StrategyWiki talk:Community Portal/2006/September

Can we add gaming company?
What I mean is can we add a article about companies that sells stuff to other people through internet ( NWFC, xbox live...etc). Example: In ACWW there are several companies that helps other people (Orchards, items, artwork..etc) and they don't charge you real money instead they charge you bells or the in-game currency. So are we allowed to post article about the company since that specific company is dedicated to the game? (sorry if I didn't make sense)--Emaj 19:49, 5 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't see the point in adding an article about a company that is tangentially related to a game. The purpose of this site is primarily to write about game strategies on how to beat enemies and obtain items, not to refer you to someone who can power level you or provide a service which you can provide for yourself if you read through this site.  It might be appropriate to mention such a company in the correct article, but I'm personally not even for that. Procyon 21:03, 5 September 2006 (CDT)


 * If the "company" is an important/regular part of the game, include references to them in the game guide itself, otherwise you could just link to Wikipedia (if there's an article there about them). Also in future, please bring issues like this up on the actual main community issues page, not the talk page. --DrBob (Talk) 01:04, 6 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Unless the company is very big and well known in the game, there is little or no point of giving them a page. This website should be mostly for telling you about the things that will affect almost everyone while they are video gaming, not a 1 person company who will weed your town. It's nearly impossible for a game like ACWW to have companies that will weed your town get so well known that everyone talks about them. Maybe for a MMORPG but otherwise probably not.

Touch Generations
Hi, I'm new here so I hope I'm allowed to contribute here... Anyway, I was thinking of logo for Touch Generation games, as there are quite alot now. And maybe one for the Bit Generation GBA games. I've just done a little guide on Big Brain Academy. I was also wondering why some guides are done as a book, and some are just one page. Shouldn't they all be one page because then it would be alot easier to navigate round. Phoenix499 07:18, 24 September 2006 (CDT)

One other thing. Why is the Toolbox on the right, pages would be shorter and wider if it was placed under Help.


 * Of course you're allowed to contribute here. :-) What do you mean by "touch generation" and "bit generation" games? All guides should really be done as books (with sub-paging), as it reduces load times, and enables you to more easily find what you're looking for. One-page guides should eventually be split up into sub-pages. --DrBob (Talk) 07:37, 24 September 2006 (CDT)

http://www.touchgenerations.com/enGB/home/home.php Touch Generation! And the Bit Generation games are for the GBA but they're only out in Japan. (If you don't own a DS you won't understand). Okay, I'll try and turn my guides into book guides. Phoenix499 08:07, 24 September 2006 (CDT)

Another proposal: MAME guide?
Hello. I may be reaching the point where I'm biting off more than I can chew, but I wanted to throw another proposal out there. I'm not married to the idea of doing it, but I would be happy to add a MAME guide to the site if there was enough support for it. It obviously would not be a game strategy guide, but more of a how-to guide (how to download it, how to set it up, how to start it, and how to use it.) That sort of thing. I am aware that this does not precisely fit the motif for this site, and I would not be disappointed at all if it was felt that such a guide does not belong here. On the off chance that people would welcome it though, I would be happy to start it, so I thought I would seek opinions. Ironically, someone started a BYOAC (Build Your Own Arcade Controls) wiki site over here, but it's a slightly different topic. Thanks! Procyon 15:05, 6 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Doesn't MAME already have a wiki, or is that DOSBox? And doesn't EasyEmu already cover this sufficiently? I'm not opposed to the idea, but sufficient resources are already out there, just not necessarily in a wiki format. Still, it's an interesting idea. GarrettTalk 16:00, 6 September 2006 (CDT)
 * It's funny, I thought it would be interesting to do the research before I asked, so I simply Googled "MAME wiki," and while I came up with a handfull of wiki entries on what MAME is, there were no guides. But you raise an interesting point in that there are in fact a few guides floating around out there, in various states of completeness and thoroughness.  However, something else occurred to me while reading your response.  As neat as I may think the idea is, I doubt many people will find themselves scratching their heads about MAME and think to themselves, "Where should I look for answers?  I know, I'll check StrategyWiki!"
 * o_O; Unless the page was featured so prominantly on Google during a search that you couldn't help discovering it, I imagine it would not serve a tremendous purpose on this site. Still... I could be swayed ^_^ Procyon 16:16, 6 September 2006 (CDT)
 * If there were enough guides for games that worked on MAME, then it would probably become quite useful. I don't know exactly how google pagerank works, but with the number of links the MAME page would get, I'd assume it would get rated pretty well.  I'd suggest putting together a few guides first, then the MAME page. -- Prod 17:39, 6 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Lol, you obviously haven't looked at my user page ;) (although I would personally admit to a Famicom bias, it just so happens that many of its games were also early arcade games.) Procyon 18:06, 6 September 2006 (CDT)


 * If you want to do it, Procyon, then that settles the issue in my mind! My reasoning is that if we have someone willing do make a certain guide about certain games (or game systems), no matter how obscure they may be, all this does is expand the material that SW covers. In effect, it accomplishes our goals of covering even more games. I don't think we should stifle this. We're a strategy guide for all of videogaming. If you'll do it, let's have a MAME guide! :)  ech elon  23:19, 6 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Well, that's all I needed to hear. I'll start on it.  Really what I think I'll do is create an Emulator category (not that I expect it to expand significantly,) and add a MAME sub-category to that.  Then any game that can be played in MAME can be categorized under it.  Then I'll link the guide to from the category page.  Thanks Echelon! Procyon 10:13, 7 September 2006 (CDT)

Now that roughly 90% of the guide is done, I've put out "feeler" invitations on message boards with heavy MAME traffic in order to drum up interest and support, not only for the guide, but also for StrategyWiki itself. If nothing else, we may get a new batch of dedicated editors to the site as a result. Procyon 15:28, 11 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Before you do that, sort out your CamelCase! :-P --DrBob (Talk) 15:32, 11 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Oh... OK... I thought that I had. Could you point out of an example of what you mean?  In some cases, it's intentional because it reflects the actual name given to some programs, but I tried not to abuse it anywhere else.  Give me a for-instance on my talk page.  Thanks!  Procyon 15:58, 11 September 2006 (CDT)

Collaboration of the Month (September)
Collaboration of the Month/2006-09 It's been one week. For now, I've copied last month's collaboration there since its better than nothing. I read some of the earlier discussions about what collaborations should be. My opinion is that giving people too big a job just makes people avoid it. Right now Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas seems to be a very popular game for faq's (*ahem*). So I would suggest that if we put that as the main collaboration, there would be a lot of people who may know a few things to add in. Also, collaborations should be prepared ahead of time, rather than after the month has begun. -- Prod 18:02, 7 September 2006 (CDT)
 * sounds fine to me. --blendmaster 20:37, 7 September 2006 (CDT)

Collaboration of the Month (October)
Well then, let's get this started shall we? I think the collaboration for November should be to finalize main page layout, and table of contents formatting. It's not quite as easy for someone just finding the site, but I think it's better for StrategyWiki as a whole.. --blendmaster 20:37, 7 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Heh, I was thinking about your suggestion, and my ideas have been going in circles :P. These are things that I feel need to be done by the already establish community, rather than by new users who happened to find this site.  Heres a small list of things that I think need to be done:
 * Community "to-do" list (perhaps on the community portal, like GuildWiki)
 * Main Page layout, due to registration requirement, account creation should be highly visible
 * Collaboration of the month voting page (like wikipedia)
 * Actually, this stuff probably belongs on Collaboration of the Month -- Prod 21:26, 7 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Those are all great ideas, especially a new layout. Also, isn't it time for an archive? There's 37 sub-sections on this page alone; it usually stops at like 20. --Antaios 22:00, 7 September 2006 (CDT)
 * I've set up Collaboration of the Month and something similar on Promising Guide of the Month. -- Prod 21:25, 23 September 2006 (CDT)

Template woes
I would appreciate it if anyone could give me a hand. If you take a look at the template I'm trying to create, Template:SvC CFC Char, I can't figure out how to write the Backups section of the template properly so that it doesn't make so much room in that cell of the table. I don't really understand why it insists on doing that. Here's the idea behind it.

Let's say I'm looking at a Capcom character card. Some of his backups are other Capcom characters, and some of them are SNK characters. The game displays the Capcom backups and hides, but indicates the existance of, an SNK backup. So I thought it would be clever to list the SNK backups in the template in a white font. That way, they're there if you want to highlight over them and see them, but they won't be spoiled for you if you don't want to know.

A character can have up to three backups, and they may be three same-universe backups, or three other-universe backups (the obackups), or some combination in between. So I figured that this "little" if block would serve the purpose (the line feeds are faked for clarity, this is all supposed to be one line): Backup:

It kind of gets the job done, but if you look at the example that I have on the Template page, it makes that whole section huge, when all I really want is for it to be on just one line like everything else. Can anyone help me find a solution to this problem? Thank you very much. Procyon 15:01, 12 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I suppose you could split "Backup" into multiple rows, and include the row markup in each qif, so the rows are only displayed if there's something in them. --DrBob (Talk) 00:14, 13 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I found a solution, and it was very close to yours DrBob. I just put them in to multiple columns of a nested table in that row.  It worked out pretty much the way I had hoped it would, except for some small spacing issues that I can easily over look.  Thanks for your help!  Procyon 09:54, 13 September 2006 (CDT)

Layout suggestions
Just some general suggestions about the layout. -- Prod 13:54, 16 September 2006 (CDT)
 * 1) Move "Move" from the top to the toolbox.  It's not a very commonly used feature.
 * 2) Put "Unwatch" in the toolbox.  "Watch" is already there
 * 3) Add something to tell if the talk page has been used. On wikipedia, its a red link if it hasn't been used.


 * This skin is going out of fashion, actually. As far as I'm aware, a new one is being made for a special event coming up in the next few months, but we'll bear your suggestions in mind. :-) --DrBob (Talk) 14:50, 16 September 2006 (CDT)

Final Fantasy Tactics help
Would anyone like to fill out some/all of the red links I've created in the FFT intro and Chapter one subpages? They should all be standardized, and the people pages can have the name and the info from the games "people" descriptions. I plan on havving Final Fantasy Tactics/People be a list of included pages for all the people in the game. Same with the Items, Monsters, Equipment, and other such pages. If anyone has the game, and so desires, set up a nice clean stadardized form for one or many of those and throw in some info. Thanks! -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 10:53, 20 September 2006 (CDT)


 * In all honesty, I would love to help as FFT is my number one "stuck on a desert island for eternity with just one game" choice. But I feel as though I need to get through several other projects that I've started first.  I just wanted to take a moment and point out that the walkthroughs are a little difficult to follow along with as one giant block of text.  They may benefit from being reformated with bullets to provide an easy to follow point-by-point explination of the battle.  The template is a great start, but more spacing (such as between the blue and red bars) and organization may make the guide easier for many people to enjoy.  Just my $0.02.  Procyon 10:58, 20 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Hope the desert has electricity. Made a few changes, let me know what you think. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions)
 * And here I thought you were talking about the Fast Fourier Transform. -- Prod 21:28, 23 September 2006 (CDT)

Trying to motivate authors at WikiKnowledge to come here
While I've been in the process of Transwiki-ing the fighting moves guide from WikiKnowledge to StrategyWiki, I've noticed a lot of work being done in the realm of video games by two particular authors. I've contatced them to let them know how much their work would be appreciated over here. So far one has declined due to that fact that I think he is to WikiKnowledge what Echelon is to StrategyWiki, so he's not inclined to support someone else's Wiki (unfortunately.) But he did of course say we're free to grab stuff from his Super Smash Bros. Melee pages since it's public domain, and I think a lot of his work could be used to flesh out missing areas of our guide. Anyway, my point is, I'm trying to lure more people over here who's work would be better served (in my opinion) living here than anywhere else. Procyon 13:27, 25 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Excellent! :-D --DrBob (Talk) 14:08, 25 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm having an interesting tete-a-tete with Gmcfoley from WikiKnowledge at the user talk page that I established for myself to hash out the issue. If any of you are inclined, have a look at it and see if you can help me win him over.  I'm trying to be polite and civil, yet assertive about the issue.  I don't have any desire to start some kind of Wiki flame war, and he's entitled to leave the moves lists over there if he wishes.  This is one of those cases where the saying, "you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar" is definitely appropriate.  Procyon 18:35, 25 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Yes, Gmcfoley founded WikiKnowledge. I haven't read any definitive statement from him, but I get the impression that he doesn't like copyleft licenses (hence WikiKnowledge being public domain), and therefore contributing here would be a contradiction. Similarly, moving the movelists here would also mean essentially removing them from the public domain. GarrettTalk 20:18, 25 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, he's made it pretty apparent that he has no desire to relinquish control over his site's copy of the moves, so I think it's a dead issue. Too bad, as I'm pretty sure this site's version is going to grow leaps and bounds over his, largely because he's only interested in maintaining it, not adding to it.  That's OK... the ace up my sleeve?  Redirecting all of the links on wikipedia from his site to ours ;) Procyon 20:27, 25 September 2006 (CDT)

Spoilers
How's this?

-- Prod 17:51, 25 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Well, the problem is that sometimes spoilers stretch over a large area, and putting that in a spoiler box would be clumsy. Another possiblity would be to use spoiler ends like Wikipedia and include a link to jump to the end (of course this means that any more than one pair won't jump correctly). GarrettTalk 20:27, 25 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Maybe a section of text that is very dull (#f5f5f5, or something almost white) that turns to black on mouseover (it would be better as a transition, so javascript would be better than just CSS). Something like this wouldn't be too annoying, would it? It may also work to conceal images. Images that are highly spoilers could also have their own "fade in" type of code to obscure them and gradually reveal them only when the user is certain he/she wants to view them. (This prevents accidental mouseover.) Just some thoughts...  ech elon  01:28, 26 September 2006 (CDT)
 * I like what Prod's suggesting, and it means that I don't have to write any more JS. ;-) --DrBob (Talk) 11:21, 26 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Here's a sample. -- Prod 19:32, 26 September 2006 (CDT)
 * It's a bit easy-to-miss. How about making the text slightly larger, and using the same background colour as Spoilers? --DrBob (Talk) 00:56, 27 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't think any of the article's content should be hidden by default. As DrBob said, it can be easy to miss. In fact, I don't think it can be made extremely noticeable without being gaudy and annoying. It is great to have useful spoiler markings, however I think most people are aware that they take a risk of revealing some integral plot details by reading a strategy guide. I prefer Garrett's suggestion of begin/end a la Wikipedia, with links to skip spoilers to add user-friendlyness. Actually, when I first saw it on the StarFox page, while I didn't miss the spoiler box itself, I hadn't realized until then that it was hding text with javascript and I had to click on the [Show] text. I instead expected the section of spoilers to be located below the box. --inarius 14:38, 28 September 2006 (CDT)

Now I'm upset...
OK, I don't pretend to understand all of the legal mumbo jumbo concerning the content on this site, I contribute to it willingly and freely. But what precisely is the rule about people "stealing" content from it and using it on their site. Apparently, my little tiff with Gmcfoley wisened him up to the content that I am contributing to this site that is designed to enhance the moves lists which he so begrudgingly won't relinquish. But now he's gone and ripped off the content that I created for the Super Street Fighter II Turbo Revival page and added it to his useless wiki site, nearly word for word, including that very image which I resized to 320x320 and uploaded here. I'm only greatful that he's too lazy to bother uploading the graphics that really make our move lists shine. But I'm sure he put that page up for pure spite. Do we have any recourse or do we have to just live with it? I'm all for scouring and harvesting his site for any content that may be useful to ours now. Procyon 22:03, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

P.S. I gave him a little dig on the discussion page.
 * This is the main reason I prefer to be under a copyrighted website. From PD, anyone can take the data (from say wikiknowledge) and upload it anywhere they want (say strategywiki) and pass it off as their own work.  Of course this doesn't stop it from happening in reverse, but hopefully we can get him to take it down. Either that, or we get video game people to come here from wikipedia rather than going to wikiknowledge.  -- Prod 23:32, 26 September 2006 (CDT)


 * "designed to enhance the moves lists which he so begrudgingly won't relinquish" You DO realize that the names of moves, as well as the commands to do them are in no way CRable.  So he can't claim ownership overthem at all. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 02:07, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Also, "Most content at WikiKnowledge is in the Public Domain and may used as you wish." so you can take whatever you want if it's in the PD. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 02:09, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Thanks Mason, but I'm mostly upset about the history behind the move lists. You see, I started that project on WikiBooks (mostly because it wasn't welcome on wikipedia.)  I created over 90% of the content that was there.  Then the WikiBooks owner got a bug up his butt about video game content and decreed that it had to move to another site.  Unfortunately, I had slowed down my additions to the content and was largely unaware of the politics occuring at the time.  Ultimately, Gmcfoley took it upon himself to move the project to his site before I could take sufficient action to move it here first.  Now, I know he's more than entitled to do that.  I can't coerce him to remove the content from his site just because I want him to.  It would be nice if he decided on his own to let the project go and support the official move lists that we have here, but he's chosen not to do that, so oh well.  However, now he's competing with me with an External Link war on wikipedia.  So anywhere where I once pointed to the WikiBooks entry, he's pointing to WikiKnowledge instead.  So far, when I redirect those links to here, he switched it back to his site, so I simply added links to here back without removing his.  My gripe is purely egotistical, and had no basis in rules or legality.  I have to live with it, I just hate living with decisions made by jerks.  I'm just gonna have to act my age on this one.  Procyon 09:30, 28 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Wikibooks is GFDL, the moves themselves and the actions he can put lists together himself, but the text you wrote is "yours". He can't just make all the text PD because thats protected under the GFDL (unless of course you said you're releasing it under PD).  So legally, he can't. -- Prod 09:56, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * So you're saying that I may have a legitimate point that I can use to ask him to remove the lists from his site? If so, how exactly would I go about enforcing it?  I suppose another question to ask is, is it worth bothering?  I would rather see people reference StrategyWiki's version and support it on the merit that it is purely the better project than WikiKnowledge's.  Gmcfoley has neither the passion nor the knowledge (pun intended) to update those lists beyond simple formatting.  He will never add Mortal Kombat moves like Antaios is doing, so it will remain stagnant and inferior.  Procyon 10:29, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Prod, if you were the one who wrote on Gmcfoley's Talk page (my apologies if it was not you), it looks like I may have confused you about the issue. Super Street Fighter II Turbo Revival is not actually part of the move lists project.  You are correct that he took StrategyWiki's GFDL content and posted it on his PD site, but that page is a seperate and different issue from the Move Lists project.  This is going to get confusing, but... When I started the project on WikiBooks, I put all of the pages under one heading: Fighting Game Moves.  When WikiBooks threatened to delete the content, Gmcfoley moved all of it to his site to "preserve" it.  He then proceeded to "dismantle" it, and each game and character as it's own individual entry on his site.  I, as the project's originator and majority content provider, wanted to officially move it here, which I feel that I technically have.  I consider StrategyWiki's version the official version, and the other site's version depricated.  However, Gmcfoley insists on maintaining his version of it.  Even if I have some legal ground to force him to remove it, I'd rather he did so willingly, because in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter all that much.  However, what he did with SSF2T Revival was clearly a violation.  I just don't know what to do about it.  Procyon 12:50, 28 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Wasn't me, but I know the guy (he's usually a lurker >.>). Whatever info was on wikiknowledge is now PD.  If you brought it here, this version is now copyrighted, and info from here can't be put back in PD without all authors allowing it (well not sure about all, but major at least).  Any PD info is "his" but he can't copy changes from here to there (without having a link back to the version here).  He doesn't have to remove it, and he probably won't.  If you have a better version here than there, put a link on those pages to here.  It's a good improvement to his page, good link back to SW, and so everyone wins. If SSF2TR was here, and he copied it there (not from the PD info) then that is definately a copyvio and he "legally" has to take it down.  Enforcement is kinda useless though :P  Not like were going to sue him or anything.  It's just looks bad on him if doesn't.   -- Prod 13:53, 28 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Sorry to but in, but I am interested in this conversation and may not be following due to the acronyms / lack of knowledge. It sounds as though you are saying that content originated on this site cannot be posted on a PD site. But, from what I understand of the GFDL, it states that this content can be copied or modified, and used commercially or non-commercially. Also, it mentions "copyleft", being able to reproduce and use this content on another site in the PD. This itself seems to contradict the statement about copying for commercial uses - so suffice it to say, I'm confused. Honestly, I wouldn't want to be contributing to site content that wasn't more or less PD. I can also empathize with requiring that commercial sites which copy content be required to cite the source, but not beyond that. --inarius 14:56, 28 September 2006 (CDT)
 * You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License.
 * It just means, if you didn't make it, tell where you got it from, and its still under GFDL. I guess I should mention that IANAL (why do I have to link through wikibooks for that to work?). -- Prod 16:45, 28 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Thanks for the clarification. --inarius 18:09, 28 September 2006 (CDT)

More template woes
I created this template for Street Fighter Alpha 3. Either the letter should show or it shouldn't based on the parameters that get passed in to it. It even works fine in the examples I created on the template page itself. So can anyone explain why this is happening? I don't understand why Wiki sticks a linefeed between the X and the A. It doesn't do that in my examples, why would it start to do that when I use the template on a page? Also, I don't know why, but if you put a space after the template, all of the text after it becomes fixed width. I'm so frustrated... Procyon 10:04, 27 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm beginning to think that consider the problems I'm having with this template, and the other template problem I mentioned earlier in the Community Issues, that perhaps there's a problem with the qif template?? Just a thought... Procyon 10:09, 27 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm looking at the HTML source that the page is generating. I don't get this (I cut out the super long image anchors):

   Move Name
 * Where did that  come from??? I certainly didn't ask for it, but how did the PHP code determine that it belongs there? Procyon 11:02, 27 September 2006 (CDT)
 * YES YES YES, I am the template god :). FIXED!  o boy...how awesome :). -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 02:03, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Dude, you rock! Thanks!!!  ^_^ Procyon 09:31, 28 September 2006 (CDT)

LOL, at first inspection, it looked like you solved the problem completely, and you did a much better job than I did, so I thank you once again. However, looking more closely, I couldn't figure out why the text was lying so low compared to the graphics. So I looked at the source to see what PHP had generated. You only succeeded in moving the. Have a look (super long anchors snipped again):    Move Name I can't come up with a rational explination why that  occurs. I doubt this has anything to do with your solution Mason, and it may be deeper down in the HTML generation, so only Echelon might be able to solve the problem if he's well versed in PHP. I guess I'll have to deal with it for now. At least thanks to you, it's better than it was. Procyon 10:16, 28 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Simple issue, just style="valign:middle"-ed the property, see?  Enjoy. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 23:44, 28 September 2006 (CDT)

Hacking
I am moving this ridiculous conversation to Minun's personal talk page as it does not belong here. This is not an issue that concerns StrategyWiki's community. Procyon 15:12, 30 September 2006 (CDT)

Parser Functions
Parser extension might make some templates a bit easier to understand as its shorter than qif. I don't know enough about this stuff, but it looks interesting. -- Prod 23:15, 28 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Are these avalaible to test? --inarius 09:51, 29 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Does anyone know if there's a way to create variables and assign values to them? I wanted to do somethere where every other Special Move template shaded itself grey.  So the first one would set some variable to 1, and the next one would read it and if it was 1, shade the table row grey and set the variable to 0.  Then the next one would read it again, see that it was zero, and draw the row white, and so on.  But there doesn't seem to be any way to make your own controls like that.  Just curious.  Procyon 20:05, 29 September 2006 (CDT)

I was looking at the Mega Man 2 page which has references at the bottom. Perhaps we could get http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cite/Cite.php installed. -- Prod 10:14, 2 October 2006 (CDT)
 * ref and note already serve this purpose fairly adequately. You can see them in action in BS Zelda: Kodai no Sekiban/Cheats. GarrettTalk 14:23, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

New Pokedex or Partnership?
Hello everyone. I happened to notice some edits that 0-172 was making when it occurred to me that StrategyWiki does not have it's own Pokedex. And it certainly seems that among the many things StrategyWiki should have, a Pokedex should be one of them. However, it didn't take very long until I discovered Bulbapedia and I thought, how awesome is this? So I was curious what many of you felt about approaching them and seeing if we could form some sort of partnership between them and us. Essentially, they could provide all of our visitors with (well presented) Pokedex information instead of forcing us to reinvent the wheel and write something that's been written a million times before, and we could provide their visitors with the actual walkthroughs to Pokemon games. Is this something that we need? No, but I think it would be a great way to form a mutually beneficial partnership with another Wiki site (not that we need that either, I just think it would be neat to cross polinate some of the talent that we have.) OK, I'm getting off my soap box. What do you think? Procyon 20:37, 28 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Nice find :) It would be cool to have them link to SW (we always need more quality contributors ;-) ) We could link to them on all the pokemon guides (if they're that good, we should do that anywayz).  However, how would they link back to us?  I checked out the website, and I'm having a bit of trouble finding where to go. -- Prod 21:09, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Hm. They already have Pokedex entries (e.g. Poliwrath), so I'm not sure they'd need or want an external Pokedex. Also they use the evil BY-NC-SA rather than the GFDL. Hm. Copying the old Wikibook Pokedex here is certainly an idea, although linking to them or Serebii is probably just as good. The MAME guide worked out pretty well so I don't really have a problem with this either way. GarrettTalk 21:40, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I thought perhaps the way that it could work, is that whenever we mention a Pokemon, we externally link to them, like so:
 * "Walk out of Pallet Town until you reach the grass. If you walk around there, you will find a Rattata or a Pidgey."
 * and so on. They appear to have stubs for each of the games like Pokemon Red and Blue so perhaps we could twist their arm to point to us instead. Procyon 22:16, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * It's in PD at wikiknowledge so we can easily copy it here. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 23:49, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Yes, but like so many things on that site, it's ugly and presented with little care. Personally speaking, I'd rather link to a site like Bulbapedia where you know they care about the content they have, and they will keep it updated with new information since they're passionate about it.  Plus there's the possibility of attracting new talent to our site.  Procyon 08:02, 29 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Procyon makes a good point. While we could certainly have our own Pokedex, I'm kind of leaning towards linking to theirs. We can always change it in the future if something doesn't work out. What we should definitely concentrate on, though, are getting some good Pokemon guides.  ech elon  00:40, 30 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I suggest being BOLD, and making one right now, and also link to theirs "for more information" as I'd hope they'd link to us for more information on guides. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 14:46, 8 October 2006 (CDT)
 * And I have been bold. I'll make it a list of red links soon. :)

Well, I would have appreciated a little more patience on the matter. It's not that I object to having a pokedex on StrategyWiki. By all means, if someone is willing to put in the time and effort to make one (and I mean REALLY make a GOOD one) than we should go for it. But it's it just going to be a half-assed attempt to throw something up in order to claim that we have one, then I'd rather just rely on Bulbapedia, who has done a really impressive job. Mason, really question yourself as to how dedicated you're going to be in filling out the 386+ entries that need to be filled out. Either that, or find people who you know will be dedicated to the effort. Procyon 18:42, 8 October 2006 (CDT)
 * I won't be dedicated to it. But that doesn't mean the red links won't inspire those people who will be dedicated to it.  I think the pokedex is definitly within the scope of strategywiki and therefore we should make it as obvious as possible that if someone wants to be dedicated to something like that, then can do so.  But if not that's all good to, that's what the bulbapedia links are for. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 20:33, 8 October 2006 (CDT)

So, any news on this? Is there a partnership or not? -- Prod 19:53, 17 October 2006 (CDT)
 * As nothing was happening, I created the template BP:Template:StrategyWiki, and added it to the BP:Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire page. Unfortunately, we have very little about the other games, so I'm not sure if we should link them here. Though, it might attract some people to write the guides that don't exist. -- Prod (Talk) 11:17, 4 December 2006 (CST)
 * Yeah, I feel kind of responsible for this. I was anxious to form the partnership, but their response was luke warm, and then I moved on to other projects and didn't feel particularly encouraged to pursue it.  The way I view the situation is that the partnership is very unofficial, and though I don't think they are taking any advantage of our resources like we may be of theirs, in time that could change if I manage to focus on more than just Ruby and Sapphire. And by that, I don't just mean the newer games, I mean Red/Blue/Yellow and Silver/Gold/Crystal as well.  I've been toying with the idea of contributing to R/B/Y in the not-so-near future.  But that was a great idea Prod. Procyon 12:12, 4 December 2006 (CST)