No edit summary |
(Undo revision 1243464 by 77.181.44.31 (talk)) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | {{Ten Forward Thread Nav|layout}} |
+ | {{Ten Forward Thread Nav|layout|Archive}} |
<!-- <nowiki>Please always sign your post with "-- ~~~~". See "[[Help:Talk page]]". Please do not overwrite any of this text, and write your comment below. </nowiki> --> |
<!-- <nowiki>Please always sign your post with "-- ~~~~". See "[[Help:Talk page]]". Please do not overwrite any of this text, and write your comment below. </nowiki> --> |
||
We really need to style the inline wikipedia links differently than internal links. I don't think adding the little wikipedia arrow (http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/monobook/external.png) is a good idea but at least a slight change - maybe <span style='color:#66bbff; text-decoration: underline; border-bottom: 1px solid #66bbff;'>double underline</span> - just enough to say - "hey, this isn't a link to a page on this wiki"... — [[User:Morder|Morder]] ([[User talk:Morder|talk]]) 02:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC) |
We really need to style the inline wikipedia links differently than internal links. I don't think adding the little wikipedia arrow (http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/monobook/external.png) is a good idea but at least a slight change - maybe <span style='color:#66bbff; text-decoration: underline; border-bottom: 1px solid #66bbff;'>double underline</span> - just enough to say - "hey, this isn't a link to a page on this wiki"... — [[User:Morder|Morder]] ([[User talk:Morder|talk]]) 02:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:::I'm definitely in support of anything that makes the reader aware of the "external" nature of an inline link (and as an aside, as has been discussed elsewhere, I think we should avoid inline links to external pages in ''most'' cases anyway). However, I don't really like the suggested "double underline" style. It looks like this crappy "inline adlink" scheme that some websites have going. :) -- [[User:Cid Highwind|Cid Highwind]] 14:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC) |
:::I'm definitely in support of anything that makes the reader aware of the "external" nature of an inline link (and as an aside, as has been discussed elsewhere, I think we should avoid inline links to external pages in ''most'' cases anyway). However, I don't really like the suggested "double underline" style. It looks like this crappy "inline adlink" scheme that some websites have going. :) -- [[User:Cid Highwind|Cid Highwind]] 14:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
| − | :::I agree with Cid's comments. The double underline immediately reminded me of the ad links that a lot of websites are now using. I like the different color idea. It would definately tell the reader that it perhaps goes somewhere else, without disrupting the flow of the sentence. -- [[ |
+ | ::::I agree with Cid's comments. The double underline immediately reminded me of the ad links that a lot of websites are now using. I like the different color idea. It would definately tell the reader that it perhaps goes somewhere else, without disrupting the flow of the sentence. -- [[User:TrekFan|TrekFan]] <sup>[[User Talk:TrekFan|<span style="color:#00FF00;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 14:53, 20 June 2009 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 03:37, 6 February 2011
This forum discussion has been archived
This forum discussion has been archived and should not be added to. Please visit the Forums to begin a new topic in the relevant location.
We really need to style the inline wikipedia links differently than internal links. I don't think adding the little wikipedia arrow (http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/monobook/external.png) is a good idea but at least a slight change - maybe double underline - just enough to say - "hey, this isn't a link to a page on this wiki"... — Morder (talk) 02:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
- We used to have a little globe bubble that looked like a blue egg, not sure what happened to it. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
- That was replaced with the globe icon that we now have, which is only used for external links. Wikipedia (and related wikis, like Wikiquotes, Wictionary, etc.) and all Wikia links are treated as internal links, so they don't get an external link icon. That Wikipedia arrow icon is just their version of our globe. -- Renegade54 02:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, I meant that adding the arrow (or globe) disrupts the flow of the sentence (where the inline wiki template is used) and thus another change - like color - would be better suited to show that the link goes to somewhere other than memory-alpha. — Morder (talk) 03:00, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm definitely in support of anything that makes the reader aware of the "external" nature of an inline link (and as an aside, as has been discussed elsewhere, I think we should avoid inline links to external pages in most cases anyway). However, I don't really like the suggested "double underline" style. It looks like this crappy "inline adlink" scheme that some websites have going. :) -- Cid Highwind 14:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with Cid's comments. The double underline immediately reminded me of the ad links that a lot of websites are now using. I like the different color idea. It would definately tell the reader that it perhaps goes somewhere else, without disrupting the flow of the sentence. -- TrekFan Talk 14:53, 20 June 2009 (UTC)