+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Site & Forum Feedback (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Thread: Wiki - Feedback Thread (/showthread.php?tid=10912)
Wiki - Feedback Thread - chovynz - 09-30-2008
' Wrote:I was reading the wiki about class 5 turrets and I found something really weird. :crazy:This isnt really the place to discuss that. Thank you for pointing it out. I'll remove the content from that page as it doesn't follow the precedents, is potentially confusing, and the original author hasn't done what I've asked him to.
I don't think that's a good 'RP' way to get them especially if you're a lawful. :sleep:
Oh and in the class 10 guns article it states that the Nomad Energy Blaster and Nomad Energy Cannon belong to the Nomads faction. The guns are in fact human-modified and I think they should belong to the Order because they are the ones who applied the technology on human ships.
As for the nomad blaster and cannon, I think you need to re-read the article. It does not read as what you have said here. Also think about where they come from. You are basically using nomad body parts - irrespective of who has modified them. So yes, they do belong to the "Nomad faction."
looqas Wrote:Should we change the commodity section of the Planets (and the templates too) to be the same as in Bases?Yeah it does need doing, but we still haven't nutted out how to do those commodities. Looqas if you could set up a separate Skype account (so that your wife still has her account and you have your own, this sort of thing would be easier to deal with. Let me know when you have done that and I'll add you to the chat.
Compare e.g. Planet Cambridge and Vogtland Base.
Quote:How about ships sold? Should we remove the ships sold from planets and stick with the precedent set by Igiss in Disco Readme just stating the system where the ship can be bought?Yeah thats a tricky one as well. It does need nutting out as well. I think we should just leave it for the time being and talk about it later.
Wiki - Feedback Thread - chovynz - 10-04-2008
Edited First post To do list.
Wiki - Feedback Thread - looqas - 10-06-2008
Planet pages. A problem. There are two schools of templates in them. Compare Crete and the template New London. The commodities section specifically. I changed some planets to template models, but not all...
Planet pages are a bit mess and missing categories in overall. I wouldn't worry about it too much though, but it's bad if people just copy-paste from an incomplete page.
oh, btw. The skype account of mine does not work very well. Skype stops responding if I try to log on to mine. So I need to sort it out...
Wiki - Feedback Thread - looqas - 10-16-2008
I made A LOT of edits to ships. I touched almost all of them. Mostly chanced the "Places Sold" to conform to the template "Availability". Just to cut the copy-paste cycle of "Places Sold".
Many of the ship articles still need the full template applied.
EDIT: About Planets.
Compare the Planet New Tokyo and Planet Cambridge. Why the Contents box is shown in New Tokyo and not in Cambridge???? I can't to see any difference whatsoever between the two of them.
I think it's better off without the Content box.
Wiki - Feedback Thread - chovynz - 10-17-2008
' Wrote:I made A LOT of edits to ships. I touched almost all of them. Mostly chanced the "Places Sold" to conform to the template "Availability". Just to cut the copy-paste cycle of "Places Sold".Ships also need their base locations removed. Spoken to Igiss, we've come to a "co-operation".
Many of the ship articles still need the full template applied.
EDIT: About Planets.
Compare the Planet New Tokyo and Planet Cambridge. Why the Contents box is shown in New Tokyo and not in Cambridge???? I can't to see any difference whatsoever between the two of them.
I think it's better off without the Content box.
It would be good if we could have only the systems where they are found in the "Availablty" headers and no specific bases. That was a precedent set by Igiss way back when he wrote the Readme's. So, no bases or planets should be listed only the systems. This precedent also goes for equipment, instead of having huge lists of the bases found; the lists will comprise of the systems that eh equipments are found in.
Its an acceptable solution for those who want to know where things are so that they can continue RPing, and those who still want to discover things.
I'll be able to help with this sometime soon.
As for the Contents box, it appearing is based on how many Headers you have in the page content. I think the trigger is 4 Headers?
Wiki - Feedback Thread - Zelot - 10-17-2008
' Wrote:Ships also need their base locations removed. Spoken to Igiss, we've come to a "co-operation".
It would be good if we could have only the systems where they are found in the "Availablty" headers and no specific bases. That was a precedent set by Igiss way back when he wrote the Readme's. So, no bases or planets should be listed only the systems. This precedent also goes for equipment, instead of having huge lists of the bases found; the lists will comprise of the systems that eh equipments are found in.
Its an acceptable solution for those who want to know where things are so that they can continue RPing, and those who still want to discover things.
I'll be able to help with this sometime soon.
As for the Contents box, it appearing is based on how many Headers you have in the page content. I think the trigger is 4 Headers?
The ships system idea is a good one. Once 4.85 is out, I will have more time to put toward orginizing some of the wiki stuff.
Wiki - Feedback Thread - looqas - 10-17-2008
' Wrote:Ships also need their base locations removed. Spoken to Igiss, we've come to a "co-operation".
It would be good if we could have only the systems where they are found in the "Availablty" headers and no specific bases. That was a precedent set by Igiss way back when he wrote the Readme's. So, no bases or planets should be listed only the systems. This precedent also goes for equipment, instead of having huge lists of the bases found; the lists will comprise of the systems that eh equipments are found in.
Its an acceptable solution for those who want to know where things are so that they can continue RPing, and those who still want to discover things.
I'll be able to help with this sometime soon.
As for the Contents box, it appearing is based on how many Headers you have in the page content. I think the trigger is 4 Headers?
Ok. I'll do some. I don't have time to finish the thing now, but I'll start going through the ships list alphabetically and removing base names only leaving systems. I'll do Odin first though since it's a Style Guide's example.
EDIT: Did only Odin and 'A' category.
Wiki - Feedback Thread - Tomtomrawr - 10-18-2008
' Wrote:Friends, Romans, Ladies and Gents, Anglo-Saxons, British, French,
Kiwi, Aussie, Americans, Chinese, Irish, Kusarinese Crimelords, Sheep and Goats.
you forgot Goa'ulds', and the wiki looks really good, congrats to everyone who made it, you did a good job:D.
Wiki - Feedback Thread - FooFighter - 10-22-2008
New York
The first thing you'll probably notice is that I have "created" a System infobox template out of the ship infobox template (hope that's OK :/ ); apart from that and the text under "Synopsis" (which I only have edited slightly) pretty much everything on the page was written by myself or directly copied from FL (again, a little bit edited though).
Feedback please.
Wiki - Feedback Thread - looqas - 10-22-2008
Looks nice, but...
I've been pushing for including those "Areas of Interest" kind of thing, but so far the reception has been somewhat stale. And the reason is that if we decide to implement the pages like you have put there, then what's left to Discover?
I don't know. I honestly don't.
btw. What's the Order of Roaring piratz??;)