User talk:The Rooster

Home

Talk

Bots

Contribs

Sandpit

. . .

Use the '+' tab at the top to create a new section at the bottom. If I've come to you, let's keep the conversation there; if you're coming to me, I'll be replying here. The archive can be found here. Your current project Danger Report Update It has been a year since your sweeping updates of Danger Reporting, and now you're updating them once again. Because I'm very obsessively fuzzy about aesthetic looks of the Wiki, I believe there are things that can be improved upon. But since it looks like you haven't finished them yet (for example, Template:UpdateDR hasn't been linked to), I'm not going to do anything for now. Few questions I'd like to ask first: What's the scope of your project this time? What are you changing? I believe one of the things you're doing is clarifying the Building Danger Levels. But there are tons of stuffs you changed in the past few days and I don't think I can keep track of them all. What new things you are adding? What old things you are removing? I will try to standardize the looks of new stuffs to the old ones. And if there are pages/templates/maps that will be removed, I better make backups of them so they can be used as references. Unless, of course, you want to revolutionize new solutions from scratch, independently from the past system. Is it really necessary to put Status Reports in tables (like this and this)? For some reason, I have a strong dislike of them. Perhaps that's because the old Building Danger Levels didn't have visible tables. I admit that all those borders make them a little bit easier to read. But on the other hand, the descriptive texts looks like they are in cages. If you're fine with it, I'd like to remove the borders, or at least keep them to a minimum. If not, then I'll only round the corners and center them. -- Kittithaj 00:08, 23 July 2009 (BST) if you feel we need to organize the list somehow, then i have two words for you: zebra stripes. They allow non-border tables to be better organized with an awesome look if you have the right colors set for each row or pair of rows. Take a look here --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 01:39, 23 July 2009 (BST) I have taken the time to convert the Mall/Building status table into a "zebra stripes" format here. --RahrahCome join the #party!12:50, 23 July 2009 (BST) Almost there. You need to be able to easily differentiate one line from another, and the colors you have chosen dont. Like i said above, it only works if you have the right color set. Still, you are on the right path. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 20:02, 23 July 2009 (BST) They seem fine to me, they match the very example you linked to if I'm not mistaken, what wrong with them? --  RoosterDragon  20:07, 23 July 2009 (BST) each situation requires a different combination of colors. The set used on the example work there because there are several columns and little data, mostly numbers. The status list is only 3 columns wide, and most of it is text with one image in each line. For that you need a set of colors that would stand out more, yet not enough to take the eyes away of the content of the line you are currently reading. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 20:35, 23 July 2009 (BST) i just went to the item location table page, and WTF? These were not the colors i used originally, nor the colors i seen in my notebook at home last night. WTF? --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 20:38, 23 July 2009 (BST) at home now, checking rory's work. That color set works nicely now. Its so strange that i get to see the same page with two different color sets in two different computers. Must be because i use my notebook at night, with brightness set down to ease the eyes. I wonder how this look in a CRT screen. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 00:02, 24 July 2009 (BST) I figure the tables probably needed some sort of border as they looked a bit unconstrained otherwise. Setting the wikitable class was probably is definitely just me being lazy. I also wanted to try and knock the width down since particularly the MPM one was very wide, and had squished up text on smaller resolutions. If you chaps ever wish to override me on aethistic issues feel free (now and in the future), you're all much better at it than me. I quite like the example you've knocked up, much better than mine, I'd go with it. I was gearing up the new update DR templates so I could phase over reports without disrupting those on the old one, I have some random musings on how I'm looking to fix the reports in User:The Rooster/Sandpit/2, but basically: Recategorize everything to that new system since reports have wildly varying categories right now. Use the disambig variable where possible. Change to the new UpdateDR template, which can allow a few different lists of building definitions: buildings, malls, necrotechs, forts. Create templates for buildings without them, so I don't have to fix any again. Identify any reports with unexpected names (such as ones that might need disambiguation, that are spelt wrong, that are just plain wrong, etc) so somebody can fix them. Thanks for mentioning it, there I was being a jerk and making crappy sweeping changes under everybody's nose as usual. --  RoosterDragon  17:03, 23 July 2009 (BST) A clarfiying afterthought: I like the above example as a good way to contain the table without the 'cage-like' internal borders. I'd still like to slim it down, increase the font size and do some rewording per my original attempt if that's ok. --  RoosterDragon  18:01, 23 July 2009 (BST) Ok, I've passed the changes without borders/headers/etc. Just tightening everything up a bit actually helped to 'contain' the table so I guess the borders weren't need after all. If it still needs tweaking feel free, just be sure to hit them all: Building, Necrotech and Mall. I also reverted my changes to Template:Mobile-PhoneMastOperationLevels and tweaked from the old version. Can't say I'm entirely sure what to do with this template. It's a bit fiddly. I think maybe the enlarged font-size should come down a notch? Dunno. --  RoosterDragon  16:31, 26 July 2009 (BST) Aww... Come on, you're not being a jerk. Everyone of us here just wants to make the Wiki better. It's just normal that when you make changes, some will like it, some will not. Let us cooperate for the best result. As for table looking unconstrained, well, why not? We're all free men. And we don't need our borders to cage us in! Seriously, though, Template:BuildingDangerLevels is fine by itself. If you think the descriptions (i.e. "Meaning") need to be rewritten better, go ahead and change them. But I don't see the necessity to draw all the borders in, or adding headers that say Icon-Status-Meaning. The table itself is self-explanatory; people can understand it the first time they see it. Zebra stripes aren't even needed. The same thing can be said to Template:Mobile-PhoneMastOperationLevels. Although there are two types of statuses and icons, I don't think it would be too hard for would-be Wiki editors to figure them out. Of course, those things I said are purely aesthetic. But good presentation is almost as important as good information. Caging up the tables makes them easiest to read. But only people who never work with tables before are going to need that help. And in this age of spreadsheet, how many of them are here on the internet anyway? I propose using those two tables without border and sub-header (Icon, Status, etc.) at all. Or if not, go with Rorybob's zebra stripes style, with solid outer border taken off. As for the scope of your project, I must say it is very interesting. The old system is like an unplanned tower construction. It is built level by level, upon older works, by different editors, with little or no documentation. It works, but its parts don't combine well, and has much redundancy. And like an unplanned tower, it might collapse one day in the future. So if you can put everything up together into one solid and uniform system, it'd be much better. Just one thing to ask, please don't change the way updating will be done too much. Old Wiki editors are like old dogs. While we can still learn new tricks, we'd be happier if we don't have to! -- Kittithaj 23:35, 23 July 2009 (BST) Alright, I'll just run my other changes through then, and promise not to touch anything else :P Won't be changing how the system actually updates, everybody will still edit the same way. It's just updating all the old templates for consistency with the new ones. --  RoosterDragon  New Maps Break Wiki Hey! Don't just read other people's unfinished comment! And how do you find my Sandbox anyway? I only created it just two days ago, and it has no visible link! Anyway, everything that can be fixed is fixed. The masts map, however, isn't. And there is no easy way to do it. I don't know what you have changed to the mast system. But all those changes make the old map incompatible with the new system. To use the 21 July version, everything you have changed must be revert. That would be painful. Not to mention it would cause new conflicts as well (the horror!) Maybe you should analyze your code and determine the cause of problem. If I was the first one to notice this problem and report to you, then not many people use it anyway. (Or maybe not many people use Firefox, but I doubt that.) So, the mast map can wait a few days while you're working on it. Now, with you've already read my reply (it is almost finished anyway.) Should I post it again on your talk page? -- Kittithaj 22:42, 29 July 2009 (BST) I haven't read it properly, but when I noticed the bold bits saying "Holy crap, it's all broken!" (or to that effect) I paid more attention. The MPM map isn't a big issue, I bet almost nobody uses it, plus I think I know the problem. While the old formatters that allow the older revisions of the other maps to work aren't gone yet, I did manage to SD the one for the masts. I can restore that and I think that'll do the job. Post your reply, if only for posterity. As to finding your page, I noticed it on Special:Recentchanges of course. Second link in the nav bar on the left, best tool ever. --  RoosterDragon  22:50, 29 July 2009 (BST) Well, good to see a quick temporary solution is possible with the masts map. But yeah, I believe not many people use it. Heck, I myself never use the mobile phone once! I'm not finished what I'm going to do, though. So I'll post my reply later, when it's done, which is probably tomorrow. This section is getting confusing, too. -- Kittithaj 23:43, 29 July 2009 (BST) Actually I just fixed the whole problem. Yay me. So yeah, you finish up your reply and I'll see if I can't have some subheadings sorted out by tomorrow. --  RoosterDragon  23:49, 29 July 2009 (BST) Initial Changes Complete Ok, I've run a whole raft of changes through. All the danger reports have been standardized and created. There are no gaps, I assure you. I've gone through Category:Danger Reports and all its subcategories. I've changed the text on all the pages and also used that "where you are" thingy like they have in the Misconduct archives since that helps. I recategorized a lot of pages, some gained new ones, others lost some and I fiddled with the sort keys a lot as well. This included messing with pages related to the Building Information Center, the category of the same name and related pages. I've created a Status Map for every type of building which I've included on each subcategory of Category:Building Danger Levels. The exceptions are office buildings (way too many to even hope to show with template include limits) and the zoo (tis only one report). As you can see, mostly grey. I shifted stuff related to the Template:DangerMap to Category:Suburb Danger Reports (it previously was in the now master category, Danger Levels) and also changed the DangerMap itself to reduce the code and tidy it up a bit. It is fixed width and text size. The 11px font size prevents blocks from stretching and also makes it look similar to the image records people have taken (For me in IE, the 12px default font made it look a bit off). It now looks the same in IE, FF and these records (to me at least). I'm still clearing up a few loose templates, categories, etc. I haven't forgotten, but a few are still in use in custom projects and aren't quick fixes. I hope nothing is downright wrong. If it is however, a lot of it is templated so fixing it shouldn't take overly many edits. Some fresh eyes will help in identifying where tweaks are needed, methinks. --  RoosterDragon  01:45, 30 July 2009 (BST) Do I understand correctly that all buildings in Malton now have their own Danger Reports, that's why no further instructions for creating them is needed? It looks like so, because I've seen a Danger Report of a junkyard in Owsleybank. Okay, isn't that a bit excessive? It's really an overkill. And to think that I once discouraged Lariat2301 from creating too many of them, fearing they will never be in use. And most likely so, evidently by all those "grayed-out" reports. Even that junkyard Danger Report isn't even been included in the main junkyard page itself. People not using them is one thing, but I'm afraid that all those pages will put more work on your bot (and ultimately, yourself) whenever the next sweeping changes is needed. Anyway, here is my finally finished comment: Thoughts About Changes Sorry for the slow response. But you changed a lot of things, I have to review all a lot of them before I can give my comment. First I must say your new system is brilliant. No more confusing, cross-referencing templates. Just one template that can be used anywhere with any type of building. The leaning tower of chaos is now redesigned and made secured. Now, what I'd like to change visually is the How to Update section. I always like the old style better. So this is what I propose for a change: Template:UpdateDR Template:UpdateDRMast How to Update a Building Danger Report Check out the building. Change the status line to one of the available status codes. status=STATUS CODE Add more information about the building in the comment line. comment=YOUR COMMENTS Sign your edit by changing the user line. Just replace it with four tildes. user=~~~~ How to update a Building Danger Report Check out the building. Change the mast_status line to one of the available mast status codes. mast_status=MAST STATUS CODE Change the status line to one of the available building status codes. status=BUILDING STATUS CODE Add more information about the building in the comment line. comment=YOUR COMMENTS Sign your edit by changing the user line. Just replace it with four tildes. user=~~~~ Nothing fancy here. I just copy the old table header and combine it with the new table body. And I rewrite the comment section. As for the Building, NT, Mall, and Mobile-PhoneMastOperationLevels, I see no point in changing the style at this point. They work fine without border and your descriptions are understandable enough. And your enlarged font-size is actually smaller than original versions. Of course, There are things that I think can be improved upon, things that I am still not sure about. Things like: Ackland Mall and its weird-looking Danger Report on its page. I look at the oldest possible version from August 2008, and see that this problem persists for over a year now. Is there no way to fix it? In the same vein, what about NT Mast? It's another template from the old system you deleted. I don't know which suburb and building was that. Does it has the same problem with Danger Report as the mall? Which leads to another old problem. While updating Danger Report for a mast, you can't see the Mast Status on the Danger Report page itself. Can this be fixed? Regarding your rewrite of Danger report. The first three levels are used when barricades are still up. What if barricades are down but survivors still maintain control (and barricades can't be put back because there are too many zombies, like in NT siege?) What if survivors are outnumbered but the building is still intact, use "in zombie hands"? Is this too much hairsplitting? But there are always the possibilities, especially... Mall and big buildings. While mall have their own Danger Level classification, big buildings have none. Should they have their own Danger Level like malls? And if they do, should the classification be exactly the same as malls? Or should the number of zombies be tweaked? For example, I don't think hundreds of zombies will gather to attack a Cathedral. You removed this comment of mine, citing it was not needed anymore. Well, it would be fine if no new Danger Report will ever be created again. And I won't mind that bit getting removed. Still, are you sure about that? I believe malls, NTs, masts, forts, large buildings, PDs, FSs, hospitals, factories, and the zoo are all covered. Still, what if someone want to add a new Danger Report to a less important building? For example, a new group may want to use a bar as their headquarter, and need a Danger Report for it. The comment would be useful in that situation. And... Looks like all buildings, no matter how trivial, have their own Danger Reports now. The new Template:BuildingStatus doesn't have a usage direction. Should it be written so new editors can easily use it? I'd do it myself, but it is protected... If all possible Danger Reports have been created, then the usage direction is not needed. Also, I see that you've moved some of the more frequently used template usage directions to their talk pages. I know you're tidying the code up so they won't load the server too much. But shouldn't there be a message telling people to look at the talk page for usage guide at least? Maybe one link with the word "Usage" which leads to the talk page? Again, this is for new Wiki editors, so they won't be confused of what to do. Template:DangerMap page fonts are too small, can't you increase the font size to at least the size of the suburbs in Template:Suburb? Again this is protected so I have to consult you about it. And, your recent edits on the maps seem to cause undesirable effects. All new malls, NTs, masts, strategic buildings map looks weird on Internet Explorer, with all the building squares stretched. Worse, those new revised maps doesn't work on Firefox 3 at all. The problem lies on the templates. The last working templates are from 21 July 2009: malls, NTs, strategic buildings. Also, the report for The Poulter Building was missing. It must be changed to The Poulter Building (Shore Hills) to work. Perhaps there is a problem in your disambiguation system? The MPM, however, doesn't work on Firefox 3 at all, no matter which version it is. Even the oldest one from June 2008 now gives blank mast status colors, like the 21 July 2009 version. If you're using Internet Explorer, you won't notice those problems. But for Firefox users, those are serious issues rendering the map unreadable. I suggest reverting those templates to 21 July 2009 version (and add (Shore Hills) to The Poulter Building) as a temporary solution while you're working on it. As for masts map, well, you have to revert your mast system as well to fix that... Seems to be fixed. And by the way, all templates associated with the old Danger Report system have been removed and replaced with newer ones. Template:Updatedr and Template:Updatedr norot is replaced with Template:UpdateDR. Template:BuildingDangerLevels plus rot is replaced with Template:NecrotechDangerLevels. I've told people who use those templates the reason for the changes. I believe most of them don't mind. Three people who uses Template:Updatedr (Goebi, 007 warbear, Dr Stiles) don't seem to be active anymore. I can't believe I'm saying this, since I'm a conservationist at heart, but feel free to remove them. All of them are archived in my Sandbox anyway. That's it for now. I'll try to look at other in-depth changes later. -- Kittithaj 23:56, 30 July 2009 (BST) All Reports: You understand correctly, every building now has a report no matter how trivial. I agree it's throughly excessive. My not-so-masterful plan is to see how well they get used during the next few months, and then we'll have some information to go on in considering what reports to keep. I imagine the majority can be binned (my next round of sweeping changes will be mass deleting a lot of them). After that we'll have a consistant implementation and usage of reports and no reason to add any more. We can put a notice somewhere about not creating any more (an update to the LSG makes the most sense in that respect) So yeah, it's a temporary thing, and I'm not fooling myself by thinking otherwise. It's all part of the plan though, worry not. Changing the UpdateDR appearance: Looks fine to me, go ahead and just run it through. Building/NT/etc DangerLevels templates: The font size appears smaller? I will address this later in the reply. Ackland Mall: Ackland Mall is a total bastard in regards to having a mast. I changed the behind-the-scenes a bit but not the appearance of anything. If you can reference which template is being used to format it that making it look weird that might help. If you could mock up a version that doesn't look weird that'd be great, it doesn't need to work but that way I can see if it might be possible. NT Mast: That's The Herman Building, it doesn't have any problems with the new system. You pass {{UpdateDRMast|NecroTech}} which gives the mast update instructions with NT danger levels at the bottom. Tis fine. Updating a Mast report: Not seeing the mast status, I know! Tis not a straightforward issue however: The danger report pages have a nifty definition that User:Morgan Blair put in when she originally overhauled the MPM template system. The template variable, allowing you to decide what template gets the data and thus change the entire format. It's the most bloody useful addition ever, and so I propogated it to all reports when I first did some major runs. Anyway, it defaults to BuildingStatus or MallStatus if not set. So if you just plain call the report it shows up in the standard template. The mast reports have a special template which you can pass to show the mast status: BuildingStatusMalTel. The reports default to the usual standard template for consistancy, and so you must pass the special template to get the mast status. This leaves a few possible fixes which I had considered but decided none were suitable. Change the default on mast reports to the mast template. Tis a good idea but I figured for consistency it's best to keep the default templates as default. Otherwise you need to know what the default template is to get this minority of reports, those with masts, to display in the same fashion as other reports. Use noinclude tags so that the mast template is used when you update the report, but so the report is show in the usual style when used. I figured the problem would be users wondering why the hell the template looked different when they try to use it and not being able to work out why. Have some sort of special box that shows up in the usage documentation that shows the status. I didn't know whether it would be seen, or if it might still cause confusion like above when the user didn't see it on using the report. So yeah, none of the options seemed all gain for no cost, so I didn't change anything. I'll be interested in your opinion on this. Barricade Rewording: I aimed for consistancy with the safe status, as well as trying to push the "survivors haven't lost yet" angle. With NT sieges and the like, people usually just post under/attack or siege if there are ongoing temporary break-ins. It usually then goes to ruined/in zombie hands once the zombies break through in large enough numbers such that people can see the building will inevitably be emptied and ruined, even if this takes another day. As for large buildings, that's a good point. Aside from malls and the forts though, the large buildings probably don't any more action than your normal single block building anyway. So I figure the normal levels aren't unreasonable, but a dedicated template is also fine. To hell if I know what levels to set though (the fort one I knocked up is the same as the mall one, but reworded). Template Usage: That was a rush job when A/VB hit the include limits recently. I just hit a few templates with large noinclude sections that were used on the page to try and fix it. Making it less crap is on my to do list, but I did try and provide a link to the talk page at least. DangerMap: This is interesting. I discovered that all the images taken for the archives showed a smaller font that what appeared to me on IE. I was also annoyed as the font size I had skewed the map a bit as suburbs with long unbroken names caused their column to stretch. I decided to resort to definite pixel based sizes on the whole map (it was a fixed width and heights anyway, so it was just about making the internals evenly spaced and whatnot) and so I knocked the font size down a notch to prevent stretching. It also now matches the archive images almost dead on. I got FF to investigate the error with the status maps you had discovered, and later noticed that a lot of fonts came out smaller than their IE equivalent. The default font sizes on both are the same at 13px, and some investigating later I found an error with FF. A quick comparison is in my 6th sandpit. Long story short, FF screws up on % font changes making them smaller than they should be. So my changes to the DangerMap were mostly to make it look the same in IE as FF, provided you are on the default font-size. Your comments suggests yours may be larger than default. Doubly so since Template:Suburb appears to use the same size to me! Resolving this issue fully will take further investigation as IE can do the math, but nobody on this site uses it, FF fails at the math but people are used to what it produces. Then throw my changes to fixed from scaling fonts into the mix, which nukes you if you're not on the default size. Further throw into the mix the generally fixed width/height definitions all over the wiki making scaling fonts in tables even more of a problem. It's a massacre. Old templates: Thanks for doing that, I got a lot of the misc uses but was still thinking over whether to subst or update some of those leftover ones, especially like you said since some of those users aren't around to reply to inquires. You've done it which saves me all that darned thinking, top stuff. I'll see they get tagged and SD'ed in due course. Thanks for the comprehensive reply, it will certainly help straighten out the loose ends. --  RoosterDragon  01:06, 31 July 2009 (BST) I'm glad you find my reply useful. I feared it might be too long and annoying. Sometimes I talk/write too much and many people don't appreciate that. For the old templates, well, I can just change them all without telling the users. But I don't like to do that. I would hate it too if the same thing is done to me. So I take time writing all those notes. Perhaps too much time really, because no one seems to care enough to write back. :/ I've changed both Template:UpdateDR and Template:UpdateDRMast to the new version. But for all other changes, I'll wait for a while. I'm taking a Wiki-break right now. All those system changes from last week, combined with my own pet project to check and sort out all suburbs' News Archive, really exhausted me. I've only skimmed past your reply. And will read it more carefully when I've done recharging. -- Kittithaj 20:17, 3 August 2009 (BST) While every building has a danger report, it appears that the majority of the location pages don't have their corresponding report listed on them. It might be a bit much to ask, but do you think you could have a bot go through and add the reports to the location pages?--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 06:46, 10 August 2009 (BST) Somewhere it the mass of text up there I mentioned that I plan on deleting the unused ones at some point. I don't want to add in all the reports only to remove the vast majority at a later date. If you run across any building's you think should have one on the page, feel free to include it however. --  RoosterDragon  15:11, 10 August 2009 (BST) Ahh, that makes sense. Still, I get the feeling that most buildings won't be updated without the link. Granted, they probably wouldn't get updated with one either, so I suppose it doesn't really matter anyways.--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 00:23, 11 August 2009 (BST) Philosoph Knights' Wiki Thanks, that was fast. Haunting the recent changes, then? CITIZEN VI 16:49, 26 July 2009 (BST) As always. --  RoosterDragon  16:53, 26 July 2009 (BST) BIC categories I noticed that you consolidated the TRP categories under the "Other Buildings" header into Category: Building Danger Levels. While this does save space, that category's still a mess, I'm not that sure your average user would be able to find the hospital or PD listings on it (even threw me off for a minute). I'm adding back the other listings to the directory, just for the ease of access. Other than that, nice tweaks to the BIC page (I'd still like to have a FS map by the way).--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 19:52, 26 July 2009 (BST) I'm working on that mess as we speak, a bot is running to fill in the missing reports and re-categorize (check RC with show bots turned on). No reports will show up in there when it's done. Just give it a while. :) I'll knock up maps for most everything once it's done. I figure in a few months I can use them to see how well used the reports are and ditch anything that is awash with unknown. --  RoosterDragon  20:08, 26 July 2009 (BST) You and your darn bots. Where would we be without them? =P --~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 20:11, 26 July 2009 (BST) I'm better than his bots. Ask him. --ϑϑℜ 22:46, 26 July 2009 (BST) Just stopping by... I lurk/stalk around the recent suggestions page quite frequently, and as such have seen a few of your edits, and by a few, I mean five hundred of them. I don't know if anyone else is doing it, so I just wanted to take the time to thank you for all the work you're doing to keep this wiki a convenient and orderly place. Call me a kiss-ass if you want, but he has something like 20% of all wiki edits over the past couple of weeks; if that doesn't deserve a quick thanks than I don't know what does. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 17:37, 28 July 2009 (BST) Agreed. Linkthewindow  Talk  22:18, 28 July 2009 (BST) I just called to say I love you I just called to say how much I care I just called to say I love you And I mean it from the bottom of my heart <3<3--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 04:36, 29 July 2009 (BST) I find it most ironic that the day after I get this message, I find out I've broken large swathes of wiki. Go me! --  RoosterDragon  22:54, 29 July 2009 (BST) Who cares if you wrecked the place? You'll probably have it back up and better by the weekend :P. Anyways, have to say thanks for siccing your bot army on the danger reports- I don't want to think how long it would have taken Rory and me to do all that my hand!--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 01:17, 30 July 2009 (BST) As a matter of fact, I already fixed it. :D --  RoosterDragon  01:22, 30 July 2009 (BST) While I'm stopping by, I thought I'd drop this: Special:Contributions/Chekken, Is that considered kosher? It seems like the llama might have to get out his floss if this keeps up... Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 02:25, 30 July 2009 (BST) Seems a bit odd, overcading/overbarricading is the term anyways. Twill likely end up on A/D in short order I should think. --  RoosterDragon  02:29, 30 July 2009 (BST) It seems like some butthurt newbie-turned-troll going on a wikicrusade against barricading, and the last thing we need around here are trolls and drama! What would life be like if we had those!? Oh, wait... Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 02:32, 30 July 2009 (BST) I've seen zeds using danger info to find targets - may stop updating. Comments? or direct me to this conversation if it's already happened. thanks Baruch 18:20, 8 August 2009 (BST) It's a community resource, anybody can use it for any purpose. --  RoosterDragon  17:43, 9 August 2009 (BST) NecroWatch Hub Scan Age Template Hi, what did you do to the key template? Judging by the code it looks to have been useful (no idea what you did, though :P ), but, at least in Firefox, you screwed up the formatting a bit: http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/6239/55134430.png CITIZEN VI 18:24, 30 July 2009 (BST) Aw, whoops. I'll get right on fixing that. I was just swapping out some old templates. --  RoosterDragon  18:26, 30 July 2009 (BST) Fixed. --  RoosterDragon  18:34, 30 July 2009 (BST) Thanks, but, um, it's still a bit messed up (the colour blocks in the key are way to the left -- maybe this is a browser compatibility thing). CITIZEN VI 01:28, 3 August 2009 (BST) Actually I had intended it to look like that. I didn't realise the text had been left aligned on purpose there... Anyway, I've reduced the width and made the text left align again, is it ok now? --  RoosterDragon  01:39, 3 August 2009 (BST) Response: I got your message, luckily, since I was actually checking the wiki, which I pay very little attention to normally. Thanks for the offer, we would appreciate it if you would take a whack at fixing our ad. It was done on the quick by a friend of ours who hasn't had time to fix it. I fixed the link to our forum, if you would like to come there and discuss it privately. Thanks, --Calista griffin 01:37, 31 July 2009 (BST) A WINNER IS U Nice work with that template!--Orange Talk 17:00, 1 August 2009 (BST) Well I couldn't let you have all the glory with those transparent item pictures. So yeah, good job with uploadi- OH DEAR GOD MY USERPAGE! --  RoosterDragon  17:08, 1 August 2009 (BST) My Suggestions I removed my suggestion on crucifixes because there was no way it could win, and I realized that other items would go better with the newspaper style of slap then a crucifix. I then realized I could make a new suggestion since I took it down. I only thought of making a new one to take it's place after the deed was done. I don't post in developing suggestions because I spend a lot of time thinking them over, trying for the fairest and most realistic way to do it. If I ever have trouble with either fairness or realness, I will post in in developing first. Thank you for notifying me of you dissatisfaction, and I will work towards improvement. --Justinbronze 19:49, 2 August 2009 (BST) Please note: Removing suggestions to post new non-revision suggestions is considered abuse of the system. In other words, if you withdraw a suggestion, you can only re-post a revision of that suggestion in the same day. Otherwise, it's not hard to wait a few hours. --Bob Boberton TF / DW 20:14, 2 August 2009 (BST) Then again, those rules are draconian and do not take into the account that new users generally have no fucking clue what they're doing.-- High Overlord and Lead Conspirator of the Administrative Rebellion. Want help? 20:51, 2 August 2009 (BST) Sorry about my edits I'm trying to find a good place to put the link to this ALICE/ NecroWatch related RPjournal thing, but I can't. Could you help me? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Justinbronze (talk • contribs) 00:45, 3 August 2009. I had forgotten NecroWatch was a group!. But, could I add the link to a page related to ALICE, as I doubt she is a group, she is more flavour than anything. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Justinbronze (talk • contribs) 00:55, 3 August 2009. Question about Deletions Might as well ask to see if you know. Speedy deletions have to go the two weeks if someone votes keep, right? Nothing strange happened in the meantime, did it? --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 21:29, 3 August 2009 (BST) If somebody votes keep then it gets moved to deletions. At which point it would be subject to the usual two weeks for any deletion. --  RoosterDragon  21:32, 3 August 2009 (BST) So then, this shouldn't have happened? --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 21:36, 3 August 2009 (BST) That was originally a deletions vote. The three speedy votes meant that the pages were then eligible to be removed. But by the time Nubis got to it a few people had allotted keeps. So you should be asking him really. --  RoosterDragon  21:42, 3 August 2009 (BST) I wanted to get a non-involved sysop view of things in case there was something I was missing. How long between the speedy delete votes and processing the request does there have to be? Meaning, could hypothetically someone post a deletions, three people vote speedydelete within seconds of one another, and then immediately after a sysop legitimately delete it? Or does more time have to pass? --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 21:47, 3 August 2009 (BST) The rules don't exactly cover it. I mean there was a period where three speedy's or more were lodged with no keeps. If he'd nuked it then it would have been kosher and any intended latter votes moot. If you want a philosophical discussion on that, I'm sure A/M could turn out walls of text on the matter. Personally I would have let the vote run, but the minimal content and the bulk of speedy votes don't make it near controversial enough for me to quibble. --  RoosterDragon  22:03, 3 August 2009 (BST) I'd rather get a clarification for a timeframe added to the Deletions policy. I just recall Hagnat got caned in the past for something similar. After all, I can't undo the deletions to have the ones I voted Keep for run through their normal time. --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 23:12, 3 August 2009 (BST) If you want clarification, make a section on the deletions talk page about it and I'm sure the other sysops can decide how to treat the grey area. If you want your keeps restored: A/U. --  RoosterDragon  23:15, 3 August 2009 (BST) Your new category navigation links are fantastic. Many thanks! --Bob Boberton TF / DW 23:02, 3 August 2009 (BST) Well, somebody had to untangle the mess that is our categorization structure. --  RoosterDragon  23:07, 3 August 2009 (BST) WTH What did my page do wrong? Moreover, why the hell did you put it up for deletion? (New User Page) And you could at least bother to waste enough of your time to put a link to the actual discussion for deleting it. (Despite the fact I know its just a template; I just feel like bitching about it) --The Shoemaker Talk Red Faction 23:44, 3 August 2009 (BST) I put a SD banner on it to alert people. This means you need only check the A/SD page, though there isn't any discussion yet. Further, being a speedy there likely will not be. There are link in the banner if you care to follow them next time. The page is hideously coded and looks really rather bad. It uses HTML for examples when the is valid wiki-markup to do the same and the wiki markup is preferred in such cases. We have an help section which covers all the basic markup and more anyway. The page is not worth saving, but if you want to drag it out you can vote keep on the SD page and it'll be moved to normal deletions for two weeks of voting. I don't imagine it'll be kept though. --  RoosterDragon  23:53, 3 August 2009 (BST) Dude... Does categorising pages turn you on?--Orange Talk 02:09, 4 August 2009 (BST) Yes, yes it does. He admitted it on IRC. Creepy, I know. I haven't been back to the channel since he said so. :s -- High Overlord and Lead Conspirator of the Administrative Rebellion. Want help? 02:41, 4 August 2009 (BST) ... --  RoosterDragon  02:42, 4 August 2009 (BST) The new mini maps are pretty damn sexy. But aren't malls TRP's?--RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 20:56, 4 August 2009 (BST) They're on there, but you'll need eyes like a hawk to pick them out. It's #FFE on a white background (#FFF). So yeah, frankly all the colours need to be better as most of just different shades of grey. Unfortunately borders on the minimap squares are not possible so you're left with plain colours. I'm not sure what to do (is there some sort of standard colour scheme for differentiating TRPs easily?) but you can knock about with these templates to change the colours if you have any ideas. --  RoosterDragon  21:01, 4 August 2009 (BST) Oh yeah, very slightly blue. Perhaps green? It's not as if we have any forests.... All the other colours seem fine. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 21:04, 4 August 2009 (BST) Green it is. I guess I'll make Forts orange or something. --  RoosterDragon  21:10, 4 August 2009 (BST) Yep. Looks good. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 21:17, 4 August 2009 (BST) about border colors, you can set them on you template as 'border-color: #FFF!important' or some sort. There is some hacks to make it work on IE too. Anyway, great to see this function of the suburb template finally being implemented. It was a planned move, but one with lots of work to be done, which your bots made it a lot easier. Congratulations --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 21:26, 4 August 2009 (BST) Don Roosterone i am in need of a favor that only you, Don Roosterone, can do without spamming recent changes. I need you to solve this problem with your bots, linking the families of malton to a single category instead of four. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 14:24, 6 August 2009 (BST) ddr made the change before your bots could have the chance. Thanks anyway. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 15:51, 6 August 2009 (BST) I'd noticed and was going to ask Conn what the deal was at some point. But this works too, I mean DDR's practically a re-categorization bot all on his own. --  RoosterDragon  16:24, 6 August 2009 (BST) Civil Defense and the EBS Hello! My name is George Zip, and I'm sending an alt - Captain Video - south to work the Emergency Broadcast system, with the intention of permanently bringing it back online in the name of public service and Civil Defense. Video has a generator, a radio transmitter, fuel, a single FAK, some ammunition and two needles, and, knowing your interest in the EBS, I was curious if you'd be willing to join me in an attack on its current undead occupants. Cheers! -George Zip ◆◆◆ 23:42, 7 August 2009 (BST) Request moving Image:Tompson-mall-logo I still don't have time to review all your changes yet (yes, still busy with other things and having a break.) But I have noticed a mistake that should be fixed immediately. Image:Tompson-mall-logo.JPG needs moving. It is the only mall image that ends with uppercase .JPG, and thus doesn't work with your Template:Mall Logo, causing a red link. I can't believe that people looking at, and updating the page never care to fix it since you have added the auto-update feature on March. Well, now that I accidentally come across it, time to make it right. After the move to lowercase .jpg, links on those pages have to be fixed too: UDWiki:Projects/The Great Mall Project UDWiki talk:Projects/The Great Mall Project Mall Images -- Kittithaj 19:47, 11 August 2009 (BST) Couldn't you have done this yourself? In the time it took you to write that I'm sure you could've uploaded a replacement and fixed three links. Tis hardly an major change or anything. No worries though, I'll jump on it. --  RoosterDragon  20:31, 11 August 2009 (BST) Well, the reason I request it to be moved is to preserve old information. And I have no power to move it myself. Deleting it and all information associated with it, such as the original uploader, is gone. And you know I'm all about preserving those information. Since you chose the delete/re-upload route, I added the original uploader name, User:Daniel Hicken, to it. Have to give credit where credit is due, even though he may not be here anymore. -- Kittithaj 22:09, 11 August 2009 (BST)