User talk:Tekka Maki

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Greentown

Just so you know, I get that all of the new Greentown pages I've made this week need 9-blocks. I've started in the NW corner and I'm working my way through the 'burb. --Alice Cuinn 00:48, 6 June 2007 (BST)

I made the changes primarily to fix the category listings. The 9-block notices aren't a complaint to you, but a notice to others who search out them out and add the blocks everywhere. --Tekka Maki 17:58, 6 June 2007 (BST)
And that's fine, I'm just letting you know I'm not making pages and then leaving them unfinished. My goal is to create/edit/9-block every square in Greentown. I'm getting there ... --Alice Cuinn 18:50, 6 June 2007 (BST)

Motels and Redirects and Institutional Wastefulness

If you're going to move motel pages from Stone Motel to The Stone Motel, can you please leave a redirect on the old page, it's better than nothing, or deleting -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 01:28, 27 May 2007 (BST)

I left a note in the summary explaining that they should be deleted. They shouldn't be redirects, because I made sure nothing else was pointing to them. --Tekka Maki 20:23, 27 May 2007 (BST)
Well if someone put them there in the first place, there's a chance that someone will link to there in the future. That's why such pages are listed in the locations style guide as needing redirects. No problem though, just minor details, the pages definitely needed moving. If you want something deleted though, it's best to put it up on the speedydeletions page to ensure a sysops sees it -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 01:30, 28 May 2007 (BST)
The only reason people linked to them is because the original creator made a mistake and others just linked to what existed. All the standardized links were pointing to nothing and were immediately "fixed" when the page was moved. Thanks for the information on the speedydeletions, I will do that for those pages. --Tekka Maki 19:41, 28 May 2007 (BST)
Newbies come on all the time, creating pages in the wrong place, and yes, it is plausible that they search for Stone Motel, rather than The Stone Motel, and end up just recreating the page in the wrong place again. Leave them as redirects please -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 03:49, 29 May 2007 (BST)
If newbies search for X Motel, "The X Motel" will be the first thing that pops up. The logical extension of your argument is that we should create hundreds and hundreds of unnecessary pages. It makes more sense to clean up a very small mess than to create an enormous one to disguise it. --Tekka Maki 23:17, 29 May 2007 (BST)
The reason that "The Stone Motel" comes up when you search for "Stone Motel" is because there is a redirect, you get sent to the correct place automatically. Try it with a motel that doesn't have a redirect, say the "Soper Motel" for example. You have to type in "The Soper Motel" to get to it's page (and even that's a redirect to a grouped location page). Redirects are good, this is exactly what they're meant to be used for. Now I don't give a stuff if you don't want to create them, I'm not going to force you to do anything, but don't go putting useful ones that are part of wiki policy up for deletion, or break them once they've been created -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 01:54, 30 May 2007 (BST)
If things are set up properly (try "Gadd Motel"), the search works as it should. Your example shows why redirects are not preferable for common usage. The point I am making about creating hundreds of worthless links is to show that your proposition does not scale. It is obviously inefficient and counterintuitive to create a bunch of links no one is going to use, and if it doesn't make sense on a large scale, it's not the right thing to do. Also you have mischaracterized what I've done. I moved the data to the proper place, I didn't hunt down links just because I didn't like them. If I hadn't moved them, they would still be in, as you say, "the wrong place" and would therefore still be "invisible" in terms of maps and other standardized links. Your proposal increases the chances that this will happen in the future by confusing the issue and encouraging people to create entries in "the wrong place". --Tekka Maki 22:15, 30 May 2007 (BST)

Appreciative People

Hope you didn't mind me stepping in to help you with the club categories. --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 22:40, 31 July 2006 (BST)

No problem, sir. --Tekka Maki 22:49, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Thanks for your work with the museums pages. Buddhagazelle 18:50, 2 May 2007 (BST)

I enjoy tidying things up! --Tekka Maki 18:47, 3 May 2007 (BST)

"The"Problem

I understand your concern and I am not ignore what you said to me before it is just thatautomatic location template maker does misscategorize the "the" locations, (as well as link to disambig pages from time to time) I was planning to go back over all the location pages and correct them for both errors after I finished making all the locations. I am aware that it sounds like an inefficient method of doing it but timewise it is much faster than filling out every location page completely correctly by hand. - Vantar 05:30, 25 August 2007 (BST)

I see your point, but wouldn't it be a whole lot easier (and better for everyone in the long run) if you worked to correct the template maker first? Another wasteful aspect of the generated pages the extra title line created above the description. No other pages have that line, and it's clearly just there to fluff up the page with noise to make it look bigger. The net result is that the name of the block is listed in the window title bar, the top of the wiki entry, the top of the 3x3 map, and again above the Description line, as if anyone could possibly be confused as to what is about to be described at that point. Seems sensible to clean things up once rather than hundreds of times. --Tekka Maki 04:37, 26 August 2007 (BST)
I do not have control over the template maker nor do I have the coding ability to make the change in the way it handles categories so I'm not too sure if making the changes to it is a better way to go.As for the line you are talking about, I know there was a reason for it, I don't know what it was. I have a hunch it be be related to a method of creating grouped location pages(such as Dunell Hills Streets) by using pages as templates. If you really want to change the template maker talk to Jedaz about it, he wrote it. - Vantar 05:19, 26 August 2007 (BST)
Wouldn't it be easier to talk to Jedaz himself? The change has got to be fairly trivial for him to make once. I don't understand why you're creating a sea of errors when a far simpler solution exists. If you plan on cleaning up the enormous mess you're making, that is one way of dealing with the problem, but it doesn't seem to be very efficient or wise, especially given that you're aware of the problems. The subject line makes sense on a page that has many locations, but there's no reason or precedent for it on single location pages. A little research at this point could save everyone a lot of time in the future. Better to do it right the first time than fill the world with errors and work it out later. --Tekka Maki 09:27, 26 August 2007 (BST)
Why haven't you contacted Jedaz yourself, if you're the one that found the problem? It's not hard... and would have taken a whole lot less bytes of wiki-space than this conversation The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talkcontribs) at 09:39 26 August 2007 (BST)
I thought the person spamming the wiki with hundreds of errors might be more interested in the issue than I am. I contacted Vantar because ultimately he's the one who (he claims) is going to clean up the mess. If you're concerned about saving wiki-space, you could have contacted Jedaz instead of writing the above. Even more to the point, Vantar should have contacted the guy instead of telling me about him. Consider the messenger duly shot. --Tekka Maki 15:46, 26 August 2007 (BST)
Quite the martyr arn't we. I asked Jed for you The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talkcontribs) at 12:08 27 August 2007 (BST)
There were two reason I told you to to talk to Jedaz, first off because you asked if it would be easier to do it the way you suggested and as I said I didn't know but I figured Jedaz would since he was the one who would be doing to coding. Secondly now if you have some other concern about the location block maker you know who to talk to. Inefficient in the short term but more efficient in the long run. I also think you may of missed my point about that line appearing on single location pages as well as multiple location pages, I meant that the line could be used to create multi location out of the single location pages like this(this just shows the idea there would be some formating to work out if this plan were to be used) Sorry if you feel like I was attacking you it was not my intent- Vantar 17:51, 27 August 2007 (BST)
No worries, Vantar. I was just hoping to save you some time and work. I do appreciate all you're doing, I just don't want you to burn out doing a bunch of grunt work. I still don't think the subject line is necessary, however, since you're creating one page for every block and eliminating the need for those multi-location pages. --Tekka Maki 13:28, 29 August 2007 (BST)
Personal tools
project wonderful
column-okay