User talk:Space

From Discovery Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search


Well uh... If you went on Skype, I determined the issue had nothing to do with the icons template yesterday. I also determined that the same issue occurs using the FN template in a table. See User:Zenreich/IconTest for reference.

Zenreich 11:24, 16 April 2012 (CEST)

I didn't have access to Skype on the computer that I was working on at the time. I'll go have a look now. As for me working on the Icons template - There were still a few "rough edges" (aka errors) in it yesterday. I can't remember if I've added my revisions to it yet - I'll check. Hopefully we can make some progress if it's actually the FN template that's acting up.
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
Space (talk) 15:54, 16 April 2012 (CEST)

Rezolved the bomber misleading pages

Hello! Thaks for telling me about the code generator bug, i have already corrected the Light Fighters that we're labeled as Bombers. Anyway, good luck with the learning for the exams!

Logic(talk) 11:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Many thanks! It's unfortunately got quite a few bugs like that which I'm trying to catalogue and correct, but it's far better than no code generator no matter which state it is in. :) - Space (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2015 (CEST)

Main Code Generator bugs

While i was updating ships i discovered some bugs, which are very common in the code generator, in the ships section:

  • Light Fighter class tends to be replaced with Bomber class.
  • Transport Cruiser and Liner classes tends to be replaced withe the Heavy Fighter class.
  • Battleship class bases tensds to be replaced with Station class.

I hope this log of the bugs i found will prove uselfull - Logic (talk) 10:57, 23 May 2015 (CEST)

Thanks, that agrees with much of what I've noticed when I've tried to use it myself minus the latter one; can't say I've seen that before. I'll take a look at it again when I can after my exams are done in about two weeks; should be fixable somehow either directly in the code generator or in the Wiki-side JavaScript/jQuery frontend (i.e. the "Generate code" button). Again, thanks! :) - Space (talk) 00:27, 24 May 2015 (CEST)

Thank you

Thaks Space for the "trusted" promotion, i was going to request it today :P. Anyway i'll continue to be as active as always and i wont stop until the wiki will be at least 85-90% updated.(If you are annoied by my daily usage of you're talk page, feel free to tell me.) - Logic (talk) 15:42, 24 May 2015 (CEST)

No, no, of course not; that's precisely what talk pages are there for, so it's no problem whatsoever. And I'm glad to hear that; I haven't really seen anybody except me around doing large amounts of update work since v4.86 or so, so that's a very, very welcome change. I'll probably be around doing update work as well again after the fifth or so when I'm done with all my exams for this semester. Again, many thanks for the effort! :) - Space (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2015 (CEST)

Trusted info

Can you explain me the the trusted users rights?(Discovery Wiki:Trusted users)(on my talk page please, + thank you again for the promotion :) - Logic (talk) 15:58, 24 May 2015 (CEST)

Deletion Request

Because the deletion req. page is never seen by an admin, im going to post it here, i have 2 Delete Req:

1. I request the deletion of the weapons pae because no one uses them anymore + it will take a life to update them all.
2. I found a 2nd Murillo page, different from the main one.

The pages up for deletion category is frequently checked by me and that's the system we use for requesting page deletion these days; you can add a page to it by using Template:Delete. The second Murillo/Murmillo page has been redirected to the current one, but I will not be deleting every single weapon page; the fact that they are hard to maintain now doesn't mean that will continue to be the case, and they've also got a lot of weapon effects images and such that you cannot get with any other tool except for going in-game, which makes them far from "never used". Them taking long to update - like the rest of the Wiki, and particularly so before the "Generate code" button, never mind last year when we didn't even have a working code generator - doesn't make them valid deletion targets, just a lot less likely to get updated in the first place when there are so few active editors these days. - Space (talk) 09:54, 25 May 2015 (CEST)
PS: That's not to say that I haven't considered it before, but I don't see a reason to stop having weapons and equipment on the Wiki any more these days now that there's a working code generator around again. It is, however, not at all a simple operation to update them as the current pages use a different style than what the old code generator outputs, and the "Generate code" script does not yet compensate for this by copying over gun images and such. - Space (talk) 09:57, 25 May 2015 (CEST)
PSS: I'll take a look at methods for automating gun page updates later, as they should be quite a lot easier to automate than regular pages; gun pages seldom have long infocards or anything like that which require manually adding wikilinks or other kinds of editor interaction/verification, unlike most content on the code generator. I personally wouldn't recommend updating them manually either, and I perfectly understand that you don't want to do so; I don't either, particularly with guns and equipment being a type of page that can see major changes between each mod version as gun classes are rebalanced and such. - Space (talk) 10:10, 25 May 2015 (CEST)


Do you know why they removed the Barge? - Logic (talk) 10:44, 25 May 2015 (CEST)

I would presume that it was due to the issues of having to balance the trade/jumpdrive system for it, but there haven't really been all that many specifics published about the reasoning behind it, I believe. See this thread for more information: Barge Owners - Inquire Within (and particularly this post in it). - Space (talk) 12:28, 25 May 2015 (CEST)


Hey, Space, it's TLI-Inferno, I've been working a lot on updating the wiki again. I've never actually added ships to it before; I just looked at other ship pages and hoped I did it right. Take a look at the Sunburst and let me know if I missed anything.

TLI-Inferno|24.08.2014|10:27 PM (EST)

Seems good to me; the only thing that I saw was off at first glance was the version template (v4.87 isn't a valid version; the current one is v4.87.0.7), which I've corrected. Thanks for the effort! : ) - Space (talk) 20:46, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Space, I want to ask you something. Not so long ago I made a suggestion at the discussion from Kusari about changing the page Kusari Empire to Republic of Kusari (look at the discussion for more information). Well nobody answer me about that, and I do not want to do this on my own, because there is very many linked with the Kusari Empire. So I just want to know if we should do this or not.

Misterich|25.05.2014|11:16 (CET)

I saw your copy of the system map template. Is there anything that you need a hand with, or any reason why we're not currently seeming to use it on pages? As an aside, is there anywhere you know I can get a copy of the new mining information/rules etc? I'd like to see about updating the Mining Guide, but haven't much of a clue where to start. Korlus - (talk) (contribs) 23:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not being used yet because it isn't done yet. It lacks a way to render trade lanes, which I'm trying to fix using HTML5/CSS3 or something similar. Browser support for both of those options have improved quite a bit since last year. As for updating the Mining Guide: I'd suggest starting here. - Space (talk) 08:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The Lost

Hey do you have some info about the Lost Sector? - Logic (talk) 15:24, 28 May 2015 (CEST)

Not really beyond what's on my navmap pages, no; it's pretty much a dead-end system with connections to Omicron Delta and a planet in it. Can't recall there being much lore related to it either, I'm afraid. Were you looking for anything specific? - Space (talk) 15:29, 28 May 2015 (CEST)

Im talking about the new Lost SECTOR(not system), but nevermind - -Logic (talk) 21:11, 28 May 2015 (CEST)

This? Still not sure I understand what you're talking about, unfortunately. Can't say I've heard about anything with that name in Discovery before. - Space (talk) 21:16, 28 May 2015 (CEST)

Space, i have one more question(about the wiki this time), do you think the Template:System v2 is better then the Template:System? Because to me the first one seems to be more user friendly then thesecond - Logic (talk) 21:19, 28 May 2015 (CEST)

Template:System v2 has a bit more functionality, but for some reason I must say that I still prefer the looks and layout of the old one (i.e. Template:System). Do you mean Template:System v2 when you say the second one, or is it the other way around? Both could use a bit of improvement, to be honest, as neither of them are perfect. - Space (talk) 21:25, 28 May 2015 (CEST)


Thing is, no where do i see Even on the main page it is stating And furthermore it seems that all the auto generated pages, Plutonium , have 4.88.0 on them, including the "new" menu of |- and | not the ||. If the auto generated pages use a menu with |- that means that we have to go and hand change every page to the template that you claim is the correct one. Which is it? because when the code generator was working it was use the |- style menus and not the one from the template of |. If a template is to make things easier, which it should have been, then it should reflect the current changes to the generator that creates the information. About the
its an html habit that I got into and on searching some of the mediawiki pages they suggested using the
for certain things. within a table to get Decay Rate to display on 2 lines, you dont just hit the enter button and have it advance down a line, you have to put Decay
Rate for it to work correctly. As for the main commodities page, up until i started going through it, it had not been touched since 2014 with a single edit, and then further back to 2012. Enlighten me as to why someone would be comparing commodities. The table has no useable information for comparing prices since the server default rate is different from the prices on the table. When I happen to use the table I am there for one thing.. to find the commodity I am searching for and with the cleaned up spoiler tables it allowed a simpler search.. not scrolling endlessly down looking for an item. click the sub menu scroll a 1/4 maybe 1/2 page and there it is. Even with my mouse set to the max of 10 lines per, it took me 11 rolls to make it to the bottom of the page as you have it set right now. As for the note of "these tables will also unfortunately not be sortable due to the table inside the header." Before I ever posted anything to the page I made sure the tables were sortable or I would not have made a change, so saying the tables were unsortable was incorrect. Did you even try sorting the tables? As to the sig/ad.. I stand rebuked on that.. I can understand where you are coming from on that.

Reply to comment on my talk page, 04.07.2015

I hate to be the bearer of bad news about the update but it never got into the main stream commodities. I have gone through the first couple letter if the commodities pages, looking at the version numbers and the only ones I was able to find on the updates were made by you on april 8. 2015 and the was a select few.. at no point is there a n any of the revisions, including your contributions. The main commodities page was outdated at 4.87.

Yes Ive got skype. jamesgod1979