YPPedia talk:Policies and guidelines/Archive 1

''These discussions are a matter of historical Yppedia record. Please don't modify them. ''


 * ''This page archives discussions from YPPedia talk:Policies and guidelines. Archived votes can be found here.

Formatting/style policies
Do you think that we should do one space or two between sentences? It's a little nitpick, but it would help in keeping writing consistent across the site. I've just been following the style of the page that I'm editing at the moment.

--Lizthegrey 29 July 2005 10:22 (PDT)
 * Uhm, unless they're doing it differently and rendering all spaces as "&amp;nbsp;", the default html thing is that one or two spaces doesn't matter, only one will render unless you are using the space code as the second.       In fact you can use as many spaces as you want between sentences, it shows up as only one                  (take a look at my text here in the edit page view). --Guppymomma 29 July 2005 10:30 (PDT)

Vanity pages
Section moved to YPPedia talk:Vanity guidelines--Fiddler 22:13, 16 May 2006 (PDT)

Image Names
I think we need to put in an official statement about naming images something that shows what they are (looking at the recent upload of "Beef.jpg"....). --Guppymomma 08:06, 2 September 2005 (PDT)


 * Agreed. Thoughts on a naming scheme?  I'm thinking a prefix system like "Player-Bonecaya.jpg" --Barrister 10:16, 2 September 2005 (PDT)

Quick fix required - refer to wikicities not wikicites (a french site) - Dylan

I will need to upload numerous images for my tutorial contest entry. I would like to get some idea of how they should be named to prevent conflicts. Is something like BC_ShopTutorial_image-name.png appropriate, excessive, or what? Are there name spaces for images like there are for text pages? --Behindcurtai 21:51, 3 March 2006 (PST)


 * No namespaces for images. Just use a format like Tutorial-NAME-IMAGENAME.EXTENSION with a mention in the summary that it's for the tutorial contest.  If there are a vast number of images, somebody'll will probably make a template for 'em to use in the summary.  --Guppymomma 21:37, 4 March 2006 (PST)

Style Guide Link?
Given the usefulness of the style guide, and the important tools it provides for those creating new pages (infoboxes, especially), could there be a link to it somewhere in the Policies and Guidelines document, since that can be reached with the click of a button? --Emufarmers 00:43, 6 March 2006 (PST)

Sorting for Indigo Ocean stuff
Should we be taking the German articles into account when sorting, like we do for the English ones (a, an and the)? The German ones are der, die and das, for reference. --Thunderbird 23:43, 19 April 2006 (PDT)


 * I believe we should. Also "ein" and "eine".  I'm kind of assuming that the Germans alphabetize like we do.  I only have a couple of years of high school German under my belt.  And that's from a long time ago.  --Barrister 01:14, 20 April 2006 (PDT)

Banning trophies from pirate pages
Shouldn't this policy also include vessel lists? --Arminius 21:42, 30 December 2006 (PST)
 * I understand how listing and having the images of trophies are unnecessary. How about just a link to our in-game trophy gallery (similar to the links to our actual in-game info page or portrait galleries)? --Nordenx 13:05 07 January 2007 (PST)
 * Well actually its already there since the pirate in-game info page includes a link to portrait gallery and trophy collection.--Cecidrake 13:45, 7 January 2007 (PST)

Proposal to add a "no lists of standard-named ships" policy
I'm not sure it's appropriate for people to have complete ship lists on their pirate pages; off the top of my head:
 * They're impossible for anyone but the subject of the page to maintain, which goes against the wiki tenet of pages being maintainable by the community.
 * They're impossible for anyone to verify or confirm, which goes against another basic wiki tenet.
 * They rarely add much to the page in question. (I mean, really... does it matter to you that Weirdbeard's sloop is called the Ugly Cod?)

On the other hand, names of custom-renamed ships can be interesting and impressive. Likewise, ship names (standard or otherwise) can be a functional and perfectly valid part of a broader narrative or biography. So I propose we set policy to say that pirate pages should not contain lists of standard-named vessels. --Ponytailguy 21:48, 30 December 2006 (PST)
 * Barrister brought to my attention that we are not covering crew pages under this policy change. If standard named vessel lists on pirate pages are all those thing mentioned above, should this policy apply to crew and flag pages as well? --Arminius 14:57, 5 January 2007 (PST)
 * Wondering same thing as Arminius up there, specially since I came across this in recent changes: Lunar Rogues/ships. User Thefirstdude even made a template for making ship lists and I still consider the same standards listed by PTG apply to crew pages. --Cecidrake 10:02, 6 February 2007 (PST)


 * Wow, I was totally unaware of this when I made the templates. The list on Lunar Rogues/ships is meant primarily for crew purposes - it is often very helpful to see a crew's ships when looking at the "Where are my vessels" list is inconvenient.  I understand that most people really don't care, and that's why on the Lunar Rogues page it is inside a  .  The template for My ships can then have a note added saying it should only be used for custom-named ships.  I just saw so many recent pirate pages with ship lists on them, I thought I'd make a standardized form for them.  --Thefirstdude 10:34, 6 February 2007 (PST)

Portraits on crew pages
Since I'm not entirely sure of my own feelings on the matter, I thought I'd put this up here. There are two cases I see of portraits on crew pages. One is the crew portrait, as seen here. The second is random other portrait, as seen here. What are some of your thoughts on the matter? --Thefirstdude 15:12, 18 February 2007 (PST)


 * If the portraits on crew and flag articles depict individual pirates who already have an article about themselves, then that is somewhat excessive. Group portraits on crew and flag articles are obviously suitable but then we run into problems with how tall and wide they are. That impacts the layout of the articles. -- Faulkston 15:34, 18 February 2007 (PST)


 * I was actually thinking about this. What about adding an option to the crew infobox for a crew portrait (such as the pirate infobox) that would put the portrait up in a standard (and small) size?  If this has already been done, I didn't find it in a cursory search.  Sashamorning 16:06, 18 February 2007 (PST)


 * That might be a good idea - except crew/flag infoboxes can link to the respective in-game info pages, which can have portraits on them. -- Thefirstdude 16:59, 18 February 2007 (PST)


 * That's not a good reason to not add it; the pirate infoboxes all link back the the in-game info pages and they're much more prevalent because of the ease of adding that link. Yoweb links in the flag and crew infoboxes are much rarer because of the extra step of tracking down the ID number.  I also agree with Faulkston, decorating a crew article with a portrait of the captain, especially if he already has a separate article, is just ego-fluff.  Sasha, if you want to create a mockup to see how adding a portrait would affect the infobox, go ahead and keep us updated.--Fiddler 18:01, 18 February 2007 (PST)


 * All good points. Sounds good to me, Fiddler.  -- Thefirstdude 18:03, 18 February 2007 (PST)


 * Well, I went ahead and hacked something together. Basically I stole the code from Infobox_pirate/portrait/yes and changed the width to match the portrait I have.  I agree it looks a bit hacked, but at least it works.  And no manual resizing needs doing.  See here.  -- Thefirstdude 18:31, 19 February 2007 (PST)
 * Minor addendum: I fixed the previous width weirdness issues by making the infobox table the same width as the portrait. It is a bit wider than previously, however it looks relatively nice (in my opinion). -- Thefirstdude 18:36, 19 February 2007 (PST)


 * Sorry, I wasn't around much today so I didn't see the note, but what you did looks really great TFD. ^_^  Furthermore, it gives incentive for the crew to get crew portraits, rather than just a captain's portrait (which I agree is completely inappropriate). Sashamorning 18:49, 19 February 2007 (PST)


 * I would suggest in this instance that the portrait go below the infobox. I know that kind of is opposite how the pirate pages are but with multiple people this is a different instance.--Muffynz 20:04, 19 February 2007 (PST)


 * OK, so I tried moving the pic below the box. I had to force the pic to shrink, to fit in the box.  (I hate to say it, but we can't always expect that ppl will shrink their portraits to the correct size... is there a hard and fast file size limit, or are YPP portriats fine as-is?)  Here's what I have at this point.  Sashamorning 07:10, 20 February 2007 (PST)


 * Hmm... not sure which I like better... but Sasha, you bring up a point I thought about and tried to avoid last night. We will have to have some way of setting the width of the thing to vary with the portrait width (as all the expansive portraits have different widths).  I'll have a mock-up ready in a bit.  -- Thefirstdude 14:52, 20 February 2007 (PST)


 * OK, I scraped something together, see it at the same place. I can't figure out why Example 3 is screwed up, most likely to do with the showhide. -- Thefirstdude 15:20, 20 February 2007 (PST)
 * Edit: I'm stupid, I just left off the px on the imagewidth... -- Thefirstdude 15:39, 20 February 2007 (PST)


 * Looks great. Can we get a consensus on this?  I'd like to use it on our crew page (which, I guess, I could do anyway, but I'd rather use a global template.  Sashamorning 06:12, 21 February 2007 (PST)


 * Can we please have some consensus on this? -- Thefirstdude 22:30, 23 February 2007 (PST)


 * Hello? Anyone home? -- Thefirstdude 22:07, 26 February 2007 (PST)


 * Some of us have been out of town and have real jobs to work on, have some patience. The crew name needs to be centered along with the last updated date and crewid number stuff.  The picture is too wide for people running at lower resolutions.  I suggest either 300 or 250.  --Guppymomma 07:00, 27 February 2007 (PST)


 * I really like this use of the infobox to show crew piccies! But shouldn't the picture go on top of the infobox to conform to pirate infoboxes that have the image on top? --Whitemonkey 07:32, 27 February 2007 (PST)


 * The pirate infobox is already the odd-man-out among all the other infoboxes; it's best not to follow that as an example. Picture on the bottom already follows the sample of infobox building, seen here at Chippendale.  Also, I'll agree with Gupppymomma - center those fields and shring the image and I think we have a winner.--Fiddler 08:05, 27 February 2007 (PST)


 * OK.The fields are centered, but the screws with stuff.  See [the same place] to see what I mean.
 * The image widths are just the widths I got from the gallery page. I think it's unrealistic to expect people to resize the images themselves, and I don't see a way of doing it with JPGs in the wiki.
 * Finally, yes, definitely picture on the bottom.   -- Thefirstdude 15:14, 27 February 2007 (PST)
 * Ok, that makes sense! I like the layout as well.  Is there any chance of incorporating the image into the box itself as with other infoboxes or is the image too wide to do it without having to rejig things? --Whitemonkey 15:18, 27 February 2007 (PST)
 * I don't know what you're talking about unrealistic expectations with resizing. You can resize any image on the wiki using wikimarkup.  [[Image:nameblah.png|300px]]  If show/hide is causing trouble with showing your test cases, perhaps it would be best to not use it so the test case is like the actual use on crew pages. --Guppymomma 15:25, 27 February 2007 (PST)


 * OK, same place as always. I decided upon 280px width because I'm special like that (or so I'm told).  Other than that, I think it's all good.  -- Thefirstdude 15:50, 27 February 2007 (PST)


 * There's no need for a vote. We discussed it, it looks good, and issues have been addressed.  Make a clean sandbox for each template change and an admin will make the required changes later.--Fiddler 19:23, 1 March 2007 (PST)


 * Ditto Fiddler's comments. --Guppymomma 20:09, 1 March 2007 (PST)


 * Sorry it took me so long to see this. Linkies here. -- Thefirstdude (t/c) 09:39, 4 March 2007 (PST)


 * I'm sorry if I sound impatient, but there have been plenty of active admins around in the last eight days, and I don't see anything new. -- Thefirstdude (t/c) 17:10, 12 March 2007 (PDT)


 * And it's been another six days.... -- Thefirstdude (t/c) 08:06, 18 March 2007 (PDT)


 * And 7 more... If none of you admins wants to do this, would you like to make me an admin temporarily, or temporarily unprotect the page so I can make these changes? I am getting really frustrated.  It's been three full weeks, and nothing at all has happened.  I hope I'm not being unreasonable for expecting something to happen in three weeks that was unanimously agreed upon.  -- Thefirstdude (t/c) 22:39, 24 March 2007 (PDT)

Okay, I've updated the crew template and am going to hold off on the flag template as I ran into a couple of issues that might be a problem. First issue was I changed the nowiki to a noinclude on the portrait/no template as the words This page is blank were appearing on the crew page. Secondly, have a look at the Crew Schmew page that I updated after updating the templates. All of the text seems to start beside the portrait rather then at the top of the page. I think this is a problem and want to see what we can do about it before we continue with the flag templates. Aside from that, I think it looks great. -- Cedarwings (t/c) 00:35, 25 March 2007 (PDT)


 * After some talking, we realized this only happens in Internet Explorer... and we have no idea why. That is, in Firefox the text appears at the top of the page as normal.  Moving the portrait in the Infobox pirate to the bottom proved to make no difference (see this), making it all the more puzzling.  If anyone has any ideas, it would be greatly appreciated.   -- Thefirstdude (t/c) 00:56, 25 March 2007 (PDT)