User talk:Doorkeeper

From Dwarf Fortress Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Thanks![edit]

Thank you for the time and effort you've put into fixing up the Dwarf Fortress Wiki; you're doing a fine job! --Loci (talk) 16:43, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. – Doorkeeper 07:45, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

naxboxes[edit]

I just added {{soil}} to go along with the soil navboxes you created a couple days ago. Using that on soil pages instead of the version-specific templates is preferable because it allows the page text to be copied without changes when we do a version migration (although that hasn't happened in a long time). I'll set up a script to change those when I get a chance, so don't worry about changing them yourself. Thanks for all the work you've been doing! —Lethosor (talk) 16:26, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, and I wasn't aware of that feature (the helper template). I'll remember to ask these things beforehand. This wiki has a very unique structure and I try so my edits don't accidentally screw with them, but I make mistakes too... I'll finish up some of my lesser edits on the soil articles for now. -– Doorkeeper 18:55, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Lethosor, I recently uploaded File:Jabberer.png (that I took from here), but before I had it uploaded to the wiki, I converted the file format from .jpg to .png because I had a preconceived notion that it would make the image come out better. I just learned more about image file formats and I realized that this did nothing but make the file unnecessarily bigger (and it also altered the brightness of the image, something I had not intended). It is a small mistake but I feel bothered over making such an error and I cannot leave it alone. Could you delete that file, so I can upload the image again (this time not converting it into a png) and replace it? I can't do "Upload a new version of the file" because I think the file format can't be altered as it is once uploaded. I was originally going to move the file name but I wasn't sure if it would work and decided not to, so I am asking to you instead. – Doorkeeper 11:43, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Infoboxes[edit]

Great project goals, you seem to making great strides with those fantastic looking infoboxes! Few thoughts:

  • Creature template seem a little too big and overwhelming with details. I'd suggest to use collapsible elements to hide some of the less used details like the list of body tissue composition.
  • The default infobox width on mediawiki projects is 22em not 24em, its minor thing but it would better align with [[File:image|thumb]] which also default to 22em.
  • Personally, I find the usefulness of the appearance sections dubious given how few people actually use the default ascii tileset. Also with upcoming steam release various entities appearance might change which could break the layout.
  • For connivance I have added Category:Infobox templates to help group all the infboxe templates and their elements in one place you can review them at.
  • If you planning to work on the skill/labor Infobox template I would apricate if you can consider the terminolgy used there.

Anyway, keep at it mate --Jan (talk) 11:59, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Much thanks for the suggestions – Doorkeeper 15:57, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
  • 22em was actually the original size I went with, before changing it to 24em midway (I used wikipedia:Template:Chembox as my base). But I didn't know that they set it for that reason. I like keeping it to the standard so I'll change it, but as of now I don't plan on using images.
  • Useful or not, I believe it's important to present all default graphics of the game... not good at explaining myself. I play in ascii and there'll be a portion of the playerbase who'll keep playing the classic version in vanilla ascii. Yeah I've been thinking about Steam graphics. NetHackWiki displays both ascii & sprites side-by-side, which is what I imagine/wish we could do. I don't know if they'll allow us to upload and use steam sprites on this wiki, if there were already discussions on this I haven't looked it up or seen it. Regardless I do want there to be representation for both official versions (steam & classic). Can't do much until Steam release. Proofs of concept:
Appearance
Graphical Classic
Tile Dwarf head pixel.png
Soldier tile Dwarf head pixel2.png
Child tile Dwarf head pixel.png
Appearance
Tile Dwarf head pixel.png
Soldier tile Dwarf head pixel2.png
Child tile Dwarf head pixel.png
Appearance
Tile Dwarf head pixel.png
Soldier tile Dwarf head pixel2.png
Child tile Dwarf head pixel.png
Appearance
Tile Dwarf head pixel.png 
Soldier tile Dwarf head pixel2.png 
Child tile Dwarf head pixel.png 
  • The width is about consistency for all elements on the page side e.g. currently the infoboxes are 200px width, so I try to keep all images to that size. I hate doing it and rather we use image thumb default size. Which in the future the admin could easily adjust with mediawiki var to anything else(even 24em) just like with templates.
  • You are right about the need to document the vannila ascii, but other than the concern that the steam tiles will take much more space than ascii I don't have anything else to offer atm. If you manage to find something then great but otherwise don't get bogged down with future proofing considerations, once the data is plugged is easy to shift things around.
  • I am not familiar with any copyright discussion beside couple of glimpses on talk pages of other users, however, I doubt there would be any issue with using the steam sprites under fairuse. Covering interface elements is standard practice for wikis. The best The Trappist could argue is for reduced quality screenshots or some other thing to make life more complicated for us, but IMO they will be shooting themselves in the foot as the wiki is the face of DF. If someone want to pirate the tileset they aren't going to bother with wiki wasting countless hours build and coding it sprite ... by sprite, they are going to download in full from the net within the week of the release.

--Jan (talk) 18:24, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

  • On the point that infoboxes might be too big and overwhelming with details. From what I seen many articles for specific entities are rather short(e.g. DF2014:Lorikeet), so a long infobox will dominate the page, resulting in huge empty article area with most users spend more time to find the basic info amidst all the extra details. Another alternative to collapsible sections is using a tabber extension (it will require an admin to setup first) which would allow to add extra info in tabs. Also commonly used for appearance e.g. we can have tabs for regular, soldier and child tile appearance in more compact form.
  • Speak of more compact, here is final idea for your consideration (the tooltip might be better placed over the individual symbols):
Title
Tile Appearance  ;  ;

--Happy new year. --Jan (talk) 13:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy new year, and welcome to the wiki btw. – Doorkeeper 18:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

navbox redlinks[edit]

Not sure that adding all those redlinks to Template:DF2014_materials is a good idea. The way I see it, navbox suppose to be a navigation aid to help people find and explore related content on the wiki, not yet another way\place to list all possible options ever. Here the red links are redirects material (eye, brain, lung, heart, liver etc all will likely end up in the same place like brain -> Prepared organs). So adding them all doesn't improve my ability to find stuff rather obfuscate my ability to find the few important entries on the list.

Personally, I find such large list easy to get lost in and if we have to use them I would prefer using two naboxes separate ones, first is a general summary that outlines the most important concepts, followed by dedicated (possibly collapsed) more detailed list for specific topics that will only show on those topics. --Jan (talk) 17:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

You're right about the redlinks. All those redlinks are articles that should exist, but are otherwise not useful for navigation. And unless someone else is up to the task right now, I'm not gonna create those pages anytime soon (until I finish the mat infobox). I'll remove the redlinks now. For your second issue, are you referring to the "Dependent materials" section that I made before? I recombined back the two sections before reading your message. Hopefully the current configuration is better. – Doorkeeper 19:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for making Template:*, was contemplating if I should create one or not. – Doorkeeper 20:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
I wouldn't mind the redlinks if there were content behind them, but these should be covered as sections on more general article. We should create redirects for them though. (Btw how do you feel about categorizing redirects, so that relevant category has all possible options.)
The second part, wasn't about something specific but trying to further conversation about navboxes, where I think we should experiment a little more with their presentation. Take Template:DF2014_creatures wall of links for example:
  • Do we need the 'Subterranean animal people' distinction? while technically true in raw, in practice there is no game play difference between them and the dozens of other animal people listed bellow and will only confuse people when grouped with the main races.
  • The many long list of creatures are overwhelming.
  • Mixing list of creatures by biome categories and vermin categories isn't explained and confusing (Why elephant are Tropical and not a Mammal, what miscellaneous refer to?) Maybe these should be grouped or split, after all vermin has their own template Template:DF2014_vermin.
Maybe we should just keep races and add collapsed subgroups for the rest: creatures, vermin, and monster\beasts\whatever that will only show on relevant pages.
Anyway just something to think over. I hope others might also have ideas on this. I have been toying with something similar with modding but lack of familiarity with it grind that to halt. --Jan (talk) 11:57, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Otherwise great work with navboxes and their documentation, you even went above and beyond reworking all other namespaces! I haven't had time to look closely, so just few quick thoughts:
  • Damn you for stealing Template:*, I was playing with it for double spaces, but don't worry about it go with common named template i'll manage.
  • class 'infobox' doesn't seem to be defined, so we better use something else like 'navbox' to give us more options or styling if we ever choose to employ them or if anyone seeks to make personal css.
  • I know its carry over, but the contrast for Template:DF2014_files, Template:DF2014_stones, Template:DF2014 vermin seem off for me. Also personally I am not fan of the whole different color navboxes, might also be an issue for color impaired people I seen some post about that recently.
--Jan (talk) 12:09, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm very sorry about stealing the template. You mentioned flatlists so I immediately assumed you've made it for the navboxes. I'll make sure to ask beforehand next time.
Redirects: if there are existing page sections or relevant articles that redlinks can redirect to, then yeah that should be sufficient for now. It is my opinion however that material templates are notable enough to have their own respective pages. I feel dizzy about categorising redirects.
Navbox presentation: so something like in Template:DF2014 plants, w/ the collapsible sections, though uncollapsing a specific section on specific pages is a feature that doesn't exist w/ the template as of now. I'll work on that after I finish converting the remaining navboxes.
  • There is definitely a difference b/w subterranean animal people and the other entity races or wild animal people. They should remain in the 'Races' group, but I will revert it back to how it was, w/o the 'Subterranean animal people' group box on the left.
  • I've been thinking about expanding the current default width of the navbox. That maybe could alleviate readability issues in navboxes w/ large lists (plants and gem navboxes too). But the root problem is bad sorting/grouping, not large lists, I feel.
  • Creature navbox was grouped like this before I started. The current categories were originally based on the text files in the raw/objects game folder, though people have modified them slightly over time. No one really attempted to reorganise it since then. Regarding vermin, they weren't originally linked in the creatures navbox in fact; that's why there's a separate navbox for vermin in the first place. It looks like linking vermin in the creatures navbox was a relatively recent change. I think grouping vermin in one section and their non-vermin man/giant variations in another section would cause even more confusion. Either split creatures and vermin to separate navboxes, or use another method to distinguish them in the same navbox, such as italicising vermin links.
Last points: I just left the classes how they were for the admins deal with. Zippy created the navbox colours, so you should ask Zippy instead and let'em know if it's okay to remove them. I'm not a fan of custom colours either. I actually altered some of the colours as I was converting whenever it felt like there was too little contrast w/ the text. – Doorkeeper 16:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the noted redlink topics. Categorizing redirects could work in this situation, we already using this here Category:DF2014:Creature_attributes. So if you want to have a list of all body parts this could work, and categories auto marks redirects(non content pages). Otherwise content is king, we should avoid one paragraph forever stubs, instead add them as sections to a more general entry, like body, that give a complete overview in one place avoiding click-fests (could also be used to refer to body tokens). Btw as power user there is a good chance you are using adblock, if so try disabling it and take look how such stubs look to virtually everyone, where the content is drowned in UI elements, ads, and navboxes.
Navbox presentation: I agree that bad sorting/grouping is part of the problem, hopefully we can find ways to keep improving, maybe we should start more general discussion to see if others has any ideas too for specific topics? (We could also raise the question of color scheme there)
  • Pretty sure you can uncollapse specific section using the 'state' parameter for Template:Navbox you implemented. For example in Template:DF2014 plants this should be possible by renaming the parameters you pass child navboxes to something like state-plants, state-tree, and state-grasses, and changing their default value to collapsed. Then either call it directly as {{DF2014 plants|state-plants=expanded}} or create dedicated templates for them that do that, so you can use {{DF2014 plants}}{{DF2014 trees}} etc. Maybe something we can try.
  • Creature navbox, doesn't matter how we got here, only if we can find a way to improve the overwhelming wall of links with categories that make no sense.
  • Subterranean animal people: The five main races, or the civilized races, has distinct gameplay features. They have sites on the world map, can be interacted with, send caravans\emissaries\raids, can use plots etc. Subterranean animal people has none of that, they are a placeholder that in practice has more in common with the rest of animal people. Is there any other notable gameplay difference? so we can add it to the relevant wiki entry --Jan (talk) 23:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I'm not against keeping small features in general/umbrella pages. Will try out your advice tomorrow. Subterranean animal people spawn differently compared to wild populations... they can also form outcast groups in town sewers. They're the only source of blowguns. They're meant to be primitive tribesmen, hence why they don't have a lot going for them than the main civs. They have a lot more going for them than wild animal people. It's the fact these creatures form their own unique entity that makes them distinct from other animal men. Which is why I insist that they should be kept in their own category, as is. – Doorkeeper 04:52, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Template modding[edit]

Concerning Template:DF2014 modding. I was hopping that someone more familiar with modding will give some attention to this. Any chance you can, or know someone who can, spend couple of minutes to add a couple of words to the relevant token articles lead to better explain their purpose and how they all tie together? it could be very useful for the upcoming steam release.

Otherwise, I like the idea to change it to a sidebar, it works better as vertical list, and that space is unused on modding articles. One little challenge is its size, since many token articles start with reference table (e.g. DF2014:Position_token) the template push the table down creating a huge white space in the beginning (at least for lower res), and I am planning to include there other relevant modding articles beside tokens. --Jan (talk) 23:27, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad you like the sidebar switch. Later, I'll edit the sidebar so each section can collapse. – Doorkeeper 03:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)