Oolite Bulletins

Fatleaf wrote:

Smivs wrote:

OK, I changed the stub pages to redirects (well, back to a redirect in the Boa's case) and this stops them showing on the Oolite ships page, so redirect's aren't the amswer I'm afraid.
Maik, I don't like the idea of having info spread over lots of pages for one OXP. What do you see as the purpose/benefit of having the info box on the ship page as opposed to the OXP's page?

Just throwing idea's about!

How about the way the Dragon does it? With multiple entries in the box. It works with the new way and shows up on the Dynamic list without any problems. Like I said just throwing ideas about!!!

It kills sorting if ships have names starting with different letters, different prices, etc.

So should I leave the Dragon where it is or change it back tot he old style?

Fatleaf wrote:

So should I leave the Dragon where it is or change it back tot he old style?

Right now the dynamic list displays nonsense for the Dragon. I would extract the ships to individual pages, like I did for the [wiki]BoyRacer[/wiki], and also mark them as stubs. Can't hurt to have someone write a bit more background on them later. Let's only keep Smivs' pages as they are as he objects to this practice.

maik wrote:

Fatleaf wrote:

So should I leave the Dragon where it is or change it back tot he old style?

Right now the dynamic list displays nonsense for the Dragon. I would extract the ships to individual pages, like I did for the [wiki]BoyRacer[/wiki], and also mark them as stubs. Can't hurt to have someone write a bit more background on them later. Let's only keep Smivs' pages as they are as he objects to this practice.

Shouldn't we also ask Cdr. Wyvern if he objects to his page being fiddled with as he might not appreciate it.

I would be more comfortable leaving the multiple entries out till we have asked the author for his thoughts before hacking them up.

Why is a lot of the entries that are OXP ships being displayed as Standard when their page lists them as OXP?

Smivs wrote:

Maik, I don't like the idea of having info spread over lots of pages for one OXP. What do you see as the purpose/benefit of having the info box on the ship page as opposed to the OXP's page?

Commander McLane already gave a good answer to the first part. Regarding your question: The purpose is to have all ships show up as one line in the dynamic ship list. This only works for cases where there is one ship info box per ship per one wiki page. All other cases lead to problems:

• One wiki page with more than one ship info box gets a comma separated list for each parameter in the table. This breaks sorting (only the first entry is used for sorting) and calculations (cargo size and volume).
• One wiki page with one ship info box for many ships also breaks sorting and calculations for the same reasons.

The benefit is that your ships get free exposure in all dynamic ship lists, which can replace the alphabetical, fastest, biggest, most expensive, etc. ship lists that you find when you click on "Ships" on the Oolite main page.

Fatleaf wrote:

Why is a lot of the entries that are OXP ships being displayed as Standard when their page lists them as OXP?

cim already noticed it above, I use the wrong source to determine this property and will fix it shortly.

Fatleaf wrote:

maik wrote:

Fatleaf wrote:

So should I leave the Dragon where it is or change it back tot he old style?

Right now the dynamic list displays nonsense for the Dragon. I would extract the ships to individual pages, like I did for the [wiki]BoyRacer[/wiki], and also mark them as stubs. Can't hurt to have someone write a bit more background on them later. Let's only keep Smivs' pages as they are as he objects to this practice.

Shouldn't we also ask Cdr. Wyvern if he objects to his page being fiddled with as he might not appreciate it.

I would be more comfortable leaving the multiple entries out till we have asked the author for his thoughts before hacking them up.

Also a solution. It that case I suggest to leave them using the plain Infobox ShipStats Oolite template so they don't turn up in the dynamic list with wrong entries.

Edited to add: I have a rather liberal attitude with regards to wiki content. The disclaimer under the edit box says: Don't submit unless you understand that your submission can and will be edited mercilessly. There is no page ownership, everybody is free to modify content pages. Authors come and go, asking for permission to change someone else's content can be quite impractical. Especially, if multiple authors are involved.

That said, I understand that one might feel it's wrong to work like this. Asking can't hurt and if someone expresses his objection then of course it should be respected.

maik wrote:

Edited to add: I have a rather liberal attitude with regards to wiki content. The disclaimer under the edit box says: Don't submit unless you understand that your submission can and will be edited mercilessly. There is no page ownership, everybody is free to modify content pages. Authors come and go, asking for permission to change someone else's content can be quite impractical. Especially, if multiple authors are involved.

That said, I understand that one might feel it's wrong to work like this. Asking can't hurt and if someone expresses his objection then of course it should be respected.

For me it seems a bit presumptuous to change somebody else's work 'without so much as a by your leave'. I appreciate the need to have a disclaimer for anybody to be able to edit content. But that doesn't mean we have to abandon manners and adopt a 'because I have a right to do something I shall do it' attitude. But that is just my way of working. If an oxp seems have been abandoned and the author has disappeared then he could be deemed to have abandoned the work then I have no objection.

But as I said that is just my personal opinion.

That's the 'D' section complete. Moving on to the 'C' since I see it hasn't been started on.

Fatleaf wrote:

maik wrote:

Edited to add: I have a rather liberal attitude with regards to wiki content. The disclaimer under the edit box says: Don't submit unless you understand that your submission can and will be edited mercilessly. There is no page ownership, everybody is free to modify content pages. Authors come and go, asking for permission to change someone else's content can be quite impractical. Especially, if multiple authors are involved.

That said, I understand that one might feel it's wrong to work like this. Asking can't hurt and if someone expresses his objection then of course it should be respected.

For me it seems a bit presumptuous to change somebody else's work 'without so much as a by your leave'. I appreciate the need to have a disclaimer for anybody to be able to edit content. But that doesn't mean we have to abandon manners and adopt a 'because I have a right to do something I shall do it' attitude. But that is just my way of working. If an oxp seems have been abandoned and the author has disappeared then he could be deemed to have abandoned the work then I have no objection.

But as I said that is just my personal opinion.

I know there are different opinions on this. What it shows it that we should have our own Elite Wiki Etiquette spelled out. That would certainly help avoiding treading on people's toes. But this is a topic for another thread.

Back to topic: I'll continue with 'E' now.

Y and Z done

That's 'C' done. I'm taking a break before the 'F'in ones!

I haven't included the following ships for the above reasons.

Chopped Cobra, Clippers, Cobra III NjX.