I see. I still think that a countdown for EfSM would be cool, but let's see what are GA's thoughts in what you just said. If you too agree on doing it, let's do it, I guess? (although I don't really know how to do one)
Well, I believe it's been a while since the little incident that happened with me (I think you know what I'm talking about?) and I apologize again for what happened back then. Anyway, I'm here to asking for Content Moderator rights. What are your thoughts about that?
Back when you updated the page for Goosebumps 2, I was a little worried. A tweet from Stine seems slightly less than conclusive... And now, seeing that the tweet has been deleted, I feel even less confident.
I'm not saying the title won't be Slappy Halloween, but we needa' be more careful.
From the second Presents book: Felt Tip Roman and Felt Tip Roman Heavy. Also, a lot of varients of Futura.
From the 3-Pack tombstones: I think it's either Franco Regular or Bold.
From the wolf mask: Crackhouse (I'm not even joking.)\
For the Fright Light book... I can't figure out the original font. There are too many knock-offs! Creeper, Halloween Regular, Post Crypt, Bloody Cyrilic... All essentially the same. But which came first?
[PostCrypt] was started by a comic book called "Tales from the Crypt" in the 1950s and the pun on Adobe's PostScript was digitized by Walter Kafton-Minkel by 1993, who for some reason is not mentioned here at dafonts
the original lettering may have been done by Al Feldstein who was the editor of the comic book and later became editor of Mad magazine after Harvey Kurtzman left EC (Entertaining Comics)
Unlike what the user suggests, the Tales from the Crypt font actually isn't identical to PostCrypt, but it seems like the clear influence.
What is up with the release dates for 30 Tales to Give You Goosebumps and Living Dummy Collection?
30 Tales is all over the place. On the original series page, I originally had it as April 2004, because that's what it said on Barnes and Nobel's website. But then later, Nick changed it to July 2004. Not sure where he got that from. So I tried looking up the release date. Goodreads lists it as December 2004, and some other listings I saw said it was released January 2004. What the heck?
And for Living Dummy Collection, most websites say it was released in 2005. But Barnes and Nobel says November 2004.
R.L. Stine has said that Pet Sematary is one of his favorite novels by Stephen King. Stine says that multiple books that he's written took inspiration from Pet Sematary — most notably Cry of the Cat and Claws!.
Outside of the Give Yourself Goosebumps series, Earth Geeks Must Go! is the only Goosebumps book to use the present tense.
Return to HorrorLand is a sequel to One Day at HorrorLand, but it also references Monster Blood and Bad Hare Day.
(1) It was in the top 30 most viewed pages on the wiki, so clearly it wasn't just me using it. (2) The page was ultra-simplified. The other list page is the polar opposite of that. With the text page, you could literally copy and paste every book title in one fell swoop. Now, that's gone.
Also, we miiight have to create a page for Goosebumps #1 Aussie Fan soon. He was pretty vague about it, but he just said on a live stream that he's doing some of project with Scholastic, and it will boost his sub count.
Since he seemingly unlisted the stream, I'll post a transcript of what he said.
"I've got one thing I really want to tell you, but I can't. It's very confidential. I got a message from Scholastic about doing something with them. Can't tell you guys exactly what it is, but it's got something to do with me being the biggest fan and having the biggest collection. Of course. It's got something to do with that. Yeah, um, they sent me a message about doing something with them. It's a hush-hush thing. But, yeah, finally they've reached out to me about... Doing something, let's just say, really awesome. Something really cool."
I can't avoid comparing it to the cover for The Haunter (because they both feature ghosts in similar poses). The Haunter is so detailed -- the house in the background almost looks photo-realistic. There is enough depth to make the artwork feel like it's actually taking place in its own, inhabitable universe. This new cover looks flat and a little dull.
Have I been too negative about SlappyWorld? I feel like I've been too negative. I liked that Weirdo one, and the think the Shudder Mansion cover is pretty interesting (I just don't like how the wall is replaced with a texture).
Hey a while ago I asked you about tips to helping one of the wikis I administer on to be promoted. Well, since then I have added a Community Page, Wiki Achievements, User Rights, and done a lot to page the main page look professional. I also added some bright and vivid colors to the templates. If it's not too much trouble, could you go check it out and let me know if there is anything I could fix? Thank you so much.
(But firstly, I bolded the stuff I'm still deciding.)
>Cool, you added a slider to the homepage. But the images for slots 1 and 4 are low quality.
Yeah, I thought so too. I wasn't sure how to increase the size for the fourth one, so I just uploaded a better image. My first one, though it may not be clear, looks good in terms of action, so I'll just leave it as is for now at least.
>"Photos and videos are a great way to add visuals to your wiki. Find videos about your topic by exploring Wikia's Video Library." <--- this text needs to go. Add a pol in its place or something.
Right. I replaced the text with a poll on the new movie.
>Why does the image below the slider have a weird yellow border around it?
Oops. I fixed it now.
>Don't use default wiki headers on the homepage (I'm talking about the "Welcome to the Wiki!" header). Use a template box or image instead.
I'm still debating whether to turn it into an image or template box. I'll probably ask the other admin.
>The tan and blue color scheme just looks... odd. (pictured)
I first changed the links to olive green, however it looked a bit weird, so I changed them to dark green.
>You really need a proper background. The current one isn't professional.
Does that mean the sides of the wiki (for example: on this wiki the sides show a haunted house with ghostly trees)?
>Sorry to say, but you still got a ways to go. Keep trying.
Of course! Thank you so much for all these great tips!
This says it'll be called Slappy's Revenge, and the plot sounds laughable:
Slappy is brought back to life and wants to use his supernatural powers to unleash an apocalypse on Halloween night with the help of Nikola Tesla. It’s also focusing on a set of new kids, who include a 17-year-old named Sarah, her brother Sonny and his best friend Sam.
I'm going to use me ultra-rare, once-every-blue-moon, mega-effective veto power
Part of the whole reason I created the subpages was because I wanted to reduce stubs. That's why I made it so you can link directly to a row on the table. If the table is collapsible, it ruins that entire feature.
>>Medium section on the table
>Oh, that's why. 🤦
Yup. It includes the book and any adaptations of the book.
I finished Ghost Camp, and I've been looking into Return to Ghost Camp. My memory of it is hazy. According to the Wiki, the two books take place at different camps and feature different characters.
...But lets take a look at those camp names: (1) Camp Spirit Moon (2) Camp Full Moon. Could this have just been a mistake? Are they set at the same camp? Both have a baseball diamond, a lake, a dock, canoes, and a stone building that the protagonist assumes to be a mess hall.
TBH I think Stine just thought of the name first and didn't bother to change it after he finished the book. Same with Ghost Camp. Like, why is it even called that? Doesn't the title give away the twist? The non-ghost girl on the cover isn't even in the book either. Man, the Ghost Camp books are odd..
EDIT: Same with The Haunted School too. The school isn't even haunted...
I had an idea, but I'd like to know what you think of it: Creating character categories based on series. (Examples: Original series (characters), Give Yourself Goosebumps (characters), etc...) These categories seem like they'd be a useful way of separating characters and books. I'd been considering this for a few days, and Ernesto suggested something very similar to this recently.
Also, should I mass remove the Goosebumps category?
Last thing, can we rename the "Series 1" category? Maybe call it "Goosebumps" or "Original series" or something.
Are the book series categories even useful? I mean, if someone wants a list of the books they could go to the page for that series or just look at the list of Goosebumps books. I have never once clicked on a main series category to see a list of books. In fact, I think "Series 1" is the only main series category I've ever clicked on. This is coming from someone who's been visiting this site everyday for the past 2 years.
I see your point. However, I occasionally use the categories to help with bot stuff. AWB let's you make mass edits to every page in a specific category, so having the book categories has been and will be useful (for me at least).
Drew, randomly commenting in a thread between two people about an unrelated issue is essentially spam.
You've repeatedly asked for more info about the movie, but I've already explained this: everything we know about the upcoming film is on the article.
Please, please stop messaging me and other users asking them for information. There's nothing that I know about the film that isn't on the article. There's nothing that anyone else knows that isn't on the article.