Changes: WoWWiki talk:Village pump

Edit this page

Back to page

(Styling: gogo schmidt)
(moved a few discussions to wowwiki talk:styling)
Line 300: Line 300:
== Minor CSS tweaks ==
== Minor CSS tweaks ==
: ''Discussion moved to [[WoWWiki talk:Styling]], as it seems to be relevant to the discussion that will continue there.'' [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 02:14, 22 June 2006 (EDT)
Unless I hear someone screaming NOOOOO in the very near future, I'm going to submit a few CSS patches to Rustak, which I hope he'll add:
* Make clicked links a bit brighter; they're hard to read sometimes, especially so in anything-but-dark rooms.
* Make TOCs darker (#282828) than the standard page (#333333) rather than lighter. Everything in TOCs is links so they'll become easier to read - and it'll look better =)
--[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 09:30, 17 June 2006 (EDT)
Both of those ideas sound good to me! -- [[User:Kirkburn|Kirkburn]] 09:51, 17 June 2006 (EDT)
: As well as that, ask also if he can change the default skin to monobook, transfer all code from current css formatting to [[mediawiki:monobook.css]]. This would allow us admins to change the formatting accordingly, and also we could add further stuff, such as
.tooltip { <noinclude>[[:Category:WoW Utility Templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]
</noinclude>background-color:#111111; border:1px solid #bbbbbb; float:right; width:20em; padding:1ex; margin:0 0 1ex 1ex; color: white; }
: Also, to drop the css code for the corner image so that mediawiki software will choose [[:image:wiki.png]]. (In case anyone's wondering, [[:image:wiki.jpg]], to the best of my understanding, won't work.) We could still use the orc icon (he doesn't like what's currently at wiki.png). I don't care. But when the time comes to change the icon, I'd like to be able to do that right away. (But maybe he wants it that way. ;p ) [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 15:08, 17 June 2006 (EDT)
:: Uhm, no, I'm not lumping in a quick "please apply this diff here" request with a jobload like that. I want it to actually get done =) --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 18:46, 17 June 2006 (EDT)
::: /me votes for both! =) -- [[User:Kirkburn|Kirkburn]] 19:24, 17 June 2006 (EDT)
::: Then you can just direct him here :) [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 01:41, 18 June 2006 (EDT)
:::: I'm not quite following the reasoning here. Why does it have to be monobook.css? Is that the only one the non-shell-access-admins can edit? If so, wouldn't we be screwing over people that use other skins if we only keep monobook up to date? (Is the solution just the scrap all the other skins? =)) --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 09:31, 18 June 2006 (EDT)
I've sent Rustak an updated wowwiki/main.css that, in my opinion, solves some of the worst problems with the skin. E.g. selected history/diff lines being unreadable, new pages list being unreadable, the metadata box for images not being readable, not enough spacing before &lt;h1&gt;s / &lt;h1&gt;s... and some minor tweaks. Shouldn't be a shock to anyone used to the skin, but doesn't solve the skinning problems either. --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 11:47, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
== Styling ==
== Styling ==
[[user:ElusiveByte]] removed formatting from [[Interface Customization]] [] due to not looking good with Nostalgia skin. What comments do you all have? Please leave them here, since it should be considered a wiki-wide discussion. That type of formatting he didn't like pervades this wiki. [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 22:59, 18 June 2006 (EDT)
: ''Discussion moved to [[WoWWiki talk:Styling]], as it seems to be relevant to the discussion that will continue there. Sorry about moving it one more time. '' [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 02:14, 22 June 2006 (EDT)
: He's absolutely right about using skin styles. Problem is.... there are none. And whatever we use needs to be in all skins. --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 05:51, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
: Hm, I lie. They don't. It'll only look boring in other skins. Come to think of it, I'm going to download the wowwiki skin and give it an overhaul and mail it to Rustak and refer to this discussion and solve this matter once and for all. --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 06:01, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
: On a sidenote... wouldn't it be Bloody Wonderful if Rustak could set up FTP access to the skins directory and hand out user names and passwords to a select few? I wouldn't being one of those ;-) &nbsp; (I'll start out by mailing him about that I think..) &nbsp; --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 06:01, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
:: I would rather not have FTP access, but that the skins would be in MediaWiki software where they belong, such as [[MediaWiki:Monobook.css]] and other appropriate areas. But note that even if you use Monobook to display your pages, '''MediaWiki:Monobook.css''' will have no effect on it. :( What I would rather have is that it did.
:: This also is why I want to make use of the skins so that we can use classes. Classes are so much better (especially when you have a situation like this where you can choose skins), but right now we can't make use of them. [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 09:11, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
''Pulled from the talk page of the aforementioned page:''
: Not looking good was an understatement. Nostalgia uses the standard link coloring (dark blue, dark purple), which is.. well... basically not readable with dark backgrounds. --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 12:13, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
: The proper markup is much more important than the style. I made sure the default rendering of the markup looks fine in other skins. It currently looks horrible in Nostalgia, which I use because I have a hard time reading the default skin. If you want the links to look pretty, until such time that you are willing to spend the effort to use *class* definitions from the skin stylesheets to create the desired style, no style is better. Even if you have to author the custom classes for whatever skin you use. It's you who wishes to add the "style"; you should do the work. You should not do it half-assedly then make those who use other skins suffer. Usablity is much more important that style. - [[User:ElusiveByte|ElusiveByte]].
:: Well said, and I had the same idea quite some time ago. I asked in what I had hoped to be a popular place so others would read it and comment, but there was no result. I had asked if anyone used any other skin. Now we know. That said, you ''seem'', due to the lack of prior interest, to be the only one or one of the very, very few to have an issue with this. Is the default "wowwiki" skin so great a burden to read? This is not the only wiki to use dark backgrounds and white text. [ Memory-Alpha] is another, except they use the "Monobook.css" but completely modified to look similar to this. [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 23:32, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
:: For reference, these pages look like this in Nostalgia and Monobook:
::* [[Interface Customization]] [ as ElusiveByte edited it]: [ nostalgia] [ monobook]
::* [[Main Page]]: [ nostalgia] [ monobook]
::* [[WoWWiki:Main Page Dev 3]]: [ nostalgia] [ monobook]
::* [[WoWWiki:Templates]]: [ nostalgia] [ monobook]
::: ElusiveByte, insulting us isn't going to help. It would be better to explain why the default skin doesn't work for you and how we can improve it, rather than shouting at us for stuff we've worked hard on. The default style of the wiki is the one it is desgined around, there's no gettign around that. We're not wikipedia and we have limited resources to check the designs in every skin that available :)
::: The style sheets are being discussed, but unfortunately only Rustak, the admin, is able to do stuff directly atm. I'm glad [[WoWWiki:Main Page Dev 3]] looks okay in the other skins though :) -- [[User:Kirkburn|Kirkburn]] 07:31, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
:::: Kirkburn, I did a poor job of curbing my frustration when I wrote that. I appologize to all. Just so everyone understands, I removed the custom, hard-coded colors from that page, and explained in my summary how in-line styles hurt users of other skins. When I came back later, the author of the in-line styles had reverted my change with no address to the real problem. I got frustrated and wrote what you see above. I don't see that it was all that insulting. Had I left out "half-assedly", it would have been much more professional, though.
:::: I stand by my general statement: If you want custom colors for certain layout elements (borders, div backgrounds, etc), those colors should be defined in classes in the css file of the skin of your choice. Then, if users of other skins wish to implement your classes in the css file for their skin, they will do that work. Using inline styles for colors forces every viewer of that page, regardless of what skin they have selected, to see those colors. That is not a very friendly practice. It makes it very hard for me to read with my desired skin.
:::: So you see, when I made the page readable for everyone (but less colorful), and the original author simply reverted my change, I took that as an offense myself. My comment originally appeared on that specific page's discussion page. Taken out of context of that discussion, yes, it sounds harsh, so I wrote all of this to explain my position. [[User:ElusiveByte|ElusiveByte]] 18:49, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
::::: Just a small factual correction: I'm the main author of the page (as it is today), and I wasn't the one that reverted it ;)
::::: And, yes, I think we all agree that this is a problem. We hope to have something happen pretty soon. I for one will jump over the ability to tweak stylesheets live and make templates and colorful pages use classes from the skins. --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 16:59, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
I just got a brilliant idea. How about we make a demo CSS file of sorts and we can include all the classes we want, to fit the skin we all use. Then we format those same classes everwhere else. Then neither Rustak nor anyone else has to wade through all the classes and design a new skin, if you get my drift. Also, periodically we can email Rustak (or he might patrol) and then, until he sets it up so that we can edit it ourselves, he can post that CSS formatting to whatever he has. How about that? How about moving this discussion to [[WoWWiki talk:Styling]] and develping a CSS file at [[WoWWiki:Styling/wowwiki.css]] or some such? Any better ideas?
Thanks for your explanation, ElusiveByte, and as Mikk said, we tend to agree, but as I said too, we didn't have anyone complaining about it so we didn't think there was an issue. [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 17:24, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
: Go for it. I've got plenty ideas of how to design useful classes that I'd like to throw around. --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 21:09, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
When I mailed the new main.css (with the minor tweaks) to Rustak, the discussion slided over onto being able to edit skins from inside the Wiki. He's aware of the problem, and we talked about different ways of fixing it. (Won't say more here as I don't know how much he wants public.) --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 17:18, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
: I guess it'll be evident when it happens then. Thanks. I guess it might have benefitted everyone if I had done similarly with main.css some while back. I didn't think that one through. [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 06:42, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
== Images ==
== Images ==
Line 314: Line 314:
== Updated skin ==
== Updated skin ==
: ''Discussion moved to [[WoWWiki talk:Styling]], as it seems to be relevant to the discussion that will continue there.'' [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 02:14, 22 June 2006 (EDT)
Ooh, purple ;) Now can we do something about getting the new front page implemented ''please''. The current one is inadequate and out of date. Tbh, I don't see a need to vote on it as the other are also out-of-date and already have most of their content on [[WoWWiki:Main_Page_Dev_3]]. =) Poke, poke, pole! -- [[User:Kirkburn|Kirkburn]] 15:03, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
: Well, more of a blueish-gray. Either way, it's much brighter than it used to be. The regular links are also brighter, which means they shine less in text -- not being too distracted by colorful blobs is good for reading comprehension. (Aye, my better half works with layout. Does it show? >.<) &nbsp; --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 15:07, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
:: At best, it doesn't make sense. Why doesn't each page call a skin page that we can change? We're still at a loss to set up classes. :( Whom does this change help? [[User:D. F. Schmidt|Schmidt]] 16:01, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
::: o.O You're confusing two discussions. This is the result of my "minor css tweaks" post a ways back, which was something I was hoping could be fixed fairly quickly, and, lo and behold, it was. Notice for instance how [[Special:Newpages]] is actually readable now, and how you can actually read the two first lines of [ page history], not just see two big white blocks, and a couple of other minor tweaks and fixes. And no, it doesn't help squat with the using-different-skins issue. I can't fix that by mailing Rustak a new main.css =P --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 17:13, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
(I'm now posting something re: skinning in [[#Styling]] btw.. --[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 17:16, 20 June 2006 (EDT))
== Warcraft III & Warcraft III :TFT map editor ==
== Warcraft III & Warcraft III :TFT map editor ==

Revision as of 06:14, June 22, 2006

WoWWiki:Village pump/Please leave this line as it is thanks

Comment out extra boilerplate?

Oh, I hope this is the right spot to ask this question. When using a boilerplate as a basis for article information, is it best to delete all the sections that you don't use, or comment them out so that someone else can add info there if needed? Hrm.. asked that way, I think I just answered myself. I'm just not sure how concerned we are in general with page file sizes and things like that. Also, is there a completed guide someplace for help on procedures for editing things correctly? Or someplace to ask newbie questions? I've been fumbling around a bit, and it seems like the help files are kind of all over the place...and half of them are stubs. :)

I really want to help with this whole project, but I don't want to screw it up. Gilly DH 12:37, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

If you just don't know what the information should be then just leave it blanks (i.e. level of something). If you know a certain field doesn't apply to the article then delete it, (i.e the DPS of armor..) and if there may or may not be information then you can delete it or comment it out. I don't think page size as far as KBs is as much of a concern as page size in the terms of a really long article no one wants to read or edit. As far as getting help it can sorta be a pain to figure out where to ask where someone will actually see it. Help:Editing will be your best choice for finding up to date, wowWiki specific, editing information. If you have questions about a certain article you should ask on that articles talk page. If you just have a question that you want to be sure someone sees and answers you can ask on my talk page and I will answer it the best I can as will almost anyone who is active here.  :)--Ralthor 23:48, 28 May 2006 (EDT)
Category:Help has useful info, as has WoWWiki:Community Portal. But, yeah, a lot is stubs :-(   - I'm actually working on trying to improve the situation right now (and have been for the past week or so). Feel free to contribute ;)
But, yeah, here's definitely a good place to ask questions, and Ralthor's pointer is the reference for how wiki markup actually works. --Mikk 04:30, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
Thankee much, gentlefolk. I've already been using Help:Editing heavily and now I've bookmarked Category:Help too. I had been starting on the Community Portal page, but got frustrated when articles that seemed to have the exact info I wanted were stubs. And I can't contribute to something I don't know about. ;)
However, I don't have a problem with the code. More like: What categories should I use for this widget? (don't want to contribute to the problem of incorrect categorization). And something else, but I forget what it was now. Anyway, I'll ask the category questions on the article talk pages. Thanks again. Gilly DH 09:17, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
You're in a pretty unique situation right now, though.
  • You're new to editing WoWWiki
  • You care about your pages; categorization, editability, etc..
  • You communicate :-)
If you were to do something simple like keeping a tally of problems you run into, it could help immensely. For people long used to WoWWiki, it's hard to guess where the problem areas lie - they know everything too well already. (Well, ok, blank stubs = bad. But the problem is what should actually go in them :-))
--Mikk 10:50, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
Heh, you could probably say I'm in the same position. Btw, it's a very good idea to check where the main page links actually go - I flagged up the problem with the Quests link earlier - it doesn't really go anywhere of interest :-O
Mikk, you're doing a great job btw!
-- Kirkburn 10:58, 29 May 2006 (EDT)

Use of Javascript and HTML events in MediaWiki?

If I haven't completely misinterpreted the results of the current Template:Delete/Vote/Content/Dev – specifically this version – it seems that we can't use onmouseover or onmouseout or onmouseclick. I extend that to mean that we probably can't use any HTML events to call functions. If anyone can think of a way to make a banner expand to display a policy abbreviation, so that we can have smaller banners, please let me know here or on a more relevant talk page (and of course let me know where it is). Thanks. Schmidt 14:17, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

div style="hover { some attribute that makes the div go bigger };" perhaps? I suck a fair bit at CSS, unfortunately. This page might have a useful tip or two. Notice especially what goes on when you mouse over examples; the functionality for that is shown in the last example.
However, I'd personally be leery to hide away important information like that. It's a little bit like going back to those "Hey, find the right random place to click in this picture of (me|my cat|my car|my room|a smurf) here to get to where you want! But I'm not even gonna tell you that there's something clickable here!" games that were so popular in like 1995 to me. --Mikk 15:17, 30 May 2006 (EDT)
I know what you're talking about. Yeah, we wouldn't want to hide away the policy, but here's my rationale: For one thing, we wouldn't be hiding anything away really. We would be stowing it. See, we could have a note saying something like "Mouse over this banner to see an abbreviated policy." That way people that would actually read that would see it. And further, the full policy is on another page anyways. In any case, I don't see how this hover thing will work, but I'll see what I can do. Schmidt 15:25, 30 May 2006 (EDT)
Hey, something I know about! Yes, you could use css to do something like this, however :hover doesn't work in Internet Explorer, except for links. If you make it a link to the full policy though, you wouldn't have a problem. Gilly DH 18:08, 30 May 2006 (EDT)
MSIE just sucks. I wouldn't mind excluding all the MSIE users. No, just kidding. I know that I used to work at Comfort Inn where they didn't have Firefox which I prefer, so by what I said at the beginning of this paragraph would be something of a double standard. Anyways, yes, we would link to the policy anyways. But unless I'm mistaken, I can't use :hover anyways because I can't write any CSS formatting for :hover. Where would I put it? SCRIPT doesn't work, so I can't do <SCRIPT type="css/text">, which is what I would normally use. Am I missing anything? Schmidt 18:21, 30 May 2006 (EDT)
Ah...hrm. Can you link to an external stylesheet? I don't know of a way to do inline styles for :hover. And.. I just realized that links don't really work the same way in Wikicode anyway. So actually, I'm out of my depth :(
However, I see there's a ton of stylesheets and javascript pages linked in the general page source. Is there a way to name things in WoWWiki? There should be... there's a specific style for image frames and toc boxes, right?, so can you add one for policy boxes? Then you might be able to do something in an external stylesheet. I'm just throwing ideas out here, hoping one of them will be slightly useful. 19:59, 30 May 2006 (EDT) -- didn't sign it right the first time, which reminds me to preview :P Gilly DH 20:24, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

I figured I was out of my depth too, which is mostly why I'm trying to recruit other people for perhaps one more tool than I had. I appreciate your effort. In any case, I know that I could apply a class to it, which would be better than an ID, but I can't access the CSS file that each page links to, so I can't make use of external sheets. That's the problem at hand. I'm trying to do this without having such access. Schmidt 20:27, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

I didn't realize you didn't have any access to the stylesheets. I'll see if I can think of anything. Meantime, hopefully someone else will have an idea. Gilly DH 20:41, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

A few things that I mentioned to Rustak

I just wrote Rustak mentioning some important things I've had in mind. This is to tell you that you don't need to contact him, and also to let you know when he returns with an answer.

The topics I discussed:

I'll let you all know when there's an answer, or maybe he'll respond right here. Schmidt 16:40, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

LOL. He already responded, like 15 minutes after I had written him. He said he'll take a look at it. Well, he said a lot more than that. I'm not sure how much he wants public.
  • As for the wiki icon, he doesn't like the image I used for the test, so maybe if we open up more options, that would be helpful.
  • He doesn't necessarily want to introduce new namespaces, but the discussion is still in progress.
  • On CSS formatting files, he's looking into alternatives to how it is right now, and may implement the use later.
I I'll let you know when he responds again. Schmidt 17:06, 30 May 2006 (EDT)
So he didn't like the image you used, which is pretty close the icon 3 which is winning the Proposed new sidebar vote, does he not like that icon either?--Ralthor 19:02, 31 May 2006 (EDT)

Categorizing templates

(Aye, I'm obviously taking a break in my WoW playing :-)) I'm going over all the templates in "Template:" and categorizing them. Take a look at Category:Templates to see what I'm doing and shout here if you have any input. I've done A through D at the moment. Unfortunately I managed to introduce newlines in some places where there really shouldn't be any. I'll be going back over everything and fixing it tomorrow morning. Right now I seriously need some Zzzzz. --Mikk 15:58, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

Fleshed out the texts in the categories a lot more, which should help explain what the heck I'm actually doing. Yes, the texts are fairly huge now, which kind of goes against policy, but I figure they're pages by editors for editors so perhaps it matters less? --Mikk 02:39, 31 May 2006 (EDT)
Schmidt and I started swinging our handbags at eachother about Category:Templates that should have been local. I started a vote about it. Please help us stop :-) → discussion page.   --Mikk 15:32, 2 June 2006 (EDT)
Yes, please help him stop. :-P Schmidt 16:27, 2 June 2006 (EDT)
Oi! *swings*   --Mikk 02:11, 3 June 2006 (EDT)

Phew, I've gone over them all and done an initial categorization. Of course, I might be wrong about some classifications, but now at least the brunt of the work is done. It also earned me the dubios honor of a 2500club membership >.<   --Mikk 07:37, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

Style and substance

The Wiki is too complicated. There, I've said it.

It has expanded massively recently, and needs some serious work sorting out pages. The kind of stuff I have problems with are pages with nearly identical names serving different purposes, or wildly varying pages that are almost identical. For example:

  • Quest and Quests ... should be one page
  • Trainer and Trainers ... I have merged (Trainer redirects to Trainers)
  • The professions-related pages are all over the shop

... and similar stuff.

Now, I'm not really complaining, but I think there should be more of an emphasis on sorting the existing pages rather than adding more and more all the time. There are database sites out there that can do directory listings much better than a wiki - but what a wiki can do better is the background, the explanations, the commentary ... which is what I reckon should be concentrated on. Giant lists of minor quests are of little use if they're infrequently updated and they can get more info on thottbot or suchlike - sticking to the big stuff, the useful stuff will help much more.

I guess I'm saying that too many pages = contributions spread too thinly. The wiki has something like 10,000 active pages, and there aren't nearly enough people working on it to police them all (Mikk is doing a great job of clearing up stuff at the moment though, I must say - a lot of pages need deletion - which would probably speed up the wiki, too).

I hope this doesn't step on anyone's toes :) -- Kirkburn 12:35, 1 June 2006 (EDT)

Fwiw, I'm not getting involved in this discussion. I came here to fiddle with API pages and I haven't even gotten started with that :-) (But I do agree with Kirkburn's general notions.) --Mikk 14:46, 1 June 2006 (EDT)
Heh, I'm not trying to drag you into this :P Heck, it might make you stop ;) ... anyways, I'm not advocating radical changes, just suggesting we try and concentrate on what we already have a little more. -- Kirkburn 16:17, 1 June 2006 (EDT)

Two new policy proposals

I just thought I'd draw your attention to two new policy proposals I put up:

Comments and flames go in their respective talk pages :-) --Mikk 16:39, 1 June 2006 (EDT)

Since we are drawing attention to things I will draw attention to the two votes I put up on Help:Contents.  ;)--Ralthor 17:59, 1 June 2006 (EDT)


I started looking at the Orphanage and noticed that a lot of the items are similar. First of all, do we care if there are items in the orphanage? Should we have a goal that most pages should be linked into the main wiki?

There's a lot of items that are put in Categories but since they are not directly linked, they show up as orphans. Some examples are:

I'd be willing to clean up items out of the orphanage, but I'm just curious if anyone else thinks this would be a good idea. - ClydeJr 17:08, 3 June 2006 (EDT)

Some pages in the orphanage should obviously be linked into other pages since they're useful. But a lot of them.... uh, no, they're navigated via categories if at all. Glossary and abbreviation pages definitely strike me as such pages. I'm thinking that perhaps we should turn Orphanage into an actual page (with a well-visible link to specialpages at the top), and just have "Pages that aren't linked to but really aren't meant to:" below that and just dump meant-to-be-orphans there. It would make the specialpage useful again. Right now, trying to find something meaningful to do there is just ... meaningless.
If we go with that, finding meant-to-be-orphaned pages and linking to them from the Orphanage would indeed be a task worthy of praise :-)
--Mikk 04:42, 4 June 2006 (EDT)
Meh, this is a wiki. I just went ahead and set the page up to show you what I mean. If it is decided that this is a Bad Idea(tm), just revert it back to the redirect. I won't take offense :-) --Mikk 05:06, 4 June 2006 (EDT)

A "Things to do" category?

I was just considering setting up a "Things to do" category, which would contain pretty much everything that a bored contributor could browse through to find ... well... things to do :-)   All the stub categories... votes in progress... the categories for pages tagged for merging/moving/cleanup/etc... the orphanage ...

Note that I don't mean including the actual pages that need action in the category, but rather the pages that LIST things to do.

Anyone else think it's a good idea? Or a better name for the category?   I kind of want it to be obvious enough that contributors can go "ah-hah!" when just looking at the name, but yet short and to-the-point. --Mikk 10:16, 4 June 2006 (EDT)

Well there is WoWWiki:Community_Portal/To Do, which could probably be reorganized to have all that information. Do the same thing we were doing to Help:Content/Dev, where the ToDo information that is included is an abbreviated list of the most populat ones (or all of them if they will fit) with short descriptions and on the actual page you could have a much larger list with maybe a little more information about what exactly to do with the categories... Yea I like that idea, just need to make sure the more link is include ;)--Ralthor 10:28, 4 June 2006 (EDT)
Yeah, the portal todo list is more or less the same idea, but I was thinking it'd be a good thing for new contributors to see a "Things to do" link at the bottom of something they stumble over, and immediately get referenced to even more things to do! :-)   --Mikk 12:31, 4 June 2006 (EDT)

Call me restless. I went ahead and did it after realizing that there are so many categories containing useful things to do that simply do not get linked to from anywhere meaningful. Now they are. Check out Category:Things to do. (There's also a link to the category from the community portal todo list.)

Axeing Stub/Section and Stub/Section2

Shamelessly plugging my vote to axe these two templates. I've already rewritten all the existing stub tags to say "article or section", which seems much more useful to me.


So I created a new collaboration of the week for people to check out. On the talk page there are some suggestions and ideas for how to make the COTW something useful. --Ralthor 12:50, 4 June 2006 (EDT)

Nice one! And I wouldn't worry too much about the process if I were you; don't fix what isn't broken imo. If people actually start warring about what should be the COTW at some point in the future, you could start implementing lengthy procedures then :-)   --Mikk 16:26, 4 June 2006 (EDT)
(This is really nit picking :-)) I think your writing style in the COTW is a bit too .. well.. "official". If it had been me, I think I'd have gone with something a bit more colloquial. After all, it's meant to be something along the lines of "hey mates! let's run off and do this together now!". --Mikk 07:08, 5 June 2006 (EDT)
Oh and another thing... What that bit about "subst in some random template that doesn't exist"? I don't get it :-) --Mikk 07:08, 5 June 2006 (EDT)
oh i figured I would make a template at some point and the when you created a new nomination you would substitute it (like vote/talk) and that would place the description, support, and comment section there. So once that was made it would read {{Subst:COTW/Nomination}} or something like that.--Ralthor 07:56, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

Open plea to Rustak for more RAM for the poor server

First, I have to say: I think I can speak for everyone when I say "We love you for putting up this machine and giving us the opportunity to work with this great project!".

But now to .. erm.. some constructive criticism?

This box is in sore need of some more RAM for the poor MySQL database. This is what I'm seeing now (and I do have a page load timer):

  • Regular page view times of 10--30 seconds. Sometimes more, but that's the norm.
  • Page submit times of 30--300(!) seconds. If I post a few pages after eachother (in different tabs), I nearly always go and grab a smoke right after. Sometimes the pages have finished submitting when I get back. Sometimes, not. (Yep, I've been smoking way too much the past couple of weeks >.<).

Perhaps it's possible to tweak the memory usage settings of the mysql db somehow to avoid the upgrade, but when I've had mysql databases go ultraslow on me in the past, I've just thrown a few more ram chips on the problem and they've generally been happy; it's faster than spending days trying to tweak them :-)

(On a sidenote, page previews are generally much much faster, so it does smell like a database problem to me.)

--Mikk 07:17, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

Ah, good, so it's not just me with the problem. Perhaps a good idea would be to try and clear out some of the stuff needing deletion (@ all admins) - that should help alleviate load, as less links would need evaluating, etc... There's just so many pages that need to disappear! (and it would be cheaper!) -- Kirkburn 09:23, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
That's a few hundred pages out of 27,599 pages. While I agree that they should be deleted already, I wouldn't count on it helping the server load a lot :-(   --Mikk 12:41, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
Meh, I broke my own record --Mikk 02:03, 12 June 2006 (EDT) File:Wikiloadtime.png
The last couple of days I've been double checking the theory that the DB is to blame. During multi-minute page load lags, I've opened the picture of Mr Friendly Orc in the top left corner in a separate window and reloaded him a couple of times. I've been getting OLTs (Orc Load Times :-)) of 0.3--2 seconds. (Then again, there's a cache somewhere in front of the actual wiki server so I might just be talking to that even though I'm requesting refreshes. Hard to tell from my end.) --Mikk 08:31, 12 June 2006 (EDT)

Is it still a problem? I've made a few tweaks that should help quite a bit; the server has 2GB of ram which is more than plenty to hold the entire working set in memory. Most of the wait is mediawiki cpu hogging, and I'm going to be doing some more stuff to alleviate that. Rustak 10:31, 12 June 2006 (EDT)

Wow. It's way faster now. Thanks. Schmidt 11:30, 12 June 2006 (EDT)
Woot! Damn, HUGE difference. Thanks! --Mikk 13:53, 12 June 2006 (EDT)
/cheer for Rustak! -- Kirkburn 17:15, 12 June 2006 (EDT)
Okay, now that's I've been testing it more .... triple /cheer and a /beer! Such a difference, hope it stays like this :D

AddOns Section revamp?

I was just looking at the addons section, and noticed it's incredibly messy. The following could probably be reduced to just two pages:

Suggestions? -- Kirkburn 10:29, 10 June 2006 (EDT)

In my humble opinion, WoWWiki shouldn't even have generic addon lists. To be quite frank, they're totally pathetic compared to any addon database site. WoWWiki could certainly provide space (imo) for addons that wants to use it as the main doco site for their addon, or addons where contributors are providing useful input, but the vast majority of what's listed is mostly "go download at ...." and not updated for well over a year. Heck, it wouldn't surprise me if most of them have been abandoned and no longer even function. --Mikk 14:07, 10 June 2006 (EDT)
To be honest, I agree ... the wiki never will be a repository for addons, so we may as well cut it down to:
  • Explaining what an addon/mod is
  • Link to any addon pages that exist on the wiki and are updated

All on one page, since there won't be enough for more than that. -- Kirkburn 17:24, 10 June 2006 (EDT)

Village pump summary in Community portal

I got a bit creative with awk and curl, and whoopie, there's now a summary of the Village pump in the "About WoWWiki" box in the community portal. It'll work approximately until my linux box keels over, which may be any day or a year from now (the hard drive is making very funny noises and I haven't gotten around to replacing it yet.)

The only gotcha is that it sorts topics according to user signatures, so if you don't sign correctly (~~~~), the post won't appear. Consequently, I won't sign THIS one correctly because it doesn't need to appear there :-) --Mikk

wowwiki in pda format?


i must say that this site is really very useful to access information about WoW. as the subject says, im wondering is it possible to have an offline version of it so that we can access this information on the go. something like, in pda format so that WoW fanatics can do some readings and such. i know that wikipedia has a pda version and i think it would be pretty cool if wowwiki could have one. --Unknownz 03:34, 14 June 2006 (EDT)

Great job!

As a newcomert to WoW I looked at a lot of sites (forums, FAQs etc) to gather all the information I can get. I keep coming back to WoWWiki most of the time. It's extremely useful and has great potential. Keep up the good work!

-- Nyenyec 12:49, 14 June 2006 (EDT)

I would love to have get some comments on visitors' satisfaction. (I know it sounds lame, yes. First time, I swear.) Is it easy to find what you need, and are there any specific pages that you frequently visit that other visitors are likely to want to read? Comment on WoWWiki talk:Proposed new sidebar if you have any comments on the bar on the left. Schmidt 22:27, 14 June 2006 (EDT)
I consider myself a Wiki-veteran (I'm a Wikipedia admin), but an absolute beginner in all matters WoW.
To me the most useful thing in WoWWiki is an easy way to read about a game concept and all related game concepts. E.g. DKP, Faction or even Death. It helps a lot if every first reference to a certain term in a page is linkified, all the synonyms and abbreviations are there as redirects and the categories are maintained properly. A "See also" section is also very useful. One thing I miss that is being used in Wikipedia is a template:Main [2]. This would be useful in the Paladin/Talents Paladin Talents relation for example.
The ClassNav template is great, this approach could be used in other places, e.g. for zones/cities.
-- Nyenyec 08:34, 15 June 2006 (EDT)
Using that template is only as valuable as saying Main article: .... Nothing wrong with that, but I can't think of a lot of articles that would use it. (That particular example of the pally page does have links to all the talents.) I'm not altogether averse to it anyways, though. Are all the articles easy to find for you, and all that? Are some difficult to find, that you think should be more available? I'm not asking just for you, but you are perhaps among few that could answer a question like that. Everyone else here knows where to look for all the pages. Of course your being a veteran of MediaWiki doesn't help our cause. =/ But maybe this is enough different. Schmidt 08:49, 15 June 2006 (EDT)
Re: template:main. It would be helpful in the Newbie Guide too, but it's not essential as long as the right links are there in the text.
Re: Navigation. Yeah, I just type whatever I need in the URL bar of my browser. :) But my suggestion is to aggressively linkify everything, make sure that the rights things are referenced (e.g. Newbie Guide#Player vs Player (PvP) links PvP Flag 4 times, but doesn't reference PvP at all). And also, in addition to categories create more navigational templates. In my experience categories are not as easy to use for beginners at first.
-- Nyenyec 09:18, 15 June 2006 (EDT)
Yeah, I'm a big proponent of nav templates whenever I can think of a use. See Template:Tlink, Template:Tlink. I made several others, too. I can't always think of a time to use them for. Someone else came up with a loot list for raids, Template:Tlink. I'll look into the other things you mentioned. Do you have anything to say about the main page or the sidebar? Schmidt 09:28, 15 June 2006 (EDT)

Importing from QuestHistory addon to WoWWiki?

I didn't find anything related to this on my first few site searches, so my apologies if this has already been discussed to death. Are there advantages to WoWWiki's quest listings over Allakhazam and/or Thottbot? I'd say yes, and those advantages would include the absence of popup ads, easy editing, and (most importantly for me) an XML export of any page to insure against content being lost or locked in.

In that case, what can be done to make creating quest pages both easier and less error-prone? One thing I'd considered was to use the QuestHistory addon to record pertinent information about quests seen, and then to reformat its saved data into Wiki pages. I've started on a standalone Lua program that:

  • reads a QuestHistory.lua saved variables file
  • reads a copy of the quest page boilerplate
  • prompts the user for which quest they want to write up
  • inserts data from QuestHistory.lua file into the boilerplate template
  • writes out the new Wiki page

Would others consider this worthwhile? The technical requirements are currently pretty low: Lua 5.0 binaries for Windows weigh in at 180kb, and my program is another 6k. Depending on responses, I can provide more information, find a place to put the code for review, etc. --Noam 16:57, 15 June 2006 (EDT)

Hey that sounds kind of cool. Though I'm not following exactly how you're proposing that the pages actually be generated. Would existing pages always be replaced, even if you only need to update a quest text?   If so, wouldn't it be niftier if you just generated wikitext that could be pasted into an existing page? Such a thing could even be written as a real addon that just pops up a multiline editing window in the end that you can copy&paste wikitext from!   --Mikk 19:19, 15 June 2006 (EDT)
I'm definitely not proposing an automatic replacement, editing, or creation of pages. The current implementation aims toward a file or text box that could be pasted into the Wiki. Even if I wanted something more automatic, Lua doesn't have any way of handling network traffic or similar, so everything has to be done with files and/or standard input and output (keyboard and screen). In essence, it's just a simple template parser that uses the quest boilerplate as its template, and the QuestHistory data as the things to fill in. I've also not looked at doing a WoW addon, just at using Lua as a language to write a small standalone program. --Noam 21:16, 15 June 2006 (EDT)
I've updated my user page to include the Lua code and an example of the Thazzril's Pick quest being written up. You can compare it to the original Thazz'ril's Pick page and see how well I did. --Noam 21:38, 15 June 2006 (EDT)
Oi nice. Hey, while you're at it, how about tweaking the quest boilerplate a bit? Level obtained, monetary rewards, etc, do not really need to be high level headings. A nice little box off to the right would look much nicer imo =) --Mikk 10:43, 16 June 2006 (EDT)
I made this (Boilerplate:Quest) a while ago, but I don't think it caught on.--Ralthor 15:59, 16 June 2006 (EDT)
I don't know how I missed Ralthor's boilerplate, but I guess I did. It's good for me; all my code will do is parse through whatever template you tell it to, and do a global search and replace on particular words or phrases as directed. --Noam 16:26, 16 June 2006 (EDT)
Whoa Ralthor. Just chuck the old one out the window and redirect it to yours tbh. --Mikk 16:43, 16 June 2006 (EDT)
One more update. I've modified my program to use Ralthor's boilerplate as a template. You can see the first results at Quest:Glyphic Tablet. Lua code and quest template are now at --Noam 20:34, 18 June 2006 (EDT)
Quick question: Where do we add "human" hints, tips, explanations? --Dracomage 07:31, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
Ralthor's boilerplate has sections for details and additional notes. My program won't touch them, so edit them as you like when you upload a quest. I deleted them on my sample quest since there wasn't anything relevant on that particular quest. My goal with this program is just to cut down on the tedium of entering in the NPC, zone, level, and other information easily extracted from the quest log. It won't figure out exactly which mobs to kill, what items to collect, etc. (There are some entries in QuestHistory.lua related to those, but they're difficult to parse out in a general case.) --Noam 16:49, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
Kickass! I suggest you set up a page, e.g. QuestHistory WoWWiki converter and describe how stuff works (i.e. where to get lua.exe, etc). Then we've got to figure out all the places to link to it in an obnoxiously big and noticeable manner. =)   --Mikk 17:40, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
I only noticed this cool idea while scanning recent changes, so I would suggest moving this discussion to Category talk:Quests or Talk:Quests (should Quest be the main page wth Quests having the redirect?). --Fandyllic 5:06 PM PDT 19 Jun 2006
Moving discussion to Talk:Quests#QuestHistory_to_WoWWiki_converter_idea. I'll work up installation instructions later. --Noam 07:59, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

Fan fiction

Regarding User:Charred But Alives Gnoll Rumor stuff? I'm not sure what the normal limits are on fan fiction pages - I've given him advice about marking his pages as fan fiction (which he has been doing), but he's also been trying to link it on the Gnoll page and Rumored Races page - I reverted the former, and left the latter (but added a note mentioning it was fan fiction). Any views? -- Kirkburn 14:28, 16 June 2006 (EDT)

Sounds about right to me from what I know of policy? (He just went and violated the upcoming Fanfic policy though, by stating things that conflict with lore. Bookkeepers are alerted =)) --Mikk 14:59, 16 June 2006 (EDT)
Maybe we could make a nice little fan fiction template box thing that you added links to and the title was, "Fan Fiction related to this topic:"...--Ralthor 16:01, 16 June 2006 (EDT)
Sounds like a great idea to me. Something like Template:Tlink perhaps (with a clear heading, of course) that one can chuck at the end of the page. It'll allow fanfic authors a little bit of exposure whilst not polluting canon lore in an untoward way, imo. (Though I'm not going to go against Teh Masters of Lore on this one, it's not a dear subject do me :-)) --Mikk 16:52, 16 June 2006 (EDT)

Minor CSS tweaks

Discussion moved to WoWWiki talk:Styling, as it seems to be relevant to the discussion that will continue there. Schmidt 02:14, 22 June 2006 (EDT)


Discussion moved to WoWWiki talk:Styling, as it seems to be relevant to the discussion that will continue there. Sorry about moving it one more time. Schmidt 02:14, 22 June 2006 (EDT)


Just thought I might bring everyone's attention to Special:Unusedimages ... lots of images that can be linked into the wiki there! Before you upload more, check out the list :) -- Kirkburn 09:23, 19 June 2006 (EDT)


Kirkburn and I did some handbag swinging over FAQ and came to the conclusion that we needed (well, sorta) a Category:FAQs. Except neither of us know of all the FAQs floating around. The page doesn't necessarily have to be named "FAQ", but it does have to address frequently asked questions. Please add pages like that to the category! Thanks! --Mikk 13:54, 19 June 2006 (EDT)

Updated skin

Discussion moved to WoWWiki talk:Styling, as it seems to be relevant to the discussion that will continue there. Schmidt 02:14, 22 June 2006 (EDT)

Warcraft III & Warcraft III :TFT map editor

Is this the right place to ask questions about these games' map editor ? If not, can you help me please ?--Kirochi 15:12, 20 June 2006 (EDT)

  • Google "wc3 map editor forum", click "I'm feeling lucky". Tadaa. --Mikk 15:21, 20 June 2006 (EDT)

Slowdown again?

It it just me or did the wiki slow back down a factor of 5 overnight? I'm getting page posting times in the 1-2 minute range again =/   --Mikk 08:14, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

It happened to me a while back, but it's fine again, to me. It sounds like a personal problem, to me. ;p Really, I think it's periodic, and I think it's when several people at once use the special pages, like double redirects, and other things. Schmidt 10:52, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
Aye, cleared up here too. I wouldn't have said anything except it persisted for several hours. Ahwell :-)   --Mikk 12:21, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

Linking external images

Is it accepted policy to include images hosted at external site in the articles?

E.g. Sense Undead includes an image hosted at thottbot.

-- Nyenyec 14:17, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

Erhm, no, can't say that it is to my knowledge. Blizzard themselves are a little unclear on the direct linking subject afaik, but they at least encourage people to use their graphics in non-profit "fan" sites (such as WoWWiki), so a lot of graphics on WoWWiki are linked from various Blizzard servers. Stealing Thott's bandwidth though seems just plain wrong. --Mikk 14:39, 21 June 2006 (EDT)
I always bring the picture into the wiki. Besides the whole stealing bandwidth thing, you never know if the linked picture is going to be deleted or moved. That doesn't happen much for things linked from Thott or Alla, but on other picture hosting sites they might remove the picture after so many days and the link is gone.
If the picture is an icon, such as the one you mentioned on Sense Undead, save it as the icon name (Spell_Holy_SenseUndead.jpg) in the wiki. A lot of items, abilities, talents, and spells use the same icons and we can reuse the same icon. - ClydeJr 14:57, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki