18,700
edits
User talk:Paradox-01/Archive1: Difference between revisions
m
link fixes
Paradox-01 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
m (link fixes) |
||
| Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
==List of (now) unused sections== | ==List of (now) unused sections== | ||
While translating I noticed two misplaced sections. "Where went all the details?" was actually part of "Griffin in a Syndicate helicopter?" but off-topic. | While translating I noticed two misplaced sections. "Where went all the details?" was actually part of "Griffin in a Syndicate helicopter?" but off-topic. | ||
* [[Talk:Restless_Souls/Reconstruction/Gapfilling#Where went all the details. | * [[Talk:Restless_Souls/Reconstruction/Gapfilling#Where went all the details.3F]] (contains Hardy's talk) | ||
* [[Talk:Restless_Souls/Reconstruction/Gapfilling#Jamie]] (random thoughts) | * [[Talk:Restless_Souls/Reconstruction/Gapfilling#Jamie]] (random thoughts) | ||
::Paradox, you do know about this page, right? -- <nowiki>[[Restless_Souls/Reconstruction/Summary_of_2032]]</nowiki>. It is orphaned, so I just wanted to make sure you didn't forget about it. --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] 20:13, 28 February 2008 (CET) | ::Paradox, you do know about this page, right? -- <nowiki>[[Restless_Souls/Reconstruction/Summary_of_2032]]</nowiki>. It is orphaned, so I just wanted to make sure you didn't forget about it. --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] 20:13, 28 February 2008 (CET) | ||
| Line 501: | Line 501: | ||
Just wanted to say, I still feel this is an important thing to add to the wiki. But I made it too complex the first time around. Rather than a dynamically generated table, we should probably stick to something that is set up manually. Although my more complex code was never finished, we do still have the hovertable class available, as used above (and I can easily change it to display info on a click instead of a mouse-hover if that's better). Let me know if you have any new ideas on how to present the info, or if you want to stick with the format we had before. | Just wanted to say, I still feel this is an important thing to add to the wiki. But I made it too complex the first time around. Rather than a dynamically generated table, we should probably stick to something that is set up manually. Although my more complex code was never finished, we do still have the hovertable class available, as used above (and I can easily change it to display info on a click instead of a mouse-hover if that's better). Let me know if you have any new ideas on how to present the info, or if you want to stick with the format we had before. | ||
The fact is, looking at this with a fresh perspective, I'm not 100% convinced that the arrow-based table is the best use of space or the easiest thing to read, or that we need fancy JS either. What about the simple text-based approach I suggested [[ | The fact is, looking at this with a fresh perspective, I'm not 100% convinced that the arrow-based table is the best use of space or the easiest thing to read, or that we need fancy JS either. What about the simple text-based approach I suggested [[Special:Permalink/21714#Organizing_the_modding_side_of_the_wiki|here]], combined with your anchor-based TOC serving as an alphabetical index at the beginning? --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] ([[User talk:Iritscen|talk]]) 00:03, 18 April 2013 (CEST) | ||
: About that thing at [[ | : About that thing at [[Special:Permalink/21714#Organizing_the_modding_side_of_the_wiki|Current_events]]. Sounds like you want a simple page with sections and links. So if you don't want to hierarchal information then you could take [[XML:File_types]] and extend it. In that case I wouldn't use '''<nowiki>===</nowiki>''' but '''<nowiki>{{Anchor|some_anchor_name}}</nowiki>'''. This prevents the page to be ripped in sections. By that the user can follow links and the page will still look nice. --[[User:Paradox-01|paradox-01]] ([[User talk:Paradox-01|talk]]) 12:56, 18 April 2013 (CEST) | ||
::Basically, yes. I like that "File types" page, I just would like the descriptions to be a bit longer and to list what types they have under them, or what types can contain them, and maybe group them by type. I think I'll make a separate WIP table in my userspace so I don't mess up yours, because I'm not 100% clear on what I want it to look like. --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] ([[User talk:Iritscen|talk]]) 13:59, 18 April 2013 (CEST) | ::Basically, yes. I like that "File types" page, I just would like the descriptions to be a bit longer and to list what types they have under them, or what types can contain them, and maybe group them by type. I think I'll make a separate WIP table in my userspace so I don't mess up yours, because I'm not 100% clear on what I want it to look like. --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] ([[User talk:Iritscen|talk]]) 13:59, 18 April 2013 (CEST) | ||