Talk:Main Page/archive2

Version of MediaWiki?

Sorry if this is completely the wrong place, but does anybody know which version of MediaWiki these pages uses? Maybe that information could be included in the page About DwarfFortressWiki? --Gauteamus 17:00, 17 December 2007 (EST)

I think I found out. This page: Special:Version says the version is 1.10.1, which should mean that limited #for-loops are supported. I will delete these comments soonishly, but will let them stay for a while incase someone has comments --Gauteamus 17:28, 17 December 2007 (EST)

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)

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)

Humor?

Any thoughts about possibly linking Main Page/Quote Archive page somewhere on the main page? Its an orphan at the moment and is pretty funny and relevant. Vanan 15:19, 13 November 2007 (EST)

I'd like to be able to see that happen. New people coming here might get overwhelmed if we don't amuse them with some good humor here and there.--AlBorland 13:42, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Where does one stick new funny quotes? Namely, this:
""Thikut Atheludib, Marksdwarf cancels shooting at Archery Range: Interrupted by Groundhog pup" - What brave soldiers I have" Juckto 18:45, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Combat Logs?

What about a section where people could post cool combat logs from adventurer mode. This would different from the "Stories" section, which is more prose. (This is 'cause I'd like to post the log of a battle I had with a particularly clumsy Giant, who slammed into a wall allowing me to stab him in the back of the head for the eventual win. Its no dragon-slaying tale, but I still think its good.) --Wahnsinniger 11:59, 2 December 2007 (EST)

German Translation

I've got requests for either having a German wiki or Namespace. I'd like to have everybody's opinion on this. If you people think that having German (and maybe other languages eventually) translations on the main wiki is going to be annoying, tell me. I can also setup a new wiki on a subdomain (de.dwarffortresswiki.net for example). How would it be best organized? Should I use LanguageTemplates? Is there a need for other additional languages? --Senso 09:31, 17 January 2008 (EST)

Since Dwarf Fortress is only available in English, if you can play the game, you can also read the wiki. I really don't think a German (or any other language) wiki version is worth the effort.--Siliziumleben 14:22, 18 January 2008 (EST)

My oppinion also. This doesn't mean we should stop those enthusiam people though. --Eagle of Fire 13:06, 17 January 2008 (EST)

There's a big difference between understanding a game interface and reading long and complex tutorials, descriptions, discussions etc. I know French people who play this game; they can understand the UI but they use the French wiki for reference. Also, if I decide to use a separate wiki/subdomain, this will be totally transparent to you. --Senso 16:40, 17 January 2008 (EST)

My first language, the one I used since I'm born, is French. Yet, I way prefer this wiki over the french one. --Eagle of Fire 10:06, 18 January 2008 (EST)

I'm French too, you know. But when I offered to host a DF wiki, I didn't do it in French because I know English is widely used. But I'm still glad that someone else started a French wiki. --Senso 22:58, 20 January 2008 (EST)

I don't see what harm could come from hosting a German, Japanese, and Russian wiki. It's not like it will interfere with the English one. Also, as a student of languages, I would love to read equivalent articles in German and Japanese. --DDouble 22:01, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I am german and while I can read english books like german ones, I have to agree that being able to use a UI and understanding the finer points in a tutorial etc. are two quite different things. I guess that if the bandwidth of the wiki is no burden on anyone, it could actually lead to an influx of new ideas and players, which is very important for a "community" game like DF. --Caiburn 20:44, 18 February 2008 (CET+1)

Requesting installation of ParserFunctions extension

It would be nice if the ParserFunctions[1] extension was installed (#if, #expr, etc). It would be useful for having templates that exclude parts of it if no values are provided. Note: I cannot find a place for requesting extensions --Aygar 13:00, 21 January 2008 (EST)

ParserFunctions has been installed. I did a quick test and it works. Let me know if you run into problems. --Senso 11:54, 22 January 2008 (EST)

Quote randomization

VengefulDonut, if you want to randomize that for improved quality, you'll need to do it right: Many (most?) of the quotes in the quote archive are in an ARCHIVE: They are bad quotes never intended to be reused. Also, what do we do when we get new quotes? Do they get put in a database, not to be used till the RNG chooses? --Savok 20:11, 7 February 2008 (EST)

What would you like? VengefulDonut 20:36, 7 February 2008 (EST)

I suggest that one quote is permanant, and the other quote refresh everytime we visit the page. So far, I noticed that even if I refresh the page, the same quotes stay. --Eagle of Fire 05:49, 8 February 2008 (EST)

A new quote on the left, and a randomized archive quote on the right? As for the refesh: the template checks the time. --Jackard 06:35, 8 February 2008 (EST)

What is the tick? Every few minutes? --Eagle of Fire 08:14, 8 February 2008 (EST)

The template checks the time, but the time doesn't update because the server caches the page. It gets a new one whenever the server refreshes it; you can force this by editing the page or by clicking the preview button. Also, I could make it so that one of the quote boxes picks from the newest x quotes. VengefulDonut 10:43, 8 February 2008 (EST)

Having a newer quote on the left and an archived one on the right sounds better than a permanent quote on either. PS. Might want to remove a few of them, like the 'palisade' quote. --Jackard 11:47, 8 February 2008 (EST)

The goal of the quote archive was to archive every single quote which ever got to the main page. If you want to thin out only the best quotes, I suggest you use a separate database for that. Even then, how "good" is a quote is very open to interpretation and taste. If I had to remove all the quotes I find bad or unfunny myself, I'd probably remove 80% of the present quotes in the archive. --Eagle of Fire 18:46, 8 February 2008 (EST)

Ok. The right quotebox now chooses from the last 10 quotes instead of from among all of them. If anyone feels like they want to prune out or fiddle with quotes, go for it. I think what I've set up should be pretty straightforward, but if you have questions I'll be glad to answer them. VengefulDonut 20:11, 8 February 2008 (EST)

I added two new quotes (40, and 41), but only 40 is showing up at the moment, am I doing something wrong? --Markavian 10:10, 10 March 2008 (EDT)

You did it exactly right. The left quote box randomly chooses between all quotes. The right quote box randomly chooses between the 10 newest. It will come up eventually. VengefulDonut 10:17, 10 March 2008 (EDT)

Version updates

There's a new version out today, so the version number and release date need changing. Unfortunately I have absolutely no idea how to do this as they appear to use some kind of function instead of being typed in. Somebody with the know-how fancy making the change? --TangoThree 10:04, 24 February 2008 (EST)

Template:current/version

Template:current/lastupdate

VengefulDonut 10:15, 24 February 2008 (EST)

"American" English or Rest-Of-The-World English?

Just a minor question, while spell-checking articles, I've encountered a few discrepancies between the two, but I usually see the "rest of the world English" more. So what's the official rule here, assuming we're going for a constant? --Snoob 08:40, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Haha. You don't sound biased at all ;). I figure we can go one of two routes. We can either claim that DF is an american topic, since it's being made in america by an american and the wiki is on an american domain—or we can say DF is an international topic since people from all over are funding Toady. If it's an international topic, we might as well follow the wikipedia manual of style. Wikipedia has no preference over the variant used, but there should be consistency in each article. The first user who makes an edit which disambiguates the variety being used in the article is considered the first major contributor and all subsequent edits to that article should use the same type of english. If in doubt, we have history pages. I think the reason you see british english more often in the wiki is because we've had a few editors who in their extreme modesty decided british english is superior and changed several of the american english articles over. I've noticed this happening on a few occasions. (please dont do that). VengefulDonut 09:53, 7 March 2008 (EST)

I second sticking with the Wikipedia's Manual of Style for language. And as a note, there isn't a "Rest of the World English." In fact, the language is documented to vary much as the countries that speak it.

So, how does the Namibian English variant sound to everyone? At least then most of us are at an equal starting point! :P --TarrVetus 11:25, 7 March 2008 (EST)

I made a pretty bad assumption there, I suppose. I was trying to not sound biased, but I suppose I accidentally let it creep in somewhere. I'll just leave the variations to you guys and stick to cleaning up actual typos then. :P --Snoob 11:37, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Hehe. I can sympathize, Snoob. I've had this debate with myself in the past, though it was from the other side. --TarrVetus 13:17, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Navigation on bottom

Since recently (2 or 3 days) the navigation and search box are at the very bottom of every page (opera user). Can someone please fix this? --Koltom 07:38, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

It's at the bottom of the page for me too, and I'm using Firefox. Klada 11:43, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Confirm this is happening for me as well, Firefox 2.0.0.12 ubuntu 7.04. --Nunix 14:56, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

For what it's worth, ditto, and FF 2.0.0.12 Windows XP Home Edition Version 2002 Service Pack 2. --Savok 15:07, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Hah! Sorry, meant Senso. XD Good to have another confirmation regardless. Anyway, I went ahead and emailed him. It's weird how it just cropped up all of a sudden, hopefully something easily fixed. --Nunix 02:00, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

It should be back to normal now, sorry for that. --Senso 11:54, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

No worries, looks good here. Thanks! --Nunix 17:54, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

*Koltom jumps up and rejoices*

"Koltom was pleased to have a mandate deadline met lately."? --FunnyMan 06:13, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Many Laughs

Congrats to whomever made the april's fool's day changes. Yvain 04:34, 1 April 2008 (EDT)