article "Raising_Early_Growth_of_HE"_by_Jason_Cawley_1997_v2.6/7 Should be deleted as its is a duplicate of "Raising_Early_Growth_in_HP_Race_Design"_by_Jason_Cawley_1997_v2.6/7 but with the wrong category and a typo in the title Volcane 22:24, 29 August 2008 (NZST)
- Thanx, Fixed Gible 10:51, 30 August 2008 (NZST)
Hey. I hope you don't mind me doing all the massive overhaul of the wiki.
I was raised on Wikipedia in the spirit of "be bold", so I can't help but to edit if can improve something. :)
Regards, Misza 18:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- Go for it. Also Dammit. I need to go through and tidy the policy pages. but yeah...read them before you edit too much, they're mostly correct. Also Help:Editing, & Things to do Gible 22:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- Well, you're the boss here. And if you say it's not Wikipedia then it ain't.
- Still, in the interest of usability, I'll think how to redesign the navboxen so that they stand out a bit and not completely blend in with the text of the article. The folks at Wikipedia know what they're doing most of the time. And in fact, we're building sort of an encyclopedia here as well. In other words, I'm trying to strike a balance between Stars! (which is simplicity) and Web 2.0 (which is a web page exploding in your face).
- I like the proof-of-concept for engine infoboxes - an "at a glance" look at the topic. For the engines, I'd like to also add the profile of fuel usage vs warp (dynamically generated through template parameters).
- Don't bother with edit summaries too much. I use them but it's just an old habit - I like to view diffs of people's edits anyway to see what they've changed. Misza 20:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I read the atom feed myself.
- Also, am I correct to assume that uploads will be reenabled after the wiki upgrade is complete? Misza 22:35, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually no...that was an oversight on my part, it should have been enabled already. Keep an eye out for anything else that's not the way it should be too...most obviously obscure parts of the skin whose colours I haven't changed from Monobook and have been rendered unreadable or merely unsightly. Gible 01:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
A few general Q's
Hey boss, wassup? :)
So, I've been thinking a bit about how to best structure the wiki, but I have some questions, mostly regarding your vision of it.
- Do we want many small articles or less longer ones? For example, every part in the game can have it's own page. Which is reasonable for stuff like hulls, where there's a ton to write (example designs etc.) but pretty pointless for, say, beams (how much can you write about Yakimora Light Phaser?). These could be done as a single page with subsections for each "class" (beams would be - lasers, phasers, sappers, blasters etc.).
- Short answer - yes. I've tried to do both and build the larger list-like pages with includes. eg MT & less so Utilities. As you say, it is pointless for small items, but larger items don't include as neatly. I guess I've tried to approach it from an OO perspective - trying to keep all the info about each thing in one place.
- The only place I've stuck to a rigid framework is the Stars! Player's Guide, which is being built in exactly the same structure as the help file - every small page is there, and I've turned the small list pages into the larger include pages. Quite a few of the small pages there are actually tooltips in the help file, they're both page and tooltip here too.
- More images? One could theoretically extract images for each ship part - at worst by taking screenshots and cropping them in Gimp. Want?
- Are we an encyclopedia or a strategy guide? For each part, hull or whatever the article can consist of tips and a strategic commentary (which will be just as good as the authors writing it, so unless you get people like Jason or Micha to QA the content...). Or just dry facts.
- We're it. Everything Stars! related belongs here. Tips and strategies in articles are perfectly fine with me and the commentary is vital to show the validity of the tip/strategy and to indicate the community opinion about things. eg Crash Sweeping is generally considered to be a perfectly valid action, but some consider it to be an abuse of the mechanics, here how you do it:blargh
Oh, and when do we upgrade back to port 80? :)
- Good question. No idea. I have no control over that except to ask Yanni to do it (which I have) and I'm about to get pushy about it since he's hosting for free
- I have thought about fiddling the old wiki to appear to be the new wiki and share the DB, but I'm patient yet.
Cheers, Misza 21:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- Gible 21:58, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
So, like what I did on Weapons? I found this document I printed out many years ago. I'm pretty sure I lost the electronic version (only proving that paper is more durable than hard drives ), so I'm retyping it into a wikitable. Misza 19:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)