Forum:User page and signature limits

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > User page and signature limits
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 24 May 2009 by Calebchiam.

My computer may not be the fastest, but I feel that there is a large amount of signatures that are extremely big. The same goes with userpages. I'm having trouble loading YG pages because of some people's signatures. What happened to limits?

I'm not trying to criticize anyone here. However, certain people's signatures are big enough that they eclipse the text right next to them. And some of them contain questionable material that would offend PETA, if they ever came here.

If I try to go look up something about this user (no offense, Brux), I had to wait about 2 minutes for the page to load. What I am asking is simple enough. I want a limit on user pages and signatures, a reasonable length and kilobyte limit. Admittedly, the same goes for user sub-pages; there are a lot of them. This includes things like this page.

I'm expecting opposition. I know everyone likes their userpage and doesn't want limits. But I have made my point of view. Huanghe63talk 00:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Slight support - I do think signatures should be limited in size. What can a incredibly large signature do except cause lag? As for the userpages...some users like having big userpages, but it is very possible to shrink them down a bit by removing unnecessary sections. My userpage was gigantic at one point, but I managed to remove half the content from it. In the case of Brux's userpage... I think that he may want to organize his userboxes, as they take up a majority of the page.  Tien  00:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Support signature limit - Signature size limits would be much more in tune with the purpose of the rule which is to reduce lag on pages with signatures on them. It can work both ways, if a signature has two big images on them, it may follow the current rules but w0ould still cause lag. Now if someone wanted three images but they are a small size and would not cause lag then I see no problem with them. As for userpages I oppose that proposal. Userpages are not meant to be held to stict guidelines and they are not posted all over discussions such as the Yew Grove. Zaros tally.PNGBladeQuick chat button.png# 06:08, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Support (signatures) - Indeed, some signatures are just tóo big, like this: Template:Signatures/Ssswizmig. It makes the page a bit... unreadible. I don't actually think this limit is necessary for userpages, but the example of Bruxacosmica is too big. And anyway, how many users actually reads the whole page?-- Miasmic Blitz icon.png Hapi007 Talk! Sign! . 09:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - although i agree some peoples are too big such as Liam - Beta Tester (talk) and alot of the Bunnie sigs, though why should we care what PETA thinks, I see no problems with userpages. Bruxs user page took no time to load on my computer. --File:Red phat chathead.png‎|30px|My hair is ftw ^.^ Noah Talk to meh here <-You should really talk with me..... 17:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I am an active member of PETA. I have attended many of their events and I care what they think. I went Vegetarian for 2 1/2 years with PETA by my side. 19:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose/Support - i had no problem loading that userpage, but we should put a limit on stupid subpages like this page Bird's nest (raven egg).png Talk! Quest! x Tim x Sign! Edit # Small pouch.png 17:08, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Support Signature Limit - As above.

Bonziiznob Talk

19:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Support signature limit; query userpage limit - Some are far to large... May I ask what such a limit would be on userpages? And would it be rule (userpages must be less than xyz kilobytes/kibibytes) or a guideline (userpages should be less than xyz kilobytes/kibibytes). I think a guideline is in order for userpages, but a rule for signatures. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 23:58, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Support signature limit, oppose userpage limit - I can understand why we should have a signature limit. Some signatures are so large that they as you say, eclipse the text next to them. However, I oppose the userpage limit simply because if you find that a userpage takes too long to load, don't visit it. It took about 5 secs to load on my computer. For articles, it is understandable that we don't want to have so much text that the page takes ages to load, but for userpages it isn't. If a userpage takes too long to load, all you have to do is simply not visit it. After all, it's not an article about in-game content or something of the sort. It's where users write about themselves, the user is not obligated in any way to make sure that the page loads quickly for you. C.ChiamTalk 13:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Support signature proposal, somewhat oppose userpage proposal - Some signatures need to be limited on their size, because they're completely distorting the text around them. However, as for userpages, I don't see a problem. First of all, personally, Brux's userpage loaded on my computer in about two seconds. While my computer may be a bit faster than normal, most computers would probably only take a little longer to load that page. What's fast enough to load for people is extremely subjective. For example, if I came along with a 200 mhz computer, I could go to almost any page and watch it take ages to load. Also, as Caleb said, you don't have to visit userpages, and it's basically for users to put stuff about them. I could understand if the page was full of random spam like "@@@@@@" for six megabytes, but otherwise, it's not a huge deal. Butterman62 (talk) 14:20, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Note I stumbled across this discussion and thought I'd add something. There have been, for quite a while, rules regarding signatures. They are found at Template:Signatures. Among those rules, are that

  • Signatures may not have more than two pictures per signature: large numbers of pictures may slow down some computers.
  • Signatures may not contain pictures that are larger than standard text size.
  • Signatures must not contain line breaks (as this upsets the numbering in signature lists, etc).
  • Signatures may not span multiple lines of text. In other words, they should be one line of text in vertical size.

Only the first deals with storage size of the signature, but all of them have to do with limiting the real estate that a signature consumes. My guess is that many of the signatures that you have found break one of these existing rules and can be forcibly altered or removed accordingly. If not, feel free to add to those rules (or make them more explicit). Endasil (Talk) @  20:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Stop! Stop! Hammer Time http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/1886/mchammer.gif : Look at this signature. Now that's ridiculous; it's way larger than it needs to be, and the animation of the guy airwalking is unnecessary.  Tien  12:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh come on, I love that one. :P 12:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Oh alright, I guess I'll change my sig :P 3:49, 16 May 2009 (Bangkok Time)

'Support signature, oppose userpage - I support the signature rules, since who has to have a large signature? And with numerous signatures on a talk page, it would make it hard to read. As for the userpages, a userpage is for someone to talk about themselves. So what if someone has a little more to say than another, or if they want nice looking colors on their page. It might be possible for it to be split up into smaller sections, like User:*name*/Userbox for a list of userboxes that apply to that user, due to many of the pages being filled with them. But, as for a permanent rule about userpages, I oppose that, let the people have fun with it. ~MuzTalk 20:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Support(Signature Limit only) - Per all above. Besides, signatures affect everyone, as said above you don't have to view user pages. - TehKittyCatTalk Wikian-Book 21:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Support the signiture bit It would be nice to have talk pages load quicker, and I (not trying to pick fights here) dont really see what is gained from having a fancy signature. --Serenity1137 08:21, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment - The rules are already there for the signatures, we just need to enforce them. As far as userpages are concerned, I don't think there should be any restrictions. Administrator Hurston (T # C) 09:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


Support signature limits I think other people have already made some good comments. There should be no need for animations in signatures, there should be an image limit of 2 or 3 per signature and there should be a size limit or perhaps 20-30px in height. As for userpages, I don't think there should be too many restrictions on what you can and can't put on there, but as a personal preference I would like to see the number of userboxes on the main user space limited. Perhaps a limit of 12 (not including 99 skill userboxes which could be covered under a seperate policy). Any more should be placed into a user subpage. I think that's a more than reasonable limit. --Gold ore.png Mercifull UK serv.svg (Talk) 11:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment - In the signature guideline, it states:
  • Signatures should not have more than two pictures per signature: large numbers of pictures may slow down some computers.
  • Signatures must not contain pictures that are larger than standard text size.
  • Signatures must not contain line breaks (as this upsets the numbering in signature lists, etc).
  • Signatures should not span multiple lines of text. In other words, they should be one line of text in vertical size.

This is already a policy, it just needs more reinforcing. --— Enigma 13:34, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments; @Mercifull, I agree with limiting the number of userboxes on someones user page. A maximum of 12 sounds enough for most users. It will most likely decrease the pageload of a user like Bruxacosmica.
@9the Enigma9, I think we should add this one to that policy;
*Signatures should not contain animating images. Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 16:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Support sig limit and have idea - why don't we limit the amount of subpages a user can have to 5 or so?Joe Click Here for Awesomeness15:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that'd defeat the purpose, here... in fact, I'd personally encourage the creation of subpages to store stuff like userboxes instead of limiting them. A page which links to, I don't know, 8 subpages causes alot less lag than that same userpage hosting the material of all 8 subpages.
Anywho, I support signature limits, and weak support userpage limits per above; frankly, stuff like userboxes, gallerys, guestbooks, and the like can easily be moved into a subpage. I also support Elf's Proposal to disallow animations in signatures. It's completely unneeded and really only causes lag. --Beware the underrated. Pikaandpi Berserker Fury!Hit hard or go home. 16:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Support signature limits, oppose userpage limits - For one, Signatures that are big and take up a lot of room have to be limited. But you don't have to visit people's userpages. My proudest achievement Juliusc01Talk Click here if you think this wiki is obsessed with bunniesN W A  F T W 02:19, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

oppose userpage limits, kinda-sorta support signature limits - Well, I kinda liked my sig, but I do understand that it may have caused a bit of lag for some people. If the limit is put in place, will animated pictures be banned from signatures? Just wondering Stop! Stop! Hammer Time http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/1886/mchammer.gif 11:43, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment: After reading this thread Forum:Thumbnail animations are bigger in size I see no reason why the banning of animations in signatures should not come into effect immediately. --Gold ore.png Mercifull UK serv.svg (Talk) 12:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Lol? [[1]] Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 18:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Support signature limit; oppose userpage limit I don't lag on any of our pages, but I still find big signatures very distracting on a page. Horsehead Talk 20:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Bump Can an administartor make up the consensus here and take the changes in effect? This has been open for 2 weeks now. Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 15:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment Well, the signature limit seems to be agreed upon, although I have no idea how many kilobytes it should be limited at. Also, it's agreed upon no animations in signatures.

The user page limit failed, pretty obvious. Anyway, I would close it, but I forsee a conflict of interest if I did, since I'm the one who suggested it. Huanghe63talk 00:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment @Huanghe63 - I thought that we talked about the dimensions of a signature and not kilobytes. Like how high? Does it not break up lines? Maybe http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/3994/300x35.png is a limit we can set? (I still agree with the 'No animations in signatures' btw.) Adult chameleon (automatic).png Anurin Talk · Sign! . 00:48, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


Closed - As requested by author.  Tien  01:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)