Difference between revisions of "CreationKit:Community Portal/Organization"

← Older edit

CreationKit:Community Portal/Organization (edit)

Revision as of 08:13, 26 August 2013

10,817 bytes added , 08:13, 26 August 2013

m

→‎Papyrus Functions Organisation: Added note on unsual papyrus function page names.

Anonymous user

imported>CraftySentinel

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 __NEWSECTIONLINK__
-''Please add new topics of discussion to the top of the page, with its own secondary header (example: == Header ==). ''
+''Please add new topics of discussion to the bottom of the page, each with its own secondary header (example: == Header ==). You can do this easily by clicking the '''+''' button.''
+== Questions unrelated to the Wiki ==
+I was wondering what the consensus was, on the subject of allowing the creation of new articles for generic modding-related questions. If it's no different from the [http://cs.elderscrolls.com/index.php/Talk:Main_Page#Questions_should_go_to_the_forums CS wiki], perhaps something like [http://cs.elderscrolls.com/index.php/Talk:Main_Page#Heads-up_for_new_users this] could be implemented this time around?<br /><b>[[User:ShadeMe|shadeMe]] <sup>[[User_talk:ShadeMe|<span style="font-family: Oblivion, Daedric Runes; size=2;">TALK</span>]]</sup></b> 05:22, 22 February 2012 (EST)
+:Yes, this should be all things modding, not just the CK, despite the name.
+:As for the welcome script, everything I said then is still true, though I don't think the DWbot account is set up yet.
+:[[User:Dragoonwraith|<span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">D</span>ragoon <span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">W</span>raith]] [[User_talk:Dragoonwraith|<span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">TALK</span>]] 22:09, 22 February 2012 (EST)
 == Making Papyrus entries the main ones ==
@@ Line 157: / Line 166: @@
 :This is very useful, I'm sure it helps a lot in the long run!
 :--[[User:Qazaaq|Qazaaq]] 11:32, 18 February 2012 (EST)
+:: Thanks for applying them to [[:Category:Getting Started]] - and for indirectly teaching me that you can just use <code><nowiki>{{name|blah...}}</nowiki></code> instead of the decidedly more cumbersome <code><nowiki>{{Template:name|blah...}}</nowiki></code>!
+::Turns out the [[:Template:ErrorBox|ErrorBox]] was only ever created by one user, in one place, and I've since replaced that with a WarningBox anyway. It's pointless and confusing when WarningBox exists, and the ErrorBox icon could be confused with IncompletePage icon. So I've Afd'd it.
+::[[:Template:SteamTip|SteamTip]] is only used on [[Main Page]]. Would be cool if it could be replaced by the template, to take advantage of Qazaaq's cool size-fiddling.
+::[[:Template:WarningBox|WarningBox]] is a dumb name that I now regret, and I'd rename it if I knew how, and if I could think of a better name.
+:: --[[User:Catwheezle|Catwheezle]] 00:32, 19 February 2012 (EST)
+:::You can "rename" anything by Moving it. Moving will keep its associated history, and set up a redirect (which works as hoped for with Templates).
+:::[[User:Dragoonwraith|<span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">D</span>ragoon <span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">W</span>raith]] [[User_talk:Dragoonwraith|<span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">TALK</span>]] 09:25, 20 February 2012 (EST)
+== Snippets ==
+There are quite a few pieces of information on the wiki that could be used in multiple places. Examples of this are hotkeys and the summary of a script function. I'm going to call these pieces snippets.
+Snippets are ideally defined only once. That allows us to make changes more quickly, and it makes it easier to keep the information accurate.
+The ideal place to define a snippet is on the page that also contains the detailed information on that topic. This means the following for our examples. The summary/definition of a function can be defined under its own heading on the script function's own page. Controls can be defined on a separate page listing all controls available for a specific window.
+Applying snippets can be done by transcluding the page (note, this is not necessarily a template) with the snippet into the page where the snippet should be displayed. For this page containing the snippet should be setup with <tt><nowiki><includeonly></nowiki></tt>, <tt><nowiki><noinclude></nowiki></tt> and <tt><nowiki><onlyinclude></nowiki></tt>-tags to only display the snippet after transclusion.
+A problem arises when more than one snippet needs to be defined on the same page. For example a controls page could have different snippets with sets of controls for different tasks. There are two viable options here:
+; Snippets on subpages
+: This allows us to keep the snippets related to the page they belong to. Ideally all subpaged snippets are used in the article they belong to.
+; Snippets on templates
+: This allows us to keep the snippets
+===Keeping track of snippets===
+I have identified the following options for tracking snippets:
+; Snippet category
+: Keeping all snippets in a snippet category. Note that only complete pages can be added to a category. This means not a snippet is added to the category, but the article containing it. This is not an issue if all snippets are defined on their own page.
+; Manual listing of all snippets
+: This method works unrelated to where the snippets are defined.
+''Unfinished'' [[User:Qazaaq|Qazaaq]] 09:59, 21 February 2012 (EST)
+:: I ran into this problem last night, with the Preview window controls. I put them into the tutorial I was working through, realized that was a retarded place to duplicate the information, and moved them into the page about the Preview window instead.
+::I'm unsure that having the controls hidden off on a separate page would be terribly useful to someone reading the tutorial (the controls would be two clicks away; or there's need to be two tabs they'd need to open up). But at the same time, it kind of makes sense to have quickref sheets as a separate thing.
+:: I'd vote for using templates instead, because they're cool and froody... but they may fail with large snippets, so may be considerably less froody than expected.
+::With other templates, I've had them add to a category on the assumption that other people are like me, and want to find all the cool tips, or all the new features, in one go, and want to have a list of pages that contain them. though admittedly, we've got "what links here" for that anyway, so maybe that's pointless redundancy. --[[User:Catwheezle|Catwheezle]] 20:45, 21 February 2012 (EST)
+== Add to the bottom of the page or the top? ==
+The "+" button does the exact opposite of what the lede asks us to do - and most people reading the page will know to look at the bottom, or the history, anyway, because wikis are always add-to-bottom. Should we change the lede, or enforce post-to-top? --[[User:Catwheezle|Catwheezle]] 20:41, 21 February 2012 (EST)
+:Standard MediaWiki practice is to find new things at the bottom of the page. Probably because there's usually header stuff on the top of the page that they don't want getting messed with when a newbie wants to ask a new question. I vote we stick with this practice, because changing the '+' behavior will probably be impossible. The lede will, of course, need to be changed.
+:[[User:Dragoonwraith|<span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">D</span>ragoon <span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">W</span>raith]] [[User_talk:Dragoonwraith|<span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">TALK</span>]] 23:13, 21 February 2012 (EST)
+== Porting from the GECK wiki ==
+Is there a list of cool stuff that the GECK wiki has, that we should port? If not, should we make such a list? --[[User:Catwheezle|Catwheezle]] 20:41, 21 February 2012 (EST)
+:I'm not aware of any such list. I'm not sure the list itself will be useful; just port whatever you might want to use.
+:I know that the Oblivion CS Wiki's Function template is quite robust; not sure where the GECK version stands.
+:[[User:Dragoonwraith|<span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">D</span>ragoon <span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">W</span>raith]] [[User_talk:Dragoonwraith|<span style="font-family: Oblivion; size=2;">TALK</span>]] 23:14, 21 February 2012 (EST)
+== Template:Unsigned ==
+So, I made a bit of a change to template:unsigned, so it wouldn't care what order your arguments were, or even whether you'd left the date off.
+This came about because of a [[:User talk:Catwheezle|conversation]] with [[User:Fowl|Fowl]], where they created a second template, Unsigned2. This is how mediawiki handled the problem, and it is a good option... but I felt that two templates would be a little unfriendly and confusing, and we'd have to choose which is the better of the two, to recommend that people use, and things like that.
+The [[:Template:Unsigned|revised template]] SEEMS to work, and was a good learning experience for me towards more complex templates. Interested whether people think it's crap and shouldn't be used, though.
+--[[User:Catwheezle|Catwheezle]] 03:21, 23 February 2012 (EST)
+:I'm amazed this was possible with markup, well done sir.  --- [[User:Fowl|Fowl]] 18:04, 23 February 2012 (EST)
+::Heh - thanks :) Sadly, though, it's a more brittle solution than yours, for all its snazziness. If the wiki gets an update that happens to change that error message, then the template will stop accepting arguments in the non-default order until someone updates the error message in the template to be the same.
+::Not a huge issue even then, maybe, because bizarrely, it seems like the ones entered in the past won't be affected because it caches those in some freaky-weird way that I didn't understand when I was testing, and made me spend ages going "hey, this isn't changing... why isn't this changing?" --[[User:Catwheezle|Catwheezle]] 01:58, 24 February 2012 (EST)
+== Papyrus Functions Organisation ==
+I know it's been awhile since people have posted here but hopefully we can start up the organisation conversation again. I think it would be beneficial for a page dedicated as a list for all functions that can be used within papyrus.
+The Papyrus category is hardly a good way of finding functions due to... well being spread out all over the page(As all categories are). So instead this dedicated page would be similar to  [http://cs.elderscrolls.com/index.php?title=List_of_Functions CSWiki], quite simply functions categorised into tables from A-Z, or alternatively it might be more efficient to sort them by Script Object, Actor, ActorBase, ActiveMagicEffect, etc.
+I don't mind doing the legwork for this page but I would like input from others before I commit to any changes/creation. So what do you guys think? I am leaning towards having it Script Object Based. --[[User:CraftySentinel|CraftySentinel]] ([[User talk:CraftySentinel|talk]]) 2013-08-24T05:35:24 (EDT)
+:Sounds like a great idea to me. --[[User:Catwheezle|Catwheezle]] ([[User talk:Catwheezle|talk]]) 2013-08-24T15:09:12 (EDT)
+::Created the page ([[List of Papyrus Functions]]) to begin with it's flagged as incomplete for now. All Papyrus Functions should be there that are on the wiki, also added a [[Template:Compact ToC|Compact ToC]] template. I just hope I haven't jumped the gun on this.
+::I noticed there's a small number of pages that do not follow the usual naming convention for Papyrus pages(Function - BaseScript) Perhaps it will pay to move them to names that are inline with the naming convention for uniformity? By my count there's only 7. --[[User:CraftySentinel|CraftySentinel]] ([[User talk:CraftySentinel|talk]]) 2013-08-25T06:16:16 (EDT)