User talk:Clotho

From SpiralKnights

Revision as of 20:25, 23 October 2015 by Novaster (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

Archived discussions can be found here. If you have a suggestion for Spiral Knights, please use the Suggestions Forum instead. If you need assistance with your account, use the links on the Support Portal to get help.

Operation Crimson Hammer

Okay! As you can see, several of us are working on getting anything mission related up to date, and Operation Crimson Hammer (OCH) is a mission - expansion subtype. Editors really need to be able to edit this page, because it is a large part of the game and connected to several things. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can tell, the only reason it's locked to general editors is because it has Billing information. My solution to this problem:

Create the subpage: Operation Crimson Hammer/Billing and protect that.

Have {{main|Operation Crimson Hammer/Billing}} in an acquisition section somewhere on the OCH page, and let the main OCH page be edited by us (unprotect it).

Unless it was protected for some other reason? Could we have a similar solution(s) for that if so?

Thanks,

--Novaster 11:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

That page is linked to our billing documentation therefore it needs to be protected in full, not just part of it. An alternative would be to make the changes in a sandbox, once ready, let me know and I'll update the changes in the page itself. --Clotho 17:00, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
That's going to be a bit difficult. Editors really need to be able to freely edit a page that's such a large interactive and dynamic part of the game. That makes a lot of hassle to unprotect/protect a page on staff end over time. It's not possible to create Operation Crimson Hammer/Billing, protect that, and then adjust billing documentation to link to that page instead? If not, I'll have to work something out on our end, but it likely won't be as pretty. --Novaster 17:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Quoted from email to support (regarding my inability to log in for a day or so, but another employee resolved the ticket so you might not have seen this): OCH issue: make a billing page about OCH, named "Operation Crimson Hammer/Billing" and protect it. This page would be a page in its own right and be able to be fully protected. Attempt to make billing documentation link to this "Operation Crimson Hammer/Billing" page instead of the "Operation Crimson Hammer" page. Unprotect the "Operation Crimson Hammer" page indefinitely and make sure it always links to the "Operation Crimson Hammer/Billing" page. This is because OCH is a major part of the game and editors need to be able to edit it freely. This method of billing protection as a subpage with a main expansion mission page should work for future expansion releases. Just imagine having to protect/unprotect OCH and any future expansions every time the game changes and editors need to update aspects of this/those page(s) - awful, right? Other editors seem to agree with me, and they should write a response on your (Clothos') talk page soon. Additional requests/details in the #subsection ("Operation Crimson Hammer") on your (Clotho's) talk page.

--Novaster 21:45, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll discuss this with the billing department, but I don't foresee any changes in the near future. Sorry! --Clotho 20:42, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Actually, what might work for the time being is a Sandbox/Operation Crimson Hammer where you guys make all the editions you want and I'll just copy/paste the contents into the protected page. --Clotho 20:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
I view this as a bandaid solution for reasons stated above (quite a hassle to do it this way if we continue to get more expansion missions). I/We'll work on that...soonish, most likely, but real life is very pressing for me these days. Let's hope billing can be flexible! --Novaster 20:53, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
We have another idea that might work better. I'll post here as soon as it's fleshed out. --Clotho 20:04, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Sounds exciting. --Novaster 20:13, 12 October 2015 (UTC)


Those icons

Sorry to bother you again but these files need a better tag: {{official image}} sounds better by the fact those are blocked and only used in the main-support pages:

Thx and sorry for the bother --Hikaru 00:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Done! No bother at all :) --Clotho 00:51, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Oh but the Icon image's tag was keep. Was intentional? --Hikaru 01:27, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Whooops! Look what i just forgot u//u (same tag because is official post) --Hikaru 01:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Yep, it is an icon after all, used in an official capacity. If it shouldn't be there for whatever reason, please let me know and I'll remove it. Done with the last one as well. --Clotho 23:32, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Oh well i dont mind :) it was just because those, being official, wouldnt be used for users. But dunno really that much about it. Its okay if they stay like that :P thx! --Hikaru 04:18, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

"Fixing" User usage of mainspace files

These files: There is still these icons of prestige badge: Prestigefinal-green.pngPrestige Rank 1 Red.png45kPrestigeBadge.pngPrestigebadgeaquatwostripedot.pngVermillion-badge-45k.png Prank vanguard.png (copypasted from previous post for separation of issues)

I will usually politely fix file usage on individual user pages if they are using an image that has an out of date or poorly named filename, something I was uncomfortable doing because it was userspace until I talked with a few people and saw this edit by Equinox. Hikaru and I decided it would be best to upload all of the prestige icons to consistent names, and Hikaru did the uploading.

Do you think I should just go ahead and fix those other prestige visuals? --Novaster 20:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I will probably go ahead and just fix these, since it's not a huge issue, and we've already had someone go and upload their own because they changed their color, and I am 99% sure while 100% guessing it's because they didn't know we had the nice high quality versions, and they would know if we had fixed the file for them. --Novaster 20:13, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Quoting Clotho from previous merged issue, now separated: The same applies to the prestige visuals, they are welcome to use them in that manner, but only in user space. --Clotho 01:11, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

So I am a bit confused now. Prestige icons are, well, I think anyway, official game images (seen in the upper left-hand corner of the HUD and next to user names), should we remove the list showing all possible color and rank configurations from the Prestige page (which is mainspace)? Or were you referring to only the above "cancerous" files? I refer to them as cancerous, due to the nature of malignant cancer and how duplicate files with different file names tend to propagate and confuse things on the wiki over time unless they are controlled. Since Hikaru and I made a uniform file system and provided the visuals, I view the usage of these prestige duplicates the same way as icons and other visuals around the wiki (just gonna link to this edit by Equinox again) and wish to rectify the issues. As I mentioned previously, users might want a blurry/different visual version for their own use, but I don't think that's appropriate for this wiki, again, considering Equinox's edit. But yeah, now I'm a bit confused but feel strongly we need to clean things! Just gonna stand here with a bucket of water, bottle of glass cleaner, and brandish my paper towels. --Novaster 14:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Duplicate Icon Issue

This issue is very similar to the prestige visual inquiry above. There are several complications. File:Trinket Icon.png seems to have been uploaded to serve some purpose in the mainspace (image tag and vendor list) - either because trinket icons were limited at the time, or due to a lapse in consistency. Either way, there was a hiccup in the past in conflict with the icon naming convention used by the majority of the wiki - here's an example, the Arsenal page has more. I have fixed the bad file's use in the mainspace to better reflect both reality (using an old trinket icon that's colored like the health trinkets to represent current trinkets that are not health trinkets = bad) and wiki consistency, with File:Icon-trinket.png. The issue now is what to do with the colored file in use in the userspace. We don't want duplicate files around (or files with too-similar names) causing problems around the wiki, no matter what space they're in. Again with the cancer.

Normally I would just fix this (as of discussions with users, here's one, for a long time, I refused to do so because I have always viewed userspace as "pseudo-personal space"), but recently we've had a bit of upset. Which is sort of okay, it means people care. But it's also making our wiki messy and extremely difficult to take care of. All these things just so we can clean up some user use of images for the health of the wiki while also not disrupting their work for the sake of social taboo.

To make our editing job easier, it would be nice to have a direct official approach for the process. Equinox is an admin, we are not, so we may refer to their edits, but it feels uncomfortable (at least for me) to enforce the same process, even though it is necessary. It would be fantastic if we could establish a process for handling userspace use of mainspace content. We would publish the userspace policy in the style guide, so we may refer users to it for justification, and new editors trying to help. Here is my proposal, I'd like it to be reviewed and approved/adjusted/rejected by staff. So far I've just used wikipedia logic, but yeah, something official for our wiki would be helpful.

Personal tools