Difference between revisions of "MHWiki talk:Editor's Corner"

From MHWiki
m (New Editors)
m (New Editors)
Line 296: Line 296:
== New Editors ==
== New Editors ==
:Can anyone else vouch for Kathy, she wants to be able to edit so she can do some quite extensive edits: http://www.mousehuntgame.com/forum/showthread.php?1055-The-Official-Wiki-Suggestion-Thread&p=506008#post506008 [[User:Aaronmil|aaronmil]] 12:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
:Can anyone else vouch for Kathy and Tan, they want to be able to edit so they can do some quite extensive updating:
::[[User:Aaronmil|aaronmil]] 12:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:57, 27 June 2011

Access changes after recent vandalism

This discussion was moved from User talk:Grexx as it is an issue that involves the wiki as a whole.

Given the changes required to avoid repeats of the recent vandalism, would it be worth putting some instructions on here as to how to contact one of the editors to inform of updates required / how to apply to become an editor? -- Twentypence 06:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, I have personally tested with a dummy account on exactly how restrictive the new permissions are, and it can be summarized simply that all normal users are not given any editing rights on both articles and discussion pages. So they are effectively shut out of this discussion. To make up for that, any user who is unable to reply here may message me through Facebook with what you wish to add to the discussion. If you so prefer, you can give me your wiki alias and your identity will be kept confidential. However I will only be able to assist on weekends and evenings (GMT+8).
To begin with, I think it bears mentioning that the Developers clearly didn't have the time to consult users on this change as it could be considered an emergency fix. I say this partly because out of the current editor list of 20, just over half are inactives. The issue of wiki permissions is now like a sliding scale that has just moved between two extremes, and we'll need to find a common ground here which can then be further discussed with the Developers. We're not doing this directly over on Dave or Giorgio's talk page since they're probably busy as it is with pushing out content, and the MH Wiki issue likely diverted their schedules by at least 2 to 4 days.
To be clear, as editors, we don't have a direct line to the Developers (except those also marked as Sysops, who are probably staff). So whatever we discuss here may, or may not be implemented.
With regards to any updates, for the time being anything other than very important updates which users can contact myself or any other editor who volunteers, minor edits should be put aside. It is impossible for the current pool of editors to conduct every single edit needed. Also, none of the current group of users with edit permissions actually applied to become editors, but were picked by the Developers based roughly on their level of contributions to the MH Wiki over time, regardless of their current activity in the game or wiki. Thus applying to be an editor is a process that is basically unavailable to users right now based on the current criteria, since they are unable to make any edits at all.
I think a couple of changes need to be made to the current user permissions, which we'll need to let the developers know. Without participation from general users, most wikis will just wither away as existing editors move on to other things, and the MH Wiki is surely not an exception. The question now is what level of participation (ie user rights) would be ideal.
I think as a general starting point, we'll discuss what permissions normal users should have, and separately, what permissions we would like to see given to more frequent users, who are currently under the user group 'editors', as well as laying down some ground rules as to what would qualify a user for editor permissions.
Due to time constraints, I'll just quickly mention what I think should be assigned for normal users. Edit rights is a must to be restored, for both articles and discussion pages. Without users contributing, the wiki certainly won't be as good as it is now, nor as complete. -- Grexx 18:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Just looking through the user permissions page, it says auto-confirmed users can create discussion pages, I presume they can also edit those pages, if that's the case, then could we setup a changes required discussion page where all non-editors can post? While it would still take the current group a lot of time to do all of that, at least we could use it to keep track of what we do need to do, and would show potential new editors to the sysops. -- Twentypence 12:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
The ability to Edit pages and mark edits as minor should be available. If we restrict who can create a new page (which would cut down on content that does not belong) and restrict who can move pages - I think that would have helped against the last round of vandalism. However when a new mouse or location comes out - the casual users created new pages has been useful. I don't see a way out of this conflict of concerns - but I fully support having edit rights restored. -- Ralphminer 14:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Quick update on what I managed to catch from the Feedback Friday session is that they are working on something that will verify and link the MH Wiki accounts to the Facebook MH account, so only actual players will be allowed to edit the wiki, so that should solve the majority of the issues we had. In the meantime, if there is a user that you would like to vouch for to be given editor permissions, I think we can propose the names here and the Developers can decide if they wish to add them up as Editors until something more firm is done up. -- Grexx 19:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I actually don't support having edit rights restored, unless we have active admins on this wiki as en.wiki does. Perhaps we could let anyone edit discussion pages only, and disallow them from editing any other pages or creating a page. If they actually provide constructive contributions, perhaps then give them "Editor" privileges. If they vandalize talk pages, block them.
Re to Twentypence: Even though autoconfirmed users supposedly can create discussion pages, they actually cannot, as they lack the "edit" permission. MC10 04:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion Box

With the current influx of new information, what do people think of having a suggestion box of some kind? I was thinking a thread on the MH forums where players could post things they think need updating / correcting and then we editors can check for any stuff we've missed? -- Twentypence 08:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I second the notion. ____m. 08:21, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I had a chat with a Mod earlier, it's been suggested that we might put a thread in the Community Support and Help, the upside is that there's little traffic so it'll stay relatively close to the top, downside is that not a lot of people scroll that far down on the forums page, so might not see it, we could put a link to it on the front page of the wiki and do some advertising via Nibbler / other threads to increase awareness. -- Twentypence 12:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
It'll work only if there are at least a few editors actively monitoring and making the necessary adjustments. Some care must be taken when making edits based on user feedback because it might not be fully thought out due to lack of editing experience on the part of the general player base. It'll also be a good idea for some ground rules to be laid out right at the start too, to preempt potential problems. A couple of quick rules I can think of would be (1) that not all suggestions will be implemented. (2) It is also up to an interested editor to make an edit, so players should not expect instant adjustments. (3) Players should be credited with the suggestion in the edit summary unless they request otherwise, so that edits are easy to track, as well as providing a basic level of accountability and ownership over the info. This will hopefully avoid too many harebrained suggestions.
Aim to discuss the idea more completely over here and possibly with the mods before proceeding, and all the important information should be presented clearly in the starter post. The majority of people respond to the starter post, and it's always very difficult to post updates in the middle of a discussion, other than creating a new thread. -- grexx 15:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Response from Mods "So far the consensus is that we'd prefer a thread to be kept in Community Support and there to be a prominent link to it on the Wiki.", so I think we should prepare what we want and run it past the Mods, then put a link to the thread on the front page. -- Twentypence 20:11, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I like this idea. Can we do it? I would try to keep track of the thread with the suggestions and respond (either by making changes or explaining why not). I guess we just need to come up with the post, and some way to advertise it on the MHWiki main page... -- Camomiletea 01:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Just to get the ball rolling, here's a first draft for the post, please feel free to make any changes you feel are appropriate then we can forward to the Mods when happy. -- Twentypence 22:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
What about a dedicated MHWiki fanpage? That will leave us with lots of control. Victor.Songtalk 01:45, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Regarding the draft, it's almost good to go. I'm making a few edits to it and we'll see the comments on that. Toning down some of the terms used, as well as lowering the requirement for editing permissions since the wiki has always been open to all to edit, regardless of editing skills, so we should keep the bar to editing rights to a minimum. The only reason we should have some criteria is to avoid having to recommend one-off contributors.
Victor: A dedicated fanpage is a good idea, but it will also mean more things to watch over, and you'll need a pool of users (not necessarily wiki editors) to help with running the fanpage, so that's something to consider. I wouldn't recommend doing it as a solo or small group effort. I think it's a good idea though if there's enough people interested. -- Grexx 05:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Draft Post

The MouseHunt Wiki is a useful resource for all players to find information about the game, and up till recently, it has been available for any player to edit. Unfortunately a recent case of vandalism has seen the developers put in tighter controls temporarily, and currently only a limited number of editors can edit the wiki.

While the developers are working on a more secure method of editing, the current group of editors would like to keep the wiki open as a community effort as input from players is invaluable in keeping the wiki an up-to-date and useful resource for the community. To this end, we invite players to post suggestions for any updates/corrections they feel are needed to the MH Wiki in this thread.

Some quick guidelines for posting:

Please keep your posts concise but informative, preferably with a link to the page in question that needs updating.

Not all suggestions will be implemented, and those that are may not be done instantly due to time constraints, so please do not post duplicate requests for the same changes.

Players whose suggestions are implemented will be credited in the edit summaries, and those with at least a few good suggestions can request for editing permissions on the MH Wiki, which will be put up as a recommendation to the developers. Please ensure that you have registered a wiki account for this purpose.

Thank you for your assistance in keeping the Wiki accurate!

Does anyone have any other changes to make, or should I send to the mods? -- Twentypence 06:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
It's been a few days without any edits, so I'd say it's ready. -- camomiletea 02:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Thread has now been created http://tinyurl.com/mh-wiki-support, I'm going to add a quick link to this on the main page, but feel free to move / edit that. -- Twentypence 05:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
I say it's ready too. Contact the Nibbler too, see if they can feature this in one of their editions. -- Victor.Songtalk 05:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Was just wondering on the activity on the post, and then I saw the thread recently posted (4 hours ago) in the community support forums :) Just wanted to add an additional remark for editors, when you're replying to a specific post/suggestion, it'll be good practice to quote the post number, which will make tracking comments a breeze. -- Grexx 05:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Great idea folks! I fielded a simple and sensible request this evening. Mr Meem 07:09, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Gee, Facebook just removed post numbering with their latest "update". They are turning the forums into a useless comment thread style. Regardless, it's still 30 posts on a page. If possible, do quote the user name and page number, ie "@Contributor 1 (Page 3):", again for easier tracking. If any of you are really bored and like to count sheep, go ahead and quote user name, page number, and post number lol. Like maybe "@Contributor 1 (Page 2, Post 8):". I'd suggest including the post number when replying to a post some time back. It's going to be a bit harder to follow the discussions now though. Can't even reply to a specific individual anymore. -- Grexx 18:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Adding Editors - New Process

Documenting the new process of adding editors... Frequent contributors to the forum thread should be approached to see if they are interested in becoming MH Wiki editors. If so, they should be told to create a wiki account. Then their profile link with their selected wiki username should be sent to Michele Spencer via Facebook private message. -- camomiletea 22:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Good enough for the Main Page ?

I vote for this page to be put under the "You Can Help!"-Section.... as a start. _____m. 19:55, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh it was created with the sole intention to be there lol. But I'm hoping to flesh out the additional pages more before we put it up. Also want to give more time for other editors to improve on the main article, since that's going to be the first point of contact for many first time editors. -- Grexx 20:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Ah, finally. It's more or less completed. There's still touching up needed here and there, but I'll be putting it up in a while after giving it a once over. -- Grexx 19:11, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Data Needed

Removed the link since there doesn't seem to be much permanent need for it. Also, data gathering is probably better done on the forums where there's a larger audience. -- Grexx 11:14, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

MH Wiki In Spanish

Well, I would like to translate MH Wiki, because I know a lot of people that play the game that are Latinoamericans, and do not know English like me. So, if can do it, let me know, because it's something that I really want to do. Anyone who's willing to help me if I get the chance, he/she will be well very useful, and I'll be very thankful.

Thank you.


MH Wiki In Bahasa Indonesia

I am fluently speaking and writing in Bahasa Indonesia. I'm willing to help to translate them in Bahasa Indonesia. --Pus 13:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

MH Wiki in any language

A couple of points to note before embarking on a MH Wiki in any other language:

  • Check with the developers for confirmation before proceeding. This is after all an English wiki, and it could potentially be confusing to players since even fewer editors can vet through information presented in another language for errors, as well as confusing the English MH Wiki players with additional non-english search results.
  • Do not canvass for help on the MH Wiki itself. Most players do not visit the discussion pages at all, so you will find very little response to your alternate language plans. The best place to gather a group of like-minded individuals is on the forums.
  • It is not recommended anyone take up translating as a solo effort as it will be unhelpful for the language speakers if pages are left half-done.
  • In case any work is started, remember you don't need to mimic the MH Wiki proper word for word or layout for layout. A slightly different layout can always be used if it makes more sense for the language.
  • One good way to cut down on work needed is to use transclusions of portions of the MH Wiki pages.

-- Grexx 14:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

As per feedback from the developers, there should be no further addition of any MH Wiki pages in any other language besides English until they determine that there is a need for it, in which case it will probably be on a separate MH Wiki address. Any new non-English pages added will automatically be tagged for deletion.
For the exact text from Dave, his reply to BastetAmidala can be seen here. -- Grexx 11:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Existing non-English MH Wiki articles

Fellow editors, I'm looking for some feedback on what to do with existing non-English articles. Please see the section above for more details. I can think of 2 options at the moment.

  • First option is removal of all alternate language articles.
  • Second option is to create a separate link for these articles and branching out from there.

My opinion is for removal since no further work should be done on them, and they're bound to be outdated, but I'm leaving the option open if someone can come up with a good solution on the issue.

Based on memory, there are both Spanish and French language versions of some pages up at the moment. The Spanish pages should be quite outdated by now as there haven't been any edits to them in a while, and the French pages have just been recently added so should be up-to-date. -- Grexx 11:42, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd also go for removal since there's really no point keeping them if Dave said not to add more which means they're bound to become outdated sooner or later. Maybe somebody can archive whatever is available so that, at the very least, the efforts of non-English editors would not be wasted. Something like placing all available non-English information into one article for now and tag all others for deletion. --Mikeyco 12:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I also think they should be deleted. -- Camomiletea 13:32, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Also I'm not so sure about archiving, because the articles are bound to become out of date. -- Camomiletea 14:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Regarding archiving, another option is to give each page a category such as Category:non-English, then removing all content from them. This way the content is stored for future reference, while at the same time they don't appear in any of the links or search pages and disrupt the functioning of the English MH Wiki. -- Grexx 15:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm I guess we're a little behind on handling the issue. As discussed previously, the articles are bound to be outdated (and probably already are), thus the articles will be cleared and they will be put up for deletion. -- Grexx 20:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Painful Vomiting mouse

I deleted its content because i found it offensive. I still have the codeing though. I did this accidently at first but did not change it yet. if anyone has any opposition or if did it right thank you--Stinson 04:23, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Image Links

Image Bank

After going through the images for Crafting Items (image table is available at Talk:Crafting Items at the moment), I think it would be a good idea to have a record of all MH server image links. It will serve as a backup in case any of the current existing image sites go down. This will be under a new project page, MHWiki:Image Bank. Any indirect images, such as those for Traps and Mice, should have at least 2 copies of each image to ensure continuity. I believe we've had past experience where images were lost for a period of time due to the site link going down. It is vital to note that the Developers have never given players any of the mice images even upon request, so this is an important issue.

Editors should also note that personal records of the images, either on your HDD or website, is not a sufficient guarantee. There is always the possibility that people move on to other things, and with that goes any images. Thus storage should ideally be on reasonably well established 3rd party image hosting services. -- Grexx 06:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I think that linking directly to MH server images would go against the developers' wishes, even if it's for internal editing purposes. Can we at least ask for permission before we proceed with this? -- Camomiletea 13:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough on that point, never thought about that. I'll check with Dave on this and see his response before proceeding. If they don't wish for us to link to MH servers at all, even for editors' use only, then we will probably stick to double copies of every image on external image sites, rather than 1 copy MH and 1 copy external for the majority of items. -- Grexx 15:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Well no response so far on the issue from the developers, probably busy with creating game content. Will be proceeding with introduction of the article shortly. The tables are mostly in place. Hopefully there won't be an issue with the server links. Anyways the editor's links don't get many page views at all. 3 articles with less than 6000 page views between them over a span of 7 months. Will be naming the page MHWiki:Image Links. With a centralized image section, we should be able to get more of the images standardized properly. -- Grexx 16:19, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Silence implies consent. Be aware that server image links will only be good for non-trap images (e.g. mice, bait, loot, etc.). Trap component links are only good as long as the linked hunter's trap setup doesn't change. Also no guarantee that the devs won't change their links, either, but redundancy is always good. :-) --B.Rossow · talk 16:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Yup I've taken that into account in the design of the article. Dynamic images will get dual external links. My main worry is that some of the editors who added the links half a year ago or longer could have moved on and we could end up with some dead links with no quick access to the images. -- Grexx 16:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Sample Tables

I'll be expanding on the article here until it is mostly ready to fit into its own page, or when Dave gives the go-ahead with the MH server image links. -- Grexx 17:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

As this will be under MHWiki:Editor's Corner, it will be relatively barebones without any of the fancier formatting to hide subsection or external links that we have on other pages. This should also make it visually easier to identify where each link leads to, without having to mouseover it. -- Grexx 07:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Another thing I noticed is that they have downscaled some of the images. For example, the original Brie image is a 16.07kb PNG, which is still available on their servers. The new image is a 4.97kb GIF. We should stick with whatever is used in-game, rather than needlessly keeping track of every single revision they make. -- Grexx 07:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

My mistake. Went to double check and realized that the larger PNG image is available from the Cheese Shoppe, versus the smaller GIF which is visible from the Cheese Tab. In this case, as much as possible, we will aim to retain the highest quality image available in-game. I have added a LQ beside any of the images that are of lower quality. The link should be updated when possible. -- Grexx 07:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Realized that the table was getting too long, so it has been shifted to User:Grexx/Sandbox#Image_Links until it is ready.

Location Header Images

I am also thinking of storing the location header images, something which is missing at the current moment. I think it might be of interest to some players. It could be included in each location article. Let me know your thoughts on this. -- Grexx 06:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I have header images stored in this gallery. I think it would be a good idea. -- Camomiletea 13:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
We'll proceed with including the header image into each location article. Only issue is where it should be placed. I don't really like the idea of throwing it right at the bottom under an ==Image== section. I think it would be better to add a short sentence under the Description and Requirements section, for example for Derr Dunes header, something like: The header image shows a Volcano in the backdrop, which appears to be the Dracano location. -- Grexx 18:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

MouseHunt T-shirt Images

The devs have provided a file of some high-res images (~1200 x 1800, PNGs) of mice for the T-shirt contest. I wonder if we're allowed to upload them somewhere and link to them, considering that the ReadMe file says: "Permission to these images were given by HitGrab for the sole purpose of using them in MouseHunt's t-shirt designing contest. Using these images outside of the MouseHunt t-shirt contest is strictly prohibited." Thoughts? -- camomiletea 21:14, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Desc parameter

In templates such as {{Base}}, format seems to be broken if any of the parameters contain more than 1 paragraph. Please use <br /> instead of an emply lines. --Bencmq 00:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Adding horizontal rules

I tried to add a horizontal rule by adding four dashes (----) which is the way wikipedia does it to reflect the horizontal rule used in the dev's FBF update but apparently the Wikia for MHWiki won't support it. Can we add this functionality in? Or am I missing something here? -- Victor.Songtalk 02:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

You're missing something here :D -- Grexx 04:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


Is javascript enabled on the wiki? I'm trying to run User:MC10/Popups.js (warning: about 260 kilobites) by trying to import it to my monobook.js, but to no avail. MC10 01:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Do articles tagged for deletion ever actually get deleted?

I was looking at the List of Orphaned Pages and noticed that a great percent of them are tagged for deletion (and rightly so), but they've remained that way for 3 months or more, never actually getting deleted. Deleting the majority of these pages would make sifting through the real pages on the site easier for the editors. The only downside would be that an uninformed editor may end up re-creating the page if (s)he were unaware that the page was previously deleted. However, I have known other Wikis to keep a "Deletion Log" and display a warning to the user when (s)he tries to create the previously deleted page. Could we do something like that? Or if not, could we just delete the majority of the tagged pages anyway? Just a thought. --Dreamwalker 00:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

If you can get one of the admins here to delete those pages, great. Dave, however, is probably busy, so he doesn't bother. Is it possible for us to elect an admin to help out with the wiki that is more active, and ask Dave to promote him? MC10 00:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
According to the User Rights Log, at least 2 other users have been promoted to Sysops status (perhaps other members of HitGrab staff?), and I'm pretty sure from other Wikis that Sysops have the power to delete. Not really proposing anything here, just mentioning stuff. --Dreamwalker 00:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Golden Shield article

Before the vandalism, I wrote an article for the Golden Shield, but I see that it is gone. Can anyone tell me: was it intentionally deleted (if so, why no redirect?), or was it lost accidentally during the vandalism restoration? --Metal 20:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

It was probably lost due to the recovery from a backup copy. We were missing about 4-7 days worth of edits, and some. If it was deleted you'd be able to see it in the history. -- Grexx 09:12, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Quantity of Loot Drops

Would it be helpful to include the amount of loot a mouse drops? For example, on the Derr Dunes page, the loot drop would be changed to state how many Red Pepper Seeds/Delicious stones are dropped by the mice there. Like Red Pepper Seed (1-3) for the Chieftain. Thanks --Azorious 10:25: 5 April 2010

I guess the max-min ranges would be helpful. Luck has a small effect, so we can't (easily) give averages. --Metal 14:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, I believe luck just increases your chance of getting more loot, but doesn't affect the possibility of getting more of a loot. It increases in probability, not possibility. Though maybe we should allow more people to comment on the matter. --Azorious 14:53 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Regardless of the effect of luck (and hunter title?), it would be tedious to list all the details for different setups. A range of 0-3 is sufficient. --Metal 15:09, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
This has been discussed before: Talk:Mice#Loot_drop_amounts
The suggestion to add a min-max range (e.g., 0-3 Red Pepper Seeds per catch, 0-1 Veggies for Beast Tamer, 0-3 Seashells for Pack, etc.) wasn't discussed previously and is not subject to the same objection. At the very least, this could go on the mice's pages, if not the area pages. --Metal 15:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Azorious asked about adding the amount of loot dropped, which has been discussed before. Anyway, I didn't link the discussion as an argument pro or contra. I do believe it's relevant however. -- rh 21:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
So, what do you think should happen? I wouldn't mind whether it went on the mice page or the area page. And now that I think about it, the range of loot drop would suffice. Add the information or not? --Azorious 08:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Sure, go for it. --Metal 12:59, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hold up a bit and think over the changes needed first. What I mentioned half a year ago under Talk:Mice#Loot drop amounts doesn't disappear overnight. You'll need to consider how, and where it could possibly be applied, as well as the effects. I'm not against an implementation of loot drop amounts, but it involves too many possible articles to be done haphazardly. It needs to be thought out where it should be included, and what purpose it would serve then.
Some quick issues that I can think of offhand is that there is need to consider how to handle when mice don't drop the same loot or amounts in the various locations they reside in (ie White Mouse, Black Widow). Where the information is located (Mice, Location, or Loot pages?) and how it is presented is also important. How it is going to be rolled out is another issue. The information itself should not pose too big a problem if you can get help from the folks at MH Analytics. -- Grexx 18:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
We could do the simple stuff first. The Tribal Isles is an obvious place to start since it is straightforward. I'd say the info could go on both the location and the mice pages. E.g.:
  • Beast Tamer would change from "They are known to drop Savoury Vegetables in Nerg Plains." to "They may drop a Savoury Vegetable on each capture in Nerg Plains" or similar.
  • Pack would change from "They are known to drop Seashells in Elub Shore." to "They are known to drop up to three Seashells in Elub Shore" or similar.
  • On the Elub Shore page, the Loot column in the table could be amended to include the possible number of drops.
Similarly for all the areas in the TI, including Dracano and JoD. --Metal 21:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
That looks good to me. Should I put this under the articles needing page under pending tasks? Or is there anything else that might be a problem that has to be discussed first? --Azorious 06:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
There are more things to be addressed, but I won't be able to follow through with this and work it all out due to time constraints, so if you guys think this is sufficient to proceed then go ahead unless other editors have something to add. Overall there shouldn't be any major problems since getting all the information up properly is better than not having it up there. Further adjustments can be made as needed, and sometimes things become clearer after they're put up into the articles. -- Grexx 09:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I say go ahead with Tribal Isles info. Then let's re-evaluate. --Metal 17:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Metal's plan sounds plausible to me. ____m. 12:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
I think that if this is done, it should be done for all locations at the same time, not just Tribal Isles. -- camomiletea 15:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Organization of Categories

This discussion was copied from Category talk:Gameplay as it involves the overall organization of categories on the wiki.

Hmm I do recall this being discussed someplace, but here should be a more suitable spot. The gameplay category seems to me, to be quite redundant. Everything on the wiki is related to the game, so unless we have a clearer definition of what belongs under the gameplay category, I think it might be a good idea to do away with it. -- Grexx 03:54, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree - doesn't seem to provide value -- Ralphminer 11:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Maybe this should be the root category? I think this category would be better then Category:Browse --Nux 22:07, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree with deleting this. --Dreamwalker 01:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I think the Categories as a whole need some looking over. Category:Browse seems to be useful, but the naming is too ambiguous to serve a useful purpose. This is going to require some thinking over. My thoughts is that Categories as a whole should be modelled after Site Maps. It currently serves as a partial site map, but the hierarchy is unclear due to numerous reasons, and so can't be properly utilized. Getting the hierarchy cleaned up will aid in overall page design greatly. Some useful reading on site maps is available here and here.
I won't be able to follow up on this for the next 2 months at least, and my guess is it'll still be outstanding then, though it would be great if someone does get started on it :) If someone does get started, I'll try to drop by now and then to offer some help. In the meantime, I'm moving this topic over to the talk page on the Editor's Corner. A quick appraisal would be that this is quite a large project since it involves thinking over the logical layout of the wiki, which is in a bit of a mess right now. There is no clear top-level category and some odd categorization here and there, and some more unnecessary double categorizations and so on, which can be fixed only with a clear hierarchy. This would require a category by category look through to see where in the hierarchy each category belongs. -- Grexx 17:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


Now every mouse's weakness is ??. What should we put? Main weakness? or everything? -Bencmq 19:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm a bit torn on the issue. On the one hand, I think it's more useful to put in the main weakness, but on the other hand that doesn't give the full picture. I definitely think that the mice should have a bit of a writeup listing all the weaknesses, especially if they are different from the typical weaknesses of a mouse group they belong to (e.g. Silth and Forest Guild). I asked Brossow to reply here since he's the one who added the item to the template. -- camomiletea 02:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Only "very effective" weaknesses in the infobox. Everything else (normal and less effective) can be addressed in the main narrative. The infobox is so people can tell at a glance what's most important (not every little detail), and only the very effective weaknesses are most important. B.Rossow · talk 02:58, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
For mice like Acolyte and Dragon which have no "very effective" weapon for them, I'm sure you'd want the best type listed anyway, even if it's only "normal", right? -- camomiletea 03:02, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, just checked and looks like they changed those ratings and they do have "very effective" types... So it's a moot question now, but if it happens, we'll deal with it then. -- camomiletea 03:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Yup. :-) B.Rossow · talk 03:24, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
I posted about this same issue on the Template:Mouse talk page, as well as the FB group — glad to finally find where the conversation is taking place! (Thanks for the link, ____m.!)
I understand the general idea that the infobox should be used for getting the most salient information at a glance, so I accept that premise. However, I'm of the opinion that in this instance, listing all three effectiveness levels meets that criterion. (You can see how I'd display the info in this edit, which has since been reverted.) I'm thinking about it primarily from the user's standpoint. For example, consider the Digby Dirt Dwellers. None of them have a "Very Effective" trap weakness, but unlike the Indigenous group, which can apparently be caught by any trap power type, the Digby Dirt Dwellers only have 4 "Effective" power types. As a user, I'd consider that very important info! And I'd find it confusing to have the infobox read "Weaknesses: None" or "Weaknesses: — " when clearly there is an effectiveness preference.
So, I obviously think we should list all three levels of effectiveness; I don't think it takes up an unacceptable amount of space, and I think it's important information to convey. However, if the feeling of the group is that only "Very Effective" power types should be listed, then I think we definitely need to change the language of the field label from "Weaknesses" to something that indicates that we're only including "Very Effective" power types — at least that would (hopefully) prevent some confusion. Perhaps Very Effective Trap Types: ? And then a chart could be templated to include the full range of weaknesses in the narrative.
Don't mean to be contrary… just my $.02! :) (FWIW, I'm quite happy to take on some of the editing necessary to get all this data into the wiki once it's sorted out how the field should be used.) --GoBecky 10:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
My feelings on the topic are obvious. Readers should not be getting all of the necessary info from an infobox. Otherwise, let's just reduce the wiki to a series of infoboxes and be done with it, saving a lot of editing hassle. "Less Effective" is an utterly worthless stat to include in an infobox; even the laziest hunter who can't be bothered to read the narrative but who has at least a shred of common sense should be able to infer which traps are less effective by virtue of the fact that they're not listed in the infobox (and in the case of mice with "very effective" stats, even which trap types are merely "effective"). With all due respect, your changes to the infobox added a lot of pointless clutter, as would the long string of text you proposed above. Readers should know (or will learn) that the infobox is at-a-glance info for a general overview, not every last little detail they need to play the game. That's why we have the narrative; if you think that the narrative is unnecessary, then I suggest you forward a proposal to convert the whole wiki to a series of infoboxes. B.Rossow · talk 12:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

To Becky: personally, I kinda envision it as listing the power types that are known to be best against the mice, so that if there is no "very effective", we'd list the next best "effective", etc. But there should be a separate narrative (outside of the infobox) providing the details explaining which power types are very effective, effective, or less effective (and perhaps ineffective too), and pointing out the things like there is no very effective and what's in the infobox is only "effective". I hope that makes sense! This can be a narrative in the Hunting Strategy section. I certainly think it needs overhaul.. -- camomiletea 17:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Very well put, Camomiletea!
I think this is the best way to go. Now we only need to find a way to shorten the long list for the Indigenous mice – best would be one line – to avoid the above-mentioned »pointless clutter« … :s ____m. 21:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
We can say "All except Parental" for the Indigenous Mice. -- camomiletea 04:31, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay… Is this the »Go!« then? Everyone agrees and is happy? Smiles all around? ;)
I guess what I'd like to know is: Can we start working and implement the data? ____m. 13:09, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Please do! :-) B.Rossow · talk 13:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I just posted a big ol' long post saying how brilliant Camo's solution was, and it seems to have gotten lost in the cracks of the internet, as it's not showing up in Recent Changes or this page's history. Fail. Anyway, yes, I think we should proceed. I'd like to help with the infoboxes, at least until a consistent format for the narrative part is established. I'll start working on the infoboxes for the mice in alpha order (as listed on Mice); if someone else wants to work on the infoboxes as well, perhaps they could start at the end of the list and work backwards? Also, a question/preference: as a user, I'd find it more helpful if the links went to the category lists for weapons of a given power type rather than the corresponding narrative section on Power Type. (Ex: Category:Physical Weapons rather than Power Type#Physical.) Is that ok? --GoBecky 13:28, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Given that the categories have no narrative associated with them, I'd strongly prefer that the links go to the Power Type article instead. Our goal should be to educate, not just provide the shortest route to playing. Direct the players to the page that explains the various power types, which then link to the categories where they can find those weapons. My $0.02. B.Rossow · talk 13:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Understood. I'll get started on the infoboxes after breakfast, then! (Although your post reminds me of some discussion awhile back on the Wiki Suggestions thread about fleshing out the Category listings with some narrative & a comparison chart… will have to remember to come back to that…) --GoBecky 13:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

New Editors

Can anyone else vouch for Kathy and Tan, they want to be able to edit so they can do some quite extensive updating:
aaronmil 12:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)