Thats the easy way. It might work. They might say yes.
No harming in doing so.
But We also need to take into account the added or changed Disco stuff. It might be just as fast to read the Disco inis / FL explorer info / datastorm / FL Stats...
Sovereign Wrote:Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.
I find it very difficult to find references to certain words which could edited to point to wiki articles. Any neat way to find out those words?
I also propose to use only capital starting letters in words in wiki article names. Makes it a lot easier to remember the name of the link while updating or writing new stuff.
example
This Is A Wiki Article Name
It's just confusing if someone writes the link
[[This is a Wiki Article Name]]
or [[This Is a Wiki Article Name]]
It does not matter if some one then writes the llink in text "This is a wiki article name" as long as he does it like [[This_Is_A_Wiki_Article_Name|This is a wiki article link]]
We already have multiple double linkage that point to different pages because of this. Or at least it seems so. Is the Wiki case sensitive or not?
EDIT2: I think there should be instruction page about the conventions used in Disco Wiki of naming pages and referring and linking. Also templates etc. It would save a lot of work if there were conventions which people could imitate. Sort of "Before you start editing take a look at this page" containing the current practises as well as links to templates currently in use. Nothing is better looking at a good example pages though, but finding those can be difficult.
I feel the General Discussion page is in-adequate and will get cluttered to handle this need over time.
' Wrote:One thing I was thinking about was haveing a background colour associated with Various faction. Your infobox would allow that, quite easily.
It's definitely possible, but I'd have to raise the issue of readability and understanding. Black text on red background = :/ Also how would new people know that orange for example relates to Outcasts, while blue relates to just LSF and not the entirety of Liberty, etc.
I can add a background colour parameter no problem though.
Quote:After seeing large block of text with many system names in them i changed my mind. Now I think it is sufficient to say New York, instead of New York system. In light of this I changed the existing systems to just, "New York" and set up a redirect from "New York System" to "New York", hoping that people would follow this precedent.
Well, what you can do is simply use the link name to change New York System to New York but still have it linking to New York System.
Code:
[[New York System|New York]]
About the Rick guy, I figure that we should restore his deletions for the time being. Deleting mass amounts of text and not replacing it with anything screams "troll" in my opinion. Don't protect the whole wiki, we still want to be able to edit it >_>
1. Igiss has protected that page. He'll have to do it. Or he can nominate other people who can do that stuff as well.
looqas Wrote:I find it very difficult to find references to certain words which could edited to point to wiki articles. Any neat way to find out those words?
2. I think you mean the words that link to a page? in that case you could go to the page in question and use the little "what links here" blue text down in the bottom left. Near special pages.
looqas Wrote:I also propose to use only capital starting letters in words in wiki article names. Makes it a lot easier to remember the name of the link while updating or writing new stuff. example This Is A Wiki Article Name It's just confusing if someone writes the link [[This is a Wiki Article Name]] or [[This Is a Wiki Article Name]] It does not matter if some one then writes the llink in text "This is a wiki article name" as long as he does it like [[This_Is_A_Wiki_Article_Name|This is a wiki article link]]
3. I agree, however some other editors feel it is better to follow standard wiki conventions - which would turn out to be "This is a wiki article name."
looqas Wrote:We already have multiple double linkage that point to different pages because of this. Or at least it seems so. Is the Wiki case sensitive or not?
4. Absolutely, it is case sensitive. "New York system" is a different page to "New York System". Thats the reason I was so fussy over the names of things, (and why certain wiki editors and I have butted heads. I really don't want to be lazy and not-consistent with the wiki, and things like capitals matter in proper nouns. I'm trying to polish and make the wiki a shining example, rather than putting any old thing up there.
looqas Wrote:EDIT2: I think there should be instruction page about the conventions used in Disco Wiki of naming pages and referring and linking. Also templates etc. It would save a lot of work if there were conventions which people could imitate. Sort of "Before you start editing take a look at this page" containing the current practises as well as links to templates currently in use. Nothing is better looking at a good example pages though, but finding those can be difficult. I feel the General Discussion page is in-adequate and will get cluttered to handle this need over time.
5. Good idea. Start one up and I'll add to it later. I think our aim for any instructions is to be as un-cluttered as possible while still having all the relevant information.
Blodo Wrote:It's definitely possible, but I'd have to raise the issue of readability and understanding. Black text on red background = :/ Also how would new people know that orange for example relates to Outcasts, while blue relates to just LSF and not the entirety of Liberty, etc.
I can add a background colour parameter no problem though.
I wasnt meaning RED RED. I was meaning a more subdued quiet color (or a tint of red, that should be possible with some css convulation), one that fits the background nicely without doing exactly what you said - Black text on Red. Readability and consistency is paramount in these things IMHO.
The blue question is a good point, but I think blue would stand more for Liberty, than a specific faction. The infobox title words Liberty Security Force or Police should be enough to distinguish between the two faction as their role and house are similar, but the methods and goals are different.
Blodo Wrote:Well, what you can do is simply use the link name to change New York System to New York but still have it linking to New York System.
[[New York System|New York]]
I know that, but I've noticed many other people don't. Many people just use "New York" in their texts. However I do think that the page it directs to should be "New York System". And again we can use pipelines (what you describe) or redirects. I'm in favor of both, those people that know how to use pipelines can do so, and those that don't - the redirect will pick up their "New York". The main problem occurs when we are talking about a system that has the same name as a planet. E.g New Berlin. My redirects would pick that up as the system, but they could quite as easily be lazily talking about "Planet New Berlin".
Blodo Wrote:About the Rick guy, I figure that we should restore his deletions for the time being. Deleting mass amounts of text and not replacing it with anything screams "troll" in my opinion. Don't protect the whole wiki, we still want to be able to edit it >_>
Yeah...I was thinking that too. If no one else reverts, ill do it. In a couple of days maybe.
I like it. But I think it needs more space on the right side. The main information can squish up a bit no problem.
Edit: Actually I think its fine like that. My preference is to have one liners not two, but it really is fine.
Sovereign Wrote:Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.
Looks good. I'm not sure if there should a sort of "personal" opinion or general view of the ship and it's capabilities. The plus side is that it give people a general idea what the ship is like. Or should we let people just to find out and try on their own. If any opinions are included then we should refrain ourselves to use neutral language since giving a too glowing reports about the ship's abilities or problems would make people shy away from the ship, thus disrupting RP a bit.
I'm for giving a bit personal insight into the ships, like "people regard this one of the best fighters in it's class in all Sirius" Or "Handles sluggishly, but makes it up for in firepower in right hands".
I am partially against putting personal opinions on ships and things.
The reason is that, everyone has an opinion, and that may change at any time.
It also means that we have no control over what is said about a ship, as "all opinions are equal."
I say that not because I want to "control" what is said about a ship, but more that,
I don't trust people to give an objective account of the ship (myself included).
If someone loves a ship and puts a glowing review on the page, and in the
next mod the ship is nerfed and suddenly they hate it, frankly, I don't see
people going back to the ship page and changing their opinion. Either they'll
forget that they wrote it, or can't be bothered.
Or if they say they like it, and run into a circumstance that makes them
say, "Oh I never thought of that... suddenly I don't like the ship as much,"
then I dont see them changing their opinion on the ship page either.
If we start opening up the wiki pages (no matter what they are - ships, guns,
planets, children, people groups) Then we start to open the possibility of
"flame wars" or opinion battles of various elements.
All of which could change very quickly.
I'm actually against personal opinions or information on the wiki at all, as I believe
that kind of information very quickly becomes obsolete. For example, what happens
when a character dies and the info on the wiki is not updated by that person who
plays the character? Or what happens when factions go to war, or become peaceful
(case in point - recent mollies and someone else truce), and that information isnt
updated? New molly players to Disco will read that obsolete info and get confused,
potentially attacking said allies. Or whatever.
I think the potential for confusion and damage is too
great to allow personal opinions on ships and such.
I'm all for more useful and or interesting factual information on the wiki, but I do
believe that opinions and personal info (like characters) should be better left to
the more fluid and opinion suitable forums.
I would think that kind of thing would be better suited on the discussion pages,
but I wouldn't want that kind of info on the main pages that everyone sees, right off the bat.
Sorry to sound so negative about it.:)It's just my opinion.
Sovereign Wrote:Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.
It's ok. You raised good points there. As with all material out in the web it's value is based on accuracy and as time goes on the accuracy can be lost. I withdraw my suggestion.
What I meant about not finding the texts that link here is that if some one wrote Crete without making a link out of it there is not "what links here" available to look at. And finding those potential links is done article by article.
This is also one point I'd like to discuss about. The amount of repetition of links inside an article.
I seriously think we need a writing guideline pronto. We should stop making new articles until we clear out the ground rules. What do you think?
I'll make a 1st draft of the Editing and writing guideline to the main page where we can discuss and make good contribs. Editing guideline exists but I think we need to modify it drastically since now it's pretty terse.
' Wrote:What I meant about not finding the texts that link here is that if some one wrote Crete without making a link out of it there is not "what links here" available to look at. And finding those potential links is done article by article.
Ah I see now. Well, one good way of finding that kind of info is Special pages. Go down to "uncategorized
pages". You'll find anything that doesn't have a category linked to it, often missed out by new editors. Play
around with the special pages and see what they do. I think you'll find lots of good and useful "Specials" in there.
Another way is to use the search button for specific key words, but then you have to
troll through LOTS of usually irrelevant article links.
Quote:This is also one point I'd like to discuss about. The amount of repetition of links inside an article.
I seriously think we need a writing guideline pronto. We should stop making new articles until we clear out the ground rules. What do you think?
I'll make a 1st draft of the Editing and writing guideline to the main page where we can discuss and make good contribs. Editing guideline exists but I think we need to modify it drastically since now it's pretty terse.
Yeah...I would say only one link of each type in an article (and im guilty of doing more than one.) It really
does visually pollute the information. Preferably I would like to see no links in text blocks, but that is
unavoidable in many cases.
Also, we need to decide on where and when we are to follow conventional wiki formats, or to come up with our own.
Case in point the new ship infobox that Blodo made. And the whole "New York System" vs "New York
system" palava. I'd love to see people being consistent with whatever we do (Thanks to those who actually
are trying to be consistent) and not just "whatever they feel like".
Sovereign Wrote:Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.
