Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

Revision as of 21:50, 13 May 2009

Note: If you have a new issue, go to the bottom, and put it's title inside a 'Level 2 headline', or two equal signs. Also, please sign your work by hitting the Sign with timestamp button. Thanks!

For General questions, not linked to the main page, please go to the Frequently Asked Questions Talk Page

Move categories to the top

First time I checked out the new wiki site and I completely missed the categories down at the bottom of this page and wondered where all the content was hidden.

Newcomers who want to browse should see the categories more prominently, like at the top of the this page.

This is a good suggestion but unfortunately moving categories on top would break the page design.--ISD Elumiel 13:12, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Example: Band of Brothers (Player alliance)

Compare the current revision (which had wikilinks added left and right upon submittal) to the draft (which has most redundant/irrelevant wikilinks stripped). Elyon Itari 12:10, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain a bit better what is the problem here ? If it is the autolinker, there is unfortunately nothing we can do atm. --ISD Elumiel 13:14, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

ParserFunction missing

Can we get Parser Function installed? It is an extra module on MediaWiki 1.70 and above. More info at the MediaWiki website. Otherwise, it's hard to make templates that are adaptable, and are pretty rigid otherwise. In particular, Template:ShipFit is having to look like Template:ShipFitBlind, which is not good, I want to differentiate between purposefully empty slots. There might be another way to do this, but right now, it's missing functionality. Direct comments to my talk page, thanks. Oh yeah, the moderation module is breaking Redirects, until they are approved. Once they're approved, they redirect just fine. --Kismeteer 08:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Note, this is still an on-going problem and will inhibit proper use of templates in the future. As of the last week of 2008, this request was denied, so don't use the #if clause in any template creation. --Kismeteer 21:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Parser function is not something CCP is planning to implement at the moment on the EVElopedia --ISD Elumiel 13:15, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Character and Corporation templates need fixing for IGB

The character and corporation templates both have a right-floated table with global info as well as the portrait / logo image. In the ingame browser, these tables show up left-aligned in front of the content text, effectively making these pages unreadable. As the EVElopedia is supposed to be ingame browser compatible, I think it would be good to modify these templates so they are at least readable.

Template: Character Example: AeonOfTime

Template: Player Corporation Example: Syrkos Technologies

Not following naming conventions

There is a new tag that you can add to such pages to list them in a Category. Template:nc

Not such a big thing but...

It would be nice if someone (or many people) can add some more details to item and ship pages. As they stand, they are pretty useless, when I can simply use the in-game browser for stats. I mean like extra information not covered by the stat screen, such as info like "Iridium is the most powerful out of Blaster ammunition types" or whatever, or "Many new players stick with the Tristan for a time because of its strengths in thing and thing"

They need a human touch, in short. Stats only tell the reader so much. --Nitro Landar 01:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, the fundamental idea behind the wiki is for players to edit these pages and add their own content to them to make the EVElopedia more informative, you are welcome to change/add info to these pages if you wish ISD Erilus Nex 18:17, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I second Nitro here. that is the kind of infos I'd also expected to find here ("Many new players stick with the Tristan for a time because of its strengths..."). well, its work in progress I guess...--It'Pannaih 10:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Well yeah, I know that, but the problem is I don't know anything. I couldn't write anything of use, but I'm sure some people have the list of the best ships and fittings memorized, for example. --Nitro Landar 14:22, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Auto linking is overzealous

The Autolinking feature on saving an article is currently overzealous, and needs some additional rules added to it:

• Do not autolink to the same page that is being written
  • eg. the Factional Warfare page contains links to Factional Warfare
• Do not autolink to redirects to the same page that is being written
  • eg. the Factional Warfare page has links to FW
• Do not autolink on the same word more than once in a sub-heading area
  • Eg. You don't need to links to Serenity Steele more than once in a document level, because a second link to Serenity Steele does not assist the reader and only makes it harder to read.

Adding to list (fully agree). DrAtomic 00:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

• Dont link generic words that are common to use in eve related articles
  • Eg. POS, corp, pvp, cep, corporation, PVP, CEO, etc.
    • Indeed, good point. Daquaris 17:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
    • I disagree, at least to some extent. Having a single link to the first reference of a POS or other moderately advanced (for inexperienced players, anyway) subjects seems meaningful. Elyon Itari 05:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Is autolinking forcefully enabled for every edit? I just spent an entire evening rewriting an article (including the removal of redundant links), only to have most of these links added again automatically. To be quite honest, I would personally much prefer manual wikilinking, since it seems the autolinking feature does more harm than good (for now, anyway). Elyon Itari 05:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, I'll forward your suggestions to the developers, but this has been an ongoing issue since before the wiki was launched, and it is unlikely to be disabled at any time in the near future. The only way to remove them is to add <nowiki></nowiki> tags around words you don't want autolinked, which is not ideal but it's the only option we have at the moment. ISD Erilus Nex 18:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Then, I would like to know - would anyone mind (or rather, would it be a problem in general) if I temporarily <nowiki'ed> some links in particarly offending articles (those with a disturbing amount of irrelevant autolinks)? Since, in my opinion, it really makes some articles unreadable, and completely destroys what use the proper links might have had, and leaves quite a bit of EVElopedia articles below acceptable with regards to readability (and thus, usefulness). Of course, these are quite possibly just my thoughts, but ... well? Elyon Itari 11:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

No, no problem in using the nowiki tag in some articles, that's the only way we can operate right now. --ISD Elumiel 13:16, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Category listing too cluttered

I notice that there's a List Exempt category to avoid having solar systems in the random page selector. Might I suggest that Constellations and Regions be added to some sort of List exempt category so they don't appear in the category list?

Also, the Category Tree tool isn't very useful and should probably be replaced with something similar to the textual category tree

--Alezra 23:32, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Rorqual Capital Industrial Ships assembly lines.

does anyone kno0w of any of these near IKAO system?

Finding the Evelopedia

Is there a link to the Evelopedia from the www.eveonline.com website? I've never found it. I have to do a 'search' to get an article to get directly here. --Marconi Bandr 00:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

EVElopedia Guide link needs fixing

The link titled EVElopedia guide at the bottom of the page currently links to Guide, but probably should link to EVElopedia guide

--Bel Amar 21:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

fixed --ISD BH Lenider 16:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

'Cateory' tag causing links to inconsistantly disapear in body text.

Heyas

Perhaps a minor issue, but I've noticed that while trying to add links to constellations the text dissapears

Like in the following example:.

Checking the edit should show that an entry was in fact made in the gaps both above and below.
Sometimes it works for, and standard categories like. Links such as, seem to work sometimes but not always and I can't see any consistant method of making it work. In some articles - including some of my own - it works, in others, it doesn't.

My primary issue, this is not usually a problem as alternate links can be found for everything except constellations. No page exists for them outside of a category tag.
When attempting to link constellations for which no page exists (They are catagories, and have no actual pages that I can find) and no redirect has been made such as for UTQ-BO then the result is 29V-1R.
I'm probably over-complicating the issue, but I don't see why the category: tag sometimes causes the link to disapear, but not always, and the only solution to the constellation problem appears to add redirects where needed.
Interscene 01:37, 14 May 2009 (GMT)

If you make a link like [[Category|Name]], it simply adds the article to a category. Hence no link showing up. However, if you make a link like Name</nowiki> the : turns it into a link rather than adding the article to that category. --ISD Salpsan 03:50, 14 May 2009 (GMT)