Talk:Skills - Revision history

Shebi: /* Skills table */

2008-12-24T08:29:57Z

Skills table

Minos: forgot sig

2008-12-24T07:07:07Z

forgot sig

Minos: /* Skills table */

2008-12-24T07:06:52Z

Skills table

Minos: /* Skills table */

2008-12-24T06:34:08Z

Skills table

Seba: /* Skills table */ new section

2008-12-23T17:23:56Z

Skills table: new section

Nekojin at 22:48, 17 December 2008

2008-12-17T22:48:24Z

Shebi at 20:39, 17 December 2008

2008-12-17T20:39:07Z

Nekojin at 20:08, 17 December 2008

2008-12-17T20:08:00Z

Shebi: New page: Right now, the skills pages are mostly at the root level ("Pottery"). However, there are also some that were created as subpages under Skills ("Skills/Pottery"). We should settle on one me...

2008-12-17T19:38:18Z

New page: Right now, the skills pages are mostly at the root level ("Pottery"). However, there are also some that were created as subpages under Skills ("Skills/Pottery"). We should settle on one me...

New page

Right now, the skills pages are mostly at the root level ("Pottery"). However, there are also some that were created as subpages under Skills ("Skills/Pottery"). We should settle on one method and make sure everything is consistent. I think keeping it flat would be best, in line with the other large topics (techs, resources, buildings, etc.) That may mean coming up with a standard for guide pages that want to use the same name, however. In other words, if "Fishing" is the skill page, we need to decide how to name the "fishing guide" page, should one be developed again. -- [[User:Shebi|Shebi]] 14:38, 17 December 2008 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:29, 24 December 2008
Line 22:		Line 22:

	You'll notice I added some <!--l--> & <!--req--> comments in all empty cells. That was an attempt to make editing easier. It should have been <!--0--> for level 0, <!--2--> for level 2, etc... That would have taken a lot time. Well feel free to modify that, as long as its html comments no one will see them on the page. [[User:Minos\|Minos]] 02:07, 24 December 2008 (EST)		You'll notice I added some <!--l--> & <!--req--> comments in all empty cells. That was an attempt to make editing easier. It should have been <!--0--> for level 0, <!--2--> for level 2, etc... That would have taken a lot time. Well feel free to modify that, as long as its html comments no one will see them on the page. [[User:Minos\|Minos]] 02:07, 24 December 2008 (EST)
		+
		+	You may also want to take a look at the [[Levels]] page. Just please don't put any tables on there. -- [[User:Shebi\|Shebi]] 03:29, 24 December 2008 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:07, 24 December 2008
Line 21:		Line 21:
	Ok I mostly fixed it. Added borders and removed useless cells, the table is skinned with the class mw_metadata. ( It's in the page's css ) I also moved the keys from the table to the bottom of it. That was making a lot of information unreadable, plus the legend/keys is always at the bottom of a graph or table.		Ok I mostly fixed it. Added borders and removed useless cells, the table is skinned with the class mw_metadata. ( It's in the page's css ) I also moved the keys from the table to the bottom of it. That was making a lot of information unreadable, plus the legend/keys is always at the bottom of a graph or table.

−	You'll notice I added some <!--l--> & <!--req--> comments in all empty cells. That was an attempt to make editing easier. It should have been <!--0--> for level 0, <!--2--> for level 2, etc... That would have taken a lot time. Well feel free to modify that, as long as its html comments no one will see them on the page.	+	You'll notice I added some <!--l--> & <!--req--> comments in all empty cells. That was an attempt to make editing easier. It should have been <!--0--> for level 0, <!--2--> for level 2, etc... That would have taken a lot time. Well feel free to modify that, as long as its html comments no one will see them on the page. [[User:Minos\|Minos]] 02:07, 24 December 2008 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:06, 24 December 2008
Line 18:		Line 18:

	I'll try fixing it [[User:Minos\|Minos]] 01:34, 24 December 2008 (EST)		I'll try fixing it [[User:Minos\|Minos]] 01:34, 24 December 2008 (EST)
		+
		+	Ok I mostly fixed it. Added borders and removed useless cells, the table is skinned with the class mw_metadata. ( It's in the page's css ) I also moved the keys from the table to the bottom of it. That was making a lot of information unreadable, plus the legend/keys is always at the bottom of a graph or table.
		+
		+	You'll notice I added some <!--l--> & <!--req--> comments in all empty cells. That was an attempt to make editing easier. It should have been <!--0--> for level 0, <!--2--> for level 2, etc... That would have taken a lot time. Well feel free to modify that, as long as its html comments no one will see them on the page.

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:34, 24 December 2008
Line 16:		Line 16:

	Actually that table is such a mess I wont give an example, but would ask a border to be used if and where possible. YIKES! ~[[Users:Seba\|Seba]]		Actually that table is such a mess I wont give an example, but would ask a border to be used if and where possible. YIKES! ~[[Users:Seba\|Seba]]
		+
		+	I'll try fixing it [[User:Minos\|Minos]] 01:34, 24 December 2008 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:23, 23 December 2008
Line 10:		Line 10:

	Good point. There shouldn't be much in the way of conflicting namespaced pages for such a narrowly-focused Wiki. --[[User:Nekojin\|Nekojin]] 17:48, 17 December 2008 (EST)		Good point. There shouldn't be much in the way of conflicting namespaced pages for such a narrowly-focused Wiki. --[[User:Nekojin\|Nekojin]] 17:48, 17 December 2008 (EST)
		+
		+	== Skills table ==
		+
		+	Can anyone easily understand the Skills Table? Or is it just me? perhaps something like this...?
		+
		+	Actually that table is such a mess I wont give an example, but would ask a border to be used if and where possible. YIKES! ~[[Users:Seba\|Seba]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:48, 17 December 2008
Line 8:		Line 8:

	Doesn't mean I necessarily agree, but it does simplify a lot of things (like Category links not needed a default sort or piped link name) to keep it flat. -- [[User:Shebi\|Shebi]] 15:39, 17 December 2008 (EST)		Doesn't mean I necessarily agree, but it does simplify a lot of things (like Category links not needed a default sort or piped link name) to keep it flat. -- [[User:Shebi\|Shebi]] 15:39, 17 December 2008 (EST)
		+
		+	Good point. There shouldn't be much in the way of conflicting namespaced pages for such a narrowly-focused Wiki. --[[User:Nekojin\|Nekojin]] 17:48, 17 December 2008 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:39, 17 December 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:

	IMO, it should be properly treed - Skills/Pottery for Pottery, Techs/Beekeeping for Beekeeping, Stats/Strength for Strength, and so on. --[[User:Nekojin\|Nekojin]] 15:08, 17 December 2008 (EST)		IMO, it should be properly treed - Skills/Pottery for Pottery, Techs/Beekeeping for Beekeeping, Stats/Strength for Strength, and so on. --[[User:Nekojin\|Nekojin]] 15:08, 17 December 2008 (EST)
		+
		+	From the MediaWiki help pages:
		+
		+	''People instinctively think hierarchically when trying to organise information, so it may be tempting to use subpages all the time. However, subpages can be over-used. Remember that having a page name with a slash will generally make the name longer, harder to remember, and thus more difficult to link to. Some people find it more elegant to keep page naming simple. By sticking to a flat naming structure, with a manually maintained web of wiki links, a structure will emerge organically (and this can include a pseudo-hierarchy).''
		+
		+	Doesn't mean I necessarily agree, but it does simplify a lot of things (like Category links not needed a default sort or piped link name) to keep it flat. -- [[User:Shebi\|Shebi]] 15:39, 17 December 2008 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:08, 17 December 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Right now, the skills pages are mostly at the root level ("Pottery"). However, there are also some that were created as subpages under Skills ("Skills/Pottery"). We should settle on one method and make sure everything is consistent. I think keeping it flat would be best, in line with the other large topics (techs, resources, buildings, etc.) That may mean coming up with a standard for guide pages that want to use the same name, however. In other words, if "Fishing" is the skill page, we need to decide how to name the "fishing guide" page, should one be developed again. -- [[User:Shebi\|Shebi]] 14:38, 17 December 2008 (EST)		Right now, the skills pages are mostly at the root level ("Pottery"). However, there are also some that were created as subpages under Skills ("Skills/Pottery"). We should settle on one method and make sure everything is consistent. I think keeping it flat would be best, in line with the other large topics (techs, resources, buildings, etc.) That may mean coming up with a standard for guide pages that want to use the same name, however. In other words, if "Fishing" is the skill page, we need to decide how to name the "fishing guide" page, should one be developed again. -- [[User:Shebi\|Shebi]] 14:38, 17 December 2008 (EST)
		+
		+	IMO, it should be properly treed - Skills/Pottery for Pottery, Techs/Beekeeping for Beekeeping, Stats/Strength for Strength, and so on. --[[User:Nekojin\|Nekojin]] 15:08, 17 December 2008 (EST)