrong with using templates as signatures when we have talkboxes that do the exact same thing.

Also, one colour? Technically yours has three. Do you just mean in the text? I always used to use two, the same colours in my current talkbox at the time. Like this. Is that not alright?

Also ten characters markup? What does that mean? I thought "markup" meant "code"? So you can't do anything with ten characters.

Can't see what's wrong with sup and sub really. Are you just offering the "perfect signature"? Because no signature other than defaults follow them rules. 88.108.103.218 11:14, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii319/THE_faethin/kainfinal.png

		FëasindëTalk "Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." 21:46, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
		So what most of us would like to propose is the following: Clear display of one's username, ie eg no abuse of non-Latin characters. Timestamp. Always. No obtrusive images. Really, instead of coming up with loads and loads of commandments we could stick with these and be done with it.

The One Commandment: God Needs Booze!- Bender B. Rodriguez. Exdeath64 02:17, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the image control (or getting rid of them altogether) and timestamps of course. I also feel that that users should be able to use whichever color scheme they wish, and that foriegn languages can be used but not abused. Lastly, I wholeheartedly disagree with imposing a character limit. It would do more harm than good, especially to those of us with longer usernames. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 03:30, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

The character limits are just tentative (in fact all the proposals too, just need to pick which ones can tweaked). Ideally it shouldn't be a full sentence like "The One Commandment: God Needs Booze!- Bender B. Rodriguez." since that just distracts from the whole conversation. What "most of us" would propose could mean just the basic signature "You 20:10, October 20, 2010 (UTC)" then. We should be able to customize our sigs if we can customize talkboxes, the question is when's customizing getting too far? ^BLUER一番 03:51, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

That was not a sig, merely a joke on Fae's use of the word Commandment. Sorry for the confusion. Exdeath64 05:51, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Lol I knew that but it was inviting to use it as an example. ^BLUER一番 06:02, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii319/THE_faethin/kainfinal.png

		FëasindëTalk "Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." 06:07, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
		edit conflict yo Bluer, I really don't see the point of your comment other than to scold Ex64 and use quotation marks on a figure of speech. If the point is "when does customising get too far?" I don't see why limiting the rules to the three I proposed above does not resolve the situation. We might even go a bit farther and define "obtrusive image" as an image that exceeds 15px.

Thumbs up to you Fae. Get down that high horse once in awhile, won't ya?

Like I said, it's only a tentative proposal: I myself never used images in my sig. Fae's talk template breaking the flow of the convo here is just as disruptive as an image in a sig. While his proposal is sound, that's essentially the default and basic sig config installed. If that's how everyone's sig should be kept, I don't see why not. But I'm with Yuan, as long as the username is legible in latin letters, nothing wrong with having non-latin fonts beside it. Ah she meant foreign languages. Sounded the same, but I like my non-latin letters, awww...^BLUER一番 07:04, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

As you wish, but talk templates were originally designed to improve the flow of conversation in the first place.

If you notice, my proposal tries to be as general as it can while avoiding arbitrariness: the part "Clear display of one's username, ie no abuse of non-Latin characters." should be interpreted as "use whatever you want to as long as your name is included in Latin letters" (I now realise that the correct phrase should have been "eg" and not "ie" up there >_<). What I was aiming at was a minimum in the numbers of rules that we are to add to our rather long policy page. I still believe that by modifying or making more specific those three criteria we might lay down to rest this trivial topic. Faethin^{te audio} 12:17, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

3 core points are good. Colors shouldn't matter as long as the sig is legible; add other language letters after the Latin part if you so desire. What the sig links to shouldn't matter as long as one of the links is the respective userpage. Bluer's bullet point of not pretending to be other users should follow logically. I am confused as to why any images should "not be fair use image[s]"... they should all be fair use, right? 8bit 15:35, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

As someone who has never used the sig feature (and probably never will), I just want to say that as a... "non-sig" user, there is nothing more irritating than obstrusive images. Case in point when I voted for a FA this month, at first I thought it was me who had somehow messed up coding. It looks messy. However, colour schemes and foreign languages do not bother me - they become identifiable over time. I wholeheartedly agree with the image restrictions. But yes, I thought I'd throw my two cents in as a non-sig user, because us little guys are effected by them too :) - Paramina 06:10, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

I do use a custom signature, but I have to agree with Paramina here. If you see a signature that is in another language, then you just hover over to see who it is; then you will remember who it was the next time you see that signature. I don't necessarily mind the images, but they are a little annoying sometimes. They could be scaled down, but then there are probably a lot of signatures that need it done (not just Bjarnster's). But with the foreign languages again, it isn't thathard for someone to tell who it is. With my second one (), even though it is made with the Pulse Cocoon alphabet, the letter look almost the same to latin letters, so it is quite easy to tell that it is mine. But that's just me, and someone will make a fuss of it I'm sure. A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 17:00, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Aren't they SilverCrono's signature colours?

And there's your problem. Whenever I see that signature, I think of him, not you. 88.108.127.117 17:05, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

(edit confliction) I know you can just hover your mouse over the sig to find out who it is, but it is still an unnecessary inconvenience to the vast majority of users. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 17:09, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Hey look, I got two negative responses within ten minutes. Anyways, there is a difference between my and Silver's Cocoon (sorry, forgot before which one it was). For one, his colors are light silver and blue, while mine are dark silver and grey (there is a difference). Plus, his name is longer then mine (since I have the dots, which couldn't go into the sig), so there's another one. And as to you Jeppo, I still do it even if the name is printed there clearly; just because they have a name in latin doesn't mean that that is their username (Bjarnster is an example... again). A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 17:18, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

You're right! I've either seen two sigs with blue and grey, or two sigs with two shades of grey tho'... But it doesn't matter what's different. There may be two different lengths, but everytime I see either I'll still think of one person. BTW, I was defending people who used different languages in their username earlier. One of the most notable colours in your normal sig is the darkred. So using a grey and darkred would be easier to identify. 88.108.127.117 17:27, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I had this discussion with Sorceror Nobody )because he's the one who made the sig for me), and we jsut both decided against using the dark red. I believe it's in his second archive, but I will find the exact subject within his talk page so you can read it over (You'd have to look at my talk apge too, ebcause we went back and forth I think). Just a second. A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 17:32, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

EDIT: Okay, here's the entire conversation. I started it, so you would start on SN's talk page, and the you would switch over to mine. Doe's that help you any JBed? (once you're done reading it of course) A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 17:36, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, it's not that much of an incovenience. You have your hand on the mouse when you read it anyway so you can scroll down. It takes about a second. 88.108.127.117 17:27, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

It still defeats the object of having a signature. And all those seconds of unnecessary inconveniences add up to the point of frustration. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 18:12, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

If someone has enogh time to be on this wiki instead of doing something else, they certainly have enough tme to take a second to look at the name of the user. Being on here for so long, I have pretty much all the current signautres memorized - I know who's who. And no offense, but why do I get the feeling that you are the only one who is frustrated by it Jeppo? 18:18, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, if you ever get to the stage of life that I am currently at, you'll get frustrated by pretty much anything. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 19:01, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Well, at least I won't get to that stage any time soon (if ever). A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 19:15, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Honestly,why i tit so cool to have a signature so long that you divide it up so people have the click one half of you name or comment to get user page,the other half for Talk page. Putting large images like mysidian Resident did is just too much. Naruto195 07:09, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

The thing is, his name isn't even "Mysidian Resident", it's "Bjarnster". Luckily, he uses a template, which means we can just edit User:Bjarnster/sig and change the image sizes which will change all existing uses. 88.108.127.117 11:17, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, I have to disagree with the animated images part. I say animated images are fine, but must be restricted to a certain Number of frames. Like, my sig. only has three frames, not three thousand. --Admiral Levithan 19:20, July 10, 2010 (UTC) P.S. It's good to be back.

I also disagree with the animated images part as I quite like them, as long as they are not large.

@Admiral Leviathan: You can shrink your images in your sig by amending your signature to "File:Signiture.png|110px|link=User:Admiral Levithan" "File:Admiral's_Salute.gif|8px|link=User Blog:Admiral Levithan". You will also have to license those images.

And for anybody who do not know how to shrink your images down to 15 pixels high, use the following formula: Length / Height * 15. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 22:50, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

As an amendment; perhaps all sigs should link to the userpage? Some of them don't, and it's rather annoying. Likeacupcake 01:50, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

I haven't actually seen any that don't link to their userpage yet. But yes, I agree. A link to your userpage is essential. Links to your talk and contribution pages are optional. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 10:17, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Bluer makes a good point down in the Resolution section. If somebody uses a template for their signature, then it is easy to amend image sizes and whatnot so that it conforms to the new policy, but for those that don't use templates, you would have to ask them to amend their signature. But if they don't listen to you, what then? Test templates? It would be a bit harsh if it went as far as blocking users because they have a disruptive signature and refused to change it. I suppose that's why I preferred them to be guidelines, rather than actual policies. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 10:17, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Removing messages with violating signatures would probably be best. We won't invade others' talk pages and start weeding out sigs with large images, of course, but as TA already pointed out, inappropriate sigs left on policy and other official Wiki pages will probably be removed, unless the message is vital. Users should also have the right to alter or delete large sig messages on their own talk pages. 8bit 04:31, July 13, 2010 (UTC)

Don't Care: I don't know WHO deleted my prior vote (and it may of been a computer error, but since I actually SAW the edit go through, this seems unlikely) but whoever it was should cease to mess with the voting process. Anyway, I'm just putting this up since I tend to be kind of outspoken regarding any increase in regulations, I should probably let you lot know that I won't be raising a stink about this, aside from the odd inappropriate joke which would happen regardless. Exdeath64 08:10, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

It was I who removed your "vote" because you failed to read the instructions. Seriously, I know you adore giving out your opinion, whether asked for it or not and whether it is carefully crafted or not, but stop posting just because you love to see your name on the page. This is not the first time I ask you to carefully consider everything before jumping into the fray. Faethin^{te audio} 04:49, July 13, 2010 (UTC)

		Sorceror Nobody – The supreme nonentity Talk · Flan's Elbow Colosseum · MSPA Wiki · 15:58, July 13, 2010 (UTC) "I can detect matter down to one atom in a vacuum the size of the moon, and apparently, this guy doesn't exist" -- Foaly
		Clarity: Mostly agree, but I object to the exclusion of things like my Cocoon signature. A lot of the letters resemble the corresponding latin letters closely enough to be fairly decipherable, and the colour scheme for my sigs is always the red and blue that are universal to... well, just about anything that's associated with my online persona of Sorceror Nobody. I concede that the japanese ones are downright unintelligible to most people, so fair enough excluding those. It's also fair enough to exclude sigs that have the username completely absent. I mean, my second sig may be written in the Cocoon script, but it's still just my username, unlike The Mysidian Resident some people's. Timestamp: I am guilty of omitting it on occasion. However, when I do, it's usually something in my userspace. Either that, or a really insignificant post or one that follows extremely closely after my previous one. Nonetheless, I do not oppose enforcing timestamps. BIG images: Definitely think this needs controlling. Fully agreed here. EDIT: I suppose I could animate my Cocoon Sig so it morphs between Cocoon and Latin letters... but I'd rather not have to Category: Detailed opinion

On that issue about non-latin lettering sig. As an example, people who know Japanese like me would easily know who wrote it, but those who don't won't. Or those who didn't have the language installed; they would only see boxes. Same goes to those who use Hindi, Arabic, Hebrew, Greek or Cyrillic. The same with using unique FF fonts - do you suppose everyone knows Spiran lettering at the top of their heads?
I think we should regard using latin lettering as a courtesy to other users, the same as telling other users when you made your comment with the timestamp. It's easier and less headache-y to you and anyone else. I don't see it as limiting your creativity; as TA put it you can do that at your userpage too. ^BLUER一番 02:41, July 15, 2010 (UTC)

If, hypothetically, the latin lettering restriction is 'enforced', will the following animation be an acceptable compromise? http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx238/SorcerorNobody/Cocoonsiganimated.gif compared to the current old (non-animated) one used to sign this comment -- 21:11, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

As long as it links to your userpage we don't see why not. ^BLUER一番 12:09, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, done it -- 14:04, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

So, if someone is allowed to make an animated picture that goes back and forth between the lain and non-lain letters, then why can't that be done for every non-latin signature? It wouldn't be that hard to make the change, and it seems that SN has the means to do so. And, since it is a picture, you don't have to worry about it not showing up for some users. A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 18:52, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

No one said it can't. 88.108.117.2 19:05, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

But no one had brought up the thought either, so I was just bringing out another option that would both let users use their non-latin fonts (or even different names) and still keep within the rules. Bluerfn doesn't see anything wrong with SN's, so there shouldn't be anything wrong with do it to the rest of the signatures out there. A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 19:09, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Disclaimer: While I do have the means to do so, I am certainly not willing to animate every custom sig evar. You can ask if you want, but don't expect anything. Thank you for your attention -- Sorceror Nobody  19:29, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Wasn't saying that you would be the one doing it; I used you as an example because you were the one who had been animating the sigs. If anyone can do it, then they can help as well. And I don't mean every signature! I just meant the ones tht have different names then the user it corresponds to, or one with non-latin fonts (or any FF scripts, like yours, mine, Silver's, and Oavatos') A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 19:32, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Haven't you learned by now not to take everything I say seriously? :P -- SN, 20:17, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

It's very hard to tell SN, because it's usually the case that you don't know that a post isn't meant to be taken seriously until after you've already said something about it and the respective user tells you it's not meant to be taken seriously. To me, it just looks like you didn't seemt o like that I was implicating that you would animate all of the foreign sigs, and so I couldn't tell that you were joking. A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 20:22, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

What shouldn't be taken seriously in this case is me implying that everyone would want me to do it. The rest of the disclaimer, i.e. that people can ask me but shouldn't expect anything, should be taken seriously. If a sig is to be animated, that would be the responsibility of the user, although they can ask the creator if that person isn't the sig's user. In other words, I'm willing to animate your sig and Oavatos's sig because I created them. I would not feel any such obligation to any arbitrary user who had a request for me -- Sorceror Nobody  20:28, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Please get a talkpage, you two. You're bumping the thread needlessly. ^BLUER一番 20:31, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Blue :( A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 20:33, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Me too -- Sorceror Nobody  21:12, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Resolution

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii319/THE_faethin/kainfinal.png

		FëasindëTalk "Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." 22:02, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
		Listen guys: this thread is going nowhere, as it normally happens when there's so many people merely commenting as opposed to actually giving input. This is my proposal. If the majority of users agree with it we use it, 'kay? Clear display of one's username. You may use whatever writing system you want to use provided your user name is written in Latin letters. Timestamp. Always. I agree wholeheartedly with Bluer in that the timestamp has been neglected, for no reason other than lazyness. It would be compulsory for all users to include a timestamp in their sig. No exceptions. No images higher than 15px. Taller images disrupt the flow of a conversation and are quite pointless in the end. Please agree or disagree. If you wish to voice your opinion do so on the previous section of this thread.

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff25/bluerfn/occu-27.png

		Ser Blue says at 02:41, July 15, 2010 (UTC)
		Please also add to the resolution that all sigs should be linked at the very least to the user page. Applies mostly to custom sigs.

---

• Agree: Fae is sexy and therefore he's right. Faethin^{te audio} 22:02, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree:Agree. Agree. Must. Agree. O__O -Azul ^{(talk・contribs)} 22:06, July 10, 2010

(UTC)

• Agree: I second Fae's reasoning. (Seriously though, this comes off as kinda common sense to me.)--Otherarrow 22:08, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: I think this is very good reasoning. My Sig's okay though, right? The Banner that says 'ADMIRAL LEVITHAN' is 18px. :o. --Admiral Levithan 22:23, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: Glad we're not mincing on the finer issues. - +DeadlySlashSword+ 22:23, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: It's pretty much what I said at the top. You can easily make an nice, original signature by following these guidelines. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 22:41, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: I thought the timestamp was compulsory anyway, since it is compulsory on talk bubbles. ScatheMote 22:45, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: "Fae is sexy and therefore he's right." Can't really argue with that logic. Plus, anything ridding this wiki of those vile, giant, page-messing images is alright by me. - Paramina 22:52, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: Although it's not that serious. Judge Balthier 23:06, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: While the "only Latin Letters" certainly limits the creativeness of custom sigs, this is nonetheless a good suggestion. So, of course I am going to agree. Besides, I always do the timestamp, so at least I ahve been following one of the rules. A.J. two ^{(Smashboards)} 01:43, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: — Yuan^Salve!_Acta 01:45, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: Likeacupcake 01:52, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: "You may use whatever writing system you want to use provided your user name is written in Latin letters" - I think Fae means that as long as your username is portrayed with Latin letters, you can write anything else you want after that in non-Latin. There is ample room for creativity. 8bit 02:18, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: And now it's up to the user or the community to police it? Guideline making is one thing, implementing is another. ^BLUER一番 02:56, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Disagree: The clear display of username screws me over slightly, the timestamp rule is f'ing obvious anyway, but I agree with the restriction on images. So yeah, first rule screws me over.  Armageddon11!  11:09, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: Common sense. Also, just hovering the mouse over the sig doesn't seem to work all the time for me (I couldn't tell who above person was). Sad, as having to click on the link just to see who it is is a lot of lost time on a slow computer... KujaRhapsodos 12:45, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: Seriously. If you don't care, GTFO. You're not being helpful at all. - Henryacores^ 16:28, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: Expect that this is going to be the letter of the law on the DNC from here on out. T·A·C·T·I·C·A·N·G·E·L 04:02, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
• Mostly agree: See my detailed opinion above -- Sorceror Nobody  15:58, July 13, 2010 (UTC)
  • Fully agree, now that I no longer have to worry about losing my Cocoon Sig -- Sorceror Nobody  14:04, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree:If I want to talk to you,I don't want to go over somones name and see its not even the correct Username. Drake Clawfangs for example. Naruto195 00:39, July 15, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: All 3 of my sigs work :D ShirubaKurono , , 19:40, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: My 2 sigs work :D EDIT:Except people who have a nickname which they are referred to as more than their username, they should be able to use that. 死の騎士 17:22, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
• Agree: As long as acronyms are OK. I definitely use 'SCM' a lot more than 'Some Color Mage'. Some Color Mage 08:14, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

EDIT: And then I realise my current sig uses my full name. Still agree though.

• Agree: --YamiMysteriaG 10:01, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Enforcing this policy

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii319/THE_faethin/kainfinal.png

		FëasindëTalk "Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." 03:08, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
		As of right now, all comments signed with signatures that do not comply with this policy will be removed. Cheers.

This work? It uses Greek letters but it still reads my name. This is what I based the name "Oavatos" off of. I had google tranlated "Death" and this was the result. I only just found out that it was really a Greek demon of death pronounced "Thánatos". ◄ Θάνατος ► 04:27, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

@Oavatos: Well, it's still quite easy to tell it's you, even though theta (Θ) is indeed TH and nu (ν) is N. A more accurate one for "Oavatos" would probably be Οαφατος (Oaphatos). Less obviously you, but you might get away with it. Greek alphabet FTW, BTW

@Fae: Do you want people to track down all previous instances of unacceptable signatures and replace them, or is the enforcement only "from now on" rather than being applied retroactively too? -- Sorceror Nobody  14:56, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, I think going around changing them all retroactively would be both somewhat rude and unnecessarily time-consuming. Just my personal vote. Bluestarultor 15:04, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

I fail to see how it'd be "rude". The only thing I think you could mean is changing other people's sigs, which isn't an issue because each person changes their own, not anyone else's. Also, for those who use templates (in my case, this one), just editing them will cause all instances of that signaure to be changed automatically -- Sorceror Nobody  15:39, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, the grammar confused me. I thought the question was whether to go and wipe them all out, which would be rude. If people just do their own, it's not so bad. Still unnecessary, though. Bluestarultor 16:01, September 13, 2010 (UTC)