User:Foetuses

I sometimes edit stuff; I mostly work with images and tables because I don't play anymore don't do as much work on the wiki as I could be because I'm too busy playing the game. ;) All curio images officially fixed, though. Only took a year. :)

I'm not sure if your also saying that you are also stopping with your HnH RoB wiki updates. But at least a thanks from me for the work you have done here. And yea, Actually playing the game sucks up a lot of time. ;) Cheers. --.MvGulik. 05:24, 5 June 2013 (EDT)

Nah, I love editing wikis. Just making it clear that I'm not playing and I'm not going to be a frequent editor, probably. Depends on how things turn out with the new codebase and my overall interests. You've been very dedicated to this wiki over these year(s?!), though, it's admirable. I've seen your attempts to archive the haven-res.jar file (an attempt to reduce bandwidth usage for the servers because new resources won't have to be loaded when seen? Though the influx of new members might make that trivial.) Have you considered a git repo? It might fit your purposes better (BitBucket is great). Or an SVN trunk. Most of my projects are utilities that never see the light of day, but if you ever need some extra man-hours, I've got way too much time on my hands and a semi-decent programming background, and I could potentially contribute to something if you needed it. Just an offer though, not expecting anything, I'll be polling this page for updates as I do for other sites every day or so just in case, though. ;) Good luck with whatever your current endeavours are. Foetuses [talk][cont.] 05:43, 5 June 2013 (EDT)

Roger and Thanks. :)

"Have you considered a git repo?" I do have a github account, but I never got around to really trying to use it.

"current endeavours" Trying to fit in with Brodgar2 group. ... Not going that well, lol.

--.MvGulik. 11:58, 5 June 2013 (EDT)

"verified, RIP q14 chrysalis". lol. Its sacrifice to the Rob wiki shall not be forgotten. ;) --.MvGulik. 12:47, 26 August 2013 (EDT)

[[Images to Fix]](page gone)

Talk about Wikifying

PS: Not trying to take any side. But think that knowing that certain pages/sites do or don't use something is not that interesting (other than as general examples of how it looks). Why they do or don't is. As such I looked up wikipedia's documentation/guides on the subject.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking#Underlinking (Overlinking is the next section).

But in addition I also think every wiki site has to make his own decision in this matter. (don't forget the additional work load, implementing and maintaining, that comes with implementing/following curtain rules/features.) --MvGulik 06:19, 21 May 2012 (EDT)

Yes, I also read the guidelines. And I agree, not every wiki is the same. I was just providing a counter-example. Having to scroll up the page or read through the starting paragraph of one to find a link to something you just read about simply isn't practical, though. Obviously having a link every other line isn't going to help either, it's redundant, distracting, and distasteful. Here's what I've been going by:

• Every object should be linked to when mentioned, including structures, items, animals, and anything else named in the game.
• No object should be linked to more than once in the same section. Of course, there are exceptions, but I think when you start to get to the point where a section gets lengthy enough to require a second page link or short enough not too need one, it needs to be reformatted. To quote Linus Torvalds, "... if you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix your program." Not exactly the same principle, but I think it illustrates the idea well enough.
• As per items I've been capitalising them as titled in-game, structures like Ovens, Herbalist Tables, Stone Mansions, etc. Hunger, Agility, Intelligence, Stoneworking, should all be capitalised as well, I think. I faced an issue on the Wooden Bow page where lowercase 'bow' was being used to refer to the Wooden Bow, even though it applied both to the Wooden Bow and the Ranger's Bow. The same problem could be seen with strength and Strength, e.g. 'Pickaxes are of greater strength than Stone Axes' and 'Players with greater Strength can break down Palisades', you could have a conflict such as 'Players with lesser Strength than needed can use a Pickaxe, which increases the strength of their hits.' And so far as formatting has gone thus far, if one property, such as Strength, is capitalised, so must be Intelligence, Agility, Dexterity, etc. and thus must be Hunger, Happiness, Ranging, etc.
• Most every image should have a transparent background, unless an in-game example is needed to explain something that can't be described well with words alone, like tree-planting layouts and UI navigation. Also, strictly PNG images, as they are lossless and won't misrepresent any in-game data. PNGGauntlet is a good tool for reducing the size of PNG images.
  I stopped using PNGGauntlet in favour of a pngout -> optipng -o7 -> advpng -z -4 chain, I haven't used the software in a while though.
• For math formulas I've been using subscript for the 'q' in text such as 'qwood' and 'qstring'. Fractions should be numerator/denominator. $(_{q}Example={\frac {Coefficient(_{q}{Variable})+Strength}{Denominator}})$ That would be "qexample = coefficient*qvariable / strength" in the common text format here. The math code for the above formula is <math>(_{q}Example = \frac{Coefficient(_q{Variable}) + Strength}{Denominator})</math>
• A lot of people seem to be using [[Plural|Plurals]] for their plural links, but I'm sure [[Plural]]s is preferred.
• Also, as common practice, <br> should be avoided, and, if necessary, should be self-closing to be XHTML compliant, i.e. <br>
  June 2013 reflection: the XHTML spec does not give preference to <br>vs<br>, and perhaps not even <br>

That's all I can think of for now, but it seems the most rational way to do things. Any other ideas? Foetuses 09:23, 21 May 2012

Nothing wrong with your standards. Although on RoB wiki there is generally no direct need for using more than one inter-link on a given item in a single page. As most pages are generally short. But at the same time pages can contain a lot of reverences to other objects. And not knowing what might change in the future in relation to the game ... Trying to keep thinks simple and easy to maintain is a main concern here I think. Adding additional inter-links on a section base for the bigger pages don't seem that wrong to me. But to prevent different users adding and removing inter-links the rules for it need to be clear.
Erm ... looked for the page that contains the rule(s) in question. But could not find it. Doh ... Found it. --MvGulik 08:42, 22 May 2012 (EDT)

Alright, I'll keep the linking to what seems rational for each page. I just have a bit of an obsession with everything being the same, standards, rules, guidelines, to be followed regardless of content, but I absolutely see your point there. Though I have also noticed that Article Standards isn't too detailed when it comes to page format, wiki code, math, tags, and categories. Perhaps an expansion would be in order? Foetuses 19:04, 21 May 2012 (EDT)

Maybe ... But feel free to drop ideas at the Article_Standards talk page. --MvGulik 01:00, 23 May 2012 (EDT)