User talk:MvGulik

From Ring of Brodgar
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Talk pages that generate broken links

I have been using the "Wanted Pages" list to find broken links. Is there a way to ignore broken links that come from talk/discussion pages? (Example: the discussion on Talk:Rock Crystal generates four broken links)

It doesn't seem right to edit the discussion but those "missing" pages are cluttering up the Wanted Pages list for me. Phaen (talk) 18:57, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Editing discussion can be a bit tricky. But in the Talk:Rock Crystal case those broken-links are title suggestions. As such I see no reason to maintain them as active links. Just converting those broken [[links]] to "quoted" page-title suggestion seems fine to me. --.MvGulik. 03:15, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Ok I'll do that. Thanks for the advice! Phaen (talk) 09:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Old Filet of Fish page

Could you please un-delete the Filet of Fish page and move it to Legacy:Filet of Fish? I don't know how to un-delete things but I'm trying to make it so Legacy:Fishsticks doesn't have a broken link anymore. Phaen (talk) 09:28, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Mm, yea. There is a little RoB problem here. I could, if there was something to un-delete.
Unfortunately, after the last mediawiki version update of RoB, all deleted page-revisions (or at least there history entries) where lost (not sure why). :(
The related delete-action log-entry however stuck around.
Image of related restore page. Any available deleted revision would turn up under the "Page History" header, which is eerily blank.
So your left with having to start a new page in this case. (figure that is also true for other Legacy pages you like to restore I'm afraid)
(PS: The "Filet of Fish" pages was just a disambig page.)
--.MvGulik. 12:17, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Fixed (test). Page content pulled from a 2014-02-19 RoB-wiki archive dump. --.MvGulik. 10:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

There's talking whale in this game. Never say never and Party Like It's 1999 (talk) 06:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Don't think its a good idea if other editors also (by example) start adding highly unrelated comments across RoB. (good basic self test: Would it be helpful if everyone would do what I do.) --.MvGulik. 08:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
What makes you think it's not a good idea in fun game-related wiki, as long as information added is not false? Hope it's not a feeling of panic.
Other editors? Don't get it personal, but when big righteous fish eats all small fish in community, there'd be only 1 fish left in the sea, which is lose-lose activity-wise. Alone editor can barely Party Like It's 1999 (talk) 15:14, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
What makes you think its a good idea to have no general standards other than "as long as it holds true you can, or should be able to, add anything you like" ?
Ps: I have the strong feeling your just using some throwaway alt-RoB account to try to stir up some dust for whatever reason. As such it might be a good idea to get to some real useful point.
--.MvGulik. 11:10, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
General standard of spreading information derived from concept introduced by HHGttG.
Ps: False alarm, don't panic, no need to develop little boss syndrome. Goal is to do no evil and Party Like It's 1999 (talk) 11:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)


Think its a good idea if other editors also start adding related comments across RoB, as this practice would improve reader's knowledge, experience and plant new ideas which otherwise could be limited. It would've been helpful gameplay-wise if everyone would've done that. --Party Like It's 1999 (talk) 11:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Neither of these edits, [1] & [2], are of any particular usefulness to the related page-subject itself. And if your interested in improving the general reader's knowledge ... you can consolidate your ideas in some user "Party's how to play the game guide page".
Discussion closed. --.MvGulik. 15:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)