User talk:Kami-sama

From Stellaris Wiki
Revision as of 11:23, 12 March 2018 by Dauth (talk | contribs) (Style templates)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Version tags

Hi and welcome to the wiki. As it happens, several of your past edits have had to be reversed. Please refrain from changing Version tags unless the article/section is fully updated. It is not enough to merely confirm the existing information is up-to-date while new relevant data is still missing. Thanks. ~ SolSys (talk) 00:12, 23 October 2017 (CEST)

Well the new relevant data was not for the standard traits section, it was for the one below. That's why I updated the version after writing the only 1.8 change that wasn't already done by someone else. Then I moved on to the last section since that needed a bit more time. Kami-sama (talk) 00:41, 23 October 2017 (CEST)


When you upload an image can you please put them in a category and assign a copyright tag. I've added the information for the ones you uploaded earlier today. Thanks. Dauth (talk) 22:13, 25 October 2017 (CEST)

Thanks. I'll keep it in mind. Kami-sama (talk) 15:57, 26 October 2017 (CEST)

[Unindented] With image uploads you'll need to force refresh on the updated page to get to see the new image. Otherwise your browser will use the cached version. Dauth (talk) 20:32, 30 November 2017 (CET)

If you're talking about just refreshing the page from my browser to load it again that's not the problem, take a look at the file history and see how the current one doesn't update. Judging by the file history I suppose SolSys had the same issue with it. I remember having had this problem with the a Fallen Empire image too and ended up having to upload it under a different name to show correctly. Maybe deleting the Sacred Nexus file and uploading it again with the image edited by SolSys would work, or it might still fail because of the same name. Anyway since I can't delete pages I can't give it a try. Kami-sama (talk) 20:45, 30 November 2017 (CET)
I've just done a null edit (one where you change nothing but the server rebuilds the page) on the buildings page and the sacred nexus looks good to me. Dauth (talk) 22:02, 30 November 2017 (CET)
Actually, I just uploaded several slightly different files. To force-refresh use CTRL+F5 on windows -- F5 by itself will just reopen the page using the cache. ~ SolSys (talk) 23:03, 30 November 2017 (CET)
I see what you meant by force-refresh now, I never knew of this issue. Thanks guys, Paradox always picks the best ^_^ Kami-sama (talk) 23:13, 30 November 2017 (CET)
To be fair, it is an issue only in really specific cases -- which then can be solved through force-refresh. The reason it works this way is to help you browse the web faster and reduce data congestion on the ISPs infrastructure. For example, if you watch a popular video from YouTube, you are likely not to access any Alphabet servers as the ISP probably saved the video on its local server to reduce some of the overhead. ~ SolSys (talk) 23:47, 30 November 2017 (CET)


You've stated that you're not interested in the contest running today onwards in an edit summary on another page. If this is the case can you confirm it here for me? I don't want to unfairly remove you without you confirming it first. Thanks Dauth (talk) 09:51, 16 November 2017 (CET)

Yep, I'm not interested in the contest. Hope it'll be a good incentive for others though. Kami-sama (talk) 10:44, 16 November 2017 (CET)
OK thanks for confirming. If you change your mind let me know. Dauth (talk) 12:28, 16 November 2017 (CET)

Easter Egg page

Thanks for tidying it up. I have semi-protected the page to prevent edits by anonymous users to stem the flow of vanity edits. Hopefully we can keep it trimmed to something reasonable. Dauth (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2018 (CET)

Just doing my part, I want to have every easter egg but I also want to keep the page clean. As they add more easter eggs with every additional content I'll see what can be done to keep it like this without removing anything that's an undeniable reference. Kami-sama (talk) 22:24, 12 January 2018 (CET)

Editorial tags

Just a reminder that editorial tags are to be removed by wiki staff after evaluating the changes -- not by the editor making the changes. Please refrain from doing so in the future. ~ SolSys (talk) 10:28, 27 January 2018 (CET)

Sorry, when I first started editing the wiki most pages had cleanup tags and I removed them after I was done and nobody complained. I didn't even have an account when I did that. So I thought it was okay. I'll leave them in the future. Kami-sama (talk) 14:29, 27 January 2018 (CET)

Bonus tables

You do have edit rights to bonus tables. I've protected them to prevent edits from anon/non-autoconfirmed users. You however are auto-confirmed and have the rights to edit the tables. You can find them in {{Bonus table}}. Cheers, Dauth (talk) 13:45, 22 February 2018 (CET)

I knew I could edit them but I didn't know how. Thanks ^^ Kami-sama (talk) 13:51, 22 February 2018 (CET)

Icon template

Make sure refrain from deleting old icon entries. They may be still in use across the wiki and are referenced in the historical edits. If an entry is no longer relevant, move it to the bottom obsolete/outdated section [with a note]. ~ SolSys (talk) 14:29, 24 February 2018 (CET)

I assume you're talking about the mausoleum icon, I only deleted it because it's not mentioned anywhere on the wiki and the icon is now used for the habitat administration. If the icon would've simply been unused in the game I would've left it in the outdated section so that it remains accessible in case it's brought back into the game or recycled. Kami-sama (talk) 14:38, 24 February 2018 (CET)
If you were referring to how I renamed the torpedo icon to guided despite the obvious errors it'll cause on the outdated pages is because I'm planning to rewrite every single ship table on the wiki due to the large changes in ship design. Kami-sama (talk) 14:46, 24 February 2018 (CET)
And in the mean time it will remain with errors? No. -- and again, it is also referenced in the history edits for those who use it. ~ SolSys (talk) 14:51, 24 February 2018 (CET)
Point taken, didn't think of the history edits. I worked on many wikis but never on a 4X game one so this is the most complex one so far. I like criticism though, it's the fastest way to improve, so keep pointing my mistakes. Kami-sama (talk) 14:59, 24 February 2018 (CET)
Another consideration is that mods may use historic content so by keeping everything in place we're more able to support their pages. Dauth (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2018 (CET)
You have to consider that while the wiki's goal is to be updated to the latest patch version, PDX allows players to play on the version they prefer so not all users will be on the latest version. ~ SolSys (talk) 15:15, 24 February 2018 (CET)
Right, I totally forgot about that. You're like my mentors XD Kami-sama (talk) 15:23, 24 February 2018 (CET)
I'll stop touching the templates page, it seems I can't handle it right. This was so much easier on the Anno wikis. Kami-sama (talk) 22:16, 24 February 2018 (CET)

Star classification

You reverted my edit to the with the reasoning "The staff always insisted that the list remains alphabetic. At least the game doesn't have class O stars." Admittedly, I should have checked the edit history first, but it seems like the most recent edit pertaining to this was a re-ordering based solely on the listing in the game files. If you can find a comment from wiki staff on the matter, I'll gladly accept the edit.

However, as it stands, I see no reason to sort this list alphabetically. Not only is it against real-world practice, but it's clear from the star's visuals (i.e. the icons) that B should be placed above A. It would be like rearranging the rainbow from "Red-Orange-Yellow-Green-Blue-Indigo-Violet" to "Blue-Green-Indigo-Orange-Red-Violet-Yellow" - it just doesn't make sense. TristanBomb (talk) 01:02, 26 February 2018 (CET)

10:45, 16 September 2017‎ SolSys (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (58,258 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Undo revision 21838 by (talk) Again, I get the reasoning, BUT the rest of the list is alphabetical)
23:09, 15 September 2017‎ (talk)‎ . . (58,258 bytes) (0)‎ . . (→‎Stars: The order of spectral classification is OBAFGKM. O is not available in-game, so the order here should be BAFGKM)

But now that I read this again, this applied before I split the table because they added special effects to black holes, neutron stars and pulsars so I think it no longer applies. I would've preferred the list ordered after real life classification as well so I'll put it back ^_^ Kami-sama (talk) 11:27, 26 February 2018 (CET)
The order in the in game files can be found here: Stellaris\common\planet_classes\00_planet_classes.txt. As a moderator I don't mind which order is used as long as it is clearly defined. Either alphabetically or listed as in the game files or listed in the order of stellar evolution. A link to stellar evolution on wikipedia for the order or stars would not go amiss here. As long as we don't have an edit war the wiki staff will be happy with any decision. Thanks Dauth (talk) 11:34, 26 February 2018 (CET)
This seems to require a bit of clarification on my part -- all other sorting on the page is alphabetical, so this one ended up that way too. "Real life" order [or order within the game files] has of little importance as most of the users are not aware of star order classifications [or how it is ordered within the game files], but hopefully they are aware of the order of the alphabet. As the table is small it is not a big issue to break the default sorting since you can see the whole thing immediately, but it should be of good reason. ~ SolSys (talk) 14:21, 26 February 2018 (CET)
Actually, there is already a precedent for non-alphabetic sorting: the Habitable Worlds section, which groups them by their climate type. I've in favor of alphabetical sorting for consistency, but only when it doesn't compromise on meaning or content, and this is one of those cases. The star classes in Stellaris are based on real stellar classifications, which do have an order, and alphabetical sorting would lose that meaning. That said, linking to the Wikipedia article is a good call, as it gives readers who don't know about the topic a reason as to why they're out of order. Also, sparking an edit war was never my intention, especially given that I'm a new user and it's such a minor detail. TristanBomb (talk)
That is fine -- and there is no edit war. As you have noted, many places on the wiki have non-default sorting to help understand them [tech, perks, and etc.]. The original table contained additional entries [aside from the star classes] than the current one so a regular ordering deemed more beneficial. It is more reasonable to have the spectral sorting now than it was before so all is fine [with a note explaining the sorting of course]. ~ SolSys (talk) 09:39, 27 February 2018 (CET)

Style templates

While I don't disagree with the rewrite tag on the population page. That decision is normally reserved for the moderating team. Hopefully when we mark a page for a rewrite we should also take the time to explain what needs changing on the talk pages. If you would like to list these too then I'm happy to let it stand. Its really good to see proactive edits on the wikis. Thanks, Dauth (talk) 00:12, 12 March 2018 (CET)

I wanted to give a reason but I didn't know how to express properly and detailed enough that while the upper half of the page is acceptable (if outdated in case of Happiness), the lower half needs work. I tried to do it myself but didn't have time. I'll see what I can do when I'll be more free. Kami-sama (talk) 11:43, 12 March 2018 (CET)
You could say that on the talk page. Generally I also use the reasons listed on the {{Rewrite}} template documentation. Dauth (talk) 12:22, 12 March 2018 (CET)