Talk:Main Page

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

The Stop Censorship Banner

Can we get this off of the wiki? This place isn't for political advocacy. --Bouchart 23:37, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

No. If this bill passes, I will be unable to host the wiki due to the legal issues involved. --Briess 00:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

The bills have been essentially struck down. There's a chance they'll return, but I think the banner doesn't need to be up anymore.--173.167.163.13 18:18, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

SOPA/PIPA have been struck down. ACTA, however, is far from dead. --78.144.215.247 20:40, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

New version

The main page recognises the new version, but not the new release date. 188.95.42.176 14:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

That's because the release date comes from a different template, which nobody updated. Given that this version is not save-compatible with 0.31.xx, it's very likely that a new namespace will be created to cover it, so it might be good to wait on updating existing pages. --Quietust 14:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

A few questions, then:

• Is the DF2010 namespace going to be changed to df31 or similar, based on the version number instead of our placeholder title?
• Will the new namespace be DF2012, df34, or something else?
• {{ArticleVersion}} and Dwarf Fortress Wiki:Current will need to be updated, yes?

Yay new version! --Timrem 20:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

On each of those questions, I'm not sure - I've contacted the admins, but I haven't yet gotten a response. --Quietust 20:48, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The main page has recognized the new version but not the new release date, again. Just reminding the people in charge to fix this :) --Merreton 16:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You can change it yourself, you know. Template:Current/lastupdate. --Timrem 18:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Typo

"French forum ,Canard PC Thread (Fr)" comma needs to be moved to the left

Editing Guide

I'd like to suggest that a new page with editing tips be created and linked to the main page. I think expanding on this would be great. I especially would be interested in more information on how to do redirects, since I've done some incorrectly in the past (thanks for fixing them, Quietust!). I think it would be an excellent resource for those who haven't edited any other wikis before (like me) and for people who aren't familiar with the particular quirks of this wiki. Hopefully, this would reduce the number of red links we have the next time the namespace changes. --Cali 09:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I very much agree. I signed up recently to help out, and, as a new wiki person, I couldn't find a consolidated source of information about editing standards. The "Centralized discussion" page needs the aforementioned links. Especially the link to the [[1]]Alphabet Constitution. Darchitect 15:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)Darchitect

Yes, the "Alphabet Constitution" should be easier to find, and is included in the link I provided above. I'm glad I'm not the only who thinks this would be a useful idea. --Cali 00:38, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Gameplay Elements: Buildings vs. Workshops

Is there some reason why there are two separate pages for the same thing? And why does the Workshop page have this "Tier" categorization implemented? It doesn't seem to be necessary. I think the two should should be merged, and only contain a brief overview of what each workshop does, with a link to the workshop page.Darchitect 15:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)Darchitect

Yes. Workshops are buildings, but not all buildings are workshops.

The tier system is an attempt at systematizing the workshops relative to their input and output. As it is unnecessary, confusing, and not directly representative of the game, it should be removed. No article should list workshops anyway, as we have {{workshops}} for that.

I suggest that we make DF2012:Workshop a short general article that refers the user on to the specific workshop articles. --Nahno 23:02, 28 February 2012 (UTC)-

Excellent suggestion. I second the motion. I'm going to edit the Buildings article a bit, as well, as it doesn't communicate its concept very well. --Darchitect 20:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)