User talk:Mtew/flames

‌		‌	‌	General	‌		Talk		‌	Characters	‌	‌	Diaries	‌	‌	Projects	‌	‌	My templates	‌	‌	Special Pages	‌

‌		‌	‌	Archive 1	‌	‌	Archive 2	‌		Flames		‌	The Sewer	‌

This is the discussions for User:Mtew that in MY opinion contain more heat than light. I will apply the same rules as I use on User talk:Mtew except that the 'reasonable' rule will be relaxed. Mtew 14:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

May I suggest....

Wiki on a stick? Your personal experimentations are clogging recent changes here, and, as what is basically a personal version of the wiki, it should be hosted on a personal site, not on the userspace of a public wiki. Thank you. Lord Belar 22:28, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Please explain clogging recent changes here. Maybe you mean Your personal experimentations here are clogging recent changes,, but I still don't see how that is happening, but I'd take your word on it if that is what you mean.

The stick thing is interesting, but I am not running a Microsoft system, so I really doubt it would work. I am thinking seriously about putting up a local WIKI server to test things on, but my main project is based on Guild Wars and duplicating the entire WIKI would probably be messing too close to the bounds of copyright violations. mtew 23:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

It just looks like you're testing tabs and wikicode, which isn't very Guild Wars-based; I'm sure you can test that code on your own test wiki - once you're done with the testing, you can put the finished product here. You'll even be able to install your own extensions, meaning you won't have to rely on the community or ArenaNet for the software extras. Also, I'm not sure how your project belongs on this wiki; it just seems like you're using its tools and content for your own purposes (which probably won't serve the wiki in the end).

As to clogging recent changes, Belar means that the multiple edits you're making in a short amount of time are creating multiple entries in special:recentchanges. -- Brains12 \ talk 23:35, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. The tabs are intended to be used in My Region Summary Project. It has heavy cross navigation requirements. I have just finished the third milestone in rewritting the folder tab templates and have hit a snag trying to get to the fourth. I think I will need poke's assistance if what I am trying to do is even possible. I will not be working on that until I have heard from him.

I did mark all the changes I made to my own pages 'minor'. I was under the impression that made it clear that they were low priority for review and put less load on the reviewers as a result.

mtew 01:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

"Clogging recent changes here" is simple English, and means exactly what it says. Given your failed attempt to criticize my grammar, I am surmising that the aforementioned is not your native language, and/or you are quite dumb. Furthermore, please fix your usage of punctuation marks in quotations, an elementary matter, before criticizing my choice in word order.

Most wikis run on servers running Apache Linux, so that is immaterial. Unless you mean you're running Mac OS X, in which case you would most definitely fall under the second category of the second sentence of the first paragraph. Before crying copyright limitations, I would suggest familiarizing yourself with the basic premise of a wiki, as to not show your utter ignorance so plainly. Thank you.

Lord Belar 23:38, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Personal attacks are unnecessary and a violation of GWW policy. -- Wyn 23:47, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I said 'close', trying to be polite. mtew 01:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

English IS my native language. I was NOT criticising your grammar. You were abusing the verb 'clogging', applying it to the whole WIKI rather than to the review system. The result was unclear, not ungrammatical, and I asked for an explanation, not a correction. The different word order produced a slightly different meaning, shifting the emphasis from the WIKI as a whole to the changes. Brains12's clarification was sufficient and confirmed my speculation that you were talking about change tracking.

And you fail to specify your referent properly again. I presume you are talking about the text at the link target. Both categories reference WindowS, the Microsoft product, not the X-Window (singular) system nor the OS-X equivalent.

As for servers, I am well aware that Apache is the preferred HTTP server, but there are some indications that the server here is of the IIS variety.

Also, there is a thing called a 'collection copyright', and some of the material on the WIKI is NOT covered by the GFDL. Further, I was not crying copyright limitations. I was saying that I didn't know enough to feel comfortable copying the whole thing.

You are getting very close to a NAS violation with your response, Calling people 'dumb' (when you mean 'stupid', but it realy means 'unable to speak') and 'ignorant'. You might want to look up the term 'projecting' as used in psychology.

mtew 01:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Note: The following text was written by Belar and I'm just posting for him, as he is currently unavailable to do so. Copyright, attribution and resposibility for the content lays by Lord Belar alone.

»I fail to see how using the basic SVO format of English could confuse you, especially since 'clogging' and 'wiki' don not even appear in the same clause, so unless your browser can't display commas, it's perfectly clear. My examples of Apache Linux and OS X were simply to demonstrate that Windows was not a requirement for running Wikimedia software, it simply means you won't have a step by step guide for installation. I don't give a damn what this server is running, the only requirement for my example to be valid is that there exists, somewhere, an Apache server with Wikimedia. Before saying anything else about copyright on this wiki, I strongly suggest that you read the contents of the below link ('these licensing terms'), which details the copyright on this wiki. A 'NAS violation?' What do you mean? Wikipedia returns many results for 'NAS,' but I fail to see what an Alzheimer's charity, a Greek village or any of the plethora of other options available has to do with this wiki or the conversation at hand. 'Dumb,' when used within the common English vernacular, is a synonym of 'stupid,' etc., and is not often, at least in this day and age, to indicate 'mute.' You may wish to look up the term 'Asperger' as used in psychology, as well as 'hypocrite' in standard English. Also, 'wiki' is not typed in all caps. Lord Belar 01:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

« End.

Also here is something I want to add: The server the wiki is running, is in fact a Unix machine. Apart from that there is no difference to Windows or Linux servers - just install a webserver with php and MySQL as the database (or XAMPP if you like) and you can get a wiki run for yourself. From what I saw in your pages, I don't think you currently really need any references to existing pages and especially to its content on GWW. All you currently do is building up a structure and getting your templates work. But that you can also do alone with other link titles or even redlinks. poke | talk 01:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

If this was a news group, Belar would have just earned a place in my 'ignore' filter. He seems to have quite a nasty disposition. (Appology: I meant NPA, not NAS. Dyslexia.)

Thank you for the information about the server. IIS servers are a lot more delicate than Apache, which I thought might explain why you and others are so worried about it.

The current incarnation of my project is pretty much stand-alone, but I wanted to get something with the right pieces in the right places before using DPL to do the look-ups. As it stands, it would be a maintenance nightmare. As TheRave noted, it duplicates much of the information already available on other pages. It should get the information from those sources. In particular, much of the information is available as infobox parameters. What is not available could be added as additional parameters. (The infobox does NOT need to be changed to use the extra information.)

I am missing the significance of 'link titles' and 'redlinks'. I suspect they have something to do with display text and links to non-existant pages. More information would be appreciated.

mtew 03:02, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Pigs

You are in violation of GWW:1RR. Please discuss things on the talk page if you believe you've discovered something. A screenshot of the quest log would be an example. Backsword 03:36, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I have only UNDONE this once! This IS a repeatable quest. It may also be a mini-game. The Quest infobox provides much more information in an accessible form than a bunch of category tags. For one thing, the list of repeatables is built using DPL and reflects the quest documentation automatically. mtew 03:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[1] [2]. Screaming that you are right is not helpful either. If you are in possession of evidence that we are wrong, please present it on the talk page of that article. Backsword 04:12, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

What's this with the Royal "we"?!?. Yes, I reverted it ONCE. You will note that the quest type is Mini-game. The mini-game list is NOT updated automatically and does NOT provide information on Campaign and Region in a searchable form. The quest infobox does. As for shouting, something is needed to get your attention. mtew 04:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

....I just linked your two reverts. Accusations of sockpuppetry are also silly, just as shouting. If you want to add info to the minigame list, do so. That's unrelated.

But again, the correct thing is to present your data on the talk page of that article. You have a belief, you make claims and all that is fine. But when you get challenged, don't revert war, don't make accusations, don't shout. Just make your case on the talk page of the article. Backsword 04:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The first was NOT a revert. It was a change to a modified infobox invocation. What is this about sock pupets? I was talking about your abuse of the pronoun "we" where you should have said "I". The sequences, whatever they are, were listed as quests for at least 18 months. There are tools available to search and extract information from infoboxes. There are no such tools for mini-games. By removing the infobox, you messed up the existing lists, making them incomplete.

Your tone is abusive. Either calm down and think straight or shut up. mtew 05:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Seing as you refuse the issue, as well as resort to outright lies, acusations and personal attacks, it's very hard for me to AGF. But I'll make one last try:

Perhaps you believe that the 'undo' function is what a revert is. That's not the case~. In the context of a wiki community it means, quoting from policy, A revert, in this context, means undoing, in whole or in part, the actions of another editor or of other editors.. Do note the 'in part' section.

And in any case, refusing to discuss just means you will be outside of concensus. Backsword 03:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

YOU are NOT the sole determiner of what the consensus is in spite of your use of "we".  In fact YOU have been told multiple times to behave yourself.  YOU are the one who is being uncivil.  YOU are the one messing things up.  And YOU are the one that has been attacking me. 

I am NOT refusing to discuss this.  I am only insisting that the discussion proceed in a civil and rational fashion.      mtew 05:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

You have a peculiar notion of civil and rational. I'm only commenting on this to point out that it is not allowed on this wiki. Backsword 14:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

At this point both of you need to calm down. Backsword, you're not explaining things clearly, the use of "we" is a bit out of context, and you're not AGF'ing enough. Mtew, technically I do think you did do 2 reverts since that first edit Backsword linked to was a revert to a (changed) older version. Also, you're dealing with a single user: try to bring in other opinions/users to get a bigger picture. --JonTheMon 05:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments weren't directed at anyone but mtew so they didn't provide context both of us were aware of. Short summary: Wongba¹ changed this article from it's earlier erronious content. Mtew's² comment about me messing things up refers to this edit which caused problems at List of repeatable quests. As he has refused to comment, he hasn't objected, so I'm changing things now. Backsword 14:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

1. Who is not me.
2. Who is not me, either.

(Reset indent) I moved this to the flames archive because that is what it is. I do NOT appreciate your resurrection of it here Backsword. If you wanted to continue this, you should have done it in 'Flames'. From now on, Backsword, STAY OFF MY MAIN TALK PAGE!

halp, halp

I'm being oppressed. Lord Belar 03:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

ABSO-DAMN-LUTELY! I am allowed to and will remove personal attacks that do not contribute to the discussion.      mtew 03:07, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

It was six characters, how could it be NPA? I can't even fit "Fuck you, asshole," in that space. Also, learn to speak English, 'damn' cannot be placed in the middle of words, only 'fuck' can. Lord Belar 03:36, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

^ QFT 03:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

We've been through this before.  YOU are the one unfamiliar with the older traditions of the English language as spoken in the United States.  That happens to be profanity, not just vulgarity, and indicates a desire for eternal, not just momentary, torment.  Further it was not an 'NPA', it was a 'PA'. 'NPA' is the rule you broke.  Now stay off this page unless you have something constructive to contribute.      mtew 04:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay I've reverted that a wee bit. QFT isn't a personal attack, it might be borderline trolling but it's still not really such a breach of policy as being in need of being deleted. Also profanity isn't against the rules of this wiki, only aiming it at a person/group of people is. Thus I've uncensored one of the comments, I've let the other one stay censored as it could be interpreted as a personal attack from one viewpoint, although from another it isn't. I would rather we stop this conversation now though guys as really its just acting as flame-bait. EDIT: although Mtew please feel free to archive the convo if you don't want it on your talk page. -- Salome 04:10, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I was not commenting on your meaning, just your grammar. Also, on this wiki, and every other wiki of which I have been a part calls it an 'NPA' after the name of the policy, not necessarily what the comment is. You have still failed to state why it is an NPA in the first place, but rather neatly sidestepping this issue with tangential and factually incorrect rants. Additionally, do not censor my comments, this isn't Australia. As a side note, "English language as spoken in the United States" is not of the "older traditions." Lord Belar 04:14, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Belar: You were censored because the comment did not belong in that discussion.  Further, you do not read very well; you mix up what you want to hear with what was actually said.  You have been told to stay off this page unless certain conditions are met.  Now do it!

Salome: In context, it was a personal attack in my opinion, and was also trolling (an attempt to disrupt the discussion).  If what he said had had any constructive content, I would have left it.  He's done this kind of thing before on my page and has been relagated to the flames archive as a result.  He has been told twice now to stay off this page unless he has something constructive to say.  Since this particular section is almost entirely heat and noise, I will be archiving it fairly quickly.      mtew 05:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

stop baiting mtew, m8 AIG 04:49, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

He's just making a fool of himself, and now I am reminded that he is not rational, I will be ignoring him.      mtew 05:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

That is what you have said before, but you have yet to provide a reason. So I ask you thus: Why? If it is true that my reading comprehension is poor, then do point out instances where that is so, as your unsubstantiated claims seem merely a failed attempt to sully my character. Furthermore, I do not believe you in any position to be making orders, so do kindly desist. In re your second paragraph, since when has your opinion carried so much weight as to silence commentary? Also, you threat to ignore my commentary seems awfully petty and childish. Isn't it about time you stood up and took responsibility for your censoring actions? As an addendum, I would suggest that you become proficient with use of the space bar. Hint: It's the big one between the alt keys. Lord Belar 05:27, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Balor: See the top of this page.  Stay OFF this page unless you are making constructive comments.  That is NOT subject to debate.  Your latest addition was nothing more than a personal attack.      mtew 05:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Please familiarize yourself with the policies on this wiki. You cannot remove comments as you see fit on your talk page, nor any other talk page, for that matter. This page is a community space to contact you, and is subject to all the policies of other talk pages. You may archive comments, but not remove them unless they are blatant personal attacks. There is no "No Profanity" policy here, so you can't censor that, either. If you don't like these rules, you are free to not participate on this wiki (which I'm sure no one wants), but if you wish to continue to participate here, then please know and follow the policies. Again, profanity in itself does not constitute a personal attack, and therefore you have no right to censor any user's comments just because they contain it. --★KOKUOU★ 06:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Read the policies yourself! There is a link to it at the top of this page and has been there since I created this page. The material was deleted because it was a personal attack. The censored text was abusive. I do not remove material that I disagree with. I remove material that is patently false and abusive. The material that Belar posted and I removed was BOTH. You may like the guy, but that is no excuse for letting him break the rules and attack people. mtew 07:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay Mtew, i'm not getting into a revert war with you over this. I'be re-added belar's comment as Kokuou was right in everything he said to you. Look I'm not daft and I'm well aware that Belar was baiting you in response to you deleting a rather glib comment of his earlier (again which wasn't really a blatant direct attack). Ultimately no Belar shouldn't be baiting you, however in this instance that doesn't give you the right to delete his comments if they fall within the boundries of the policies. Which in this instance they do. Also their is no "no profanity" policy on this wiki, thus if you dont like that language on your page please just archive this topic now, so its dead and buried. I honestly am not trying to get at you here, but it's just that you are falling foul of a few of our policies, which although I understand your reasoning for doing so, isn't changing the fact that it's still against policy. I've asked Belar to drop this convo with you and now im asking you to do the same. -- Salome 07:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Salome: Get off the 'profanity' schtick. I was the one using the profanity. Belar was merely being vulgar. That was not the reason I censored his text. He was being abusive. He was attacking. Those are violations of this WIKI's policy. Also, check the flow of the conversation. He was mildly annoyed with what I did. Understandable. My response was to essentially show him my middle finger all by its lonesome. That upset him and he started getting irrational. Things have gone down-hill from there with him leading the charge. He went so far over the line that anybody who isn't taken in by his act would see that, especially if they bothered to review his past comments. Now I admit I was baiting him and in a very sneaky way, but he's the one breaking the rules. The poor sod does not know when he is out-classed. He simply can not read what is written. For example he failed to understand the distinction between old traditions in US English and that British English has other traditions that are possibly older. I cut him off because he was simply breaking the rules too obviously. If he had any sutilty I would have been glad to continue the discussion, but I do not enjoy abusing puppies. mtew 08:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

As Salome and Kokuou have indicated, unfortunately, it's you that are violating policy by deleting/censoring your talk page. Regardless of what notice you place on the top of it, it is not yours to regulate, it's the community's based on consensus for the Userpage policy. Furthermore, you need to remove your rules that are in conflict with wiki policy. My suggestion would be to just stop feeding the trolls by simply ignoring them rather than responding to them and escalating the situation. -- Wyn 07:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Wyn: Please open your eyes. Balar was doing personal attacks. The policy states that personal attacks may be deleted and by implication do not have to be archived. The only possible point of conflict between the rules I stated and the WIKI policy is that I make the decision on what is an attack. mtew 08:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I have read through everything that has been posted today, and none of it qualifies as anything other than trolling. There is no NPA violations on this page. I have also reverted your censorship of profanity, since as has been pointed out, we do not have a 'No Profanity" policy (it's been proposed and failed on numerous occasions) so you just have to deal with it. Once again, I suggest you just ignore it and move on, and simply archive this section tomorrow. -- Wyn 08:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Then read it again. Trolling is aimed at being disruptive. His intent is not to be disruptive. His aim is to be insulting. And note, the problem is NOT 'profanity'. I was the one using profanity. Belar was merely vulgar. The edit was to remove abuse, not to clean up the language.      mtew 08:41, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

You have been informed by 2 admins that there is no NPA violation in what Belar has posted. He is trolling you and you are giving him exactly what he wants. simply stop responding. His actions are not disrupting the wiki, though I'm sure they are disrupting you. As such, you can feel free to archive this at your convenience, but you can not delete it, or censor it. -- Wyn 08:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

And Admins are gods?  Come off it.  You know better than that.      mtew 09:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) There have been several "vulgar" pieces of text posted on this wiki in the past, but nothing on your page so far has been vulgar, in the sense that it is used on this wiki. "Vulgarity" here refers to a few things here, including obscene, disgusting, or racist comments/posts, but trolling (the only type of disruptive comments that have been posted on your page thus far) is not one thing that is subject to removal by the user on his or her talk page. Archive, yes; censorship, no (as much as you may dislike it). Lord Belar may have made an immature move by posting disruptive comments on your page in the first place, but then your "response was to essentially show him [your] middle finger all by its lonesome." This is neither rational nor mature, meaning any further comments or trolling attempts by Lord Belar were brought on by you alone. The appropriate response you should have taken was to notify him (politely... well, at least without breaking NPA) that you don't appreciate his actions and ask him to stop. Any further disruption should have been reported to the admins, and they will take care of things from there. That is what they are here for. Just as you are allowed to post snide responses back at an user (even if they "started" it), they are free to do so with you, providing neither break GWW:NPA. That being said, this isn't a schoolyard, and neither of you are children, so I would advise at least one of you take the high road (i.e. be mature) and ignore the other. --★KOKUOU★ 09:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Um, racist comments are more than vulgar. They usually fall into the 'fighting words' category. Also, get OFF the vulgarity and profanity schtick. I couldn't care less about profanity and vulgarity per se. It came up only because Balar couldn't understand the difference between the two. Just another example of his ignorance. In my opinion, Belar went beyond the NPA line. THAT is the problem as far as I am concerned. And yes, I started it. And escalated it. With malice. But I did not ATTACK him. I basicly told him to STFUp. Not cool, but I am off my meds and grumpy as all hell. Beware the grumpy old Max! He is real touchy and gets real nasty when attacked. mtew 09:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Map size?

What is that supposed to be? And what is it used for? poke | talk 11:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

See the Template:Location infobox talk page. It is a DPL accessible value of the information in the notes section. I will be using it to calculate regional contributions to the cartography titles. I know that information is, at best, approximate, but WTH. mtew 11:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Will this DPL report be used by anyone else than you? And why do you think we need a dynamic list for that? Those values are quite static so making a list once should be enough and would not involve that many useless edits on the location pages themselves (which will actually ping a lot people)... poke | talk 11:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

As mentioned, I was asked about cartography titles ingame, and was going to point the player to the report when finished. It is fairly static information, but a static table would not track corrections if there are any. mtew 11:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Corrections of approximations are not really helpful imo; there won't be any correct values.. And I don't see where the problem with a static list would be. Even when values are updated, either somebody will notice that and update it in the list as well, or we have two different approximate values - which is no problem at all, because none of those values will be perfect.

What I want to say, I repeatedly saw you adding parameters or other information-like things to the non-visibile area of articles now, and all you want to do with it is always some DPL report. However you make those reports only in your user space, rather inaccessible to other users (because often the lists were not easy to understand or they are somewhere very deep in your complex subpage system) and also not really understandable what those lists actually do, because the code is in general very complex (too complex actually) and impossible to understand from other perspectives. And again, all those things happen in your user space only, but still involve quite a mass of edits in the main space without any positive result for the normal wiki visitor.

Maybe you are a bit obsessed with DPL :/ poke | talk 12:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Having to update information in two different places is almost never a good idea.

Yes, the reports are too complex for general use as they stand. They are tests of stuff that could and, if there is no objection, will be simplified and added to main space articles. mtew 12:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I will be the first to admit that I am not as technically knowledgeable of the wiki and its workings as Poke is, however personally all these recent changes you are making both in regards to this project and the backdoor link project you started before, I personally object too as their is no inherent worth in these edits to anyone other than yourself. However I can foresee your edits causing a great deal of confusion to the average wiki user, as to be honest they confuse the hell outta me. Regardless of my personal stance however, changes of this magnitude across the wiki should reach some kind of consensus, however even when you have asked for peoples input, you have not waited for that input before proceeding. I think that as a community we should decide if we want to keep any of these edits you have made, (both this current project and your previous project), thus I would advise you to stop adding this edit for now until we reach a consensus. -- Salome 12:25, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

That is totally unreasonable. These are fairly big projects and waiting for everyone to agree would mean they would never get done. I have been careful NOT to make changes that would be seen by the normal WIKI user, so the confusion is limited to (possibly over-curious) people who are watching minor edits on the recent change list. If the changes were more visible, you would be correct, and I would wait before continuing. If I insisted that others help with the project, that would also require waiting for agreement. Since neither is the case, I will proceed unless a good reason is provided to wait. I see this as an inappropriate attempt to impose your personal opinion upon me. I also resent your disparaging remarks; just because you can't see their worth does not mean the edits contribute no value.

Also, it is 'back-link', not 'backdoor'. mtew 13:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to a wiki then, mtew. A wiki is not a semantic database that holds all data in a fine format and just puts it together as it is needed. A wiki is a set of static articles; a wiki basically implicates redundancy. All those nice extensions like DPL just are a small tool to add some dynamic content to those static set. That those tools however get their information directly from those static and textual articles, is a big loss in the dynamic aspect because it takes a lot of time. Do you actually know how much time just generating such a list from the template's parameters take? And it will be generated whenever _any_ of the used articles changes, that means most probably multiple times a day.

We have other static lists on the wiki, for example for a quite similar title: Vanquisher. That list works perfectly fine, looks good and is very easy to change - for everybody. Static lists are in most cases much easier to work with and doesn't involve that many time to generate, because the content is just static.

I have the feeling that you are actually not really interested in other's opinions at all. There were a lot of comments to prior projects of you, where I or others have shown clear confusion or doubt of the usefulness of your actions/projects. However all you did was answering with often ungrounded or just plain sentences such as "Having to update information in two different places is almost never a good idea." whereas others have said a lot in different directions before. And then you just continue or work on some other project again without really resolving that..

If you really want to do such things, like the game link backlink lists (or whatever you may call it), you should rather think of making your own wiki on your personal website or just write your own database application that includes all those information you want to gather. poke | talk 12:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed with Poke -- Salome 12:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

You are simply wrong about a WIKI not being a database as you know very well. It does pull the various pieces together when requested. That is what makes WIKI coding work. Also, semantics is about meaning, and the important part of a WIKI is not the bits and bytes it contains. The important part of a WIKI is the meaning of the information it contains. I happen to see ways that the semantic linkages can be improved. I may be going about it backwards however.

Yes, the lists do get regenerated when a referenced article is changed but only when someone pulls up the list if I understand correctly. If this was not true, load times for complex reports would be much faster.

As for the vanquisher kill counts, the counts in the notes on each explorable area page do NOT get updated automatically. The correct way to do this would be to have a template that pulled the specific values from the lists and inserted them into the page. Learning how to do that is on my personal 'to do' list, but is fairly low priority since it would take a fairly heavy effort on my part to dig out that information. Maybe you knows how to do it. (I suspect that the string manipulation extension would be needed to do this right.)

I do consider other peoples opinions. If they are based on sound judgement, I do adjust my actions in accordance with those opinions. However, if the opinion is basically "I don't understand you and I insist that you stop", I consider that the other person is being unreasonable. SysAdmins have more power and their opinions carry more weight as a result, but that does NOT mean they are always right. You should notice (and obviously have not) that the Al and At templates have NOT been created.

Finally, copying the contents of the whole WIKE is impractical and might even be illegal, so GET REAL! mtew 13:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I know you're trying to add useful information and all, but you were overly trigger happy on this last one. For something that hits many pages, you should have waited at least for more feedback before continuing. --JonTheMon 13:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Huh? Adding 'map size' parameters to nine pages is 'many pages'. Considering there are over 200 explorable area pages and that I have not touched outpost and town pages, I think you exaggerate for affect. mtew 13:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

To be fair, I just checked rc quick and saw the last few entries were these edits, and inferred that it was just the tip of the iceberg w/o looking closer. --JonTheMon 13:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) A fundamental aspect of editing a wiki is the ease of which to do so. DPL calls or variables and wickerwackers and fipfops aren't supposed to be on every article - it's just too complicated for the average wiki user, and even too complicated for the experienced wiki users. Making everything synchronised by adding complicated code which would just confuse experienced users let alone a novice user isn't a very good idea. It's much easier to manually edit pages - and it works, too. It's been working for three or four years, in fact.

While DPL can be useful for those special circumstances, it shouldn't be an every-day common-usage template. I know you're having fun experimenting with it and all... but is it really appropriate or necessary? -- Brains12 \ talk 14:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

To throw my two cents in... if everyone is questioning the usefulness of whatever the hell it is you're doing, you should probably rethink it. Instead of writing off each person's opinion down as unreasonable, consider that you're just too out in left field to make that call on your own. Remember, we want you to get consensus because that's the wiki way - all that bullshit you were spewing about wikis being this and that up above? Yeah, wikis are based on consensus. Don't use "it's a wiki" to defend your pet project then throw "it's a wiki" out the window when it comes to getting consensus. -Auron >8< 14:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes DPL is the right tool, sometimes it isn't. To find out, creating test reports "deep in userspace" seems a good way to go. Arguing each case on its merits also seems like a good way to go (and I just did on Template_talk:Location_infobox#Add_map_size_information_-_not_displayed). But brains12 goes further than that, and I perceive other contributors here to demand the same: a request that amounts to "do not meddle with DPL on this wiki", maybe changed to "do not engage on a DPL project without presenting it first and getting consensus". Is that how this wiki always does projects? --mendel 14:35, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Brains: The additional parameters to templates do NOT invoke DPL; they can be used by DPL. Nor do my changes to main space pages use variables.

'Fun' is a bit slippery in this context. I am trying to find some large scale patterns. That might be 'fun' in some sense, I guess, but not quite what I usually associate with 'fun'.

Auron: So I can't play in left field? Why not?

I see many of the more intrusive personalities sticking their 'two cents' in, but that is NOT everyone. And while you may consider abstractions bullshit, I don't. As for consensus, the consensus I read says "I don't see why" with "Be careful you don't mess up" implied, not "Don't do that". There is a big difference between the two. mtew 14:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Are you reading the same page as everyone else? -- Salome 15:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes. mtew 15:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

mendel, it is more like "don't edit every page and add parameters to the infoboxes, just to make it possible for yourself (only) to play with DPL" or something similar :/

mtew, I never said the vanquisher list is dynamical or the lines on some of the explorable areas are dynamical based on the list (which would be possible btw). If you read my comment above then you will notice that I was highlighting the list of being static and working fine. I don't want every page to get other content from some other page automatically and update everything when something changes. Static content is fine and it is actually the initial idea of a wiki; for example one evidence for that would be the fact that all those nice parser functions like #if and such, which add the possibility of working dynamically with content, are not a core feature of a normal MediaWiki installation. Yes, we have those extensions installed to make some things easier (for example the infoboxes, to display the correct things based on the given expressions), but that still doesn't imply that we have to make everything dynamic. A wiki is not based on data; it is based on articles, and articles are static.

I really don't mind you playing with DPL in your userspace, but it does annoy me, when you edit a lot of articles in the main space, just to get your things working without any positive effect of those edits to the other users (you have 710 edits in the main space at the moment, and I think most of those edits are just for your projects). And it does annoy me, that when you are asked about what you are doing, you are not really responsive to the questions about it (such as for your At/Al templates, there are still fundamental questions about what those templates are meant to do!) or even ignore the questions at all.

"I don't see why" is a lot more negative than "Yes, do it" or "good idea, go on" – and people can't say "don't do this" if they don't even get the idea behind your actions. So they ask for it. poke | talk 15:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I didn't say the vanquisher list was dynamic either. I'll go even further – I am very probably going about this the wrong way. However, there should be a mechanism that at least semi-automatically synchronizes the pages and the list.

Something along the lines of a bot run. When synchronization is needed, have the bot put the number into the places marked with special tags or comments.

clicking on the number should take you to the master list.

The same basic mechanism should be used to maintain the cartography information. In fact I think some general purpose cross reference synchronizer that is NOT fully dynamic like DPL, but not static either, is needed.

As for the 'Al' template, you asked a good question. The answer involves prospective uses and trying to present the information in a way that clearly shows why it would be useful. The 'clearly' part is very difficult to get right. I am not ignoring you requests for clarification. I want to get the ideas across. I just am having a hard time doing it, at least in part because I don't see why you don't see what I am talking about. When I see that happening, I have learned that just running my mouth will not help. I have to think like the other guy and put the idea into terms that the other guy will understand. That takes a LOT of dream time to accomplish. Sometimes providing an answer is impossible because the values I use do not exist for the other guy. I might be able to fake something that would pass, but I try not to do fakes. mtew 15:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I think "fakes" are useful because they are prototypes of what you want to do. And a working/semi-working prototype is immensely useful for communicating what you are trying to do. --JonTheMon 15:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

:-) You are talking about 'prototypes'. I meant 'fake' arguments in the sense of 'not genuine'. mtew 16:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Mtew, I don't think anyone truly understands what you are trying to accomplish and that includes yourself. Further to this I don't think any of us think the project is worthwhile other than yourself. One cannot gain consensus on this at the moment, as no one really understands just what the hell it is you are trying to achieve. Therefore I would propose that you make a mini version of whatever it is you are trying to achieve within your own userspace, as an example of what it is you are hoping to achieve, before continuing with any of these projects that you have set yourself recently. Then people can actually give you proper input and then we can gain common consensus on this issue. EDIT: not my best paragraph ever, but you get the point. -- Salome 16:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Mtew, you just don't get it, huh? There is no need for dynamic lists - this is a wiki! :/

And if you are not even able to express your ideas for those templates yourself, then I don't think they are useful at all! poke | talk 16:08, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I just said that DPL does not seem to be the answer, but something is needed.

I can express the ideas but the problem is putting it in terms you will understand. As for your judgment on usefulness, usefulness is pragmatic. The test should be: create it and see if someone uses it and how they use it. Your assumption that you can predict all uses for all things is a bit weird. mtew 16:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Why is something needed? A plain static list, as we have for the vanquisher title, is completely fine!

And templates are basically created because they are either totally awesome and an innovation so they will be used, or they are needed and as such created. I can't see any innovation in your At/Al ideas (probably because I am unimaginative..? Or rather because you still didn't say what they do), and they are not needed anywhere either - so what are they for? poke | talk 16:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

As I said, I think I was going about it the wrong way.

1. The list can be and almost certainly should be almost static. Updates will be rare.
2. The information on the various pages should match the information in the list. (This is what I think I had wrong. I was trying to make the list match the page content.)
3. There should be a mechanism that brings the two pieces of information into harmony that does not require people get involved in the details.
4. That mechanism does not have to be dynamic since the basic information does not change often.
5. DPL can do that, but is over-kill for this situation. Something else is needed.

Does that look like a bot job to you? It does to me, but I haven't done bots yet.

There is another use for templates: Express a fairly complex sequence in a compact form. If the sequence is complicated enough that it is painful to type, but would be used if it were not for that pain, then a template that performs that sequence would be used if available. In fact, spending a little extra effort to make the template useable in more situations can be a good thing.

The 'Al' and 'At' templates are that kind of useful. They are basically an elaboration of #ifexist. They are not particularly innovative, nor do they express a common sequence. They might be convenient to have, or they might not. How useful would depend on the features they implement. I asked for suggestions on what features might make them more useful. I thought I had expressed that idea but, you didn't get it. I still don't understand why you don't get it. mtew 17:10, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Use debug=5 on a DPL query squirrelled away somewhere to generate wikicode that you can copy & paste to a more exposed wikipage. --mendel 17:25, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Or just gather the information one by one (similar to how you are copying the values from the notes section into a parameter of the infobox) and add them in a static table. That doesn't require any changes to make it work with DPL in the first place. poke | talk 17:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

That is almost what they are complaining about. That doesn't get around the problem of putting the information where DPL can get at it. They are fussing about putting the information on the location pages. The test code in my user space is one stage short of that and could be converted to that form by simply adding the debug in the right place.

The discussion so far indicates that the information should be in a list and I am saying there should be a mechanism for copying the information from the list to the right spot on the individual pages. While DPL or a template that invokes DPL could do the job, they are saying that is an unnecessary load on the WIKI server. They have a point. Hence the bot runs. mtew 17:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Why use a bot run, when you planned to do all that work yourself after all? You wanted to put all those information that is inside of the notes section into the infobox; so where is the problem with - instead of putting it in as a parameter - to just make a list with those values? I really don't get it. poke | talk 17:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

This has gone beyond just the 'map size' stuff. I've also changed my mind to the point where I agree that an almost static table is a better solution. I am more than willing to give up the addition of the infobox parameter if there is another way to maintain consistency. THAT is where the bot gets involved... mtew 17:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Just a quick comment here: You stated above that "SysAdmins have more power and their opinions carry more weight as a result...". This shows your fundamental lack of understanding just what a wiki is. SysAdmins, as you call them, have the same weight as any other user on the wiki, even unregistered ones. If you can't/won't understand that, then maybe you should rethink why you are here in the first place. This is a community that is run by the community for the community. That means that, if you are doing something that has repercussions to how articles/information is edited or updated, it has to be accessible by the average user wiki. Considering that even poke, one of our resident wikicode experts, is having a hard time at understanding the hows and whys of your project, I'd say it's fairly safe to say that your pet project is above the scope of the large majority of the wiki users here. Consensus doesn't mean that you continue what you're doing until someone gives you a valid reason to do otherwise; rather, it means stop what you are doing until an agreement/consensus can be reached. I'd suggest you take that advice, given to you by many users above already, to heart. --★KOKUOU★ 18:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The "hows and whys" of the "map size" project are simple to understand. If you posit that the average wiki user has to be able to understand every page, then you can't use DPL at all (and for most, even quite a few templates would be out) - and clearly it is used on this wiki. And, since we're calling in superior wikivalues^TM, complaining about edits that don't affect your own use of the wiki in a demonstrable way is what I suspect to be ownership. Implying that Mtew is not stopping what he is doing is a low rhetoric move, because clearly he has stopped editing mainspace. --mendel 18:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

KOKUOU: Come off it. Of course that is the way it is supposed to be, but in practice it just ain't so. You treat a guy carrying a gun with more respect than other people if you have any brains at all. The same goes here. You missed the meaning of 'more weight'. It does not mean 'obey'. It means consider the consequences of getting 'em mad at you. Everyone deserves respect until they have demonstrated otherwise, but the admins can do more damage to you than the others can.

And the part about 'stop until consensus...' is also completely off the wall when the consensus has NOT said 'STOP', which it has NOT done in this case. If everything has to stop because someone has their finger up their arse and is uncomfortable as a result, nothing will ever get done. There HAS to be a reason explaining why something should stop, and the reason has to be something quite a bit stronger than 'because I said so'. mtew 19:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

There also has to be a reason why something should start, and so far, I haven't seen one, other than you want to see how this would work. It has been said all along that much of your project is beyond the understanding of the average wiki user, and btw, simple dpl is usable by the average wiki user, or they have the brains to ask how it works, same for templates. Again, I would echo the sentiment that when even poke is confused, or not understanding your project, it's gone way beyond what an average wiki user can/will comprehend. -- Wyn 19:33, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Wyn, talking about "your project" when the subject still says "map size" (and I think this is a simple to understand project, Poke does understand how it works) confuses the issue. I've replied on that project, I've made a move forward to reshape the At/Al project into something that is more understable, but everybody seems to be ignoring that there alternate ways to react to Mtew than making him stop. Every wiki project starts because some individual wants it to start, what more reason is needed? Wikis shine when others come and improve on them; they almost always run into drama when somebody tries to yell stop. --mendel 20:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) A sysop doesn't block because he gets "mad". You know what? Pretend the sysops that are commenting here are all 'normal' users. They don't have the ability block or delete, they're just commenting on something. They're discussing. Yep - that's the viewpoint of everyone else in this discussion.

Reading between the lines (i.e. reading the lines) pretty much shows to me here that people want you to stop for the reasons that they gave (e.g. new stuff not being of any use, current system works fine, too complicated, etc). I think you need to understand that pet projects are fine, but only as long as the community doesn't have an objection. -- Just another user discussing \ just so it's clear 19:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

@mendel: I realized he has stop; I was emphasizing what consensus was because he clearly indicated himself that he will not do so until someone gives him a compelling reason. That is not how this, or any other wiki, works.

@mtew: As Brains just said above me, that is how wikis work, and I especially have faith in the admins of our little wiki that they will not ban someone just because you piss them off. They are a very reasonable bunch and have not/do not abuse their power. Your not understanding this is a giveaway of how little you know about how this community operates. Not that that's a bad thing, however, because you're fairly new here and you're not expected to know everything right off the bat. What we're saying here is, in essence, "if something ain't broke, don't fix it." This is especially true if it doesn't make anything any easier, and only complicates things, to boot.--★KOKUOU★ 19:49, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Wyn: You are coming to this a bit late. I have agreed with Poke that this was not the right way to reach this goal. I've been giving him a hard time because we have not yet agreed on what really needs to be done. The others see the argument and have pitched a fit. They are doing the 'tall puppy' bit. Please look at all that has been said before taking sides.

Brains: I did NOT say they DID get mad, I said they COULD get mad and that has to be considered. And you will notice I give Poke a hard time when I think he is wrong even though he is an admin. I trust he understands that. I am much less sure about some of the others. The fact they have stuck their noses into this gives me reason for concern. So what is really bothering you?

As far as this particular project is concerned, I have not made any additional edits to main space. On the other hand I am VERY uncomfortable with the attitude that minor edits that add latent information are somehow not allowed. It's as if the Recent Change Log with minor edits has to be kept pristine and that everybody has to understand everything everybody else is doing without effort. mtew 20:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

KOKUOU: You are more than a little off base. I have NOT said I would not stop. In fact I have stopped and will not resume further main space edits on this project unless there is agreement that further edits would be useful. I also said that reasons need to be provided for asking that I stop. They do not have to be 'compelling', merely reasonable and debatable; "because I don't understand what you are doing" is not reasonable if you make no effort to understand. Embedded in this hurrah's nest is a debate between me and Poke about the problem, but it is a little hard to follow because of the noise and stench the rest of you are making. mtew 20:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The fact that I have not commented previously in no way means I haven't been following the debate/discussion, I have simply chosen to not comment since I felt you were getting a lot of input from everyone else and might not need any from me. I understand that my comment was based more on your overall project rather than simply the Map size portion this section is suppose to be talking about, but it seems that your projects are all in some way interconnected, and they all seem to require modification of mainspace articles whether it's additional parameters in infoboxes or something else. As such they affect every editor of this wiki. -- Wyn 21:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)