Gswiki:Village pump/Archive 009: Difference between revisions

The official GemStone IV encyclopedia.
< Gswiki:Village pump
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (GS4-KEIOS moved page Gswiki:Village pump/Archive009 to Gswiki:Village pump/Archive 009 without leaving a redirect: Used the wrong name.)
 
(180 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Welcome to the village pump, where anyone can say anything about whatever, and people can respond! Yeehaw! Remember to sign your comments by putting 4 tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) at the end.
Welcome to the village pump, where anyone can say anything about whatever, and people can respond! Yeehaw! Remember to sign your comments by putting 4 tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) at the end.


== New Spell Templates ==
== Reorganization ==
The site wasn't very well organized in terms of consistency in categories. I'm making an effort to get everything into cohesive layers of categories. Open up the [[:Category:River's Rest|River's Rest]] category and there are no longer almost 200 pages there, there are some pages that don't fit in sub categories that will remain in the RR category, but many of the pages have been only categorized under the subcategory, such as the Casler Huntington Storyline, or hunting areas, or Museum, it's still in process, I jump around.


I'm not exactly opposed to all-encompassing categories, but that didn't really exist in the first place, so I figure I'd put things in a sensible location before expanding if people think there is a need. There were also over 500 pages uncategorized and that has been cut to 30, mainly pages that are incomplete/abandoned efforts (not the tones, that I have a lot of additional recent info to add).
Check out articles [[401]] and [[415]]. I've created two new spell templates which I think are necessary because each '''type''' of spell ([[template:offensive spell|attack]]/[[template:defensive spell|defense]]/[[template:utility spell|utility]]) has different basic features, therefore requires a unique template (utility template to come, its gonna be blue). I'm not in love with the colors or anything, I simply thought it important to differentiate each spell type by making it obvious at-a-glance. [[User:IRVINETOMOE|Irvine]] had the interesting idea of color-coding each spell by its circle, which I'm not against, but I would have to find another way of visually differentiating each spell type. Anyways, please do share your opinions, I'd like to hear them (especially Ollie's). [[User:ULTHRIPE|<sub>who is</sub>]] '''Ulthripe''' [[User talk:ULTHRIPE|<sup>reads this</sup>]] 07:37, 30 June 2006 (EDT)


I have also reviewed the categories and tried to consolidate very similar ones or ones with one page. I have not touched categories having to do with creatures unless something seemed off (see [[troll wraith]]). I'm also paying special attention to the "Gemstone" group of categories that appear in the left navigation panel. I think these should be especially clean in terms of filtering information into the right subcategories as they are linked from every single page. For example, do we really need every wand listed in the Magic category? I think keeping them off the main Magic category page and in the Common Magical Items subcategory is more comprehensive.
: I don't see how this is better than the existing spell template. There's nothing about the colors tha makes anything obvious at-a-glance. If anything, it makes it more confusing, requiring visitors who are not familiar with what the colors mean (or even that they mean anything) to take extra effort to figure it out. The text presented in the existing spell template is more than sufficient in providing all the important basic information about a particular spell. Anything else is handled by the spell description. It also seriously disrupts any attempt at cohesive visual style of Krakiipedia (I'm not a fan of the inconsistent table coloration within some other articles, either, and am planning on doing a review and developing a single unifying table design.) Also, in the future, when proposing changes like this, do not make changes the existing articles to illustrate. Use either that article's Talk page, or the Sandbox.
: [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 10:57, 30 June 2006 (EDT)


For the saved posts, does every saved post really need its own page? Isn't it easier in a lot of cases to consolidate them under 1 page (e.g. [[Major Spiritual (saved posts)]]). This obviously doesn't fit for every post, but I like to see the progression of things rather than go digging for the next change. I think grouping and/or linking between the saved posts for one topic is extremely helpful. [[User:VANKRASN39|VANKRASN39]] 17:47, 23 May 2014 (EDT)
I do, however, like how he lists attack spells as warding spells. And, your last statement goes against the general "Be Bold" policy that we've been holding to, and personally, I disagree with that entirely. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 13:01, 30 June 2006 (EDT)


== How to Color Text ==
: If you'll take a look at the [[Help:Style (spells)]] you will note that including the type of attack (be it bolt, warding, or what have you) is already a part of our style specification. I'm not entirely sure what "Be Bold" policy you're refering to. Our style and layout guidelines are not set in stone, but neither do I agree that a change like this has any real positive effect, or that there is any issue with the current spell templates. The existing spell template already clearly states what type of spell is being described. Using a color-based system unnecessarily complicates something that is already presented in simplest terms. Is there some underlying issue that this change would address that I'm not seeing?
: [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 17:16, 30 June 2006 (EDT)


Hey, its been a long time since I've done serious work on Krakiipedia, and I forgot how to color text. I have some text I want to make red, and I thought it would be way too ghetto to just link them to a non-existant page, though if it comes to that, I will totally do that. Any tips? [[User:IRVINETOMOE|IRVINETOMOE]] 12:10, 6 September 2012 (EDT)
I'm not a huge fan of the specific colors used, but that's just me. I don't mind the fact that there are colors, but again, it's really not that useful. The color coding is more useful for interpreting information at a glance. Say you have a whole list of the 400's, and you want to color-code those with a nice legend beside it, bravo. But here, I'll say that it doesn't really add anything, since you'll likely never see two of those tables on the same page. Then again, I'll say bravo for making the pages, though making the page you made link to .../wiki/401 would be great so it was easier to link to. Smooches,
[[User:ALKALOIDS|ALKALOIDS]] 17:27, 30 June 2006 (EDT)


: <nowiki><span style="color:red"> red </span></nowiki> will make the text in between the span and /span <span style="color:red">red</span>. I generally google any wiki formatting questions I have. Check these pages out for info and color numbering: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_color_formatting_help and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Using_colours. I think all of our wiki geeks who warred over wiki styles are gone, so unless you make an entire page hot pink font on a bright yellow background, use colors as you see fit. [[User:MILQUETOAST|Becca]] 15:13, 8 September 2012 (EDT)
: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold_in_updating_pages Be Bold!] That's what I'm referring to. In any case, I believe that U is right in saying that different types of spells should be listed seperately, as not all bits of information are really applicable to all spells. For example, the duration doesn't really apply to most attack spells. Only those with a duration would have a field for being stackable or not. Having a seperate field for being stackable or not reduces the overall length of the duration field, does it not? But then, I don't work on spells, generally, the only exceptiong being [[1625]]... which doesn't really fall under most spell classifications. I don't mind the color coding, myself, and I was particularly annoyed when someone felt the need to remove the colors from my table on the [[herb]] page. Though, I also tend to lean towards more subdued colors. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 19:26, 30 June 2006 (EDT)


:: Unfortunately, I'm working a table that has lots of different ways of showing special info already, including bolded text, underlined text, and the little cross symbol as well. I needed one more, and because it was a warning, so to speak, red seemed to make the most sense to me. Thanks for the info! If you have any further suggestions, you can see the table on the [[Minor Summoning (725)]] page. [[User:IRVINETOMOE|IRVINETOMOE]] 15:33, 8 September 2012 (EDT)
The improvement I attempted was to account for each type of spell being fundamentally different in its attributes. As Andy said, ''"not all bits of information are really applicable to all spells."'' For instance, attack spells wont have a "span" and defense spells shouldnt have a "range." I can agree with your policy of keeping things simple as to not confuse the casual reader, but each attribute of the spell (such as whether its [[stackable]]/[[refreshable]]/[[block]] duration) '''needs''' to be on there. To me, an important part of a template is that it requires the user to enter all of the necessary/desired information or makes it obvious when that information is missing. It bothers me that some attack spells have an attack type ([[bolt]]/[[warding]]/[[maneuver]]) listed, while its left out of others. The whole colors thing I'm not married to, and I can even agree it sticks out like a sore thumb. Anyways, thank you all for the comments, prototype 2 coming soon. [[User:ULTHRIPE|<sub>who is</sub>]] '''Ulthripe''' [[User talk:ULTHRIPE|<sup>reads this</sup>]] 06:43, 1 July 2006 (EDT)
== We Need SysOps ==


So, as far as I can tell, we do not have any active SysOp accounts. The main thing that differs for a SysOp is the ability to move/delete pages and edit the main page. My policy has been to promote the most active contributors to this level when necessary, but I haven't really kept up on who has been doing what on KP in any significant capacity for a while, which is unfortunate. What this means is that I do not have a good idea of who contributes what or who might be interested in or appropriate for this responsibility.
== Cite.php ==
Here, I suggest, for the use of References, that you put this in KP: [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cite/Cite.php Cite.php]. Also, [[Special:Version]] shows we're running 1.6 alpha of MediaWiki. Wikipedia, itself, is using version 1.7 alpha, though, the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Download MediaWiki Download page] only shows version 1.6.7 available for download. So, I'm not quite sure exactly what that all means, but I'm just evaluating what I see. In all honesty, I just want to be able to use the Cite.php thing. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 16:31, 14 June 2006 (EDT)


So, how about this, you guys nominate yourselves and give a brief reason why. I'll look into the edit history of those nominated and as long as I don't see anything questionable, we should have a few more SysOps around. I'll check back in a week or so, since the new year is upon us.
: Done. See [[Krakiipedia:Sandbox#Cite.php]]. I'll also be updating to the latest version of MediaWiki software later today. I want to set up a decent testing solution first, so I can ensure the transition between versions will be as smooth as possible. - [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 11:56, 16 June 2006 (EDT)


All of this said, I want to take a moment to thank everyone who contributes to Krakiipedia. Without those contributions this place would be an empty shell with a clever name. You guys are the best.
== Combat Maneuvers ==
I was sitting around thinking about what I felt needed work while adding some stuff to the Warrior page, and it looks like combat maneuvers are nearly universally undocumented. I don't know how most of them function beyond their basic description, so I'd ask that anyone with experience in any particular maneuvers write up a page for it. Hopefully, all the assorted people working will fill in a good lot of them, and the remaining ones can be filled in from there. [[User:IRVINETOMOE|IRVINETOMOE]] 20:01, 30 May 2006 (PDT)


(Man, I just reviewed this edit and scrolled down to see a similar message from 2008. That message is almost four years old. Wow. Still, I'm being sincere here, folks. Thank you very much for the work you all do.)
== Krakiipedia Skin ==
I'm currently in the middle of mucking about with a custom skin for Krakiipedia, which anyone interesting in checking out can do so by setting their preferences to use 'myskin' instead of 'monobook' (or whatever your skin setting may be.) It's a SERIOUS work in progress at this stage, as I'm mainly trying to re-wrap my head around CSS layout. The basic theme I'm shooting for is slightly Egyptian/Lost-Scrolls-of-Alexandria. The Lost Scrolls of Krakiipedia! We'll see how it goes. - Oliver ([[User:Anshou|User]] | [[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]) 16:10, 30 May 2006 (PDT)


[[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 13:07, 30 December 2011 (EST)
Mucked about a bit more, and the skin is a bit more 'together' now. In Firefox, anyway. Internet Explorer proves to be the devil, evermore. Anyone have any experience with CSS under IE that might want to lend a hand to making the layout, uh, function? [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 22:28, 31 May 2006 (EDT)
:I'd be interested in being a SysOp. For one, it'd be nice to be able to clean-up (aka delete) after myself when I'm, f.ex., testing something. [[User:KAGE|KAGE]] 22:53, 4 January 2012 (EST)
::Kage would be a fine sysop, he's one of the most active editors around. --[[User:KANYDA|Drew]] 14:38, 9 January 2012 (EST)
:::Thank you, Drew. - [[User:KAGE|KAGE]] 15:46, 16 January 2012 (EST)
::Hey, I'll second that emotion. I know Kage would do an outstanding job. - [[User:SPYRIDONM1|Mark]] 22:33, 16 January 2012 (EST)
:::Thank you, Mark - [[User:KAGE|KAGE]] 06:13, 17 January 2012 (EST)
:This is a bit old, but I'd be a SysOp if you are still looking for some. [[User:DAID|DAID]] 02:17, 24 November 2012 (EST)


== Notice! ==
== New Users ==
Slackers. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 21:23, 15 April 2006 (PDT)


Welcome to the few new users, yay! Apologies for taking forever to activate your accounts. [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 13:07, 30 December 2011 (EST)
== CSS files, wikis, etc. ==
:Sure! Let the riff raff in, why don't'cha! I mean...ummm...hi! - [[User:KAGE|KAGE]] 01:19, 31 December 2011 (EST)
[[MediaWiki_talk:Common.css]]. That is all. Well, that and I'd like to investigate the potentual uses of the [[MediaWiki:Common.css]] and the [[MediaWiki:Monobook.css]]. As I mentioned, I'm not very familiar with either of these objects, but I guess we could use the Common.css to define classes in Krakiipedia. Classes would be... useful for replacing something as simple as the prettytable template, and, defined as a class, one could use the prettytable class and still define additional styles without messing up the entire table (which is why I added the "<nowiki>{{{1| }}}</nowiki>" at the end of the Prettytable template). Anyway, we're geared for growth, and I hear using templates within templates can be harmful to the server.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Prettytable#move_this_to_CSS] -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 21:22, 5 April 2006 (PDT)


== User list by number of edits ==
: It's late, but we really should start using CSS classes and ids for any templates which involve any markup including custom styling. More to ensure that these templates look right across all skins rather than being able to define additional inline styles. We should be shying away from using inline styles. I started this a bit, since I'm semi-actively working on the new KP skin. I updated some elements on the front page to work as such. - [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 12:02, 16 June 2006 (EDT)
Is there a way to sort the user list by number of edits? It'd be fun to see a list of them. [[User:KANYDA|Drew]] 15:51, 16 September 2011 (EDT)


== KP Skin ==
== Reference link inconsistancies ==
I'm looking for suggestions on which word to use when refering to a reference link: "Resources," "References," or "External links." The most commonly used word, thus far, is "Reference," which would likely be more appropriate if pluralized, even if the article only has one reference link. "References" just so happens to be what I'm leaning towards. -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 07:36, 4 April 2006 (PDT)


Does anyone actually use the KP skin option? This is something I added sometime close to the beginning of KP's existence, but haven't really had time or inclination to expand on. I've always thought that getting a nice, custom theme designed for KP should be done, but my skills just aren't up to snuff.
: I think the section should be labeled External Links, since that's what they are. They're not necessarily references, at least not in the common use of the term. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_(TV_series) Wikipedia:Lost (TV series)] is a good example of how I think we should be handling things like this. - Oliver ([[User:Anshou|User]] | [[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]) 15:16, 8 April 2006 (PDT)


Just curious. [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 12:07, 30 March 2010 (EDT)
:: If the links appearing at the bottom of an article are intended to support the facts contained within, then the section ought to be entitled "References," since that is what they are (regardless of their internal/external locations). I could be misunderstanding the purpose of those links, though. Its a bit superflous to have several sections of links at the bottom of each article, perhaps just one or two which are standard and coverall. If indeed the additional links are intended as support for the facts contained within an article, it would be most appropriate to include a "References" and "Additional Information" sections where appropriate. If the intention is simply to list associated links, it would be more appropriate to separate them by their location, having both a "Related Articles" and "External Links" section. *SammichKing*..[[User:ULTHRIPE|who?]]..[[User talk:ULTHRIPE|wha?]] 23:08, 23 April 2006 (PDT)


:I've checked it out a couple of times, but...not really. On Wikipedia I do use this option, however: (User interface gadgets) Use a black background with green text on the Monobook skin. Love it. [[User:KAGE|KAGE]] 12:52, 30 March 2010 (EDT)
::: Using a References section is fine, as long as proper referential notations are used, otherwise there's little point. Links to other articles in the wiki that atre not directly imbeded into the article itself, such as for guides or saved posts, should be included in a Related Articles section. All other links to be included, but not attributed as references, should be included in an External Links section. - Oliver ([[User:Anshou|User]] | [[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]) 07:17, 24 April 2006 (PDT)
:: Oh, by the way, the reference method that Wikipedia uses, such as that in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_(TV_series) Lost] article, doesn't work in Krakiipedia. I wonder if there was a software upgrade or something. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 08:09, 6 May 2006 (PDT)
::: It looks like it's a MediaWiki extention. I just figured they had a couple of templates for the formatting, heh. I'll look into getting it installed. - Oliver ([[User:Anshou|User]] | [[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]) 08:48, 6 May 2006 (PDT)
:: The <math> tags also seem to be a wikimedia extention, though, I don't know how useful that'd be. I imagine it'd be at least somewhat useful. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 08:24, 10 May 2006 (PDT)


== Front page editing ==
== A suggestion for the [[Main Page]], and then some ==
The front page is looking a little stale, especially under the growing pains section. For instance the Ranger article is now pretty fully featured and I think it can safely be removed. In it's place might I suggest [[The Rift]] which is an article that could really benefit from expansion. (Also as an aside while I'm previewing this, it appears the 4 tilde signature is not working) 15:15, 2 September 2009 (EDT) ([[User:KANYDA]] )
I would like to suggest adding the 'play' button to the Main Page in addition to the verbage required for "all GemStone IV fansites" listed on Play.net... then adding the following at the bottom:
<blockquote><small>
Simutronics® is a registered trademark and service mark of Simutronics Corporation. All rights reserved. The GemStone ® IV game is copyright © 1987-2006 Simutronics Corp. All rights reserved. GemStone ® is a registered trademark of Simutronics Corp. All rights reserved.
</small></blockquote>
Then! We could add Krakiipedia as a fansite page on play.net! Whoo! and all that. -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 01:30, 4 April 2006 (PDT)
: We actually already have the copyright notice on the [[Krakiipedia:General_disclaimer]] page, which is linked from the bottom of every page, so we're covered there (the guidelines don't appear to require that the message be on the main page). - [[User:Ildran|Ildran]] 10:32, 4 April 2006 (PDT)
::Well, I guess now all it needs is the '[[:Image:Gs4play.gif|play]]' button. -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 15:48, 4 April 2006 (PDT)


: Hmm, let's test... Seemed it just now worked for me, the tilde signature. Maybe one of the SysOps may know more about it than me, though. [[User:DRIZZT-12|Adam]] <sup>[[User talk:DRIZZT-12|talk]]</sup> 17:54, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
== More thoughts on Templates ==
Since the Weapon tables are used rather often and each weapon may be refereced multiple times, I'm thinking of just making a template for each specific weapon type. IE, [[Template:Weapon table sai]] for the sai. It'd replace all those [[Template:Weapon table entry]] and [[Template:Weapon table simple]] references I have, and it'd allow for quick corrections, should some data be found wrong. -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 17:46, 2 April 2006 (PDT)


::Maybe I'm just confused, on WP they use four tildes and two dashes and that puts the time and date and your user name. When I try it here four tildes puts just the time and date but no user name, I'll give it another shot.[[User:KANYDA|Drew]] 01:24, 3 September 2009 (EDT)
:That would work beautifully. I see you've figured out that you can include templates from other templates, so I don't need to suggest doing it that way :) - [[User:Ildran|Ildran]] 10:25, 4 April 2006 (PDT)


:::Seems to work now, hmm. I was on another computer and using NoScript, maybe that was the culprit. 01:25, 3 September 2009 (EDT)
== [[Template:Profession training|Profession training template]] ==
Okay, I've been messing with this for a while, and... I think I'm finally satisfied with it being on the sidebar like it is -- it's just a really long sidebar. Now, my thought is to add this template to [[Template:Profession]]. Any thoughts or objections? -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 14:29, 2 April 2006 (PDT)


:I switched out [[The Rift]] page for the [[Ranger]] page, and put some links into the current featured article page...more lively? [[User:MILQUETOAST|Becca]] 19:47, 3 September 2009 (EDT)
: Looks fantastic! I would definately like to see this in use on each of the profession pages. It would also be interesting to create a table which cross-references all the professions and TP costs of their skills for comparison sake. It could go on the [[skill]]s page. *SammichKing*..[[User:ULTHRIPE|who?]]..[[User talk:ULTHRIPE|wha?]] 22:37, 2 April 2006 (PDT)


::Very nice. One other request could we get a front page link to https://gswiki.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Category:Legendary_Items somewhere on the front page? It's my favorite section and I know that of several other people, and one I'd like to encourage growth in. [[User:KANYDA|Drew]] 03:09, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
== Essays on the KP ==
I found a post somewhere on the forums asking the policy of essays and suggesting a disclaimer that states that the essay may be objective in opinion or might generally not have a NPOV. Seeing as they are listed as essays, generally, I'm not terribly worried about their existance, but, well, we could discuss it. -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 07:25, 1 April 2006 (PST)


:::Another good suggestion! I added the link to the [[:Category:Legendary Items|Legendary Items]] category to the In-Universe category link, as well as the [[:Category:Storylines|Storylines]] category link because I'd like to see that fleshed out myself. [[User:MILQUETOAST|Becca]] 17:23, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
:I think essays are fine. The entire site should be considered unofficial information anyway. As well, we're not Wikipedia, there's no NPOV policy here, especially as IC matters are concerned (though for OOC pages, they should generally be information without commentary, if only because that makes it a more useful reference). If someone wants to put up an essay by their character that says that dark elves are scum, that's cool with me, though it probably should be clearly marked as IC material rather than OOC. Perhaps we should make a template that says something along the lines of "The text on this page is written from an in-character point of view, and as such may be subject to in-character prejudice or inaccuracies."? - [[User:Ildran|Ildran]] 11:10, 1 April 2006 (PST)


= [[Gswiki:Village pump/Archives|Archives]] =
::I would guess that IC and OOC articles are, for the most part, easily identified, and don't require marking as being an IC or OOC article. Generally, though, we know that certain categories are IC and others are OOC. However, I wouldn't mind having a tag for articles that don't generally meet a NPOV. I know this isn't Wikipedia, but damnit, what value is a resource that is full of opinions? I like the POV disclaimer idea.
{{Gswiki:Village pump/Archives}}
I would also like to state that I'm amazed at just how many profession pages have absolutely nothing in them! -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 20:30, 1 April 2006 (PST)
:For the most part I try to only put information out that will absolutely not need to be adjusted. Though I have felt like writing and posting descriptions, I worry about the possibility of plagiarizing and generally the scrutiny of others. I'm not quite as worried about writing in the discussion of pages as it is merely suggestions I wish to add. I leave it up to someone else to finalize it in the main page.
:[[User:CANNOND|CANNOND]] 23:33, 3 April 2006 (PDT)

::Eh. I see it as, if I do something that someone doesn't like, they'll change it, or tell me about it. Though, [[User:ULTHRIPE|Ulthripe]] and I talk about potentual changes that we have questions about through IM's/IRC rather often. For example, not to long ago, U and I had a rather long discussion about the [[Status]] article. The IRC server we're on is the one listed at the bottom of the [[Main Page]], in the channel #GemStone. Through AIM, and just about everything else, I can be contacted by this screenname, Belathus. You're welcome to contact me, and you're welcome on the IRC server, Dustin. -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 23:44, 3 April 2006 (PDT)

:::I guess I could point out that the IRC server is currently unavailable... -[[User:BELATHUS|Belathus]] 23:46, 3 April 2006 (PDT)

:::Yeah, that's generally a good way to look at it. If you screw something up, someone will fix it. Don't worry about submitting something that's not perfect, the whole point of a Wiki is that everyone gets together to create information. As the Wikipedia folks say, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BB be bold!]. - [[User:Ildran|Ildran]] 10:36, 4 April 2006 (PDT)

= [[Krakiipedia:Village pump/Archives|Archives]] =
{{Krakiipedia:Village pump/Archives}}

Latest revision as of 15:44, 3 January 2015

Welcome to the village pump, where anyone can say anything about whatever, and people can respond! Yeehaw! Remember to sign your comments by putting 4 tildes (~~~~) at the end.

Reorganization

The site wasn't very well organized in terms of consistency in categories. I'm making an effort to get everything into cohesive layers of categories. Open up the River's Rest category and there are no longer almost 200 pages there, there are some pages that don't fit in sub categories that will remain in the RR category, but many of the pages have been only categorized under the subcategory, such as the Casler Huntington Storyline, or hunting areas, or Museum, it's still in process, I jump around.

I'm not exactly opposed to all-encompassing categories, but that didn't really exist in the first place, so I figure I'd put things in a sensible location before expanding if people think there is a need. There were also over 500 pages uncategorized and that has been cut to 30, mainly pages that are incomplete/abandoned efforts (not the tones, that I have a lot of additional recent info to add).

I have also reviewed the categories and tried to consolidate very similar ones or ones with one page. I have not touched categories having to do with creatures unless something seemed off (see troll wraith). I'm also paying special attention to the "Gemstone" group of categories that appear in the left navigation panel. I think these should be especially clean in terms of filtering information into the right subcategories as they are linked from every single page. For example, do we really need every wand listed in the Magic category? I think keeping them off the main Magic category page and in the Common Magical Items subcategory is more comprehensive.

For the saved posts, does every saved post really need its own page? Isn't it easier in a lot of cases to consolidate them under 1 page (e.g. Major Spiritual (saved posts)). This obviously doesn't fit for every post, but I like to see the progression of things rather than go digging for the next change. I think grouping and/or linking between the saved posts for one topic is extremely helpful. VANKRASN39 17:47, 23 May 2014 (EDT)

How to Color Text

Hey, its been a long time since I've done serious work on Krakiipedia, and I forgot how to color text. I have some text I want to make red, and I thought it would be way too ghetto to just link them to a non-existant page, though if it comes to that, I will totally do that. Any tips? IRVINETOMOE 12:10, 6 September 2012 (EDT)

<span style="color:red"> red </span> will make the text in between the span and /span red. I generally google any wiki formatting questions I have. Check these pages out for info and color numbering: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_color_formatting_help and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Using_colours. I think all of our wiki geeks who warred over wiki styles are gone, so unless you make an entire page hot pink font on a bright yellow background, use colors as you see fit. Becca 15:13, 8 September 2012 (EDT)
Unfortunately, I'm working a table that has lots of different ways of showing special info already, including bolded text, underlined text, and the little cross symbol as well. I needed one more, and because it was a warning, so to speak, red seemed to make the most sense to me. Thanks for the info! If you have any further suggestions, you can see the table on the Minor Summoning (725) page. IRVINETOMOE 15:33, 8 September 2012 (EDT)

We Need SysOps

So, as far as I can tell, we do not have any active SysOp accounts. The main thing that differs for a SysOp is the ability to move/delete pages and edit the main page. My policy has been to promote the most active contributors to this level when necessary, but I haven't really kept up on who has been doing what on KP in any significant capacity for a while, which is unfortunate. What this means is that I do not have a good idea of who contributes what or who might be interested in or appropriate for this responsibility.

So, how about this, you guys nominate yourselves and give a brief reason why. I'll look into the edit history of those nominated and as long as I don't see anything questionable, we should have a few more SysOps around. I'll check back in a week or so, since the new year is upon us.

All of this said, I want to take a moment to thank everyone who contributes to Krakiipedia. Without those contributions this place would be an empty shell with a clever name. You guys are the best.

(Man, I just reviewed this edit and scrolled down to see a similar message from 2008. That message is almost four years old. Wow. Still, I'm being sincere here, folks. Thank you very much for the work you all do.)

Oliver Talk 13:07, 30 December 2011 (EST)

I'd be interested in being a SysOp. For one, it'd be nice to be able to clean-up (aka delete) after myself when I'm, f.ex., testing something. KAGE 22:53, 4 January 2012 (EST)
Kage would be a fine sysop, he's one of the most active editors around. --Drew 14:38, 9 January 2012 (EST)
Thank you, Drew. - KAGE 15:46, 16 January 2012 (EST)
Hey, I'll second that emotion. I know Kage would do an outstanding job. - Mark 22:33, 16 January 2012 (EST)
Thank you, Mark - KAGE 06:13, 17 January 2012 (EST)
This is a bit old, but I'd be a SysOp if you are still looking for some. DAID 02:17, 24 November 2012 (EST)

New Users

Welcome to the few new users, yay! Apologies for taking forever to activate your accounts. Oliver Talk 13:07, 30 December 2011 (EST)

Sure! Let the riff raff in, why don't'cha! I mean...ummm...hi! - KAGE 01:19, 31 December 2011 (EST)

User list by number of edits

Is there a way to sort the user list by number of edits? It'd be fun to see a list of them. Drew 15:51, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

KP Skin

Does anyone actually use the KP skin option? This is something I added sometime close to the beginning of KP's existence, but haven't really had time or inclination to expand on. I've always thought that getting a nice, custom theme designed for KP should be done, but my skills just aren't up to snuff.

Just curious. Oliver Talk 12:07, 30 March 2010 (EDT)

I've checked it out a couple of times, but...not really. On Wikipedia I do use this option, however: (User interface gadgets) Use a black background with green text on the Monobook skin. Love it. KAGE 12:52, 30 March 2010 (EDT)

Front page editing

The front page is looking a little stale, especially under the growing pains section. For instance the Ranger article is now pretty fully featured and I think it can safely be removed. In it's place might I suggest The Rift which is an article that could really benefit from expansion. (Also as an aside while I'm previewing this, it appears the 4 tilde signature is not working) 15:15, 2 September 2009 (EDT) (User:KANYDA )

Hmm, let's test... Seemed it just now worked for me, the tilde signature. Maybe one of the SysOps may know more about it than me, though. Adam talk 17:54, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
Maybe I'm just confused, on WP they use four tildes and two dashes and that puts the time and date and your user name. When I try it here four tildes puts just the time and date but no user name, I'll give it another shot.Drew 01:24, 3 September 2009 (EDT)
Seems to work now, hmm. I was on another computer and using NoScript, maybe that was the culprit. 01:25, 3 September 2009 (EDT)
I switched out The Rift page for the Ranger page, and put some links into the current featured article page...more lively? Becca 19:47, 3 September 2009 (EDT)
Very nice. One other request could we get a front page link to https://gswiki.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Category:Legendary_Items somewhere on the front page? It's my favorite section and I know that of several other people, and one I'd like to encourage growth in. Drew 03:09, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
Another good suggestion! I added the link to the Legendary Items category to the In-Universe category link, as well as the Storylines category link because I'd like to see that fleshed out myself. Becca 17:23, 4 September 2009 (EDT)

Archives

Archives of the Village Pump page.