YellowWarningTriangle.png This wiki is closed in favour of the new wiki. Information shown is likely to be very out of date.

Difference between revisions of "User talk:Tazuras"

From Discovery Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Fixed formatting.)
 
(12 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
I would be interested to access the Skype chat. I would need to reinstall Skype first. My ID is Canadian12345678.
+
==Camera Ship==
 +
When you changed the picture for the Camera ship are you sure you are thinking of the same ship, it uses the starflier model (or at least as far as I can tell, if not tell me which one and I'll render it)
 +
http://images.boardgamegeek.com/images/pic526917.jpg (please excuse where i posted the pic, I don't have a photobucket account and its easy to post pictures there)
  
−
== Article revert [[Fighters]] resp. [[Table:Very Heavy Fighters]] ==
+
:Tazuras, might want to check again. If you bought it before the 4.85, you might still be seeing the earlier version. I'm just suggesting this as I don't know for certain; I DO know that the camera ship does appear like the starflier in the ship dealer screen. It very well have that shape, but an invisible texture. In any case, please confirm which way it is. Easiest way would be to buy one in Penn again, and see if it has changed anything.
−
Putting aside that using custom namespaces unnecessarly transcludes and complicates a wiki structure, why would you need to put that table into another article? There's no good reason to. And even if, why are only the VHS in a seperate template? (Why should the ship specs be on two different pages? That's pointless.) --[[User:Tsaryu|Tsaryu]]<sup>[[User talk:Tsaryu|Talk]]</sup> 05:51, 23 June 2009 (MDT)
+
:~Chovynz~ (Blabs • Ego) 23:24, 26 July 2009 (MDT)
  
−
:See [[Talk:Table:Very_Heavy_Fighters]].  If you think the placement of this table in [[VHF Combat Tips]] is "pointless" then it may be best to discuss it there.  --[[User:Tazuras|Tazuras]] 10:22, 23 June 2009 (MDT)
+
==Ultimate Trading Guide edit==
  
−
::The reasons I moved the content from the seperate article is that first, transcluding pages is usually to be avoided because it makes the wiki structure unnecessarily complicated. Next, why using an arbitrary namespace, when you can use a template? Furthermore, why do you did this only for VHFs, and not for LFs, HFs and SVHFs? You can easily link to the ''Fighters'' page from the Combat Tips page. In dictionaries you won't find data (especially lists) twice either. You'll always find a "see (relatedarticle)". Be consistent. --[[User:Tsaryu|Tsaryu]]<sup>[[User talk:Tsaryu|Talk]]</sup> 00:50, 25 June 2009 (MDT)
+
Well, you removed the chat list section from the article, and then you said in the edit to see the talk page. I checked the article's, mine and yours. Which one are you referring to?[[User:Tumble-Weed|Tumble-Weed]]'' <sup>([[User talk: Tumble-Weed|ComLink]])  ([[Special:Contributions/Tumble-Weed|Holocron]])</sup> [[Image:Zoners.png|40px]] 18:57, 20 May 2010 (MDT)
−
 
 
−
:::Please explain how having to edit in one place instead of two make it more complicated.  As for the arbitrary namespace, sure, it can go in the template namespace.  I didnt put it there because it is not what i would consider or a dictionary would define as a template, it's a table.  I only did it for VHF's because that is the only table that is in the wiki twice.  I originally included it in the tactics article because i thought the author probably referred to it frequently, warranting it's placement there instead of on a separate page.  Having seen he does not, I will now remove it.
 
−
:::Also, I find that generalities and metaphors are frequently flawed and generally do not fully apply to specific situations.  I dont like seeing creativity stifled simply because it's not done that way other places.  This doesnt mean that they dont have some validity, but I think discussing the specifics of the situation at hand is much more useful.
 
−
:::--[[User:Tazuras|Tazuras]] 14:31, 25 June 2009 (MDT)
 
−
 
 
−
No problem, I had intended to fix the renders, the current ones are simply placeholders until I have something better than paint. The Gallic gunboat, for instance, worked like a charm unlike the others.
 

Latest revision as of 00:58, 21 May 2010

Camera Ship

When you changed the picture for the Camera ship are you sure you are thinking of the same ship, it uses the starflier model (or at least as far as I can tell, if not tell me which one and I'll render it) http://images.boardgamegeek.com/images/pic526917.jpg (please excuse where i posted the pic, I don't have a photobucket account and its easy to post pictures there)

Tazuras, might want to check again. If you bought it before the 4.85, you might still be seeing the earlier version. I'm just suggesting this as I don't know for certain; I DO know that the camera ship does appear like the starflier in the ship dealer screen. It very well have that shape, but an invisible texture. In any case, please confirm which way it is. Easiest way would be to buy one in Penn again, and see if it has changed anything.
~Chovynz~ (Blabs • Ego) 23:24, 26 July 2009 (MDT)

Ultimate Trading Guide edit

Well, you removed the chat list section from the article, and then you said in the edit to see the talk page. I checked the article's, mine and yours. Which one are you referring to?Tumble-Weed (ComLink) (Holocron) Zoners.png 18:57, 20 May 2010 (MDT)

Retrieved from "https://discoverygc.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Tazuras&oldid=39205"