User:LoonWoof/talk archive

Welcome!
Wow, you've been busy. Nice!

I've been the only editor for a little while, so it's really nice to have company. Let me know if there's anything you want to talk about, or if you have questions about this weird semantic stuff ( and   and   etc.)

-Red Agliator (talk) 13:05, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks for the pleasant welcome. I realize the game is in alpha and that this wiki is under just as much development, but I'm still a bit surprised at how much is missing here. I've been looking through the recent changes list and seen that you've been pretty much working alone on this site for quite a while (and you've done a lot!) and hopefully we can increase the content here to the point where other players won't be required to "discover" for themselves how to accomplish (what seems to me to be) basic tasks. With all that said: Yes, I have a few (score) questions on a wide range of topics, but I'm (usually) a very patient person and starting slow seems appropriate in this case. I wanted to ask questions, but all the pages I visited seemed to be empty or I had questions about what I found (Help:Contents [I can't seem to get <=this link to work; the url is http://tugwiki.com/wiki/Help:Contents], Tutorial [this appears to be a missing page], questions, &c.), so I just started with minor edits and while doing that I noticed how many pages were missing images and with a bit of searching I located the Projects page and right at the top was "Adding images!"... so I did. Unfortunately, the Image Policy page link on the Standards page is broken, so I looked through the image list to see how other images on the site have been formatted. (Feedback on the images I've uploaded would be greatly appreciated, as I'd like to add more images in the near future, but would like to be sure I'm not submitting images that may not meet the standards and would therefore need to be re-done.) Also, I created a few pages to go along with some of the images I uploaded, but after viewing your Dear Editors page (which I don't completely understand) and seeing the results of my creations, I'm not sure I'm creating pages properly and efficiently. (Well, I'm pretty sure I'm not...)


 * So here are some just-getting-started questions:


 * Where should I post questions for the time being? Here on this page? [edit: Hmmm... I guess I did that, didn't I?]
 * Should I leave questions on your User_talk:Red_"Alligator" page? (Sorry, that's how I misread your name until I noticed the speliing.)
 * And how could I have made this a bulleted list? (Oy.) [edit: Ohhhh... like that.]


 * =LoonWoof (talk) 16:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I've run across two pages that might work depending on your questions: TUG wiki:Feedback seems to be for discussions about things that cross multiple pages (and I imagine eventually for standards). TUG wiki:Questions seems to be for 'how to do x' questions, though it hasn't been used yet.


 * For questions about that weird semantic markup or about why I did something the way I did, my own talk page is probably best. I've been designing the semantic structure from scratch, and at the moment, I'm the only one who really knows how to use it. (Once people start asking questions, I'll know how to write a 'getting started with this weird stuff' page.) Oh, and check out TUG wiki:Choosing a Semantic Boilerplate: it'll lead you to boilerplates, and hopefully get you oriented.


 * As for most of the other stuff you mentioned: I think this is because the wiki is so new. Tyrx set up the software/hardware and created an outline / placeholders, probably during kickstarter when there wasn't a game, only the dev posts. So, in the absence of standards or other editors, I've been making up my own standards as I go along. (And creating new pages/subjects whenever the need seems to arise.) As the editor community expands again, I expect those standards will be discussed, and lots of pages will be changed.


 * The "Dear Editors" page is just a place I could store private boilerplate text for myself. Check out Tools to see it in action (jump to the bottom of the Tool table). But to tell the truth, don't expect anything in my sandbox to make sense: that's where I do my thinking and scribbling and tests and stuff that isn't ready to show others.


 * -Red Agliator (talk) 18:03, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Image "Standards"
With the image names, I was trying to think of all the possible things that we might or might not want pictures of, and include them from the start. I don't have much of a Minecraft background, so I don't know off the top of my head which things they usually do. And to tell the truth, I like keeping an open mind about what TUG will need.

I have no idea which ones we'll want to keep (or whether all)--I figured other people would discuss and decide the eventual standard. So, here was what I was thinking when I brainstormed the names:
 * Texture: There are a bunch of texture files in the game folders, which can be converted from tga to jpg and uploaded. That's how I uploaded the texture for Stacked Wood . (On mine, it's C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\SteamApps\common\TUG\Game\Core\Materials\textures)
 * Inventory: what the icon looks like in your inventory or in your hand. Those files are accessible somewhere in the game folders (C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\SteamApps\common\TUG\Game\Core\UI\MenuIcons)
 * Material (or Clump, for some): what the building material looks like on the ground in the world. So a screenshot of that bulbous thing when you drop dirt, for example. That makes a lot of sense for things like trees and pumpkins, maybe it doesn't make so much sense for those clumps? Dunno.
 * Block: What the block looks like in the world. Maybe a screenshot of how it shows up in a biome, or maybe what one square voxel looks like.

I'll suggest uploading images at their raw size to save work (for now, at least). The  tag can scale images at any size--that "75px" is just the setting I happened to put in the markup early on. Maybe "thumb" will be better? Dunno.

We probably need to come up with some standards around aspect ratios - I find it an odd mix to have really tall pictures like the hoe in the tables next to square stuff like hammer rocks. Rotating the hoe so it is diagonal might change that. Or....maybe we want it that way?

I hope that helps. Ponder on all those questions to decide what you like, and what you think works in practice, and we can see what discussion is needed. We rule the wiki! (Well, it feels like it a little.)


 * Oh! And as for the texture files, I've already converted them all. I was waiting to upload them as pages were added - it automatically names them correctly if I click on the missing image to do an upload. If you want, you can add pages and I can then add images. -Red Agliator (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I found the "XYZ inventory" images for things as they show up in the inventory/toolbar/hand slot. I uploaded them for all the tool pages ( Crude Axe, etc.). Take a look and see how the inventory images compare to the screenshots. -Red Agliator (talk) 03:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I took a look at the images on Crude Axe, Bronze Axe , and Animal Horn . I'm thinking that the differences you're seeing are because the links have slightly different modifiers.
 * The images without borders seem to be the ones set to 75px, 120px, etc.
 * The images with borders seem to be the ones set to "thumb".
 * I think the single/double border might be an illusion: we don't see the inside border on the screenshot, because that light gray blends in with the snow color.
 * I noticed that changing the left-aligned image to a thumb fixed the alignment problem. But I have no idea why the right alignment isn't working with the 120px version--it seems like it should. (But then I'm not even close to being an expert with wiki markup.)
 * When I edit Crude Axe, I do see the "Wikitext | Preview | Changes" tabs. My best guess: I have noticed that sometimes the wiki gets temporarily confused while I'm editing, and doesn't show all the categories and semantic stuff at the end. Does going to the bottom and clicking the Preview button fix the view? If not, try coming back to that page in 1/2 hour and see whether that helps.


 * We're doing a lot of chatting back and forth (yay!), which might be easier in real time with a chat program of some sort. What do you think?


 * --Red Agliator (talk) 12:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

I have a multi-protocol chat program (Pidgin) with AIM and Yahoo accounts. What do you use?


 * --LoonWoof (talk) 19:49, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Chatting & more
I can make an AIM or Yahoo account pretty easily. I have a "Red Agliator" Skype account (I've used that a lot even just for text chatting, no voice). I have google and a few other things, too.

Oh, and hold off on adding "inventory image::" to every page for a little. There are advantages to simply moving "main picture::" to the inventory image, so we should chat first. --Red Agliator (talk) 00:39, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Doh! Too late - I've already done that for pretty much ALL the tools and weapons. =/

--LoonWoof (talk) 00:42, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Lol! Well, there are all the other pages on the wiki left to go.

And no, I can't create a new AIM or Yahoo account without a mobile phone number. So it'll have to be some other kind of account. >.< I'm scrolling through the list of Pidgin protocols now.

--Red Agliator (talk) 00:51, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I was/is(?) doing the same thing. I haven't used ICQ in nearly 20 years (gak!) and I'm not sure how Google Talk works. I have a Google+ account...

--LoonWoof (talk) 00:57, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Pidgin says it works with Google Talk. I know that means that if I download pidgin, I can talk to you using my google account. However, do you know whether: you can use pidgin to talk to me while I'm using google talk? I'll download a new app if I have to, but if I don't have to, even better. Oh, and my account: stick a period where the space is, and it lives at gmail. -Red Agliator (talk) 01:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I've been trying to get Pidgin to connect to my G+ acct, but I'm having a little difficulty - probably due to the security settings on the account. Pidgin should be able to chat with your client so you shouldn't have to install any more software...

--LoonWoof (talk) 01:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Be sure to check Talk:Controls for additional posts.

Thoughts on Commands/Controls
Here are my thoughts on those pages - no answers, just some questions and current thoughts. Keep the table? I'm not sure whether we're best served by keeping the table and just editing it. For one thing, it's hard to edit. For another, it might make more sense to divide things into sections: moving vs. interacting with the world vs. interacting with the inventory, and include some prose paragraphs. For example, the creative toolbar will be hard to explain entirely in a table.

Combine the pages? My personal vote would be to put all the commands into the commands page and figure out an obvious place to link from. One reason is that the console commands are somewhat spoilery, and I like the idea of keeping them elsewhere for people who don't want to see spoilery things. I also suspect that a combined page will end up really, really long.

Oh, and it's quite possible that the someone I find might be me. (Though in that case, I don't think I have a choice but to split about the giant table.) -Red Agliator (talk) 11:51, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Re: Projects: commands/controls
Will do! I'll try to give a quick glance today (sooner rather than later), but it may take me a while to do a full look-through.

Oh, and I fully agree with the 'out-of-date' thing: I try to never put that on until a page is live. Though I do take pages live before they're 100% up-to-date -- I just use the current release numbers plus something like 'wip' in the fourth spot.

-Red Agliator (talk) 15:30, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Quickie feedback
First reactions to a quick skim: ...and so on. I'll dig deeper later on. -Red Agliator (talk) 15:51, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, thank you, thank you for doing this!
 * I love the opening paragraph!
 * It might be worth arranging the sections in the order in which people encounter them first time through Survival mode. Off the top of my head, maybe:
 * 1) movement
 * 2) picking up Hammer Rock s and Pumpkin s (is that 'interacting with objects'?)
 * 3) inventory, once they've picked up those rocks and pumpkins
 * 4) harvesting blocks, and probably placing them for building
 * A personal preference: For Action(block)>Scale Size, I missed the 'Shift' modifier the first time I saw the original table because it's in a different column. It might help people like me if the 'Shift' modifier were right next to the 'Mouse Scroll'.

was: Comments on Ruminations
Do the available inventory images have white or transparent backgrounds? If they are transparent, can we "overlay" the image with a background image of the hand? Or is that overkill?

I think they are indeed transparent in tga format: the thumbnail maker I downloaded shows them with transparency on my desktop, anyway. I think my bulk re-format program lost the transparency when I changed them to png. I either need to figure out the correct settings, or find a different bulk reformat program that keeps the transparency. If/when we do get transparency working, we she consider using gif instead of png - smaller files, less overhead, more similar file type. -Red Agliator (talk) 12:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

chance for a few page standardizations
Since I'll be going through every page editing the image nametags, it'll be easy enough for me to make minor changes to the display code for those images, too. I was thinking of just setting everything to. If you'd rather something else (different settings for different images, for instance), let me know so I can do that instead. It'll be at least a day before I need that info, I think.)

I'm not thinking about settling the final settings now. Just...while we have the opportunity, is there anything we know right now that we'll want changed? &mdash;Red Agliator (talk) 15:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Image Policy
I put up the Image Policy page for only two reasons:


 * You wanted to know the property names I intended to use
 * I couldn't keep track of all the many things we'd talked about

So, at the moment, think of it as a notebook for us to keep our notes. Nothing in there is set in stone; almost all of it should probably be changed.

In fact, I'm really, really hoping you'll take the page over, and change things the way you think they should be. I don't have the brainwidth to focus on image policy/convention AND semantic stuff. (And I'd rather do semantic stuff.) And since you're doing the uploads, and asking lots of questions about policies, it'd be clever for you to create them instead ;) &mdash;Red Agliator (talk) 16:11, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Inventory picture and main picture
The decision I have in mind is which of these to choose: Why? My initial thought when I created it (see Property:Main picture description) was that "main picture" would be the picture that all ask queries display. So some pages might have the texture image be the one that displays in lists, others could have their 'in the world' picture displayed in lists, others could have the inventory icon display, and so on. In other words, the choice would be made on the item's page, not on the pages with those list displays.
 * 1) Keep  where it is, and add  ?
 * 2) Move  to the inventory image?

I see advantages to both ways of going about it. #1 is more straightforward, and in the future, we can have different list pages displaying different ways. #2 touches fewer pages (we don't have to edit the list pages, they'll auto-update).

The big difference I see is if we ever have tables/lists/galleries that mix items that can and can't be carried in inventory. On Crafting Workspace s, for example, things like the workbench and the cauldron do have inventory images. But campfires and ancient stone tables don't. With option 1, we'll have to display  on that page no matter what, because we can't have a query display some with   and some with. With option 2, we could mix where the pictures come from, just by moving the  property to whichever image makes the most sense for that item. -Red Agliator (talk) 12:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm on this project, but don't expect any changes right away. Besides the fact that I need to noodle through image types and names, I need to be very careful when I start editing files so I don't break every query table/gallery display on the wiki at once.
 * I could use a little help with the noodling part. As you probably noticed, I'm trying to plan for the future and allow for every possible type of picture that someone might want on a particular type of page. I'm happy with what I've come up with for items (world screenie, plus inventory if appropriate). I'm not sure about terrain blocks/building blocks/building materials, though -- I feel like I'm missing some. Let me know if you want to help me brainstorm what people might want in the future.
 * -Red Agliator (talk) 14:38, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'm certainly willing to help. You said you "need to noodle through image types and names" and that you could use help with that. Exactly what do you need done?
 * I just scanned through the Property:Main picture list (btw, I didn't find any filenames with "main" in their names, so that page [if I'm remembering it correctly] has probably been changed) and I can see how very useful (especially for tracking purposes) slapping Properties on "things" can be. So I guess I'm advocating that all images be given nametags/properties. Also, if you look at that list under "R" you will find two of your sandbox pages listed: Fire Pit and Flat Rock. This is what I was referring to in another post as "polluting" the Special Pages. (Yes, I know the entire wiki is a work-in-progress and those pages are temporary...)
 * --LoonWoof (talk) 15:12, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oops! I meant to get rid of all of those when I took that property live. Fixed!  -Red Agliator (talk) 19:43, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, I found an instance of:
 * It's on  Property:Main picture !
 * &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 05:18, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Need input on types of images we'll need
Before I can come up with property names (nametags) for all the images a page will provide, I have to figure out which images a page will provide. Here are the types of images I have thought of so far, with a long-winded description of what I'm thinking of. I feel like I'm missing some - can you think of any? (And please ignore things like name, aspect ratio, size of the uploaded file; image policy is important and related, but can be a different discussion, I think.)

-Red Agliator (talk) 18:42, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Objects in the world
(such as tree s, Critters and Monsters | animals, etc.)


 * Looking again at Cat and Goat, it looks like I'd originally intended two for animals: Cat live.png and Cat dead.png. Not sure whether we need both of those, or nametags for both of those, but I wanted to keep this section up to date. &mdash;Red Agliator (talk) 16:15, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Items that can be picked up
(such as tool s, weapon s, the crude Bed|bed, etc.)

Blocks and building materials
( gravel is the best example, since it is a terrain block, a building material, and can be placed as a sharp-edged building block)


 * It seems to me that you've covered everything pretty well here; in fact the gallery above regarding the different "states" that blocks can have helps clarify a lot of the confusion I had in this area. Thanks!
 * I'll keep this shtuf in mind while I work through some of the other things I'm doing around here and I will try to post additional updates on a daily basis, okay? Or will that hold you up from getting any work done?
 * Of course, if you're feeling adventurous you can always dive into my disjointed ramblings about Categories...
 * &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 06:36, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Whew! Since you didn't think of any other image types, I have what I need to noodle up some good names. So it's all in my court, nothing more needed from you. Now it'll just take a day or three for my "back burner" to bubble up some names I'm happy with.
 * And yeah, I was thinking that this information on what pictures are which should go somewhere. The tutorial? An image how-to? Image policies? Can I leave it to you to find a place for that info somehow?
 * &mdash;Red Agliator (talk) 14:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I'll throw it on the Projects pile/give it some thought. I'm thinking (off the top of my noggin) that it should be somewhere in the area of Image Guidelines/Image Standards/"How images are used throughout the wiki". Are things set up now so that I can go through and upload all of the new inventory images? And what filenaming convention should I use:  inventory.png? Would you prefer a capital or lowercase "i"? Maybe I should just go look at one or two of the item pages you changed today...?
 * &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 17:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Changes to property names

 * If any of your pages use "inventory picture", you can now use "has inventory icon"
 * "main picture" will be going away in the near future (today, tomorrow, or the next day). You can use "has image in world" to get most of the same pages

Have you had a chance to try a boilerplate?
TUG wiki:Choosing a Semantic Boilerplate

I had two purposes with those:
 * Keep all the latest styles/decisions up to date in a central place.
 * If people modify existing pages, they may very well find the ones that don't completely match new ways of doing things. For instance, once we figure out inventory picture vs. main picture, I'll be updating those first with that change.


 * Start trying to document the pages / page types, even if only in a small way.
 * So, as you come up with ideas about what you want to tell new editors, see whether any of that might fit well on those pages.

-Red Agliator (talk) 12:02, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I should have tried this sooner (rather than copy/pasting), but I (finally) used a BP to create a page: Bronze Hoe Head. Due to the BP text being a huge block, I had to break up various portions by adding newlines (i.e. before section headers) and I choose to add other whitespace for readability. Also (minor point, but you may want to add them to the BP) the Workspace item isn't surrounded by double square brackets. --LoonWoof (talk) 15:18, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Sounds like we need to fix the instructions. The idea is to choose "Edit" to see the markup, and copy and paste that into the new page. It has newlines and white space and all sorts of stuff.

I definitely want to get all the BPs fixed. Can you be more specific about which bp is missing the square brackets and where? --Red "Alligator" (talk) 46:17, Bureaucracy 54 in the YOLD 3180 (CTU) '''[edit: added missing signature! =P]'''


 * Yes, the BP in question is TUG wiki:Boilerplate-Crafted-Other and the section reads:
 * Also, if the markup isn't visible at all on the Read page (as it currently is for this one) that would pretty much force editors to use the Edit tab to copy the correctly-formatted markup...
 * --LoonWoof (talk) 04:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * As far as the missing brackets, most of the set commands on this wiki don't require them. (Unimportant technical reason: Property:Is made with workspace has property type "Page".)
 * As for the second half of what you said, I'm not sure what you mean. If you have a specific suggestion in mind, go ahead and just edit the boilerplates/instructions. I'm relying on new people to help write TUG wiki help! (Lucky you!)
 * --Red Agliator (talk) 19:39, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Re: the missing brackets &mdash; instead of:
 * I think it should be:
 * so that a link to the relevent workspace page is created instead of just plain text.
 * so that a link to the relevent workspace page is created instead of just plain text.
 * so that a link to the relevent workspace page is created instead of just plain text.


 * As for making the markup text available only on the edit page there are a couple different templates available on Wikipedia:  and , but apparently they're not available here and I can't seem to get ahold of the markup for them. The only other way I know of accomplishing what I envision is to place an open-ended comment line just before the BP markup, but this prevents any comments from being used within the BP markup itself. I've modified TUG wiki:Boilerplate-Crafted-Other as an example. Feel free to revert the changes or modify the page as you see fit. (BTW, I added "Click the Edit tab..." as a new first step in the instructions for this BP.)
 * &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 04:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Feedback request: which links do new users need?
I'm working on a draft of a welcome message I can post on people's pages. (I started with Wikipedia's welcome messages.) It includes a list of links I think people might need to get started. You've joined more recently than I have, so I'd like your input. Also, is the message missing anything basic? -Red Agliator (talk) 19:28, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I looked over the welcome page and while it's short and concise (almost terse) it seems to contain pretty much those things that new users would need to get started here. Probably the biggest issue is that the Tutorial page doesn't exist yet...


 * Nitpicking: the comment "I hope you enjoy editing here!" sounds to me like a closing statement.


 * Other thoughts: when I first joined and found the Questions page, I avoided using it because there was nothing there yet. Silly, I know. So I thought maybe I would post something like this on the page:

Is this where I should ask questions about this wiki? &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 03:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC) Yes it is! Don't be shy! &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 03:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * This seems like a good place to comment on the welcome message you left for me on my page. It was/is a short but very warm greeting that greatly impressed me favorably. Thank you. (If you'd like to you can review it.)
 * &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 03:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Kinokijin
I love the Kinokojin picture, btw! And personally, don't worry too much about image policy stuff before making things live. Especially whether or not the UI shows -- I can't imagine being skilled enough to turn off my UI AND chase it successfully AND hit the screenshot button.== Kinokijin ==

I love the Kinokojin picture, btw! And personally, don't worry too much about image policy stuff before making things live. Especially whether or not the UI shows -- I can't imagine being skilled enough to turn off my UI AND chase it successfully AND hit the screenshot button. ==Red "Alligator" on Bureaucracy 57 in the YOLD 3180


 * LOL. Thank you. It did take a bit of work and it will probably be even more difficult in future versions of the game once the code is changed so that  critter s don't get stuck in the environment so much. Although I am a little disappointed that the tooltip is partly obscuring its feet. =^ And, of course, I want to get a shot of the Kinokojin's front... Maybe a close-up of its face... (And I'll name the files "K1.png", "K2.png", "K3.png", &c.)
 * &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 16:49, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

New discussion
I put up a new discussion on User:LoonWoof/Discussions/Image Policies and Standards. (Posting this note here so you'll get the 'you have new messages' notice.)

Feedback request: are boilerplate changes acceptable?
I liked your edits to TUG wiki:Boilerplate-Crafted-Other, but I realized that I really wanted to keep the internal comments (such as "recipe definition"). I found a way to do that with the markup, and tried a different way of marking where copy and paste should start and stop. (I also tweaked a few of the instructions.)

I wanted to double-check with you before I format all boilerplates this way: Do my tweaks still solve the problems you were trying to solve? Is this good enough for now? (I expect to continue tweaking the boilerplates frequently.)

And one other question to consider (now or later): would it be helpful to editors if we moved the copy-paste markup to the top of the page? If we do that, it would be the most obvious thing they see once they hit Edit.

Let me know what you think. Red Agliator (talk) 16:35, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, the newest changes look good to me and I agree that it would probably be more convenient for editors if the markup is hidden at the top of the page. I knew there had to be a simple way of hiding text without losing the ability to use comments. Good work.
 * &mdash;LoonWoof (talk) 17:03, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Property: has seed icon
What's your plan for where Property:has seed icon will be accessed? (Which current auto-updating lists need that property, or which manual lists need that in order to be made auto-updating?) &mdash;Red Agliator (talk) 21:00, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info! On my own, I wasn't able to deduce anything from the information you'd made live already.
 * To tell the truth, I'd be happier if new semantic stuff stayed out of the main space even more than you've already done. I noticed that you were testing the display stuff in your sandbox, which is great, but seeing a new property on live pages without a heads up was disconcerting. Here are my first thoughts/suggestions:


 * Use Property:Sandboxing and Property:Sandboxing2 instead of naming a new property right away. That way, if we don't end up implementing and using a new property name, we haven't created a new property name and/or page for later folks to get confused about. (Even if we can eventually delete the property documentation pages, it looks like deleting the property data from Special:Properties will be extremely challenging.)
 * Keep all property markup in a sandbox, not on the live pages. We don't even need to duplicate existing pages (like Melon, etc.): the test markup setting the property can go on any old page. The page names that are returned will be wrong, but the values will be right.
 * Don't implement a new, live property without a working documentation page. The documentation was the first place I looked to see what you were using 'has seed icon' for&mdash;what kind of pages it belonged on, which pages would display it in queries, what problem it was solving, and so on. Once we get a lot of active editors, having documentation right away will be even more helpful.
 * Sorry to be so long-winded on this topic, but apparently it's very important to me to hide semantic stuff as much as (and for as long as) we can while doing the messy work of development. Hopefully I phrased everything in an even-handed manner. And of course, all of the above is open for discussion.
 * &mdash;Red Agliator (talk) 14:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the Property:has seed icon description page! It looks to me like it covers what editors will need to know about the property. –Red Agliator (talk) 14:31, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm marking some pages for proposed deletion
Since none of the currently active editors can delete pages, we're going to need to make a list and contact one of the admins. (I have a few ways to reach the admins if I use non-wiki methods.)

For now, I'm using Category:Proposed deletion to make that list. If it works for you, feel free to join in. (This is a temporary measure; I didn't figure we needed to work out a complicated deletion policy/process yet.)

&mdash;Red Agliator (talk) 15:48, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Grouped objects/items
As this appears to me to be part of the larger "group pages" subject that I've been champing on a while now &mdash; and you seem to have completed all your Primary Projects &mdash; would you have the inclination and time in the near future to discuss the subject and explore its options?

Sure. In the interests of keeping the conversation manageable, we should see if we can narrow down the focus a bit. For example, my main concern with whether or not to group objects has to do with SMW properties: what they yield when broken, where they can be found, and what text (page title) shows up in the various ask queries. If I had to guess, it'd be that your focus on group pages is often from the point of view of images / collections of images. (But that's all by inference from the discussions we've had.) Maybe you could figure out which factors tend make you want group pages, and which factors tend to make you want to split apart group pages, and we can go from there?

Ping me next time we're both on. For me, "Available" means that I'm at or near my computer and checking for chat every 5-30 minutes, so that 'status' means it's a fine time to check in.

&mdash;Red Agliator (talk) 02:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I think User:LoonWoof/Sandbox/Bronze Age (a proposal for an updated Technology page) shows what I'm getting at. In this case, current pages such as Scavenging, Stone Age and Bronze Age would be turned into re-directs such as Technology#Scavenging, Technology#Stone Age and Technology#Bronze Age.

Ah, that's nice and specific! Let me address that one case here–I'm not comfortable treating all group pages as the same. There are many different reasons for the various group pages, and how a particular type of change affects one set of groupings will not be the same as how it affects other groupings.

I see two parts to your suggestion: The first is to put links to sub-items on a group page. (The various sets of galleries on your proposed tech page.) Since that's simply a matter of changing what information is displayed on a page, that won't cause any problem with the SMW features.

The second half, the idea of turning Scavenging, Stone Age , and Bronze Age into redirects will cause significant semantic problems across the wiki. There are many item pages, queries , and properties that use Scavenging , Stone Age , or Bronze Age as part of their semantic markup. In addition, each of those three pages has its own property, Property:sort order, which in turn is used by item pages, queries, and more properties.

Deleting or redirecting any of those three technology subpages will affect all of those properties and queries, as well as every page that relies on any of those properties or queries. (Searching the wiki to find all of those is doable, but complicated enough that we should save that for a different part of the conversation.)

–Red Agliator (talk) 15:19, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Re: Newly Uploaded Images
Thanks for the heads up on contents of the recently uploaded batch of images! I don't expect to be adding those images to pages any time soon, since some new, complicated SMW projects have reared their head. But I'll be sure to check there first. Thanks!

–Red Agliator (talk) 13:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Description for has seed icon property
I'd like to see the Property:has seed icon page filled out as soon as we get the chance, so we have a permanent record of where that property should go, what it should be used for, and so on. For now, there's a paragraph in one of our discussions that explains most of that, but at some point, other editors will have questions about it, too.

Let me know whether you plan to do this, or whether you want me to do this. Thanks!

–Red Agliator (talk) 13:54, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Re: Grouped objects/items
(Or is there a way to have these things apply only to a section instead of a page?)

No. Semantic Mediawiki defines one 'entity' as one page. Values in different sections all apply to the page they're on. Creating three redirect pages to a single page doesn't help, either.

...it seems to me that most of the code could be transferred to the Technology page, the Sort Order and Sort Key seem to be highly dependent on the page on which they're defined

Don't get distracted by sort order and sort key&mdash;they are not the reason that the three technologies need to remain as separate pages. Even if there were no sort order property, if we want three possible values (Scavenging separate from Stone Age separate from Bronze Age), we need three pages.

Look at the updated Technology page. You have one query for  and a different one for. Because of the 'one entity is one page', having two queries means you need two pages.

...in that (as far as I understand this shtuf) group pages should(?) reflect the Category (or possibly the Concept) that is described by the group page's contents. Since "group pages" by their nature should have "members" it seems to follow that some sort of list should be included on the page.

I don't think you and I are using the same meanings for that word "Category." If I carefully read what you say, it sounds to me like you're talking about the abstract concept of a 'category of objects'. When I say "Category," it is not at all abstract. I am thinking about how  is used in SMW: a   allows me to do a search without making a property. If I use those my meanings when reading your quote, I would not be able to agree with what you said. So that tells me that there is some larger misunderstanding going on.

Maybe that's why I have been trying to stick to specific cases instead of talking about things at a higher level&mdash;I feel the chances of understanding each other are higher if we deal in details. It's not that one of us is using the words incorrectly, it's that those words are not working as a way for us to communicate.

–Red Agliator (talk) 14:26, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Distracted for the next few days
This has turned into a family weekend for me, so I'm not sure how much I'll be able to get online between now and Monday. (I don't expect to be on Pidgin or irc at all.) Just a heads up that I'll be slow in responding...

–Red Agliator (talk) 20:05, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Category confusion
Thanks for explaining your intent with the building block question, and no worries about the confusion. I realized when I saw your question that we were thinking about things differently, but it wasn't immediately obvious to me where your thinking was starting. But now I get it! –Red Agliator (talk) 20:43, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Natural Resource
Here's another item/page that I'm confused by its "classification". As far as I understand, Cobblestone is not found "naturally" in the world, it is instead "created" by breaking Stone Blocks. (Perhaps my terms are off somewhat, please let me know if this is so.) If this is correct, why is Cobblestone in  Category:Natural Resource? I added a sentence to the Category:Natural Resource description to hopefully clarify its intended use. See whether that clears up the confusion. If not, explain what that category means to you, and I'll try to figure out where we're different. –Red Agliator (talk) 12:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Re: Important Changes: Apothecary vs. Alchemy
Thanks for updating links and properties to match this standard! I renamed the Potion boilerplate to match, also. Between us, I think we probably caught all the changes we need to make, but I'll keep my eye peeled over the next week or so. –Red Agliator (talk) 13:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Category Hierarchy redirect page
If you have no objections, I'd like to vote for marking the Category Hierarchy redirect page for deletion. It keeps showing up in the search suggestions when I start typing "Category:...". It might confuse new wiki folks if they run across it. Red Agliator (talk) 14:17, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

re: Category:Pages with broken file links
Hrm. I don't understand why that category page is incorrect. I did a test and found out how to fix it, though: I opened Cane Stalk for editing, then saved it without making changes. (Some people call that a "null edit".) It then disappeared from the category.

(As a side note, the refresh command should've done the same thing, but didn't. No idea, don't ask me, lol.)

–Red Agliator (talk) 15:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)