Difference between revisions of "The re-PSUPedia:Raffon Field Base"

Revision as of 00:56, 30 May 2008

Welcome to Raffon Field Base, the page where you can discuss and ask questions about PSUPedia!

• This page is for general discussion about the PSUPedia.
  • Unlike the actual Raffon Field Base, it's not for chit-chat, trading or anything else that has nothing to do with PSUPedia, or its contents.
  • If you have a question about a specific article, it's better to make a comment on that article's talk page, rather than posting it here.
  • Things that can go here: general suggestions about the 'Pedia, content that needs to be added, errors and bugs, etc.
• When raising a new topic of discussion, please use a header (=== Your Discussion Title Here ===) and place it at the top of the 'Current Discussions' section.
• Finally, when making a comment, sign it by using 4 tildes (~), this will add your username and the time and date of your comment. In addition, if responding to a comment, please use the summary box on the edit page to let others know what you have responded to.

Enjoy! - the PSUPedia Staff.

To help save space and make browsing this page easier, older discussions will be archived here.

To-do list

For a list of in-progress and soon-to-be-started projects at the PSUPedia, please see the following article.

• To-do list

Current Discussions

Forums - a consultation

• This is a controversial topic and I'm by no means for them (nor am I totally against, either), but I feel as though we should explore any avenue that could help the site even if we take no action on it. I can see both pros and cons for forums, the pros being that it might enable people unfamiliar or unwilling to use a wiki to leave feedback, give us information or corrections in a forum environment that they might be more familiar with. It might also let the staff have a place where they can discuss sensitive matters in private (not sure if this can be done on the wiki, but if it can, it might be something to look at). The cons though are that bad forums may reflect badly on the site (might endanger our neutrality too, if we have such a major community element), and that effort has to be expended to moderate any forums which may prove not to be worth it in the end. The last time PSUPedia had forums they became a terrible circlejerk - the main reason why I'm personally skeptical about them. Still, feel free to discuss and debate - this is a consultation, not a vote, and nothing is binding. But if particularly compelling arguments are made and enough support to make it worthwhile comes up, it may be possible to trial forums as an experiment. At this stage though, this is just a discussion and nothing is planned. - Mewn 16:00, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
  • I think it's good if it's used to talk about facts (not opinions), submit information, talk about the various projects and make polls. Other talks belong to another forum. Essen 16:38, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
  • This is a touchy subject. While the ancient PSUP forum was indeed a massive circlejerk, very unique circumstances brought that about (very few people used PSUP at that time, we had very little information about PSU since virtually nothing specific was known, and only like 5 people used the forum anyway). I highly doubt that a new forum would have even remotely similar results. However, I am somewhat skeptical, as I do not quite see the need for forums here. For information submission or questions, people can simply use the talk page. I do understand that many people are confused by the wiki system, but I just don't know how much of a help the forums would be. For things other than info submission and article questions, I'm not quite sure what else would be discussed that isn't also covered on the official forum, PSOW, or hell, even Diadu. It would facilitate communication between staff members here, yes, and that is probably one of the biggest positives a forum could have. As far as the community aspect, I feel it would likely be a double-edged sword. While I'm sure having forums would give a more community feel and get (potential) users more enthusiastic about PSUPedia, it is unavoidable that certain individuals would think poorly of either the general forum content or the moderation, and therefore it would leave a bad taste in their collective mouths regarding PSUPedia in general (I know some feel this way concerning PSOW). Anyway, I'm willing to hear more discussion on this topic, and I'd be open to trying forums if users seem to want them. --Qwerty 17:01, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
  • I remember the mess that was the forums here a few years back. After a few visits, I made sure to steer clear of them from then on. But, I think it's worth a try again since the site has improved remarkably over the years. Maintaining community neutrality is a must, but with the moderation we've carried out on the wiki, I doubt it'd be much of a problem to continue at a forum. If we can set up and stick to guidelines that state "information only" and "no trades, no guilds, no console wars, no drama, no shit," things could work out. On the other hand, strict moderation tends to piss people off or simply scare them away. The bad side of this could be giving the site a bad name with the people who want to use it to sell Meseta or their rarz or recruit guild members. Conversely, in the case of strict moderation scaring people away, it would lead to a smaller community of only the people who genuinely want to use the board for its intended purpose. All in all, I think it's worth a shot. If we decide to try it and things start going down the drain, we just pull the plug. ;) - EspioKaos 17:43, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
  • @ Essen - that would be mostly the point, for discussion of objective info that will help the wiki as a site, and to encourage people to participate. The community niches are taken up by the official boards and PSOW, while Diadu has the drama niche, so I'd like to see if we can do something different.
  • @ Qwerty - It's true that unique circumstances, not least the immaturity of Ahzi, Asim and Internets brought that about, but I think the danger remains of it potentially not being popular enough to be worth it. As for people thinking badly of the site because of the forums, I think that's a danger, yes, but I'm not sure that anyone who currently contributes right now will be turned off helping the site because of forums, especially if we can run them well. If people who have never contributed before do not use the site as a result of the forums, that is really not an issue for me - in my view we ought to be considering how to improve the site as a whole, not necessarily to see how many people we can get using us without contributing (whether by editing the wiki or submitting info via other means). In short, if we get, say, 10 new regular contributors helping out via forums (or even on here) and 5 people decide to not use the site because of the forums, I still think that may be worth it.
  • @ Espio - The biggest problem with setting up forums is to establish a balance between helping the site and establishing a community that can help the site. I think that if the only thing we ever concentrate on is site information, no-one outside the wiki contributors will probably bother with forums. But at the same time, too much community stuff might bring in people, but would possibly make us partisan. I've no interest in this site being rivals with anyone, and I don't want 'official board sux' or 'posw sux' mentalities running through anyone who posts on PSUP (of course, people can hold private opinions, I just don't want PSUP being a staging ground for closed-minded attacks). With that in mind, should we trial forums, I would want to start with 3 public forums: 'General PSU discussion' for discussion of the game, 'PSUP discussion' for discussion about projects, corrections, help on the site etc. and 'Off-topic discussion' just to give other people something to talk about. That's all I can see us needing, at least at the start. I don't like the idea of trade forums and anything remotely like Player Matchup forums will open a guilded can of worms. I suppose the general thing we should be aiming for is 'Come for the talk, stay for the site.' As for moderation, a degree of strictness is required, so yeah, no console wars, no drama bullshit, limited flaming/trolling at the very most, and maybe a pointer that if people want to flame and troll the official boards and Diadu are far better for that. - Mewn 07:16, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
    • I'm assuming there probably isn't going to be many more replies, with only the regulars checking this area for stuff other people brought up. As for the image thing I believe this will only cripple the immature that somehow end up being banned. Jokes I'm fine with personally, and I believe other people here have trolled ridiculous topics elsewhere before too. Active moderation I don't really feel up to myself, but I feel like modding attitudes would be a more important issue. Either way, circumstances have indeed changed since back then. Would it be worth it? A trial period (although that probably means little more than "we're starting it but might or might not dump it again") most certainly would seem to be, since there isn't much to lose. Other than time, and personal stains of creating another potential failure (or to be arrogant and blind enough to have believed in it for that matter). I think I voted against this ages ago when the discussion came up at one point shortly after the original forums, but I don't mind anymore per se. - Tycho 14:07, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
    • OK then add a section specifically for data submission (for easier use) and make sure you can subscribe to an RSS on each sections separately. If there's all that I don't see why not try. Essen 15:28, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
• Ok then, since the general feeling is that we should at least try, what steps do we need to take now to set up a "trial"? I presume we will need Dream_XG's help on this, no? If for nothing else, then at least to set up a subdomain (e.g. forums.psupedia.info; I fear that failing to place it in a subdomain could cause some nasty wiki-URL side effects). When it comes to forum software, it seems to me that phpBB3 would be the obvious choice, considering it's free and other comparable packages are ridiculously priced. However, I'm open to hearing other suggestions. --Qwerty 16:18, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
  • I'll speak to DreamXG, since I imagine he's an expert (there are forums on some of his other projects that I assume he set up). I'm not technically very good at setting up forums, although I should be fine with an administrator control panel once all the groundwork has been done. A subdomain will probably be a good idea. I noticed that the other projects use vBulletin for their forums, so I'll see what he thinks. - Mewn 16:48, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
    • Ah, I see. What other projects do you mean, though? I can't seem to find any of them linked on tsukimono.net. Anyway, I'm most familiar with phpBB, and I've dabbled in Invision Free, but I reckon vBulletin would be simple enough to figure out, if that's what we will use. I didn't really consider it or Invision since both seem ostentatiously priced, but if DreamXG already has a license, then I guess it could work, though I personally prefer the more simplistic look of phpBB. --Qwerty 16:59, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
    • http://fantatennis.org/forums/ (don't mind the rather bad colour scheme) - Mewn 17:04, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
    • You might also want to take a look at this one. It is a very different concept than most forums but, having used it mostly for work-related stuff, I find it very useful. Especially if you don't have that many sections. Otherwise I'm more for a sucky phpbb3 than a bloated vbulletin. Essen 17:45, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
      • Eh, that looks ok, and I guess it could work. However, part of our reasoning for a forum would be for the community aspects, and I think this would be better achieved with a more traditional forum. I agree that vB is bloated, and that's really why I'd prefer phpBB3. I mean, vB is fine for PSOW's new forum system, but I don't think anything as fancy as that would fit with PSUPedia. Also, I did a little looking into it, and it seems that there are much fewer freely available styles for vB, compared to phpBB. Anyway, just my two cents. (In case it isn't obvious yet, I like phpBB. :>) --Qwerty 18:02, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
• Regardless of which forum software we pick, it may be worthwhile looking into a user integration plugin. I'm actually ambivalent about this, since I don't think it would be particularly necessary, but I just wanted throw it out so you know it's available. --Qwerty 18:23, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Right, so for forum choices we seem to have Vanilla, phpBB3 and vBulletin. I agree with Qwerty that a more traditional forum might be better but Vanilla would work in a pinch. As for a user integration plugin, sounds like an unnecessary hassle and it has the potential to be more trouble than it's worth, especially if we're only trialing forums. - Mewn 18:42, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
• I have nothing against 2ch, but Vanilla isn't very appealing visually. Essen, could you elaborate on your criticism against phpBB3? Cause otherwise this seems like a pretty clear-cut case to me. - Tycho 10:37, 27 May 2008 (CDT)

Edit: What about MyBB? - Tycho 11:25, 27 May 2008 (CDT)

• • The vanilla forum after the first installation is what it is: vanilla. Then you can install addons. There's addons for adding functionality or for changing the look of the forums. Or you can make your own look, the CSS isn't complicated. When you install an adddon, you just have to unzip the files in the correct folder. Then you activate the addon in the admin panel. Updating the forum is done entirely via the admin panel, vanilla itself is gonna ask you to check updates and will download and install everything.
  • The difference with traditional western forums software is the organization. In other forums you have categories and posts in these categories. In vanilla you tag your post and then everyone can filter the posts like they want. This is the sort of nice things you can do with vanilla: get everything except off-topic on my index page for example. Not having to enter a section, go read the posts, go out the section, go in another section, repeat. Less clics with vanilla since you have all posts by default.
  • You can probably make a media-wiki style without much trouble either since vanilla is very simple by default.
  • Anyway if it's not vanilla I'm for phpbb but be ready for updating it every month because of all the security problems. Essen 15:16, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Vanilla seems like an interesting concept, but from a purely subjective point of view I have to say I prefer the idea of having seperate subforums than tagging posts. I like to go into an individual subforum and know that the majority of what I see will be about that particular topic - it's what I'm used to, after all. Also, from a non-personal point of view, this alternative system seems a little too avant-garde, I think people in general might prefer something more traditional. I think myBB might not be bad, but realistically I am not an expert on different forum software so I will leave that up to others. - Mewn 15:38, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
• Just throwing my opinion in on this. I'll be good with whatever is selected. I've used phpBB, vB, Invision and others, so I've adapted to pretty much everything. As far as setup goes, couldn't help there since I've never tried; but as a member, I'd know my way around. - EspioKaos 12:01, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
• I agree with Mewn; I'm sure Vanilla would be fun to use for a different sort of experience, but I have serious doubts about it's usefulness in achieving our desired ends. Concerning myBB, that summary makes it look like it is almost exactly like phpBB, but (I reckon) probably with much fewer extensions, plug-ins, and styles. I just don't see any real reason to use it over phpBB. Anyway, just my two cents. In other news, I looked into the setup for phpBB, and it looks very straightforward, only requiring FTP of the software to the server, and subsequent installation through a built-in wizard you run in your browser. Assuming whichever package we pick is just as easy (phpBB is one of the easier to install according to some reviews I read), I reckon we may only need DreamXG to set up the subdomain, and then we can handle the rest on our own. Probably. --Qwerty 18:56, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
• Well, I think DreamXG is talking to Tycho - I didn't count on the fact that, after all this time, he is still unwilling to talk to me. But no matter, so long as his help is secured it's no big deal. I think that if we go with phpBB we will need to install a plugin for RSS feeds - that way we can have a subforum dedicated solely to data submissions as Essen requested. - Mewn 19:11, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Just posting a link to such a plugin for future reference. It seems to be capable of exactly what we want, generating RSS or ATOM feeds for either selected forum sections, topics, posts, PMs, or the entire forum. --Qwerty 20:06, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
• 'Looks easy/hard to install'? I've already prepared all three, and only still need to do the configuration/add-on stuff, so I'm basically waiting for a decision. XP - Tycho 19:54, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Well, I can only speak for myself, but it looks to me like phpBB would be a good compromise, since no one seems to have any major objections to it. --Qwerty 20:06, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
• Actually phpBB3 appears to have 100+ mods, MyBB 200+. Looking for styles for phpBB3 on their own site sucks (even if you try to search differently), but they are around anyway. Why doesn't have phpBB3 that many? Because it's not phpBB2, which is like 15 times as old. Skins for MyBB are easier to get, although they don't seem to be easy to find elsewhere (I love this one, but can't find the source). Also, the MyBB site sucks for getting an idea of what the skins look like. So I dunno, it's not like only one of the two has third-party support or anything. - Tycho 20:35, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
  • I see, I figured that phpBB would be more known and therefore more supported, but it was just an assumption. Anyway, this page is a nice place to preview styles for phpBB3. Personally, I think Serenity has a nice, minimalistic appearance and would generally mesh with the site as a whole in terms of colors. Other ones I liked are AeroBlue (although possibly to dark), Milky Way (except the orange, but we can change that), and even the default alternate theme, subsilver2. Serenity, Milky Way, and subsilver2 (and a few others) can be recolorized via this handy tool that even generates all the necessary files for you. anyway, just something to think about --Qwerty 21:01, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
• phpBB, MyBB. Gonna try and look for all desirable mods to allow for a real comparison. (Sorry, don't intend to push this, just thinking that both are to be considered.) - Tycho 22:12, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
  • You also may wana check out SMF. also a PHP based forum that i have had great luck with. strong feature set and extreamly configurable yet very simplistic configuration and visuals if wanted. i have setup 3-4 forums using it for random cases. low overhead and low maintanace. Tigerbyte 23:45, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
    • I looked at it briefly, but much like myBB, I just didn't see anything significantly different from phpBB, with which I'm just more familiar and comfortable. Even when it comes to silly things, like the links at the bottom of a topic: I'd rather have phpBB's "return to X forum" than myBB's "previous/next thread" links. :\ I dunno, just seems to me like phpBB would be the most common and therefore familiar package for our potential users, compared to less familiar things that, in my eyes, don't seem to offer any particular advantages. --Qwerty 23:57, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
      • I yield, phpBB looks less bloated. - Tycho 01:38, 28 May 2008 (CDT)

Edit: Oh, I can do this stuff. New URL.

Another Edit: Okay, I'm tired of playing around with this; since this is still a temp phase, if anyone else wants to check out the options (I already tried everything, attempted to make a few mods and added some skins), go ahead. User: admin, pass: admintest. No vandalizing jokes please, thanks. XP - Tycho 03:43, 28 May 2008 (CDT)

• • You do realize that the forums (for me at least) have been broken all day, right? Lots of parser and syntax PHP errors. - Sekani 19:56, 29 May 2008 (CDT)

Area articles

• I want to try and get articles for each of the individual PSU areas set up sometime, however I know that, for better or worse, people here enjoy academic debates on what name to use. So in order to save time I want us all to agree on names BEFORE I start any articles. See below table:

• 'My name' is my suggested names for the areas, the 'PSUP names' are what we shall eventually agree on, and the alternative names can be made redirects. Feel free to edit the table or post comments here, I'd like to get a consensus before I make any templates or articles. - Mewn 13:39, 24 May 2008 (CDT)
• Great idea. Here are my thoughts. Any that I don't mention from the list are identical to what you have.
  • Rozenom Milate 04 - The game refers to the field of Train Rescue as "aboard train," so I'd be happy calling this field "train." "Milate 04" would be cool, too, since the jukebox disc that has this song calls it that.
  • Shikon Islands - Actually, I'm cool with the name, but I'd like to suggest adding an entry for Agata Islands. Just like Raffon Meadow and Lakeshore, both have the same drop charts, but they technically are different areas... kind of.
  • Dark Plant - I think this one should be called AMF HQ or AMF Headquarters. AMF HQ CenCom is another name it's called in-game, I think.
  • Illuminus Lab - I prefer Il Cabo Base for this one. (Actually, I set up an article at that link a while back to play around with some ideas for field articles.)
  • Dark RELICS - Rykros RELICS
  • Dark Planet Ryucross - I'd like to say simply Rykros, but the game is inconsistent there, stating that a few missions which take place in Rykros' RELICS site are on Rykros. Hopefully the mission that takes place on the planet's surface will come out in Japan soon and maybe shed a little light on how we can sort that out.
• I think that pretty much covers it. - EspioKaos 15:15, 24 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Not sure why I used Ryucross instead of Rykros, must be too used to the former.
    • Rozenom Milate 04 can be renamed 'Train' or 'Milate 04', we'll see what others think.
    • Are Shikon and Agata really different like Raffon Meadow and Lakeshore are? The actual map layouts of Meadow and Lakeshore differ, since Lakeshore has the water and everything whereas Meadow doesn't, so I guess that's why they're considered different areas. If it poses a problem 'Islands' will suffice.
    • AMF HQ is fine for Dark Plant, I just went off the name that appeared on Shougai PSO all that time ago.
    • Ditto for Illuminus Lab.
    • Rykros RELICS is fine and more precise than Dark RELICS.
    • Rykros will have to do for now, I guess. Maybe it'll be something like 'Rykros surface' or 'Rykros depths', something that qualifies it as being different from Rykros RELICS, since Sega have done a nice job of blurring Rykros RELICS and Rykros itself.
    • Added Moatoob RELICS as I had forgotten that one. - Mewn 15:34, 24 May 2008 (CDT)
• I guess visually Agata and Shikon are the same. Thinking back, it's only their mission box image that's different. (Only slightly so, of course.) "Islands" works for me.  :) - EspioKaos 16:22, 24 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Changed my suggested names after considering Espio's suggestions, if no-one else raises any objections in the next, ooh, 10 hours (by 9:30pm BST), these will become the names we use here. - Mewn 05:33, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Time's up, the names we have now will be the PSUP names. As with everything else they're not set in stone and can be changed, but it seems no-one is making a fuss right now. I've altered the table to reflect all this.- Mewn 16:00, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
• Cool. Now, what all information should we include in these articles? I figure drop charts for box and area drops are a must. Perhaps a list of missions which take place in each field and pictures of the area to pretty things up. - EspioKaos 17:26, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Yeah, I definately agree on the dropcharts, the list of missions that take place in the area and images (maybe both of the areas in-game and the little images you get when selecting a mission). Maybe some flavour text as well, since some of the areas are described either somewhere on the official site or in-game (like lobby descriptions or just general chatter, i.e. we know that HIVEs are A-Photon Satellites taken over by the SEED). Some kind of template at the bottom with links to the other areas might be good too. One thing to consider with the dropcharts is that some drops appear to be only in AoI missions (like, say, [B] Daiga-Misakic in Her Secret Mission S), should they just be listed with the AoI icon () next to them? - Mewn 17:34, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
    • With AOTI stuff in PSU fields, we might be able to get away with reference tags stating that you've got to be in an AOTI mission for a chance of getting that particular drop. On the other hand, I don't think there any cases of AOTI-exclusive drops crossing into PSU missions (in this example, the only mission that takes place in the temple area at a high enough level for [B] Daiga-Misakic to drop is an AOTI mission). Really, I guess it kind of depends on the style of drop chart we go for. If it lists missions like what I've got in the Il Cabo Base article, there wouldn't be much of a need to ID AOTI stuff since the mission article would take care of that. - EspioKaos 17:57, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
    • There's a couple, if we assume that the 10* boards start dropping at level 100+ as with the AoI area drops. Daiga-Misakic and Fuka-Misakic both drop in the Islands area, the same area as Rainbow Beast, Halarodoc drops in Temple, same area as Grove of Fanatics. Some lower level drops too, like Aksuc in lower-level Galenigare Mine AoI missions (which, at the moment, is pretty much Restorations 1). It's not a major issue right now, but it might become one if Sega release more AoI missions in old areas. - Mewn 18:10, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
    • Some kind of template at the bottom with links to the other areas might be good too. Done. --Qwerty 18:12, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
• Very nice, Qwerty! Colors might need some work, but the design is perfect. On the Aksuc dropping in Galenigare (and the other examples), I think I've got it covered. I'd been considering making alterations to the drop templates to allow us to specify drop chart listings as PSU or AOTI should occasions like this arise. (The first thing that got me thinking about it was Her Secret Mission S and when we found out the stuff that it drops. But after making a specific drop template just for that mission, I put the previous idea on the back burner. Now I see that may now have been the best solution.) Anyway, what I was thinking was we can add something to our PSU area drop templates that will allow them to be used in both PSU and AOTI mission articles at the same time, yet display the correct drops depending on what version of the game the mission is from. Basically, let's say we have two mission in Galenigare Mine; the first in PSU, the other in AOTI. When filling in the drop chart for the PSU article, the templates would be typed as {{Tunnels area | 50}}, but for the AOTI article it would be something like {{Tunnels area | 50 AOTI}} or {{Tunnels area | AOTI 50}}. This way, all we have to do is add AOTI drop values to PSU templates. And really, the same thing can apply to enemies, as I think the AOTI Perfect Bible mentions one boss from PSU that will have an AOTI drop item only when it appears in an AOTI mission. - EspioKaos 19:20, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
• That template change sounds like a good idea if it can be implemented. Out of interest, what's the v1 boss with the AoI drop? Sounds interesting. - Mewn 19:46, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
  • Just looked it up, but I seem to have remembered it a little incorrectly. The items actually are PSU weapons and unit that drop either exclusively in PSU missions or AOTI missions. Also, there are a few more than I recalled:
    • Adahna Degahna LV100-149 - Sori / Mind - PSU only
    • Zoal Goug LV100-149 - Sori / TECH Charge - PSU only
    • Dulk Fakis LV100-149 - Buccaneer - PSU only
    • De Ragnus LV100-149 - [B] Thunder Cannon - AOTI only
    • De Ragnus LV100-149 - [B] Deathmaker - PSU only
    • Dimmagolus LV100-149 - [B] Shigga Bines - AOTI only
    • Magas Maggahna LV100-149 - [B] Rabol Asted - PSU only
  • Interestingly enough, I checked the old drop charts at the Japanese wiki, and it seems that the stuff the PB lists as AOTI mission exclusive does (or at least did) drop from these enemies in normal PSU missions. So, this could be another case of the PB having incorrect data or future drop chart changes to come if/when we get missions with version 1 bosses in version 2 missions. Anyway, the template change will be a very quick one. I'll see if I can make some of the changes after while. (I'd like to sort out the HSM article since I have the area drops clumped together when they should be separated by the two areas the mission takes place in.) - EspioKaos 20:10, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
• I'm just going to make a quick change: "Hakura Temple" to "Temple." Even though Hakura is the only one that's named in online mode, we know from story mode that there is also Kokura Temple. (I think it was the one that was infected with ice SEED.) Also, the missions that take place in this area are in different sections of Neudaiz - Cost of Research is in the Mizuraki area while Grove of Fanatics is in Shikon (this is where Hakura Temple is located), meaning we've got different temple locations. - EspioKaos 09:11, 29 May 2008 (CDT)

User page edits

Is there no way to prevent user page edits from appearing under recent changes? rather than complaining people make too many edits, just fix the problem like this altogether? Battlestar 11:17, 16 May 2008 (CDT)

• Preventing user page edits from showing up would be more trouble than it's worth to be honest. Also, the sysops more or less have to keep track of all edits to prevent spam, vandalism, and other stuff. However, I did find a simple solution that will be of some use. Go here: Special:Preferences. Click on the "Recent changes" tab and check the box for "Enhanced recent changes (Javascript)." This actually collapses all the edits made on a page each day to one line. Makes a big difference. -- Sekani 15:08, 16 May 2008 (CDT)
  • I tried using the enhanced setting, but I find it to also be more trouble than it is worth. The real solution is for people to read the notice on the front page before doing anything. If you can't do that, then I'm more than happy to warn people. As someone mentioned earlier, it may be worthwhile creating a templatized notice to post when people spam their user page with edits. --Qwerty 15:13, 16 May 2008 (CDT)

Neutral synth rates

As far as I'm aware, none of the armor or weapon pages and templates show or account for the success rates when making them with no element. Since going green is apparently becoming more popular with the playerbase, especially with armor, seemed like something to bring up. - Sekani 16:59, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

• Far as I'm concerned, only an idiot would make something neutral, especially an armor. Anyway, there's no space in the tables really, so I think we can just leave it up to people to figure out on their own. It's higher than the listed numbers, we'll just leave it at that. --Qwerty 17:06, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
  • Only an idiot would waste time synthing a two-star saber, but we've got stuff on that too. Just saying. - Sekani 17:18, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
    • Touche (I'M TOO LAZY TO FIND THE PROPERLY ACCENTED E OK GOD). But yeah, there's just not room for it in the template, and it would only confuse people further. Least that's my opinion. --Qwerty 17:19, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
      • Do non-elemental weapons have a standard synth rate bonus over elementals, or does it vary from weapon to weapon? If it varies between weapon type, it might be worth adding a footnote, e.g. 'All sabers gain a 5% synth rate boost when plain photons are used instead of elemental photons'. I feel this stuff is worth having in, but especially for armours - while some of you feel that neutral armours are an idiot's game, a lot of us can't afford a set of elementals and especially with the appearance of Paradis Cataract, CASTs wanting an S-rank are going to increasingly look towards making themselves a neutral armour what with the rising price of S-rank armour with an extra slot. Strawdonkey 09:14, 14 May 2008 (CDT)
        • At the very least I'm thinking of adding a special note to some S-rank armors, since I've lost count of the number of people asking about neutral Serafi-senbas on PSOW. If no one feels like reworking the template though, I'm not going to press the issue. - Sekani 13:05, 14 May 2008 (CDT)
          • If it comes to it, I've got nothing against revising the templates to include neutral synth data. Thankfully implementation would be no problem since the success rates would be based on existing parameters (rarity for line shields and category-rarity for weapons). Only problem is finding a way to squeeze the info into the table. It can be done, I'm certain, but it'll likely require a lot of cell rearrangement. - EspioKaos 13:34, 14 May 2008 (CDT)

Crea+ weapons

• The wiki has real trouble with articles with a + in them, as we've seen with someone here. It tends to just remove them, so Creasabra+ will be Creasabra. I suppose when the time comes to make articles about them we'll just have to rename them to something like Creasabra (plus) and put a note in the article saying something like 'Due to the technical limitations of the wiki, this item's name cannot be displayed properly. It is supposed to be Creasabra+.' - Mewn 14:20, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
  • Well, it clearly can be done, it's just a matter of figuring out how. --Qwerty 14:26, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
  • The only way I can get it to work is this way. Everything else just seems to remove it and act as though it's the Creasabra article. - Mewn 14:58, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
    • I see. This must be what MediaWiki help meant when they said that using a root.com/articletitle URL format is not recommended due to certain conflicts. We may need to change everything over to the root.com/index.php?title=articletitle format (or root.com/wiki/articletitle, maybe). However, that probably involves messing with the code on levels that I am not at all comfortable with until other options have been ruled out. --Qwerty 15:03, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
      • Well, depends on how ready you are to deal with more "OMG WUT HAPIND 2 PSU PEE DIAD?" stuff. - Sekani 15:15, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
        • That would be quite a mess. I say we just go with Creasabra Plus or Crea Wand Plus until we can get Creasabra+, etc. to work properly. Then we could just redirect the Plus articles to the + articles. - EspioKaos 15:46, 10 April 2008 (CDT)

• On a slightly different note, Wormania, why did you change the Creasabra+ page to a redirect to Creasabra (plus)? It won't do anything because the problem is not so much with the article, but the URL. No matter the content of the Creasabra+ page, unless you do it as I stated above the URL changes to Creasabra and you go to that article. Unless you're doing something I'm missing, in which case I'd like you to explain it. - Mewn 15:47, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
  • Just testing, needed to see in which order the + was processed in the grand scheme of things. Also my second test didn't work, apparently you cannot redirect to "outside" pages.
    As I'm sure everyone else has been using, http://psupedia.info/index.php?title=Creasabra%2B is the page which it will accept, however the Creasabra+ directs to /Creasabra+.
    As it stands, I see two possible options. You could use Creasabra+, which is slightly messy, but does the job, or you can do the whole root directory swap, which I can see being messy. This is all ofcourse assuming there's nothing we've missed so far. -- Wormania
• Aha, holy shit, that was so stupidly obvious that it actually worked. For the sake of simplicity, let's just do it this way for now: make Creasabra plus with the content of #REDIRECT [[Creasabra+]], and it actually will redirect to the correct page. For linking to it, we can just use [[Creasabra plus | Creasabra+]] (yields Creasabra+). --Qwerty 16:10, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
  • Ah, excellent, that should be a decent way of getting round it then. - Mewn 16:28, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
  • And when you click the article tab, it sends you to the regular Creasabra :< --Beatrixkiddo 17:32, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
    • Solution: don't click the article tab. This clearly isn't the perfect solution, but it's clearly about as close as we can get without majorly changing URLs and shit. --Qwerty 17:36, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
• Don't know if this is still being considered, but I'm 99% sure that a URL change won't affect any internal links. Only links to articles here from other sites like PSOW or the official forums would be affected. Also, the main page URL can stay the same. The process should only involve changing the URL prefix in a configuration file somewhere, not too complicated. - Sekani 12:03, 11 April 2008 (CDT)
  • Not really up to me, but I guess it's at least worth a shot. If we don't like the results, we can just change it back. - EspioKaos 13:00, 11 April 2008 (CDT)
  • According to this, I think either MediaWiki is installed into the root folder (which is a bad thing, apparently), or whoever set up the wiki software redirected links to the "short" version, which is just .info/Article_Name. So, I think we need some intervention from Hitmonchan either way. --Beatrixkiddo 01:32, 12 April 2008 (CDT)
    • Tried this, but seemingly to no avail (unless it's slow). Anyway, someone shoulda tried this / called for help earlier. D: - Tycho 12:39, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
• Just wanted to chime in on this issue. It would seem that the least troubling way to solve the problem is to avoid using the '+' symbol in the page/image names at all. It seems that Media wiki/Wikipedia also avoided using the '+' symbol in the page names. We can still use the '+' in the links as illustrated by Qwerty on April 10th. As far as benefits: there wouldn't be duplicate pages to redirect to the one with the '+' in the name, the pages would be accessible from the recent changes page, you can use the article tab at the top, it would take you back to the correct page after editing, and you could view the full sized images. The only disadvantage, as far as I can tell, is that the page name wouldn't be the same as the game data. Additionally, we're not yet sure how they will be localized, it may end up not being an issue at all. -Propagandist 01:48, 28 May 2008 (CDT)

[Edit] Text too large

I think the [edit] text / link on all pages is in the wrong position, and far too large. It makes the page look messy and untidy. Compare this page http://psupedia.info/Events to this page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamcast the [Edit] text is on the far right, out of view of readers, and smaller in font size so it's non obtrusive, i've set up a wiki before and this is usually default, I don't know the history of this wiki or why you've changed this, but I just had to say something and I think it looks terrible / you should fix it.. --Battlestar

• Strange that someone with so much wiki experience doesn't know how to sign their comments.
  That aside, I agree with you that the text does look more intrusive than it should. I'm not aware at the moment of any quick fix for it though. - Sekani 09:50, 20 April 2008 (CDT)
  • Setting up a wiki doesn't automagically imbue the person with the knowledge on how to sign their comments. Thanks for the troll, but anyway, trolls aside, it says below (Battlestar 10:03, 20 April 2008 (CDT)) I guess I just forgot, huh?
    • I think it's because we're using a different version of MediaWiki than WikiPedia is. It may not look great, but this isn't a big concern for us at the moment. --Qwerty 10:42, 20 April 2008 (CDT)

Enemy spawn chart section overhaul

I see, I see. An overhaul has arrived for you! [/Tom Nook] The recent going-over of the spawn charts article made me get kind of back into wanting to finish up the conversion of the unconverted charts while getting a new style for the article set up. Basically, the new layout will give details on how to read the charts, what the notation means and then a list of missions (each link leading directly to the mission's spawn chart). With the "how to" section, I can't help but feel like I'm missing something, though. It might just be me, but if anyone notices something obvious that I omitted, please feel free to fill in the blanks. Otherwise, any suggestions? - EspioKaos 13:26, 2 April 2008 (CDT)

• Suggestions: Order rare monsters list alphabetically. The mission list could be made pretty like here maybe? Could be updated automatically if this pretty stuff was in some sort of template too. Looks good. Essen 13:40, 2 April 2008 (CDT)
  • Alphabetized.  :D Oh, just realized I forgot a few rare enemies. o: lol brb - EspioKaos 13:55, 2 April 2008 (CDT)

Offline

OK you might have seen me doing some offline work in my sandbox. I'll explain my thoughts about it here.

• Break offline in "Episode 1" and "Episode 2". There's too much different things to make them the same section. Example: drops are fixed per enemy in ep1, and per level in ep2. Missions are totally differents. Might have some balancing done between the two, etc.
• Offline doesn't need a page per item/weapon/mission/whatever. People will mostly want to know where to get their stuff and how it works, but won't worry about the descriptions much. A page like this is enough, imho. Plus there isn't that much weapons/stuff anyway.
• No need for an offline.psupedia imho. As you can see in my sandbox there's about 30 pages for ep1, without counting the more generic pages like save marker, photon charger etc, which are most of the time valid for both online and offline. We just need to stick with this slick format and remove all the old pages and clean-up the online page from everything offline-related. Also if we have an offline.psupedia, where do the scripts for episode 2 go? They're about the same for online and offline.
• Add a template to each Ep1 pages indicating that this is info for Episode 1 and that it is offline, on the top of the page. Same with other offline games.
• Once Episode 1 is done we could:
  • Add a category to the left menu, "story mode" with links to "Episode 1" and "Episode 2" for example. Can also put a link to Phantasy Star Portable.
  • Clean-up all the online pages from offline stuff.
  • Deprecate (mark for deletion) all the offline pages available and remove them a while later instead of having tons of redirections about offline. Of course before that they'll become redirections.
  • Start Episode 2 (yeah i probably will) using the same structure than for Episode 1
  • Also use the same structure for PSP.
  • Once that is done (or before) I'll probably proceed to clean-up other stuff on the wiki.

Comments, thoughts, suggestions? Essen 21:01, 13 March 2008 (CDT)

• Very impressive work, Essen! It's greatly appreciated since our offline section (as near non-existent as it was) was in bad need of help. There are a few minor standardization things that should be taken care of (de-capitalization of subsection titles in a few spots is all I've seen), but I love the look.  :D - EspioKaos 22:34, 13 March 2008 (CDT)
  • Yeah I'm trying to stick to the manual of style but might forgot stuff ^^; I'll change that on the next edits and will check a last time before putting it live. Thanks for the comment Essen 22:48, 13 March 2008 (CDT)

Categories?

• I've been noticing lately the lack of categories for most pages. For example all the *_(Offline) pages are left alone without category. Same with the scripts, and various others. There is a good bunch of categories already, but a lot of pages still haven't any. I don't think I have to explain the benefits of doing this: easy navigation to pages with similar contents. Is there recommandations for categorization, and do you mind if I have fun categorizing when I happen to stumble on one of these numerous lost pages? Same sort of question with orphaned pages. Essen 22:00, 9 March 2008 (CDT)
  • Go to town if you want :P First of all though, it might help to explain the blurred line that some categories would provide. For example, what separates Swords from Category:Swords when the former should already provide a comprehensive list? - Miraglyth 22:07, 9 March 2008 (CDT)
    • It's mostly not needed for online items as long as they link back to the Swords-like page. Unfortunately that's not always the case. It's also possible to process everything with a script if you are using categories. For example, generating a list of drops for all the items by running through the category and its childrens. If you change the template for the items, there's only one change needed to the script. If you change the pretty page, 0 needed. Without category, you need to change the script each time you change any pretty page. (And I might do that for various reasons, not only for psutools but also for making reports on what's missing in psupedia for example.) Anyway right now I was more thinking of that poor Units (Offline) page that gets linked only from Units. Meaning if you search for infos about offline, you need to go through online pages first. And if you need something else about offline (like, a weapon), you need to go back through online. Also worth noting that for the scripts, for example, there isn't really a place in the page where you can add a link back to the index (except the bottom, like categories do). Finally, and that's probably the solution to the difference between category and pretty page: you can probably make the category redirect to the pretty page. That way all users will get redirected to the page you want, you'll get links at the bottom automatically, and automated scripts can still parse the categories by adding "&redirect=no" to the URLs. Essen 23:05, 9 March 2008 (CDT) (and sorry for the lengthy comment lol I wrote as I thought about it)
    • Most of that actually makes sense, heh. On the offline thing though: Once upon a time it was suggested that we try something like offline.psupedia.info to create a distinction between Network Mode and Story/Extra Mode. Nobody really responded to the idea, indicating a general lack of interest in offline modes. If one/some people took an interest to the offline modes then that'd be another idea on top of this, though the offline modes are a confusing mix themselves - Story Mode "v1" is different to Extra Mode "v1" is different to Story Mode AOTI. The latter two of course aren't even available to the 360. - Miraglyth 07:48, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
      • Yep I remember when that suggestion popped up. I'm not really interested in offline, it's just I did ep1 again to remember the story and I needed ep1 informations. What I suggest is to separate Episode 1 and 2 since they don't work the same way for everything (like for drops, shops, etc). This would prevent some confusion if an item is in PSU and not in AoI for example. However I wouldn't advise in separating story from extra (it's only a few SUV different, and story missions not available), and don't think offline.psupedia would be good either, since stuff like NPC or scripts are not only for offline. Pics of items too. Finally, it's pretty easy to find everything in offline mode, and there's no need for editing once it's considered finished. I might try and get the complete list of drops for Ep1, wouldn't take too long since the drops don't depend on the enemy level. And clean up all this in 2 different categories, Ep1 and Ep2. Sounds like fun. Essen 09:00, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
      • I've made an example of redirection of category on the Category:Swords category. Essen 09:09, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
        • I tried a similar category redirection a while back, for some reason it didn't go over well. Never bothered to ask why. - Sekani 12:59, 13 March 2008 (CDT)
• This extension could make categories much more useful. Also, please comment that old example I made on the sword category. I think the redirection paired with this extension could make for a much better navigation. Essen 09:39, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
  • Originally, I was under the impression that categories should not redirect to an actual article as that seemed to defeat the purpose of a standalone category. However, I'm seeing now that it really would serve a great purpose, especially with something like this. I'd love to see how well this would work here, especially if if would make site navigation easier. - EspioKaos 10:07, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
    • A real life example of the extension (see at bottom) Essen 12:45, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
      • Now that looks great! Clean, easy to read; it'd be perfect for us. - EspioKaos 12:49, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
        • This really does look cool, but apparently it requires a fairly rigid existing structure already in place. Most of the pages that aren't weapons or missions are somewhat unorganized, and I have to wonder how useful this extension would be in that context. - Sekani 18:31, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
          • Categorized categories and all of that, right? I figure if we spend some time getting things put in their proper categories, we can get that extension working very nicely. When I have more time, I'll look more into it to see just how rigid it needs to be. - EspioKaos 19:41, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
    • Category containing images: this would allow automatic creation of image galleries by just adding an image to one (or more) category. This might be more or less configurable, I didn't look seriously yet. Essen 19:04, 14 April 2008 (CDT)
• .. Okay. *breathes*

So, I like categories. A lot, cause I like to have things organized.

This could be seen over one year ago when I started making loads of unnecessary categories such as '3* Weapons by GRM'. What did I think was the use of this? Trying to replicate db-like complex-parameter search functions, because I felt frustrated with the seeming limits of the wiki system. How did I believe it was possible to implement something like this? By using complex templates (behold) to automatically assign all of these categories; for example including a '3*' category whenever the template used for the 3* image is called.

Yes, my old approach sucked. However, I have now added the (albeit slightly gimpy) Multi-category search extension (along with the Breadcrumbs2 one for good measure). My old system sucked, but I believe that by embededding new categories a la '1*' 'GRM' 'Sabers' in existing (relevant icon) templates, getting a functional version of that off the ground should be relatively easy.

Not like I could do stuff without destroying existing standards or whatever, so, thoughts?

Also, I feel like the image category thing would be pretty interesting, perhaps especially combined with this (even though the search function still does feel kind of old-fashioned with all this manual copy-pasting or typing out of names..). Blah, end comment, sleep. - Tycho 14:44, 26 May 2008 (CDT)