|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | 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 [[Raffon Field Base archive|here]].
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == To-do list ==
| |
| − | For a list of in-progress and soon-to-be-started projects at the PSUPedia, please see the following article.
| |
| − | * [[The_PSUPedia:To-do_list|To-do list]]
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Current Discussions==
| |
| − | === Forum status? ===
| |
| − | Just curious if anyone knows when the forums might be back up? For the past day or so I've just been getting a blank screen. D: - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 21:29, 24 August 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * I've let Hitomi know about both this and the fact that newly uploaded images don't seem to be working properly due to a 'disk quota exceeded' error, so hopefully it should be fixed soon. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 04:44, 25 August 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * There's a bug with at least one of the templates. I get this: Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '}' in /home/psupedia/public_html/forum/cache/tpl_prosilver_overall_header.html.php on line 90 [[User:Essen|Essen]] 05:40, 29 August 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** Still can't access the forums, is anyone here? If you can't fix the bug can you at least change my theme? I can't login because of this. Thanks. [[User:Essen|Essen]] 16:08, 4 September 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** I've passed it up the ladder since I can't offer any assistance in that department. Hopefully we'll have something worked out soon. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 18:35, 4 September 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | **** Found a temporary fix by forcing the default style for now. Dunno how to edit the themes, or I'd try that. But then, which theme(s) was the culprit anyway? --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 21:36, 4 September 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ***** I'd guess its name is prosilver, but can't say for sure. Anyway thanks. [[User:Essen|Essen]] 15:29, 5 September 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ====Part 2====
| |
| − | Anyone else not able to view the forum? When I delete my cookie, I can view it and log back in, but as soon as I'm in, everything loads as a blank page. I think it's another skin error, since the default I see before I log in is...whatever the default one is, but I have the whitish one for my account. Anyway, if someone could log into the admin panel and set it to force the default style, that might work again. --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 14:29, 12 December 2008 (CST)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Loads nothing but blanks for me, even post clearing cookies. As far as I know I'm on the default theme, too, not sure. I never changed themes, anyway. [[User:Raujinn|Raujinn]] 17:16, 12 December 2008 (CST)
| |
| − | * I did something about forcing the default style on the admin panel and it seems to have messed up the forum for everyone. My bad, I'll have to get Hitomi to fix it next time I see him (hopefully tomorrow). In the meantime, consider the forum down. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 17:21, 12 December 2008 (CST)
| |
| − | ** Bad mew mew, bad! /flee - [[User:Essen|Essen]] 03:45, 13 December 2008 (CST)
| |
| − | ** Ok, the forum is fixed, I got Tycho to clear the cache and it seems to be back to normal. Sorry for any inconvienience caused by my nubishness. Qwerty, let me know if you still can't log in. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 05:29, 13 December 2008 (CST)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === Dual enemy drops ===
| |
| − | You guys may recall the recent discovery of YG-01Z BUG dropping an item that not only didn't match its current drop chart, but also one that is exclusive to ''AOTI'', a strange occurrence for a non-''AOTI''-exclusive enemy. Well, this made me think back to the Ollakas when there was some confusion about what they're supposed to drop at LV100. In White Beast they dropped [B] Nokoku-zashi, while in Moonlight Beast they dropped [B] Katsuno-zashi. I looked further into this and it seems that the division is between ''PSU'' and ''AOTI'' missions; I haven't found a case yet where they get mixed up. Another example to keep in mind is Volfu. At LV100 in Scarred Planet they drop [B] Ga-Misaki while at LV100 in The Dual Sentinel they drop [B] Giza-Misaki. (Note that at LV125, ''AOTI'' Volfus drops [B] Giza-Misaki, which can be noted in The Egg Thieves and Forest of Illusion.) Pretty soon I'm going to start adjusting drop charts to include these ''AOTI'' drops. Questions, comments, concerns? - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 16:25, 1 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Looking further into this, it seems that the dual drops always occur at LV100-124. I haven't come across any instances that do otherwise, but I won't let my guard down just yet. As far as new drop tables to display these changes, I was working on [[Template:Enemy_drop_chart|something]], but it needs a little rethinking since it's just plain massive as it is now. I'm actually leaning more toward simply doing two tables, just like with the area articles; one for ''PSU'' drops and the other for ''AOTI'' drops. And from something else I've noticed, we can likely get away with removing the LV125+ rows from the ''PSU'' table (if we do it this way) since there are no ''PSU''-accessible missions that have enemies within that range (and I seriously doubt we'll ever see such a mission). One last thing: considering this new type of drop, we may have to rethink our current weapon article drop tables to help differentiate between dual drops. If nothing else, we should be able to use reference tags to say which is which. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 20:21, 1 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** If the difference is only at lv100-124 then do a double row with different drops only for these levels. That's enough for now, isn't it? About the weapons table we can also put an icon showing the version next to the enemy name. [[User:Essen|Essen]] 01:46, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** There's also Rappys and Jaggos, on psu v1 missions they just drop giga / skill or bullet, on aoi they drop both (giga and cati), right? - [[User:Ezodagrom|Ezodagrom]] 05:52, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * I completely forgot that the one enemy that drew my attention back toward the possibility of dual drops has one that's below LV100. YG-01Z BUG's LV80 drop in ''AOTI'' missions differs from its ''PSU'' drop. But yeah, we could do it where only the rows which have dual drops are split and the others that drop the same item remain together. I'll probably throw together a few examples a little later so we can get some feedback on different designs. On the Rappy and Jaggo drops, I looked into it and it seems that they can drop both units from LV100-149 in either ''PSU'' or ''AOTI'' missions, no thing to really worry about there. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 08:28, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** Hmm...but aren't cati skill and bullet aoti only units? If they are aoti only, then they wouldn't drop in psu missions, right? :/ - [[User:Ezodagrom|Ezodagrom]] 08:35, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** Ah, I see we've got them labeled as ''AOTI''-only; we might have to change that. The data I'm going by is from the Japanese wiki. Their drop charts for Desert Terror and Plains Overlord list the Cati units dropping from their respective rare enemy while the other ''PSU'' missions list the Giga unit. Also, I'm fairly certain there was a discussion at PSOW a few months back about this very thing. I'll have to look for the thread, but I think at least one person was able to provide proof that Cati units drop in ''PSU'' missions. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 08:50, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** Here's [http://www.pso-world.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139425&highlight=cati+skill the thread I was thinking of at PSOW]. Multiple people (starting with a shop owner) confirm Cati / Bullet PP Save dropping from Jaggos in Duel in the Ruins. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 09:01, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** Yeah but the seasonal rappies have items that only drops in aoi missions, like van brella and madam brella. So the point is still valid. [[User:Essen|Essen]] 11:09, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** ''AOTI''-specific special drops (they were specials, right?). Easy enough. :) - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 11:53, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Here are [[User:EspioKaos/Sandbox4|some examples]] of possible drop chart styles. I may add some more variations later. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 10:21, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Second one looks really nice, Espio. And this sounds like it'll become pretty complicated, having to check not only whether stuff counts as special/level drops but also for what versions they apply. Jeez. D: - [[User:Tycho|Tycho]] 01:48, 3 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** I guess it shouldn't be too too hard to keep up with. When drops are discovered in-game, just note which version the mission is from and that will tell you to which drop chart the item applies. We just have to remember that when we create new ''AOTI'' mission articles, all ''PSU'' enemies must have the ''AOTI'' tag in their drop template to pull up the correct items. I just went through and added this tag to all applicable mission articles (yay for slow days at work, right?) and filled in what I could with new enemy drops. Unfortunately, we now have a few more question marks in our drop charts than I would like since I haven't been able to confirm some level drops (and I don't want to assume too much). Though it seems that most enemies have the same drops, a few have changes at even lower levels than encountered before (AMF Heavy Infantry) and some seem to have completely new charts (Bul Buna). - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 13:21, 3 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === 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. - [[User:Mewn|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. [[User:Essen|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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. ;) - [[User:EspioKaos|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. - [[User:Mewn|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. - [[User:Tycho|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. [[User:Essen|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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. - [[User:Mewn|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. --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 16:59, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** http://fantatennis.org/forums/ (don't mind the rather bad colour scheme) - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 17:04, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** You might also want to take a look at [http://getvanilla.com/ 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. [[User:Essen|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. :>) --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 18:02, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Regardless of which forum software we pick, it may be worthwhile looking into a [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:PHPBB/Users_Integration 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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. - [[User:Mewn|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. - [[User:Tycho|Tycho]] 10:37, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | : Edit: What about [http://www.forummatrix.org/compare/MyBB+phpBB MyBB]? - [[User:Tycho|Tycho]] 11:25, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** The vanilla forum after the first installation is what it is: vanilla. Then you can install [http://lussumo.com/addons/ 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. [[User:Essen|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. - [[User:Mewn|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 19:11, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** Just posting [http://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=544331 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. --[[User:Qwerty|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 - [[User:Tycho|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. --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 20:06, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Actually phpBB3 appears to have [http://www.phpbb.com/mods/db/index.php?i=browse&mode=group:phpbb&sub=3 100+] mods, MyBB [http://mods.mybboard.net/mods 200+]. Looking for styles for phpBB3 on their own site [http://www.phpbb.com/styles/db/index.php?i=browse&mode=group:phpbb&sub=3 sucks] (even if you try to search [http://www.phpbb.com/styles/db/index.php?i=browse&mode=popular&sub=rating differently]), but they [http://www.google.com/search?q=phpbb3+styles 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 [http://mods.mybboard.net/themes easier] to get, although they don't seem to be easy to find elsewhere (I love [http://www.mybbstyles.com/index.php this one], but can't find the source). Also, the MyBB site [http://mods.mybboard.net/uploads/previews/3803-1188579853-Myportal.png 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. - [[User:Tycho|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, [http://demo.phpbb3styles.net/ this page] is a nice place to preview styles for phpBB3. Personally, I think [http://demo.phpbb3styles.net/Serenity 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 [http://demo.phpbb3styles.net/AeroBlue AeroBlue] (although possibly to dark), [http://demo.phpbb3styles.net/Milky+Way Milky Way] (except the orange, but we can change that), and even the default alternate theme, [http://demo.phpbb3styles.net/subsilver2 subsilver2]. Serenity, Milky Way, and subsilver2 (and a few others) can be recolorized via [http://beta.colorizeit.com/ this handy tool] that even generates all the necessary files for you. anyway, just something to think about --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 21:01, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * [http://psupedia.info/phpBB3/ phpBB], [http://psupedia.info/MyBB/ 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.) - [[User:Tycho|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. [[User:Tigerbyte|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. --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 23:57, 27 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | **** I yield, phpBB looks less bloated. - [[User:Tycho|Tycho]] 01:38, 28 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | : Edit: Oh, I can do this stuff. [http://forum.psupedia.info/ 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 - [[User:Tycho|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. - [[User:Sekani|Sekani]] 19:56, 29 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** I had some issues when trying to view topics with the phpBB default theme (prosilver), but all the other ones seem to be working fine, and I've been mucking around in the admin CP for a good hour or so without issue. Are you even able to register? --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 20:56, 29 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** We're aware there's some problems, yeah. I don't know how to sort them out so maybe Tycho can. I dunno. Might be the RSS plugin we installed. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 03:33, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | **** Yeah, I'm fairly certain it's the plugin. I'd look into it, but I'm very strapped for time this week. :\ --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 07:28, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * Sorry I haven’t been able to contribute to this discussion until now.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | And Mewn darling, you haven’t changed one bit, I don’t know where you get these hostile thoughts from, Tycho was already in touch with me, with my connection that currently runs off a cell phone with lower speeds than 33.6k dial-up. Tried to make edits to the wiki before, but you can imagine the time-outs I was receiving.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | So! I haven’t had much luck with time lately. I would have thought PSOW, and the official boards would have been enough of a discussion place, and agree it will affect the neutrality of the wiki, but a test can’t hurt I guess.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I highly recommend you re-consider however, if the forums are for the purposes you describe before, you can go with smaller forum packages out there, and ones which have decent mediawiki integration plug-ins, it’s better to decide it now, than later, because some changes made to the db can’t be reversed nicely nor easily. (Gogo Backups of course). http://bbpress.org is an example of something really light, plug-ins and mods aren’t hard to create for it, styles can also be created, and integration can be easily achieved.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | As for the syntax errors whoever edited the template
| |
| − |
| |
| − | '''Located at:''' forum/cache/tpl_prosilver_viewtopic_body.html.php
| |
| − |
| |
| − | '''I’ve changed:''' [ <a href="{postrow.U_POSTS_VIEWTOPIC}">{L_POSTS_VIEWTOPIC}</a> ]
| |
| − |
| |
| − | '''To:''' [ ‘L_POSTS_VIEWTOPIC’ ]
| |
| − |
| |
| − | '''On:''' Line 149
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | That’s a temp fix for whatever you were trying to do, please try to make backups before making changes! I’ve noticed the wiki slow down a bit after phpBB was installed, I try and take a look into it, after work, when and if I find some time. --[[User:DreamXG|dreamXG]] 08:15, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Ah, good, Hitomi, you're here. Thanks for your help with the forums, but would you please elaborate on the one opinion I know you have that you haven't deigned to share with us, please? I'm referring, of course, to this: 'and I def dont think it should be the same power system as irc.' I'm sure there's an innocent explanation, and that my 'hostile thoughts' are just playing up again, but I'd like an answer. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 09:06, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * No prob, also the wiki might grind a little bit later tonight, I think I have identified what is slowing it down but need to lock the database to look into it. Mewn, no need to use the word innocent, as nothing has been said/done wrong from what I see. Just because I said it shouldn’t be the same power system, should bring about no hostility at all, the IRC community just seems unstable, and I’m sure you must agree to some degree. If we actually want these forums to work, at least try to eliminate potential elements of drama before hand. I’m not saying for you not to administer in the forums, if that is what you interpreted it as, I’m saying fewer admins, and mods; preferably that of people who actually work on the wiki, (which already includes yourself, doesn't t?). I’ve set the page for watch, so hopefully when I get my own connection fixed, I will try to keep updated with what’s happening, and help with installs, mods, etc... Please again, everyone, make backups of everything!! I haven’t made any in awhile, and will do when I get the next chance to.--[[User:DreamXG|dreamXG]] 10:00, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** If you're telling the truth here, I apologize for misinterpreting you. I do agree that only wiki staffers should moderate on the forums, but I don't see why that was ever an issue as this was always the plan. I don't think Scythe explained it very well to you, but that's my fault, I should have told him to link you to here, rather than ask you to talk to me - I suppose that made it sound like my idea alone, rather than the cautious optimism of people who posted their comments here. IRC is not connected to anything (certainly not here - I made sure of that) and it should be obvious that it doesn't work on the same system as this wiki, so the comparison isn't needed. But, thanks for your understanding of the forum situation. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 10:28, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Removed the old and modded in the new RSS plugin. The forum keeps erroring again though, even though I've cleared the cache and the file in question seems to be fine. I hate this crap. D: - [[User:Tycho|Tycho]] 04:29, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** Did you change the password? I wanted to lookup the problem to fix it but I can't connect via FTP. Or did I miss something? [[User:Essen|Essen]] 11:19, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * This is what happens when too many plugins/mods are installed at once, it becomes a LOT harder to see what's broken to so that it can be fixed. Is it too late to scrap everything and go for a reinstall? Then just add one plugin at a time, leave everything up for a day or so get the bugs (if any) out, then install the next one. My time is a bit more permitting at the moment so I can help fix up any errors you get the next time around. - [[User:Sekani|Sekani]] 11:36, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Edit: Got rid of old post. FTP details haven't changed. I finally realized I should just fix exactly what the error stated the problem was. They keep coming though, what the hell. D: - [[User:Tycho|Tycho]] 02:06, 3 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** Update: Fixed all, and got the hang of this stuff now. Took me long enough. - [[User:Tycho|Tycho]] 03:10, 3 June 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:
| |
| − |
| |
| − | {|class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
| |
| − | ! PSUP names !! Alternative names<br>(i.e. redirects) !! Example mission
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Linear Line]] || LL || [[Unsafe Passage]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[HIVE]] || || [[Dark Satellite]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Raffon Meadow]] || Meadow, Raffon Plains || [[Plains Overlord]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Raffon Lakeshore]] || Lakeshore || [[The Mad Beasts]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Train]] || Rozenom Milate 04, Parum Linear Line, Milate 04 || [[Train Rescue]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Seabed Plant]] || Plant || [[Lab Recovery]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Mizuraki C.D.]] || Mizuraki || [[Mizuraki Defense]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Islands]] || Islands, Shikon || [[Rainbow Beast]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Temple]] || Hakura Temple || [[Grove of Fanatics]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Kugu Desert]] || Kugu, Desert || [[Desert Terror]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Galenigare Canyon]] || Canyon || [[Valley of Carnage]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Galenigare Mine]] || || [[Tunnel Recapture]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[RELICS]] || || [[Sleeping Warriors]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[AMF Metro Linear]] || Metrolinear, Metro Linear || [[Military Subway]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Old Rozenom City]] || Rozenom, Rozenom City || [[Lightning Beasts]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[AMF HQ]] || AMF Central Command, Dark Plant || [[Electronic Brain]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[AMF Train]] || Dark Train || [[SEED Express]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Saguraki C.D.]] || Saguraki || [[Sakura Blast]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Pavilion of Air]] || Pavilion, POA || [[White Beast]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Habirao F.D.]] || Habirao || [[Hill of Spores]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Granigs Mine]] || Granigs || [[Awoken Serpent]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Il Cabo Base]] || Il Cabo, Illuminus Lab || [[Bladed Legacy]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Rykros RELICS]] || Rykros || [[The Black Nest]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | Rykros? || || N/A
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Moatoob RELICS]] || || N/A
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Forest]] || PSO Forest, Lupus Silva || [[Forest of Illusion]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Caves]] || PSO Cave || [[Phantom Fissure]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Mines]] || PSO Mines, No Man's Mines || [[Illusionary Shaft]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | [[Ruins]] || PSO Ruins || [[Maximum Attack G']]
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * '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. - [[User:Mewn|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|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. - [[User:Mewn|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. :) - [[User:EspioKaos|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. - [[User:Mewn|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.- [[User:Mewn|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|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 ({{AOTI version}}) next to them? - [[User:Mewn|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|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. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 18:10, 25 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** <i>Some kind of template at the bottom with links to the other areas might be good too.</i> [[Template:Areas|Done.]] --[[User:Qwerty|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 <code><nowiki>{{Tunnels area | 50}}</nowiki></code>, but for the ''AOTI'' article it would be something like <code><nowiki>{{Tunnels area | 50 AOTI}}</nowiki></code> or <code><nowiki>{{Tunnels area | AOTI 50}}</nowiki></code>. 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. - [[User:EspioKaos|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. - [[User:Mewn|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.) - [[User:EspioKaos|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|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? [[User:Battlestar|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. -- [[User:Sekani|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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. - [[User:Sekani|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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. - [[User:Sekani|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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. [[User:Strawdonkey|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. - [[User:Sekani|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|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 [[User:Aurly|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+''.' - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 14:20, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** Well, it clearly [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C++ can be done], it's just a matter of figuring out how. --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 14:26, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** The only way I can get it to work is [http://psupedia.info/index.php?title=Creasabra%2B this way]. Everything else just seems to remove it and act as though it's the Creasabra article. - [[User:Mewn|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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. - [[User:Sekani|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|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. - [[User:Mewn|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.<br>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+.<br>As it stands, I see two possible options. You could use [http://psupedia.info/index.php?title=Creasabra%2B 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. -- [[User:Wormania|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 <nowiki>#REDIRECT [[Creasabra+]]</nowiki>, and it actually will redirect to the correct page. For linking to it, we can just use <nowiki>[[Creasabra plus | Creasabra+]]</nowiki> (yields [[Creasabra plus | Creasabra+]]). --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 16:10, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** Ah, excellent, that should be a decent way of getting round it then. - [[User:Mewn|Mewn]] 16:28, 10 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** And when you click the article tab, it sends you to the regular Creasabra :< --[[User:Beatrixkiddo|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. --[[User:Qwerty|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. - [[User:Sekani|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 13:00, 11 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** According to [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Short_URL#Other_how-to_mini-guides 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. --[[User:Beatrixkiddo|Beatrixkiddo]] 01:32, 12 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** Tried [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Short_URL/Ampersand_solution_with_root_access#Another_option this], but seemingly to no avail (unless it's slow). Anyway, someone shoulda tried this / called for help earlier. D: - [[User:Tycho|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. -[[User:Propagandist|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.. --[[User:Battlestar|Battlestar]]
| |
| − | * Strange that someone with so much wiki experience doesn't know how to sign their comments.<br/>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. - [[User:Sekani|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 ([[User:Battlestar|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. --[[User:Qwerty|Qwerty]] 10:42, 20 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === Offline ===
| |
| − | OK you might have seen me doing some offline work [[User:Essen/Sandbox|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 [[User:Essen/Sandbox/Crossbows_(Episode_1)|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 [[User:Essen/Sandbox|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? [[User:Essen|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 - [[User:EspioKaos|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 [[User:Essen|Essen]] 22:48, 13 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * Okay so I almost finished that as you can see, but I still have a good bunch of work to do: add availability (what items appear with what chapter); grinds (can wait tho i'll do it); a few pages like the bullets, technics and common items like mates; and read again to check everything is ok, maybe add some more links etc. Then I'll start rolling it out.
| |
| − | * I have a few questions however, more general because they are also about episode 2 and psp.
| |
| − | ** Do we want individual item pages like for online? My guess is no and I made the episode 1 stuff without. But there's a few existing pages so I rather ask. Too much pages about something most people don't bother with is no good tho.
| |
| − | ** Do we want individual pages for missions? Yes for aoi and psp, no for the first episode (since the drops don't change with level, there's no rare map, etc).
| |
| − | ** I made a template for v1 offline contents, shown on top of all pages, and I also put "(Episode 1)" in the title. I think instead of putting that in the title we could use namespaces. [http://www.uesp.net/wiki/All_Games See here for an example]. All Oblivion stuff are in the Oblivion namespace, all Morrowing stuff in Morrowing namespace, etc. So for us that'd be something like "Offline:" or "Episode1:" or "OfflineEp1:" or "PSP:" or something. Like "OfflineEp1:Missions" instead of "Missions (Episode 1)" or "Offline:Partner characters" instead "Partner characters (offline)". Lots of stuff to consider and discuss about that.
| |
| − | ** I probably said it but I also separated completely the games to make it easier to check stuff and also because stats are not necessarily the same. And if you compare ep1, ep2 and psp the games are indeed all very different. I also had some troubles cleaning up the aoi stuff from the v1 ones for my project sometimes.
| |
| − | ** When I'm finished I will do one test before we can roll it out, to make sure I didn't make mistakes. I intend to speedrun the whole game (in 12 segments) and I'll use the work I did for that. It won't be a perfect check, but at least that's something, and I doubt I'll want to touch the v1 game again after that anyway.
| |
| − | ** Once everything is good there'll be a good number of pages to move and/or delete, I'll request your help about it. Then I'll start with aoi offline, and psp when it gets out in japan. I doubt much people will be interested by aoi offline but it'd be good if we could prepare the work on psp before it comes out, see who can work on it etc.
| |
| − | ** Well that was long enough. I stop talking now. ^^; [[User:Essen|Essen]] 12:34, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ***I was actually going to mention UESPwiki soon myself. Their namespace system seems to work out quite well for them, and I think it would be a good idea, though it might confuse some unless we leave online in the default namespace and merely make namespaces for the other (PSP, Ep1) things. --[[User:Beatrixkiddo|Beatrixkiddo]] 12:57, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | **** That's what I would advise to do. The main purpose of this wiki is the online game, so it can stay in the main namespace, and other stuff can fall into separate namespaces without having to do too much changes to the current pages. If I'm not mistaken you can also make it so that the search do not include these other namespaces by default, so we would only have online contents as a result unless we specify the namespace manually. [[User:Essen|Essen]] 13:05, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * The unique namespace idea is great for these sections. You've got my support with that. As far as existing articles for offline units and weapons, those likely can be done away with since there's really little need for them, as you said. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 14:07, 2 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ** OK so what namespace do we use? "Offline" for general offline content is obvious, but for the 3 other games? "Episode1", "Episode2" and "PSP"? [[User:Essen|Essen]] 02:20, 6 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | **** Hello, everyone. Oh, something I've noticed: Bel Pannon drop Dagger of Serafi offline. So...I thought that might be useful. Later! [[User:Gespenst MK II|Gespenst MK II]] 03:01 PM, 9 Dec 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 [http://psupedia.info/index.php?title=Special:Categories&limit=500 good bunch of categories] already, but a lot of pages [http://psupedia.info/index.php?title=Special:Uncategorizedpages&limit=500&offset=0 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 [http://psupedia.info/Special:Lonelypages orphaned pages]. [[User:Essen|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 [http://psupedia.info/Category:Swords Category:Swords] when the former should already provide a comprehensive list? - [[User:Miraglyth|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. [[User:Essen|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. - [[User:Miraglyth|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. [[User:Essen|Essen]] 09:00, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | **** I've made an example of redirection of category on the [http://psupedia.info/Category:Swords Category:Swords] category. [[User:Essen|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. - [[User:Sekani|Sekani]] 12:59, 13 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | * [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:BreadCrumbs2 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. [[User:Essen|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 10:07, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** [http://www.pooshlmer.com/touhouwiki/index.php/Embodiment_of_Scarlet_Devil:_Gameplay A real life example of the extension] (see at bottom) [[User:Essen|Essen]] 12:45, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | **** Now that looks great! Clean, easy to read; it'd be perfect for us. - [[User:EspioKaos|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. - [[User:Sekani|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. - [[User:EspioKaos|EspioKaos]] 19:41, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | *** [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_that_should_be_in_SVG_format 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. [[User:Essen|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 [[Special:Categories|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 ([http://psupedia.info/index.php?title=Aldaga_Steg&action=edit 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) [[Special:MultiCategorySearch|Multi-category search]] extension (along with the [[Special:Version|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. - [[User:Tycho|Tycho]] 14:44, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
