Community portal/closed

From PZwiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive of all closed discussion threads from the community portal talk page.

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Variables extension

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Add this extension to wiki, please. — Xinn (talk)

I'm worried about the affect too much of these would have on the wiki. Why do you want it? Kirrus (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Animated PNGs

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

I've added animated PNGs to the wiki, and will eventually replace most of the .gif images with them. See Fishing for an example, the Fillet recipe at the bottom of the page. Don't worry about suppоrt for it if the animated PNG doesn't work for you, most modern browsers (chrome, mozilla, or opera, and safari I think, not IE though I believe) either suppоrt it natively or have extensions/add-ons you can use to see animated PNGs.--LaDestitute (talk) 08:04, 2 August 2015 (BST)

Mistake in recipe 2055

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Probably not a good place to write this but I cant figure out how to use wiki system. There is a mistake in recipe #2055, for jar of potatoes you need 5 of potatoes not 3. Someone please update it. I tried but cant't figure out how! --Slowbackspace (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I've updated the recipe to 5. Thanks. --Pianoman (talk) 01:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Add Herbalist items/recipes ?

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

I haven't looked through everything by any means, but I noticed a lack of the items such as Ginseng, and others that can only be found by picking up the herbalist trait. (Which I believe also doesn't appear in the traits page.) Thing II (talk) 02:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Item Page Layout discussion

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Crazy Man, feel free to make your argument here. --Connall (talk) 22:34, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Anonymous Users

The Pzwiki server hosts suggested that we only allow registered users of the wiki to edit pages. Sorry if this upsets some folks but we have flipped the switch and made it so. Pianoman 02:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Without a large enough userbase to revert vandalism, this makes sense. Though if you haven't tried using Extension:AbuseFilter yet, I'd recommend giving that a shot (its fairly easy to import Wikipedia's ruleset, which is fairly large). Zellfaze 18:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
It's more about caching than it is about vandalism, though the anti-vandalism aspect is certainly helpful. Kirrus (talk)


Should we throw together a simple tutorial? just a single page with all "need to know" information such as movement, interaction and so forth? Or should we wait on that since that page would need ALLOT of maintenance since the game is changing pretty fast?

Yeah I think this is probably the way to do it, as long as it doesn't end up being a walk through. Mmmicrophone - PZwiki administrator 09:25, 2 June 2011 (BST)


Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Maybe a bit of a trivial topic. Should these pages all be on 1 generic containers page? Each of the current pages could have their own section. Just right now there doesn't seem to be a great deal of info for each page and I doubt there ever will be.. Mmmicrophone - PZwiki administrator 22:17, 1 June 2011 (BST)

done! if/when we have too much info on the page we can split it again.. Mmmicrophone - PZwiki administrator 19:35, 4 June 2011 (BST)

SPOILERS! (none in this post)

So some people have added a few spoilers to the tutorial and Kate pages. Do we want to avoid having spoilers on here or should we just go for it? At the moment there is only really 1 or 2 things that can be spoiled story wise but I'm sure there will eventually be more..

I think this depends on whether we are going to add a walkthrough for stories. In that case I would suggest the use of spoilers, but to warn for them explicitly on the top of the page Jhw 23:35, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


If you need help creating new translations please let the community know. Entering ad hoc translations within the pages of other languages is really not how we want to go about it (e.g. putting Spanish translations next to items on an English page). Pianoman 14:43, 20 July 2012 (BST)

Collapsible tables

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Is the collapsible table class implemented on this wiki yet? Might be beneficial if it was. --DUMBELLS 16:19, 11 June 2011 (BST)

hm, have installed it as per the instructions on the mediawiki site however they don't seem to work. If they don't work it will probably be best to wait until the server move is sorted as I'll most likely upgrade the software to 1.17 when that happens which has collapsible tables out of the box. Mmmicrophone - PZwiki administrator 18:31, 11 June 2011 (BST)

Crafting tables

I feel that these really should be as simple as possible so that anyone can jump in and change things if needed. I'm not 100% convinced that different templates is really the way to go with this, although can see the benefit in only having to change something once and have it update on all of the pages. templates also seem to scare people off at times.. (they also seem to have broken during the server move and I have no idea how to fix them!).

I've started up another revision of the crafting tables format which you can see starting to take shape on the crafting page. It just uses basic wikimarkup tables and all of the info will go straight into the page (for now at least). I personally think this looks a bit nicer.

Sure it might be a bit of a pain to keep them up to date when things change, but at least anyone can edit it right away without having to navigate a host of different templates.

Discussion on this is very much appreciated! Mmmicrophone - PZwiki administrator 19:32, 12 June 2011 (BST)

Looks like reinstalling some of the extensions has fixed the broken templates! The crafting page now has both old and new table styles if anyone wishes to comment? Whatever get's decided we'll stick with.. Mmmicrophone - PZwiki administrator 19:59, 12 June 2011 (BST)
On second thoughts, lets stick with what dumbells has sorted out. Although I do stand by my comment that it needs to be as simple as possible for people to add and edit things as easily as possible! Will revert the changes I made. Mmmicrophone - PZwiki administrator 22:00, 12 June 2011 (BST)

Spelling Conventions

Hi, I noticed the page and was tempted to correct it to hypochondriac , or possibly more correctly hypochondria but I actually can find no spelling conventions for the wiki. Are things to be spelled as they appear in the game - possibly with a (sic) afterwards if it is miss-spelled, or are there to be conventions as to capitalisations of links, etc...

Personally I would spell things how they are spelled in game, whether that is misspelled or not. No idea if that specific word is spelt like that in game or not. Zellfaze (talk) 12:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Link all items to items category

I think all items should be linked to items category including ammo, consumables, ect. Good idea? Bad idea? - Rachealica 19:20, 26 December 2011 (CST6CDT)

Index Page/ Contents Page

I am finding it hard to find pages, or linking relevant pages; there isn't much organization right now. There should be some sort of index or contents page that lists all up-to-date articles (not editing help or things that haven't been implemented -other than the planned features page) I think. If I wasn't familiar with the ins and outs of the game already, I'd be hard pressed to finding out on this wiki. -- Rachealica 28 December 2011 8:58 CST

Adding the Version Category to resolve this. -- Auchtor 28 March 2012 13:31 CST

French wiki main page

Hi. I'm admin of a french fansite and I started updating this wiki in french. I saw that english and russian main page are more complete than the french mainpage. I'd like to modify this mainpage like english or russian ones. How Can I do ? I have no access to the "edit" fonction, which is normal I think...

German Mainpage and other german wiki parts

Hallo,I would to start updating this wiki on german, but the problem is,I don't know how can I do it ...

Yes, I'd also like to help translate some pages into German, but I can't find a way to create a German page. It seems that only French, Russian, and Japanese languages are enabled at this point, so making a Zombies/de page wouldn't direct correctly. Or am I misunderstanding the language page guides? Holzmann 29 March, 2012

I don't have an answer for you yet but let me check around and see if I can figure it out. Thanks! Pianoman 22:32, 29 March 2012 (BST)
Thanks, I did a quick translation of the main page and made a new thread here for German speakers who want to help out. Hopefully we'll have a Wiki in four languages pretty soon :) Holzmann 11:20, 30 March 2012 (BST)

How to create crafting-recipes?

I added some items (like Peas and Dry Ramen Noodles) with crafting-recipes in them, but are the done correct? If not, how do I set them up the right way? Really confusing for me...

Hey Doc. I wish I could offer more help (hopefully someone with more knowledge will come by). Take a look at the code behind the molotov cocktail page and model your code upon it. When you see recipelookup it is referencing this page- Template:RecipeLookup which you will need to go into edit mode to see that it is a list of recipes that can be used on multiple pages. Also I believe some of your underlying ingredients either do not have pages yet or your links are incorrect - they are linking to a valid page. Pianoman 14 March 2012
Hey! Thanks for the awesome help. Hope that it is done correct now. The other items for the crafting-recipes aren´t done yet. DrCox1911 18 March 2012

Übersetzen ins Deutsche

Pianoman war sehr nett und hat eine deutschsprachige Hauptseite eingerichtet, die ich soeben übersetzt habe. Ich werde fleißig neue Seiten übersetzen, um die deutsche Wiki weiter auszubauen, aber ich möchte auch bekannt geben, dass ich kein Muttersprachler bin, also kann es durchaus passieren, dass meine Formulierungen suboptimal sind. Deshalb nehme ich es keinem übel, wenn er meine Beiträge bearbeitet :)

Diesen Thread können wir für Diskussionen bzgl. Änderungen bzw. Übersetzungen der deutschsprachigen Artikel benutzen Holzmann 11:18, 30 March 2012 (BST)

Items Page Needs to be redone...

Its looks terrible in list form. We need to do something similar to what we have in the crafting section. With a image and a short snippet of info.

You know what? You're right! I'll take a deep look into the crafting template and try to imitate its scripture to make a kick-ass article. I'm on it. Vagrant 06:32, 30 April 2012 (BST)
You sir are a gentleman and a scholar. I have been doing some work on the modding section of the wiki, I recently added Tutorials and Modding Tools. Could you think of anything else that needs to be on there? Superhaze 1:08, 2 May 2012 (PST)
I prefer using the vanilla version of PZ, so modding is not really my forte. Good job on updating this section. Vagrant 23:04, 2 May 2012 (BST)

Spanish translation

I want to help on a Spanish translation, I'm from Spain, and Spanish is a necessary language in this wiki I think, and it will expand the game to Spanish-speaking people.

How can I help? Is there any volunteer?

Thanks in advance. luchots


Quiero ayudar en una traducción al español, soy de España, y el español es un lenguaje necesario en esta wiki, creo yo, y expandirá el juego a hispano-parlantes.

¿Cómo puedo ayudar? ¿Hay algún voluntario?

Gracias de antemano. luchots

Hey Luchots, We most certainly need a Spanish translation but have not had many (or possibly any) contributors. You are welcome to do what you feel you can accomplish and hopefully other volunteers will join you. If you need any help with getting started let me know. For the suggested way of adding language articles you should also take a look at the work of Vagrant, one of our contributors who has been working on the French pages. Thanks! Pianoman 15:39, 18 May 2012 (BST) PZwWiki Admin

Add language template

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Ok, in an attempt to bring more people into the game, and to help those who doesn't know english, i just started a translation of the wiki in portuguese (taking advantage of the moment to ask those hidden portuguese speakers to join up), I would like to ask for someone (or tell me how..) the add of "Português" into the language template. I have already translated the main page: Main_Page/pt and will continue to translate on the moments that i'm not playing xD... Podesta 21:42, 10 August 2012 (BST)

Hey Podesta. Thanks for helping out. I think that I have taken care of the languages template but let me know if there are any problems. Thanks again! Pianoman 22:40, 10 August 2012 (BST)

Steam, Greenlight & the Wiki

Things continue to look up with Project Zomboid's chances of getting on Steam appearing very good. I would like to thank everyone for contributing to PZwiki and just want to say that once the next version is out and PZ is on Steam it will be more important than ever that you remember to share your knowledge. I will help guide things along as well as I can and as long as I can. Thanks Again!! Pianoman 16:58, 1 September 2012 (BST)

Traits category necessary?

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

I'm not sure if we really need individual pages for each trait when we have a list on the Traits page already. Category:Traits seems like overkill when each one can be fully understood at a glance using the table. --DUMBELLS 15:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Although if the individual pages are removed it might be a good idea to first check that any useful information from them, that is not already in the table, get added to it. Pianoman 17:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to start up on this, since it hasn't been resolved yet. --Connall (talk) 18:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
It's done. --Connall (talk) 19:40, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

RC2.9, RC3.0 and onwards

There's a new major version out of the door, with more on the way. A lot of stuff has changed. How should info about the new version be handled on the wiki? Just add it to current pages, make a new namespace, or what? Harakka 17:07, 30 April 2013 (BST)

Very good question. Exciting times indeed, but also a period where rapid changes to PZ may make additions to the wiki obsolete. I think we should edit the existing wiki namespace. Over the last couple of years we have had to cope with the different versions and due to that a bit of confusion when using the wiki. However hopefully we are nearing the point where we are closer to an official release on Steam and pzwiki will gradually lose much of the Alpha version content in favor of the retail release content. Hopefully that makes sense. If not let me know what you think. Pianoman 01:41, 1 May 2013 (BST)

Discussing the wiki

After poking around here for a bit, it seems to me that this page is the only area used for discussing the wiki -- and it's awfully inactive. So where am I to go to suggest very specific changes, or to ask questions about the wiki? It seems silly to create a discussion page for every new suggestion, but dumping everything here seems equally inefficient. Is there a place where people are actually discussing the wiki, or is everybody left to figure it out on their own? I've read through the "jazz up the wiki" thread on the old forums, but there didn't seem to be any discussion about the wiki -- just a bunch of people listing off edits they've made. Not really helpful for someone who hasn't been here from the start. So is there some kind of style guide I can refer to? Should I post all my tiny little questions here? Or should I just jump right in and hope that somebody notices if and when I do something wrong? --Felicitations 17:35, 24 July 2013 (BST)

Hi Felicitations - We do what we can with what we have. Don't let the list of admins fool you. Most have not been around for a long time and some just pop in once in a (very long) while. That is the way it is with an indie development where there can be long pauses between updates. For over a year I checked the site daily and making necessary corrections and changes but recently I have had to scale back a bit (hence the unlocking of the main page to edits). Standard rules apply to making major changes - put some sort of notice out or email me if you like. Perhaps post on the new indie stone forum. As far as style guides - I have just tried to keep things similar to the way I received them when I became an admin. I am no wiki genius and a lot of what I know has been gained by screwing around with the pages here (using the preview function of course) and utilizing the mediawiki wiki. Pianoman 23:29, 24 July 2013 (BST)
Hm. Well, none of the changes I have in mind are really "major" -- just the kind of stuff I wouldn't want to start doing if it weren't agreed upon to be a good idea. Like consolidating Category:Carpentry and Category:Construction, or renaming item pages for proper capitalization ("Dry Ramen Noodles" to "Dry ramen noodles," etc.). I don't think I've got the time to help make any major overhauls, even though we probably need some! It's just that I wouldn't want to start renaming or deleting a bunch of stuff only to be told that I'm going against the unofficial agreed-upon formatting. I'm passably familiar with wiki code; it's the PZwiki-specific stuff that I'm unsure about. Felicitations 23:56, 24 July 2013 (BST)
Consolidation, spelling/grammar correction, including redirecting and renaming all sound fine to me. There have been many contributions since the recent releases needing some review. Pianoman 01:20, 25 July 2013 (BST)

AfD 28 мая 2011 года

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Article, as far as I can tell, is titled after the day that the game was initially released. The article doesn't seem to serve much of a purpose. I can't really see any way to expand on the current content, and I feel that mentioning the initial release date in the Project Zomboid article would be much better than having an article just about that day. I propose that the article should be deleted. Zellfaze 17:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I agree, looks like a rather pointless page. - Connall 18:26, 18 November 2013

Protected Templates edit requests

I would like the documentation template added to the following templates that are currently protected:

Specifically, I'm just asking that you add {{documentation}} between the <noinclude></noinclude> tags. Zellfaze (talk) 12:16, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Buggered up a move

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

I was attempting to get a page moved to continue on my quest of standardising our i18n setup and managed to screw it up. I don't suppose I could get a sysop to delete the page Wooden window frame/fr and then move Wooden Window frame/fr to Wooden window frame/fr. Apparently the capitalisation matters, something I forgot when I made the moves. Zellfaze (talk) 14:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

This has been resolved. Thank you. Zellfaze (talk) 21:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status of this image

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

CC-0 licensed image that sidesteps all the copyright issues in this thread.

Does anyone know who made that image and under what license it was released (if any). I want to upload it here, but don't want to run afoul of copyright law. Its a really good image and I would love to see it embedded into the Knox County page instead of just linked to from it. Zellfaze (talk) 14:13, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Your guess would be as good as mine. All I know is that it originated from the forums if I'm not mistaken, since I have seen it before. --Connall (talk) 14:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Nabbed it from here: nasKo TinyZed (talk) 14:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Anyone feel like PMing nasKo and asking his permission to use the image here? I don't have an account on the forums and don't at the present time plan to make one (just intend to lurk on the forums and edit the wiki, oh and play the game). Zellfaze (talk) 14:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I'll do it. To be fair you could probably claim Fair Use on the image. --Connall (talk) 15:03, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Turns out nasKo isn't the original creator but he knows who is, so I'm following it up with him instead. --Connall (talk) 15:19, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
nasKo made a new one that you can use: --Connall (talk) 15:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Ended up making one just for use here together with Harakka on the IRC. This one only uses Public Domain imagery and images from the PZ game. Which satisfies my copyright issues I had with the old image. This image (other than the PZ bits) is licensed CC-0 which is nice for other sites. I've put it to the right side here. Zellfaze (talk) 21:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

What people are working on.

I figured I check to see what everybody is doing, since I'm nearing the edge of front page stuff I'm going to be extending outwards and don't want to start work on things that other people are already doing. I'm trying to get the farming guide updated but it's the area where I lack the most knowledge and am about to sort the modding page as well. --Connall (talk) 21:21, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Well I was about to ask if i should include farming recipes(new index 5000-5999 Template:RecipeLookup) in the Template. Like this:
Output Ingredients Description
Plowed land.png
Plowed Land
Trowel.png + Gras land.png
Trowel x1 Gras Land x1
You can plant several crops in here Skill Level required
Cabbage CropB.png
Cabbage Crop
Plowed land.png + Cabbage Seeds.png (+) Water drop.png
Plowed Land x1 Cabbage Seeds x9 Water
(consumed) (consumed)
Need 4 weeks to grow.
Water lvl over 85.
Skill Level required
Cabbage crop.png

Cabbage Crop x1
Fresh Cabbage. Skill Level required

(I need help with the descriptions ^^)

Go for it. Since it certainly counts as one, as long as you indicate it as such. Regarding descriptions I'll try and give you a hand. --Connall (talk) 22:55, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I have one major project that I am working on, and that is standardising how all of our i18n pages are done. I would like to try to come up with a standard layout for all of the item pages at some point as well. Kind of like how the Terraria Wiki has a standard layout for all of their items. Have an infobox with general info, and then a list of crafting recipes that the item is used in and the crafting recipe to make it, along with a history (though for the history we would wait until the game is released), and some trivia if there is some (easter eggs etc.).
I've also been going around and cleaning up wikilinks and the like, trying to fix things up where its clear what someone was trying to do, but hadn't quite done it right (or perhaps there is a better way). Finally I've been trying to add {{documentation}} to every template, but I've kind of been stopped by protected pages from doing that (funny that the infoboxes have a higher protection rating than the Main Page).
I want to start digging into the gamefiles and updating pages with the actual mechanics for how things work, but haven't gotten around to doing so yet. Zellfaze (talk) 23:17, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Move Main Page:Wiki Rules

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Can someone move Main Page:Wiki Rules to PZwiki:Wiki Rules. It would make more sense in that location. Zellfaze (talk) 19:16, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Done. --Connall (talk) 21:09, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki Links

Not sure if anyone else knows this, but you can do standard Wikilinks for links to Wikipedia in articles. If you preface a link with wikipedia: as in [[wikipedia:Main Page]] it will show up as wikipedia:Main Page. These links can be styled and modified in any way that regular wikilinks can. Keeps you from having to fill out a CAPTCHA each time you link there and makes generally nicer looking links. There is a full list of Interwiki prefixes available through the API. If there are any other Wikis that we link to regularly, we should probably add them to that Interwiki list, though that would require kirrus' help. Zellfaze (talk) 20:29, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

You can also use <span class="plainlinks">[httpexternallink something]</span> to hide the arrow-box thingy if that's bugging anyone. tinyZed 23:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm an admin now as well.

So Pianoman gave me admin privleges, so if you need stuff done that you are unable to do. Feel free to hit myself or Pianoman up. Post on this page as well, as I do check it regularly. --Connall (talk) 00:09, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Overview for maintenance

It would be nice if there would be some kind of graphical(or at least formated) overview for articles/categories. I thought of something like CategoryTree(with max. depth) , Semantic Graph or Graphical Category Browser. Well, if there is already something similar installed, then i havent found it -.- Minic90 (talk) 04:05, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

You can see what extensions are installed on Special:Version. It doesn't look like any extension that does those sorts of thing are intstalled. We could try to come up with some sort of category hierarchy that makes some sense. Something like a small handful of overview categories that then lead into deeper categorization so that if you need to find something you can just follow the chain down. It would take a bit of planning though, and a bit more work to document it. Zellfaze (talk) 23:21, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
You are right we should plan ahead before we (maybe) drastically change the category structure, but for the meantime it would be nice to:
  1. Check out the current structure (well its easier to see which category already exists with it ^^)
  2. Reduce the uncategorized categories by moving them in an existing super/parent category
  3. And well we need to start with something -.-
  4. ...
At least CategoryTree(with max. depth) should be installed, its tiny and easy to install. Minic90 (talk) 00:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Need admin help

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

I need Разорванная ткань moved to Ripped sheet/ru bit Ripped sheet/ru must be deleted first. Zellfaze (talk) 01:22, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Done. --Connall (talk) 10:58, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

image size

what size itemname.png or gif should be?

itemname.png 32x32

itemname_big or big_itemname.png 120x120

imagename.png 120x120

itemname_small or smallitemname.png 32x32

120x120 only 32x32 only

--Itok (talk) 19:51, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I'd upload it in the highest resolution you have and then just have Mediawiki resize it. Zellfaze (talk) 02:51, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
How about gif animated image? I replaced this file with original image from pack file(thank you Minic90).Because it had black background instead of transparent background in items page.Gif file seemed to have resize problem. And I went to Vest page. I saw Mediawiki enlarged and interpolated image looks ugly. I rarely refer individual item pages, so I don't care about it. but.. should I revert it?--Itok (talk) 05:22, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

AfD Example

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

Latest revision of this page just says "Delete me please" or something similar. Zellfaze (talk) 02:51, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes,I did mistake.please delete the page.Sorry for my bad English. --Itok (talk) 03:30, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Too much Items

Anyone think Items is getting long? Or is it fine? tinyZed 23:33, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

It's getting a bit too long. We will probably need to split the pages up soon, if items keep getting added to the game, it will become impossible to navigate. --Connall (talk) 19:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
What's crazy is we don't even have all the current items on it! Zellfaze (talk) 20:30, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Yeah. We should still probably have an all-items page, for those who want to wade through it, and a number of item-group pages. tinyZed 23:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good. Most of the items are categorised anyway, so just make each category have it's own page. I would appreciate it if the pages could be prevented from being stubs as well. Before doing that though, it would probably be best to get all the items in THEN copying them into their own category pages. --Connall (talk) 00:04, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
For sure. tinyZed 00:05, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I dont know if there is already some kind of tool to unpack the .pack files, but if there is not:
I wrote a tiny UnPacker for this matter: with this you are able to unpack and split all textures and look if there is some item(which has a texture) missing. Its still an early state, so there could be some bugs (backup your file first ^^) Minic90 (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
One more thing: Why dont we just (for now) make all tables on Items collapseable ? Example:
Item Description

Shotgun Shells

Ammunition for the Shotgun and its Sawed-Off version.

9mm Rounds

Ammunition for the Pistol.

9mm Magazine

Ammunition for the Pistol can be put in here. Only exists on normal and hardcore reloading modes.
Minic90 (talk) 02:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I've done that here but it appears it doesn't like to be centered. Fatheed (talk) 03:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Might as well go with that for now. If it looks decent enough we might keep it as a permanent thing. --Connall (talk) 08:50, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I've added style='text-align:center' to Minic90's table. Looks centered now. tinyZed 02:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, this doesnt work ^^. Its centered because I used <center></center> to get the center alignment... or does this option just work with some browsers and the table wasn't centered for you ? Minic90 (talk) 03:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Hrm. Works for me. It's (now) the exact same as the item templates on the item page. So should work. tinyZed 03:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Moving closed Discussions to Community_portal/closed ?

Shouldn't we move closed discussions to some archive article ? (see title) Minic90 (talk) 03:45, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Mainpage design

I tried some 'new' design for the Mainpage example is here: Main_page_sandbox.
What changed? :

  1. Mini picture because it takes a huge amount of space and (i think) most users/visitors will enlarge/open it anyway.
  2. Splitting of 'Useful Pages' in three seperated topics: 'Useful Pages'(still -.-); Gameworld; Gameplay because it became to long (and when I first came to this wiki I had problems to locate 'Carpentry' at the bottom [shame on me '.']) Minic90 (talk) 03:58, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Inventory Icons

MashPotato was kind enough to compile all the icons into a single folder, so feel free to use it. You'll find it here: --Connall (talk) 10:45, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Remove History from Individual Items Pages

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

So I'm just floating this out there. Is it really worth keeping track of the history of the item, unless it's because it was removed. I imagine to research and find the history of the items and maintain it would probably be rather pointless. At the very least we could think about removing the table and adding any history that we do know into the summaries of the item rather than having these empty and barren tables. --Connall (talk) 10:46, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps have history for items if the history is notable, already there, and interesting? But otherwise, yeah, those tables aren't doing much. tinyZed 14:36, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Version categories

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

What was the current thinking with the various category:Version categories?

Many articles have a category of version 0.2.0 something on them. Were they once used as a crude method to determine which pages were out of date? And if so, isn't it a bit overengineered; Shouldn't there just be a handful with the last few versions? Or maybe I'm just not appreciating the scope of some past contributor's brilliant idea. I don't know. :/

Need any templates worked on?

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

So I think I've got a working grasp on the creation and modification of MediaWiki templates. Does anyone have any that they'd like created or some existing ones that they'd like to see recieve some love? I'm working on the consumables template right now to allow it to display all the item statistics for all the different permutations of consumable (e.g. combinations of cooked/rotten/etc.) --ZombieLawnGnome (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

The work so far completed can be found here: User:ZombieLawnGnome/Sandbox It uses the Dead Rat as an example. Formatting could be improved, but it's functional. Please don't mind the "Cooked ZombieLawnGnome/Sandbox" - the template is configured to fill in the page name in those spots. :D --ZombieLawnGnome (talk) 17:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Removal of "History" & "Code" section from items.

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

This has been talked about before on the wiki and today I decided to go through with it. I am beginning to remove the history sections from items. At the moment all they are are stubs of information that would be more hassle to keep updated than they would be worth. Trying to find the complete history of an item is equally nightmarish and realistically very few people will actually need/want to know of when the item was introduced and it's history. We'll probably mention when it was introduced and removed in the summary for the item but dedicating the entire page to a stub of information is nonsensical at best. With no objections the majority of pages will be updated tomorrow rather than today.

If you feel that I should not go through with this then feel free to let me know. --Connall (talk) 16:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Go for it. Perhaps if there is an item page with a really detailed, interesting history (I'm not aware of any) then maybe it could stay. tinyZed 19:26, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Certainly if it has a good set of history in the table then keep it, otherwise it can go.

I'm also going to add Code to this list, since ZombieLawnGnome Made a compelling enough reason to get rid of it. I spoke to a couple of people in IRC and they felt the same way, so for now it's gone. In the future if I can ever get these scripts I want done, I may just automate the placement of code instead. --Connall (talk) 21:24, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

I thought this would happen, I just knew it would. Alot of these pages become meaningless stubs. Because of this I'll probably delete pages with info that can easily be collapsed into the items page table. --Connall (talk) 11:22, 11 December 2013 (UTC) (Forgot to add signature.)

Items set for deletion discussion

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

While I'm aware it points to their own discussion for each item, I feel this is a bit overkill. If you have general objections over the deletion of these pages you can raise them here instead/as well. --Connall (talk) 21:47, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Deletions went through, discusssion has been closed.

Perhaps useful to keep an eye on

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

I don't know if anyone else here knows about SteamDB, but one of the things the website does is keep track of when people update things on Steam. They have a page for Project Zomboid and I think that it might be worth keeping an eye on. It might be a good way to tell if something got updated. I'm not entirely clear on how to read all of the information on it yet, but I'm confident I'll work it out. Zellfaze (talk) 17:40, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

How recent are these pages?

Closed Discussion.

This discussion has been resolved. Please do not modify it. If additional discussion is needed, start a new one below.

While using this wiki I've been having real issues identifying what information is accurate and what's out of date (A nice harmless example is the Zombie page saying that "A zombie's corpse has a capacity of 5."). So I was thinking - we need to do something to A) identify what pages are and aren't out of date easily and B) provide a central list of pages that may need reviewing. I've done this or seen it done two ways on other wikis: either creating different namespace pages for different versions (EG a page could be "RC2.9:Zombies" and a newer version might be "B21:Zombies" (build 21)). The downside of this of course is that you would end up with tens of thousands of confusing out of date pages (that's not even considering multiple pages for multiple languages!).

So my suggested option would be something I can see was started some time ago: A category on every page marking that "this page was updated with version 0.2.0p in mind" [[Category:Version_0.2.0p]] . We can then easily see what pages haven't been updated with regards to the latest version. What's the community opinion on this, if I was to spend some time adding categories and flagging pages that need review, would that be useful? Or is this already happening somewhere that I haven't noticed? --Ascyron (talk) 20:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Generally if a page is outdated we ask people to put up a {{Notice|outdated}} the problem is though, we don't get alot of people editing the wiki so alot of pages go un-noticed. The notice indicated before automatically categorises the page into anything with {{Notice|improve}} gets automatically categorised into you can find the rest of the notice stuff here:
Now as for an easy way to identify if it's up to date, I generally add a {{VersionNotice|(whatever current version at edit is)}} to know :when the page and what version it was updated for. Though it's something I've never enforced (no-one to really enforce it onto) --Connall (talk) 00:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Just so i know, what exact version do you use for 'build 21'; shall I use {{VersionNotice|build 21}} or something else ? and btw how do you find the outdated / unmarked page based on VersionNotice ? --Susmab (talk) 19:05, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
There's no way as of yet. We usually mark it with the full version number E.g (14) but I don't believe that's the current build. --Connall (talk) 21:36, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
I would like to point out that if you are going to add notices, rather than edit a page, it is always helpful to explain why the page is out of date in the talk page. Someone put a notice up in the Survival guide but hasn't responded as to why, and I've spent a while trying to figure out why that page is outdated. --Connall (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
You can get a sense of the date by checking the history and comparing differences (e.g. now vs. June 2013). Info that's been around a while unaltered might be out of date, depending on any relevant developmental changes. I suppose you can crawl through version history checking for changes? You could also verify ingame. We could work through the more important pages to make sure they're up to date, if you want. tinyZed 22:24, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
I think we can definitely all agree that when we know a page is outdated, we should add {{Notice|outdated}} (or just update the page). That's a moot point, not really worth debating. My question is more along the lines of "What's a good way to identify all pages that haven't been updated since version x.x.x(xx) - as opposed to just the pages that have been flagged as problematic?". So the two possibilities we've discussed for this are VersionNotice vs Category. Comparing the two, it seems to me that the VersionNotice displays the version to anyone on that page, whereas using Categories does that and displays a central list that can be sorted through to find the most-out-of-date pages. Or am I missing some crucial part of VersionNotices? --Ascyron (talk) 08:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
I've added categorisation for whatever the second field is for Version Notice, so every time the notice is put up, that build number you put will become it's category. That means if you find an outdated page, you can find the category at the bottom which will lead you to a collection of pages that have the same version link.

The only problem is that since PZ's build is changing constantly it absolutely screws us since pages will become outdated in a matter of days/weeks but the information presented on those pages are still valid. --Connall (talk) 11:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

It's not going to be perfect. This will not show us what pages are outdated or incorrect, it will merely indicate which are the oldest/most out of date pages. If we can ensure that a large percentage of our editors are aware to add/update that template when they update pages, then this will show us exactly what parts of the wiki need the most work. Glad we can come to a consensus like this - I've worked on wikis where this discussion would have taken months and not gotten anywhere! I think the one outstanding question is what standard should we use for the different versions? Would everyone be happy with "" (no spaces, no leading zeroes on the build number)? --Ascyron (talk) 07:27, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Any pages that have a version notice already will have a space between the version number and build. However, I believe those are all attached to older version of the pages. So we could indeed make this the standard. --Connall (talk) 12:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)