v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
  • v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
  • Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.

Editing Dwarf Fortress Wiki talk:Community Portal

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Warning: You are not logged in.
Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.


The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Use this discussion page to talk about any issues or ideas you have about the direction of this wiki. The community portal is a hub for directing our conciousness. Read the rules carefully, take them to heart, post here if you have any questions or you think the rules can be improved.
 
Use this discussion page to talk about any issues or ideas you have about the direction of this wiki. The community portal is a hub for directing our conciousness. Read the rules carefully, take them to heart, post here if you have any questions or you think the rules can be improved.
−
{{Archive|
 
−
#[[Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/archive1|Archive 1]]
 
−
}}
 
  
 +
==Account Problems==
 +
I can't log in, but it says my username is already in use. --[[User:64.22.68.4|64.22.68.4]] 14:55, 29 October 2007 (EDT) (Peristarkawan)
 +
:Are you sure? The new wiki cleaned out all the old accounts so you have to reregister. --[[User:Hamelin|Hamelin]] 15:02, 29 October 2007 (EDT)
 +
::Unfortunately, I was unable to import all the user accounts, please recreate. --[[User:Senso|Senso]] 15:22, 29 October 2007 (EDT)
  
−
== Is this the page to discuss ? ==
+
==AdBlock==
−
can not edit the centralized discussion page.
+
Could you move all the files in the graphics directory with the word "ad" in it? For those using AdBlock or similar add-ons it will block the display of the graphics in those directories. Thanks!!! :) [[User:Schm0|Schm0]] 10:26, 5 November 2007 (EST)
−
Can a dog see globin thieves through glass ? <small>&ndash; [[template:unsigned|unsigned]] comment by [[User:Raven|Raven]]</small>
 
−
:I'd post that at [[Talk:Goblin]], or maybe [[Talk:Thief]] &mdash; this page is intended for more wiki-related discussions. The Centralized discussion page seems to have been  protected due to vandalism in the past, but it might be safe to unprotect now (I'll look into it). <br> Anyway, from what I remember, most animals only spot goblins in adjacent tiles &mdash; placing glass between the dog and the goblin would increase the distance to at least two tiles, where most animals wouldn't be able to spot the goblin (which I agree is unfortunate :( ). --[[User:Lethosor|<span style="color:#074">Lethosor</span>]] ([[User talk:Lethosor|<span style="color:#092">talk</span>]]) 13:56, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Thoughts on {{rule|i}} - Diagrams ==
+
:It doesn't look possible - re-uploading the file keeps putting it in the 'ad' folder and I cannot edit the link in the DB as it is stored inside a BLOB. I suggest you whitelist this site anyways, it's not like you need to block anything here (and blocking /*ad*/ may cause problems elsewhere too). --[[User:Senso|Senso]] 10:49, 5 November 2007 (EST)
−
Isn't [[Template:RT]] really more complexity than we need? How about this?
+
 
 +
::Well after the fact, I know, but saw a related discussion elsewhere about disabling AdBlock to support fansites worth supporting, and I think it wouldn't be a bad idea if nearly everything got placed into an as-like folder to encourage whitelisting... but that's me. --[[User:N9103|Edward]] 03:59, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Rule discussion ==
 +
 
 +
Z is pretty horrible, but not much point taking it out unless its to replace it with something better. (This whole setup is horrible, but that's irrelevant?) --[[User:Jackard|Jackard]] 21:23, 16 February 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
=== A ===
 +
 
 +
How do we handle several rules that starts with the same character? I see that '''titles''' have been moved to '''page titles''' because of '''timelessness'''. But what about other scenarios that doesnt have an solution as easy? --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 07:51, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:We can handle them as they come up. In general, I think it's better practice to avoid reusing letters than to have to rename an existing rule.
 +
 
 +
:If we want to just do away with rule '''A''' at this point, that would be fine. It was only meant to be a starting point for brainstorming, and the rules haven't changed much lately. --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 11:21, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::I Call for Judgment on this statement, this would remove the backbone rule used to define this alphabetical set of rules. We could put it outside of the rules though, like a description. --[[User:Senso|Senso]] 12:24, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::Unless we have another rule that must start with A, why not keep it? --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 12:28, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::I like rule A, it introduces the page, please keep it --[[User:Markavian|Markavian]] 16:32, 13 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
=== B and E ===
 +
 
 +
How are B and E ''rules''? --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 11:27, 7 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:Rules? I thought the alphabet was the guide for the war against entropy [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 11:34, 7 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::Well, the Alphabet rule does describe them as rules.  But I don't really think that B and E seem out of place. --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 11:37, 7 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:They will simply be replaced by "real" rules once someone have made them. --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 14:23, 7 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:I think of them more as "guidelines" ;) [[User:Turgid Bolk|Turgid Bolk]] 20:22, 7 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:I put strikes through B and E and wrote more helpful ones (along the same lines) --Me
 +
:Gravitas was a silly word. What do you think of the new rules? --[[User:Markavian|Markavian]]
 +
 
 +
:The be bold rule makes it's dramatic return! Victory! [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 19:39, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
=== I ===
 +
 
 +
Personally, I find that when the default tilesets are stretched (like [[:Image:Qs01.JPG]]), they become substantially uglier and less easy to follow than many of the user tilesets. Should they be disallowed under {{rule|I}}? --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 15:59, 16 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:If it displays that way on a computer with no alterations of settings, its by definition default.  That's exactly the kind of display I see on my computer in fullscreen mode (although I do usually play with the 800x600 in windowed mode, but I wouldn't take a screenshot from that, i'd F11 over to fullscreen - and its aspect ratio is pretty close to my windowed mode ratio).  It seems wrong to not allow what the game typically displays.
 +
:I'm curious what you think the non-stretched aspect ratio is?  I mean, I can't imagine settings which would actually make tiles look square.
 +
:--[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 16:10, 16 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::Non-stretched, the 800x600 tileset is half that size (10x12). Stretched to 800x600, it's 10x24. This is the ratio of the tiles if you actually view the bmp. To put an end to this bickering, how about an "officially approved screenshot tileset" that is *gasp* NOT one of the two default tilesets, but matches their visual style while being less cramped. How about something in a... 10x16? [80x25 = 800x400] [[User:Random832|Random832]] 23:47, 16 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::I'm against anything that creates unnecessary impediments to uploading useful images.  If you use an extremely nonstandard tileset, that'll impair the usefulness of your images.  However, as long as someone familiar with the standard tileset can look at an image and understand what is being illustrated, I would suggest the image is acceptable.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 16:30, 17 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::I'm against anything that makes you do extra work to take screenshots.  The default appearance on a computer screen should be acceptable.  We should not have to write a how-to on how to get DF to display in a way appropriate for screenshots for the wiki.  It should be 'take screen shot', 'upload screen shot', 'add screenshot to page'.  Done.  Bizarre formatting requirements are both a significant barrier to adding content to the wiki and tremendously stupid since screenshots are *advertisements* of the game as well as instructional, and we want people to look at screenshots and be correct in the belief that that is what they'll actually see in game.  I don't care what the bmp file says the aspect ratio should be, I care what the game displays that aspect ratio as.  --[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 16:49, 17 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::Insofar as I can tell, that screenshot is at exactly the same aspect ratio and size as the game window I use. It's the 800x600 tileset, I believe. It's a bit on the tall side, but otherwise I don't see much problem with it, presumably because I see it every time I play the game. I vote letting people make screenshots in whatever shape or form they prefer. Within reason, of course.--[[User:Quil|Quil]] 18:15, 17 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:How about a wikiproject to improve screenshots, so people who care about these things can clean up screenshots rather than just complaining about them? [[User:Random832|Random832]] 14:28, 21 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
From what I have seen, on a regular shaped CRT (4:3?) you can simply set the windowed and full screen, they look the same, just different sized, and are fairly clean.  For instance, I play with 800x600 resolution, because when I play windowed it is a good window size, but it is also one of the resolutions that most monitors will switch to and from easily under most any OS. [[User:Burlingk|Burlingk]] 22:31, 10 February 2009 (EST)
 +
 
 +
=== Serious Rules ===
 +
 
 +
Would it be possible for us to come up with some *real* rules that are more ... serious?  --[[User:Geofferic|Geofferic]] 08:59, 10 December 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:The alphabet rules concept is senseless. Maybe remove the fluff? --[[User:Jackard|Jackard]] 11:09, 10 December 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::Hey now, with a couple of exceptions, the rules are serious.  The point of the alphabet framework wasn't random silliness; it was to inspire creativity and make rule-writing fun.  It's hard to come up with good rules out of thin air.  It's easier to think up a topic of concern that starts with a particular letter and then write a rule about it.
 +
 
 +
::Of course, the rules have been pretty stable for a while now, so rule A hasn't been too useful lately.  There was a brief discussion a while back about dropping rule A under [[DwarfFortressWiki:Community Portal#Rule discussion]], and everybody seemed to want to keep it at the time.  If you want to reopen that discussion, then I'm okay with either keeping it or dropping it (besides which, I haven't been too active around here lately anyway). --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 11:54, 10 December 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::I support the Alphabet ruleset, I don't see why it should change. It's clean and clear. --[[User:Senso|Senso]] 16:56, 10 December 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::::It's childish, incomplete, unprofessional and silly.  The rules are not grouped logically and there is no table of contents.  There's not room for clarification or expounding and little opportunity to expand.  It should be scrapped for something that makes sense.  --[[User:Geofferic|Geofferic]] 03:25, 12 December 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::::It would be trivial to change it from an unordered list to use section headings, which would allow a table of contents and plenty of room for clarification.  I don't think "little opportunity to expand" is valid; there's no reason we can't have multiple rules for the same letter, or rules that fall outside the alphabet rubric entirely.
 +
 
 +
:::::If you want to improve the organization, then just go for it.  Let me suggest that you create the new version on a subpage at first, so that others can view two presentations side by side when discussing it. --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 12:06, 12 December 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::::While I agree with some of your points, I'd like to say that this is not a "professional" wiki and silliness in general is a good thing. This is a wiki (Internet!) about a game (Haha!) that is pretty silly itself. If you want to create a Whole Complex and Indexed Body of Rules About Everything, go for it and as [[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] said, editors should be able to choose between the two. I just don't see the need. --[[User:Senso|Senso]] 14:47, 12 December 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
=== Ack! The ToC! The ToC with a "1.26"! ===
 +
 
 +
...why do we need section headers for each of the rules? --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 22:52, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
:I've fixed the TOC. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 17:17, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
::Out of curiousity - how? --[[User:Juckto|Juckto]] 08:40, 20 November 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::Smoke and mirrors: He removed the ToC and created a sim-ToC. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 15:59, 16 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
=== W ===
 +
 
 +
Word-of-mouth: If you hear someone saying something new about the game, don't post it without trying it out yourself. You might have misunderstood something or your friend might have expressed him/herself wrongly.<br>
 +
Something like that.--[[User:Karpatius|Karppa]] 10:33, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
:That goes in the "Rule discussion" section. *ka-move* Also, remember to not put blank lines in a comment by a single user.</offtopic>
 +
:I don't like the rule. It discourages participation in the wiki. If they add something of questionable merit, they're supposed to use the verify template, as stated in rule V. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 11:39, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
::Will remember that in the future.
 +
::--[[User:Karpatius|Karppa]] 02:16, 4 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
=== W 2 ===
 +
 
 +
There are no rules about humorous content yet. I notice that references to the '''Dwarf pensioners club''' instead of '''(fortress) Guard''' have been taken out of "fact-based" articles so maybe rule W could be:
 +
 
 +
:'''Wit''' can be hard to recognise once it has been written down. It is best if it is used on clearly humour or story related pages, talk or user pages, but kept to a minimum in fact-based articles like [[Dwarf]] or [[Summer]].
 +
 
 +
This puts it "on the table" that your humour is appreciated in certain places but not in every article you contribute to. I'm not happy with my own wording but I think the intent should be there somewhere.
 +
 
 +
It could go at '''Zany''' instead because Z will be harder letter to use up!
 +
(having said all that I personally don't object to "well done" humour even in straight-cut articles like [[Screw pump]] - the issue is my humour is incomprehensible to a lot of people and can just sound rude!)
 +
[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 02:51, 6 July 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
:I like it as '''Wit'''. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 15:09, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
::With no against comments I put in in there with a reference to {{tl|D for Dwarf}}.[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 01:01, 12 July 2008 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
=== Other letters ===
 +
 
 +
Historically English had a number of letters missing from this list, namely edh (Ð/ð), thorn (Þ/þ), and yogh (Ȝ/ȝ).  Do we need rules for them?--[[User:Gandalf the Dwarf (No, really! Look it up!)|Gandalf the Dwarf (No, really! Look it up!)]] 20:49, 14 November 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:No. They do NOT exist in today's English, thus they don't belong in the list. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 22:07, 14 November 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::Of course not, that's just silly.  We do need one rule for each positive integer in existence, however. --[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 23:16, 14 November 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Enforcing consistency in screenshots? ==
 +
 
 +
Can I strongly suggest that all screenshots be taken with the default interface and tileset, for consistency's sake? It seems to me like that would be a good way of keeping the wiki aesthetics constant. [[User:EighenIndemnis|EighenIndemnis]] 11:33, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:We can make it a rule, but we shouldn't remove any screenshots for non-conformance (except to replace them with conforming screenshots). --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 11:46, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::Yeah, for some tutorials that are written while the user is playing, it would be impossible to anyway. [[User:EighenIndemnis|EighenIndemnis]] 11:47, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::I agree that images should use the default tileset for articles, but I disagree for personal pages or bloodline games. --[[User:Markavian|Markavian]]
 +
 
 +
::::The rule as written already exempts bloodline games.  The only rule that should apply to personal pages is '''D'''. --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 16:05, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
Um, I added the rule before noticing the discussion here. Anyway, I added rule '''I''', inspired by the old [[Water wheel]] image ([[:Image:PerpetualMotion.JPG]]), which was incomprehesible to me and unnecessarily large. Like Peristarkawan said, the exemption of user pages is implied, but feel free to make it explicit if you want. --[[User:Turgid Bolk|Turgid Bolk]] 16:13, 5 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
How about this?
 +
 
 +
[[Image:World_creation_screen2.png | none | frame | 400px | World creation screenshot.]]
 +
 
 +
It's clean, neat and doesn't warp the page. :) The obvious drawback is file size is not monitored. Can't we edit the file upload settings to measure pixels? Nothing over 800x600? [[User:Schm0|Schm0]] 19:16, 7 November 2007 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Redirects and article titles ==
 +
 
 +
How do you do that thing that makes a certain term redirect to a different page? Like [[Elephants]] redirecting to [[Elephant]], for example. --[[User:BahamutZERO|BahamutZERO]] 15:20, 30 October 2007 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
:If [[Elephants]] already exists, you can move the page to [[Elephant]], and it will create the redirect for you.  Otherwise, just edit [[Elephants]] to read: <nowiki>#REDIRECT [[Elephant]]</nowiki> --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 15:26, 30 October 2007 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
::I see, thanks! --[[User:BahamutZERO|BahamutZERO]] 15:27, 30 October 2007 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
:::Just FYI, if at all possible, ''do not create pages as plurals''.  Use the following syntax: <nowiki>[[Elephant]]s</nowiki>: example [[Elephant]]s. --[[User:JT|JT]] 20:20, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
What about titles that are verbs? Should they be in "base-form"? Or whatever its called (my english on this level isnt the best). Example: should the title be '''Mine''' or '''Mining'''? --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 17:30, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
  
−
<pre style="font:bold 20px/1 'Courier New';color:#ccc;background:black;width:auto;padding:0;float:left">
+
:Based on the Wikipedia style, titles should be nouns.  So in your example it should be the gerund '''Mining''', and '''Mine''' would be the title for an article about mines. I've updated the rule to reflect this. --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 17:35, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
−
╔═══╗
 
−
║+++║
 
−
║+++┼
 
−
║+++║
 
−
╚═══╝
 
−
</pre>{{-}}
 
  
−
Save the complex templates for when you actually need color
+
::What about skills and professions?  Should we have a '''Bone carving''' (labor preference) article and a '''Bone carver''' (skill) article, or would this be redundant?  I've seen both styles linked to, but tend to think that the -ing form should redirect to the -er form.  Opinions? --[[User:Mechturk|Mechturk]] 03:11, 5 November 2007 (EST)
  
−
You can even drop the complexity further for a nice typewriter character set
+
:::Sounds good to me. --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 11:21, 5 November 2007 (EST)
−
<pre style="font:bold 20px/1 'Courier New';color:#ccc;background:black;width:auto;padding:0;float:left">
 
−
#####
 
−
#...#
 
−
#...+
 
−
#...#
 
−
#####
 
−
</pre>{{-}}
 
  
−
(I picked this particular size because it makes <span style="font:bold 20px/1 'Courier New'">░░░▒▒▒▓▓▓</span> look right in them, which makes it seem that it's the size the font is designed for. I picked this _font_ because it provides all of the CP437 characters. The actual style tag you see above could be moved to a template so it would look like <code>&lt;pre <nowiki>{{TD}}</nowiki>></code>)
+
Btw, shouldnt all these comments be moved into [[DwarfFortressWiki talk:Community Portal|talk]]? --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 17:30, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
  
−
[[User:Random832|Random832]] 20:28, 30 December 2008 (EST)
+
:Moved the account problem comments to the talk page. The rest are informative. --[[User:Turgid Bolk|Turgid Bolk]] 13:26, 1 November 2007 (EDT)
  
−
== Mod content in regular articles ==
+
== Tutorials ==
  
−
"All mod content, it has been stated, should not appear in the regular articles." --[[User:Zchris13]], at [[Talk:Sand]]<br>
+
New players are getting bogged down by the complexity at the start of their fortresses, I think we should get some "getting started" or "surviving your first winter" type tutorials up as soon as possible. --[[User:BahamutZERO|BahamutZERO]] 16:33, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
−
If I recall correctly, one guy stated that yesterday. Personally, I find it rather counter-DF:<br>
 
−
"In Dwarf Fortress, modding almost ''is'' vanilla." --[[User:Savok]], at the [http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php forums]<br>
 
−
Opinions? Beliefs? Comments? Thoughts? Please, answer this, The Community! --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 11:24, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
 
  
−
:I'm probably the one who you're thinking of who stated it ;)
+
:[[Your first fortress]] will do just that. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 11:31, 2 November 2007 (EDT) <!-- changed GS to YFF on 2 June 2008 -->
−
:#I don't think that modding is ''ever'' vanilla, no matter what the game, how mod-friendly the game is, or how many mods exist.  Saying that it's incredibly common does not change the definition of the term "unmodded".
 
−
:#I think that modding information would be better served by putting it in one place.  It's easier to figure out modding and/or find the information you need if it's all on one page (or a small number of pages).  And if the information is there, why would you ''also'' put it on ''every single other article in the wiki''?
 
−
:#Whenever the ways something can be modded changes, every single article about that something would have to be changed.  If a new way to mod metals, for example, was added, then every single metal article would have to be changed to reflect this.
 
−
:#tl;dr version: I think it would be horrifically redundant even by typical wiki standards and would never be maintained anyways (seriously, there are still pages that haven't been updated since the 2D version). And that's even before you think about whether it ''should'' be done at all.
 
−
:--[[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 13:10, 8 March 2009 (EDT)<!-- reformatted by Savok to use a numbered list instead of a manually created numbered list. This note may be removed by Legacy now or by anyone after a few months-->
 
  
−
::Sorry, couldn't find it in all of yesterday's edits.
+
== Categories ==
−
::#Yeah, I shouldn't go changing my definitions of words. What I mean is "modding is normal."
 
−
::#I agree partially, but, since light modding is normal and mainstream, it should go in normal and mainstream articles.
 
−
::#No, every article that mentioned metal-modding. And I don't think that there are too many non-modding articles that do.
 
−
::#TL/DR: I think that a little mentioning of modding (for example, stating in [[Sand]] that you can mod any soil into sand (although that's a bit obvious)) is fine, although I fully agree that all possible topic-related modding should not be mentioned.
 
−
::--[[User:Savok|Savok]] 18:45, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
 
  
−
:::I think I can live with that ;). Also, I appreciate the reformatting: I couldn't find the instructions on how to make such a list, though odds are it's right in front of me =( --[[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 19:41, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
+
I saw that the category [[:category:buildings]] had been added to category [[:category:world]]. I started to look for categories without parents and adding them to world to sortof have a list of every category. Is this good thinking? --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 19:19, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
  
−
== Heading gripe ==
+
:We already have a list of all categories at [[Special:Categories]], although it does include a few categories that aren't directly related to the game.
 +
:Based upon the description of [[:Category:World]], it seems to me that most of the things that are currently in it don't really belong there. --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 19:27, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
  
−
I'd like to add to H that one shouldn't use heading sections of one = because it results in bad html coding and a title the size of the page name. It's also general practice on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Section#Creation_and_numbering_of_sections wikipedia]. Anyways, I thought I'd post something here before I go ahead and change it so I can at least pretend to have discussed it before hand. --[[User:Mikaka|Mikaka]] 05:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
+
::Ok, Ill remove them from [[:category:world]]. But how often is [[Special:Categories]] updated? I dont see [[:category:furnaces]] in there. --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 20:24, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
  
−
== Modding content ==
+
:::[[Special:Categories]] is automatically updated by the Wiki software as soon as it detects a change.  However, MediaWikis aggressively cache pages.  It's also possible you're looking a client-side cached page of it.  Finally, I don't see any content in that category so it's possible it's being ignored. See [[Special:Unusedcategories]] instead. --[[User:JT|JT]] 20:28, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
−
Is this, [[New_Plants]], really how we do it? Frankly, i found it a bit confusing at first. At least it should get a better header. --[[User:Confused|Confused]] 00:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
== JavaScript seems disabled ==
+
== Deletion ==
  
−
The collapsible box doesn't seems collapsible anymore. I don't see the [show]/[hide] anymore either, since the wiki broke. Am I the only one with this trouble ? --[[User:Karl|Karl]] 01:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
+
We now have a [[:category:deletion]], who has the power to delete pages? When are they deleted? Who make the final call? The same person that deletes them? What rules should we make regarding this? --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 11:57, 1 November 2007 (EDT)
−
:Apparently it's fixed now, at least for me. I have found that my browser cache can screw with these things on other wikis so no reason why it wouldn't happen here. Javascript becomes disabled on client web browsers far more often than it does on web hosts/sites which previously allowed it. (Possibly belatedly I know.)<font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 03:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Do we detail pointlessly? ==
+
:Anyone can mark a page for deletion using the <nowiki>{{del}}</nowiki> tag, however it is usually recommended to get a consensus that it's not worth keeping. Exceptions are things like spam or empty pages. The <nowiki>{{del}}</nowiki> tag just lets the admin know to delete it, ultimately it's his call to do so or not. Just ask around on the talk page first, if no one disagrees, add the tag. (Disclaimer: that's how it worked on the old wiki, the policy may change as this new wiki grows.) --[[User:Turgid Bolk|Turgid Bolk]] 13:02, 1 November 2007 (EDT)
  
−
As everyone knows, the wiki spoils everything about Dwarf Fortress. We have a spoiler-warning system, but it's quite disused. I think one guy said that it's pointless, because we need to put it on every page, because every page is a spoiler. We have a tendency to detail everything, much of which isn't helpful to newbies but ruins a little the delight a newbie can take in DF that no longer exists for us veterans.
+
== Water level style ==
  
−
For example, to quote the page [[woodcutter]], "Woodcutters are working outdoors where they are in constant danger of being [[ambush]]ed by invaders or attacked by wild animals (unless, of course, you are the proud owner of an [[Tower-cap#Underground_tree_farm|underground tree farm]]), but they are also one of the few civilian professions which carry [[weapons]] with them. Thus, it can be helpful to teach them how to use their axes to defend themselves (and others) properly by making them spend a few months as [[axedwarf]]s in your [[military]]."
+
I think we should have a standard style for talking about water level. We could say it various ways, such as "6/7 water," "water with a depth of 6," "a depth of 6 pool," or "water with a depth of six." It seems using the numeral makes it clear that we mean water depth, without adding the /7. --[[User:Turgid Bolk|Turgid Bolk]] 13:02, 1 November 2007 (EDT)
  
−
Here, all that really should be noted is that woodcutting skill does not help in combat. Yes, another problem with the wiki as it is is that we often assume that newbies know a lot of stuff they don't, making even DFwiki have a steep learning curve - a bit ironic. Regardless, pointless detail such as in the above article not only does not help but hurts, making the wiki dry and boring.
+
:I'm not sure. The /7 is definately unnessessary and that we should use 6 instead of six, maybe create a template to make the numberal blue/red (water/magma)?  If not "Water 6" and "Magma 5" seem short, simple, correct, and understandable.--[[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] 03:27, 2 November 2007 (EDT)
  
−
I propose that we write into our little [[Dwarf Fortress Wiki:Community Portal|constitution]] a guideline to avoid such detail in addition to removing large amounts from the wiki, fixing the pages. Of course, this is a major undertaking, not to just be done. What do y'all think? Agree? Argue? Please do comment. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 02:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
+
::Like {{Raw Tile|6|#44F|#009}} / {{Raw Tile|6|#F44|#900}} or {{Raw Tile|6|#00F|#000}} / {{Raw Tile|6|#F00|#000}}? --[[User:Matryx|Matryx]] 05:38, 5 November 2007 (EST)
  
−
:Wikis attract wikignomes who like to tinker and add information to articles until they are "complete". Attempting to define how much information can be added before an article is "over-complete" is pretty difficult.
+
:::Too hard to read against the normal white background I think. But just the coloured number on its own would stand out weirdly. --[[User:Shades|Shades]] 06:10, 5 November 2007 (EST)
−
:Is there a policy that this wiki must not spoil the game for new players?
 
−
:There are a lot of different reasons people read this wiki - it isn't just a hosted version of the wonderful instruction manual that is included with the game. Would [[computing]] be possible without collaboration (between players), which is nothing but spoiling?
 
−
:The answers would lie in either seperate articles, or some kind of template which hides information regarded as a spoiler.
 
−
:There is this option:
 
−
{| class="collapsible collapsed" style="width: 100%; background-color: lightblue;"
 
−
!colspan="1"| Basic intrduction
 
−
|-
 
−
|Woodcutters cut down trees.
 
−
|-
 
−
|}
 
−
{| class="collapsible collapsed" style="width: 100%; background-color: lightblue;"
 
−
!colspan="1"| Minor spoiler
 
−
|-
 
−
| They are one of a few civilian trades which involves carrying a weapon. In hostile areas you might want to consider training woodcutters as Axedwarves.
 
−
|-
 
−
{| class="collapsible" style="width: 100%; background-color: lightblue;"
 
−
!colspan="1"| Major spoiler
 
−
|-
 
−
|Another option on some maps is establishing an underground tree farm.
 
−
|-
 
−
|}
 
  
−
:However that requires some knowledge of either wikimarkup or html - tbh I just cookbooked it and it took me a fair bit of messing around before I got it right the first time.
+
:::: {{Raw Tile|6|#00F|#FFF}} / {{Raw Tile|6|#F00|#FFF}} or not even going so far as to use the tile template? --[[User:Matryx|Matryx]] 06:16, 5 November 2007 (EST)
−
:Another option is, linked articles, where you go from '''Woodcutter (base)''' to '''Woodcutter (minor spoiler)''' to '''Woodcutter (major spoiler)''' - it would be easy enough to include (base) in (minor spoiler) and (minor spoiler) in (major spoiler).
 
  
−
:I think "enough" readers ''want'' the major spoilers that taking them out would "degrade" this wiki.
+
:I think "depth of 7" works wonders, bold, colored text had a bit high contrast according to my taste. In case there is either magma or water, just state it. And we should also link to a waterdepth article for those that are in need of furher explanation of the concept. Example; "a water wheel needs to be placed in flowing [[water]] with a [[water depth|depth]] of at least 3". --[[User:Mizipzor|Mizipzor]] 07:44, 5 November 2007 (EST)
−
:<font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 03:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
::I just re-read [[woodcutter]] in full. IMO the article builds nicely from the basic "how to cut trees" to more advanced gameplay strategy, such as "enable woodcutting on every outdoor worker so they all carry weapons". Personally I don't see that as being a good value strategy, for the work involved in equipping that many dwarves with axes you could have a fairly useful (specialised) millitary - but it isn't the first thing a spoiler-adverse reader stumbles over. If it was the first thing in the article it would be a far greater problem.<font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 03:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
+
== Templates? ==
  
−
:I'm going to agree with Garrie on this. Counting me, there's at least one person who would not have stuck with DF if he hadn't had access to a thorough DF reference library such as this. When a new player comes to this wiki, odds are they're looking to have ''something'' spoiled.
+
Is there a page with a list of all the templates available to us? Are all of the templates migrated from the old wiki? --[[User:Felix the Cat|Felix the Cat]] 00:51, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
−
:One vote for 'Not Too Spoiled' --[[User:Njero|Njero]] 03:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
:Sorry to have apparently been totally unclear... I don't want to take spoilers out! I think that there are a lot of things, like the example from woodcutter, that a player can figure out on his <s>on</s>own, which can be a lot more fun than being told all the fine details of fortress 1337. I do think it would be good to separate the spoilers more in some cases, but that's a totally different topic.
+
:You can find a list at [[Special:Allpages?namespace=10]]. --[[User:Peristarkawan|Peristarkawan]] 01:44, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
−
:For another example, I think we can agree that it is pointless to have a page telling how to dig a 1-tile channel pit and designate it as a Quantum Dump, given that you know how a Quantum Dump works. We used to have (still have? not sure) one of those. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 03:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
 +
== Forum references ==
  
−
::I think your quantum dump page has been reincarnated at [[dwarven physics]]?
+
Where there is a bit saying "Toady said this", what is the best way to link to the forum?  Currently in magma, I've got a link to http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=001504 which shows up as [http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=001504] (not ''too'' bad). Is there a better way of doing it akin to Wikipedia with <ref>something</ref>? Maybe something like [[Template:version]] for future (but that doesn't cover the "this is how it works now" type thing. --[[User:Shagie|Shagie]] 02:17, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
−
::OK I think I see these points:
 
−
::# there is no clear guideline how much spoiling "is alowed"
 
−
::# there is no clear guideline on how specific an article can get (scope vs depth)
 
−
::# there is no clear guideline on when a "spoiler alert" should be given.
 
−
::I think that guidelines are good, in general. The rules are a bit flexible as most of us expect given this is a game-wiki not an encyclopedia. I know you do a lot more admin-editing than anyone else put together so you (Savok) probably have a better 1,000 ft view of the size of this problem than everyone else. Having said that... I would err greatly on allowing pages which are "game-world correct" to remain, allowing pages which don't have (dreadful) spoilers in the lead section to not have "ugly" spoiler warnings, and if we can have articles on [[computing]] and [[Glowing pit]] then pretty much there is no aspect of the game which is off-limits to being exposed by spoilers.
 
−
::I'm also agreeing with Njero, that if I hadn't found this wiki as quickly as I did, with detailed (and spoilerific) content of things from "how to dig" to "how to fight" and "what's hard to fight"... I would probably have deleted the game within 2 days of downloading it. Some of us don't find the forum that helpful!<font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 05:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 
−
:::+1 what GI said. I read the wiki before starting - I, personally, hate the whole "trial and errour" thing from scratch, especially in a game where the wrong little mistake can mean GAME OVER. I'm average-bright, and I still found that a lot of the "detail" was lost on me, at least until I had experienced it (or nearly so.)  HFS? Still haven't breached one yet (slow computer, and in no rush) - so I can parrot a lot about that, but really have no personal feel for it and still look forward to that experience (even if now I won't walk in blind to that particular practical joke).  If I'd wanted a surprise, I'd have not read those articles (and would be someone else). 
 
  
−
:::That said, I '''''do''''' find that many mid-experience and advanced articles do repeat basic concepts too much - the "how to dig a channel" for a quantum dump example, above. And over-link, etc. However, if a newb were to stumble on that page, altho' they aren't ready for the advanced stuff, they may wonder what the basic stuff is - and follow those links.  So... I don't think it's over-detailed for anyone except those who know the game (i.e. "us"). For the newb, stumbling about on the wiki, they either ''want'' to read about it, or ''need'' to, or both. Less detail is fewer links, and less overall usefulness to the (self-filtering) target audience.--[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 19:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
+
: IIRC the <ref> system on Wikipedia requires an extension to be installed. --[[User:Rick|Rick]] 17:48, 7 November 2007 (EST)
 +
::I know this is late but try this:
 +
::<nowiki>[http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=001504 Caption]</nowiki>
 +
::which shows as
 +
::[http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=001504 Caption]
 +
::I would use it like this:
 +
:::"According to a [http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=001504 forum post]..."
 +
::[[User:GarrieIrons|GarrieIrons]] 02:41, 6 July 2008 (EDT)
  
−
:We do not detail pointlessly. More spoiler warnings? Why not. The collapsibles might be a nice solution in many places. But no limits to the completeness of the wiki please. It's hard to figure out quite a bit of the more complex, and interesting, stuff like machinery on your own and quite a bit is counterintuitive too, like how levers work. It may be really neat if you think up using channels as moats yourself, but it still took me several tries to get a nice and working setup. Oh and bridges.. I still made so many mistakes ''after'' reading up on things. And as far as strategy goes, I have my own opinion on quite a few things said in the wiki, as do others, and often it's just those views that are put in the articles. Like I think its's fine to have your woodcutter ''not'' trained because an axe as such is a fine defense already. And knowing that, on some maps, with some effort, you can have an UG tree farm improves the fun (no, not [[fun]], '''fun'''). It's still hard and rewarding to actually ''do'' it.
+
Links of this form fail - is this forum totally gone/replaced, or can the links somehow be translated to the current forum? [[User:Random832|Random832]] 17:23, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
  
−
:Information may be a bit (over-!)redundant here and there, yes, but I am confident this will clear out on itself by and by when articles are better organized to be read "in a row". Lastly, what we write here, especially the strategy bits, will be found just as readily in the forums.  --[[User:Birthright|Birthright]] 19:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
+
== Crops categories ==
  
−
"Woodcutters are working outdoors where they are in constant danger of being ambushed by invaders or attacked by wild animals"
+
My wiki-fu is weak, but surely there is a better way to present the myriad crops than having a different category for each season and biome? [[:Category:Crops]] could at least show the seasons grouped seperate from the biomes. Are we going to put each plant in its respective biome and seasons, ''and'' in [[:Category:Crops]], or is [[List of crops]] sufficient? Just seems like there's a lot of potential for a mess here, and we need to standardize the plant pages and various categories.
  
−
You want to delete that? Savok, You are a cruel man.
+
Personally I like the way the old wiki did it, with some nice templates. Granted there are a lot more plants in this version, but not so much that we need 20 subcategories cluttering up the crops category. See [http://archive.dwarffortresswiki.net/index.php/Crops Crops] and [http://archive.dwarffortresswiki.net/index.php/Plump_Helmets Plump Helmets]; easy to tell what crops belong in what season. --[[User:Turgid Bolk|Turgid Bolk]] 02:52, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
  
−
"(unless, of course, you are the proud owner of an underground tree farm),"
+
== Wealth page... ==
  
−
I'd really like to know how the first player figured tower caps out on his own. Mayor kudos to him, if, but i rather suspect toady dropped a hint. So do we.
+
I've been looking for tips on building fortress wealth, and haven't really been able to find anything.  Can someone who knows something about it start a [[Wealth]] page?  I know that mining out areas, making things, and artifacts contribute to wealth, but that's all I know. How much does mining a square contribute? Are there other ways to build wealth? Do mined out areas have to be populated, or can I go mine away a random hill and have it count?  What are the best things to make to increase value? Do items have to be placed, or just made? and so on... --[[User:Bobson|Bobson]] 16:22, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
  
−
"but they are also one of the few civilian professions which carry weapons with them."
+
== Formatting standards ==
  
−
Well, it should be obvious that the axe still works as weapon, too...hm...but it isn't. So we say it.
+
=== Category tags ===
  
−
Thus, it can be helpful to teach them how to use their axes to defend themselves (and others)<br> properly by making them spend a few months as axedwarfs in your military."
+
On this wiki, the standard for capitalization in category tags is <tt><nowiki>[[Category:Stub]]</nowiki></tt>. I asked what it should be, and nobody answered for two and a half months, so I feel entitled to decide it. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 12:57, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
  
−
Okay this part could be reworded like you suggest: Woodcutting does not improve goblincutting. But wouldn't the information be the same? --[[User:Höhlenschreck|Höhlenschreck]] 21:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
+
=== Headers ===
  
−
I know I'm a little late to this discussion; but as an honest to goodness newbie I've found the wiki invaluable as is. I've been playing DF for probably 3 weeks now.  I attempted to dive right in and just play without reading the wiki or anything, just the actual in-game help.  What a mistake that was!  I couldn't even figure out how to turn down the volume on the in game music at first!  (partly because on a lap top without a num-pad the numbers for up-down selection were less then intuitive).  So far I've found most articles have just about the right amount of depth; although some could use some clarification).  With the help of the wiki I discovered how many mistakes I really made on my first embark and how lucky I am to still have that fort nearly 7 dwarf years later.  I almost had a lot of [[fun]] with lava; but a quick trip to the wiki made me realize all I needed was a constructed wall or door.  That really saved my bacon. --[[User:Kelsa|Kelsa]] 05:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
+
At the current time, the standard for a header is <code>=== Headers ===</code>. <code>===Headers===</code> is slightly easier to type, is typed more often by newbies, and works just as well, but has less white space. Input?<br>--[[User:Savok|Savok]] 12:57, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
  
−
== A for Anonymity? ==
+
:I like <code>=== Header ===</code> better, because it's easier to read, and the extra whitespace helps call your attention to the name of the section, whereas you might glance over it as an "unrecognized token" if you didn't manage to filter out the immediately surrounding markup.  I think the 2 bytes saved on whitespace is negligible and I certainly don't mind correcting them when I find 'em, if necessary.  A similar question (if it's not been asked) would be whether or not to include a newline in between a heading and its text.  I think for big sections of text, an extra line looks nice, but for multiple, smaller, less important sections, it's easier to manage the headings if there's no blank line separating them from the section they head. --[[User:Marble Dice|Marble Dice]] 14:18, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
  
−
On at least [[Talk:Fortress_defense#Use_of_User_Names_in_Defense_Designs|one page]], the concept of "non-ownership" of wiki contributions has been agreed upon, that designs should not have User's names attached, and phrases like ''"I like to..."'' be changed to ''"Some users like to..."'' .  Currently, the letter "[[Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Community_Portal#A|A"]] is for "Alphabet" - hardly enlightening.  I wouldn't mind seeing this slot used for a more formalized policy in this direction, to avoid repeating [[Talk:Bedroom_design#Personalisation?|this discussion]]. (Or is the alphabet thing now sacrosanct as is?)<br />
+
::I always put a blank line above and below a header (unless it's the first line in the page), except in rare situations, like the current List of Twenty-Six Rules. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 16:40, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
−
The applications of such "catch-all" pages are endless, especially as mod's become more and more prevalent both in-game and on this site.--[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 19:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
:Eh. For some things, we obviously want to give credit - [[tilesets]], for example. Personally, I would say that [[:File:Housing by Marble Dice.png|this bedroom design]] probably should be credited to Marble Dice. I don't think a policy that putting data here automatically makes ownership of it go to the wiki (and the wiki will make it anonymous) is a very useful one... --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 20:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
+
=== Talk pages ===
−
::Not so much ownership - ''certainly'' not a release of rights to intellectual property in ''any'' legal sense - but more a de-emphasis of personal credit over contribution for contribution's sake.  My name would be all over these pages, as would many others' - that would get old fast, and (possibly) encourage competition and possessiveness, rather than collaboration and contribution. But, as you say... eh.  Just thought I'd ask.--[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 21:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
:The thing that strikes me here is, it looks to me as though some of the designs (the fractals etc) have not been put here by the person who designed them. They were designed, discussed on a forum, then someone else thought they looked good and put them here.
+
The current standard seems to be to never put a blank line in a comment by a single users, except in highly lengthy comments, and to always put exactly one blank line between comments by different users, because that's what I say in [[Template:Newbie]], but is that correct? --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 16:40, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
−
:Even if that isn't right - the rest of the [[bedroom]] article reads as though that is how it happened. Until you get to the final entry - which in the original form looked very "owned".
 
−
:If you want to own something put it in user space. If you put it in article space expect it to get edited.
 
−
:I think that is the rule that needs to exist "somewhere", by nature wiki contributions aren't anonymous. <font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 00:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Category titles (capitalization) ==
+
== Italian Wiki ==
  
−
Reviving [http://dwarf.lendemaindeveille.com/index.php/Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/archive1#Category_tags this] section from the archive, you'll see that our [[Special:Categories|categories]] page (also, Category:Templates) has so many capitalization inconsistencies it'll make your head spin.  I propose Category:Formatting Templates as preferable to Category:Formatting templates though the existence of both shows that this needs to be addressed.<BR>
+
Hi!<br>
−
Also, how do you wikilink to those catagory pages?  Is it possible?--[[User:Rowenlemmings|Rowenlemmings]] 21:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
+
I've just ask to Tarn to open an italian guide on this wiki.. so can i do it? --[[User:Marte]]
−
:First I agree there should be a rule for naming categories, and as per "the" wiki, it should be "first letter of first word only capitalised unless there's a really good reason" (eg: <nowiki>[[Category:Toady One]]</nowiki> where the name of the category is a proper noun / "real name" ).
 
−
:<s>Secondly - Categories are "just" normal article pages with some magic behind them, link to them the same as any article. </s> oops I'm wrong let me check that.
 
−
:<font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 03:26, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 
−
::To link to a category page put a colon ''':'''in front of the word Category in the <nowiki>[[ ]]</nowiki> eg <nowiki>[[:Category:Wiki]]</nowiki> -> [[:Category:Wiki]]<font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 03:34, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 
−
:::Ah hah, mystery solved.--[[User:Rowenlemmings|''Rowen'']]<sup>[[User Talk:Rowenlemmings|(talk)]]</sup> 02:00, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
::While this is all well and good for new categories, renaming existing categories is much more difficult than renaming pages. With a page we can simply redirect, but to rename a category we need to go through each page in it and change the tag. This is a lot of work for relatively little gain. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 13:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
+
:No, this wiki is english only. You're free, however, to make an Italian DF wiki... I'm not sure how that works, though, so don't ask me. --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 22:29, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
−
:::Is there anyone around that can "borrow" a bot from "the other wiki" to do this kind of stuff? From my understanding a bot that
 
−
:::#scrapes '''Bad Category Name''' for the list of articles
 
−
:::#scrapes '''Bad Category Name''' for any actual content
 
−
:::#loads each article in turn
 
−
::::#searches for '''Bad Category Name'''
 
−
::::#replaces '''Bad Category Name''' with '''Good Category Name'''
 
−
::::#saves the article
 
−
:::#Writes the content from '''Bad Category Name''' to '''Good Category Name'''
 
−
:::is relatively straight forward (as bots go).
 
−
:::I don't know anything about actually using bots but I know what they can do.
 
−
:::How big is this wiki without the media part anyway? I thought the other thing about wikis is it is "relatively easy" to d/l the whole thing as a flat file, make this kind of edit with a text editor, and write it back up. After checking to see if anyone has edited any of the pages of course ;) <font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 13:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
==Bottom or Top==
+
i need an answer about this.. who can help me?
−
Not a big thing, but it seems we should have a rule whether new edits/sections in any non-article space should go at top or bottom of the page. Might also be added to the newbie welcome template. --[[User:Höhlenschreck|Höhlenschreck]] 21:49, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 
−
:Dunno if a rule is needed, most ppl quickly work out that the default action of the "+" magic button is to add a new section <b>at the bottom of the page</b> so this is how you "should" do it manually.<font face="FixedSys" color="#00FFFF">[[User:GarrieIrons|Gar]]</font>[[User Talk:GarrieIrons|rie]] 03:22, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Proposal: [[:Category:Best of DF Wiki]] ==
+
== Wikprojects ==
  
−
[[User:BaronW|BaronW's dwarven calculator]] blew my mind and made me crave some way of recognizing and celebrating it. I propose the creation of a wiki category that would consist entirely of abnormally excellent material to wow the reader and shock the house. This category would be managed by way of nomination and [[:Category talk:Best of DF Wiki|discussion]] rather than ad hoc addition, and a link to it would be added to the [[Main Page]] to encourage newbies to visit and marvel (I guess under "Wiki articles by category"). Think of it as a collective favorites list.
+
Do we have wikiprojects like Wikipedia? I want to start one on making sure answers to the [http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=ff2b3eb60775033d8509fa42a227db08&board=7.0 DF gameplay questions] in the forum are in the wiki. [[User:DanielLC|DanielLC]] 15:18, 4 October 2008 (EDT)
  
−
My nominations for initial inclusion:
+
== footnotes ==
−
* [[User:BaronW|BaronW]]'s calculator, of course
 
−
* [[:File:DF_Cheese.jpg]]
 
−
* [[:File:SquirrSurvCathedralAir1.PNG]]
 
−
* [[User:Vattic/Orcsicle maker Explained|Vattic/Orcsicle maker Explained]]
 
−
* [[Morul]]
 
  
 +
Before Wikipedia had <ref>, there were some templates they used to get about the same effect with a little more awkwardness - I can find them and get it working here if anyone wants. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 13:11, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  
−
# Feedback on the general concept?
+
== Pictures ==
−
# Comments on these nominations?
 
−
# Your own nominations?
 
−
--[[User:HebaruSan|HebaruSan]] 02:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Not sure where to put this ==
+
How about RL pictures of things like minerals, etc, that people may not be able to easily visualize? [[User:Random832|Random832]] 00:09, 30 October 2008 (EDT)
−
Does anyone else share my feeling the contributions of [[User:Raneman]] ([[Special:Contributions/Raneman]]) are, um, somewhere between odd, not getting the wiki and plain offensive? --[[Special:Contributions/92.202.17.169|92.202.17.169]] 14:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Best God EVER! ==
+
:I agree. Can someone edit [[Template:Stone layer]] to allow pictures of the actual stone? I'd be happy to contribute pictures after that. I suggest using the pictures on [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Wikimedia Commons]. [[User:DanielLC|DanielLC]] 23:39, 30 October 2008 (EDT)
  
−
I opened up an old copy of the *.040.* DF (with a popular mod package - inobtanium, molybdenum, a billion kinds of XXXmen, if it matters), named a Town Clerk, and noticed something odd about his personal life. In bright cyan, it says, ''"She is a worshipper of Liceva Wildspew the Piss of Seducers."''  '''Honest.''' (Liceva Theyisethawasa, with an umlaut y)  Now what she does in her personal life isn't the town's business, but it seemed funny enough for gossip. ;)
+
::We already link to the relevant Wikipedia article on all the stone and ore pages (at the bottom of that template). No need to bring all the pictures over here when they're just a click away. --[[User:Turgid Bolk|Turgid Bolk]] 14:43, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
  
−
I mention this here because I didn't quickly find a page explaining what the worship is all about, or whether it actually matters for game play.  Though maybe I'll figure it out when she acquires a lover. ;) [[User:Dorf and Dumb|Dorf and Dumb]] 00:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
+
== {<b></b>{[[Template:a|a]]|anchor|name}} ==
  
−
== Use of Redirect to Temporarily Point to 40d Pages? ==
+
<s>Can someone make that using my [[Template:Sandbox|quick mockup of the concept]] of anchor tags without the anchor tags? I'm busy trying to not get caught using the computer. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 23:14, 6 November 2008 (EST)</s>
  
−
I'm new here, but I've noticed that there are still some relevant topics that do no yet have DF2010 pages, yet do have pages for older versions. Would it be appropriate to temporarily have some sort of redirect page to point to the related 40d page (with a warning about it likely containing outdated information)? That is, until an updated 2010 page is created? -- [[User:Thundercraft|Thundercraft]] 23:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
+
:Nevermind, I just did it. :V --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 17:01, 19 November 2008 (EST)
  
−
== Suggestion: Add entity raws to civilized creature pages ==
+
== Worldgen artificial features ==
  
−
We already have the creature raws on each page. Why not add the entity raws for the applicable creatures, namely <s>Dwarfs</s> <s>Dwarves</s> [http://valarguild.org/varda/Tolkien/encyc/articles/d/dwarves/dwarfpluralof.htm Dwarrows], Elves, Humans, Goblins, Kobolds. All animal people civs use the same raws, so for them it may be better to create a seperate [[Animal Peoples]] page. [[User:Monkeyfetus|Monkeyfetus]] 21:18, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
+
I.e. sites, roads, etc.
  
−
== Wikis in other languages  ==
+
Right now, we have [[site]] which covers pretty much everything about buildings, [[road]] which has a section covering roads and bridges, and dwarf/goblin tunnels are briefly mentioned in both.
  
−
Who should I ask about adding another Dwarf Fortress wiki (written in other language)?
+
So, gathering opinions time - do you think we should have one article encompassing everything, one about sites and one about road/bridge/tunnel, or a different article about each map feature. And how do adventure-mode caravans fit in?
  
−
Thank you in advance.
+
[[User:Random832|Random832]] 13:09, 19 November 2008 (EST)
−
--[[User:Marzecki|Marzecki]] ([[User talk:Marzecki|talk]]) 02:10, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 
−
:As long as you have a site for it, it's fairly easy. I don't know if it's possible to host other-language wikis on this site, but they can easily be linked to from here when they're online ([[User:Briess]] can add an entry for it). --[[User:Lethosor|<span style="color:#074">Lethosor</span>]] ([[User talk:Lethosor|<span style="color:#092">talk</span>]]) 13:15, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 
  
−
: Thank you for your response. --[[User:Marzecki|Marzecki]] ([[User talk:Marzecki|talk]]) 14:15, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
+
== Redirects with potential ==
  
−
== Lies and jumping thru hoops! ==
+
I recently saw a link changed on the grounds of "when you can, don't link to a redirect" - I disagree with this - I think that when there is potential for a topic to eventually get an article of its own, links relating to that topic should go to that title so that they don't have to be altered when that article is created. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 08:34, 20 November 2008 (EST)
  
−
Yes, I'm angry.  
+
:In general I agree with you.  I also advocate the use of sensible synonym and alternate word form redirects, such as [[architect]] for [[building designer]], or [[reveal]] for [[revealed tile]] -- this makes it much easier to link things that need linking without having to pipe all the time.  (For the uninitiated, a piped link is like so: <nowiki>[[what it points to|what is displayed]]</nowiki>.)  The cost to the server for handling a redirect is negligible, according to the devs of the MediaWiki software, so we should take advantage of them, where it makes sense to do so.
  
−
Just wasted 30 minutes I could have spent playing, trying to first fix a minor page error, that I could have fixed on most other wikis in seconds, and then spent the rest of the time trying to find some way to contact a human being on this wiki. The lie, was in stating on the create account page, that giving an email was optional, but then not allowing me to actually DO anything here because I haven't validated something that was supposed to be optional in the first place. If the addy is required, then don't tell people its optional. I have no issue with using my addy, just with the lie. I did in fact give my addy, but haven't gotten around to validating it yet.
+
:In the particular case, I didn't contradict the poster because a) the redirect linked to didn't have much potential ("shore", was it?) and b) it was a piped link anyway. By the time you're going to pipe a link, at least use one that makes sense. A subsequent editor addressed that issue.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 12:36, 20 November 2008 (EST)
  
−
For the record, the page I was trying to fix is http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/Masterwork:Temple_of_Armok. on that page, it refers to a Guardian of Armok twice, and both have red links to pages that do not exist. A Google search revealed the page DOES exist here, though it has a minor typing error in the name. The name of the page is "Guardian of armok". It SHOULD be "Guardian of Armok", with the god's name capitalized. The red links point to the correct place, its the page that is in the wrong place, because of a typo.
+
Right, I just meant as a general principle. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 16:25, 24 November 2008 (EST)
  
−
Also, for whatever  its worth, I am a retired political activist, that ran a website that included, among a lot of other features, a sizable wiki. And--of course--I am a DF player. That means three things, first,, I talk a lot, second, I know my way around wikis, tho I am far from an expert on them, and third, I know a fair bit about DF and the Masterwork mod. Given those three things, I could be a help here, if this post doesn't get me banned. On the other hand, the way I feel right now after all the guff I just went thru, I will not be the least bit surprized or upset if I do get banned. I would just spend my the time I might have spent on this wike actually playing the game instead.
+
== Creature articles of little significance ==
  
−
Rick R
+
I just stumbled on [[Whale shark]] - there are numerous articles like this - and while there are plenty of creatures that are "notable" (either due to historical notoriety like the [[carp]] or [[elephant]], or due to some unique aspect of their behavior like the [[rhesus macaque]]), there's lots that are pretty much just name/tile/stats. Anyone have any thoughts on merging them into sensible categories? [[User:Random832|Random832]] 16:25, 24 November 2008 (EST)
  
−
== Mobile web mode ==
+
:An article with just stats is unimpressive, but I'd rather have the stats than not.  Merging them would be ugly unless the stats were removed, so I don't think there's any benefit to merging them.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 20:00, 24 November 2008 (EST)
  
−
I realize few of the wiki users consult this wiki in mobile phones, but I, for one, am one. Either way,  I'm here to humbly suggest to anyone responsible to this wiki to try and improve the mobile experience of this web. I know its not a fair comparison, but if you access the wikipedia with your cell phone and then access this wiki, you will see what I'm talking about. I know it's a minor thing, but for me is really the only thing here that annoys me a little.
+
== New version approaching ==
  
−
:Agreed. We could use the same extension WMF wikis use (I think it's MobileFrontend). I'll see if I can get it working when I get a chance. &mdash;[[User:Lethosor|<span style="color:#074">Lethosor</span>]] ([[User talk:Lethosor|<span style="color:#092">talk</span>]]) 02:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
+
Yes, I know it's likely not coming until april, but the new version will have some significant differences to the current one, particularly where combat is concerned. Shall we make a category and notice template in order to tag places that will likely need revision come april (or whenever it's done) in order to get a head start on organization? [[User:Fieari|Fieari]] 15:36, 25 December 2008 (EST)
−
:Not sure if it'll work on this wiki, since the extension only officially supports Mediawiki 1.22, which we don't use yet. If not, I might be able to pull together some custom CSS for mobile devices. &mdash;[[User:Lethosor|<span style="color:#074">Lethosor</span>]] ([[User talk:Lethosor|<span style="color:#092">talk</span>]]) 02:49, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Rule I - Tilesets ==
+
:It's hard to correctly anticipate what will need changing.  Better to wait until we have it in front of us, I think.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 16:09, 25 December 2008 (EST)
  
−
Back [http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/archive1#I when this was first discussed],  a number of users seemed to be in favor of allowing all screenshots that clearly represented the subject matter, not just those using the default tilesets. Unfortunately, that suggestion seems to have been lost in the shuffle, and today we still insist that "screenshots should use the default tilesets for clarity". I think that when users volunteer their time to upload screenshots we should thank them for their effort, not slap on a giant noticebox chastising them for using the wrong tileset. Practically speaking, no one is going to go to the trouble of recreating a detailed screenshot using a different tileset, so the noticeboxes just sit around indefinitely, cluttering up images without improving anything. I would like to see the "default tileset" stipulation dropped entirely from Rule I. Thoughts?--[[User:Loci|Loci]] ([[User talk:Loci|talk]]) 19:20, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
+
== Thoughts on {{rule|i}} - Diagrams ==
−
:Changed.--[[User:Loci|Loci]] ([[User talk:Loci|talk]]) 19:15, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Direct links from search don't save version setting ==
+
Isn't [[Template:RT]] really more complexity than we need? How about this?
  
−
If you search for the exact page title, you always get taken to the DF2014 namespace, regardless of what version you're currently viewing and the exact result doesn't even show up in the search result (making it seem like there's no results, unless you actually hit the search button). However, if you search for a redirected page name, it retains the correct version and also shows up in the results.
+
<pre style="font:bold 20px/1 'Courier New';color:#ccc;background:black;width:auto;padding:0;float:left">
 +
╔═══╗
 +
║+++║
 +
║+++┼
 +
║+++║
 +
╚═══╝
 +
</pre>{{-}}
  
−
A -3 [[thought]] for people that aren't using the latest version yet. [[Special:Contributions/137.147.3.135|137.147.3.135]] 12:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
+
Save the complex templates for when you actually need color
  
−
:The search has ''never'' defaulted to the current namespace - redirects from the main namespace are supposed to go to the current version's namespace ({{DF:Current}}). Any that go to v0.34 pages are incorrect. Suggestions not showing up is a separate issue, which I'll look into fixing. &mdash;[[User:Lethosor|<span style="color:#074">Lethosor</span>]] ([[User talk:Lethosor|<span style="color:#092">talk</span>]]) 01:31, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
+
You can even drop the complexity further for a nice typewriter character set
 +
<pre style="font:bold 20px/1 'Courier New';color:#ccc;background:black;width:auto;padding:0;float:left">
 +
#####
 +
#...#
 +
#...+
 +
#...#
 +
#####
 +
</pre>{{-}}
  
−
::What it has or hasn't done previously doesn't matter, what I'm saying is the current functionality is annoying if you're not using the latest version. If links on the page all stay in the same namespace, searches from the page should too. Redirects already do this, which makes me purposely try to use a redirected search term instead of a direct one so I get to the page I actually want straight away. [[Special:Contributions/137.147.3.135|137.147.3.135]] 10:53, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
+
(I picked this particular size because it makes <span style="font:bold 20px/1 'Courier New'">░░░▒▒▒▓▓▓</span> look right in them, which makes it seem that it's the size the font is designed for. I picked this _font_ because it provides all of the CP437 characters. The actual style tag you see above could be moved to a template so it would look like <code>&lt;pre <nowiki>{{TD}}</nowiki>></code>)
−
::Actually it seems redirects always take me to the v0.34 namespace ([[dorm]], for instance), it just happens that it was the one I was using, so it seemed like it was retaining the setting. [[Special:Contributions/137.147.3.135|137.147.3.135]] 10:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:::That's a cache problem - they ''should'' redirect to the DF2014 namespace. I'll see what I can do about allowing the default namespace to be changed, at least from the search - the easiest way to solve this would be to include results from versioned namespaces in the search results, if Mediawiki supports this. &mdash;[[User:Lethosor|<span style="color:#074">Lethosor</span>]] ([[User talk:Lethosor|<span style="color:#092">talk</span>]]) 01:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 
  
−
== Priority update ==
+
[[User:Random832|Random832]] 20:28, 30 December 2008 (EST)
  
−
I have had difficulty figuring out how the new priority system works, and part of that is that the wiki doesn't appear to have any information on it. I'd like to propose the creation of [[DF2014:Priority]] (or any more appropriately-titled page), or perhaps rework the pages on designations and other priority-related topics to include an explanation.
+
== Mod content in regular articles ==
  
−
It should especially be mentioned that "1" is the highest priority for designations. I had been playing under the assumption that "7" was, and my dwarves were never getting anything done that I marked as important.
+
"All mod content, it has been stated, should not appear in the regular articles." --[[User:Zchris13]], at [[Talk:Sand]]<br>
 +
If I recall correctly, one guy stated that yesterday. Personally, I find it rather counter-DF:<br>
 +
"In Dwarf Fortress, modding almost ''is'' vanilla." --[[User:Savok]], at the [http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php forums]<br>
 +
Opinions? Beliefs? Comments? Thoughts? Please, answer this, The Community! --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 11:24, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
  
−
[[User:Xolroc|Xolroc]] ([[User talk:Xolroc|talk]]) 17:58, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
+
:I'm probably the one who you're thinking of who stated it ;)
 +
:#I don't think that modding is ''ever'' vanilla, no matter what the game, how mod-friendly the game is, or how many mods exist.  Saying that it's incredibly common does not change the definition of the term "unmodded".
 +
:#I think that modding information would be better served by putting it in one place.  It's easier to figure out modding and/or find the information you need if it's all on one page (or a small number of pages).  And if the information is there, why would you ''also'' put it on ''every single other article in the wiki''?
 +
:#Whenever the ways something can be modded changes, every single article about that something would have to be changed.  If a new way to mod metals, for example, was added, then every single metal article would have to be changed to reflect this.
 +
:#tl;dr version: I think it would be horrifically redundant even by typical wiki standards and would never be maintained anyways (seriously, there are still pages that haven't been updated since the 2D version).  And that's even before you think about whether it ''should'' be done at all.
 +
:--[[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 13:10, 8 March 2009 (EDT)<!-- reformatted by Savok to use a numbered list instead of a manually created numbered list. This note may be removed by Legacy now or by anyone after a few months-->
  
−
:I'd say that should be added to the [[designation]] page, since that numeric priority system only applies to designations. That page currently points to [[Designations menu]], but feel free to change that. &mdash;[[User:Lethosor|<span style="color:#074">Lethosor</span>]] ([[User talk:Lethosor|<span style="color:#092">talk</span>]]) 20:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
+
::Sorry, couldn't find it in all of yesterday's edits.
 +
::#Yeah, I shouldn't go changing my definitions of words. What I mean is "modding is normal."
 +
::#I agree partially, but, since light modding is normal and mainstream, it should go in normal and mainstream articles.
 +
::#No, every article that mentioned metal-modding. And I don't think that there are too many non-modding articles that do.
 +
::#TL/DR: I think that a little mentioning of modding (for example, stating in [[Sand]] that you can mod any soil into sand (although that's a bit obvious)) is fine, although I fully agree that all possible topic-related modding should not be mentioned.
 +
::--[[User:Savok|Savok]] 18:45, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Please note that all contributions to Dwarf Fortress Wiki are considered to be released under the GFDL & MIT (see Dwarf Fortress Wiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Please sign comments with ~~~~

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page:

Retrieved from "https://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal"