Forum:Is there a rule against signature templates?

I noticed them being used on another wiki, and it made it much easier to change your signature if someone complained about it.

Like, right now, I'm being told my purple is illegible. I want to change it to C64 colors anyway. I'd also appreciate a guide to how to tell if something is illegible, as I can read it better than some other people's. -- Commodore Sixty-Four (talk) 13:56, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

ETA: I thought I might not be being clear. I mean being able to store my signature at User:Commodore Sixty-Four/sig, and using preferences to customize my signature to. I seem to remember one wiki saying you can't do that, but I don't know if it was this one.

And I'm not gonna get upset if you say no.

-- Commodore Sixty-Four (talk) 15:37, January 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Edit conflict:
 * People use signature templates here as well - most of the times, it's a subpage of their user page that is used. In your case, something like User:Commodore Sixty-Four/sig, probably. Just in case, there has been some controversy in the past regarding signatures that include graphics, or break the flow of discussion text (for example by using a larger font or otherwise breaking line height), or are generally too distractive. If you want to change your sig, please don't go overboard with it. :)
 * As for testing illegibility, what helps is to keep in mind that a good percentage of the population is somewhat color-blind: Make a screenshot of your signature in typical use, and change the picture to greyscale (removing the color information). If the resulting signature is hard to read, choose a different color. -- Cid Highwind 15:41, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

That's the beauty of a template. If it is too flashy or illegible, I can change it. All I wanted to do was invoke the feeling of an old computer. But I'm worried my current version is too long. What do you guys think? I'll subst it here. -- Commodore Sixty-Four (TALK) 18:06, January 13, 2010 (UTC)