User talk:BeXoR/Archive/Mar 07

''This is an archive of past discussions. Please do not edit this page. If you wish to leave me a message, do so on my talk page.''

Reason for GW Wiki "ban"
I had to give this it's own section, since the response is so...odd. When we found out about the issue, we immediately sent emails out to figure out what was going on. We ended up getting the following response back "...This certain user was accessing and updating his pages for over 13 hours straight which was perceived as an attack and was blocked at the network level. ". So, your insanely awesome amounts of contributions made our network freak out and think someone was up to something sneaky :) Don't worry, though. It's been addressed, so you can keep adding content until you fall asleep (like I'm sure you must have after that long of a contributing stint). --Emily Diehl 16:51, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * LOL - I love it!!!!
 * Oh, and Emily ... wiki contributors sleep?!? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:54, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * Yeah, I don't sleep much.. :P I had a sneaking suspicion it thought I was trying to DDOS the server or something from just loading pages so often. But really, geez, I think I'm going to need a warning to take a break every hour like the game has, I didn't think I was that bad. :( Thanks for getting to this so quickly! I'd be so bored without something to edit. :P - B e X o R  16:55, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * Apparently Bexor doesn't :p Here I think I'M bad waking up and checking contributions in the middle of the night. I have nothing on some people I guess. --Emily Diehl 16:57, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * Anytime, Bexor. I wondered where you went for so long! I'm glad it got resolved so quickly. --Emily Diehl 16:57, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * LOL, Bexor, I'm sorry that this happened to you, but please, take a break once and a while. ;)  --Rainith 17:03, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * So embarassing. D: - B e X o R  17:05, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * I knew something like this would happen, nice work BeXoR :P -- Scourge 19:14, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * LOL!!! That's hysterical. Vlad 19:33, 2 March 2007 (EST)

You should consider forcing yourself to take more breaks. Trust me, I know it's really hard. I've been there. :) Luckily I have Kalomeli who forced me to take some time off from the wiki. I soon realised that it indeed does survive sometimes without me. ;) -- (gem / talk) 15:07, 3 March 2007 (EST)

Armor formatting
It's really strange for me to see you convert the Dervish armor article from the format I posted to a more GuildWiki-ish style. I mean, the big thing that prompted me to post it was reading [ a comment of yours] lamenting being locked into GuildWiki armor formatting. So I offer some fresh ideas from a wiki armor documentation system that was remade completely from scratch with an eye toward improving past some of GuildWiki's format's issues. I thought that would be something you'd like. --Rezyk 17:28, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * Unfortunately, sometimes the way gwiki presented armor was just the best way of doing things. The format you produced wouldn't have worked with the other professions that have 25+ art styles. - B e X o R  17:31, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * I'd disagree with that. Any suggestions on how I could make sure that my format gets relatively equal consideration? --Rezyk 23:56, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * I conditionally agree with Bexor on this. I just took your (Rezyk) original edit and plugged in the new file names into it.  At 1280x1024 it was over five screens long.  That may not be what you had originally intended, I assume that because you had the male and female pictures set to different sizes that the pictures you were working with before were from different sources and you were trying to make them the same size, so the different pic sizes could account for some of the page's size.  That said, if this had been a page for Warrior armor or another of the core styles, it would have been huge.
 * What I would really need to see is a mock up of the page you would design using your style and our current graphics to give my opinion on which way I think is better. Of course if you aren't spamming changes to the wiki for 13+ hours straight and looking like a DOS attack, I don't know how you ever could hope to keep up with Bexor.  ;)  --Rainith 00:56, 3 March 2007 (EST)
 * I'm not looking for any sort of picking between my format and the current one now. The current one would win hands down, IMO. It would be possible for my version to compete if we spent a lot of effort and discussion time on it, dealing with the various issues that users see with it. Basically, if we started with it as a base, and built upon and improved and developed it together without a constant focus on making it live up to the standards of another format, we could end up with a system just as good, yet radically different. Both formats already have pros and cons compared to each other; neither is strictly better or "just best" (this is what I was disagreeing with). Maybe the development of both formats could improve each other by bleeding ideas between them. Maybe they could inspire a hybrid format that beats both. Etc, etc.
 * But, is it possible to spend time and effort to do it this way? I don't think so; people generally aren't going to develop two different versions very far (I don't blame them) and will just pick the more developed one to work from. This is why I didn't even bother with adding my formats right when the wiki started. We're going to have to use GuildWiki-like style as our base, whether we want to or not, and phase away from it in smaller steps. My reason for posting my format was simply because I've seen multiple people lamenting our being locked to starting with near-GuildWiki-style, and wishing that we had other fresh possibilities to at least consider. So although I didn't really think it could get anywhere, I threw it out in case anybody else has an idea or interest about how to get it developed.
 * Anyways, I don't plan on creating a mock up to compete directly with the current format, simply because it won't be productive enough. There's no need to compare and pick between the formats as I'm not pushing mine (although I appreciate the constructive criticism, Rainith). I'm already resigned to having to work uphill and bringing up a few of my ideas for improvement as piecemeal modifications to the current format when the time is right, and was just hoping there was a better option. --Rezyk 06:10, 3 March 2007 (EST)

Question
Hi, I'm leaving this message here because I found your name on the Bestiary/NPC... formatting talk pages @ GuildWiki. We're currently trying to create a formatting guide for it here as well, but so far without sufficient response. I'd appreciate it if you could drop by and leave your comment(s). Initial discussion started here, but is continued here. Thanks in advance ;). --Erszebet 09:37, 5 March 2007 (EST)

Common professions?
Hi, noticed you added a "Common or all professions" to the profession ordering. Could you explain to me what that means? I'm not sure I get it. -- ab.er. rant  03:14, 9 March 2007 (EST)
 * On the talk page there's a note about rune trader ordering. Things which are used by all professions go before profession specific ones (all the common insignias and runes). So this would apply to weapons without a bound attribute too. It's like our problem on the creature info box - there is a difference between no profession and any profession. I wasn't sure whether to remove the x - no profession from the list. We still need an icon that better suits "Any" - that circle thing was only an idea for it. - B e X o R  03:19, 9 March 2007 (EST)

Your icons
Hey BeXoR, I was just wondering what software you use to produce your icons? LordBiro 06:20, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Good old Photoshop 7. I like working in the dark ages. - B e X o R  06:21, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Have you tried using inkscape? I think you would like it. LordBiro 06:23, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I actually was considering downloading it today, but I plan on formatting my computer soon so I figured I'd wait. I don't really do too much graphical work these days. Though I've done some digital painting recently and it was painfully slow - I hear Corel Painter is a much better program for it. - B e X o R  06:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
 * What icons? Where? :P So... how does this Inkscape compare with Gimp? -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 20:35, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I forgot about this conversation in the midst of the image problems that occurred.
 * I don't know much about digital painting, I only have a mouse! I do enjoy painting in real life, but I don't know much about software in that regard.
 * Aberrant, the icons I'm talking about are the ones BeXoR has made scattered around the site, including at Gaile News and Template:User image.
 * Inkscape is very different from GIMP or Photoshop. GIMP, Photoshop, paint, PaintShop Pro etc. are raster graphics applications, designed for modifying bitmaps. Inkscape is a vector graphics application. Here's a video of someone producing an icon for the Tango project using Inkscape. You can see the way that you produce images in Inkscape is totally different from the way you would produce images in GIMP. Adobe Illustrator is also a vector graphics application, if you've heard of that :) LordBiro 05:14, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Oooo, thanks... I'll umm... digest it... heheh, graphics-noob alert. -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 20:59, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Nav boxes
I'm sorry, I screwed up. (Should've checked that you modified all nav templates to 140px. I used 125px when I updated the tables.) -- (CoRrRan / talk) 06:37, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
 * No worries! - B e X o R  06:59, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

May I?
Hey, BeXor, As you may have discerned, I'm a real neophyte at this whole Wiki thing. (I am just pathetically grateful this one accepts carrots!) Anyway, I admire the way your tables are set up, all nicely bordered and so forth. Would it be ok to try that on my page? I'd change categories and colours, of course. (And I need to figure out how to nest tables eventually for the splendid character section I may get build in, oh, 2009. ;) ) So let me know, and naturally if you'd rather I not borrow the frame bits, that's perfectly ok! Thanks. --Gaile  00:11, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Take anything you want. I learned a lot about wiki code when I was making my user page. :) - B e X o R  01:41, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Prof Userboxes
Thanks for the fix on the userboxes. :) --  Vallen Frostweaver  11:34, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

EQN
I had to leave EQN (I didn't want to) It's a long story, when you get back from your holiday/break talk to me on MSN lol -- Scourge   08:16, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Welcome back
Welcome back to the information superhighway :P LordBiro 09:49, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Thank you, it's such a relief. :P - B e X o R  10:28, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Crafter info project
I put up the checklist for crafter info at a common space now, so the project can get started. It's found here. Put you as editor also, since you have done some work on it already. Just remove yourself if you do not want to be there :) &mdash; Anja  12:50, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Okay, I'll take a look at it once I've caught up. :) - B e X o R  13:13, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Just wanted to make a small note that the cost template is moved and working (I have spoken to the creator over at GuildWiki, so there is no problem there). I think it's very neat to use, what do you think? &mdash; Anja  14:48, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I like the current formatting we have on the template, with the depending right or left alignment. Can the template replicate that? - B e X o R  17:06, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
 * The template does not include any alignment in it, so we will still be able to (and have to) write out the align. I don't know if and how it could be worked into the template, and if it's even wanted, considering it then could not be used in other places. &mdash; Anja  17:35, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Profession icons
Since you're usually interested in this sort of thing I've posted a draft of the redesigned icons at Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Profession colors. LordBiro 05:08, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Ascalon?
Ascalon City (outpost) is in the region of Ascalon? Do we want to combine pre-Searing locations and post-Searing locations into the same region? -- ab.er. rant  06:29, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Post-searing Ascalon is called Ruins of Ascalon apparently. - B e X o R  14:01, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Ah, I see. Thanks. -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 19:24, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

weapon stuff
Heya - For the weapons stuff I made damagetype and bowclass to be optional parameters for the weapon infobox template. You can omit or include them as you see fit for different weapons, not quite what you asked for, but maybe simpler to implement if not to understand? Do you think that type is a useful attribute to show for this template, it is almost duplication of information with the "attributes" field. --Aspectacle 07:14, 15 March 2007 (EDT)


 * I'm pretty sure you did what I wanted, just combined the three into one template. :) As long as it works you can do it whichever way you like. ;) Also you might want to check about any autocategorisation. If it's not there it might be a good idea to include it. - B e X o R  07:16, 15 March 2007 (EDT)


 * Autocategorisation is a great idea and I'd like to figure it out (I'd prefer if someone else did it first so I can copy!) but it might be a bit much for tonight. So ... good night from me!  --Aspectacle 07:26, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Actually might be best to leave it til the category guidelines have been worked out. Thanks for your help and goodnight. :) - B e X o R  07:27, 15 March 2007 (EDT)


 * I've been thinking about autocategorisation in the armor art infobox, and I will be working on it in my sandbox template with the result showing here. It will lead to bad categorising as I'm working on it as my userpages will end up in categories, but less problems with the articles needing reload al the time. If you want, you can take a look there later Aspectable, to see how I solve it and work out your own way from that :) &mdash; Anja  07:41, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
 * EDIT: I hate autocategorisation.. At least when it comes to armor :P &mdash; Anja  08:03, 15 March 2007 (EDT)


 * I've attempted a quick and dirty autocategorising template for weapons, based on Anja's work. I've had to include a type parameter in order for it to work. It can be seen at hereand with the include here.  I've attempted to get it autocategorising based on salvage as well, however this causes problems as I can't get it to parse wiki input (e.g. Steel Ingots ). Hope its somewhat helpful. --Indecision 02:43, 16 March 2007 (EDT)


 * I went through and removed all the wikilinking from the stuff I wanted to autocategorise on in the mission templates - tedious but worth while if someone decides to change the name of the mission categories. ;) Another thing about the salvage is that some things have two (or more?) common salvages. I don't know if it's installed but you'd need StringFunctions to pull each common salvage type out to properly categorise it (that could also be used to deal with the wikilinks). --Aspectacle 02:54, 16 March 2007 (EDT)


 * Looks like no StringFunctions, but I've still managed to get some auto-categorisation working despite the wikilinks. I've finished up two proposed infobox replacements (for weapon infobox and item infobox), which can be found at new item infobox and new weapon infobox. These allow for a reasonable amount of autocategorisation, particularly of materials.  Unfortunately, I haven't been able to handle multiple materials (only the first listed material is categorised), however I am still satisfied that the two templates represent an improvement on the originals. --Indecision 21:52, 20 March 2007 (EDT)


 * Given that the number of materials you can salvage is very small, maybe just do "commonsalvage2" and "commonsalvage3"? -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 01:28, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Monk Obsidian armor revert
Hi, why is it pointless to avoid the redirect from Vellum towards Roll of Vellum? I think this could be little faster than with direct link. - MSorglos 03:37, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
 * 0.001 seconds faster? Why add text to an article when it isnt needed? - - B e X o R  04:43, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I don't know how this wiki works (technically) and so which version causes more server load. My personal opinion was that it could be less traffic/load, but I have no preference. - MSorglos 04:57, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Well, while the edit was unnecessary, the revert was unnecessary as well you know. But using the redirect makes it cleaner. As for performance, I've read somewhere that redirect pages are very efficiently done. -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 05:08, 30 March 2007 (EDT)


 * There is no extra traffic when using a redirect. Redirects are encouraged, and linking to redirects is not discouraged. If someone alters a link so that it points to the article rather than the redirect it would normally be unusual for someone to revert it, but really there is no noticeable impact on the server, so I wouldn't worry too much! LordBiro 07:31, 30 March 2007 (EDT)


 * The redirects are there for a reason, there was no need for the change to be made and the smaller a page is, the better it is, even if its only 1kb difference. I reverted it because if adding in extra text became widespread it would be a nuisance. - - B e X o R  10:15, 30 March 2007 (EDT)


 * I stand by my redirect, I thought I executed it perfectly ;) -- Scourge  [[Image:User Scourge Spade.gif]] 19:35, 30 March 2007 (EDT)


 * You might be aware of Wikipedia's stance, but I've just been reading about the statistics of redirects. Following a link to an article takes 44 SELECT queries while following a link to a redirect takes 48 SELECT queries. SELECT queries are very inexpensive.


 * Altering a link so that it points to the correct article and not the redirect takes "8 transactions with 64 SELECTs, 10 UPDATEs, 4 INSERTs, and 2 DELETEs", the cost of which is 10,000 times that of following a redirect! . LordBiro 08:12, 31 March 2007 (EDT)