Difference between revisions of "User:Xenocidic"

This page is transcluded from User talk:Xenocidic. To leave a message on my talk page, click here.

My schedule

I probably won't be back until late afternoon, so you're on your own. You have a good idea how I think and feel about things, and/or what the priorities are, now. If there's anything you think I might want to discuss first before you overhaul something, we can discuss it tonight. Have a nice day! --FeralKitty (talk) 12:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Alright. At the present time my main "meta" concern is that users are forced to edit an entire article (including up to 5 platform/type tabs) if they just want to change a specific section of a single game. Solutions would be to remove the __NOEDITSECTION__ altogether, or to include an "edit this tab" button on all tabs. This is problematic without split namespaces and transclusion because the section number that signifies each main =first level tab= is arbitrary. So the options are as follows:

• Leave it as is. Users are forced to edit an entire article to change a single value and may get turned off by the enormous amount of wikicode. They'll also probably change the wrong value for the wrong platform and may mess up the tabs.
• Hard code edit this tab buttons which zero in on the =First level headers=. Problematic because new headers will force us to change the section tab and different articles will have different locations for these tabs. If we go this rouute, it should probably be simplified by an {{ template: <div align="right"><big>[http://pinataisland.info/index.php?title={{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section={{{1}}} '''edit this tab''']</big></div>
• Split articles off into separate namespaces as proposed at User talk:Jimmcq. Each article has an "edit this tab" button. (Preview at User:Xenocidic/Reddhott2) or Mousezilla)
• Re-introduce edit section tabs. Users can edit sections and they're shown as little wikicode as possible if they're just editing a section of pricing, for example. we don't have to split off into different namespaces or worry about editthistab buttons.

I'll get to work on those tasks you set for me, let me know what you think about this issue at your convenience. –xenocidic (talk) 13:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

If there were some way to retain the tabs but have users viewing only the content they needed, they wouldn't be pulling down images for content they won't be looking at (i.e. other platform images). we don't even really need separate defined namespaces, it can work with the article prefixes right away, in my opinion - if we can figure out the tabbing. It would also solve the problem that {{link}} introduced so that the page they are viewing was indeed bold in the navbox. –xenocidic (talk) 17:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll be back later this evening. Jim will be around, but give him a break. He'll have just gotten back, and I know he has some other stuff he needs to write up and such, so if he needs some time to catch up, just be patient. God knows, there's a ton of stuff to filter through/absorb. Have a nice afternoon. --FeralKitty (talk) 16:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Alrighty. I'll just do some tabbing and stuff in the meantime. Have a good one. –xenocidic (talk) 16:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind helping out with patrolling user edits? FYI, I've already gone through all the Staff edits to make them consistent. Since we have access to both games, the priority is to get all the latest data and details entered by the second. --FeralKitty (talk) 10:47, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. –xenocidic (talk) 11:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

FYI, I've got all the changes reviewed to date, but would appreciate it if you would help cover reviewing new changes for consistency (e.g., spelling, caps, white space, wording, layout), please, as I'm working on a different task for the site. --FeralKitty (talk) 12:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

k, I'll do my best but I'm trying to avoid any new spoilers for the next few days. –xenocidic (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit this tab

We used __NOEDITSECTION__ on the species pages because they just looked too cluttered with all those edit links all over the place, but the more I'm playing with it the more I realize that it might be nice to have one edit link per tab to allow a user to optionally edit just a single tab's content. It might be a decent compromise between breaking the articles into separate transcluded files. What is a good way to do this? --Jimmcq 21:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

We should create a template called {{edit tab}} which will be comprised of the following: <div align="right"><big>[http://pinataisland.info/index.php?title={{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section={{{1}}} '''edit this tab''']</big></div>. Test it out at User:Xenocidic/Reddhott. The only thing is that the section numbers have to be provided. –xenocidic (talk) 22:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Is there any way to grab the section number automatically? I'd hate to see it hardcoded and then have to change it when a subsection gets added or removed. Also, it should be formatted to look just like a standard edit link. --Jimmcq 22:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The formatting shouldn't be a problem, as for the automatic section number - I don't know... I don't think so, unfortunately. I'll try and poke around. Luckily our articles have fairly stable sections. –xenocidic (talk) 23:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

• See Template:edit section for the template as discussed above, along with the documentation instruction users how to implement it. See Mousezilla to see this template in action. –xenocidic (talk) 13:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Documentation

If you're going to write documentation for various templates, I can't understand why you would place it in the template, instead of splitting it off, which is the direction we'd been moving in. --FeralKitty (talk) 18:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't quite sure if that was standard. I'll go ahead and do that now. –xenocidic (talk) 19:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Arctic/Desert versions

I noticed that the wiki is missing the Arctic and Desert version pictures, taming requirements (at least for the ones that you evolve like the polollybear), etc. I'm going to start working on that but I doubt it will be up to par so I'm just giving you a heads up so you could possibly edit it.

I also noticed that on the species pages for the WCs, it has:

1. Complete the romance mini-game in n seconds.
2. Complete the romance mini-game in n seconds, without losing a life.
3. Complete the romance mini-game in n seconds, while collecting all coins, and without losing a life

but really, how to get a WC is to:

1. Complete the romance mini-game in n seconds, while collecting all coins, and without losing a life

and to get get the second variation, you have to:

1. Complete the romance mini-game in n seconds using two Wild-Card pinatas, while collecting all coins, and without losing a life

and to get the third variation, you have to trade with someone. I'm not sure if there is going to be any plans to edit this, or not, but it seems like something that should be done. Once again, I'll do it if you want. AIG 14:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the WC requirements need to be fixed nearly across the board... It should be more along the lines of...

1. Complete the romance mini-game with 6 or more of the species present in 'n' seconds, while collecting all the coins (or is it all the pink ones? the bonus blue ones are for twins, no?).

   (The without losing a life part is redundant, you only have 1)

2. Complete the romance mini-game with 6 or more of the species present using two wildcards(...)

...as for the 3rd wildcard. I really think there ought be a wiki article on this explaining it and just link to it. It's too difficult to properly explain in a one line bullet. As for the arctic/desert - definitely - go for it. I think FK wants the arctic and desert versions to actually use "Variant4" (for the plain region type) and variants 5-7 for the variants of the region types. –xenocidic (talk) 16:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

The wildcard article is meant to explain how to get them. Since the requirements are not different for each species, as we had originally expected, there's no need for bullets or identical explanations repeated on every species article. The Roario article (with pics only) is how the wildcard versions table will end up.

The arctic and desert species information will end up on the arctic and desert articles. We tried including them in Mousezilla and it just didn't "work." Someone also added arctic requirements to the Juicygoose article. If each arctic/desert variant has their own (different) resident requirements, then we should play around with Mousezilla and figure out how to list them. (Keeping them in with the normal requirements are just confusing. Perhaps a second section?) --FeralKitty (talk) 17:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

The arctic/Desert pinatas don't have their own requirements, however some of them like the polollybear, juicygoose, etc. don't have the resident requirements because you can get the normal version via evolution. It could be done like the sour version where there is a section below it. Doing it this way would provide pictures, bait info, etc instead of having it all clustered.

As for the Roario WC table, I think that looks much better. If you would like, I'll start changing the tables around on them so they match. I've also been keeping record of some of the time requirements for the twin bonuses. I think it would be a good idea to put that in somewhere so people know what they have to aim for. As for clarification on the hearts, the blue hearts are for WCs and the time limit is for twins. If you get all of the hearts and you meet the time limit, you get twin WCs. Here is an example of what I mean (I used THE Xenocidic as an example :D ):

Wildcard versions for the Xenocidic
Collect all the flashing hearts in the romance minigame in maximum difficulty to obtain a Wild-Card Romance 2 of the 1st version wildcards in the same situation . Trade, scan a PVC, invite someone who can create the version you need to your garden via Xbox Live and ask the person to do the romance game. To receive a twin bonus, you must finish the romance game in n seconds.
Unique trait: 3 Bumps on it's back	Unique trait:Multiple Antenna	Unique trait:2 Antenna

Also, I noticed that some of the WC pictures are missing. Are the pictures uploaded from the game good enough quality for the WIKI? AIG 18:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

All the wildcards should be pinata vision cards. You can make them yourself or you can find ones that have already been submitted to vivapinata.com as long as the images are of high enough quality (i.e. "composition"-wise) to properly show the trait. I think the table looks good, tomorrow I'll try and propagate it to all of the articles. –xenocidic (talk) 20:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

1. It's not practical to try maintain 100 identical sets of instructions on all the species pages.
2. If people need more details, they'd need to read the wildcard article anyway.
3. We don't want to stretch the table any wider or take up unnecessary vertical space, because we need to support low-res too.

Let's stick to the plan to take the bullets out completely, as the species articles are not meant to explain how to get wildcards in general. --FeralKitty (talk) 20:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it might be productive to have the twin time limit still there, but whatever you guys feel is best.

Wildcard versions for the Xenocidic
To receive a twin bonus, you must finish the romance game in n seconds.
Unique trait: 3 Bumps on it's back	Unique trait:Multiple Antenna	Unique trait:2 Antenna

It doesn't appear to take up any extra space and is something that varies from pinata to pinata rather than general info. - AIG 20:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with both of you, the lengthy instructions are best served on their own article, but if the twin time deadlines change from species to species, it wouldn't hurt to give people a goal to shoot for with the times. –xenocidic (talk) 20:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)