Ring of Brodgar talk:Community Portal

This is the general discussion page for the wiki! New founders should leave a nice welcome message and encourage new visitors and editors to leave a note to get the conversation started.

---

Image extension

Hey, i noticed all image urls in the info boxes end with lower case ".png". File:Silkmoth.png for example. If you use ms paint to quickly edit images for upload it will end with capital ".PNG". Wikia does not recognise upper case as lower case and the other way around.

So be sure to upload images with properly named. --Sami1337 --:--, 22 July 2009 (-)

Low quality stuff

Not sure about having 'low quality' stuff on main object pages. As 'low quality' in general is more a game-play tip. Having a general 'low quality' info page seems more fitting. --MvGulik 06:47, 16 May 2012 (EDT)

Categories ...

I think some space for additional thoughts in relation to the current category tree might be useful. --.MvGulik. 11:45, 11 June 2013 (EDT)

• Category:Crafted versus Category:Curiosity crafted

Not sure at the moment what to do with this.

Important thing here is that "Curiosity crafted" is actively used for Curiosity table generation. And its a hidden category (One of the reasons for making the category hidden was to not have "Curiosity crafted" appear on the category-bar at the bottom of the subject pages. As "Curiosity crafted" is kinda long.).

The other categories that are also used for table generation are: Category:Curiosity foraged and Category:Curiosity miscellaneous. The "Curiosity miscellaneous" is the default if a item fails to fit into one of the others.

--.MvGulik. 11:47, 11 June 2013 (EDT)

I'm wondering if there's a way to split up the table generation to only grab items that are in both say, Category:Crafted, and Category:Curiosity? That way we wouldn't have to have Category:All Forageables, for example, forageable items could be put under Category:Foraged and curiosities that are also foraged can be put under Category:Curiosity. Any curiosities not under Foraged or Crafted could be listed as Misc. if necessary. I haven't looked at the table generation code and am quite drained at the moment. {{#ask: [[Category:Wild Plants]] [[Category:Curiosity]]}} should work for an AND union for two cats. Example:

So as a layout we'd have a category, Curiosity for all curiosity pages to be under (it could also be a property), and categories for Crafted and Foraged items in general (or properties. productionMethod::Crafted|Foraged?) And then we can select the pages in Crafted AND Curiosities, Foraged AND Curiosities, Curiosities !AND Foraged|Crafted? (Might have to have a separate misc. category if the !AND isn't possible) Building the table shouldn't be much different.

{{#ask [[Category:Curiosity]] [[Category:Crafted]] }}
{{#ask [[Category:Curiosity]] [[Curiosity:Wild Plants]] }}
{{#ask [[Category:Curiosity]] }}[[Category:Miscellaneous]] }}
Where Crafted would contain all items obtained through crafting.

On another note, I've been attempting to group categories in Category:Content together, it seems mostly self-explanatory but if there are any comments or suggestions on that, I'm listening. I'm somewhat tied up about making a new Category:Gameplay for things like Category:Cooking/Category:Farming and probably Category:Controls to separate such things from Category:Article stubs and Category:Terrain. Any thoughts? Sorry if this doesn't make any sense, like I said, drained. Foetuses [talk][cont.] 12:56, 11 June 2013 (EDT)

Some preliminary reply's. As I currently have only a limited/murky view of some of the wiki parts where talking about here. (Kinda focused/distracted on/by some other stuff than RoB-wiki.)

"I'm wondering if there's a way to split up the table generation to ..."

I don't know at the moment if you can select data based on if it exist in two category. I have to look into that. But I also don't know if it would be a good thing (Things kinda murky for me at the moment.).

Turns out you can, with those #ask commands I listed, pretty sure. It doesn't matter what pages are in Category:Crafted, {{#ask [[Category:Crafted]] [[Category:Curiosity]]}} should only return a list or table of pages that exist in both. As for if implementation in the table is possible (on Curiosity is where I'm referring to; the tables are split into sections, but all of the curiosities are also listed in one table) it is very much possible. I'll see if I can get some example pages up to explain what I'm talking about a bit better... it all seems like it should work just fine to me, though. No need to separate crafted curiosities or foraged curiosities into their own categories, you can just selectively pick them out, if I understand correctly.

"... (it could also be a property) ..."

I think your bypassing my current general wiki knowledge here ;-) . I have not had much in-dept dealings with properties so far. I have to see if I can find some time to update my knowledge on that part.

"On another note, I've been attempting to group categories in Category:Content together, ..."

I'm not sure if there is much content available at the moment for categories like "Gameplay", "Cooking", "Farming", etc. Other than some useful links to forum topics on the subject. (?)

What I mean for Category:Cooking and so on is to include all pages relevant to cooking, i.e. categories like Category:Sausages and Category:Baked Goods, etc. But that putting them alongside other top-level cats like Category:Article stubs doesn't seem appropriate. Content is as high as it goes, so all pages related to Fishing should go under Content/Fishing. There is a Skills category, in which case I think all articles should be linked to Content/Skills/Fishing, Farming, etc. There really shouldn't be any pages in Category:Content, I think, (as opposed to pretty much every page linking directly to that category). Each page should reference it through its subcategories, so putting a page in Category:Sausage should put it under Category:Cooking which should put it under Category:Skills which should put it under Category:Content.

I'm kinda in dubio here. I feel the category tree might become way to branched and deep to easily find something. Its kinda easy to overdo it in my view. But ... well, we will see. ;-) .

Yep. Category:Content is currently where all game related pages/categories need to flow from. The Category:Browse (as current true-root category) is for general wiki-organisation stuff only.

Clearing the Category:Content category of page-links might not be a bad idea ... BUT, if it involved a lot of pages changes its better not to start after having looked at it in detail (CQ: trying to flush out potential problems in advanced.). Will try to take a look at it. --.MvGulik. 09:37, 12 June 2013 (EDT)

Think some flow-chart view of the category tree would be useful here, but I'm currently having some other stuff on my plate :-( .

Will try to reread your post later on. Your dropping a lot of info/data/idea's, and I need time to digest it properly. --.MvGulik. 16:35, 11 June 2013 (EDT)

No problem, completely understandable. :-) I'll see if I can't make it clearer as for changes that should already be present in the hierarchy and an example on my userpage. Foetuses [talk][cont.] 19:50, 11 June 2013 (EDT)

User:Foetuses/CuriosityList

PS: Foetuses, when you edit a page (for something else), could you see about moving the category tags above the first header on a page. Like I did here. ... I should add some note about this to the rules, but never got to it :-(. TIA --.MvGulik. 10:01, 12 June 2013 (EDT)

The template for category tagging like here, Category:Content, asks that they are put at the bottom of the page. Perhaps that template thing should be changed maybe. I'll add them near the top of the page from now on I guess. --Deadguy60 (talk) 17:29, 19 August 2013 (EDT)

I gave clearing the Category:Content category of page links (CQ(for others): making it only containing links to other categories.) some thought. But considering the Content category page is currently the only page that contains just about all game related pages (And as such must be used a lot by general wiki users) I think its not a good thing to do at the moment. Creating a other major index page first is an option, but that's still a lot of work for just moving the main page-index from the Content category page. I think there need to be more and better reasons for starting something like that at this moment. --.MvGulik. 02:07, 14 June 2013 (EDT)

Ah, alright, just a thought. :-) I'll see how things turn out with some more thought, then. Foetuses [talk][cont.] 14:24, 14 June 2013 (EDT)

PS: After merging/ditching the separated Ore items/pages. The Category:Ore has now only one item in it. Personally I don't see really see the point of having categories with just one item. The same it true for Category:Metal Working if the Ore category is ditched. --.MvGulik. 08:42, 23 June 2013 (EDT)

Abbreviations?

Would commonly used abbreviations be something useful to add to the wiki (IE: wtb: want to buy, etc), and under what section should it be placed under? Glossary? --DDDsDD999 (28 Jan 2012)

(In case there might be some need for a list with generally used item abbreviations.) --.MvGulik. 15:27, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

BBB: Big Bear Banger (Food)
BBC: Brodgar Blue Cheese (Food)
BTT: Bear Tooth Talisman (Equipment)
CTC|CT: Cutthroat Cuirass (Armor)
HF: Hearth Fire (Structure)
LC: Large Chest (Container)
MBC: Midnight Blue Cheese (Food)
TW: Travel Weariness (transport)

General todo's: (for anyone of course.)

• Extend list
• Reorder in sections when needed
• Find nice location for it.
• Table it if needed.
• Link it up so its easy to find.

Item Page Naming

Always great fun when you run into stuff like this. (Not!)
For the Seer's Tea Leaves item, Server/Client(Ender) is using the string "Seer's TeaLeaves" for crafting. And the string "Seer's Tea Leaves" for Curio. Why o.O why.
--.MvGulik. 21:00, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

Redirect pages

Personally I think redirects should not be used to create search-bypass only links/page. Especially not if the wiki search feature is likely to give the page, a user might be looking for, in its list. (If its not, adjusting the page itself is a possible additional option to get it listed on a given search key-word. Or in other case, using a Disambiguation page might be a option. (Disambiguation kinda the wrong word, but ok.)

The following redirect pages all seems unneeded in relation to what a RoB wiki search returns on related keywords (bar, silver, etc.)

Silver bar
Gold bar
Delicious deer dog
Wrought iron bar
Steel bar
Copper bar
Tin bar

--.MvGulik. 09:02, 9 October 2013 (EDT)

I completly agree with that. Now in search for "silver" two out of seven given pages are redirects, that's just silly. --Rook (talk) 17:15, 9 October 2013 (EDT)

Giving it 24 hrs and after that i'm going to kill every single redirect which search term turns out page it redirects to --Rook (talk) 18:55, 9 October 2013 (EDT)

It might return 'search keywords' but I - and probably many others - find it extremely annoying to have to go through that middleman page for every simple search, especially since it's case sensitive (pointless; lazy development) --MightySheep (talk) 10:03, 10 October 2013 (EDT)

I would have thought that more is better when it comes to redirect pages but the fact that they show up in the searchbox lists is kinda silly, is there no command to be excluded from lists? --MightySheep (talk) 10:03, 10 October 2013 (EDT)

My experience with using wikis in the past is that they should only show the 'search keywords' page if the search failed, ie you searched for something that doesn't exist. When the average user searches "tin bar" they would & should expect to go straight to the "Bar of Tin" page, that's a fact. --MightySheep (talk) 10:03, 10 October 2013 (EDT)