User talk:HistoricAccount Erk

From Erfwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Erk's Eyebook Page

Page Annotation

Do you think you could integrate your project into the Page Annotation project? -- Muzzafar 20:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Have a nice day! -- Muzzafar 20:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I created a section for discussing how to integrate the annotation projects, can you please have a look when you have time. --Doran 21:32, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


I guess you could ask first and move the page after. It is a collaboration project after all. -- Muzzafar 20:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

It is ok. Yes, this wiki is quite active. There was a period of rapid growth in number of articles when users tried to add as much information as possible. I suppose now is a good time to start improving quality of what is already here. Style Guidelines are under discussion and you are most welcome to add "Naming convention" section there and come up with your suggestions on the talk page. We are all reasonable people and readily accept good ideas. -- Muzzafar 20:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


Not sure if it is much use for your project, but I created a crop template. I guess it depends on which takes longer uploading all the files or working out the x/y coords to do a crop. Also, not sure how reliable it would be over multiple browsers. --Raphfrk 20:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

(Reply to message on my Talk page) Thanks, the main issue is how well it is supported by multiple browsers. --Raphfrk 14:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
(Reply to message on my Talk page) True, it might improve load time for multiple pages. Btw, is there any easy way to debug templates? It seems you can't use the preview option as it isn't updated at that point. I save the update and then try it out on a random page, but that creates alot of clutter. --Raphfrk 15:07, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Unless you have objections, I am going to replace the first 20 panel by panel pages with the crop method, so that they are the same. I am thinking of creating a page by page version of the panel by panel pages, and that will need an image for each page anyway. (Also, it helps with load times) --Raphfrk 12:28, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Links abounding

Erk, can you cut down on the number of links you're adding? Pigeon? Walnut? If someone doesn't know what a pigeon is, we're not responsible on this site for telling them. You're creating a boatload of dead links. They're hiding all of the real work that needs to be done. --Kreistor 03:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Draconian? Only in that I'm removing any links that don't go to pages you haven't created. In short: don't create links to pages you are not intending to create in the next couple days because it hides honest bugs in other people's work. If you want a Snake page, then take the 3 minutes to create it as you need it, or reasonably soon after: right now, it looks to me like you don't intend to create any of the links to the literally dozens of pages you're dead linking to, since you haven't created a single one so far. Don't create a plethora of links and hope that someone else agrees with your opinion that it deserves to exist. If you want it to exist, then create it. Slow down, create the pages that you're linking to, and be a completionist. Creating 9 dozen links to pages that no one intends to create is definitely making work for everyone else, because sooner or later, someone will have to do what I have.

Look, I understand you want to take on this massive panelization project, but don't use it to make us do things you want us to do. Just slow down on the main project, complete the pages, and then no one will have problems.

Before I got interrupted on Sunday, I created dozens of pages to take the Needed page from 90 to under 50, and 45 of those were Annotation Pages, leaving 5 pages left, all having to do with one person's pet project, so I was done. Quite literally, I've been creating all of the pages that people have been dead linking to. Your project, if you stay on the panelization part solely, will take you a couple months. In the first few days, you created 90 new links. That's an absurd amount of work to pass on to anyone else. If you intend to create those pages, the months delay from the completion of this probject to beginning to create all those pages is jsut too long to wait as we work on making this Wiki look, feel, and appear professional. How many thousands of links are you going to have at the end of this? That's too long to leave these links hanging for. Since you're not creating them, and I'm not creating them... there's not many left that are willing to: everyone else has their little projects going on, and they aren't providing that service. So, you do it, or I do it, or you stop complaining about me killing what neither of us are going to do.

Oh, and "Summon Perfect Warlord" is under "Summon Perfect Warlord Spell", BTW. --Kreistor 19:28, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Erk, right now is the time when most people need the most help in figuring out how to do this. By flooding the "Needed" page, not only are you making it hard for other people to debug their projects, but you're making it overly daunting for anyone wanting to get in and help to determine what really needs the help.

And I will point out that it is YOU that is deciding whether something should or should not exist. By putting all of those links in, you're saying that those pages Need to be done, because they appear on the Needed page, and everyone that comes to help will be pointed at that page. If they see a list of 382 items (like there are right at this moment), they're going to throw their hands in the air and not even try, because it is simply too daunting a task.

I'm not going to take any accusations from you as to how I'm playing this, Erk. You're stomping in here like an elephant, just as I finished making the Wiki look usable. You're undoing massive amounts of my work, and creating me huge problems in trying to keep this place organized. You're taking no criticism to heart, and continuing to act like a bulldozer, ignoring all feedback. I have played nice. I 'have' created some of those pages you wanted, just as I've destroyed links to others that no one ever will. That's a compromise position: I am trying to work with you by giving you the amount that can be done for you. Your turn to compromise. Get with the program and be a team player, and stop planting a ton of work on my lap. Learn where I've linked your old work to, so that I don't have to go in and repeat myself another 160 times, because we already have pages for 95% of the links your dead linking, just not under the naem or place you might think obvious to you. Figure out what really needs doing. 'Create your Categories.' Finish all the work you decided to take on, not just the one part that you find fun. We all have to work together here, and you're being ignorant (by not learning where we're linking you to) and pigheaded (by not compromising in any way). In short, if you don't want me stomping all over your pages, then take the time to figure out how to do it right the first time. Then I won't have to, will I? --Kreistor 20:05, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Congrats on figuring out this isn't your old Wiki. We've already done several weeks work here. You're trying to bring something over that needs to integrate into what we've already done, not decide that what we have is wrong and needs to changebecause you're too lazy to fit it in yourself. No, you don't get a blank slate to work with anymore: if you wanted that, you needed to start a couple weeks ago before we'd gotten in gear. We have a framework we need to operate inside at the request of Rob (Canon, Proposed Canon, Speculation). We've completed 95% of all that needs to be done, and we're ready to go with his escalation of great quantities of rules to Canon. It's ready to go live, complete enough to answer the vast majority of questions. So, no, your assumption that you can walk in and expect everything to conform to your old way is just not correct. You're going to have to work with us, and use what we've already got. That this was elsewhere before is not important to me. That it works here is important to me. So, help make it work here, with what we have, not with what your old Wiki had. Now, I don't know why you did this project, or why anyone thinks its necessary, but I'm not going to get in your way of you putting it on. All I need is it integrated into our work. So show me a sign that you're working with us, here. Toss me some kind of bone that shows me you're going to clean up the mess you've created. Otherwise, my unkind hands are going to rip into it in the same way they already have, because it needs integration. --Kreistor 20:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


Made a mod to your template. This allows each piece of text and description to be made into their own page. This will allow full strip annotations to be created from your snippets. Thus the guys doing the annotation section won't have to redo all your work. --Raphfrk 18:13, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I have created a Lister template for the page annotation pages. ((Lister|page number}} will format the text for inclusion in the page annotation pages. See Erf0001 (the only 1 updated)
I am thinking of modifying the paneller template so that it can accept either of the 2 types of images.
For example ((paneller|18|14)) will use File:TBFGK 18-14.jpg and ((paneller|18|14|tx|ty|bx|by)) would use File:TBFGK 18.jpg and the crop option using the coords given
Sound reasonable? (I don't want to be hacking your template :) ) --Raphfrk 19:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Oh and also, do you think it is worth updating the set so that they can take "TBFGK" as an input so that book 2 can be supported by using a different piece of text? --Raphfrk 19:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I have got crop and paneler to work together, centering the image took ages as the clip function has to use absolute coords. I cropped TBFGK_7:1,by trial and error. --Raphfrk 21:32, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I viewed page 20 from work (slower connection than at home) and it looks like you were right. The image in 20:1 takes longer to load, but then 20:2 to 20:16 all load instantly, as the image is already cached. --Raphfrk 10:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I have uploaded page 21-29 and setup the cropping. 28 doesn't split very well for the first 3 panels, due to it being clip art. Btw, any plans on how to handle pages like 37a. I assume we will be sticking with the archive numbers anyway? If so, the paneler script will need to be modified to handle strings as the page name, which may cause issues with the arithmetic. --Raphfrk 02:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
I updated the paneler template so that it accepts a number of panels input. Also, it now use ifexists to determine the number of panels in the previous page. --Raphfrk 12:23, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks :p. I think the lister template is usable now for the page by page stuff, though might leave it until there is agreement with the guys who created the erf00x pages. Doran's suggestion on making editing easier have improved it I think. --Raphfrk 17:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
The fight scene look pretty good. Look at TBFGK_69:1

Earth vs. Real World

I changed your references to "Earth" to "Real World". We've stuck to that term on other pages. There's a fairly good reason: Earth, in fantasy, is often an element like Water, Fire, and Air, and at the least is synonymous with dirt. It may be that Rob will stick to Dirt and Erf, but we should leave the option open so that we don't have confusion in case he does choose to use it. Further, Real World distinguishes our world from Parson's version of the world. He'd call the fictional world he lived on Earth, just as we would. This allows us to distinguish our Earth from his. --Kreistor 03:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The Stat block

How'd you get that? I will help you start this trend! Xewleer 4:06 May 9, 09 -Thank you!

Fortune Cookie

Being as you were handing out some fortune cookies, I've made you a template for them Template:FortuneCookie/doc. Enjoy! --Ichthus 08:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)