Forum:Signature policy

Proposed Policy

 * All signatures must clearly display the username of the posting user. Since this is the English Kingdom Hearts Wiki, all signatures must also use a Latin script (A, B, C... X, Y, Z) to display the user name.
 * For those of you with creative Japanese signatures, these will still be allowed, so long as your usual user name has already been written out in Latin characters.
 * Abridging is fine, so long as the author of the comment is still obvious.
 * All signatures must be followed or include a timestamp. This is not a large issue since this is already being done for the most part, but without a timestamp, we cannot tell when a discussion has taken place, and therefore its relevance/acknowledgment of other related discussions.
 * NO MORE UNNECESSARILY AND OBNOXIOUSLY LARGE IMAGES. I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH. Images must fit within the size parameters of the text, which is 15px. This shall be the limit for image size.
 * All signatures must link to at least the central user page of the posting user, i.e. not their "Userpage+" or user sub-page. Those can be linked to as well, of course, but the central user page is a necessity.

Comments
I'm for this policy, and I think you covered probably the most important points. It reminds me of the HRWiki signature policy, which seems a reasonable guideline for signatures. -- 02:31, December 12, 2010 (UTC)

Complex? I've never had to use the five tildes, it's always added a timestamp automatically, and I barely did anything to set up my sig... -- 05:28, December 12, 2010 (UTC)

EDIT CONFLICT: @17master For that, you have to create an autosig page, put your template in that, and them use that autosig in your custom signature in preferences, it gives you an automatic timestamp. 05:33, December 12, 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I've got that. I already fixed it. 05:36, December 12, 2010 (UTC)

The problem I have with that argument is that the idea that the policy should allow for users to choose the pictures they want kind of negates the point of having a policy in the first place. Not that we can't be more lax than x15px in height. After all, x20px is still small enough to fit on a single line with no trouble whatsoever. And I don't think and  are too unrecognizable. -- 01:36, December 16, 2010 (UTC)