User talk:Thebruce
From LostRing
| Revision as of 22:06, 15 March 2008 (edit) Weezel (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 22:26, 15 March 2008 (edit) (undo) Weezel (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| -- | -- | ||
| I see you bailed on the front news page and went with just the timeline. Is that because it didn't make sense to keep it in two places? I kinda felt that the news was a highlight and the timeline had everything, but I can see why the consolidation could be warranted. Personal preference was that I liked having the reverse order of seeing the newest items first, whereas with the timeline, it's going to get really long. That's great for catching up on everything, but not as good for that 'quick glance' on what's happened recently, esp if folks come back often for the 'updates'. Short of constantly doubling the text or creating a link to a bookmarked anchor everyday, there probably isn't a better method is there? [[User:Weezel|Weezel]] 15:06, 15 March 2008 (MST) | I see you bailed on the front news page and went with just the timeline. Is that because it didn't make sense to keep it in two places? I kinda felt that the news was a highlight and the timeline had everything, but I can see why the consolidation could be warranted. Personal preference was that I liked having the reverse order of seeing the newest items first, whereas with the timeline, it's going to get really long. That's great for catching up on everything, but not as good for that 'quick glance' on what's happened recently, esp if folks come back often for the 'updates'. Short of constantly doubling the text or creating a link to a bookmarked anchor everyday, there probably isn't a better method is there? [[User:Weezel|Weezel]] 15:06, 15 March 2008 (MST) | ||
| + | -- | ||
| + | Actually the anchor is a good solution. I was thinking you'd have one for each day, but it seems like a better idea would be to have an anchor called "end" and always put new text above it (with a comment not to delete it, if that was necessary.. or just kick the person that does.*smile*). That way it would always jump right to it. Alternately would be to put the anchor below the date, but before the text, it would just mean moving it everytime you started a new day, which is little extra work, though it might look cleaner when the reader jumps to the page. You'll make the right call. Is user talk the right way to discuss this, or is this kinda stuff supposed to be discussed on the page in question? (then a) how do you discuss a deleted page and b) if the discussion is on the page, unless you set a watch you don't know its being discussed without checking the recent changes right?) [[User:Weezel|Weezel]] 15:26, 15 March 2008 (MST) | ||
Revision as of 22:26, 15 March 2008
Thanks for the feedback. If you have any specific ideas, don't hesitate to let me know. I want this game to have a wiki that rivals Lostpedia or the Battlestar Wiki ~ Jes5199 15:09, 3 March 2008 (MST)
too funny, thebruce.. while you were editing diego to look like markus.. i was editing markus to look like diego!!! :( Ncfriend 18:57, 4 March 2008 (MST)
no prob. do you want to divide the quote blocks like they are on diegos page now.. or keep them like they are on markus now? Ncfriend 19:20, 4 March 2008 (MST)
kay. Ncfriend 19:21, 4 March 2008 (MST)
ok.. whatcha think now? Ncfriend 19:39, 4 March 2008 (MST)
seems like we both are working simultanously on the integration of the Eli podcast pictures. But you are faster :-) AUZ505 12 March 2008
Bruce, still learning about the wiki formatting, but is there a way to see all of the current structure and sections? I'd assume the Site Map, but that doesn't appear to be working. When trying to add links on a new page to existing pages, I'm just looking for an easy way to see what's out there already. e.g. You guys just uploaded the Eli podcast pictures (I saw from the recent changes), but other than finding them there, how would I see all the pictures that have been uploaded, or how to find their names for linking? I wanted to link them to the bottom of the podcast translations I uploaded. Weezel 19:17, 11 March 2008 (MST)
Another question, are you editing in browser, or have you setup a external editor? Reading up, it seems like a syntax based external editor is the way to go, though wikEd looks really decent too (as a Firefox User). I tried editing the monobook.js file as suggested in order to have a link to wikEd, but its not coming up. The docs say to check with the admin (If you are using wikEd on a non-Wikipedia installation check if $wgAllowUserJs is has been set to true in the MediaWiki initialization file LocalSettings.php by an administrator), so even if I've edited the monobook.js file, it's not processing it (or the monobook.css) unless you have that preference on. Looks like there is a gadget for it too, if gadgets are enabled... Thoughts? Weezel 20:12, 13 March 2008 (MST)
With all the YouTube videos, right now they are directly linked. For archive purposes do you think YouTube or the PMs will delete them? If so, is it worth me starting to save the FLV files and create a "local" version of them for the future? Easy enough to get the flv file, and if they ever go offline it'll be easier to embed a player for them. Would also let people who have YouTube blocked to download the flv and watch it with a localized player.
Also, ScarpeGrosse suggested adding a script for direct site translation for Babelfish. It could be something put in the left nav bar (maybe above the googleads) and would allow non-English folks to view the site in their language. Would you be up for that? Weezel 17:24, 14 March 2008 (MST)
So since you are saving them, I don't need to bother saving them and uploading them as files? I was going to put a (archived) link next to the embedded YouTube video, but it wouldn't let me upload an FLV file. Plus, the size of some of them is a bit large. Weezel 21:03, 14 March 2008 (MST) -- I see you bailed on the front news page and went with just the timeline. Is that because it didn't make sense to keep it in two places? I kinda felt that the news was a highlight and the timeline had everything, but I can see why the consolidation could be warranted. Personal preference was that I liked having the reverse order of seeing the newest items first, whereas with the timeline, it's going to get really long. That's great for catching up on everything, but not as good for that 'quick glance' on what's happened recently, esp if folks come back often for the 'updates'. Short of constantly doubling the text or creating a link to a bookmarked anchor everyday, there probably isn't a better method is there? Weezel 15:06, 15 March 2008 (MST) -- Actually the anchor is a good solution. I was thinking you'd have one for each day, but it seems like a better idea would be to have an anchor called "end" and always put new text above it (with a comment not to delete it, if that was necessary.. or just kick the person that does.*smile*). That way it would always jump right to it. Alternately would be to put the anchor below the date, but before the text, it would just mean moving it everytime you started a new day, which is little extra work, though it might look cleaner when the reader jumps to the page. You'll make the right call. Is user talk the right way to discuss this, or is this kinda stuff supposed to be discussed on the page in question? (then a) how do you discuss a deleted page and b) if the discussion is on the page, unless you set a watch you don't know its being discussed without checking the recent changes right?) Weezel 15:26, 15 March 2008 (MST)
