Review: Frisby @ Figmint

back to Completed Reviews

Site Name: Figmint
Owner: Frisby
Reviewed by: Georgina
Reviewed on: 28th January 2010

Site Name

It’s a nice name and it’s easy to remember.

Coding and Validation

I’m actually not going to check your coding in the validator and your CSS is the CSS validator.. You have quite a lot of skins and coding to look at here.

Just looking at everything from a glance, your coding is alright, but I can see you have messed up the structure at the end and are forgetting </body> and </html>.

I don’t have much to say about your CSS either. I noticed a parsing error on one of them but other than that, they are pretty straightfoward. Make sure you clean up the coding a little bit.

Browser Compatibility & Usability

Your site is navigable and functions in Firefox, Safari, Opera and Internet Explorer. There are some differences in the skins over the different browsers but overall, they’re done quite well and there aren’t any major problems.

I think that generally, on all skins, the text should be made a bit bigger and with greater line height. It’s a bit on the small side.

On Internet Explorer and Safari I’m getting a warning about something on your site being “unsafe” or needing me to download something extra.

Layout

I notice that you have skins but for the majority of this review I have used the fourth skin – the red and white one. I notice that the content section has a grey background in most browsers except Firefox. Also, you’re using a rather uncommon font, and if viewers don’t have this font then they will not be able to view your website with the font you wish them to. I like this red layout because it’s sleek and tidy.

I don’t have too much to say about your other skins. They are quite creative. I don’t like skin 5 because of the random writing/text you have written around it. It would look better without the “labelled” sections.

Since the interface of OS X is probably copyrighted, it might not be a good idea to copy the interface. As nice as the layout is, it isn’t that original.

I like the first skin because of the colours and because it’s more interesting than the red one I’ve been looking at. All in all, the red one is the one that is most user-friendly with its easy navigation and structure. The other ones definitely are creative but they use image navigation (which shouldn’t be depended on) and aren’t as well structured. I actually don’t really like the third skin.

Content

Layouts

I’m not really into Neopets and I’m not sure how it works now (last time I was on it, it was 2003). The userlookups are done pretty well, and I especially like this drawn Shoyru one. This sunshine one is nice as well. I think graphically, these are done well, but structurally they could be improved. I don’t really like the use of numbers as part of the navigation – as for how common it is to use, I don’t know, but it looks pretty tacky and disorganised. I think actual words would be better.

As for the display on the pages, a thumbnail would be preferable, instead of “here”. “Here” is a bit of a silly thing to link with. If you must use text, “preview” would be better.

You’re displaying code incorrectly. You should never use <textarea> to display code. Textareas are intended for user input and not for displaying code. You should use <code> and <pre> for larger sections of code, and convert the HTML into its entities, like such:

<pre>&lt;div style="position:absolute; top:0px; left:0px;"&gt;<pre> ...

And so on. DearAgony has a tutorial on how to do this.

The “Treefrog” layout is a 404. Also, I don’t really know about this lookup – it just looks like an image.

The guild layouts are okay. I think they’re good standard for Neopets, but I think they could be a lot neater and more organised. I don’t know why the codes end with </style> – is this a sort of hack for Neopets or just an error? I know the coding is the least of my worries, but I was just wondering.

I am not sure if this is some sort of trend, but large text saying “welcome” doesn’t really look very appealing. It takes up a lot of the graphic where I think text reflecting the image would be more appropriate. This applies to graphics such as this one.

Again on the guild and petpage pages, you should be displaying code correctly, and thumbnails for the images would be preferable.

The petpage layouts look alright. The CSS ones look more interesting and of better quality. The colours are used a lot better than those with Neopets images, and they are also a lot more structured. If your Neopets-styled ones were more organised, perhaps with an image at the top and content underneath, they would look a little neater in terms of structure.

You’re using a few unique/fancy fonts on your layouts. Keep in mind that if the viewer doesn’t have this font on their computer, it won’t appear the way you see it. It might be a good idea to include other fonts in the CSS: font-family: georgia, tahoma, arial.

Having said that, your coding can be improved and your CSS can be shortened.

font-size:15pt;
line-height:20pt;
letter-spacing:2px;
padding:10px;
font-weight:bold;

can be shortened to:

font: bold 15pt/20pt tahoma;
letter-spacing:2px;
padding:10px;

Where “tahoma” would be the font of your choice.

The website layouts are very nice! They’re of a much better standard than the other types of layouts you have. I assume they are typically “Neopets”. These ones look a lot better, but I think the “welcome” text could go on a few of them.

The ones with dots and numbers are simple and nice but I don’t think that the paint splat brush goes with it very well – I prefer it simple and clean without it. However this chalk one works really well because of the font style.

The “Nothing is Impossible” layout preview doesn’t seem to load.

The forum layouts link leads to the same page as the site layouts page.

Overall the layouts are alright, but it looks like you don’t spend as much time on them as your actual website layout. Since you are offering these for free to others, perhaps spend a little more time on them as they can look much better, and be coded much better.

Graphics

I know you have set out most of your pages in this way but I prefer links to have no caption or description. Most of them speak for what they are – “Brushes”, “Neopet banners”, for instance, and often I personally skip past the captions and I look for a description on the page itself, if I’m unsure of the content.

You have scaled down a few of the images on the signs pages. This can be bad if you have a lot of images or large images, because it means that the full image will have to load, which uses up unnecessary bandwidth when the viewer simply loads the page. It would load a lot faster if you created separate images for the thumbnails, with the image resized.

I don’t really see the point of many of these signs. Most people make their own signs, or simply use text – especially if they’re closing their site or going on hiatus. Instead of writing “NR” on the pages, you could write “Neopets Related”. It took me a while to figure that out.

There’s a nice variety of banners – some of them are good, some not so good. I like that there is a variety. To be honest I don’t really like the Neopets ones. I have noticed that your designs and graphics without Neopets graphics are a lot better quality.

I don’t really like the blogs. Some of them don’t even work properly. You can see them in this screenshot and this screenshot. Also, you link to your site, but you should also link to Apple for providing the graphic.

The backgrounds are simple but they’re alright.

The glitters are okay – I didn’t notice they were glittery until I looked closer, but subtle is best.

The icons are not bad, and the pixels aren’t bad either. The big dog/cow one does look a little strange, though.

The sprites are really cute! I hope you have made these yourself. (Otherwise you should not be redistributing other people’s work.) They look better than your pixels though!

On the fonts page I don’t find it necessary to write “other, not-Frisby people” – “other people” would be fine, since you’ve already mentioned yourself in this sentence.

On this page you should credit the people who have provided their handwriting. The previews would be better on this page too.

I don’t think it’s necessary to include this paragraph on your brushes page when you’ve already mentiond it as a description on the main page:

Here are some brush/image packs. I assure you, they surpass the word awesome, and are so pwnageful, in fact, no word in existence can contain the awe they inspire in their beholders. Click on the correct link to download.

That might be your opinion but other people might get the wrong impression from this if they don’t share the same opinion as you. Also, define “correct link”? You could explain how these would be used.

With the brushes and the textures, did you actually create these yourself, including the images? If not, you should give credit. The same goes for the textures. Whatever resources you used, you must credit.

The emoticons/smilies are very cute!

The stock photos lead to a DeviantArt account, which is separate from your site. You should note this on the page you link it on.

It’s nice to have the wallpapers in a pack, but if someone only wants to download the size for their computer then they shouldn’t need to download the lot.

On a lot of these pages, you do need to display code properly rather than having it all in a textarea. code and pre can also be edited how you wish, which means there is no reason to use a textarea at all.

Tutorials

I’ve now noticed that a lot of your pages don’t have titles to label the page, which can get very confusing, so I suggest you put some in. Under the miscellaneous tutorials, you own should be your own.

The tutorial for a guild layout has a lot of mistakes:
layouot should be layout
THis should be this
Thats should be That’s
Its should be It’s
textediting should be text-editing
were there’s should be where there’s
First thing’s should be First things
lefternmost is not a word
includeing should be including
prectice should be practice
Thats why should be That’s why.

I suggest you put the replacement notes within a table so that they are easier to follow. The alternating bold/not bold text is hard to understand because it’s as if you have put emphasis on certain ones.

You should explain how to use the “ruler”, since some people might not even understand how this works.

On the CSS tutorials, seperate should be separate.
Also, instead of using b, i, u and s, you should use strong, em, ins and del. This is better for screen readers for the blind, which will provide the appropriate emphasis on words with effects. The fourth page of the basic CSS tutorials is a 404.

I don’t understand why these are called “blogs”. A blog is a weblog, an online diary, and not some image where text is displayed on a section of it. Again, this isn’t displayed properly and it simply displays with a background like I showed in previous screenshots. It’s probably because you aren’t even specifying px units in your styling.

The site skinning tutorial is okay but even though you’ve credited Memory Last, you’ve copied the codes, which were written by Jem, as Rainie has credited. This means you should as well.

The padding vs. margins tutorial is pretty good and useful – in the title Marigns should be Margins.

The video tutorials are very good. I enjoyed watching them, even though the steps were pretty straightforward and simple. I think you could create a lot of other tutorials like this!

The MySQL database tutorial is very simple. Nothing much to say here.

On the website maintenance tutorial (which isn’t really a tutorial), you have some mistakes:
nameing should be naming
frusturate should be frustrate
Additionaly should be Additionally
Lets say should be Let’s say
affies is not a word; use affiliates
Co-ownies should be Co-owners.

More

Again with the link buttons page, display the code correctly.

Now I’ve noticed you’ve credited for the brushes. But if you’re just taking other people’s brushes, you’re just redistributing work that isn’t yours, which isn’t allowed. You should stick to making your own unique brushes. And, afore mentioned should be aforementioned.

On the calendar page, Its a figmint should be It’s a Figmint.

On the “Creating Characters” page you have some mistakes:
enourmous should be enormous
histroy should be history
Thats why its should be That’s why it’s
a the should be the
its absolutely should be it’s absolutely
who is should be that is
sense, it’ll should be sense; it’ll
its pretty should be it’s pretty.

On the staff members page you have some mistakes:
brith should be birth
american should be American
thats only should be that’s only
free too should be free to.

Originality & Creativity

You have a few good tutorials and ideas on your website but I found that these were overshadowed by some of your graphics which were of lower quality. I didn’t really find the Neopets graphics to be interesting because they’re not original. But you did have some content that stood out.

I got the impression that some of your brushes and fonts had at least some help from other websites – please make sure you aren’t redistributing other people’s work and that you credit for all hosts, images and resources used.

Organisation & Errors

Organisation was okay – I think the pages could be a bit better off with the images as thumbnails, especially for the layout. If code is displayed properly it can look a lot neater as well.

Overall Comment

You have good video tutorials and tutorials in general. You also have good graphic skill but I don’t feel like you use these to your full extent. I know that you offer a lot of Neopets graphics, which are obviously very useful for those who play Neopets, but even these could be of a better standard. It seems to me that a clean-out on your website is needed, and a few sorting of pages as well as some organising and checking for typos on pages.

I apologise that I don’t have much to say – you’ve got potential but I think you also have room for improvement and you can move a few things on your site around and give it a clean. Good luck.

Rating

(out of 5)