StrategyWiki talk:Community Portal

This page is for discussion of general community issues. To start a new thread click here. Resolved threads are gradually archived; see the archives box below.

Key Issues:
 * License
 * Articles to delete
 * Others to be added...

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)

Rename the license?
I don't like "StrategyWiki Public License", for several reasons. First, "Public" is unnecessary and might make people think there's some connection with the GNU GPL; also including our name is a mistake. As echelon said, "Imagine if all wikis used a single license and it made copying possible between all wikis. Wouldn't that be awesome?" Yes it would, but I can't imagine other sites would be particularly keen on using a license that so openly belongs to another site. Dropping the Public and removing our name from it are primary goals if we want anyone but us to ever use this. GarrettTalk 04:39, 2 July 2006 (PDT)


 * So you'd have it called "License" then? :-P I agree with you here, and I think now is the time to change the name if ever, before it gets too complex. --DrBob (Talk) 04:52, 2 July 2006 (PDT)


 * Guys, check out the suggestions in User:Echelon/Open Media! Leave comments on the talk page there.  ech elon  23:53, 5 July 2006 (PDT)

Image upload warning
I'm going through categorising all the images, and it's a pain. I have a horrible feeling that people are going to continue to upload uncategorised images, so why not put some Javascript on the image upload form which checks for a category link, and pops up a message box chiding the user if the output of  is true. --DrBob (Talk) 06:43, 2 July 2006 (PDT)
 * I suggest looking into the uncategorized images page sporewiki has set up and have that installed. But if this code gets put it, If you could explain how it's done, then that'd be appreciated echelon, thanks :). -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 16:42, 2 July 2006 (PDT)
 * I think we should do both. :-P The message on form submission to stop more uncategorised images being uploaded, and the uncategorised images page to help deal with the ones which have already been uploaded. Looks quite simple to install the uncategorised images page, and thanks must go to MediaWiki (and SporeWiki) for it. :-D --DrBob (Talk) 23:00, 2 July 2006 (PDT)

Open Media License
I wanted to involve everyone in writing and commenting on the "Open Media License" that I am drawing up. (I think it may be a better alternative to "StrategyWiki Public License".) You can see it here. If you wouldn't mind taking a look over it, making notes of your thoughts and ideas for improvement, and even working on it, that would be excellent. I want to slim it down quite a bit so it's a small license. Once we have a more polished and refined version, I want to show it off to Debian-legal and ask for their assistance in making this thing real. We'll of course want it to conform to all of their standards, as I generally agree with Debian-legal on most licensing issues.  ech elon  01:32, 22 July 2006 (CDT)

Display bug with IE
I've been noticing this and felt I should bring it up. It seems the All game Nav template is causing it too. Anyway, if you look at a page in IE that has that template, it seems it is too wide and it causes the text under it to be sort of "cut off" by the table. Any text following the headers (the 2 equal signs on either side) is okay. I'm surprised this hasn't been addressed. --Sivak 14:18, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * "Cut off" by which table? I've just looked at Counter-Strike: Source in IE7 beta 2 and the All Game Nav is too wide, but I'm getting no other problems with it. Could you perhaps link to a screenshot (or upload one as long as you promise to have it deleted afterwards :-P )? --DrBob (Talk) 14:29, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I checked using IE6 on the EarthBound main page and I think he's talking about this: click here to see image-- Duke  Ruckley  14:54, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, same here as dukeruckley. It seems the left edge of the main content has negative padding or something. But, it only happens on pages that have the All Game Nav on them, as far as I checked. I looked at an ealier revision of EarthBound without the All Game Nav, and it looked fine.--blendmaster 22:09, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Ah. Are you sure this only happens on pages using All Game Nav? I'll look into it later, but it's probably a symptom of one of IE's box model problems. :-( --DrBob (Talk) 15:01, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Why can't everyone just get Firefox? :p --Antaios 14:59, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * If only. However, we do have to support everyone. :-( --DrBob (Talk) 15:01, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I put a screenshot of my own. It seems maybe the images on the left which make up the menu are overlapping somehow.  Check the area I put a red box over.  It gets "uncut" after a short way down.  click here to see image  --Sivak 09:42, 27 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I think you're probably right. I checked the same pages uses Monobook and there is no problem there, so it might be the skin itself.-- Duke  Ruckley  09:46, 27 July 2006 (CDT)
 * That's partly it (the top is a JPEG while the rest is a GIF) but that still doesn't explain IE drawing it too far to the left. GarrettTalk 22:52, 27 July 2006 (CDT)

Cutscene transcripts
Some of the pages (e.g., Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas/Missions/Big Smoke) have verbatim transcripts of the cutscenes included. Besides being formatted like a screenplay (way too much space for a web page IMO), this seems like a copyvio to me. Should it go? Sympleko 07:12, 26 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Ya, it should go. It is completely unnecessary and is not useful to the user of the website anyway.  It doesn't give any hints or tips on how to play the game at all.  Plus, it just doesn't look very good.-- Duke  Ruckley  07:55, 26 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I agree on all counts. Can somebody delete Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas/Missions/In the beginning/Cutscene then?  It's all transcript.  I already orphaned the page. Sympleko 11:59, 26 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Done :) -- Duke Ruckley  12:18, 26 July 2006 (CDT)


 * You'll also want to see what links to the cutscene templates, do what's necessary with those pages, and then delete the templates themselves. (Danged dialup. :- --DrBob (Talk) 13:40, 26 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Done, there was just one page that linked to the two templates in use, and I deleted it and the templates.-- Duke Ruckley  13:49, 26 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Thanks for finishing what I started. Seems like it was only two pages. Sympleko 08:24, 28 July 2006 (CDT)

MapleStory Transwiki
I just got back from my vacation and I'm now going to try and get the MapleStory book transwikied. There are a few concerns I have before going ahead with this. I've put together a list of all the pages and images that are used by the book (though its out of date now). There are a lot of images in this (pictures of the enemies) and they are all very badly named, potentially causing collisions. Will it be possible to transwiki all the pictures automatically and rename/categorize them at the same time? Also, the MapleStory/Monsters page is quite large (90+ megs in the database including history I think, page is 83k) and is updated fairly often. Will this cause problems for the rest of strategywiki due to bandwidth issues? (It's the most edited pages on wikibooks). -- Prod 12:52, 13 August 2006 (CDT)


 * With reference to the images, I can't think of an easy way of transwikiing them off the top of my head, and if you want to rename and categorise them at the same time, it's going to have to be done manually. You can take your time over it. :-P It wouldn't be preferable to have to categorise them all later, due to the fact that we can't make a list of uncategorised images, and would thus lose them. The Monsters page is a monster. Whatever you do, it will have to be split up, and the history might have to go, but I'm not too knowledgeable in such matters. (Talk to Garrett, methinks.) I don't think we'd encounter any bandwidth issues, but it should be split up anyway, to make it at least somewhat sane to read. --DrBob (Talk) 13:03, 13 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah the history can't be imported (maximum is around 2 MB) so the history for that will have to be pasted onto the talk page. The rest shouldn't be much of a problem. Images could be transwikied automatically by Kernigh's bot, but since they have to be renamed I don't think it can handle them (unless it has a batch rename feature). I'll look into transwikiing the text portion sometime soon. GarrettTalk 21:06, 13 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Well, there 1500 revisions, so that will be some pasting :P. I'll need to go through the pages again since some pages have changed and new ones have popped up.  I'll put a note on Wikibooks Import List when its ready (hopefully soon).--Prod 07:26, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Right, sounds good. GarrettTalk 21:51, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * There are a few pages where the info was cut and pasted to another page. Those pages are now redirects.  Should they be transwikied as well, or just leave them where there are (where they will probably be deleted)? -- Prod 19:33, 17 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I can't see much point in transwikiing redirects, unless they're used really frequently. :-) --DrBob (Talk) 01:18, 18 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Hmm, guess I didn't say the part I had wanted to say (oops). I meant to say that some of those redirects have a fair bit of history behind them since the original content was cut and pasted elsewhere, and a redirect added manually.  I'll see if I can contact Kernigh about the images. -- Prod 22:11, 19 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Kernigh writes: Okay, I used my bot to download the 397 images (372 PNG, 15 JPEG, 10 GIF) from Wikibooks. They are now in a folder on my computer, along with a "files.txt" containing the image descriptions. (They are in maplestory.zip if anyone wants to look at them.) I believe that I can easily remove the extra  == Summary == ,  == Licensing == , and   tags and put everything in Category:MapleStory images. I want prod to send me some lines looking like this:


 * mv 0023423.png Whatever_the_new_name_is.png


 * I should be able to use these to rename the files (and replace the filenames in "files.txt") before I tell User:File Upload Bot (Kernigh) to upload them to StrategyWiki.


 * Also, 397 images is a lot, so should the bot receive a "bot" flag? --Kernigh 23:27, 20 August 2006 (CDT)
 * W00t, thanks :D. I'll try to upload the file somwhere around here in the next 24 hours, though I can't make any promises as I'd like to make a good naming scheme so I dont have to re-upload the pictures later, probably something like 'MapleStory Monster MonsterName.xxx' for the monsters.  -- Prod 00:01, 21 August 2006 (CDT)


 * It might be a bit late for this, but I'd just use initials for the repetitive parts of filenames, such as "MS" instead of "MapleStory". It'll save a lot of typing. --DrBob (Talk) 03:26, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

Images are being transwikid as we speak (Thank Kernigh!). I think the import list is ready for transwikiing (so many strange words >.>). If there is anything you need from me, leave a message on my talk page. (This is so exciting ^_^). -- Prod 19:53, 25 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Could you please go through all the images in the MapleStory images category once they're uploaded, and categorise them accordingly? You can find information in the policy. --DrBob (Talk) 03:26, 26 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Currently, they've all been moved into three categories, Category:MapleStory/Monsters, Category:MapleStory/Skills, Category:MapleStory/Items. Can I just add the Monster category as a subcategory of Category:Sprites and Category:Characters or do I have to put those on each and every page? Skill would go under Sprites, and Item would go under Items and Sprites. If you want them individually, do you know of a program to automatically edit a bunch of pages.  -- Prod 10:09, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Sorry to give you a load of work to do, but those categories won't do. The images'll have to go into the normal categories, but I can't think of a program off the top of my head which will allow such easy editing of multiple pages (my bot's currently out of action). Try rooting around on Wikipedia. --DrBob (Talk) 12:55, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

Everything is ready for transwikiing at Wikibooks Import List/MapleStory. When can we get started? -- Prod 22:10, 3 September 2006 (CDT)
 * I was thinking of waiting until the automated dumps are updated (this happens roughly every 20 days), as any changes between that date and the importing would have to be carried over manually. This also means the diffs between those two points would be missing. What do you think? GarrettTalk 04:10, 4 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Sounds good to me. -- Prod 07:50, 4 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Looks like the dumper bot broke. I guess it'll be another 2 or 3 weeks before we can get moved over :(. Do you think this would be a good time to start moving pages around (ie. split the monster page up into 7 or 8 separate pages), or should I wait till after the move? -- Prod 20:01, 6 September 2006 (CDT)

The transwiki is done now, except for these oversized pages which I'll do in the morning: So, um, go wild! GarrettTalk 06:19, 13 September 2006 (CDT)
 * MapleStory
 * MapleStory/Authors
 * MapleStory/Bowman Guide
 * MapleStory/Bowman Guide/Builds
 * MapleStory/FAQs
 * MapleStory/Glossary
 * MapleStory/Jobs
 * MapleStory/Magician Guide
 * MapleStory/Monsters
 * MapleStory/Quests
 * MapleStory/Quests/Party Quests
 * MapleStory/Thief Guide
 * MapleStory/Warrior Guide

Transwiki is now complete except for the histories of the above pages, which will have to be reproduced on their talk pages. GarrettTalk 19:00, 13 September 2006 (CDT)
 * From the looks of it you just copied/pasted. Some of them were done by someone else before and weren't done properly.  I'll copy paste them over. After looking at the MapleStory/Table of Contents, I realized that I missed MapleStory/Warrior Guide.  It has a very short history, so can you please transwiki it?  Also, are you going to bring over the histories, or should I?
 * Thanks for all the help Garrett. If it weren't for you, we would probably never have transwikid anywhere.  -- Prod 19:27, 13 September 2006 (CDT)
 * That page must be cursed or something, I didn't type it in properly again. MapleStory/Warrior Guide/Weapons is the page that needs to be moved. -- Prod 23:31, 13 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Cursed or not, that one imported fine too. :) As you worked out the rest are just pasted; this is because Special:Import has a limit of ~1.4 MB. GarrettTalk 05:52, 14 September 2006 (CDT)
 * To import the histories, do I just go through the history pages one by one and copy paste? or is there a program that does it? -- Prod 12:26, 15 September 2006 (CDT)
 * The GFDL isn't actually that picky. Special:Version merely uses "Magnus Manske, Brion Vibber, Lee Daniel Crocker, Tim Starling, Erik Möller, Gabriel Wicke, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, Niklas Laxström and others". So unless you think the edit summaries contain useful information you could just pick out a handful of names (I think 8 is the maximum required) and list them on the talk page. GarrettTalk 15:55, 15 September 2006 (CDT)

I added History pages to each of the pages and copied the histories from wikibooks. Put an archives link on each of the talk pages. Is that good enough, or is there anything else needed? -- Prod 18:20, 21 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Nah, looks fine. :) GarrettTalk 21:03, 21 September 2006 (CDT)

Too much like Wikipedia?
I'm wondering if we're taking too much of a Wikipedia route with these infoboxes and writeups. They have nothing to do with the actual guide content, which is what people are here for. As described above, they take up valuable screen space that could be better used by an always-visible TOC.

Personally, I'd like main pages to have a brief blurb with a Wikipedia sidebox, directly followed by a permanently visible TOC. Infoboxes look nice and all, but really don't help those wanting to get straight to guide content. Those who want encyclopedic info or metadata about a game can visit its Wikipedia entry. GarrettTalk 00:13, 19 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Erm...that's basically what we've already got? --DrBob (Talk) 10:40, 25 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I happen to agree with you, but for an entirely different reason. It's not that having this information at StrategyWiki is redundant--it's not--and it can be useful at times when distinguishing between versions comes in to play. The problem I have with the design of our main guide pages is that they are too confusing. For the newcomer, it may be difficult to tell that StrategyWiki is a place for game guides, when it appears at the superficial level that we are a repository for game info.


 * Our main pages should serve as an introduction to their respective guides, and that varies from game to game as all games have different elements and considerations. In supplement to the walkthrough itself, some guides may have full bestiaries and item lists, others may have time trial strategies for those who participate in speed runs. Our main pages should make it easy to find this key information quickly (though I don't think we should clutter main pages with a full table of contents--we have the top navigation and table of contents pages for that purpose). What do you guys think about this? Also, if you happen to agree with Garrett and I, we should perhaps collaborate on a sample introduction page.  ech elon  13:46, 19 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I can't see what you're getting at here Echelon. You haven't actually posted any suggestions, and I can't see any real improvements which could be made to our current accepted front page style. --DrBob (Talk) 10:40, 25 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Well lets be straightforward here, if you think there is a page that is "wrong" by design, redesign it at a test page, then elaborate on the changes so that we can examine if those changes in general are beneficial. No need to collaborate right now, if you think pages are wrong, either be bold and edit the pages, or make test pages that illustrate why your idea would be better.  Too much talk slows stuff down :), make a demo, show it, then we'll find out what works best. -- Mason11987 (Talk - Contributions) 10:56, 27 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, you're both right. I am working on something, but I don't think I'll be done with it for a while. For now we should just continue working with what works and I'll present you with an alternate idea when I have something more concrete.  ech  elon  11:22, 27 August 2006 (CDT)

Transwiki Fighting Game Moves Book?
Hi all. I've been watching the transwiki process of Maple Story. I have a project that I started earlier this year on wikibooks (that has since been moved to wikiknowledge) detailing all of the different moves for different 2D fighters. I pretty much completed Capcom and started working on SNK before I found strategywiki. Anyway, with blendmaster about to upload arcade buttons, I was thinking it would be a good time to consider transwiki-ing the book to here and making it much better. I have two concerns however. The easy one is: I don't really know how to transwiki something other than manually copying and pasting, and I don't know if there's a more formal process or something. The harder one is, given the layout that I used, will I be able to bring it over in the same format. That is, under Capcom I have each game, and also each character. Each game lists all of the moves for the different characters in that game, and each character lists all of the moves for that character in every game he/she appears in. It's easier if you check it out for yourselves and let me know your thoughts. As always, thanks! Procyon 20:21, 28 August 2006 (CDT) http://www.wikiknowledge.net/wiki/index.php?title=Fighting_Game_Moves


 * I don't know much about the transwiki process or its formalities, but I'll definitely support your desire to transwiki this book. I'd like to see it on StrategyWiki, and I think the potential for its growth is better here on SW as the book is relevant here.  ech elon  15:42, 2 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I'd say that would be good, but I think it should be transwikiid to a set of pages in a non-main namespace, as the main namespace is reserved for game guides, not more general guides such as this. Echelon, what thinks ye about this? --DrBob (Talk) 16:31, 2 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't have any problem simply copy/pasting the contents of the guide over to here. It's a bit of work, but it's mindless work, so there shouldn't be any problems.  DrBob, I take it that you would prefer to see a "wiki/fighting moves guide/capcom/sf2" and "wiki/fighting moves guide/capcom/ryu" as opposed to a "wiki/capcom/sf2"  and a "wiki/capcom/ryu"?  The more than I think about it, the more your approach makes sense to me, and this way we could still have main guide pages for each individual game that link in to page(s) of the fighting moves guide where ever appropriate.  My only other question would be: is there a better name for this than "fighting moves guide"?  Thanks!  Procyon 10:14, 5 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Thinking about it some more, it might make more sense to split it up, and put all the fighting moves for each game in a sub-page of the game's guide itself (e.g. "SF2/Fighting moves"). I don't know how much work that would be, though. --DrBob (Talk) 10:31, 5 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm cool with that, but what I'm not sure is where to put the "Ryu" page. For example, there will be a Street Fighter II page, a Street Fighter III page, and a Street Fighter Alpha page.  These pages will obviously contain all the moves for all of the characters in each of those games.  However, Ryu is a character in all three games, and one of the things that people commented about the original guide, was the cross referenced character pages, such as the page for Ryu which contained all of the moves for each of the games he belongs to, (so for the above example, SF2, SF3, and SFA.)  It helped illustrate how each character changed and evolved across each revision.  So the problem is, where does a "Ryu" page belong?  I was thinking "Capcom/Ryu" but that would be a new rule where a company's characters could be subdirectoried off the company's category.  I could make a "Capcom Characters" category that belongs to "Capcom" and then make "Ryu" a member of the "Capcom Characters" category, but that still begs the question: where does he live? Procyon 01:45, 6 September 2006 (CDT)


 * You could either have the SF3/Ryu page embedding the SF2/Ryu page, or have some text explaining that the moves are the same as in the previous game, with a link to the other page. --DrBob (Talk) 10:51, 6 September 2006 (CDT)

Have a look at Street Fighter II/Ryu to see how an entry might potentially look. I'm not satisfied with the ratio of the glyphs yet. The plus and the buttons may need to be scaled down (or the joystick motions scaled up.) Procyon 01:45, 6 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):  </a> </a> 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)

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)

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)