User talk:SolSys

From Stellaris Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Note: This talk page covers discussions from 2021 onwards. To see older discussions (2016 - 2020) please see User_talk:SolSys/archive.

Copyright notes acceptable documentation of permission[edit source]

Hello, what would be an acceptable level of documentation that the owners of the files have allowed their use? This is for the Star Wars: Fallen Republic mod and the devs have already posted some files stating that people can use them, but what should I provide for the files of theirs I upload? BingRazer (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there. A simple link to the official statement attached to the uploaded file should be enough. ~ SolSys (talk) 19:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Broken links to Weapons Damage (formerly broken links to Ship Damage) and the Template:Icon/<letter> templates[edit source]

Hello. New editor here on the Stellaris wiki. Let me summarize what has happened thus far regarding this matter:

  • March 28 23:40: I (Alleryn) opened a discussion on this matter at Talk:Ship_damage, mentioning the broken links (which at that time were broken links to Ship Damage.
  • March 29 8:12: I suggested a fix at Template_talk:Icon/w (a protected page i cannot edit), and suggested (via adding a Delete template) deleting the page Ship damage, since it is not a game term and it was no longer the target of any wiki link.
  • March 31 8:09: User:Dauth removed my Delete template from Ship damage, citing 'Redirects are useful for people that don't use official game terms too', which fair enough, but it's not clear to me how a redirect from Ship damage should remain while the one from Ship Damage gets deleted. Users who type in guesses at page names are not expected to know game terms, but are expected to know wiki naming conventions? (I apologize if this is getting a bit ranty, but i'm feeling pretty exhausted over an issue that i feel like should have had a relatively simple resolution).
  • March 31 15:25: I create Weapons damage as a redirect to Space_warfare#Damage. since if the non game term is going to have a redirect, then the game term should get one too, right?
  • March 31 ~17:15: I create this post.

Remaining problem rooted (imo) in your renaming of Ship Damage to Ship damage without leaving a redirect: The orphaned links in Special:WhatLinksHere/Weapons_Damage

Possible solutions:

Other problems: All/most of the Template:Icon/<letter> templates have myriad similar directs to improperly capitalized pages, e.g. Template:Icon/a has the line

| agrarian idyll = [[File:Civic_agrarian_idyll.png|link=Agrarian Idyll|{{{w|24px}}}]]

which will produce iconified links to Agrarian Idyll like this: Civic agrarian idyll.png --Alleryn (talk) 17:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and welcome to the wiki. That was quite a log so I'll try to respond point by point to ensure I won't miss something:
  • The icon template links have been changed. The pages using them will change when cache clears.
  • The icon templates are only lightly protected -- to avoid abuse by anons and spam. We do a periodic check on users to move them to a confirmed group. I somehow didn't notice you were not confirmed yet -- sorry about that, it has been fixed now ;)
  • In the past we created (logical) terms to describe in-game stuff. If they have now in-game terms they should be replaced, though the old terms/redirects can remain for now.
  • The search bar doesn't differentiate between upper/lower case letters so users shouldn't be affected by capitalization changes.
  • In-game terms from the game are capitalized in the main column of tables so they may remain as is for search purposes. In other locations please use regular capitalization etiquette.
I hope I covered all the points you brought up. If I missed something please let me know and thank you for taking an interest in bettering the wiki :) ~ SolSys (talk) 19:52, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Perfect, thank you. Sorry if i went a little overboard with the level of detail, but things had gotten muddled as edits were coming as discussions were happening, so i wanted to do my best to make things clear. I will take a look at the capitalization issues in the Template:Icon/<letter> templates this week, along with the pages they lead to (e.g. Agrarian Idyll) and see if i can get them compliant (or at least more compliant) with the wiki's naming policy. Thank you again, and i hope you are having a good day. --Alleryn (talk) 00:02, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Recently uploaded images[edit source]

Could you please add a proper copyright tag and a category to the images you recently uploaded. (File:GCW_E11.png,File:GCW_E12.png,File:GCW_E13.png,File:GCW_E14.png,File:GCW_E15.png,File:GCW_E16.png and File:GCW_logo.png). Thanks in advance. – Lillebror (talk) 15:10, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Could you also please categorize the pages you created on the 10th of April. – Lillebror (talk) 15:19, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure if they will remain. Will check. ~ SolSys (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Quality assessments[edit source]

Quick question: How do the quality assessments often found at the top of Discussions work? Are they updated periodically by the mods, or by anyone? Do we need to ask for a page to get "audited" after major edits?

TelluriumCrystal (talk) 03:55, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi, these are handled by the moderators in a periodic maintenance routine. ~ SolSys (talk) 08:06, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

GalCom resolution Rework[edit source]

Hi Solsys,
I saw that you might be working on reformatting the Galactic community resolutions, and I wanted to let you know I've been doing that also, so that we don't end up duplicating work. My WIP is at User:CaesarVincens/Sandbox and I'm glad for any comments on format or style you might have. I was more partial to the old style, but seeing how you aligned the new table I see advantages in that format too, or perhaps some hybrid of the two.--CaesarVincens (talk) 18:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi there. I saw your work. Both styles have their issues on mobile so I'm thinking on trying to combine them in some way. ~ SolSys (talk) 19:44, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'm looking at a way to better display the AI voting modifiers, perhaps as rows under the resolution rather than columns after.--CaesarVincens (talk) 22:13, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Done for now (too tired to continue). Not sure if worth retaining the resolution/category column -- even if it is better now due to disappearing on smaller screen factors. AI weight may be better off offset to a separate table (in the current style) to reduce table complexity for other editors, but I'm open to suggestions if there are better ways to convey the info. ~ SolSys (talk) 22:19, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
I've also got an example set up at User:CaesarVincens/Sandbox#Politics_and_Culture; but from my test for mobile, it appears that the Collapse list template doesn't work at all (auto-expanded, no expand/collapse options) so without a fix on that front, there's probably no good solution. --CaesarVincens (talk) 22:53, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
I've got a new example (Galactic Commerce) using the Box wrapper template and a separate table for AI voting weight, and the "hidem" for the category column. I think it works decently on mobile view. If you like the style, I'll do up the rest of the resolutions in that format and transfer it over to the main page when it's all ready.--CaesarVincens (talk) 20:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
With regards to the resolutions effects table, I prefer the one on my sandbox. It has the advantages of being simpler (less styled), using less template calls, and being/looking more consistent so even less advanced users can update it -- the resolution column itself can be put for debate (I added it to preserve the previous look).
With regards to the AI voting table, while I prefer it to keep the same look-and-feel as the effects table, I don't have a better solution to it at this time -- see examples A, B and O. As your solution offers both pass/repel information I will defer to your option (though best if not as part of a box wrapper). ~ SolSys (talk) 21:27, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Indeed, I agree with your points. I'll see if I can rework my examples to more closely match yours. I like the type A and I think I can adapt that to show the pass/repeal info without to much trouble.--CaesarVincens (talk) 21:34, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Alright, I have my own example A and example B for voting weight tables. I'm leaning more towards the B or B+ right now, though the icon only style probably won't work as well with more complicated conditions, such as The Greater Good or other resolution categories have. --CaesarVincens (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
I have merged example B+ table with the type B table to produce the type C table. Some points:
  1. While I would have liked to preserve the look of the effects table, due to levels remaining largely the same (instead of building on each other like in effects) it has a better visual-info delivery.
  2. I use the format of icon/number/name since this enables me to use them as focal points. Those who recognize what they are can skip reading the name and others can read it (caters to different player levels). -- I admit it works better when the icons part is of the same size.
  3. Though I used px in the examples they'll need to be % based on the final output.
  4. Please note the Pacifist parameter added as an example.
  5. I haven't played in a while so I'm don't know it, but does the base weight has any being mentioned benefit here? -- I added it in case there is a reason, but if not then it can be removed.
~ SolSys (talk) 08:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
1. & 2. Yeah, I prefer the B style as a base too. And fair point about using the text. My main concern was with some the more complicated scripted weights, such as Greater Good has, but then, that needs the explanation all the more. My other thought is to add a note to click on icons for more info, but still having the text is probably best.
3. & 4. I've been letting the tables auto-size for contents, but I also see the advantage of setting the widths. Also, I'm not sure what the pacifist example illustrates. I will note that Galactic Commerce (and Industrial Development) are probably not the best examples to be working on as they have relatively simple AI weights.
5. Each resolution has a base AI weight to which all other modifiers apply (scripted and game code). It's mostly standardized for the regular resolutions, though at least Leveraged Privateering is slightly different for its level. If it turns out all other standard resolutions have the same base weights by level, I'd rather make a general note and note the few exceptions.
Another important issue for layout are non-stacking conditions. For example, Free Traders and Trading Posts don't multiply against each other, and for some resolutions, this can be several items long. I've got an example at User:CaesarVincens/Sandbox#Politics_and_Culture of the two styles (icon only vs text). 0 multipliers and exclusive option it's no big deal to list out line by line, but not for non-exlusive options that are scripted not to stack.--CaesarVincens (talk) 17:33, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
The pacifist example is for a common parameter, but with different weight for each level -- I saw in you example that you added "in addition to common".