User:Mendel/Talk Archive 8

Add new section

I reserve the right to edit section titles to coincide with the section content. Size: bytes. =Comments=

Symbolic Kick - Autocat with Location InfoBox
Here's the symbolic kick/reminder to setup some autocat with the location infobox. (I thought it worth another shot :-)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 02:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

hop on IRC
Could you hop on for a moment plz? kthx Himm Taeguk  (T/C) 10:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Resolved. -- ◄mendel► 11:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Nothing is resolved... nope I'm just saying hey.[[Image:Wikismiley.svg|19px]][[Image:Spikeicon.png]]  Tenetke Mekko    My Talk 16:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Postcard
Mendel, Mendel, Mendel, postcard, postcard, postcard --   † F1 ©  Talk  17:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Userbox! -- ◄mendel► 10:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Nice let me see if I can get the Laser Sheeps in a Userbox 2 xD. It looks nice Mendel :D -- [[Image:F4Sig.jpg|19px]]  † F1 ©  Talk  16:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well not the best. But Will work on it some more if i find some time :D

--   † F1 ©  Talk  16:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, with all the bugfixing I forgot to tell you I enjoy your box! :-) -- ◄mendel► 00:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Never give all the Heart
-- ◄mendel► 22:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi-res hotlinking
Hey, as usual I am somewhat clueless to the actual appropriate location for my question/suggestion, and so just default to you and get directed from there.

This time: is it feasible to consider modifying the basic skills template (that appears on skill pages, for example uhm, say, Malign Intervention) to include a link to the hi-res version of the skill icon? As an incessantly curious artwhore, I constantly find myself going "... wtf is that" when I see skill icons, and it'd be moderately more convenient to be able to insta-link to the big version instead of having to load up the Hi-Res index, select the profession, and then CTRL+F down to it.

Something like:

Basically, I'm curious if:
 * This modification of a major site feature seems reasonable,
 * The modification would be simple to implement, and
 * Anyone would care enough to require me to go post a notice of proposed development somewhere.

Thanks for any info, -- AudreyChandler 22:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * A modification of the skill box requires sysop intervention as it places quite a bit of load on the servers, so, yes, people would care. Your suggestion has been discussed before, though I don't recall where; and as far as I know, Dr Ishmael had standardized the names of the High-res icons such that if you know the name of the skill, you can deduce the name of the icon. If that's true, it's not technically hard to implement; I'd prefer a small "enlarge" icon such as the one used on the thumbnail images instead of the more "intrusive" textual link that conveys no information about the skill. The community portal talk would probably the best place to discuss this. -- ◄mendel► 22:41, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Unofficial Official public forums.--Łô√ë [[Image:Gigathrash_sig_G.jpg|Roar.]]îğá†ħŕášħ 22:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What would we do when the hi-res icon differs from the in-game icon? --  Shadowcrest  23:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, the names are standardized, so it could be inserted as a simple algorithm into the template code. I was unaware of the server-load issues. Alright, so instead of the text, you'd prefer something more like this:


 * {| class="infobox skillbox"

! class="name" | Malign Intervention
 * colspan=2 |
 * colspan=2 |


 * }


 * How's that? (icon may be off-center a little bc, as usual, I'm not a code whiz... to put it mildly) I'll community-talk it once I can clear the basic hurdle of satisfying Mendel. x]


 * (EC) As far as Shadowcrest's concern, that is why I originally intended it to section-link to the primary hi-res article page (eg, High-resolution skill icons/Necromancer) using a # plus the skill name. Those pages have prominent notations above any skill icon that is mismatched. Alternatively, I could draft up a list of mismatched skills which should specifically be excluded &mdash; it's not extensive. And of course PvE skills could be auto-detected by the template code and given a grayed-out magnifier with the mouseover text "No high resolution icon available". -- AudreyChandler 23:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If you see me as a "hurdle", please step right past me. I like to think my contributions to the discussion improve what we finally do, and if that's not the case, I'm doing it wrong.
 * Your sample design looks fine now.
 * I don't understand the problem about mismatched skills (probably because I haven't looked), but it is possible to redirect images if the name is not what it should be (see File:MiniPolarBearIcon.png), and it is possible to introduce a parameter in the skill template that specifies the hi-res icon name if it differs (but using a redirect might be simpler?), and it is probably possible to write javascript that displays the icon when you mouse over the magnifier (i.e. without leaving the page) (but I can't do it).
 * Also, I edited your example to take advantage of the image linking that has become possible with the 1.14 update. I suspect is not possible to edit the caption of that, though. Would it make sense to simply link the skill icon to its high-res version? -- ◄mendel► 06:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Forgot to mention: we could link the profession icon to the "primary hi-res article page" instead. The possibilities are endless there. -- ◄mendel► 06:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Aw, chill~! I meant "hurdle" in a positive sense, like a checkpoint. IE, if you think something is properly designed then it probably means it's ready to be presented to the wiki community at large. I see your opinion as a very good signpost for how much development an idea still needs to be viable (since you're rather clinically direct and objective, generally patient, and not a pretentious caustic jerkwad).


 * The problem with mismatched skills is that the hi-res icons are stolen from the SealedPlay fan kit cards, and some of those cards use the wrong image for the skill (or confuse two images). A good example is at the Ranger page. The skill "Bestial Pounce" (a Prophecies skill) uses the icon for "Savage Pounce" (the Factions duplicate); meanwhile, "Savage Pounce" uses the icon for "Bestial Mauling". And checking "Bestial Mauling", it... has the correct icon. So we end up with 2 instances of Bestial Mauling, 1 (misattributed) instance of Savage Pounce, and... no hi-res to be found for Bestial Pounce. So the SealedPlay stuff has some very severe mixups going on in a few spots, and it's not at all predictable, and sometimes there's no correct icon to even redirect to.


 * I did end up on the same line of thought as you (just link from the icon), but one issue that occurs to me is that sometimes (for various reasons) people want the game-size version of the icon, or to access the File page, and it's difficult to find a link to those otherwise. But, eh, I dunno how significant that concern is. If we do decide to go with the little "magnify me" icon, I'll whip up a cute magnifying glass in Illustrator. ^_^


 * And... whot? Did you say Wikia has image-linking enabled now? :D :D :D That... is swanky. That is... very swanky. -- AudreyChandler 07:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh and hmm, linking to the general Hi-Res/Profession page was sort of my original plan, just with a section link (the little # -affix trick) to the icon's image. But when you interpreted it as linking directly to the File page, I twigged to that idea and like it better now. The grounds for it that I'm thinking is solely that it prevents people on slower connections from having to load 92,000 icons just to see the 1 they're looking for. -- AudreyChandler 07:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah and the JavaScript mouseover magnifier sounds very cool, but at the same time, I suspect it's probably best to get the basic functional framework in place (as simply as possible) and add cool toys later if they still seem like a viable improvement. But I do really like that idea, if it ever works out in the future (eg, magical code fairies visiting GWiki in the night). -- AudreyChandler 07:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Like hi.
Hiya Right... this is a long one. I bumped heads quite often with the community, and decided to stop contributing. My friend wanted to start editing but couldn't be bothered EDIT: ...to register, so... I told him to use my old account since the plan was I'd stop, and... unofficially... IPs tend to be looked down upon and get less of a say in matters. Since he grew bored of the idea of wikis incredibly quickly, I decided to return to... well, I can't really say why. I felt I should. Now I'm wondering about the name. I'm thinking of making a new account and simply having ST relink to the new one, but needless to say my judgement is worse than terrible at the moment... if you could give me guidance once again, I'd be most grateful. --> John  16:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * GW:SOCK says it's ok to make a new account when you're starting over, but it's not official or anything. -- ◄mendel► 23:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Remove vandal
If you have time (I right now do not) can you modify the remove vandal JS to at least function on history/diff pages? (doesn't have to solve IE7 issue). -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 23:37, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know how to add a check for the body class for those namespaces because I can't really code Javascript. I don't know why this feature is needed, the other wikia wikis don't seem to have it. -- ◄mendel► 23:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Other wikis weren't hit by a spree of vandalism that sends you to websites containing extremely disturbing images if you click almost anywhere inside the the page, including the "prev"/"next" links when looking at the diff of the vandalism. -User:PanSola (talk to the [[Image:follower of Lyssa.png]]) 23:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have web developer installed and can use .css to eliminate the external links altogether if needed (or via personal monobook.css or monaco.css, or browser user stylesheet). Use  . Or just revert my edit to MediaWiki:Common.js/AllInOneLoader and restart your browser. ;-) I bet turning off preview for diffs in your preferences helps, too (I never have that on). -- ◄mendel► 23:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC) & 00:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have also since changed the reference frame for positioning. -- ◄mendel► 00:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It's not about me, it's about GuildWiki users in general. I don't need to be protected by it (because I am alert enough to avoid being caught, usually), it's about other ppl going through the history of various previously vandalized articles (assuming the vandal never returns).  And... are you (Mendel) proposing to use CSS to eliminate (hide) all external links on the wiki??? -User:PanSola (talk to the [[Image:follower of Lyssa.png]]) 00:10, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * We have revision delete now, if it becomes an issue we Bcrats can simply delete the vandalized revisions. And yes, I proposed that as a stopgap measure to enable editors to fight the vandalism while it is ongoing. -- ◄mendel► 00:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That happened over a year ago, I don't see the problem recurring either. Why are we investing time in this? Entropy [[Image:Entropy Sig 2.jpg]] (C) 00:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It still affect the histories of article. If we are to not invest time in this, then I'd advocate restore the js code as that is the minimal effort solution that keeps history-digging wiki users safe. -User:PanSola (talk to the [[Image:follower of Lyssa.png]]) 00:10, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * F1 is the second user (after [ Entropy] a few weeks back) to get hit by the unexpected and undocumented behaviour of the code. I've suggested several solutions to the problem, which I'm more than willing to test if you point me at a tainted history. -- ◄mendel► 00:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Better solution: delete the offending revisions. Entropy [[Image:Entropy Sig 2.jpg]] (C) 00:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

''The page cannot be displayed. You have reached this page because the link no longer exists or was disabled for violation of our T.O.S.'' Sidebar and tabs are still accessible (monobook & monaco), diff without preview is fine, and the browser's back button is also serviceable. The history is safe. -- ◄mendel► 00:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC) & 00:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC) & 00:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

2.0 points of experience
lol: 2.000 ^_^ -- AudreyChandler 22:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * A very precise amount of experience (+/- 0.0005). -- ◄mendel► 22:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * ...OK, round 2:


 * Click me
 * 2.000
 * Click me


 * xD -- AudreyChandler 22:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I am a European so the fact that you link to has been obvious to me for a long time. However, I'm thick, so what is it that you want me to see? And do I need to add a link so you'll understand what I wanted you to see? -- ◄mendel► 07:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Uh... okay... this seems to be upsetting you so, I'm sorry? All I was saying was that the person clearly meant "2000", not "2.0". I thought you really believed they were trying to write a decimalised number, and was just trying to clarify to you that it probably wasn't a mistake on that editor's part, just a regional style difference.


 * I was just trying to be cute about it. Apparently you did not enjoy it. My apologies for that, and I'll make sure to be less obtuse and more direct in the future. -- AudreyChandler 07:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * No, you misunderstood. Have a look at [ my edit] again: clearly I understood that the person meant 2000, clearly I would know this because 2.000 is the German way to write 2,000 (and I am German), and the reason why I didn't let the edit stand is that 2.000 means 2.0 (but more precise) in the USA and Britain, and that is what my edit summary alluded to, albeit "obtusely", and that is what I also alluded to in my first response here, but again, you probably aren't mathematical enough to have appreciated the humour in that. :-P -- ◄mendel► 07:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm currently about 1⁄4 of the way through my Bachelor of Arts in Mathematics, thanks.


 * The only clear thing was that you replaced it with 2000 because it was obviously intending to say 2000 (based on how experience is awarded in GW), so your thought process was not obvious to me, really. Thus your edit summary seemed to indicate a misinterpretation of the editor's intent. Your joke about significant figures was understood, but it seemed you were playfully teasing about the person typoing 2.0.


 * This was never a very significant issue to me, and bringing it up to you was solely a spontaneous whim resulting from my enjoyment of sharing knowledge. Rest assured I did not set out to upset or inflame you. -- AudreyChandler 07:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well rest assured that mendel is neither inflamed, infected, nor inebriated. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 07:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I know you did not intend to upset or inflame me. (I wouldn't be too sure about the other two, Felix. ;-) I replaced it because it said 2.0 although it intended to say 2000, yes. ;-) So you have to read my summary not as a commentary on the editor's intent, but rather on what they actually wrote. It boggles the mind how you can suppose I can assume an editor to mean 2.0 when the previous version said 2000 &mdash; or that I did not follow your link the first time. I need to work on my public image more. :-( B.A., hmm, interesting, so I was right in assuming a probability and not certainty :). Is there numerical analysis in your syllabus? -- ◄mendel► 08:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC) & 08:02, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "the person typoing 2.0": your link suggests (and I assumed) that it wasn't, in fact, a typo, but rather the work of somebody accustomed to European-style notation. (This is supported by the IP address being registered to AtHome Benelux Network Operations Centre.) Thus, I did not correct to "2,000", but kept it at an international "2000". -- ◄mendel► 08:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC) & 08:15, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I understood your actual intent the moment you explained and contradicted my assumptions. The only reason I've kept replying so extensively here is to carefully explain why I said anything in the first place, since my flashing link to Wikipedia seemed to rub you the wrong way, and I didn't want you to be left with an impression that I was trying to be insulting.


 * No, I haven't had much numerical analysis (outside the cursory basics throughout Calculus), but it will be coming up in the upper-division courses I think. Either that, or it's one of my elective options. I might diverge off into Stats & Probability at the upper-division split, though. -- AudreyChandler 08:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Rubbing me the wrong way takes a lot more insensitivity than you've so far displayed on this wiki, ever. :-D I think stats is important but ugly, and numerical stuff is sexy, but then I'm not a true mathematician. ;-) -- ◄mendel► 08:25, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Stats is ugly, a lot of the time. When it's really good it's gorgeous but yeah, usually it gets relegated to a rather utilitarian role. But, I really like it, it's kind of blunt and intuitive which I'm better at. "Real math" &mdash; the abstract art, like analysis & proofs & true algebra & et cetera &mdash; is very sexy indeed... I wish I was more capable with it. Honestly, I am rather bad at math in general (like, no head for it), but I decided to major in it anyway because it's my favorite subject to study. I don't think I'll ever be a "true mathematician" either, but I love the stuff regardless. x] -- AudreyChandler 08:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I like stats up to the point where you have to throw lots of calculus at it to make it work. :-O I'd have liked to study dynamical systems more, but I never got much beyond reading Mandelbrot's original book. :-/ -- ◄mendel► 08:41, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Swine flu? [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 08:44, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * (reset) OK yeah, see, that: I'd have liked to study dynamical systems more, but I never got much beyond reading Mandelbrot's original book.? You are clearly much, much smarter than me. That's the kind of thing I wish slipped off my tongue, but my brain just doesn't work that way. It's frustrating. I'm insanely stubborn, though, so I refuse to stop trying to be smart like the cool science & math people. x]


 * And yesssss, the analytic parts of statistics/probability (where it starts to rejoin with abstract mathematics and gets into some weird, weird crap) is my favorite. I look at the course listing for stuff like "Time Series and Random Walks" and just... woo. Get lightheaded. Same with most crazy high-level math. Like everything on this list makes me so excited, even though I know I'm going to suck at it and get C's. It's just the coolest stuff in the world.


 * Oh, hell, reading that is making me miss Linear Algebra so much. Dammmmmmn. [0,0,1,0] OK. A little vector hit, just to keep me steady. And... maybe just one little matrix transform too... -- AudreyChandler 09:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Clearly I just sound smarter. And there was a good dynamic systems group where I was, and I was curious about the theory behind fractals and such. So that's why I can say stuff like that and mean it. :) UCB's very nice, I wish I could say I'd studied there. ;)
 * I like abstract algebra better than linear; I wouldn't want to have missed my training in Mathematical Logic even though I got it off a textbook I found on the flea market in 12th grade; Set Theory and the Incompleteness and Unpredicability stuff is also entertaining but mostly useless (read Gödel Escher Bach by Hofstadter instead ;-), and the stuff that is really sexy because it looks as if it had applications that nobody has found yet are Metric Differential Geometry, Elementary Differential Topology, and especially both Elementary Algebraic Topology and Geometry. Combinatorics again is pretty basic "must know" from my view and Mathematical Methods for Optimization is what I wish I knew more of. And do Number Theory to go into cryptography, that's sexy as well. If you like, you can deduce my tastes in rational thinking from those picks :) - and also deduce that I'm better at working with algorithms than doing complex calculus (pun intended). -- ◄mendel► 11:17, 2 May 2009 (UTC)