Dwarf Fortress Wiki talk:Centralized Discussion

From Dwarf Fortress Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

C++ Symbols

Hi, Im try using "windows debugging tools" to get some useful information about some crashs since windows 7 doesnt have the so called "dr watson" anymore (which creates a dump useful for toady). For the debug info to be more useful, there is an option to use symbols file (*.pdb) I found some c++ symbols in the wiki but is it possible to make a real pdb file out of that? copypasta into a new txt file and renaming the extension doesnt seem to work.

Clarification on "Verification" of content

The policy is that all content from 40d must be verified before making it to the 2010 namespace. Whould confirming with the changelog that something hasn't changed be good enough to meet this requirement? If not, does this means that each feature must be tested in game? bongotastic #11:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

In general the changelog is not sufficient. For example, the changelog doesn't say that the DF2010:Archery Target is now broken, but if you tried it out personally before moving it then you would know that simply copy-pasting this is a bad idea. Not a small task I know, but long-term this is far more valuable. Any article in particular you were thinking about? Mason (T-C) 12:45, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


Any thoughts on this page? Any potentially useful organizing ideas? Mason (T-C) 16:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea. --Briess 17:03, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Missing discussions?

Are there any important discussions I've missed, or anything you'd like to discussion that you'd like a location to discuss? Mason (T-C) 16:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Will any articles be pruned away or merged? In the jump from 40D to v31 a lot of articles that used to be served well by tables seem to have become their own articles, which really clutters the place up and scatters information all over unfindably. Stones, ores, and gems are the most obvious, they really only need three tables instead of hundreds of articles. --Corona688 19:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Might I suggest responses go to the just created Dwarf Fortress Wiki:Article Consolidation talk page. I think this is a big issue worth discussing, and so it deserves to be discussed there. Mason (T-C) 21:34, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I wonder, is there a place here for a Future Versions Ideas page? I have many ideas for things that could be used in future versions of Dwarf Fort, but there's no way to get the word to Toady that I'm aware of, aside from straight e-mailing him...--Aescula 20:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm not really sure if the wiki is the right place for something like that. I mostly say that because I don't think that he will look at what we set up for the wiki either. There is a Suggestions Forum that seems to be the best place for that kind of thing. I imagine if he looks anywhere he looks there. Mason (T-C) 19:53, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Template madness

Okay I was looking at DF2010:Native platinum and wanted to make the changes but the arrangement of templates make editing the sidebar incredibly complicated even for the fairly good amount of knowledge I have of the wiki.

This really doesn't need to be this complicated. Could someone explain how it works and more importantly why it needs to be so complicated. Mason (T-C) 21:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree, we need a short tutorial on templates. This is shutting out IPs (and probably the majority of editors) through the backdoor. --Birthright 00:32, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Here you go. VengefulDonut 14:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Right. You make it obvious that excessive use of templates will make the wiki unusable for all but a small aristocracy. Plus we would still need a central place frequently visited by editors that links to those pages. Maybe link to the -still missing- short tutorial next to every template in the articles? --Birthright 20:57, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
You seem confident that you will get what you want. VengefulDonut 23:52, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Magmawiki skin feedback

I just decided to try out the new skin. I am using it for ten minutes and I already can't imagine using anything different, it's great!--SanDiego 13:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

If not consolidation, then what?

I don't seem to have a lot of support for article consolidation, and have abruptly been relieved of the time I had to try and help. Fine. I still insist the clutter of pages remains troublesome. Whenever your search is slightly off, instead of returning few to no results, it returns hundreds of irrelevant results. When I search for BODY_SIZE I don't want creature_standard.txt, grimeling size, mud man size, olmman size, fire man size, insert-material-here-man size or anything else's tags, I'm looking for info on the tags themselves. Same when I search "raws", I don't mean those of beetles, whales, walruses, sturgeon, stingray, etc, etc, etc. Redirects won't fix this until we redirect every possible thing that needs to be redirected, at all, ever, but that seems an even more exhaustive task than tables.

Is it possible to prevent the search from indexing these stub articles, or at least giving them less priority? The 'whale' page is going to be irrelevant to anyone not searching for whales... --Corona688 17:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you that there isn't the support for consolidation. I do understand what you're saying. It seems like there are two possible solutions to your problem.
  • Better organization: This is entirely possible, but very complicated. I've been trying to improve this but it is very difficult. If you don't have the time to work on this and improve it you'll have to rely on my inconsistent free time to make some improvements. If you have some good ideas besides "make it better" I'm all ears.
  • Better search: This is much more difficult, and probably not exactly possible given the extreme constraints that is the mediawiki software. You'd be pleased to know that we (User:Briess and User:Emi) are working on developing a new wiki software specifically for DF. Details can be found here and here. I can only assume that they will make sure to provide improved searching as one of their goals, but if you want to post in the forum thread your wishes that would probably be useful.
Mason (T-C) 20:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, it's not the wiki that sucks, the search function is limited. You are simply asking too much. --Birthright 00:29, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Gamelog Template?

We should add a "gamelog" template, so that bored players (like me) can easily locate other player's gamelogs about the fun adventures they are getting up to. I'd do it myself, but I have no idea how to. -Romeofalling 21:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about a template, but I have been wanting a way to find other users who are "logging" their games on the wiki for weeks. Can we have a page listing such things, and feature a link to that page on the Main page? -- Maunder 21:49, 18 November 2010 (UTC) (now heading to look at Romeofalling's page)

Okay I added a new section to Stories. Anyone who is chronicling their fortress on the wiki, please add a link to your story here! -- Maunder 22:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


Currently there is a bloodline page, a bloodline category and a bloodline namespace. I understand that community stuff is currently lower priority than getting the other content ready for players, but this should all be consolidated and made easily accessible. I'd be willing to do it, but should we go with the category or namespace? Calite 00:36, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Community Portal

Why was the Community Portal link dropped from the sidebar? We kind of need to have a reachable list of editing guidelines, especially given the "dwarfs/dwarves" conflict that's going on (where said page states that the proper term would be "dwarves" due to being used in-game). --Quietust 17:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

crayon art rewards-donation drive to illustrate the wiki

I found this topic on forums and as experiment added image to DF2010:Gorlak. Is it a great/good/acceptable idea? Is it possible that there is certain licence problem? Maybe it should go to infobox? I prefer to ask before uploading 30+ images. Kogut 17:14, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Adding pictures from commons

Hello, I am trying to add a picture of a Kiwiman I draw and put on Wikimedia Commons but I dont seem to be having any luck in being able to put that image on the Kiwiman article page using Wikimedia syntax. How can I add this picture from Wikimedia Commons? I am not authorised to create new articles on this Wiki so uploading the image directly here is not an option for me right now. --Discott (talk) 12:12, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

It shows up for me below the column on the right. (You should be able to create new pages now, since Briess changed the requirement to 3 edits, but it doesn't matter in this case since this wiki can pull images from Commons.) —Lethosor (talk) 02:00, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
It is showing up for me as well now, I suspect I just needed to refresh my browser or it was due to some sort of lag between the DFwiki server and Commons... or some thing like that. --Discott (talk) 20:22, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Randomly deleted files?

I had uploaded sheet music for the two ingame tracks, and displayed them here. Mysteriously, almost all of them disappeared. For instance, if you try going to File:Song title2.png, and checking the history you can see I did upload it on Feb 17, so I'm not crazy. Is this as server problem or something? Brightgalrs (talk)

And actually something similar happened with File:Intro_movie_1.gif as well. Brightgalrs (talk) 04:41, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind, a quick ?action=purge and everything is fine. Brightgalrs (talk) 04:43, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

.SVG problems?

File:Translation Icon.svg Does anyone else see the errors in this file page? Brightgalrs (talk) 03:54, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

I do.CLA (talk) 17:06, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Briess says this is fixed: https://github.com/DF-Wiki/DF-Wiki/issues/6. That's probably a good place to report issues in the future since all of us should notice (and email notifications aren't broken). —Lethosor (talk) 00:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Multiple redirects leads to incorrect namespace

There appears to be an issue wherein navigating to a page by means of multiple redirects puts you on the wrong namespace. For example, when going to Herbalist this correctly automatically redirects to DF2014:Herbalist. Whereas if you go to Herbalism, that page appears to be a manual redirect to Herbalist (which should take you to the DF2014 namespace) but instead you end up being taken to v0.34:Herbalist. The behaviour of the automatic redirect is not consistent when reached via an intermediate manual redirect page. The same problem affects Sweet_Pod and probably many other pages. --Morlark (talk) 22:43, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes; the wiki software (and the internet in general) handles moved resources...poorly. My suggested fix is to avoid moving resources.--Loci (talk) 04:28, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Wait, are you thinking this applies to pages that were moved at some point with Special:MovePage, or just pages that were copied over by a bot? All of the DF2014 pages fall into the latter category, and should behave pretty normally, but it's entirely possible that there's some weirdness with moved pages (the former category) that I'm not aware of. It could just be issues with double redirects, though, since those seem to be the only pages I've noticed issues on. —Lethosor (talk) 21:56, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
By "moved" I meant "no longer at the same URL". All the external links, the Google indexes, and even the wiki software itself don't handle resources that are at a different URL gracefully.--Loci (talk) 03:19, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
As far as the wiki software is concerned, DF2014:Cat and DF2014:Dog are equally different from v0.34:Cat, at least internally, because we effectively created brand-new DF2014 pages and just copied over the contents from v0.34 articles. The Google issues are annoying, and I think Briess was looking into a way to weight current pages more heavily, but I don't know if that ended up being possible or not. As far as I can tell, the chief issue within the wiki is the one Morlark pointed out, with redirect chains not ending up in the right namespace (it's probably due to the auto-redirect extension, but none of us have been able to figure out why - as far as we can tell, we changed everything that was necessary to change, and editing the problematic redirects tends to fix them, but there's absolutely no reason why they should be cached for this long or anything). —Lethosor (talk) 17:40, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Creating, copying, wiki-moving, etc. are all equivalent as far as nearly everything is concerned. So you copied v0.34:Cat to DF2014:Cat. Meanwhile Main:Kitty, which used to redirect to Main:Cat then to v0.34:Cat... still redirects to v0.34:Cat. Even though it's now nearly 4 years out of date. And will continue to do so until someone goes in and manually fixes it. Unfortunately, Google is even less forgiving--you can't go in and manually tell Google "Hey, we want you to point to these new pages now". No matter how you did it, you're still changing the URL that you want things to link to by default, and that still doesn't work well.--Loci (talk) 18:20, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Oh, that's a good point about external sources. The issue with redirects within the wiki is due to something not being updated as it should, though, and it ought to be fixable. —Lethosor (talk) 21:04, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Solution for this

Couldn't we just change all main-space directs to cv:Example? Brightgalrs (talk) 10:48, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

It's been a while since I've looked at this, but I think that should work. Then again, the current mainspace redirects should work too, in theory, but they don't. It's possible that the issue is due to badly-behaved caching, in which case changing the redirects to cv would fix them temporarily but not permanently, just like editing them now does. In other words, I'm not sure it would improve the situation (at least if/when we make a new namespace), but it shouldn't make it worse. —Lethosor (talk) 21:28, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Just another suggestion– have the current version always be at like dwarffotresswiki.org/Quickstart_guide then have the old versions be moved to something like dwarffotresswiki.org/Quickstart_guide/v43 when a new version of dwarf fortress comes out. Jecowa (talk) 02:12, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Update, June 2019

I had a bot go around and create redirects from main namespace pages to cv: pages. Let me know if there are any remaining issues or pages that were missed. (I intentionally skipped /raw pages.) —Lethosor (talk) 01:35, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

  • There are still 700+ double redirects
  • The updated wiki doesn't even try to follow double redirects
  • If you enable double redirection it probably won't work since the people who wrote the wiki software consider double redirects invalid
  • If you somehow manage to get the wiki to link to the proper page, search engines et al. will still link to outdated pages
--Loci (talk) 23:40, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Double redirects are enabled. I just changed the capitalization on Rum, for example, and now it actually goes straight to DF2014:Alcohol when I access it instead of stopping at Alcohol. Obviously editing redirects constantly isn't a great solution, but I figured out where they're cached in the database, and that clearing them from that cache fixes the issue, so I'm looking into ways to fix it with an extension. Hopefully that will help. At any rate, it's better than the old system where seemingly-correct redirects would sometimes redirect to the wrong namespace - at least now, you get a link to the right page that you just have to click on.
As for search engines, that's always been an issue. Not sure what we can do about that, unless we want to fully blacklist older versions from appearing in search results, which isn't great.
Side note, the new wiki supports HTTPS, so I wasn't logged in when I followed your link to the HTTP site. I changed that to an internal link (I expect that wasn't intentional, but starting a link with "//" without the http(s): in front will use the same protocol the current page is using). —Lethosor (talk) 04:07, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
This proposal would handily resolve almost all linking issues, foreign and double, and fix a few other annoyances to boot.--Loci (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
It would also introduce some issues that I mentioned there, particularly with versioned categories and templates (which are currently very easy since every versioned page has a namespace that corresponds directly to these), as well as distinguishing between versioned and non-versioned pages (yes, {{av}} should cover those, but people forget to add that sometimes). I'm regretting the "DF2014" choice now that it's 2019, though, and your proposal certainly does have its merits. It's worth considering again, at least, definitely before the next breaking release rolls around.
I'll still try to get double redirects to work in the meantime, though, because we might still have a use for them. —Lethosor (talk) 23:03, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I think you are vastly overestimating the effort required to integrate mainspace pages. A simple wrapper template ({{DFNAMESPACE}}) can return appropriate namespace text for mainspace articles, making versioned templates and categories "just as easy". A handful of other templates ({{Category}}, {{version switch}}, {{articleVersion}}) would also need updated. So {{Creatures}} would expand to {{Main creatures}}, creatures would get added to Category:Main:Creatures, etc. You could even use a namespace alias like "Current" if you prefer ({{Current creatures}}, Category:Current:Creatures).--Loci (talk) 23:39, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
"Main" is actually an alias too, so I'd prefer "current" (aliases are pretty easy to set up). That is a good point, though. Most (hopefully all?) of the places that assume the current namespace isn't the main namespace are in templates, and updating things like {{category}} has to be done anyway for new namespaces. I'm not 100% sold on doing this before the next breaking release, but I think it's reasonable. —Lethosor (talk) 04:15, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

DFFD links

After I saw Lethosor fixing a dffd link in the recent changes ([1]) I was curious how many pages still refer to the old DFFD URL, and doing a search [2] shows that there are several. Is there an easy way to substitute "dffd.wimbli.com" with "dffd.bay12games.com" globally? CLA (talk) 13:55, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Wiki upgrade issues


There seems to be a problem with spacing in some infoboxes (previous version shown on right):


This appears to affect all pages using the {{RT}} template: stones, metals, crops, gems, Fluid logic, etc.--Loci (talk) 20:01, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

There are wider CSS issues on that page too, like the quality template not being colored and the av links being blue. We didn't see this on the testing site, so I'm not sure what broke, but I'll investigate. —Lethosor (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Update: the table is the only issue now. Probably Mediawiki-related, then. —Lethosor (talk) 20:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
I think this has been addressed (subject to caching, of course). The issue was that Mediawiki now styles the <code> tag to look like this. —Lethosor (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
The images on fluid logic are still spaced out.--Loci (talk) 21:19, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Actually, the infobox images are still vertically spaced as well.--Loci (talk) 21:37, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
I think I have improved DF2014:Copper ({{RT}}, {{RT0}}) and DF2014:Fluid_logic#Infinite_Flow_Gates ({{RTL}}). DF2014:Fluid_logic#Advanced_Complementary_fluid_logic_Gates is different somehow despite using the RT family of templates. I'm tempted to turn those into <diagram>s, but I'll keep poking around. —Lethosor (talk) 23:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
While I support updating the diagrams, it's unlikely that fluid logic is the only page with spacing problems. We either need to fix the old templates or entirely replace them.--Loci (talk) 00:28, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I definitely agree. I can't think of much else to check on fluid logic, though. Just to confirm, are you referring to the vertical white lines between columns under "Advanced Complementary fluid logic Gates" (the NOT, AND, OR, etc. diagrams)? Is there an archived copy of the wiki somewhere that you're referring to? I don't want to keep bothering you when it comes to comparing things to the old wiki. —Lethosor (talk) 02:41, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
The dfweb1 server is still returning the old wiki, at least for me. While the fluid logic diagrams are looking much better, there are still white horizontal lines running through (previous version on right):
(I think the size/font disparities are caused by the loss of upper-level CSS on the old version.)--Loci (talk) 11:58, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I made a small tweak on {{RT}} and {{RT0}}. The spacing issue seems fixed on my end. – Doorkeeper 19:45, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I couldn't do the same with {{Raw Tile}}, so I replaced <code> with <div> instead. Is there a reason for using <code>? I don't notice any significant differences (aside from the spacing fix). – Doorkeeper 20:15, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── <div> caused issues because it's a block element, as in "input triggers: XX" - these tiles took up an entire row with a div tag. I changed it to span and that's better, but I'm still seeing white vertical lines in the diagrams at DF2014:Fluid_logic#Advanced_Complementary_fluid_logic_Gates and below. Thanks for the fix, though! I assume the reason for using <code> was that it's monospaced, and other templates used it, but {{Raw Tile}} specifies several monospaced fonts anyway, so not using a code tag should be fine. —Lethosor (talk) 22:15, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

{{diagram}} appears to be broken on DF2014:Climber. Investigating. —Lethosor (talk) 23:34, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Update: this is a massive pain and I regret trying to fix it, but I will look at it some more at some point. I fixed at least one Unicode issue that was causing issues for me locally, but that didn't seem to help. —Lethosor (talk) 01:32, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Non-capturing parens weren't working for some reason; I removed them and the diagrams are back. (Broken pages may require a null edit to pick up the change.)--Loci (talk) 23:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't like that solution, but it does work. It's worth noting that that regex does work from Mediawiki's eval.php, so I think this is a parser issue. I debugged it a bit locally, and some regex replacement in the parser is returning null, which results in a blank page. I haven't yet determined why, though. —Lethosor (talk) 22:54, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Links display with underscores

The wiki seems to be inserting underscores in multi-word links, as seen in the vermin template on toad.--Loci (talk) 20:19, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

This is part of an issue I'm actively fixing (originally links to main:foo would link to DF2014:main:foo if foo had spaces in it). It should be better in maybe 10 minutes. —Lethosor (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Fixed. —Lethosor (talk) 20:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks!--Loci (talk) 21:22, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Missing raws

Some raws are now missing, e.g. Giant cave toad.--Loci (talk) 20:25, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

No idea on this one either. We didn't delete any raws, as far as I know. I'll look into it. —Lethosor (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Interesting, TOAD_GIANT_CAVE isn't in creature_subterranean.txt (or any raw file) in the DF2014 raws on the server. —Lethosor (talk) 21:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Seems we have an old version of the raws, which were presumably copied from an older migration attempt. TOAD_GIANT was renamed to TOAD_GIANT_CAVE in 0.42.05, and TOAD_GIANT is in the raws. This should be a simple fix. —Lethosor (talk) 21:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Fixed. Good catch! Other raws should be updated now too (subject to caching, again, of course). —Lethosor (talk) 21:16, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Variation raws not inheriting from base creature

The logic for parsing inherited/derived body sizes appears to have broken, e.g. Giant sperm whale.--Loci (talk) 21:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't see any obvious issue there. Maybe the raw updates above fixed this? They included a couple small additions to giant sperm whale, like [CREATURE_CLASS:MAMMAL]. The links to sperm whale and sperm whale man work for me, if that's what you mean. —Lethosor (talk) 21:18, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
The infobox contains no "Size" information because bodysizes aren't being correctly inherited from the base creature. The page displayed the inherited sizes correctly prior to the update.--Loci (talk) 21:22, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
In a likely related issue, the "Genderless" label is being mis-applied to derived creatures (e.g. Hippo man).--Loci (talk) 21:41, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Are you certain this wasn't an issue before the upgrade? I'm struggling to think of likely causes at this point; DFRawFunctions should be the only relevant extension here, and it is up to date now. —Lethosor (talk) 22:47, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes. Here's a comparison (update on right):
Biome, Attributes, Age, and Size are all incorrect. The {{variation raw}} template doesn't appear to be copying the raws from the base creature correctly--the updated /raw page is *much* shorter.--Loci (talk) 00:28, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
This is weird. The "expanded" page on /raw definitely has more than the unexpanded version visible on the creature page itself, so the creature variation code is definitely doing something, just not everything it's supposed to do. I'm thinking it has to be an issue with the extension itself, which would be a pain to troubleshoot. I've pinged Quietust about it, in case he has any ideas about what could be going on. —Lethosor (talk) 02:44, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I found a small syntax error in DFRawFunctions which used to silently "work" (passing a parameter by value when it needed to be by reference, though the target function never actually used it) but started throwing a Warning in PHP 7.1 - upon fixing it, creature variations appear to be working properly again. --Quietust (talk) 00:01, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Workshop diagrams

Workshop illustrations have overlapping tiles, e.g. Siege workshop.--Loci (talk) 21:48, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

That was another <code> issue in {{Raw Tile}}. Why it's a different template from {{RT}} is beyond me. It should be fixed there, although the siege workshop looks a little strange to me still. Maybe it's a font issue, which would be tricky to resolve. —Lethosor (talk) 22:47, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

External links with double brackets

There seems to be something odd going on w/Bay12 forum refs (example: http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Creature_token#HABIT_NUM) Uncertain as to extent, likely cause being, well...*looks at topic title*. Silverwing235 (talk) 22:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that was a legal link to begin with - it had two square brackets around an external link. I fixed it to use {{cite forum}} - feel free to use that if you encounter other similar issues. —Lethosor (talk) 22:42, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
The old wiki apparently evaluated the interior brackets to make a URL link surrounded by (non-wikified) brackets. The updated wiki preferentially evaluates the double brackets, creating a garbled wikilink instead. I don't know if that format was "legal", but it was previously working.--Loci (talk) 00:44, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
If it is behaving differently from the old wiki, it's probably due to the NamespaceLinks extension, which is new (the old wiki used a Mediawiki patch for this, but that was terrible to maintain). I haven't bothered to test this syntax on MW 1.20 to confirm that it really did work before - if it didn't, I definitely don't want to handle this case in the extension, but if it did, I'll try to come up with a fix (it will be a low priority, though). Detecting external links could be complicated because there are many possible protocols that would need to be handled (e.g. we've added support for magnet: links ourselves). —Lethosor (talk) 02:07, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't think we need to support this format, I just wanted to explain why it no longer worked. The remaining double-bracketed URLs can be converted to the proper single-bracket format without much effort.--Loci (talk) 11:58, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Favicon missing

The updated wiki doesn't appear to be serving a favicon image (used by browsers for bookmarks, tabs, etc.).--Loci (talk) 11:58, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I think this is fixed now (it took effect faster than I expected, but it's certainly serving something at favicon.ico now). —Lethosor (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Google policy violations

Apparently we lost a longstanding custom illustration because it "violates a google policy :(". I fail to see what policy a drawing of dwarf butcher carrying a cat might violate, and I strongly dislike giving Google editorial control of DFwiki content. Can we get more detail about this removal, and perhaps a "policy" of our own regarding future Google violations?--Loci (talk) 23:47, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

It fell under a general policy against "shocking content" on pages that serve ads. We can restore the image we build some controls that allow us to selectively disable ads on pages which have policy violations. Emi [T] 04:20, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
If it's possible to check for page categories in the DFAds extension, it ought to be fairly simple to do that (make a template like {{spoiler}} that also categorizes a page). That relies on people not deciding to remove the template, of course, and I'm not entirely sure if the page object is accessible from the hooks DFAds uses. —Lethosor (talk) 04:25, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Certain pages showing up messed up

I don't know if I pressed a button by accident, or if the page is just using a different formatting. Certain DF topic pages are showing up with the banner on the left, on top of the page itself.

Also the text is zoomed, which might be my problem. Eerr (talk) 21:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

We did perform a server migration this week, which could be related. However, I haven't seen any issues after trying 50 or so random pages, and I'm not really sure what the issue is that you're describing. Can you upload a screenshot of an affected page (e.g. to imgur)? —Lethosor (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Sounds like the same issue as this forum thread, which I just fixed. Let me know if you continue to see issues (and if so, on what pages). —Lethosor (talk) 17:00, 16 July 2020 (UTC)