FANDOM



Cyclops (history, logs)

Article: Cyclops

Score: 6

Nominated by: Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 05:17, May 18, 2018 (UTC)
For: 6
  1. Symbol for vote For. Not canonical Wiki form, but still very funny throughout. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 05:17, May 18, 2018 (UTC)
  2. For. Doctor Strange was a well...strange writer but an original. LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 08:08, May 18, 2018 (UTC)
  3. Symbol for vote For. If you can figure out how to format this for the main page, then POW!!! WHY does alden loveshade not know??? 04:44, June 7, 2018 (UTC)
  4. Symbol for vote For. I'm being all nit-picky about the scale (down there v in the comments) but it's a fabulously great article at any size. Snarglefoop (talk) 06:17, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
  5. Symbol for vote For. a visual comic spork. AdminBadge DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 17:50, June 15, 2018 (UTC)
  6. Oh sure. Why not. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 03:51 16 June 2018
Against: 0

No against votes

Comments
  • Comment. Article by DrStrange LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:39, May 20, 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. Isn't this more Uncyclopedia:VFP? Miley Spears Discordian American Princess (let's talk) 03:05, May 30, 2018 (UTC)
    It would have been if it was only one image. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:04, June 8, 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm not very familiar with the X-Men, so I feel like I'm not sufficiently in on the joke here. Also, it doesn't display properly for me unless I make the window wider. The images get cut off. No scroll bars or anything. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 23:42 11 June 2018
  • Width corrected; pages were set/fixed to old full width; method not revised for now. Any galleries will probably have the same problem, though I've fixed a few of them. Image galleries have always been a problem here, for the site and the editors making them. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 00:55, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
  • I can't say I care for the reformatting. Was it truly necessary? The old width was substantially more readable, IMHO -- I just read it, and flipped back to the previous version to compare. 660px squishes everything. Snarglefoop (talk) 05:17, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
  • Addendum: It's a great article, and at 1000 px, it's about the right size for comic book pages. It's presumably the original art, with different text pasted in. I missed the book where Jean Grey was introduced, but this looks like it. Be that as it may, the art (and lettering) look good at 1000px; at 660px they seem shot down. (Of course, this does depend on your screen resolution, but 96 DPI is pretty common -- and higher resolution tubes, such as are on a lot of laptops, are going to have an even worse problem). Snarglefoop (talk) 05:21, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
    Yeah, it's kind of small now. It wasn't a major problem before -- maybe I shouldn't have said anything. Not like those alcohol and sexual assault things from college that had to take up the entire width of my laptop or else. It just seemed strange that the overflow was completely gone instead of being, y'know, overflow. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 05:32 12 June 2018
  • Okay, reverted. I don't see how your problem couldn't be solved by enlarging your screen view/embiggening but I suppose that isn't included in Macintosh OS(?). --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 09:07, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
A question.... yes. Well let's see...
  • I'm not on a Mac. I'm also not on Windows, and I'm not using Android. It's been said nobody in his right mind runs Linux on the desktop.... I run Linux on the desktop. (But not Gnome, that's too popular, and not KDE, that's too twisted, but ... anyway.)
  • Enlarging the screen -- blowing up everything -- seems like an annoying solution and besides it blows up the pre-shrunk version which loses resolution.
  • Enlarging the view in the browser would make sense, aside from the issue with losing resolution, except that I hate to do that because ... um ... reasons. (Involving two-finger touch pad and trigger happy zooming and anyway...)
  • And just to be extra-weird I'm using Basilisk as my browser here. FWIW.
  • Anyhow I'm sorry, I was being very nit-picky there, and now I'm feeling guilty about it :-(
Snarglefoop (talk) 15:08, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
Not to worry. Besides, it's only one embiggen step on Chrome or Firefox, so you don't lose much resolution. Now since you are using Basilisk, you might report to Llwy-ar-lawr if FakeVector (if that's what you're using) is working well on that platform. Don't know if she can fix any problems for you, but it would be nice to know if Basilisk is happy with FakeVector or even PseudoMonoBook. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 19:09, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
Basilisk and Vivaldi both turn out to be happy with FakeVector. Basilisk also likes PseudoMonobook. (Didn't try it in Vivaldi.) Snarglefoop (talk) 06:54, June 13, 2018 (UTC)

VFH

← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH

Click to feature this article
Always check the feature queue first.
Note: the queue slot won't be properly filled until the {{FA}} code (with correct date) is on the article.
Just follow the instructions if you're unsure.