User talk:Poromenos

• How about unprotecting the main page? I can think of a few ways to improve it.
  • Done, experimentally. It will be reverted if it is vandalised, though. --Poromenos 13:20, 3 November 2006 (EST)
    • Done, what do you think? Also, forgot to sign my last message. Oops. --Trinexx 14:23, 3 November 2006 (EST)
      • Err, that's actually very very nice. I'd also like to see the brief explanation for RoDpedia added somewhere around the top, and links to information and mobs (and perhaps the stub and cleanup categories near "how you can help), but otherwise it's very complete, and a far cry better than the original page. Congratulations, sir. --Poromenos 21:53, 3 November 2006 (EST)
        • Thanks. The purpose of adding the current events page to the top is to add information about the wiki, but you can change it to display any page you want.
          • I edited it around a bit, I would still like the Mobs and Information section made as the others are, but I don't know where they should go so as to not disturb the general layout. I think adding one more row to the table would be overkill for smaller screens. --Poromenos 22:08, 3 November 2006 (EST)
            • You can display two sections within the same row without any major problems. --Trinexx 22:09, 3 November 2006 (EST)
              • Well, yes, but we'd have to add two more, one for mobs and one for info, and I don't want to add them to the single rows, since it looks better now. Perhaps modifying the "Other sites" section to a "Various" one, but Mobs and Information is more important than links, so I don't feel right about putting them in the same section. I'll think about this and see, meanwhile I would gladly listen to any suggestions you might have. --Poromenos 22:19, 3 November 2006 (EST)
                • I'll play around in the sandbox on my wiki for a bit. I'll let you know how it turns out. --Trinexx 22:39, 3 November 2006 (EST)
• I found out why the infoboxes weren't working right. Proper infoboxes (check the original version of Iteminfo I had up, you'll see what I mean.), weren't implemented until the 1.6x versions of MediaWiki. --Trinexx 09:18, 5 November 2006 (EST)
  • Do you mean I should upgrade to 1.6 if I want them to work? --Poromenos 11:32, 5 November 2006 (EST)
    • Well, I upgraded to 1.8.x, still no dice. --Poromenos 14:27, 5 November 2006 (EST)
      • The cascading include works now, but it still doesn't wrap the page. Still a victory, I suppose... --Trinexx 16:46, 5 November 2006 (EST)
• Looks like you got a few spambots crawling around. Fortunately, they're stupid and don't know how to make links properly. Hhyvbdl tried to fill the administrators article with dozens of spam links, I removed them and put up a (half-assed) article. --Trinexx 22:19, 25 November 2006 (EST)
  • Yeah, it sucks. I check the new changes RSS feed all the time, so they get banned pretty quickly. Thanks for the change! --Poromenos 06:50, 26 November 2006 (EST)
• Is there a guideline against the use of blending instead of piped links? For example, is Mobiles to be preferred instead of Mobiles, and if so why? Thanks. --Sartier 18:18, 4 December 2006 (EST)
  • I'd say blending is probably a touch better, just for efficiency. But from the finished article there's no visible difference, so I don't think it really matters much. --Tokai 19:01, 4 December 2006 (EST)
    • Indeed. Just use any one you prefer, it doesn't matter much. --Poromenos 19:08, 4 December 2006 (EST)
• Strange, it looks like the template I made back in November is working properly now o_O --Trinexx 16:35, 13 December 2006 (EST)
  • I upgraded to 1.8.2 from 1.6.something recently, maybe that did it.
• Ok, rewind. Forget everything I just said because I'm retarded. I propose the following: "The draconian|Draconian, The" for 2 reasons. Skace 18:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • 1, It will show up under "D", keeping the system cleaner.
  • 2, It will show up under "A draconian" should the name also exist in the same list (possible with a list of all items / etc). (Say you have: "The draconian|Draconian, The", "A draconian|Draconian, A", "This draconian|Draconian, This" and "Draconian". Keeping the articles in the categorization should make them all show up in proper alphabetical order when the list shows up but hopefully with the original "Draconian" showing up first.
    • No, you don't do it like that, you don't add the article in the sort field, you just do "The draconian|draconian" (no ", The"). Since they're all capitalised, then I agree, we should have mobs written like "The draconian|draconian". --Poromenos 19:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Ok, let me try this another way. below.
• Check out the Templates also, did some serious clean up. I need some feedback on the item templates, namely categorization and how it is even possible. Skace 18:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Category Examples

Let's say I have articles for all of the following pages: A draconian, The draconian, This draconian, The draconian (item), Draconian. Now. This is probably what you'd want to see in my category listing of these pages:

• D
  • Draconian
  • A draconian
  • The draconian
  • The draconian (item)
  • This draconian

In this example, all of the items are sorted in order, for this to occur, I needed to give the sort something more than 1 word. IE: I had to give it the entire article name. A draconian has to become Draconian, A. The draconian has to become Draconian, The. The draconian (item) has to become Draconian, The (item). Under the current setup, here is what I'd see:

• D
  • Draconian
• d
  • The draconian (item)
  • A draconian
  • This draconian
  • The draconian

This is just an example, but basically the mobs and items showing up under d could be in any order because I've told the wikipedia to sort them all based off of the exact same single word "draconian". So it's basically a matter of which page was created first as to which order they end up in.