- 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.
Difference between revisions of "v0.31 Talk:Glass industry"
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Are you joking? The article is hardly aesthetically pleasing , what with that broken flowchart. A flowchart which takes up half of the page space. Don't worry about changing the rating, though, I'll just upload my personal flowchart on the subject and replace it when I get home from work. It looks nice, and screwy tables won't break it. --Kydo 21:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC) | Are you joking? The article is hardly aesthetically pleasing , what with that broken flowchart. A flowchart which takes up half of the page space. Don't worry about changing the rating, though, I'll just upload my personal flowchart on the subject and replace it when I get home from work. It looks nice, and screwy tables won't break it. --Kydo 21:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Okay, there, a clean flowchart. It looks a little intimidating, probably because of just how much stuff it contains. Any suggestions on how to make it look friendlier without detracting from it's detail? --Kydo 07:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 07:34, 16 October 2010
How much of this should be copied from the 40d article? The only real difference I can see is that now sand is a trade good and can be chosen on embark. Otherwise, it seems pretty much identical. That being said, I don't see why we should say "Consult the 40d article, except sand is easier to get" if the goal is to create a stand-alone DF2010 section. --Shadowfury333 23:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Okay, that flowchart doesn't work
On Firefox 3.7, IE 8.0 and IE 9.0PP4, that flowchart doesn't work. I'd take a snapshot of it in chrome, and replace it with an image, if we all agree on that. Plus, it's never a good idea to use tables for that kind of stuff, because it is something the MagmaWiki skin can break. So? --Dree12 18:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
The flowchart is incorrect too. It shows: "Wood industry" -> "Ashery" -> "Pearlash". The correct chart would show of course: "Wood industry" -> "Wood burner" (-> "Ash") -> "Ashery" (-> "Potash") -> "Kiln" -> "Pearlash" --83.119.189.36 21:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah... There's generally no point in using a table for this, other than text sizing. The arrows are images too, which causes all sorts of link trouble. If there's more of a consensus, we should just make a new one. --Dree12 01:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Masterwork?
Are you joking? The article is hardly aesthetically pleasing , what with that broken flowchart. A flowchart which takes up half of the page space. Don't worry about changing the rating, though, I'll just upload my personal flowchart on the subject and replace it when I get home from work. It looks nice, and screwy tables won't break it. --Kydo 21:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, there, a clean flowchart. It looks a little intimidating, probably because of just how much stuff it contains. Any suggestions on how to make it look friendlier without detracting from it's detail? --Kydo 07:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)