Talk:Main Page/archive2

- GUYS I'VE TRIED TO IMPORT PRETTY MUCH ALL USER ACCOUNTS. Let me know if you notice something weird in this wiki, it's possible that parts of the import were fucked. --Senso 15:05, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

There's some people reporting problems in this thread: http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=001158 --BahamutZERO 15:22, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

The new version is out now! Update the main page! ~~

Accounts had to be wiped

It's out! It's out! Rejoice! By the way, my account is nonexistent, could you fix that? --Smoking Gnu 19:37, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

You'll have to recreate it. --Peristarkawan 19:42, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

My user account didn't turn up? :( --Markavian 20:05, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

Quoted from Senso (the wiki admin) on the forums:

"I've tried importing the user accounts but since I've upgraded to a new version of MediaWiki, it doesn't work. They've made changes, whatever.

So yeah, please recreate your account. It's sad, I know BUT LIFE IS SAD AND GLOOMY. You'll all forget about it once the new version is released."

No big deal. --Janus 20:31, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

Wow, the images during registration are ridiculous. Took me half a dozen until I could recognise more than half of it. --Ravana 23:32, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

Haha I had the same trouble, I just kept going until I got one I could read. --Gibbonofdoom 03:58, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

-Yeah, that CAPTCHA was nearly impossible, took over 50 trys to get in. :) Anyways, it's better than SPAMFEST for sure. ;) --UltimaPhantom 01:52, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Yeah sorry about that but it's either crappy CAPTCHA or SPAMFEST, I had to pick. --Senso 22:47, 31 October 2007 (EDT)

Change guide?

Was just thinking, perhaps one of the links (or sections) on the main page should be a guide to the major changes between last version and this one. Yes, a TON of stuff has changed, but a lot also has not, and a lot of the core concepts are the same... so I would imagine many of us who have played the previous version(s) would love a section where we can see a list of new basics we have to learn, along with links to those things' individual pages... like, z-axis (obviously), mechanisms, fluid dynamics, nobles, elevation/slope, farming... you get the idea. --Cliffjeff 11:43, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

Yea, I'm thinking not. Isn't the whole point of DF finding things out on your own? "Losing is Fun" and all that. Ok, so if we summarized all the changes, and someone (like me) didn't want to know we could not just not look at it right? What can I say? I'M WEAK! If we summarize the changes I will CONSUME it! (I'm only here because I still have another 6 hours of work before I can go home and try it!)

Meanwhile, I'm lazy and stubborn and would love a consolidated list of only new things I need to know =p and I'm also trapped at work and unable to mess around in the game :( but if the whole point was finding out things on your own, why would we have a wiki? ;p --Cliffjeff 15:58, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

I agree, I think the change guide is a good idea, and it would also help us direct our attention at the articles that are likely to need the most work. --Peristarkawan 16:01, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

It ought not to be very hard to generate a basic change guide based on the official change notes, and then update it as the details are discovered. --Bobson 16:26, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

A change guide 'page' might be useful pointing out major differences but I think the style of the wiki should be aimed at new users who know nothing of previous versions. I think we should not compare old/vs new as a rule, but if necessary we should include comparisons at the bottom of a page as apposed to the main article. That is how I am writing my edits. --Markavian 23:26, 31 October 2007 (EDT)

Basic Format

I think the Farming page is a good format for most of the key pages, perhaps the structure from the archive should be followed. --Infinity 05:56, 31 October 2007 (EDT)

Agreed, I've tried to copy this style on several pages, e.g. Gear Assembly. --Markavian 23:30, 31 October 2007 (EDT)

I would like to add a request for a 'build tree' of sorts. It would, for example, make figuring out how to get iron bars a whole lot less frustrating. --Dogcow 17:18, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

Hello, I've added a whole page on the various metals you can make now. This is my first time editing a wiki so feel free to make corrections for me if you want, just leave me a message on the page letting me know where I went wrong. Also, since some Alloys involve smelting 3 bars of metal now, I have included a new template called Alloy3 to display these. I'm not sure on the colors though so have at it where I'm off :) --Chthon 11:33, 3 November 2007 (EDT)

Fresh start

Hey, I just wanted to say... starting afresh for me seems to be the right move. So much has changed (I remember a focus on 'farming' and 'irrigation' before) that it just makes sense to start from a clean sheet. We've got 10 months of work to catch up on, good luck every one! --Markavian

I agree. It's also a lot of fun to go "hey, I found out something for myself! Is there a wiki page on it yet?" and adding stuff. Or wandering about the wiki and going "what's missing? Can I fill in the informational gap?"--Draco18s 17:32, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

Just a thought, but how do people feel about adding date released on the frontpage along with the version number? --Qalnor

Importing old entries

What's the stance on importing entries from the old wiki for stuff like general item stats? Most of them are still correct (or nearly so) and it would be nice not to have to switch between this and the old wiki any more. I can add a disclaimer to them stating I pulled them from the archives if that's appropriate. --Xazak 15:07, 2 November 2007 (EDT)

IMO (and I'm not admin or anything) it should be ok but only if you are 100% sure EVERYTHING is correct, and have verified it personally. I've edited at least one article someone copy-pasted with no changes that had old info in it so far and it makes me sad. --BurnedToast 15:38, 2 November 2007 (EDT)

Yes, I second this. Please be diligent if you are going to import old information. Even if you can't do it yourself, at least categorize it as needing verification so someone with the free time can. --EighenIndemnis 15:37, 6 November 2007 (EST)

You could use Template:Verify to indicate that something needs confirmation in the new version. --Senso 15:47, 6 November 2007 (EST)

I have noticed an increase of pages in which only an old Wiki page is copied/pasted along with a warning that it was copied and thus may not be accurate. Is it just me or that's exactly what we didn't want to happen, and one of the reasons we started fresh with the new Wiki to begin with? --Eagle of Fire 01:45, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Demystify messages?

Probably against the spirit of 'losing is fun', but how about a page that explains smoe of the more cryptic messages, such as; 'job item misplaced' and 'job item lost or destroyed'? Runspotrun 16:43, 8 November 2007 (EST)

Also, is there a suggestions pages? This probably isn't the best page to add ideas... Runspotrun 16:44, 8 November 2007 (EST)