Talk:Beige

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

Lol i love how the page is called beige, yet the color is actually tan :P --User:Happymonkey39/sig 03:39, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Ditto. I also love the choice of the famously monotone Ben Stein in Ferris Bueller's Day Off as the lead image. If you're chumming the waters with it on Pee Review, however, may I suggest a more standard title logo? This article deserves it. --User:MeepStarLives/sig 20:01, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Beigeopedia.png

Beigeopedia.png Seems to work well as:

 {{nologo}}<span style="position:absolute;top:-30px;
left:-155px;z-index:1;">[[File:Beigeopedia.png|157px]]</span>
Wow, I totally didn't see this. Replaced with your image anyway, and trust me, the new positioning is the same as the above coding by pure coincidence. Not my page, but I agreed with you anyhow. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/9/97/MacManiasig.png http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/0/0f/MacManiasig-cheerios.png http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/7/73/MacManiasig-holmes.png http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/7/7c/MacManiasig-starwars.png http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/7/70/MacManiasig-firefly.png http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/6/60/MacManiasig-pixar.png http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/7/76/MacManiasig-oregon.png http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/f/fd/MacManiasig-lesmiz.png http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/7/7c/MacManiasig-doctor.png http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/thumb/d/d8/HalLogo.png/16px-HalLogo.png Sir MacMania GUN[20:54 8 Aug 2010]

From Pee Review[edit]

[[{{#sub:Beige|0|{{#rpos:Beige|(}}}}]][edit]

mrthejazz I don't know if this image is the right size, but I'm trying. (please talk to me i'm lonely.) 14:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

I'll be starting this shortly, and will be done by tomorrow night. --Black Flamingo 17:54, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
Got a tad delayed coming home from work due to an exciting crash. Will have it done in the next few hours. Sorry. --Black Flamingo 17:09, August 11, 2010 (UTC)
: {{{{{#sub:HCPIM|0|1}}comment}}}
: {{{{{#sub:HCPIM|1|1}}comment}}}
: {{{{{#sub:HCPIM|2|1}}comment}}}
: {{{{{#sub:HCPIM|3|1}}comment}}}
: {{{{{#sub:HCPIM|4|1}}comment}}}
Final Score: 38.5 So to sum up, the main problem here really is briefness. I hope my review helps. Don't take any of my criticisms to heart, this is a great article, my suggestions are just there to help you should you want to change anything. Good luck with this (and with WotM, damn you), and feel free to contact me if you need any clarification or want me to look at any changes.
Reviewer: --Black Flamingo 18:08, August 11, 2010 (UTC)


Question[edit]

Would this article just be better without beige-colored text? It worked for yellow, so maybe I tried too hard here.

No, on the contrary, I think this is one of those precious few situations that the turn the page just one colour angle works indispensably. The repetition in the writing and the fact that the subject is the unassuming and chromatically monotonous color beige complements the format nicely. Rather, what I think would be the defining step is to somehow figure out how to make as much as is humanly possible of the regular Uncyclopedia elements (navbar, links, tabs) match. This could make Beige the proverbial King of Colour(themed pages). Being not so intimate with MediaWiki and its vagaries, I spent a few frustrating hours trying to make this happen for you, learning a tad about how wikis handle Cascading Style Sheets. In any sort of setup, the solution would be trivial, but since wikis are a morass of transcluded code snippets, it's a little difficult to tell how extensively this sort of thing has been attempted before. I think the sane way to go about it is to focus solely upon making the Table of Contents beige/tan to match. If you check out Red, you can see this has already been accomplished, but not with a template or font tag or something so fortunately simple as that: it exploits kludgey changes made to the master file that controls how everyone sees Uncyclopedia, MediaWiki:Common.css, originally hacked together for the purpose of "stealth red links". Wikipedia, and therefore most "wikis" in existence, construct content pages programmatically upon an HTML spewing PHP custom-backend. It's like MadLibs, but with a public database, and the result should be the same every time. Since MediaWiki therefore has created a standardized list of navigational and format elements and used them widely as "classes", and have been so kind as to give us [handy list of them], accessing them and inline-styling them with CSS should be the elegant and trivial solution. But Jimbo and Company, in their infinite wisdom, despite allowing users to change CSS (skins), and browsers to change CSS, and admins to change CSS (global), left out the ability for authors to use the same functionality to undermine their "look and feel" standards for the purposes of a page. You can use CSS in wikitext, but it needs to be right next to what you're styling (in the article), the antithesis of the spirit in which CSS was created. In other words, article creators are allowed no simple way to change generated or transcluded content, such as TOC's and cquotes and the navbar at the side of the page. It's easy to see why they thought to do that: the purpose of Wikipedia was to give people their own little sandbox while preserving the standardized appearance of the site. The same philosophy works poorly on wikis like ours, and that's why we have this neat little page called Uncyclopedia:Hacks.

There's three ways I see one being able to get around this.

  1. This way is the most likely: we put in NOTOC, a "magic word" that suppresses the generation of a section table of contents for the article, and just put in an HTML table that looks like the normal Table of Contents. This is the most sane option, although it feels like kind of a cop-out somehow.
  2. We get somebody really knowledgeable about this stuff, who also happens to be an admin, to make a little hacky class for making all text beige, just like "new" for Red. Since that functionality probably wouldn't see much use outside of this article, it would be more than a little silly to change the master file just for that.
  3. The admins choose to find and successfully install something that works akin to [this extension], which will seem equally silly now, but might help out a half-dozen Featured Article writers a few years down the line.
  4. Some really smart and benevolent power user swoops down from the heavens with an answer to our needs, in the form of a magical template that lets you replace navigation elements at will, or change all text on the page one color. Or, alternatively, informs me of my stupidity and offers you some one-liner solution.

In any event, I actually think this quandary might be of some interest to the right people, and so advise you to extend your Call for Experts to the Help, or even the main section of the Village Dump, where it is most likely for those sorts of miraculous folks to reside. --User:MeepStarLives/sig 05:01, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Or hey, you could just kill that mean nasty TOC, which is what it looks like you did while I was typing all of that nonsense anyway. *facepalm* --User:MeepStarLives/sig 05:04, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and perhaps it's just me, but there's a bit of a formatting disaster around "The Summary of Commentary on Current Economic Conditions" on my 1020x768 screen, due to the "Did You Know?" box, and the three [edit] headings, which sometimes I like to remove en masse with the similarly applied NOEDITSECTION.--User:MeepStarLives/sig 05:20, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Well Done[edit]

Very Funny. Well Done. Even if reading it does make one bilious and,well, a bit Beige and Cyndi Lauper Green about the Gills . Two possible areas worthy of mention : 1/ Burberry and fake Burberry, the Yuppies who wear the former and Chavs who wear the latter. 2/ Billy Connolly on the subject of Beige. Perhaps you mentioned both when I was out puking my ring up and I missed it.--User:Phrage/sig 04:25, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I really sincerely appreciate your compliment. I also have no idea what that other stuff is that you are talking about. But yes. Thank you. mrthejazz I don't know if this image is the right size, but I'm trying. (please talk to me i'm lonely.) 04:30, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
Burberry Clothing is expensive Beige fashion clothing, particularly a vile Beige Tartan and often worn by crass people. Originally a marker for the rich it is now a symbol of the lower middle class gormless social climber. Lots of cheap illegal copies are made and sold as a result.
Billy Connolly is a famous comedian who has several routines about the colour Beige
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmpRQLaxF60 this is an early one but he developed the theme in later performances.
Here is another Beige mention by him http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-WJO0YQLOs&feature=related
Google Billy Connolly and you might find the new one about Beige people.
There is even a facebook page for the Anti Beige
You are right -the wikipedia beige page is scarily funny
Keep the funnies coming.--User:Phrage/sig 06:43, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Figured It Out[edit]

Also, I put together the code you would need to "paint the town beige" and change most of links and the Uncyclopedia links to one color. It'd be something like:


But you'd have to ask User:Sannse very nicely to install an update to the Wiki in the form of the mw:Extension:PageCSS extension. I also fixed the featured article badge to blend in with the overall chromatic theme, as you asked on my talk page. Cheers!--User:MeepStarLives/sig 21:56, August 29, 2010 (UTC)