Talk:Style Guide

Very nice! I have been working a bit on NPC faction pages. Perhaps it would be a good idea to either add the style to the guide or if it is not good enough, amend it so that it fits everyone's vision. Example completed pages:

• Gas Miners Guild (NPC faction)

--Blodo 02:51, 20 August 2008 (GMT)

Thanks. Will do. Good work on the templates and infoboxes. I'm quite impressed with how the wiki is turning out. Chovynz 03:13, 20 August 2008 (GMT)

Category: Discovery Content

I'm thinking of removing all references to this category from all the pages. It seems a bit obsolete in my opinion, as we have removed the "Stock vs Discovery" issue and merged the ship lists. The same thing applies here to this category, and this category only seems to be used for ships anyway. Chovynz 04:06, 20 August 2008 (GMT)

Sounds good, although it could be used for comparing the changes in Discovery in relation to vanilla. So I'm only partial about deleting that category. Deleting it would make the mod information more seamless, but I suppose we would lose the listing. So perhaps adding all the discovery systems and bases to it as well? Just an idea. --Blodo 04:53, 20 August 2008 (GMT)

It could be used for that, and I guess we could do that. It means that we have to go through the ships and remove it from those that are Vanilla. But what to do for the transports? Those were not flyable but some were in Vanilla. Does that category come out of only the flyable Vanilla ships? Or should it be removed from all Vanilla ships, regardless of them being flyable or not? Chovynz 04:58, 20 August 2008 (GMT)

Very good. It will help tremendously. Looqas 09:07, 20 August 2008 (GMT)

This comment is regarding to the "package price" for ships. I believe it is a useless number as it says nothing. How many players do you see that buy a ship with level 2-3 armor and actually keep that armor? Hull price should be there, Package price should not. example [1]

First of all, please sign your name at the end of your talk posts using the signature button or "~~~~" Secondly, the package price does have a purpose. In order to buy a ship the value of a character's account (sale price of ship + equipment + commods + credits) must be equal to or greater than the package price, not the hull price. Thirdly, I find it strange that you updated all the bomber prices to their package prices on the bomber page instead of the hull prices, especially considering that the hull price is what the message at the top of the page says the number is supposed to be. Tazuras 20:21, 17 May 2009 (MDT)

I will go back and edit those. To buy a ship you do not need to pay the "package price" once you select a ship, you can remove everything that comes with the ship and that is how you pay the hull price, not the package price.

--Triple88a 21:44, 17 May 2009 (MDT)

It is true you do not need to pay the package price, but you need to be able to pay the package price to even press the select ship button, try having only enough to pay the hull price sometime and you will find I am right Tazuras 00:35, 18 May 2009 (MDT)

Roger, i now see what you mean the button is not there.I guess this idea can be deleted. My mistake on the confusion.--Triple88a 15:16, 18 May 2009 (MDT)

I also suggest we start adding the version of modifications to every page. For example i just edited the bomber ship comparison page and i added a version bar this way you can easily see what ship needs to be edited when 4.86 comes out. [2]

Yeah, this isnt a bad idea, just to help us keep track and let everyone else know it is updated. I dont think the tables and the individual pages should be updated independently though as switching between different versions of the ship when one clicks on a link could be pretty confusing Tazuras 20:21, 17 May 2009 (MDT)

you mean like i have the main bomber page? Each ship has its own update version to confirm it has been edited? i added that because there are users that can only edit couple ships at a time, not everything at once like i did today. I would prefer the update # being added for every page: weapons, ships, other equipment, cargo and so forth, this way you know you are looking at new information and not something that was written and forgotten to be edited from 8.42 or something like it.

--Triple88a 21:44, 17 May 2009 (MDT)

Well, I dont know if it needs to be present on every page. I mean the history tab can tell us when something was last edited and can show us what was changed with each edit. What I dont like is having 4.85 next to the ship entry in the table, and having it link to a specific ship page with information from 4.84 . These should not be changed independently, they should be updated at the same time.Tazuras 00:35, 18 May 2009 (MDT)

I will now start updating the Bombers and also work on the price tag for the main bomber comparison pages.--Triple88a 15:16, 18 May 2009 (MDT)

The prices on the main bomber comparison page have been corrected. Also every single bomber has been updated and the missing ones have been added. The only thing i cannot confirm is the pictures as i do not have the software to confirm and do what is needed to render new up to date pictures.--Triple88a 21:37, 18 May 2009 (MDT)

I also edited the Barghest with the new info from 4.85 and again i added the harmless line "Version 4.85" on the bottom of the page. This way you can clearly see what statistics you are looking at when viewing the page and you can clearly see what pages need to be updated or are no longer valid. [3]

This one I am on the fence on. Although I think it is a good idea for this information to be present I don't think the version number should have it's own sub-heading... Perhaps a 4.85 category? Tazuras 20:21, 17 May 2009 (MDT)

perhaps just a small text underneath everything should do it? I added the sub-heading to show the idea.

--Triple88a 21:44, 17 May 2009 (MDT)

Yeah, that would be better, but I would still like to find a better place for it. Personally I like the wiki to be as in RP as possible and that version number just shatters that illusion for me. I'll think on it, maybe someone else will think of something. Tazuras 00:35, 18 May 2009 (MDT)

As the 4.85 goes, how about having it on the bottom of the page where it says categories or even further down on the page by the "this page was last modified" area.--Triple88a 15:16, 18 May 2009 (MDT)

JPG??

Um, I'd really like to know why the hell to use JPG instead of PNG. Looking at any image is but a friggin' pain right now! --Skasi 11:06, 5 July 2011 (UTC)