1,301
edits
Project:General Discussions: Difference between revisions
m
→Banners
m (→Banners) |
|||
| Line 149: | Line 149: | ||
::::::::::Why do you keep insisting that my idea will never catch on? It's too early to make that assessment. I don't know what your problem is. At least Lucario and Kolano are giving it a chance even though they initially reject the concept. --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 20:36, 7 November 2015 (CET) | ::::::::::Why do you keep insisting that my idea will never catch on? It's too early to make that assessment. I don't know what your problem is. At least Lucario and Kolano are giving it a chance even though they initially reject the concept. --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 20:36, 7 November 2015 (CET) | ||
Well... I am against the ratings concept, but um, the bars are very poorly done. Garishly colored, not aligned properly, cuts into the paragraph, encourages the creation of issue reports just because an issue hasn't been tagged (which happens often), and that's a problem for the issue tracker. If the bars are a work in progress, they should have been *finished* before being proposed. What is here right now is totally unacceptable! Plus there's the fact that ratings are subjective, and it adds to maintenance of issues... I don't like moving the 16:9 bit to the infobox either, that just seems silly to me... There are only 60 or so games would use it out of 3000, so it would break consistency. Adding it everywhere for consistency just leaves useless information in over 3000 pages, so 60 can have it, which is even more silly! I don't really see how any of these changes improves anything, and lots of ways they make things worse... - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 14:00, 8 November 2015 (CET) | Well... I am against the ratings concept, but um, the bars are very poorly done. Garishly colored, not aligned properly, cuts into the paragraph, encourages the creation of issue reports just because an issue hasn't been tagged (which happens often), and that's a problem for the issue tracker. If the bars are a work in progress, they should have been *finished* before being proposed. What is here right now is totally unacceptable! Plus there's the fact that ratings are subjective, and it adds to maintenance of issues... I don't like moving the 16:9 bit to the infobox either, that just seems silly to me... There are only 60 or so games would use it out of 3000, so it would break consistency. Adding it everywhere for consistency just leaves useless information in over 3000 pages, so 60 can have it, which is even more silly! I don't really see how any of these changes improves anything, and lots of ways they make things worse... - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 14:00, 8 November 2015 (CET) | ||
:It seems that Kolano has taken interest in the concept and seems to be working on getting it looking right. If a bug report is missing, the link the template generates encourages either creation (duplication can be found as I have seen people change the status to that) or find the bug report (slower). Either way, supplying the bug report ID will attempt to remove the game from [[:Category:Pages with missing bug reports]], which you don't want a game to appear under. I wouldn't have gotten feedback for the current state it is in. The first version wouldn't have been very helpful to Wiki users at all. I had to propose early and it was helpful with some feedback to further tweak the concept. I never considered my proposal in a finished state let alone a deployable state. I was just proposing a concept. I also noticed that the admins may not understand the true power of templates. It's like a function or method in C++, if designed well, it can reduce the amount of code needed to produce the same result if not more results. If designed poorly, spaghetti code and breaks can result. I see the Wiki's state as having some redundant output that could be easily fixed with a template (function) for common elements and increase functionality hopefully without sacrificing current usefulness. 60/3000 pages is little relatively speaking but maintain 60 individual pages is tough. A template can make the job easier. --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 20:37, 8 November 2015 (CET) | :It seems that Kolano has taken interest in the concept and seems to be working on getting it looking right. If a bug report is missing, the link the template generates encourages either creation (duplication can be found as I have seen people change the status to that) or find the bug report (slower). Either way, supplying the bug report ID will attempt to remove the game from [[:Category:Pages with missing bug reports]], which you don't want a game to appear under. I wouldn't have gotten feedback for the current state it is in. The first version wouldn't have been very helpful to Wiki users at all. I had to propose early and it was helpful with some feedback to further tweak the concept. I never considered my proposal in a finished state let alone a deployable state. I was just proposing a concept. I also noticed that the admins may not understand the true power of templates and categories. Templates are great for scripting that can include categories while categories are great for not just general organization but also organizing specific problems pages may have (see [[Project:To Do]]). It's like a function or method in C++, if designed well, it can reduce the amount of code needed to produce the same result if not more results. If designed poorly, spaghetti code and breaks can result. I see the Wiki's state as having some redundant output that could be easily fixed with a template (function) for common elements and increase functionality hopefully without sacrificing current usefulness. 60/3000 pages is little relatively speaking but maintain 60 individual pages is tough. A template can make the job easier. --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 20:37, 8 November 2015 (CET) | ||
=== Global Replacement Request === | === Global Replacement Request === | ||