User talk:Mattamue
Hi,
Seeing that you might keep updating the crafting information of items, may I suggest you a different way to display long lists of tools, components, etc?
To keep it consistent with the rest of the navbox lists it'd be better if you use dots to separate the items of a list instead of commas.
There's a template now in the wiki that takes care of the "drawing" of the dot correctly: Template:md. To use it you just have to put this {{md}} at the start of each item (except the first one). To increase readability and make the updating process easier it's also good to separate each item with empty comments.
For an example of what I mean check the wiki code of the stone hammer page.
The empty comments are there to make sure the list will be displayed correctly. By using the comments code that way, the wiki thinks you input all the items in a single line, instead of multiple lines. Otherwise the last line height uses to be higher than normal.
Anyway, if you feel like this is too much trouble you can keep using commas. But I'd appreciate if you at least consider it.
--Kenoxite (talk) 00:53, 9 October 2013 (PDT)
- Yes, thank you for the guidance. Happy to help create a similar look. --Mattamue (talk) 07:54, 10 October 2013 (PDT)
- Great. You might have noticed that I've kept tweaking template:craft. Now it allows you so set every different tool and component separately. So far it allows up to 6 of each, but it's easy to expand it to whatever the amount of needed tools or comps are. For a recent example check 9mm. --Kenoxite (talk) 08:08, 10 October 2013 (PDT)
- Actually, now that we're both starting to reformat how the crafting is displayed the height of that navbox will become "soon" a non-issue. I guess I'll just make it uncollapsed now, anyway, as I don't quite like the idea of collapsing the "section" navboxes. Should be done when you read this. --Kenoxite (talk) 09:00, 10 October 2013 (PDT)
As a matter of fact, all this discussion has got me thinking about how all the crafting data in this wiki works. I didn't want to get to this partly because I was waiting for BMacZero's bot, and partly because I'm currently busy updating other sections. But I guess it'd be better to start with this as soon as possible. The idea here is to use a system similar to the one I'm using to integrate item pages into item lists, without having to enter the data twice. The crafting data of an item would be in its own page, and it would then be called either from the main crafting page or the item page simply by embedding it (say {{:crafting/longbow}}, {{:crafting/<whatever>}}). That would allow both to implement the crafting data in the item pages and updating the data itself way easily than now, as you'd only need to update the crafting page for that given item. I guess I'll start to work on this tomorrow (heck, I'm tempted to start now) and halt my update of the ammo area. I'll keep you updated. --Kenoxite (talk) 09:20, 10 October 2013 (PDT)
- Okay, I will stop for now. Let me know what you would like to do! --Mattamue (talk) 09:23, 10 October 2013 (PDT)
- Looking good so far. Does this mean that the wiki will be able to built its own component in, tool in and category lists? --Mattamue (talk) 05:49, 11 October 2013 (PDT)
- Thanks. No, it's not that smart. All I'm doing is to tell the wiki to use one template or another depending on the page it's embedded in. No semantic database stuff here. The parameters you mention have to be entered manually, so you have to do a quick search in your text editor of choice for the instances where it's used as comp or tool. BTW, I can't go on for today. I stopped at grenade (I always update from top to bottom, in this case from recipes.json). Do you think you can go on your own for a while without instructions? If no, I'll try to create a cheat sheet in the following hours. We also should probably split the workload, if you're willing to help me on this. Say, me odd categories and you even, or something like that. --Kenoxite (talk) 06:15, 11 October 2013 (PDT)
- Well, close enough. Both the recipe page name (crafting/<item>) and the instances where the name appears in that page must be lowercase for all this to work. I'm working right now in full instructions. Will be up soon. BTW, good job on updating the chainsaw item info. That saves a lot of work later. --Kenoxite (talk) 08:29, 11 October 2013 (PDT)
Updating crafting recipes in the new system
You can read complete instructions here. Tell me if you have any further doubts. Also, to divide the workload, what about you concentrate on ammo recipes now (recipes from CC_AMMO category)? Tomorrow I'll finish weapons and start with food. --Kenoxite (talk) 09:07, 11 October 2013 (PDT)
I've been updating the weapons and food recipes these last two days. They're done, except some controversial food items that might eventually be placed as drinks. Following this odd/even rule I'll work on chemistry recipes next. If you think you can't help with the recipes, just tell me and I'll take care of the rest (ammo, drinks, etc). BTW, there's some new parameters that must be introduced when present, related to the recipe books and levels needed for some recipes (check morningstar for an example). I've also tweaked template:craft further. Probably the most important new feature is a link below all recipes that allows you to edit that particular recipe directly. That will come particularly handy in further game updates. If the recipe doesn't exist (as in a page with a recipe but without a recipe page) it creates a new page ready for you to fill it at will. --Kenoxite (talk) 11:33, 12 October 2013 (PDT)
- It all looks great! I just got settled into a new place and my connection didn't happen when it was supposed to. I'll browse around and jump in where I can. --Mattamue (talk) 18:17, 30 October 2013 (PDT)
- Looks like cc_ammo is done!
- I haven't been editing the wiki for weeks now. It's a huge, time consuming and pretty much ungrateful task, particularly for a single person, so I guess I got burnt out. Feel free to continue with the updating of the recipes from the remaining categories. I think only drinks, some food, and misc (which it's done up to "seat") are left. I also did some aesthetic changes (still in need of tweaking and expanding) and fleshed out the ranged weapons, ammo, mods, clothing and enemies sections, although ammo (which is a particularly complex section) still needs some finishing touches. I might come back here eventually and keep improving the remaining sections (tools, comestibles, etc), but right now I don't have the strength and will to do so. If you need further help or guidance when updating mention it in my talk page, so I get notified if I log in again here. And, yes, you should focus on the info available on the latest stable, not experimental builds. --Kenoxite (talk) 01:12, 1 November 2013 (PDT)
New guide
I just read your new guide - 'Power' - and I have to say that it's quite good; it should help new players out a lot. Thank you for writing it! - Rivet (talk) 00:08, 26 October 2015 (PDT)
Ver template
Hey Mattamue, I saw you made some edits to the ver template. And as I mentioned on the talk page and the forums, you kinda changed it away from the way I used it before. (I used it as an inline thing, you used it as a infobox thing) Currently it is used as both all over the place. I was planning to use it as a dynamic system so you can point out changes in the various versions. (As in, this game mechanic is about to change in experimental to X, and this was added in 0.A). Which is imho a better way to give people a hint to wether the information is still relevant. (As we don't have a DF like versioning system).
You clearly intended it as a DF like 'this page is for version X' system. I think it would be fine to have both on the wiki. (As we don't have a proper versioning system, (which would require bots when we release a new version) yet). But currently they conflict. As my intended usage was something that shows in the text a small change in versions (As shown on this version here: old spirtual page (ver template is broken of course, but look at the last note)), and yours is just tagging the whole page as being of a certain version (my version would also work for the tagging, but only if you added it on top of the page).
So my suggestion is to make an additional template. Some sort of {{infobox:ver}} or {{ver:inline}} or something. --Soyweiser (talk) 17:37, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'm on board with your inline version for sure. For me the top template change was needed for an overall status of the page's state in the course of the development. I felt listing the inline didn't give the needed information about the freshness of the page's details basically. I might have mentioned it, but nethacks wiki does this to some level of effectiveness and that's where I cribbed it from. In the end, and I think you agree, I feel both the inline and page versions are needed. I just never got around to getting the inline back into working order. Maybe splitting the page version off would be best since there are already prior uses that intend inline... which I broke! Otherwise, I think the page temple can get a lot of use in adding mod information into the wiki. Having someone to collaborate with could really help the wiki. I just ran out of steam a few months ago. Mattamue (talk) 02:23, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah, I created, added and updated the template:InlineVer in various places. And updated the mod template you created. Yeah, I also ran out of steam a few times already. Usually after I had to grand plans all at once :D --Soyweiser (talk) 11:58, 8 August 2016 (UTC)