Editing Template talk:D for dwarf

== Ugly drawing? ==

I think the drawing is very ugly and more of an eyesore than anything contributative. Would anyone be against making this a text-only template? --[[User:Richards|Richards]] 20:41, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-== New image ==
+== Ugly drawing? ==
-I uploaded another image for a sharper looking D in context of satire. Any suggestions are welcome. Here are the two images that could be used, one without the minus sign and the other with. The one with the minus sign I originally chose because of the idea that it was in context of satire, but some articles using this template are very well written without satire. So I'm opting for the original. Tell me what you think, and design one for the template if you'd like to. --[[User:Richards|Richards]] 10:23, 11 September 2008 (EDT)
+I think the drawing is very ugly and more of an eyesore than anything contributative. Would anyone be against making this a text-only template? --[[User:Richards|Richards]] 20:41, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
-[[image:D4Dwarf.png]]
-[[image:D-Letter-M.jpg]]
-== Need / Size ==
-I'm starting to find this a bit patronising. Do we really need such a large warning that an article contains wit? Are we not capable of deducing that for ourselves? Now I'm all for funny and witty articles which liven the place up, but maybe just make the 'warnings' a little more subtle? <small>&ndash; [[template:unsigned|unsigned]] comment by [[User:Khimaera UK|Khimaera UK]]</small>
-It's more of a template for editors rather than users. This way we can have serious pages in addition to silly ones. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 17:18, 14 January 2009 (EST)
-: Fair, but the message at the top of every D rated page still rather dominates the article. I don't propose removing it entirely, but does anyone else think it could be at least a bit.. smaller? --[[User:Khimaera UK|JK]] 17:25, 14 January 2009 (EST)
-::It could be, by only being a sidebar of sorts, but that would probably negatively affect any article with a sidebar already that gets tagged with this, making it even more disruptive. It also "could" go at the bottom, but that would defeat the purpose, of ensuring people don't read the page literally.
-::Something that the community could consider, that would probably be for the best in the end, is a separate namespace for humor articles. It's been suggested at some point, but the prevailing reason(s) it hasn't worked (IMO) is due to a lack of quantity to fill the space with. If we got every other mainspace article a humorous version, it would be pretty useful, and good for a little wiki-surfing when one feels like reading some game-related humor. As is, I think there are less than 2-3% of mainspace articles with '''D''' content, much less articles that actually have a humorous version separate from the main article. --[[User:N9103|Edward]] 23:19, 14 January 2009 (EST)
-:Just shrink it down to about 48 pixels high and shorten the info text. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 10:17, 15 January 2009 (EST)
-:: I think that's the best solution. Sidebaring it would mess up a few pages (espcially the rock ones, which are all sidebar... but there's a prize for the first person to make [[shale]] amusing...) and at the bottom would indeed be pointless. I shall get editing. --[[User:Khimaera UK|Khimaera UK]] 10:26, 15 January 2009 (EST)
-== Or not ==
- "not-so-witty humour, bad humour... don't believe everything you read"
-Exactly.--[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 00:21, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
-== Image missing ==
-Why isn't the image showing up? It hasn't been deleted.... [[User:Hairy Dude|Hairy Dude]] ([[User talk:Hairy Dude|talk]]) 12:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
-* I was under the impression that "Image:" was an (older) alias for "File:". But apparently it doesn't work any more. I've fixed it. [[User:Hairy Dude|Hairy Dude]] ([[User talk:Hairy Dude|talk]]) 12:32, 26 July 2016 (UTC)