StrategyWiki:Staff lounge/2009/February

← January 2009 | February 2009 | March 2009 ⊟

Xbox template

The way I look at it, I'm surprised that the left and right shoulder trigger for the old Xbox controller is missing, so they use the modern shoulder triggers designed for Xbox360. The guy working on the images should really double check because if we're going to stick with that format, than I'm afraid I might end up believing that all Xbox games is actually the Xbox360 games. All it needs is just the left and right triggers from the original Xbox controller so it if there is someone who knows how to do those images, maybe I shouldn't buy into it that the button layout can be mistook for anything else. Besides, when I work on "Enter the Matrix" button layout, when it comes to the Xbox, somehow to make up for the left shoulder trigger, I have to use the Xbox360 left trigger so anyone can believe that the Xbox controller has that button. Johnnyauau2000 06:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

From Xbox controller buttons: Controller buttons for the Xbox System. These are based on colors from a controller from a Xbox 360 system, but as the two controllers are almost exactly the same, this button set contains the unique buttons of both the xbox 360 and xbox consoles. I haven't really seen much of an issue with this. The / works perfectly fine for either system, and I've used it on any guide for which I've done the Xbox controls. My 360 controller's black anyway, and my Xbox controller was the original large controller, which had some differences (most of the buttons aren't round). The idea is that the images handle the widest possible range of system controls. For instance the psx template works for 4 systems with very few issues (though I admit to asking for some PSP-specific images, it still works to use and /)--~Vizeroth (contribs)~-- 07:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

So from this point on, Xbox and Xbox360 controllers are exactly alike, that no matter what game you play, there's no difference between the two. But seriously, I don't think I'll ever test that theory using left and right triggers. The only way I know the difference is the Xbox360 controller resembles more like the PS2 controller and the Xbox controller comes close to the Gamecube controller without the Z button. If you want to test that theory between the Xbox and the Xbox360 controller, test it on "The Godfather". I am certain that the old normal Xbox controller is no different to the Xbox360 controller. Johnnyauau2000 09:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

If there are differences between the controls for the two systems on the same game, just specify that in the controls page (and any other page that uses the control templates). If I need to use to do something, I just need to know what it's going to do on the system I'm using to play the game. Here's an example of a game that is on the PS2 and PSP, which has slightly different controls between the two systems (and also DS controls): Disgaea: Hour of Darkness/Controls. If the controls are completely different between the Xbox and Xbox360, just list both sets of controls, as I did in the Additional Controls section on that page. The / control images aren't the best for the PSP, but they get the information across to the users, which is what is most important.--~Vizeroth (contribs)~-- 14:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Gallery tag

Is there a way to resize images that are inside a gallery? Specifically, I'm talking about the ones near the bottom of this page. I guess it's fine at that size, but I'd like them to be bigger if possible. Baejung92 (talk) 05:11, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

You could use a table instead, even a {{prettytable}} will work. Then you just set the image size in the image tags, like an image anywhere else.--~Vizeroth (contribs)~-- 06:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I changed the sizes on that page; you can fix them to whatever sizes you were looking for. Also, if you find the image size you want makes them too big to display four across (the default), you can use the perrow parameter to set how many images per row. - najzere 07:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Out of curiosity, how come the images don't fill the entire box? Baejung92 (talk) 01:18, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The Statistical Table.

Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Statistical comparison

The table in the link is very HARD to understand. There's all this numbers and so complex to understand that to me it just won't cut it. I still have the game guide and I'm now doing a fresh page with those statistics which is easier to understand. I want to know what they're thinking because they want to be dead accurate about doing every little move which is for people who thinks they're smart and using their scientific approach to give them a better understanding between each character. Johnnyauau2000 06:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Unrelated, but please use [[Internal links]] when linking to pages on the wiki, not external links. --Skizzerz 16:27, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

What's an internal link? Johnnyauau2000 00:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

for example, the fixed version of the above link is written like this: [[Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Statistical comparison]]. See StrategyWiki:Guide/Links for more details. --~Vizeroth~-- 01:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, back on topic: I agree with you in that I cannot understand half of what the stuff means. I've seen your work so far on the new table and it's looking good, just be sure to explain in detail what all of the stuff means (like what "Attack" is even though it seems fairly obvious). When you're done, replace the old table(s) with your new one(s), a new page isn't necessary. If you want to keep the old ones, that's fine too :) --Skizzerz 23:29, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll wait a little longer and if there isn't any change then I can move my new table. I'll still try to simplify what I wrote in a new page and make sure my effort doesn't go to waste. I also kept the new table data in case someone decides to delete my old page that I work so hard on. Johnnyauau2000 00:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Last thing, I wouldn't delete pages or replace sections without anyone's consent. The reason is simply that I might get warned for violating rules of Strategy wiki the way I was warned in Wikipeadia. In order for me not to repeat it again is to know if what anyone thinks before I decide. Also, it would've been easier to delete the page "Statistical comparison", but if we work together as a team to get a better outcome, it would be nice to resolve this without any hardship. Johnnyauau2000 04:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The reason I mentioned it because someone who made "Statistical comparison" might be upset and accuse me of breaking the rules that you're not allowed to delete pages so it's up to the users if they want to keep it or not. I don't know how much more of a reason I have to give so I now leave it up users who are editing in this site. Johnnyauau2000 05:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I doubt anyone's going to be upset. And if someone does become upset, we'll be able to resolve it then. Go right ahead and do what you want to do.--DukeRuckley^{Talk | Contribs} 14:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Redirect problems

For some reason I'm having trouble getting redirects to work. I click the #R button on a blank page and edit the link. When I hit preview, instead of showing up with the arrow, it shows up as 1. REDIRECT [[link]]. Obviously I haven't been saving these pages, because I don't want people to have to run around behind me fixing them. This has only been happening for the last couple of days, and the browser doesn't seem to make a difference (just tried it in IE and Chrome just in case something changed in Firefox recently).--~Vizeroth~-- 00:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

That's how it's always shown up for me. Just make sure the link is blue and save it; we can delete it if it's not right. - najzere 01:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Strange, maybe it was in my head. Seems to work fine, so I guess I'll just try to ignore it.--~Vizeroth~-- 01:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Previewing the page won't actually show the page you are trying to redirect to... You'd have to transclude to do that. So instead, when previewing, it thinks you are making a list. As long as the link is blue when you preview, it'll redirect you properly.--DukeRuckley^{Talk | Contribs} 04:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Image categories

Some images don't seem to have categories that aptly describe them with the type of specificity we try for. For instance, Image:RA3.CryoLegionnaire.jpg is clearly artwork, as it's not taken from a screenshot or anything (I don't think), yet just the Artwork category doesn't really describe the image. Also, it's not really a Character in the traditional sense, because I think in its game it's just a unit you can mass produce.

There are a lot of strategy games where a "Units" category might be applicable, and even more where "Enemies" would fit. I don't know whether we really want to add more image categories right now, but for images like the Cryo Legionnaire or this one, should we lean towards the vaguer, yet more accurate Artwork, or use less fitting categories that may be more descriptive? - najzere 17:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not much of a fan of any of our image categories, with the exception of the guide-specific categories. What is the purpose of an 'Artwork' category, for instance? It's not really useful beyond defining what type of work the image is (and its vague at that). Image categories such as 'Characters' not only aren't useful (because of how they mesh all characters from all games) but they don't even describe the image! As I've mentioned before, I think we either need to get rid of a bunch of these, or we need to rename them to be more accurate (Characters = Character images). Maybe we should create subcategories (such as Concept Art and Sketches) to fit under the Artwork category.

I guess we need to figure out the intent of the categorization and go from there. Regardless, we'll need to overhaul something before we're done. Better to start now than wait until we have even more images to deal with.--DukeRuckley^{Talk | Contribs} 19:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Forum topics: here and here. -- Prod (Talk) 20:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)