User talk:ZombieLawnGnome: Difference between revisions

From PZwiki
Line 20: Line 20:


:::I'll probably see about altering the template so the notice then categorises the page the notice is displayed on. --[[User:Connall|Connall]] ([[User talk:Connall|talk]]) 12:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
:::I'll probably see about altering the template so the notice then categorises the page the notice is displayed on. --[[User:Connall|Connall]] ([[User talk:Connall|talk]]) 12:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
== Response to code query. ==
The reason as to why coding snippets are added to the item pages (at least my reasoning) is more of just legacy support. I wasn't the admin to decide to implement codes in item pages, but I continue to keep implementing them unless people feel that the support should be stopped. When I make design decisions regarding the wiki, I usually try to get a general guide on how people would feel about it. Now of course that varies based on the type of design, a minor design change I just change, but anything big I usually hold off on until I have a sounding board for that sort of thing. I consider item page codes to be one of those things. Technically we don't support history section in items anymore for somewhat the same reason as you feel we should get rid of coding (though not exactly.)
While admittedly the admin who most likely decided to implement these is probably long gone, I usually maintain the belief they had a reason to include it so just keep up the tradition. As for code for items? Does it have a use? Admittedly I'm not entirely certain on it myself.
So what usefulness could it have, the only thing I could think of usefulness wise is certainly curiosity, but it does provide certain information on what stats it affects (though this information is presented through tables as well.) Allows the user to see how the code is set out, or know what naming convention it uses in the code. The eventual plan is also to have the wiki become a developer resource as well, which I suspect is partially I reason I never removed it, since the code allows people to see how different items coding is set out in relation to others etc. I may just ask around regarding peoples opinion on the section and remove it if people feel strongly enough. --[[User:Connall|Connall]] ([[User talk:Connall|talk]]) 10:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:31, 10 December 2013

Hmmm... I am such a mediawiki newbie... I had no idea you could create a personal sandbox. I have to look into this later...

Why not integrate data immediately?

Why are you placing this information in the discussion page, rather than just integrating it into it as you find it? --Connall (talk) 18:10, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Because I have style questions, and also I'm working on a template to hold all the different permutations of cooked/freshness. What do you think of it so far:

User:ZombieLawnGnome/Sandbox

Fair enough, looks pretty good. If you're putting that into the individual item pages then feel free. Thumbs up. Just remember to move it to a template page and out of sandbox. :p --Connall (talk) 19:20, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll get started on some of it in just a little while. --ZombieLawnGnome (talk) 19:22, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

It's looking good. Only thing is I wouldn't bother doing Version Category, just use {{VersionNotice|version}} notice at the top of the page instead. Looking great though! :D --Connall (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
I was doing it for two reasons:
  1. Following the already present style
  2. Because I had planned on using it as a crude system to see which articles may be out of date. (I got the idea from the Dwarf Fortress wiki) --ZombieLawnGnome (talk) 12:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
I'll probably see about altering the template so the notice then categorises the page the notice is displayed on. --Connall (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Response to code query.

The reason as to why coding snippets are added to the item pages (at least my reasoning) is more of just legacy support. I wasn't the admin to decide to implement codes in item pages, but I continue to keep implementing them unless people feel that the support should be stopped. When I make design decisions regarding the wiki, I usually try to get a general guide on how people would feel about it. Now of course that varies based on the type of design, a minor design change I just change, but anything big I usually hold off on until I have a sounding board for that sort of thing. I consider item page codes to be one of those things. Technically we don't support history section in items anymore for somewhat the same reason as you feel we should get rid of coding (though not exactly.)

While admittedly the admin who most likely decided to implement these is probably long gone, I usually maintain the belief they had a reason to include it so just keep up the tradition. As for code for items? Does it have a use? Admittedly I'm not entirely certain on it myself.

So what usefulness could it have, the only thing I could think of usefulness wise is certainly curiosity, but it does provide certain information on what stats it affects (though this information is presented through tables as well.) Allows the user to see how the code is set out, or know what naming convention it uses in the code. The eventual plan is also to have the wiki become a developer resource as well, which I suspect is partially I reason I never removed it, since the code allows people to see how different items coding is set out in relation to others etc. I may just ask around regarding peoples opinion on the section and remove it if people feel strongly enough. --Connall (talk) 10:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)