User talk:DryHumour

Templates

Adding new templates to mainspace articles should be discussed and reach consensus on the appropriate formatting guideline page before it is implemented. I would recommend you hold off on applying your {{pp}} to further pages until you have done that. Thanks! -- Wyn talk 06:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Procedure excerpted from User talk:Wynthyst for my own reference

Apologies for contravening accepted policies wrt Template:pp. FWIW, I did read the applicable guideline articles. Where is the right place to learn the ins and outs of this wiki? --DryHumour 07:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

If you wish to propose changing the formatting on a large number of mainspace articles, you should start a topic on the appropriate formatting guideline page. In this case it would be: Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Locations. Propose your changes, and ask for community opinion. If no one comments within 36 hrs or so, you should reference it on: Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for comment. It may take several days to gather enough comments/opinions to determine a consensus on the issue. If no one comments within that time, no one cares, and you should go ahead and make the changes. I personally like the template, but am not sure it's appropriate on all location pages, but it definitely has potential for use. -- Wyn talk 07:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the guidance and feedback; I'll start the process rolling as you outlined. --DryHumour 13:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Why...

do we need profession glyphs on profession-specific quest pages? It's just redundant, because a few words before the respective glyph, it says "X as a primary profession" --Riddle 17:27, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Just for consistency with other quest pages. --DryHumour 17:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

What other type of quest pages use glyphs? There's nothing in GWW:QUESTS that says "this specific requirement needs a glyph to represent it". --Riddle 17:37, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

See Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Locations#Profession specific quests --DryHumour 17:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

There's nothing in that conversation that says "go onto each profession-specific pages and add the respective profession-specific glyph" or something to that extent. I agree with the glyph on location pages, as that makes sense and is convenient. To point out the obvious, quest pages aren't location pages. So I think adding X glyph after saying "X is a requirement" on the quest pages is unnecessarily redundant. --Riddle 17:50, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Feel free to revert if you feel strongly about it. --DryHumour 18:00, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

(FWIW, though, I think that providing a coloured symbol to draw the eye is a better way to quickly communicate the relevant information. --DryHumour 18:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC))

Ok. I'll get to that. By the way, good work on the stuff you're doing. --Riddle 18:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Damage calculation

A couple of things. 1)For "Effect of Attributes on Weapon Damage" how wide of a screen did you check it on? 'cause for my screen it's wider than the window. 2) What's with all of the commented out <math> tags? --JonTheMon 02:29, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

That the tables are too wide for some browsers is, unfortunately, inevitable with the inverted layout. I felt that it was better to have more horizontal density at the expense of potentially requiring some horizontal scrolling.

The <math> tags were already there for most of the entries, so I just followed suit. (Although this MediaWiki doesn't support the math extension, it is quite handy to be able to cut-n-paste the markup to one which does — e.g. wikipedia — in order to generate the PNGs.) --DryHumour 02:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Policy pages

Please stop making your "little" changes to policy pages without really discussing them. The Copyright page is going to be changing very soon, with the opening of the feedback namespace. These changes you are making are really non essential, and without proper discussion for proposed changes, you should just leave them alone. If you need clarification of a policy for your own enlightenment, simply ask, don't assume the policy wording itself needs to be changed. Thanks. -- Wyn talk 00:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

You might have mentioned that in the discussion on GWWT:USER, in which you participated. If a change is "non-essential", how much discussion is necessary? In the case of the reverted edit, I was simply harmonizing what was said on GWW:USER with GWW:IUP. What harm is there in that? --DryHumour 01:06, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

That you are making language changes to a policy due to a discussion for a different policy? The language that is present has gained consensus through discussion, and shouldn't be changed without further discussion. I appreciate your wish to participate, and contribute, but leaping to policy changes is not necessarily the place to start. -- Wyn talk 01:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, I didn't mention it, because I'm trying to play as well as wiki, and had no idea you were going to make changes to the Image Use Policy until after you did it. -- Wyn talk 01:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

FWIW I did make the edit in good faith, and I apologize unreservedly for any policies or rules I may have broken by doing so. My understanding of your comment in the GWWT:USER discussion was that you agreed that the language was, at best, unclear and should therefore be corrected. Since GWW:IUP policy was directly called out by the GWW:USER, the clause which wsa modified served the same purpose in both, and the language used was identical, I assumed that there would be no problem in harmonizing the two. However, I understand that as a new contributor, I should be circumspect and should forebear from making assumption or jumping to conclusions. I will return to making minor changes and corrections to NON-policy pages, as my ability allows. And all I was originally trying to do was correct a minor grammatical flaw. Sigh.... --DryHumour 01:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not that you wanted to make changes to the policies; it's that you made the changes to the policies without getting community consensus first. As policies are core to how the wiki operates, making even seemingly minor changes could have unintended consequences and should therefore be put before the first, or at least be made aware of it before it happens. --JonTheMon 01:45, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I fully understand and agree with you about the importance of this type of core meta-content. In this instance, I made an honest mistake concerning what I believed to be the outcome of a discussion. I will not intentionally repeat that error a second time. (The LARTing I received this time is enough, thanks ;-) --DryHumour 01:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry too much about it, Dry- I'm from GuildWiki, and all these rules that make you afraid to even correct a typo (or, in your case, a grammatical mistake!) on a policy page seem really arbitrary and red-tapey to me too; you're not alone. :P – Emmett 01:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I honestly do understand the need for strong policy and enforcement on a wiki like this one (perhaps in contrast with GuildWiki). This is, after all, the main ArenaNet portal and forms a part of their business model. (Frankly, I'm amazed that they allow real-time edits. Their lawyers must take Malox by the bucketload whenever they think about it.) There was even a small voice in the back of my head that said "You're going to get in sooo much trouble if you fiddle with this. Leave it alone. There are lots of other places to get your grammar jollies." I should learn to pay more attention to that little voice. :-) It's just so hard to hear over all of the other little voices which are telling me to wear tinfoil hats and rutebega around my neck to ward off tax officials.... --DryHumour 02:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

LART? --JonTheMon 02:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Luser Attitude Re-adjustment Tool :-) --DryHumour 02:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we don't have GWW:IAR, so I can't use that in Dry's support. I can, however, say that anyone who thinks that minor grammatical changes also change the meaning/spirit of the policy is a dipshit. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 02:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Dry, I think the problem is that the voices in fact are telling you to wear tin foil, when it actually should be aluminum foil, as it is more recyclable. 42 - talk 02:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Your quest template

I really like the way that looks. Good job! -- Wyn talk 03:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much, although my contributions are very minor indeed. I do feel a bit of trepidation about going live since it's such a central template, so I'll wait until the wee hours (EDT anyway) to actually commit it. Hopefully that way if we need to yank it, it will have caused a minimum of disruption. I've been slowly bleeding in changes to the quests themselves over the last few hours – again to minimize disruption if they need to be pulled. --DryHumour 03:45, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I think it looks very good, BE BRAVE! I don't think anyone is going to come up with any serious opposition to it. -- Wyn talk 12:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Much (very) recent cleanup

A general Thanks :D | 72 {U|T|C} - 03:13, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

The main motivation has been to add better indication of profession-specific quests, but I figured while I was going to have to grot through hundreds of quests, missions, and locations I might as well update them to the latest and greatest. Glad that someone is finding it useful! --DryHumour 18:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Time zone tables.

We have the same discussion EVERY year for EVERY event. To make it short, concensus is for PST/UTC only (maybe PDT for the matematically challenged ones). Check any festival article and any festival article's talk page.--Fighterdoken 17:04, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I've made a proposal to formalize this at GWWT:GF#Time Zones. --DryHumour 17:37, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Table foramt

Read: Talk:Halloween_2009#Time_zones.2C_again..., there format for final tables. --Itay Alon 18:04, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Please feel free to contribute your opinions to the discussion at GWWT:GF#Time Zones. --DryHumour 18:06, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Quests

You said about doing the quests and such and about wanting help well me and Wyn are also helping do them , doing them in sections so right now im working on factions nooby ones and Wyn is doing the main factions ones, as far as i know the NF havent been done yet so could start on them if you wanted. Simzy 22:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey great! By coincidence that's exactly what I've been working on this afternoon. BTW, feel free to use {{Standard prerequisites}} and {{Offer dialog}} if you like to save yourself a little typing. --DryHumour 22:57, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Take a look

Dry, since you seem to have a better handle on templates than I do, could you take a look at an idea I have had. What I am trying to do is have a template that can be used on the Norn NPC pages (this idea could conceivably be ported and adjusted for other similar situations later) for dialogue. With help from Wyn, I have figured out a part of it, and have your template offer dialogue in that section. But I would like, since it is the same exact text, to be able to use that part in the larger template. Hopefully, you will be able to easily see what I mean from looking at the page. It is in my sandbox User:42/Sandbox. Check it out, let me know what you think, and if you have any questions, put them on my talk page, cause after I get this figured out, I am probably going to move the contents to a main space template and delete the work. 42 - talk 02:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I haven't gotten far enough in the game to have access to the Norn, so I can't be positive I understand what you're looking for. Based on User:42/Sandbox and on Beojorn, I hacked together User:DryHumour/Sandbox/Norn bounty dialogue. You're welcome to copy it if you find it at all useful. --DryHumour 03:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

That looks like it will work for what I need, except for the small adjustment of having to take out the name, as this template would be used on each specific NPCs page. The other thing is the ICON size which I can change simply enough. In the game, it is the size I had on my page. Was trying for accurate representation to reflect in-game dialogue. Thanks for the help, and when I get done with this, will have to pick your brain some more, templates like this are kicking my ass. 42 - talk 06:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, in User:42/NornResDialogueTest I have the proposed "programming" steps I am trying or at least thinking it would follow. I am used to that because of the programming I had in school, but unfortunately, when I am able to work on these templates is at the end of the day, and I am usually brain fried by then. 42 - talk 06:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd actually suggest leaving the name in, otherwise some of the dialogue won't quite follow the guidelines. The name could be defaulted to the page name to save some typing if you wished. (I've updated User:DryHumour/Sandbox/Norn bounty dialogue to demonstrate one way this might be done.) Scaling of graphics is always a bit tricky; I'd suggest trying to balance the visual impact of the two icons (particularly since the Norn icon is quite visually dense to begin with). --DryHumour 06:35, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The visual size difference is taken from judgement on it while literally staring at the screen when that dialogue box is up and running in game. That was the closest (at 31 px) I could judge them to be in size difference in game to here. Will take a look again, ty for the help, you will get full credit for the heavy duty tweaking. 42 - talk 06:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Beojorn is not a good idea to use for a finished product example. Check my sandbox page linked above and scroll down to the bottom. Those examples (without the comment about the dialogue missin on the actual page) is what I am trying for for finished product. Matter of fact, right after leaving this will go change end example, will just put name above dialogue section heading, from that line down is how I am looking for. 42 - talk 06:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The first part of the text, the initial dialogue, and the actual dialogue line is the exact same as the norn collectors in the areas. Was thinking of making that be one template, that would be used on the collector pages, and then have the norn hunting party dialogue template call the other one, give the "text" specific to each char to the template frontend, and the bigger template would show the end result listed on the bottom of the page. Multiple calls to offer would work, but was hoping to hide them within the larger template with the small front end. That big template would be able to call the offer dialogue template since that work was already done, but since the text passed appears in 2 spots in the finished product, was wondering f it could be passed back so the end result shows 2 times from one entry of text from the editor. 42 - talk 06:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The idea of refactoring into two independently usable templates is probably a good one. (Again, I've never been to that area, so my grasp of the requirements is not very strong.) If I understand you properly, you want to "save" the result of an expanded template and emit it twice. If so, that's probably not really necessary (although I believe it is possible by making clever use of #vardefine and/or subst). The overhead of expanding the template is quite small, and the page results are cached so there's probably little need to worry too much about efficiency. Remember Knuth: Premature optimization is the root of all evil. --DryHumour 06:58, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Re-edited Beojorn to show desired end result. 42 - talk 07:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

This isn't so much an optimization issue as much as trying to make it so that the editor has to enter the 3 specific parts of text when using this template, and the template does the work to present that text in the desired end result. It is also to standardize the text so that all pages this applies to have the same look, since the "dialogue chain" is exactly the same for each of the ones this would be used on. The reason for the big template to call the little one is the same reason as using the offer dialogue template, the work is already done. That "initial dialogue" section is what the collectors a player would talk to say, and since that section is exactly the same for all norn this applies to, why not re-use the existing template (java mindset, why make the same exact code, when you can re-use exisiting). 42 - talk 07:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

That seems reasonable. There's no trouble nesting templates, even quite deeply, so you can just include them as you see fit. I've updated User:DryHumour/Sandbox/Norn bounty dialogue and added User:DryHumour/Sandbox/Norn collector dialogue. With reference to "make it so that the editor has to enter the 3 specific parts of text when using this template", I assume that you didn't mean "make it mandatory to enter all three parts"? A common usage scenario will likely be that any given user may not have all three parts of the text handy, but it is best to encourage people to enter at least what they have. (This comes up fairly often in quest dialogues, particularly with the "ask" text.) It is usually best to arrange it so that a missing piece of data has either has a reasonable default (even, e.g., "Missing" etc.) , or so that the template avoids the missing data altogether. --DryHumour 07:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

There could be a default Missing text to be used if any of the sections are missing, and that would still show the format the way it would look, even without that. I have apparently not made it clear, the layout you are still working from seems to be incorrect. You have the idea of pulling the "collector" template into the main one, but the layout is still not there. If you scroll all the way down to the bottom of my sandbox page, you will see the end design I am trying for on this. Also, on User:42/NornResDialogueTest, I now have "ideas" on a possible template coded with how I think I want it to work to have the end result work. I also have on the beginning, a "flowchart" of sorts to show the steps I think the template would do, and the "front end" of it. (I am not picky about the names, I wanted to make it specifically different so the names didn't get confuzed with offer dialogue names.)

Also on that, in the specific example dialogue template, I used the "names" in triple braces to show where I wanted them to go in the end result, if used in the multiple offer dialogue template calls. Sorry if this isn't clear. 42 - talk 07:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Also, the part on the sandbox underneath the parameters section shows an example without anything specific, just using the i-text acc-text and dec-text placeholders, the intended end result look. I have been looking at your example text, and I just had an idea, going to go test it out. Will let you know when done, so you can peruse my hack job, and let me know what you think. 42 - talk 07:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm still not sure I totally understand what you're looking for, but I had another stab based on the examples at the end of User:42/NornResDialogueTest. (The details of the formatting I'll leave to you.) Since I've never seen the dialogues themselves in-game, I'm not too sure what the "secondary dialog" is for exactly, since it appears to be virtually the same as the "after defeat" dialog. I assume that's the bit you're interested in factoring out? If so, I probably wouldn't bother if I were you: it's probably overkill unless it's ever going to be used standalone like the "collector" part. Also, even if there's actually a distinction in-game – that revisits trigger the same dialog minus the line from the player – it doesn't really add much value on the wiki page: players will figure it out for themselves pretty quickly. (Although, again, I may be misunderstanding.) But if you really want to go ahead, it looks like you've got the hang of it and should be able to manage the necessary refactoring without any difficulty. As for myself, I definitely need some sleep! --DryHumour 08:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I think I have it licked, from your examples, and my own Irish descent bullheadedness. Check out User:42/Sandbox/NornNHPDialogue and User:42/Sandbox/NornInitDialogue to see what I mean.

The reason the text is the same, and needs to be presented seperately like that is because that is the text that happens every time you talk to that particular Norn, it isn't right off, and possibly could be left out, because you have to defeat them only once. The line of "how can I be a part of the hunt is done only once, after the very first time you defeat that particular Norn. Either way, check out those pages, and give me some feed back on them. I am calling it a night, it is well past my bed time. Thanks a lot for the help already. 42 - talk 08:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You're most welcome. Let me know if I can be of any more help. --DryHumour 15:33, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure if how I have my current "test bench" is set up to have it show a "default" text if the person didn't enter anything, and I don't know of any way else to "test" than to put it into production, and hammer out the kinks from that stage. I think, from reading the help template stuff on metawiki that I have it so it will work, gonna check once more to see. 42 - talk 16:30, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The usual way to test templates is to have a <noinclude> section on the template page containing an example (like the "Ogg" example on User:DryHumour/Sandbox/Norn bounty dialogue). Owing to the manner that the wiki substitutes and caches pages, you'll need to do a purge: either add ?action=purge to the end of the URL or, even simpler, click the "clock" to the left of your username in the very, very first line of the wiki page (which will purge the current page). Alternatively, just create another sandbox page which uses the template you want to test. --DryHumour 16:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I got it "working" except for one small detail, I have the "default" text showing when viewing the template page itself, but it loses something in the translation. The default text is not showing up in active use. Currently I have it in use on Ruven, with the "default" text entered in by hand. If you could take a look at Template:Norn bounty dialogue and make adjustments, it would be helpful. Didn't know about the clock thing, and I am not seeing it on this one, is it not there on talk pages? I was also under the impression that "preview" forced a refresh of the page. 42 - talk 17:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you have enough/the right parameters for that. How would your template handle Ragnvald? (Don't save, just preview). --JonTheMon 17:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, exceptional cases would require some manual input. We could certainly go with some sort of convenience template which wraps a name, a piece of text, and an {{Offer dialog}} to make it as painless as possible. (I haven't gotten that far yet myself, so I can't really anticipate what might be needed I'm afraid.) --DryHumour 17:32, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) The clock may be a user preference setting – sorry for any confusion. Preview will indeed refresh, but the template transclusion in the example will be from the last saved copy of the template, not the copy which you are presumably changing. For the template page itself, the thing to remember is that any bits not in an <includeonly> will be rendered directly, exactly as for any other normal page. (Effectively all parameters are treated as not set.) It is fairly standard to simply leave that as is, although you occasionally also see the body of the real template wrapped in <inlcudeonly>. Take a look at some other existing templates to get a feel for things. (Personally, I prefer to see the expansion, warts and all.) There's also GWW:TEMPLATES. --DryHumour 17:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I went with the situation I knew about. I did not know of the other ones, and the template can be added to as long as that addition is consistent along all of the NPCs it is used on. However, this isn't intended to be the "only" thing allowed to be used in dialogue. Dry is right, you can hand enter afterwards more specific items that only apply to that particular NPC. Or, if that text layout is the same on multiple NPCs, make another template to format it, letting the editor enter in the page specific information as this one did. 42 - talk 17:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Then please try to make the template flexible and robust enough to handle the various situations. --JonTheMon 17:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I can't provide any useful opinion on this specific instance, but JonTheMon is right in the general case: it tends to be preferable to have a "one size fits all" solution as that simplifies use and reduces confusion. That's just a rule of thumb though. If Ragnvald is the only exception, I don't think that adding the complexity necessary to deal with that one case is warranted. Likewise, if the general case is going to be a bear, I might consider two or more simpler templates to deal with the two or more common variations on the theme. Either way, this should probably be discussed on Template talk:Norn bounty dialogue so that others can weigh in. --DryHumour 17:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Just thought of something. This template could be modified to not force the == Dialogue == line to show. That way, if there is text that goes in between where the dialogue line and the rest of the template does happen to be different on pages, it can still be entered by hand. Other than that, the other text could be entered by hand, this would make the specific part this template covers usable as-is. Jon, feel free to edit the template to improve the situations you know about, I don't know them. 42 - talk 17:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Once again, I would like to ask you to please propose the changes to the formatting guideline pages before proceeding with this. I see it as being a lot of effort for zero benefit, and I highly doubt the community would approve of increasing the complexity with the use of multiple templates. -- Wyn talk 17:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Just for clarity, note that I am not the proposer. My only real contribution was to provide some help to User:42 with the templating. Further discussion probably ought to be on Template talk:Norn bounty dialogue, GWW:NPC, and anywhere else which is applicable. (Ideally not here. ) --DryHumour 18:02, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Tjorvi Throstson has the same format of text, and I suspect most of the blessing givers do as well, it's just not documented well. --JonTheMon 18:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

This dialogue line (and comments below) moved by User:42 to Template talk:Norn bounty dialogue page under "Flexibility" Dry, sorry for taking up so much of your talk page on this, when it should have been moved a lot sooner than this. 42 - talk 19:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem at all. Electrons are cheap . I'm more concerned that a wider audience should be able to find it in a less obscure spot and have their input. (Also inevitably some day this page will get archived and the discussion will be, for all practical purposes, lost to future archeologists.) --DryHumour 19:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you clarify your reason?

What's your exact reason for reverting my edit on Anvil Rock? You aren't being very specified. You claimed to be following GWW:LOCATIONS, yet you just reverted everything I did that's in accordance with it. The only thing I noticed that I did wrong was the change to the way affiliations are specified that I didn't notice. -- ab.er.rant 15:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I noticed the change to the "Charmable animals" section too. It's a bit odd to put "Animals" under "Charmable animals" though. -- ab.er.rant 15:33, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) My sincere apologies, apparent edit collision or inadvertent edit of an old version on my part. Not too sure how that happened. (Oddly I got two notification emails for your one edit.) The only thing I really intended to change was the "Foes" list, where the guideline I've been following is "[[foe type 2]]s ([[affiliation]])". BTW, have we decided that we're keeping the "Exits" sections? I had been removing them since they are missing from the main GWW:LOCATIONS page. (Obviously I don't mind either way, I'd just like to get it right since I've been working my way through all of the quests, missions, locations, and NPCs.) --DryHumour 15:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

The addition of Animals stems from the discussion GWWT:LOCATIONS#Headline links. It's a sort of a compromise between the people who wanted to have the headline linked, and those who didn't. --DryHumour 15:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh no worries about revert, re-reading your edit summary made me kinda guess it's to do with the NPCs section. You're more up-to-date on the guidelines than me anyway.

I just noticed the removal and discussion on the "Exits" section. I'm not so involved anymore so I don't have strong opinions either way. IIRC, the reason why I kept "Exits" was because neither the infobox nor the maps show which exit corresponds to which explorable area. The map only shows the names of outposts. Of course, it's just minor details. The direction could probably be moved to the infobox too. I'll try to remember not to add "Exits" cos... I did add a few in - after I vanquish a place, I just pop in to see what's missing and add them in (based on my now-outdated memory of GWW:LOCATIONS :D -- ab.er.rant 15:47, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

ooops

Thanks for catching that! -- Wyn talk 05:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem. --DryHumour 05:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Take another look, please?

Dry, could you take another look at the new template design? Prospective Norn bounty dialogue version 2 and let me know, if you understand, how I can get my default text to show up if nothing is used. I know on your Template:Offer dialog you have defaults used if nothing is entered, and I have been trying to pick apart your template, and reading the pages with the if/else stuff, and it is kicking my ass. 42 - talk 19:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Depending on the effect you want to achieve, you may not need anything more complicated than a default value in the expansion(s): {{{foo|bar}}} where bar is the result of the expansion if foo is not defined. I have updated User:DryHumour/Sandbox/Norn bounty dialogue to illustrate this technique. See also, for example, meta:Help:Template and meta:Help:Parameter default. --DryHumour 21:16, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I have the missing text being the alternate if the parameter is empty, I thought, but for some reason, the default text isn't showing up in actual use. If you look at the backside of Template:Norn bounty dialogue, you should be able to see how I mean. I have it in active use on one page, and for some reason, without anything in the parameters, it shows a blank where the text is supposed to be. I hand put in the text "missing text" where it was to make it happen. When the text is entered in the parameter, it displays just fine like it is supposed to. 42 - talk 01:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) If the page you have in mind is http://wiki.guildwars.com/index.php?title=Ruven&oldid=1795445, the difficulty is that an empty parameter is not the same thing as an undefined parameter. If you wish to provide a default when the parameter is either undefined or is empty, you need something like:

{{ #if: {{{foo|}}} | {{{foo}}} | bar }}

This is covered explicitly at the end of the first section of meta:Help:Template#Parameters. --DryHumour 06:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I tried reading that part, but I think because I am used to programming languages that usually have more visual space in them, it is confusing me more than it should. Also, you can use the {{ri}} tag for reset indent. I tried the same thing as you with the small tags until someone told me about the template. 42 - talk 07:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

As I understood it, {{ri}} is intended for use as a {{subst}} which is how I actually use it (likewise {{ec}}). But you are correct, either approach will work. --DryHumour 16:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Since the sole purpose (as I see it) is to post the reset indent tag, {{ri}} would seem to be the way to go, either way works, as you said.

Been re-reading, and I think I finally figured out what it is I am doing wrong, why the default isn't showing up. It was the "if" statements like I thought. Now all I need to do is figure out how to get it to act properly. 42 - talk 02:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) By way of example, the existing Template:Offer dialog allows an empty accept parameter which causes it to display the accept icon and the text "Accept" but without any quoted italicized text following. (I mention this because it uses an #if to achieve this, illustrating this technique.) The User:DryHumour/Sandbox/Offer dialogue template makes even more use of conditionals to provide a variety of default and fallback effects, and remains backward compatible with the original version. As outlined above, I would guess that you want something along the lines of:

{{ #if: {{{accept|}}} | {{{accept}}} | ‹missing› }}

which will expand into "‹missing›" if the parameter accept is either missing or empty. --DryHumour 03:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

http://wiki.guildwars.com/index.php?title=Wintersday_2009&diff=1835709

Oh so is that how you do it? Thanks for that I had no idea. I was just going to put: Snowball Dominance in there. Cheers for that mate. -- Lacky 19:05, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. "You are in a twisty maze of templates, all of them alike." --DryHumour 19:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Template:Standard prerequisites

got the autolink hero for you (: –alistic 04:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I was trying to avoid resorting to an extra parameter, but Mediawiki quoting and expansion rules are dark Gods…. --DryHumour 04:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

One more thing, when trying to use it with only |hero=Zhed Shadowhoof (or any other heroes), it will still display pre-searing info (as is default), when an Elonian character is not needed, there is no way to get rid of it. –alistic 01:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

The campaign parameter is mandatory. --DryHumour 02:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

{{Standard prerequisites|campaign=Nightfall|hero=Zhed Shadowhoof}}

• Required hero: Zhed Shadowhoof
• Elonian (Nightfall) character

Not what I'm aiming for. I only want the hero part. –alistic 02:29, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

My apologies: I misunderstood what you were asking for. Try

{{Standard prerequisites|campaign=Nightfall|nationality=any|hero=Zhed Shadowhoof}}

• Required hero: Zhed Shadowhoof

That should do the trick. --DryHumour 02:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! –alistic 03:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyvio much?

You sooo know better :P -- Wyn talk 04:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

How can posting screenshots of contents of a wiki to that wiki possibly be a copyvio? --DryHumour 04:37, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

If it's the browsers themselves, I invoke the principle of fair use. --DryHumour 04:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Fair use is not usable here. Upload them to photobucket or imageshack and link them, but they can't live on GWW. -- Wyn talk 04:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, but why on earth is the principle of fair use not applicable while copyright is? --DryHumour 04:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Arena Net's legal team has said no to Fair Use images repeatedly. -- Wyn talk 04:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Well it's their sandbox and their toys.... I'll move them to imageshack. --DryHumour 04:47, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Preq

why none? if any secondary profession is possible, then it's x/any. it's not that you can only accept this quest as long as you only have a primary and no secondary profession. —ZerphaThe Improver

Actually, yes it is. The template is used on articles like A Mesmer's Burden, in which the character must not yet have chosen a secondary. If you've found it used in other contexts where this is not the correct behaviour, chances are that inappropriate arguments are being passed. --DryHumour 00:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

silly me, it already slightly dawned at me when writing this comment while thinking of pre-Searing. sorry :P —ZerphaThe Improver 13:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

It IS under discussion, so put them back until the issue is decided.

Since it is under discussion, it would be more polite to leave the changes in place as an example. If the decision goes they way it seems to be going, the additions looks like it will be accepted. --Max 2 18:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It would have been more polite for you not to revert — without comment, multiple times — others who disagreed with you. The status quo should be preserved absent any consensus to the contrary. While the debate continues, no consensus has been reached, so no changes to the status quo should be made. --DryHumour 18:45, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

PuhLease. I did add comments on the discussion pages to begin with when I undid the undos. I also started the discussion on the formatting page. Going through and removing all of a persons edits without starting a discussion is very disrespectful and unfortunately typical of the 'in crowd' here. After a few repetitions sharp edges develop on one's sensibilities. --Max 2 19:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Pot. Kettle. Black. I did not break any rules or guidelines. But you definitely broke GWW:QUESTS#Requirements and you certainly broke the spirit, if not the letter, of the GWW:1RV. Moreover, mainspace changes are not the place to leave "examples", user sandboxes are. This was drilled into me, rather unpleasantly, by what you term the in crowd, of which I'm certainly no part. Your past track record does not exactly single you out as the easiest person in the world to work with and I'm beginning to see why. I suggest that we consider this water under the bridge and attempt to contribute constructively to the debate on GWWT:QUESTS. --DryHumour 19:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Could you please comment on the first two paragraph in the When to note the absence of a requirement section. --Max 2 00:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

"...added complexity" Huh?

--Max 2 03:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

You've added two nested template calls to non-trivial templates to no obvious benefit. --DryHumour 06:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

{{lookup}}, while comprehensive, is very simple in concept and implementation. (Its most complicated aspect is mixing the documentation of the property list with the implementation. That can be redone if you really think it is that complicated.) It is quite obvious what it does, making anything that uses it easier to understand. I contend that, overall, it makes things easier to understand, not harder. --Max 2 16:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I disagree that it improves comprehension. It requires the reader to access and understand two other templates. Measured by template count, page count, token count, nesting, branching, or total number of words of documentation, it has increased the complexity. My main concern is actually that it seems to be a solution in search of a problem. The existing mechanism works pretty well: the input argument space is small and well defined (and normalization actually only serves to expand that potential space). There are no other users clamouring for change -- indeed, I am one of the very few users of the template. Actually where help is really needed is in actually auditing the quests and ensuring that the information (not only prerequisites, but also rewards, foes, maps, etc.) is correct, up to date, and useful. In particular, boss maps would, I think, be more helpful to the vast majority of the audience than tweaking the meta-behaviour of the template. --DryHumour 17:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I have to disagree, It's one template used twice, not two separate templates and you do not have to understand the inner working of {{lookup}} to understand what it does. In addition to all the technical measures you call out, there is also the ability to hide complexity, which {{lookup}} does. Step back and look at the template as a piece of exposition rather than a programming exercise, and I think you will see that the {{lookup}} version is clearer. --Max 2 19:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I apologize for my misunderstanding: I thought there were two templates, {{normalize}} and {{lookup}} and didn't realize that they had been (or perhaps always were) a single template. However, my personal opinion remains that its use does not serve to clarify the workings of {{Standard prerequisites}} above and beyond what a simple {{switch}} statement would. (For my part, I find it slightly less clear, actually but that is obviously extremely subjective.) All of this being said, it is of course, just my opinion. As such, I have tried not to interfere with your work (with the exceptions of requesting due process, and the temporary rollback when the problem with EotN emerged). I have stated my case, and will leave it at that. --DryHumour 18:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

{{normalize}} has been replaced by {{lookup}} and template:normalize has been deleted at my request. As documented {{ lookup | property | something }} looks up the 'property' property of 'something'. --Max 2 19:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Also, I was reviewing the pre-Searing quests when certain people jumped on me with both feet (which did not stop me, but which I still resent) and an external disaster struck (which forced me to stop for months while I delt with it). You will find remnants of that review on the discussion pages in the form of check lists usable for generating DPL reports.

You mention 'foes' which is a part of the larger 'environmental impact'. For one thing, there should be an initial environment assessment for each zone, preferably with a map, not just a list of 'friends' and 'foes', but I'm not familiar enough with the graphic tools to generate them as needed. Then, quests that change the environment should describe both their temporary and permanent impacts. (Before and after maps with a button to blink-compare the two would be great.) If you think it might be worth doing, it could be a formal project with tutorials on the way to do these. --Max 2 18:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Something like that might be interesting, but I would definitely check to see if there is an audience (and support) for doing so before putting a great deal of effort into it. I was thinking in much smaller terms: to bring some of the "earlier" articles up to the standard of some of the later ones (and for boss maps specifically, I was thinking more of locations than quests, per se). For example, Jahai Bluffs, not that it is the non ultra plus (or even totally GWW:LOCATIONS compliant), but it does serve as a good comparative. --DryHumour 18:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I was basically doing that with the check list before the interruption. As noted in discussion elsewhere, the problem is keeping track of what has been done and what needs doing. Giving people credit for their reviews may help. --Max 2 19:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

LoopFunctions

Do you think this would be useful? --Max 2 16:29, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe that it is best to shy away as much as possible from treating a wiki as a programming exercise. It narrows the audience which is able to usefully contribute. It is worth mentioning in this connection that I have been asked on a number of occasions to consider using {{subst}} rather than the templates themselves. --DryHumour 16:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with not treating the articles as programming exercises. However writing templates is a kind of programming and having good tools helps. NOT having good tools also narrows the audience. The trick is to not simply use the tool for the sake of using it. Instead, use the tool when you need the function the tool provides.

I don't quite understand the reference to {{subst}}. Do you mean 'subst:' and why <nowiki>...</nowiki> instead of {{tl|...}}? --Max 2 17:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

{{subst}} is a function rather than a template: it is replaced by the result of expanding its argument. Effectively, the template listed as its argument is "inlined" when saved. One use of it is to make templates into "authoring" tools: if the author subst's them, subsequent editors only see the expanded text. In some cases this is perceived as desirable, and in other cases not: it is largely a matter of taste, however. For templates, I tend to apply the principle often attributed to Einstein: "As simple as possible, but no simpler." --DryHumour 18:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Mtew's template changes

Hey DryHumour, as you have been more involved in this template thing than I was, can you see if there are any quest pages that are currently "broken" after all these changes? Mtew has sent me an email stating that there are many that are broken now that he is blocked an unable to edit them, but I honestly don't see it. I admit that I have not kept up with the templates used and all that they do, so I may just be missing it. --Rainith 06:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll check. Did Mtew manage to get banned again? --DryHumour 06:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I hit him for the general disruption that his use of widely used mainspace templates has caused (as opposed to sandboxing it somewhere first), and his general ignoring/dismissing everyone who asked him to stop and explain himself / gain some sort of consensus. --Rainith 06:59, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I have tried to get through myself (this time and on several other previous occasions) but I have not succeeded either. (I actually suspect some type of personality disorder, but that is speculation on my part.) I'm ashamed to admit that I lost my temper for a while this time. It's been rather a long week, but I know that is a poor excuse.

Incidentally, I assume that under the circumstances, should it prove necessary, I am permitted to violate 1RR for this (and only this) very specific purpose? --DryHumour 07:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict x2) Out of curiosity and a desire to prevent this from getting any messier when mtew comes back, can you tell me what you find wrong with mtew's changes? Such as if he had gone through and changed everything, but the display didn't look any different (i.e., no duplicated lines of info)/ --Riddle 07:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

As far as I am concerned any necessary changes to fix things at this point would not be subject to 1RR as Mtew has claimed in the email he sent me that some of the pre-searing quests are broken, so they need to be fixed. If either of you were accused of breaking 1RR for fixing them, I would argue in your defense. I am in the same boat as you Riddle in that I couldn't see what difference either edit made, but as I said, I haven't paid attention to the templates used here for at least a couple of years, so I am quite out of practice. Whatever happens, I'll check back tomorrow later today it is late very early and I'm tired so I'm going to bed. --Rainith 07:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Put briefly, my motivation for the template (as its original author) was to reduce duplication of information on quest pages: the Pre/AA requirement is common to all of the Pre quests, so I put it in the template proper. It wasn't until well into this most recent debate that I began to understand that his goal was not to minimize duplication, but rather to enable simpler DPL queries, but by that time the debate was hopelessly charged. Both goals are reasonable, but in this case are at somewhat at cross purposes (although various solutions are possible). For my part, I would still argue against duplication, but I would obviously defer to community consensus. FWIW, my original reverts were based on a genuine belief that an honest mistake had been made and which I believed I was correcting. --DryHumour 07:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

There were only a half a dozen or so which others hadn't already reverted. If either of you feel that my actions were inappropriate, do please let me know. I actually quite dislike acrimony, and am not proud that I let myself get dragged in. I have to admit, the thing which bothered me the most was actually not so much the change itself but the total lack of discussion concerning what he was about to do; in particular, I lost my temper at "Having to clear everything with you slows things down." --DryHumour 07:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not a sysop so I can't say this with a lot of weight but I think your actions are appropriate. I also have to agree with your speculation about a personality disorder. He has on occasion ran out of meds and became very combative. He has depression, and it sounds pretty bad; even on his user page he says that his meds aren't enough lately. As far as PD goes, I don't think it's clinical but it's there (not sure what type, might be mixed), which makes it harder to try to communicate with him. As far as what I prefer, duplication of info on quest pages is distracting at best; though my frustration is echoed by others... I really had no clue what he wanted as an end product. My question is, how would simplifying DPL queries improve the usability of the wiki for the general public? (I'm asking this since I don't have much knowledge about dynamic page lists ^_^.) --Lania Elderfire 16:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I'm not sure what he has in mind for DPL: only he can answer that. DPL is employed, with great utility, e.g. on List of Prophecies quests, so there is certainly precedent. For my part, I will have to try harder to find some way of working with him. To that end I have an idea how both sets of requirements (minimal duplication; ease of DPL) can be achieved using a new template call specifically to make DPL easier embedded inside {{Standard prerequisites}}. I'll try to mock something up in my sandbox over the weekend. On the other hand, if we can't reach some sort of compromise, I think I will have to recuse myself in order to avoid further contributing to the problem. (I have already done so in the case of a previous disagreement we had, and it did seem to help.) --DryHumour 18:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Mtew mailed me something of an explanation of what he was trying to do, but I'm not versed enough in template coding and DPL to understand it. I suggested to him that when he comes back he posts a proposal on the template's talk page with what he wants to do and to get peoples opinions on it before he proceeds. I don't know if that will happen but I did tell him that proceeding the way that he has been, i.e. going full steam on the changes as everyone else is yelling "Stop! WTF are you doing?" won't work and will result in more blocks for him. --Rainith 23:32, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Formatting templates project

I've set up an area for creating new formatting templates here. That page provides an over-view of what I intend to do. Please comment. --Max 2 19:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

New Project — Guideline Report

Please take a look at this. --Max 2 20:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. Please comment here on the test template usage report. --Max 2 20:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

1RR

Please don't break the GWW:1RR again. Revert #1 and #2 on Defend the Wall. --Silver Edge 12:03, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Apologies; I didn't realize that reverting two different contributors for a minor formatting change was considered a breach. --DryHumour (talk) 12:18, 30 December 2014 (UTC)