User talk:Banaticus

From Lotro-Wiki.com
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome back

Hi there, I noticed your addition of a template. While your idea is great, it is equally easy to transclude from any page than from a template. I moved your table to the Category:Outfitter NPCs page, for two reasons: 1) it is much much easier to maintain NPC lists at the category page (quicker to see of somebody is missing or removed, and it is harder to find and even know of a template), 2) that is how we have come to work at this wiki. Your initiative was brilliant, a little research had helped ;-)

Now your template is a redirect. That is not optimal but it works. At some future clean-up I may walk over the transcluding pages end link them correctly, unless somebody beats me to it. Thanks again, good work! -- Zimoon 19:17, 23 August 2012 (EDT)

Regarding Hatt, please see Help:Names#Cross-linking_Duplicate_Pages for guide-lines. There is absolutely no point in creating even more pages when there are only three or less same-name NPCs. The less number of links editors can do mistakes with, the better. But it is crucial to use the Other-template on top of such pages.
I understand your intention, really I do, but there are also other aspects to weigh in when deciding against the existing guide-lines. If you have really good reasons to ignore them, please ask beforehand. That said, your contributions are indeed appreciated, feel warmly welcome even though the bumpy start. -- Zimoon 19:40, 23 August 2012 (EDT)
Just put the template onto the Category page, just like it was on the NPC's pages -- problem solved, it's just as easily findable as it is now and less pages would have needed to be updated or will need to be updated. Additionally, more or less information could be added to the Category page without worrying about include or noinclude tags. Yes, the less number of links editors can make mistakes with, the better. Earlier, if an editor was to link to Hatt, it would be obvious that they were making a mistake. Now it's not obvious. Previously, if an additional outfitter was added anywhere, only the template needed to be updated. Now all of those individual pages would all have to be updated. Banaticus (talk) 23:21, 23 August 2012 (EDT)
Regarding templates; I can just relay my experience from this wiki which is that the closer you have information to the expected page, the better. A template is always one step further away, minimum. Already today it is often the case that somebody adds for example a new quest, with a new quest giver, but it stops there. There are of course several reasons, but an outspoken reason is that it is (was?) hard to find the pages to update, the others are of course that there are so many pages to update just for one new quest, as we are not a database but a wiki. Next thing, you do not really have to make a "template" for such information but a plain page will do fine, e.g. {{:A_Page}}.
Since the category page is for NPCs only there are no worries about onlyinclude and includeonly etc. If more information must be knitted together we use to have "transclusion NPCs". For an example you may see NPC Healer, its subcategories, and its "helper pages".
Regarding Hatt I may agree. Had the original editor thought another Hatt would show up the guideline is to name them "Hatt (Othrikar)" and "Hatt (Thorin's Hall)". Whether location name or occupation name is better is another topic, but remember that there are same-name NPCs with same occupations too, but never at the same location.
Again, welcome around. I really do hope I have not set you back in any way. There are always several ways to do things, we may not use the optimal way always, but one thing is for sure: using a multitude of different ways will inevitable lead us back to the wild-grown jungle of pages of the past, but sticking to a uniform way is helpful to editors, as well as visitors. Suggestions are welcomed, we do change, I was eager to change certain things a year back but was talked into pacing down and now realize that not all my suggestions were awesome, but neither were they wrong. Safe travels, and happy outfitting yourself now :)
-- Zimoon 04:48, 24 August 2012 (EDT)
I have moved Hatt to Hatt (Othrikar) and will remove Hatt completely in a minute. I believe you have a point, it is always better to have unique names when there is a name-clash, but we are using the location as specifier. -- Zimoon 06:22, 24 August 2012 (EDT)
Why remove Hatt completely? If pages have been disambiguated, there should be a disambiguation page clarifying who's who. A person typing something out might also try to link to Hatt. Banaticus (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2012 (EDT)
Because we do avoid disambiguation pages unless there are more than 3 same-name clashes. Up to and including 3 we do fine with the Other-template linking between them. More than 2 links for others will just be messy.
Now some reasons :)
  • Editors do not always remember to follow up links they add and very often we find links to a disambiguation page, when it should been to a specific page. No "Hatt" means no chance to do that wrong. Thence, the less disambiguation pages the better.
  • The quick-search-feature will display all hits for as far as you have typed, thus typing "Hatt" will show you to possible target pages, select one of them and you are there. Actually it will display, if possible, more hits if the reg-exp finds anything nearby.
Does this in any way make sense to you? -- Zimoon 13:40, 28 August 2012 (EDT)
You can modify what the quick-search displays -- just set it to not display the pages that're disambiguation pages. If someone incorrectly links to Hatt, then it's better that it goes to a disambiguation page than to be red-linked or to otherwise appear that it doesn't go to a page at all. Banaticus (talk) 15:58, 28 August 2012 (EDT)
This is not really about search, that is just a good side-effect, useful when there are ≤ 3 same-names.
But that is the whole point, without "Hatt" it is visible right away that the link is wrong, and the editor is alerted by a red link. That is not the case if a disambiguation page.
There are a few reason we reached consensus with the limit of 3 same-names will do without a disambiguation page.
Now turn around and ask yourself: "weighing the pros and cons I see this far, what makes better sense?"
I do not claim that our guidelines are always supreme, but they do work and have been massaged over the years. Thus, if you have really good reasons to change them, stop arguing with me but summarize those suggestions and post them at a related talk-page ;)
We do listen!!!
-- Zimoon 16:06, 28 August 2012 (EDT)
That's what I've been posting the whole time, suggestions. :) I try to avoid simply saying, "That's stupid." So I'll say things like, "You can modify what the quick-search displays..." "If... then..." etc. Banaticus (talk) 16:34, 28 August 2012 (EDT)
Good. And I turned around and listened to you, and now Hatt is Hatt (Othrikar) as that was a very good suggestion. Next thing: users are seldom interested in too many options or hearing that "this can be done .. this way", they want simplicity. And editors want the easier way, I guess, and they forget, as all humans do. That is why I explained that there are more things to the topic than just <whatever>.
What I meant is, give the guidelines a spin. If you find anything that seems "stupid", tell us and start the discussion from there. But please, don't just rush away and do things "your way". That was what I did, and look at me now ;)
-- Zimoon 17:20, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

War-steed Traits

Hey there! Saw your edits on War-steed Traits - 'twas a noble effort, heh. Sadly, as you observed, we don't yet have the pop-up capability for the war-steed trait template (it's not a function of being in a table or not; it just doesn't use the tooltip functionality at all).

Obviously, this would be nice to have! I'll make a mental note to see about this when I get some off time if someone else doesn't get to it. Thanks for finding this limitation. Sethladan 01:33, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Good work!

Hey Banaticus!

I just wanted to thank you for your big edits on The Mirror-halls of Lumul-nar. Well done! :) --Freepy (talk) 11:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Removing duplicate update page

Hi. I will remove Update 17.1 Hotfix - December 17, 2015 if there are no objections within the next week. It seems a duplicate of Update 17.1 Hotfix 2 - December 17, 2015. --EoD (talk) 02:07, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I got the name wrong, but I wasn't sure who to message about it or how to mark it for deletion. Banaticus (talk) 17:16, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Just message any active user listed on the Lotro-Wiki.com:Administrators or Lotro-Wiki.com:Bureaucrats pages. Both usergroups have permission to delete pages. -- Gestrid (talk) 20:12, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the wiki (after 9 years of occasional editing)

This was about 20 months after I first edited my user page and began to contribute to the wiki (much more then than recently), but I appreciate the welcome. Thanks. :) Banaticus 02:56, 28 December 2008 (PST)

Probably a little late on promotions, but thanks for all the edits! --Lotroadmin (talk) 23:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. So, just curious, but why did you dig up a thread from eight years ago to respond to, and why did you plonk it down at the top of my talk page? Did you just add me as an admin? If so, thanks. :) Banaticus (talk) 01:57, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Minas Tirith (After Battle) Quests

You added a Sample four-day quest order do the Category:Minas Tirith (After Battle) Quests. Are you sure, this is working? I think the Interlude also counts to the Aiding Minas Tirith Quest, if you have it. Barny (talk) 17:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

It didn't, because that's how I did it. However, the limit of four/day was removed with the recent update so it doesn't matter anymore. :) 01:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Racial traits

Hi, I saw that you've updated information concerning racial traits with main stats which are going to change with Mordor. On BR, I've collected values starting from level 10. I think that for each racial trait the values are the same and only stat type differs. You can find the values here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114tECPr5on8eNF8FLon6pvBbaodBSxqukTvR0KklBHk/edit?usp=sharing Use it as you see fit. --Gisel Avaleazar (talk) 22:49, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

I've updated the spreadsheet. Now it shows also how you can calculate the stat. --Gisel Avaleazar (talk) 11:08, 2 August 2017 (UTC)