Opinion on templates for Cerberus Daily News articles

I know you're probably still busy with other activities, but if you have the time, I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at the Cerberus Daily News templates I've cooked up in my sandbox page: User:Dammej/Sandbox

I've also posted the proposal in the project forums at Forum:Cerberus Daily News templates.

I'd like to draw particular attention to the User:Dammej/Sandbox/Template:CDNLatestStory and User:Dammej/Sandbox/Template:CDNStories templates, as they use DPL along with a parameter to include stories from another page into the page that transcludes the template. so if I use {{CDNStories|June 2010}}, it'll include all the cerberus daily news articles from that page.

I'll spare you the verbage of the details here, since this message would become quite long. No doubt some decisions might look weird though, so if anything jumps out at you as being a particularly stupid way of doing something, let me know. :P Thanks in advance! Dammej 04:20, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

I am up well beyond my neck in work, so apologies for the tardy response. On the offchance that anything I have to say is still relevant, I think the idea is a worthwhile one. The implementation of the User:Dammej/Sandbox/Template:CDNStories is a little, well, brute force. Is there no better way? --DRY 06:01, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
I tried many things. Perhaps it's that I don't know DPL syntax very well, but I could not for the life of me get it to pull just the sections that exist from the article, and then correctly give the section title. If I used a regex that matched all those sections (Week one through six), then it would put them all under the last section that exists. Multsecseparators doesn't work with the %SECTION% magic word either, so I couldn't use that. (Or I was using it improperly)
But if I attempt to include all potential sections (weeks one through six), then it names empty sections with the regex I gave it. Infuriating. Hence why I have a massive amount of "Replace"s to remove empty sections.
I haven't been able to think of other ways to do this, so if you have any suggestions that might work, I'd love to hear them. Even if they seem obvious to you. I haven't had much experience with DPL syntax, so I could have missed something that would have saved me a bundle. Dammej 06:17, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
Although I normally don't mind pitching in to help out, realistically I'm too busy to help very much. If you can't find a reasonable query, the other angle to attack from is the format of the original data: perhaps changing its layout is preferable if it makes the queries simpler. (Note however that I have no objective reason to believe that is necessarily the case here: it is just a generic suggestion.) --DRY 06:28, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
I'd been contemplating over a way to make this easier for days. Like making different pages which contain only the stories and including those instead, when it suddenly dawned on me that I could just transclude the archive itself, and put <onlyinclude> tags around all of the articles. I'm unsure why I didn't think of that before. Anyway, your comment gave me a push in the right direction, so thanks. :) -- Dammej (talk) 00:03, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Archiving Article Talk Pages

I just saw your comments on Spart's talk page, and I figured that I should tell you that I sent you an email with some proposed guidelines. I don't know if you got it, and please let me know if you did or not. I also sent you another email, so I don't know if you got that either. As to the time limit, Spart really didn't want it, but I an neutral on the opinion. I can see both sides so this is something we need to hammer out. Lancer1289 06:10, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Appoligies in advance for an edit conflict. There is currently a discussion going on for what type of box we should use, see Forum:Talk Page Archive Images, and please do cast your vote. Personally I can see the archive boxes, just with a few changes. Lancer1289 06:13, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
Yes, my post was in response to the email. I'm quite laissez faire when it comes to these things. I participate on some other wikis which have much more proscriptive rules and have found that they get awfully bogged down in the minutiae of enforcing them — accompanied with all sorts of drama and angst. I tend to think we're better off leaving ourselves flexibility. --DRY 06:25, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
Ok. However I think the size or number of comments is a good limit becuase they will prevent pages from getting too long or to big in size. I have seen other wikis get really bogged down with this kind of thing, so the proposals were deisgned to allow a great amount of flexablility when it comes to this topic, which is kind of what we need. Lancer1289 06:31, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with the principle: I'd just suggest avoiding specifying particular numbers or procedures. --DRY 06:48, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
Indeed I can see the point, but those would just be guidelines rather than actual "this is where we cut it off". I really don't like set numbers either, which is why they should really serve as guidelines. Lancer1289 06:55, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
I think that we're in violent agreement at this point Smiley --DRY 07:05, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
Nice. So you think that the size and comments should serve as guidelines rather than limits if I am understanding you correctly. I don't think Spart will disagree. Lancer1289 07:09, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Policy Forum

I don't know whether or not you have noticed but there is currently a proposal to establish a new forum where policy for the ME Wiki can be debated and voted on. The forum would allow anyone to bring to a policy question to the attention of the community and we could use some input. Take a look at the proposal on the Forum:Policy Forum page. Thanks in advance. Lancer1289 02:41, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

Morinth's possible real name and categorizing it with online User Name

In the latest DLC, we have received new info on Morinth, specifically about the a former name she has, "Mirala". I respect SpartHawg's opinion, but I have to disagree on how he is downplaying the importance of the name. Even if it isn't her real name, it was obviously a name she used before that even her sister's knew and her sister's have limited access to outer info, possibly no access at all if you look at Samara's dosier in the Shadow Broker base. Currently the name has no mention in the article and I would like to rectify that, but I do not wish to enter conflict with another Sparthawg over this. -- 20:38, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

With another me? Is there an evil twin out there somewhere I don't know about? Hmmm... and since evil twins are often German, that would mean that we need to be on the lookout for someone named Wilhelm. And his username is probably SpartSchwein or something like that. This is... disconcerting, to say the least! :P SpartHawg948 20:48, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Problem with Lancer1289

I don't know how to handle this and I think I need help from another admin. I spent 12 hours yesterday dealing with Lancer1289 over what seems to me to be an insignificant issue, and I think he's abusing his authority as an admin to bully me.

A brief summary: I'm playing ME2 and noticed that the four planet pages on which there are shops (Omega, Citadel, Illium, Tuchanka) don't have links on their pages to their shops. Thinking this merely a technical oversight, I went ahead and added them. Lancer immediately removed them, claiming doing so violated the Manual of Style for planets because shops are not notable locations. I proposed changing the MoS to allow this, as I felt shops are notable. The discussion, primarily with Lancer, is here: Mass Effect Wiki talk:Manual of Style/Planets#Shop list. I know it's a lot to read, but doesn't it strike you that Lancer has gone off the deep end?

If you want to skip that, the next step is that I proposed a compromise: instead of a list of shops on the planet page, a simple link to the Merchants Guide sub-listing for that planet. Unfortunately, that page is just for ME1, so I added a nicely, if simply, formatted list with the ME2 locations. Lancer deleted this because it didn't conform to Lancer's stylistic preferences! Lancer even deleted the separate page I created, Shops in Mass Effect 2, on the grounds that this "should" be on the Merchants Guide page. The discussion there Talk:Shops in Mass Effect 2 is even more aggravating; he is demanding that I collaborate with him on his perfect ideal of a Merchants Guide in order to have a list of ME2 shop locations at all.

Is this seriously how a wiki is supposed to work? Lancer demands prior consultation on all changes because he's an admin, demands other people submit to his work routine, and takes any suggestion that he's being overly aggressive as a dire personal insult. I feel abused, and that he's giving this site a bad name.

I've cross-posted this on Tullis' and SpartHawg948's talk pages. Hythloday1 17:00, December 31, 2010 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.