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)
- 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)
- You can display two sections within the same row without any major problems. --Trinexx 22:09, 3 November 2006 (EST)
- 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)
- 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.
- 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)
- Done, what do you think? Also, forgot to sign my last message. Oops. --Trinexx 14:23, 3 November 2006 (EST)
- Done, experimentally. It will be reverted if it is vandalised, though. --Poromenos 13:20, 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)
- 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)
- Actually the guideline is that piped links are preferred, but that's only because I just noticed that blending, well, works. Earlier versions of MediaWiki highlighted only the linked part of the word, resulting in an unlinked "s". I still think I prefer piped links, because it's more suited to what you're trying to do (link to something other than what's highlighted), but I won't object to people using blending. --Poromenos 18:25, 4 December 2006 (EST)