GuildWiki

GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.

READ MORE

GuildWiki
Line 63: Line 63:
 
:Hmm, a tricky question here. The "overreaction" I was referring to wasn't a reaction after noticing an anon user being called an idiot, but rather a reaction after noticing a debate being described as idiotic. If Stabber had said "anon, you are an idiot", then your reaction would be completely fair and proper. So it was in the judgement of "whether Stabber has called someone an idiot or not" where I consider you to have overreacted. As I have described on Stabber's talk page, an idiot debate can easily result from the participants being in the heat of things, and/or being stubborn. It could also be a result of insufficient explanation of implications/intentions which leads to misunderstanding and undue hostility which in turn increases the heat and stubborness. -[[User:SolaPan|SolaPan]] 14:43, 1 April 2006 (CST)
 
:Hmm, a tricky question here. The "overreaction" I was referring to wasn't a reaction after noticing an anon user being called an idiot, but rather a reaction after noticing a debate being described as idiotic. If Stabber had said "anon, you are an idiot", then your reaction would be completely fair and proper. So it was in the judgement of "whether Stabber has called someone an idiot or not" where I consider you to have overreacted. As I have described on Stabber's talk page, an idiot debate can easily result from the participants being in the heat of things, and/or being stubborn. It could also be a result of insufficient explanation of implications/intentions which leads to misunderstanding and undue hostility which in turn increases the heat and stubborness. -[[User:SolaPan|SolaPan]] 14:43, 1 April 2006 (CST)
   
::There is some confusion here. You are talking about a debate being called idiotic, but mine was not a reaction was not to anything like that. It was to a different use of the "idiot" term. Please let me know if you still feel I overreacted. --[[User:Rezyk|Rezyk]] 04:36, 3 April 2006 (CDT)
+
::There is some confusion here. You are talking about a debate being called idiotic, but mine was not a reaction to anything like that. It was to a different use of the "idiot" term. Please let me know if you still feel I overreacted. --[[User:Rezyk|Rezyk]] 04:36, 3 April 2006 (CDT)

Revision as of 09:39, 3 April 2006

Past mistakes are moved into the User talk:PanSola/MistakeArchive

Other closed issues are moved to User talk:PanSola/Archive

Please stop recategorizing skills

Please let the discussion to take its natural course before making or editing new categories! User:Stabber/Sig 18:33, 16 March 2006 (CST)

There was a discussion, Category talk:Skill, and no one argued against it for about two months. -PanSola 18:35, 16 March 2006 (CST)
There is a current ongoing discussion about skill categories that will almost 100% invalidate all the stuff you're doing now. Have patience for a little while longer. User:Stabber/Sig 18:36, 16 March 2006 (CST)
Not really, I didnt see how it affected anything related to Skill types. All the discussions were between Profession and Campaigns. Besides, if you haven't noticed, I finished doing everything before you told me to stop. I wasn't creating a new category. I was following the "Plural rule" with the usual "use parenthesis for disambiguation" practice. Nothing new. Skil types weren't even on your graph. -PanSola 18:38, 16 March 2006 (CST)
But it's the same story, PanSola. Prophecies Skills by type, Glyphs by Campaign, same story. I think Tetris' chart was to illustrate, not dictate where the suffix/prefix will go. Basically we have to major trees right now, Skills by Profession (branching into attributes) and skills by type (branching into attacks/glyphs/signets/...). With the introduction of Skills by Campaign, we now have 3 possibilities of browsing:
  • By Profession x By Campaign
  • By Campaign x By Profession
  • By Campaign x By type
  • By Type x By Campaign
  • By Type x By Profession
The remaining case (By Profession x By Type) seems uninteresting. Yes, this is getting uglier by the minute. :) Anyways, just wanted to comment that the categorization is affected. (i.e. there will be Prophecies Signet, Core Signets and Factions Signets). :( --Karlos 19:21, 16 March 2006 (CST)
Well again, I'm not inventing a new category. I'm just applying the plural rule, and add disambiguation so it doesn't get confused with Category:Skills. I wasn't touching the prefix/suffix system. If someone created an article for the Domination Magic (Quest) article, but misnamed it to Domination Magick, I don't care if there is a debate on whether we want to add campaign suffix to quest articles or not, I am renaming the article to Domination Magic (Quest) in the mean time.-PanSola 19:52, 16 March 2006 (CST)

Progression - NA icon

Please see User:Evil_Greven/Aura_of_Restoration. What do you think about the insertion of the NA icon there? While I'd like to do it via the N/A template, it doesn't work properly with the table. - Greven 09:08, 17 March 2006 (CST)

Visually it look nice. Functionally I don't see the necessity. To make a template that works with it will be quite a hassel. But if you can get it to work without overly complicating the template syntax (some complication of syntax seems unavoidable to me), I don't see a problem with it. -PanSola 09:11, 17 March 2006 (CST)

Skill Box version 6?

Please see: User:Evil_Greven/Unyielding_Aura2 when you have the chance. Sorry, I blatently ripped off your design, however there's no way I'm entering it, I merely wish to address the concerns of two people who commented on the vote. - Greven 17:14, 17 March 2006 (CST) Oh yeah.. check out the little quick tip thing (mouseover energy/upkeep/activation/recharge icons), and incidently... is there a reason anymore to keep the larger Quick Reference List box (skill/profession icon & attribute) with the the hybrid format? - Greven 17:26, 17 March 2006 (CST)

While the final result is nice, I don't see any way to code the cool feature into the general template. And I am NOT going to make templates Energy1 to Energy25, Recharge1 to Recharge126 or whatever. Exactly whose and which concerns are you suppposed to be addressing btw? - PanSola who can't log in due to stupid bug.
JoDiamonds and Xeeron both left comments right above this (GuildWiki_talk:Style_and_formatting/Skills#Skill_Icon_Format) section. Yeah, I know, I don't like that either.. I was testing to see if I could use a template within a template like that, but I can't get it to work correctly. I'll be gone most of the rest of the day, so I won't be here until then. - Greven 23:41, 17 March 2006 (CST)
Agh one last thing before I go, check the history of the template and you can see the various versions that were made, the earliest looked more like the Comprehensive Box 2 merged with your Portrait 5, if you decide on entering you wouldn't have to rewrite that way. - Greven 23:53, 17 March 2006 (CST)
I want to also keep LordBiro's concerns addressed though. Namely that "using only the icon provides a confusing line of text to screen readers". That was the main reason I created Hybrid 3~5 (all of which puts stats in a column with text labels instead of the row of icons seen in Hybrid 2). I think JoeDi's concern is already addressed with Hybrid 5, and I don't see anything else left to change. -24.7.179.183 04:36, 18 March 2006 (CST)
One thing that will have to be changed about Hybrid 5 is using the h2 for the Description text. Check out the User:PanSola/Unyielding_AuraP5, and click the [edit]s -- they don't match up correctly, and even if you change nothing else that will have to be corrected. The formatting is a bit off on my variant, but I'm unsure of the tags for which to correct the proper text size. I might suggest moving the Profession icon into the Icon box and making it full-size, as LordBiro also commented on the reasoning for this. Further, it seems the Quest-available notification gained importance for the Landscape format. Could Hybrid 5 be reduced further in horizontal size with a smaller Skill Categorization width? It seems like there is a lot of wasted space there. Lastly, about the nifty templates, it wouldn't be quite as many as it might seem, even if it's still impractical. Energy costs are 5, 10, 15, 25. Adrenaline is 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Sacrifice is 8, 10, 15, 17, 20, 25, 33. Activation is 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8. The worst one would be Recharge... 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 24, 25, 30, 45, 55, 60, 115. I wish I could figure out a way to just include them & the value in the template. - Greven 10:19, 18 March 2006 (CST)
the H2 issue is fixed. As for icon box, it's going to look weird if the skill icon is off center. And the profession icon at "full size" is still relatively small so putting them next to each other will look really weird, at least the ways I can think of to arrange them. As for wasted space for the landscape format, remember there are users of different resolutions. Finally, as for the floating tip, I figured out a much easier way to work it, using two templates per stat. However I'm busier this weekend than I expected, and I don't think it really matter in the terms of template proposals (it doesn't affect the design), so we can just add that feature in later. I doubt anyone's vote is going to get affected by the lack of that feature. -24.7.179.183 09:52, 19 March 2006 (CST)
Ah the Description looks nice. I see your point about the skill icon & profession icon... you're right, it would probably look goofy. I'm very curious and eager to see the better tooltip templates. Also, I agree with the floating tooltips being unnecessary to the design, but on the other hand it should display the tooltips in a Text browser next to the image, right? If that's the case the detail descriptions would be unnecessary and cutting them would save some space. - Greven 10:22, 19 March 2006 (CST)
BTW v6 is done. -SolaPan 19:41, 19 March 2006 (CST)

SolaPan?

How come you changed name? :s — Skuld 18:23, 20 March 2006 (CST)

Moo.

I dunno if you ever knew about my progression template script thing, but I put it back up here. It should help with filling in the progression tables for the new skills, unless they've changed the attribute/value relationship (which would be odd). --Fyren 17:48, 24 March 2006 (CST)

What do I have to do with it o_O? -SolaPan 17:55, 24 March 2006 (CST)
If you mean "how do you use it," plug in names for the attributes (like "[[Healing Prayers]]") and effects (like "damage"), then the skill numbers for 0 and 15 in that attribute. It'll spit out a filled in template for the skill. If you mean "what do I do with it knowing that," I dunno. Tell whoever is likely to be filling in the progression tables. I don't know who to tell and you were the first person in the recent changes I knew, so I'm telling you, heh. --18:01, 24 March 2006 (CST)
And "max" is the max attribute number, so like 16 for tactics, 19 for blood, etc. It fills in N/As where they should go. --Fyren 18:04, 24 March 2006 (CST)
"I don't know who to tell and you were the first person in the recent changes I knew, so I'm telling you, heh." well that answers the question I was asking... o_O""" -SolaPan 15:37, 25 March 2006 (CST)

Overreacting

You mentioned that you think I was overreacting with this comment. To be fair, can you make a suggestion about how exactly I ought to react differently the next time I notice an anon user being called an idiot? --Rezyk 05:27, 1 April 2006 (CST)

[sticking nose where it doesn't belong again..] For my part (since I made a similar comment), I think you were 100% right to say that calling the anon an idiot was not good behavior, but you seemed to make a much bigger deal out of it than it needed to be (talking about it being grounds for being banned and all that). A simple "Don't you think you over-reacted there?" would have sounded more friendly..... Anyway, my 2 gold. I know I'm a newcomer and not totally aware of the social dynamics here, so sorry if I'm stepping on toes.... --Rain Over Pebbles 06:01, 1 April 2006 (CST)
My issue with that kind of response is that it doesn't convey as much useful info, and more importantly involves a major difference in my personal judgement. I am actually still reserving judgement on whether or not it was "good behavior" (and don't even believe that my judgement is particularly relevant), and wish I knew where you got a different idea (really -- it would be a big favor to me if anyone helped me understand where these kinds of ideas about me come from, as I suspect it is a root cause of much angst). Also, you are not stepping on my toes; I consider this constructive criticism (although I can't say I necessarily agree with it). Thanks. --Rezyk 04:36, 3 April 2006 (CDT)
Hmm, a tricky question here. The "overreaction" I was referring to wasn't a reaction after noticing an anon user being called an idiot, but rather a reaction after noticing a debate being described as idiotic. If Stabber had said "anon, you are an idiot", then your reaction would be completely fair and proper. So it was in the judgement of "whether Stabber has called someone an idiot or not" where I consider you to have overreacted. As I have described on Stabber's talk page, an idiot debate can easily result from the participants being in the heat of things, and/or being stubborn. It could also be a result of insufficient explanation of implications/intentions which leads to misunderstanding and undue hostility which in turn increases the heat and stubborness. -SolaPan 14:43, 1 April 2006 (CST)
There is some confusion here. You are talking about a debate being called idiotic, but mine was not a reaction to anything like that. It was to a different use of the "idiot" term. Please let me know if you still feel I overreacted. --Rezyk 04:36, 3 April 2006 (CDT)