Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-02-28/Gallery

Gallery

Signed with pride

The January issue's In focus piece by DiplomatTesterMan mentioned Athaenara's signature gallery. Here it is – reformatted slightly for The Signpost – for readers' enjoyment.

Boxing it up

Flying the flags

Playing out the line

Wingdings and dingbats

Upside down

Infinite variety

← Previous "Gallery"

Next "Gallery" →

In this issue

28 February 2019 (all comments)

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.

This piece was a neat idea; the signatures we see communicate individuality that make us real people, not just machines. I will point out that my favorite signature has always been Chrissymad's. Chris Troutman (talk) 11:51, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Golly, this year has started off with a bang for my Wikipedia Signature Gallery!

First a mention in last month's Signpost (The Collective Consciousness of Admin Userpages) and now this month somebody copied nearly the whole darned thing?!?

The signature gallery project probably self-taught me as much about html markup and wikipedia editing details as any article I wrote. I started it on my talk page, of all places, trying the patience of some experienced editors at the time (first six sigs in November 2006).

What the heck, anyway, here's another doozy, what's not to love? – Athaenara ✉ 13:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm responsible for the Gallery in my user space and "authored" it, I did not have anything to do with this Signpost page. I think it was a bit much, to put it mildly: a section or two with some commentary about why Bri thought it was worthy of Signpost inclusion would have been more interesting. But this is Wikipedia, where the editing never stops: hey, Bri, it's not to late to pare it down! – Athaenara ✉ 05:27, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"By Athaenara" in the byline really bothered me, so I removed it (diff). – Athaenara ✉ 23:14, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While all of these signatures are lovely, I've always been a fan for the good ole classic default one. Can't beat a classic. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone "flying" an image (not emoji) flag is violating Wikipedia:Signatures#Images. We shouldn't create a fancy gallery for these. Furthermore, I dislike the idea of adding fancy colors and HTML tags to a signature. If someone has something important to say, the arguments should stand out, not the signature. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That reminds me, It is now almost ten years since we have had a Request for signatureship, at the time, mine was suggestion number 5. I'm not sure where that would fit in the article above. Ϣere SpielChequers 23:06, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Side point, but if you're a killjoy like me who prefers not to see custom signatures, there is: this script which transforms everything to a uniform style when you view. --LukeSurl^{t c} 09:16, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In one poll, there was no opposition, but just before the final conclusion and the formal consensus was reached, one of the agreeing voters crossed out his vote and registered a dissenting vote. He was asked: Now that you have broken the consensus, at least explain why you changed your mind? - The user honestly replied: Honestly, I did not change my mind, I just changed my signature and could not find another place to try it! Arbabi second (talk) 11:27, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Want the latest Signpost delivered to your talk page each month?

Home

About