User talk:Albedo

Aluminum in copper

I have definitely seen aluminum inside a copper vein. It was freakin amazing. Also found 3 magnetite flippin huge clusters, each as big as my fort, 3 lignite veins, 2 microcline (bleagh) big groups, gold and silver vein, 1 hematite vein. It was great. More iron than I know what to do with. But totally aluminum in copper. --Zchris13 12:26, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Stone articles

The articles on the various types of stone are based entirely on data taken from the game raws. It's possible the raw data has changed since the article was written, but observation alone is not good enough when we have that kind of inside info. If you see some sort of weird anomaly (like veins of aluminum), then Toady would most likely appreciate a bug report about that. VengefulDonut 06:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

not veins of aluminum. Aluminum adjacent to veins. I have seen it in hematite, and copper. --Zchris13 00:05, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Could someone point me to where the discussions are on how the articles should be set up? Sorry. I just... I'm being impulsive and driven and stuff and I want to know so I can /do/ stuff, and... you know, stuff. With stuff in it. I'm clearer after sleep, I promise. (Don't believe me, I'm always ambiguous, though rarely by intent.) --jaz 08:11, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

NM. Found it. Duh... Trust me, sleep is my friend. - jaz

(response)

But is it an anomaly? I'm not sure how to read the RAW's at that level. --Albedo 07:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Both are IGNEOUS_EXTRUSIVE, so, depending upon how the raws are acted upon, there are several ways this could happen...

1) The layer tiles are replaced first with veins(copper), and then small clusters (aluminum). Veins sometimes leave pockets of the layer stone incased, when the vein splits and then reconnects. I've seen it a few times, but I wouldn't call it common. The small cluster that would have been aluminum if the copper weren't there covers part or all of the area within the pocket. The rest of area of the small cluster is ignored, since the aluminum raws do not mention copper. (The way platinum mentions magnetite, for example).

2) The layer tiles are replaced first with the small clusters (aluminum) and then the veins (copper)... the copper vein just happens to meander around the pre-existing aluminum.

3) It does several iterations of whatever order it does, making both options 1 and 2 possible, potentially simultaniously (though not in the same tile, obviously).

4) Something completely different I have no clue about. I could make some stabs at things that could have caused that result, but they would all be both difficult and clunky, both in the design and in the implimentation.

5) It glitched. It's a computer. It happens all the time.

Was that completely useless, or just mostly so? - jaz 20:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC) (Poking around at modding is helping me learn to read RAW)

Trader

If the Appraiser skill is the highest skill you have, isn't the profession "trader"? I know I've seen the trader profession before. Below is what I think the skill/professions are.

Appraiser -> Trader
Building designer -> Architect
Organizer -> Administrator
Record keeper ->Clerk

I think that you are correct in that the overall skill (when you have two or more skills close in skill level) is also adminstrator. --Kwieland 20:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Just read your log - I notice you build walls around the pipe. Have you considered a channel around the pit? Same effect, but you don't have to carry stone.--Kwieland 21:17, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixed Trader - my bad. Read the Skill discussion page - that group of skills is not at all clear.

I don't intend to go near the imps - the wall will create an AG enclosure above my dining hall/kitchen area, for AG crops, statue garden, private water and fishing area, etc etc. (More extensive answers in Kwieland's talk page) --Albedo 01:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

fuel

While it is true that I moved the page to "Refined coal", the page I moved it from was "Refined Coal". The naming convention you were asking about is to only capitalize the first letter, since wiki links are case sensitive on all letters except the first. I think the original name of the article was "Refined Coal".

As for the origin of the term, it appears in the cancellation message if you assign a fuel-requiring task when you have no fuel. If this message no longer shows up, I have no qualms about retiring the term. However, if it still does then "refined coal" is a more suitable name than "fuel" since only "refined coal" appears in-game. VengefulDonut 06:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the confusion needs to be cleared up, but I don't think separating fuel and refined coal into separate articles will help since they are just words for the same thing. I think that the best solution would be a short disambiguation at the top of the refined coal page. As long as all the terms redirect to that page anyone interested in any of them will end up seeing it. As for the title, we should definitely prefer an in-game term over a forum-supplied term. Everyone who uses the wiki plays the game, but not everyone uses the forum.

The article as-is contains all the information pertaining to the naming issue, but if you think it's confusing, the page organization may be to blame. Perhaps information pertaining to names and categories could be consolidated at the top. VengefulDonut 15:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "fuel coal". The terms are "refined coal" and "coal fuel". VengefulDonut 13:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I know, I know! And I find I can't shake that term! (esp when tired). Not sure where used it this time, but it's like Pres. Bush saying "nucular arsenal". Arrrggghhhh!!!! --Albedo 22:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Olivine

See Talk:Olivine VengefulDonut 07:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

That revealed vein comment of Zchris13

I totally understand why you undid that, but it was sort of funny. And I can accomplish that without using a third party utility. I can create down stairs on the level above, which reveals the tile. --Zchris13 23:57, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

armorsmith page - re quality of artifact armor

In my head, I thought artifact armour & weapons were better than masterwork too, but that's not what the Item quality page says:

☼Item Name☼ Masterful ×12 ×2.0

Unique name Artifact ×120 ×2.0

And we should assume that's accurate, neh?--Albedo 23:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

nobody knows. It is a mystery!!!! Ohhhh...
I really don't know what to believe. Toady has dropped contradicting hints, people report contradicting data, and nobody really knows what is going on. I say we just put a maybe in there. --Zchris13 02:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorting table on Metal page by color

The issue is that the only plaintext in the color column is "*", which is hard to sort by. If we want it to be sortable we need the plaintext of each entry to not be identical. A pretty way to pull this off isn't coming to mind, but that's the goal. Nice work on the table, by the way. VengefulDonut 13:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe the first letter of the color name, in the same color as the background. --Zchris13 17:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Or change the tile entirely - the more I look at it, not sure what the whole "background color" achieves. But as I understand it the use of the icon (the asterisk) representing the ore is the problem. May take some rethinking.--Albedo 22:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Every metal has a unique foreground color and a unique background color. On items like doors, you get to see both. This is actually why doors are included in the corners of the diagram on the assorted metal pages (eg: copper) VengefulDonut 23:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

<Nods> Got it. Is there a way to "pipe" the icon in, and use some numerical representation to sort? Meh, you've probably thought of that. Or piping the icon in??? Or using a subtly diff icon? Sorting by color is, admittedly, perhaps the least of our concerns with that table. Maybe remove the "sortable" part from the template for now?--Albedo 23:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

What is it we are sorting here? --Zchris13 23:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Metal page table (fixed in sub-title above)

HA! fixed. me r hte supra jeeeenius! Completely by accident, natch. Tried adding numbers in w/ the asterisks, to give the system something to sort. That worked w/ only 2 numbers, they all sorted. So I backed out, and tried same w/ small numbers for a better look. Then w/ only 1 small "A" for adamantine, no numbers - that worked too! Then, just for the helluvit, I tried making one asterisk small - and that worked too, w/ no visible difference in text. All it needed was one difference, and they all get sorted, np. woot and a half.--Albedo 01:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

lol. Did you try it with no change at all? I bet that would have sorted, too. Why? Because the edit right before yours was a fix :P VengefulDonut 05:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

... buzzkill! LOL! didn't even see an edit before mine. suuuuupra jeeeeenius!--Albedo 08:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

User name vs preferred name/nickname

Albedo, I don't know why you think that it's unacceptable for someone to use a different name to sign their posts.
There's a built-in function for doing exactly that (once you figure out how to use it) in your preferences.
Additionally, while this isn't Wikipedia, you still shouldn't bite the newbies. -Edward 21:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I guess because I'm used to going to "User:Name" to find their page, and that doesn't work - why take one username when you intend to use an entirely diff nickname? And I felt I was more muzzling than biting - over-enthusiasm is laudable, and ignorance is something that everyone has, but a bad combination together in public.--Albedo 21:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I joined with my usual semi-anonymous handle, as I wasn't sure I'd stick around, or that the wiki was going to be worth working on. Later decided that I was going to try to be a significant part of the community, and set my nickname/signature to my Real first name. That's probably something similar to most people who use non-User name signatures. It's also possible that what name people would normally choose won't work for signing up. In the end, clicking the signature of a user will take you there, regardless of what they put in it or why they don't use their user name. -Edward 23:41, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Do tell. And you do this "clicking" thing with that computer mouse thing???... Stating the obvious is... well, exactly what it is. --Albedo 23:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

lol... ok, you want blunt? Don't tell other people to do something a certain way that you prefer, simply because you don't want to use the system already in place. -Edward

No, altho' blunt serves it's purpose. However now you're simply repeating what you've already said, which again serves none. But it seems I must follow suit - if I want to go to your page but don't have your sig in front of me, I would normally type "User:Edward" in the search box and hit "go" - that doesn't work. Hence, problematic, and NO direct system is in place. Solution? Either Search, or create a redirect for you. And your personal shift in names is not what TD did - which I thought would also be obvious. Your concern is admirable - I think you are/were confused as to my exact position, which is "Why adopt a psuedonym the same day you create the User Account?".--Albedo 00:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

It annoys me too, Albedo. But I really just think we should let it lie. Can't really hurt anything, can it? Other than our brains, but whatever.--Zchris13 00:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

<nods> --Albedo 00:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

... I didn't mean to get you all riled up. And thank you, Edward, for asking him not to bite me, but I /did/ rather earn it... at least the ignorant + over-enthusiastic part. (I'm not saying I'm cured, yet, either.) Also, with warnings all over the place, if I can't handle a little criticism, I should just go home and cry, and not come back until I'm all grown up. Boo hoo. Ok, I'm done now.

Again, as to the me not signing with a link, it was a P.S. There was a (hand typed, oif) link directly above. Also, I was /really/ new and /really/ ignorant. I'm still fairly new (I've still got the "how to use the tildies to sign your name" guide at the top of my talks page so I don't forget), and I'll always be ignorant, but I'm fairly decent at figuring things out once five or six people have yelled at me about the same thing. Thanks, btw. I did need that. - jaz 20:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I might recommend putting in a new-user default page that explains basic behind-the-wiki language, except for 2 things. A) It would not have helped me keep out of trouble, since I initially signed up due to poor impulse control and I /had/ to respond to... I don't even know what, anymore. And B) most (but not all) is fairly easy to pick up on the fly if you (bother to) look at how it was done by the other six people who responded before you... which is why I was typing my link out by hand at first... and some of them said "Teres Draconis" instead of "jaz" because I didn't understand the syntax at all. When I say "I don't speak geek," I'm not joking. But I think I'm learning to read this dialect fairly well. - jaz

The WTML is fairly easy to understand, much easier than HTML. There is a very helpful help section at The Big Wiki. Note that their rules are different from ours, you don't need to follow their style guidelines.--Zchris13 17:17, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Non-Dwarves guide to stone comment

I guess you removed my comment on alunite to avoid confusion with the value stuff? I've had places where you can't go more than 20 tiles or so without "You have struck Alunite!".--Smjjames 12:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

(response) Np then as it's understandable to avoid confusion.

Armor sets

You seem to be interested in changing these. How do you like what I did?--Zchris13 01:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
VengefulDonut seems not to like it so much. hmm...--Zchris13 03:48, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

glass = wood

Elves dislike green glass as well? VengefulDonut 00:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Good point - now that you mention it, dunno. (I didn't make the original post, just expanded to explain the connection). I've got a Spring trading session coming up, and green/clear glass - I can triple check. Or, if you know the answer, of course feel free to edit the edit, np by me.--Albedo 01:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I have no clue on this one :P VengefulDonut 06:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Did you use charcoal as fuel when making the glass? (charcoal = dead tree) I've found that on the few fortresses I've had with /no/ source of coke, elves got /very/ picky about what they'd buy. If you used charcoal to smelt the ores, using coke to make finished products may "correct" this problem, but it's rather hard to tell, now. Of course, that doesn't help with glass, does it? That's a single fuel product. - jaz 09:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

quotes

You know, if you change a quote then it's not a quote any more. VengefulDonut 23:34, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, fyi, quote page policy is that re-adding removed quotes requites a talk page discussion. VengefulDonut 23:36, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

You're right, but considering your given reasons for that mass deletion, I didn't bother with a vote for each one, I just reduced their size and replaced. Not all of them - a couple I didn't feel should have been there to begin with, length or no.--Albedo 01:02, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

You didn't respond to the first issue, which is the bigger one imo. VengefulDonut 05:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

You can't change what someone else said just because they didnt say it the way you wanted them to. If the spelling bothers you so much, then feel free to tag it with [sic], but if you change the content at all then it's not a quote any more. VengefulDonut 07:49, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but that is, in my personal opinion, absolutely absurd. But fine - you asked for it.--Albedo 11:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Arbitrary quote removal is completely supported by the current quote guidelines. You can find them on talk:Main Page/Quote. These are not guidelines that I made up on the spot or forced on anyone. They have been around for a while. This is not cause for ad-hominem attacks (actually, I can't think of any situation that is) VengefulDonut 16:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Various disagreements

I just wanted to say that even though you and me are disagreeing quite a bit lately, I usually agree with most of your decisions. I think you're a good, rational editor. So please don't take things personally when an argument comes up. VengefulDonut 16:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Good rational editor. Yup.--Zchris13 22:00, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

And it all seems so polite. It's nice when people can disagree with courtesy and style. - jaz 09:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Defense Guide

Hi, I'm a lurker, and know squat about wiki editing. However, there is something that should go into one of the new pages - but I'm not sure which. Mechanics (and others) have a nasty habit of wanting to clean, or reload traps during conflict. Forbidding traps after they are built will keep, for example, DOdok McGoblinBait from deciding to reload a stone trap in the middle of a siege. I got this info from User:0x517A5D's Siege Checklist, which has some other defense info as well. FWIW, I think you're doing a great job with this. --Bob 01:29, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

[[link]]s vs [[links]]

You know why redirects were invented right?

So editors like me can be lazy. (Alternatively you could hunt up all the plural redirects and nuke all of them, there are plenty.)

Having said that, I made the change because I find [[masons]] easier on the eye in the edit window than [[mason]]s, but it's an "individual preference" I guess.

By the way: rhetorical questions in edit comments make you look like a smart arse, just like my first line makes me look like one. There is no "tone of voice" in an edit comment. GarrieIrons 06:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

G'morning! You're right. I was tired, and hadn't remembered you were an old hand at this. My comments were meant to be helpful, not condescending, but I can see how it could be read either way. So many editors dive in without realizing what's going on, and since it's invisible in the final product... Meh, in the end, masons, masunz - whatever works. I guess for me, it's all about the "root word stem", but as you say, that's just preference. For what it's worth, I agree with 99% of your edits that I've seen, and the other 1% are a coin toss by me. I guess this is one coin toss I kneejerked on.--Albedo 13:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

No harm, no foul... you say g'morning, I say g'night! All I know is I just survived an ambush for the first time without saying f#@k this and abandoning. Pop went from 65 to 50 though... :( (my recruits v their Master bowmen) Thank you surpentine passageway and stone-fall traps! Now what do I do with a half-dozen gobs? GarrieIrons 14:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Screenshot Tilessets

I'm sure you're aware of Rule I.
Mentioning it due to the SS's you put up on the Vein (and other) page(s). -Edward 00:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

??? - I am aware of it, and I use the vanilla DF tileset - why do you mention it?--Albedo 01:15, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see the issue, you're using the default graphical set. Hmm.. the rule is kinda ambiguous there. I just picked up on it from seeing the bearded dwarf, since I always stick to the pure ASCII, as does most of the wiki. Perhaps this means that a call for clarification should be made on Rule I? -Edward 03:34, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, the "default graphical set" - and rule I says "Images and screenshots should use the default tilesets for clarity" - not sure what else it is that you were expecting, nor what "clarification" there needs to be made - default is defaul, neh? The recent tiles I posted in mega projects (tower) were straight off this site - here Character table. Can you point to an example of what you were expecting? --Albedo 05:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The graphical set and character set use somewhat different images for most of the tiles. Certain characters like the dwarves, and dwarfbuck, have noticeable differences between the graphical and character sets. It's no big deal really, but it seems inconsistent to have some SS's with the graphical set and SS's and diagrams with the character set. (Not that it's your fault either, mind you. I agree that the rule was followed, but as I said, I think the rule might need to be changed.) -Edward 21:21, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see - I remember that I tried using the default "tiles", but my PC balked at the very idea. It seems there are about 3 different "defaults" lying around - those two plus this wiki's ascii table - hrmmm. While standardization is good, I'm not sure how we can expect a "vanilla user" to conform to both sets. (How diff is it?) --Albedo 22:38, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Not sure how I could quantify the differences any further than I have already. You could look for yourself at the curses and graphical files in your directory for further comparison. The differences aren't really that big, and I agree that the average editor probably wouldn't know the difference, but then, you're no average editor, are you? ;) I guess the most I'm realistically hoping for is that a handful of editors that are looking for something to do (perhaps Jaz would be a good recruit for this?) would re-capture the images that don't use whichever set is agreed upon to be the standard. I dunno, don't really have any ideas for this, outside of the idea that we need ideas :p -Edward 21:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

???

If you know what's going on, then I must be missing something. I don't get the point of what you did at all. How is [[rope]] different from [[restraint|rope]]? VengefulDonut 21:49, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

re: End of statement

See talk:soap. VengefulDonut

Masonry

I see in several articles you've mentioned that a building requires the masonry labor to construct. For a few of these, I'm suspicious because of how it is with screw pumps. There it depends on the building material, just as with walls and bridges. Rock, glass, and soap building materials will require masonry. Wood will require carpentry, and metal will require metalsmithing. I have only had this come up with bridges, screw pumps, and walls, but I expect this will hold in general. VengefulDonut 03:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, you're right - I make those with stone blocks exclusively, and wanted to emphasize the 2-stage construction - just spaced on other labors for other materials. I'll track down what I can.--Albedo 05:52, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

version tags

You can use {{subst:current}} to create a version tag on a page for the current version. When you use template:version in other cases, please try to use an actual version number (eg: 0.28.181.40d) since otherwise it will get stuck into category:unknown version rather than the appropriate version category. This will matter when game updates make us pick over the old stuff. Also, the game mechanics of 40d# versions are identical to 40d since the only changes are Baughn's OpenGL fixes. For this reason, it's safe to bundle those under 40d's umbrella. VengefulDonut 02:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

RE: Garnierite

I'm an absolute twit; It *was* in gabbro, i forgot that gabbro looks exactly like obsidian. *doh*. Riffraffselbow 01:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Burrows

Toady did put in burrows, but the version Toady is working on is different from Baughn's OpenGL project. The d# releases are made by Baughn. When we have another version from Toady (with different game code) it will have a different version number. VengefulDonut 18:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The "open gaming" was an just incredibly weird thing to see in the article. An "open gaming" update doesn't even parse right. It wasn't an intended as an insult; rather an exclamation at the strangeness of the thing. VengefulDonut 21:23, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and the other arrangement wasn't consistent with the formatting of the article. I didn't think altering it would be a problem since the same information is available a paragraph away. It's aesthetic nitpicking. VengefulDonut 21:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

2 minutes

That would mean your framerate would not be 100 FPS. Shardok 10:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

More confidence? It's obvious. That's *all* that needed said. And frankly, I don't care whether people with faster computers see the game as more of a game or not. All I was doing was explaining *why* it takes you 2 minutes as opposed to 2 seconds for you (which was already explained *in* the article after my revision. Shardok 10:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Except that you'd be deleting a talk discussion between multiple people. Even just deleting your parts would ruin the discussion, and whether or not it was or wasn't valid at this time doesn't mean it couldn't be a valid discussion for people later on, maybe someone using the Dig Deeper mod will have the same question and won't be certain if it's the mod or by default, then by seeing the talk there they'll see that it's the mod that does it. Or someone could have the same weird problem as you and might be able to give better explanation for why. Shardok 19:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

actually

would be nobles'. :) But this wording is better anyway. --Koltom 23:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Quietust explained the purpose of the restricted areas in the article. They are purely to demonstrate that the dwarves had no route except that one. VengefulDonut 23:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: Ice Wolf

(you can "verify" yourself by looking at the file. 100% the same as "wolf" except biome and activity cycle)

My "^[Verify]" was aimed toward the statement of them being "unnatural" creatures, not identical to regular wolves. Sorry for the confusion, though. --Bronzebeard 20:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Contact Info

Yes, I will make my email address available as soon as I get a few more things worked out with the server. Briess 18:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

IP Numbers / Sig

Is it possible you were logged out at the time? I enabled anonymous edits for at least a trial period earlier today. If that's not it, let me know and I'll dig deeper.--Briess 06:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia.com does not have any edit restriction time; instead, they have a brief period of time before a user is auto-confirmed. IP issues may seem odd, but a user is not going to have his IP address dynamically reallocated while using the wiki (as that would cause an internet disconnection at the minimum), responding on the talk page is the same for as a user, and restricting edits based on an arbitrary account scheme is not exactly something that is welcoming. Instead, (and this is from my experience on wikipedia); you'll find that many times the users that continue on and perform substantial positive edits start out as an ip, and eventually register a username; also, the way the current captcha is set up encourages registration (skip the annoying captcha instead of filling one out every single edit, yay!). I understand where your concerns are coming from, but some people like to be anonymous contributors. We shouldn't begrudge them that; and if ip vandalism ever becomes an issue, it's trivial for an sysop to block an IP, range of IPs, or I can very quickly disable edits from unregistered users. At the very least, I want to see what kind of anonymous contributions we will get here for about a month before I go and disable anonymous edits again. --Briess 06:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeesh, you just want to make me work, huh? announcements all over the place! Yeah, I'll point out the stuff somewhere, but preferably when I'm less sleepy and slightly more awake. :) Also, my brain is not sufficiently on right now to answer your question in any fashion that would make sense, so I'll do that once I've had my caffeine for the day.--Briess 09:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Eagles

"In the real world, Giant Eagles are flying supermarkets that are nearly as strong as elephants." I laughed for a good couple of minutes.--Briess 21:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Er, oops, meant to see if you thought perhaps we should change it :V --Briess 22:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Pages for Deletion

I went through the pages for deletion category, and the majority of them I instead redirected to the appropriate article, or rolled back to a version with a redirect to an article. --Briess 17:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I prefer to err on the side of caution when it comes to deleting pages - although administrators (sysops) can review the full revision history of a deleted page, it becomes inaccessible to any others who would attempt to access those resources. Also, the search engine capability is notoriously weak on the mediawiki engine; until such a time that either this wiki is upgraded to a version with improved spelling detection and / or the search system is replaced, I would prefer to err on allowing the redirect of spelling errors to the intended page; the redirect pages consume very few resources server-wise (1 redirect action is completely followed to the target page in as few as 180 lines of code, versus displaying a page which is a cost hit of 10s of thousands of processing events). I can completely understand your concern on keeping the site 'clean,' but until we have a feature for the wiki (and this is something I'm working on!) allowing for tagged 'stable' or 'excellent' revisions, I highly doubt any measure of cleanliness truly matters to anyone except for us wiki-connoisseurs. Also, if the inclusion of such a spelling travesty as "bizmuth bronze" allows some poor, um -- well, moron to access the material they needed, perhaps we can consider that a success?

Also, I don't want to claim here that any such policy is set in stone; instead, it's just something I felt would be an appropriate reaction. If you disagree, I propose we >>EDIT WAR!!!<< over these pages. Er, I really meant if you still disagree, I'm more than willing to continue discussing what the appropriate course of action should be over any editorial policies we may have on this wiki. --Briess 23:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Is that a threat or a promise? ;) --Briess 00:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Graphics gone missing

I thought I had recovered all the missing graphics, but I guess I was wrong. Let me know if another rears its ugly [404] head. --Briess 16:32, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Exploratory mining

I'm a bit confused as to what you mean by labor vs. net effect. Ordinarily, I would expect labor to refer to the number of mining jobs necessary to dig out a particular area, whereas net effect would be the number of tiles dug out. However, the comment you made would seem to imply the opposite. What exactly do you mean by labor? --LaVacaMorada 01:17, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Economic Stone: Bauxite?

Excellent edit. I like the way you did it better than I, and your point is well-seen. Just figured I'd pop by to give a thumbs up since I would assume editor's changes aren't well-received as a general rule (though it seems most people here run contrary to that tenet). Anyway, good work! Erd T. Mans (the guy who inserted Bauxite where it didn't belong!)

NO0B!

If you have questions, you can ask here or you can email me at locriani in the something is gmail address. Behind the scenes code is... fun, and the best place to learn that is at the mediawiki wiki, or, for the new engine, the [wagn|http://www.wagn.org wagn] wiki pages. Wagn is rather interesting, but will take a bit to get used to. Yeah, I want to kind of get a few of the templates and features in on Wagn before we start really stuffing new version information into the wiki (and create an account, so I can grant you admin on that as well), so that's what I'm playing with at the moment. Honestly, even with the link in the front page, about 1/10 people will look at it, 1/1000 will register an account, and nobody will actually edit it, so I think we're safe for the new version pages. :) --Briess 17:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Your account password is now the name of the 5th Special:UnwatchedPages on the list, all lowercase. Please change it :) --Briess

Dwarf Fortress Wiki:Versions

Based on your comments and input on the administration requests pages I thought you might be interested in this kind of discussion. Please bring in your comments on this page and on it's talk page and let everyone know what you think. Thanks! Mason11987 20:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Could you drop by and comment on "consensus" again? [1] Mason ^(T-C) 00:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Current events

I'd like you to take a look here [2]. Thanks Mason ^(T-C) 15:01, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Disabling Edit Rights

If you click on hide patrolled entries, all of my edits will be hidden. --Briess 21:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Addendum - since QuietBot is marked as a bot, its edits are also hidden by default. --Briess 21:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Title of pages in tab

It seems with the "40d" migration, most pages just show 40d in the tab at the top of the article (like where the discussion, edit, etc tabs are) . Can that be changed to show the article title instead? I looked at experience and appraiser and they both had it so I assume it is universal. If you can check that appraiser question, I'd appreciate it too ;) --Kwieland 00:01, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, all of the 'normal' articles show "Page" in that tab, not the article title, since that tab is used to indicate the namespace in which the page resides. --Quietust 01:39, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand. What is a normal article? One for the "future" DF?--Kwieland 05:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

The title of the pages have never been in the tab. I don't understand it except from observation - if you open any page from before the "new format" (for instance, and go back to the page itself (rather than any redirect to a d40 page), for instance hammer, you'll see the word "page" where you'd expect the Article Title to be. I suspect that's a sort of "domain", an organizational option for wiki. Default is "page", but "those who know wiki code (better than I)" have set up a different one, "40d", to distinguish those articles from the previous, or what until now have been "normal" (ie, undistinguished/default) ones. This umbrella category for articles is called a "namespace". The current Admin paradigm is that for every future version release, there will be a new namespace - so there will be a (ver = DF2010) namespace very soon, and then some years in the future a (ver = 201?) namespace, etc., etc., to keep the articles from muddying each other, and to allow any legacy versions to keep their documentation intact. (It's been said before, but it bears repeating - Users should remember that "DF2010" will 'not be the official version name, that's just a "working title" users have adopted to refer to the imminent(?) release... and personally I'd find it darkly hilarious and not overly surprising if it weren't released until 2011.) --Albedo 13:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)