User talk:Presbyter

From The Last Sovereign Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Minor edit designation[edit source]

Hey Presbyter. Thanks for helping out on the wiki lately.

I just wanted to note one thing - if you are adding or changing actual useful info in a page, rather than correcting a formatting issue or something, please don't mark it as minor. "Minor" is a label about importance of the change, not size, and is used as a filter when viewing Special:RecentChanges.

Thanks again. -Decanter (talk) 05:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Decanter, alright thanks. I'll pay closer attention to this. Presbyter (talk) 07:21, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Gawnfall edits[edit source]

Hey again. Just wanted to let you know why I partly reverted some of your edits to Council of Gawnfall: The preferred heading style is sentence case (like on Wikipedia) and precollapsed tables make it harder to Ctrl+F the page. -Decanter (talk) 05:53, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for letting me know. Presbyter (talk) 09:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Dashes[edit source]

Disuse of em-dashes is not an accident; it's in line with our guidelines. I've also noticed you replacing ordinary keyboard - symbols with – which... is not something that's come up before. Is there a benefit to this I'm not seeing? Does it outweigh the drawback of a surprising lack of results when a user tries to search the page for the - symbol? -Decanter (talk | contribs) 20:44, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh, it seems I forgot about the em-dash guideline. Sorry about that!
In terms of the en-dashes... to be honest, I didn't even know it makes that big of a difference with the search. The benefit is purely aesthetical. So there is absolutely no reason to keep them if they come with such a drawback. Thanks for bringing this up. Presbyter (talk) 16:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

RP coloration[edit source]

I've noticed that you've started coloring all mentions of RP values, not just changes... why? I'm fairly sure this wasn't already a wiki convention (for RP or anything else). -Decanter (talk | contribs) 04:34, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

The coloration seemed to serve not only the purpose of indicating changes but to make them stand out altogether, hence the bold type. At least, that's how I interpreted it. The other scores (Economy, Religion, Social) have been colored regardless of being a change or a static value. So static RP values seemed to me like an inconsistence that has been overlooked.
Personally, I like it the way it is now because it makes those values stand out better and provides visual consistence across the wiki. But I'm also aware that the documentation only speaks of changes. If that's not how they're intended to be used or if you don't like it, I can revert remove the template for those. Presbyter (talk) 14:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Hm. It's been a while since I've worked with conditional formatting in templates but I think it would be feasible to make it work based on presence of plus or minus sign rather than math, which would be more efficient than removing the template from many places on many pages. Assuming that's the case... this seems like a subjective enough decision I should poll the community via forum thread, not make unilaterally. -Decanter (talk | contribs) 00:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
That should be possible. Since I've been playing with templates lately, I could take over that part. Presbyter (talk) 12:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
I took the liberty to experiment and made it work. You can check it out in my sandbox. So feel free to poll. :)
One thing left for discussion, though, would be how to handle negative RP values (e.g. the Ginasta RP check in the 3AW Final Assault. If the majority opts for not coloring static RP scores (used as reference and in comparisons), such special occasions would require an exception rule in the template. Presbyter (talk) 14:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
An exception rule, or just refraining from use of the template in those cases. I'm not sure how one would code such an exception anyway. -Decanter (talk | contribs) 22:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Same here. I'd just include an optional parameter to the template that forces neutral formatting regardless of a plus or minus symbol. I've updated the sandbox template with this parameter.
Of course, whether this is used solely depends on the editors and their knowledge about this parameter versus not using the template at all in such a case... But I think, considering the rarity of such an occurence, this is a good middle ground. Presbyter (talk) 15:14, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, just so you know, I'll insert the RP template in its current form with upcoming edits (effectively coloring every value, of course). The new template to remove the coloring for unsigned values is prepared. Once the community decided on a solution, we can just replace the current one. This way, we produce the look the majority wants while also making the wiki's contents semantically coherent (meaning to enable the code to frame RP values as such, independent of the specific value).
If you're unhappy with this course of action or if it does turn out to be premature, I'll revert the changes. Presbyter (talk) 18:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC)