Talk:Skin (computing)

Untitled discussion 1

I intend to move this page to Skin (computing), as "computing" seems a better category than "computer". I also intend to make Skinnable redirect here, but since "What links here" is unavailable at present, I wouldn't be able to ensure nothing broke as a result. I will therefore wait until such time as it is switched on. - IMSoP 21:13, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The feature came back, so I've carried out the changes. I hope nobody disagrees with my judgement. - IMSoP 19:10, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Untitled discussion 2

With respect to XUL being "possible but difficult": I didn't remove it because I disagree with the statement, but because I felt that it was a subjective comment that added no real information to the article. It is possible to make such changes with XUL, as compared to it not being possible without. For it to be "hard", however, there would have to be an "easier" equivalent, and even then it may well come down to taste what was "hard". See also Wikipedia:Neutral point of view - IMSoP 07:32, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Untitled discussion 3

Because of the offensiveness of the term "skins" to some minorities, it is being replaced CAPs

As far as I know this is fictitious. I've never heard it (and I'm very much in the skinning community), no mention of it on google. The same person added it to Wiktionary. GreenReaper 1 July 2005 22:26 (UTC)

Untitled discussion 4

This text was removed by Centrx - I think it has value, but could do with being integrated somehow into the main body rather than being a separate part:

In computer gaming and virtual reality, a skin is either an image which is used to texture a player's avatar, or a complete 3D model which defines the avatar. They are particularly popular in first-person shooters, racing games and The Sims series, with many such games having many hundreds of player-created skins, ranging from TV characters to complex imaginary creatures. Many fan websites for these games are exclusively devoted to letting players download skins.

--GreenReaper 13:55, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that the actual concept of a skin is so insubstantial that it does not warrant an encyclopedia article. The present article talks about software programs and similar historical matters. A skin in computing is really no different from a skin by any other traditional meaning of the word, the superficial covering. - Centrx 14:04, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Untitled discussion 5

Wikipedia should have skins... I hate looking at white pages with black text, I prefer black pages with white text instead.

So tell your browser to apply a different CSS stylesheet. --FOo 03:30, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Not that this is the right place for this discussion, but Wikipedia (or rather, the MediaWiki software used by the site) does have skins - and, indeed, the ability to easily apply your own CSS. - IMSoP 20:57, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

How not to promote a skin development company

To the anonymous user who has twice thrice edited this article:

The list of skin development groups on Skin (computing) is currently in alphabetic order. I respectfully ask that you cease your attempts to promote The Skins Factory over other such groups by bolding it and put it at the top of the list. It was not OK two months ago, and it is not OK now. See section five of Wikipedia:Advertising#How not to be a spammer. GreenReaper 04:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

(note: I have no problem with The Skins Factory having a link here - I would not even argue over an article, although I suspect others might. I do have a problem with attempts to jump in front.) GreenReaper 04:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the alphabetical approach makes sense. I think applying the same rules to the sites listed under 'Skinning communities' would be beneficial as well. -- Alick Brown 00:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with the removal of Essorant, pixtudio and skinplant from the 'Skin development companies' list. Unless there's a reason for that I think that change should be reverted. -- Alick Brown 04:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. I do wonder what prompted that. GreenReaper 04:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Historical question

Does anyone know when and where the use of 'skin' in this sense originated?

Thanks quota 16:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

It may have been Winamp, or possibly some other music program. I am not sure about that though and do not have a definitive reference for it. GreenReaper 13:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

This site suggests that the name originated from Quake. GreenReaper 13:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Back-to-front

This article has got the terminology back-to-front! The term 'skin' is mainly associated with superficial/aesthetic changes to a user interface, whereas a 'theme' tends to make more significant changes to the look-and-feel.

Only simple programs like Winamp (which just switches between different images) use the term 'skin'. More sophisticated systems like Mozilla's XUL, KDE, or Gnome all use the term 'theme'. 78.86.135.70 (talk) 10:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Then fix it? GreenReaper (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree in that the notion that skinning is somehow more complex than theming is wrong. Visual styles in Windows are indeed more complex than Windows 98 style themes, but M$ don't call them skins (the MSDN article in the references does not mention that term). On the contrary Firefox 'complete themes' are a rather complex matter. This is also completely unsourced, plus it has been pending for years now, so I will be bold and remove it. -- Sebastian 91.6.159.126 (talk) 09:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

A wp:reliable source supporting this would be useful. Searching on "skin" and computing often returns themes. Could it be a change of terminology? A wp:reliable source making this distinction would be useful. Otherwise this appears to be wp:original research Jim1138 (talk) 10:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

There won't be any sources about that distinction since, as your search turned out, these two terms mean basically the same. Original research lies in the article itself, not in the deletion. See wp:burden, WP:CANTFIX. (By the way, wp:cantfix does not work, do you know how to fix this?) -- Sebastian 91.6.156.77 (talk) 11:22, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, go ahead and restore it. WP:CANTFIX (non-redirect link btw) is a redirect, wp:cantfix is a non-existent page. One would need to create wp:cantfix with the same text on the upper-case version. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 11:31, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Did so, cheers -- Sebastian 91.6.156.77 (talk) 12:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Punk Hair by Keishii Roo.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:37, 28 October 2022 (UTC)