User:Kgarrett1969/Archive 1

Couple of other quick pointers

If someone is in the midst of editing their page with several edits, it's best to wait a while until you edit the same article. This helps stop confusing edit conflict messages from happening. The general rule of thumb is to wait for the article to be untouched for at least 15 minutes. You should be able to see the times for everything on the Recent changes. And next pointer is that we've got some nice canned messages for folks for a few things so you don't have to type them out. The one that you might be interested in is Template:Frequency. To use it, edit the user talk page and put in {{subst:Frequency|User:Guppymomma}} --~~~~ (in that example the page is User:Guppymomma, but pop in whatever page is getting over a dozen edits in a short period of time). I'll do it for real below so you can see what happens - the text is automatically put into the page instead of just the template being included. --Guppymomma 08:20, 12 September 2006 (PDT)

Here's what it looks like:

Edit Frequency

Hoy hoy... I was going through the recent changes, and I ran across the edits to User:Guppymomma. If you'd like to see the page history, take a look here, and I think you can see why it's sticking out at me :-/. I don't want to discourage you from editing, because it's good to see you putting so much effort into improving your page... but it's always good wiki practice to get into using the Preview button instead of just posting stuff directly, because that way you know if you like what you're about to post before you actually do, so you can catch things like spelling/grammar, line breaks, formatting, and so on without having to waste time and effort making tons of minor edits. In any event, welcome to the YPPedia, and good luck in future! --Guppymomma 08:20, 12 September 2006 (PDT)

• Just recording a useful link I came across for me self. {{Subst:frequency|[article title]}} --Kgarrett1969 10:18, 6 June 2007 (PDT)

When and When Not to Use Crewstub

Ok I'm at a loss as to what qualifies as where this template should be used. I've been working on updating Out of Date crew pages and I've seen some pretty inconsistent usage and it one case I took one out and had someone point out that it should have been left in. When should it be used and when should it not be used? I've been told that having just a Public Statement and crew infobox is not enough to remove the stub. Which I can handle but I have seen some pages with a very short Public Statement, say two lines in History and a link to a crew forum link without the stub. How is this better than a very informative Public Statement and deserves no stub? If a Statement is very informative about the crew can that be grounds for removing the stub? Help I'm just looking for a good solid rule of thumb to use when updating crew information pages.--Kgarrett1969 07:58, 28 September 2006 (PDT)

It depends on the crew. If it's a crew that's been around a long time and been part of a highly active or island owning flag, then surely they must have some history. Crews that have 3 people and haven't been around for a long time and are part of a small/unactive flag are not likely to have additional history. Crews that fall into that last category and have the couple folks there as dormant for several months, well, they're not likely to have additional history or have someone who knows anything to put in there. There's no hard & fast rule. If you think that a crew has more of a story to tell, feel free to put in the crewstub & go the AtteSmythe route of posing some questions on the talk page to help along in writing an informative article. --Guppymomma 08:25, 28 September 2006 (PDT)

Thanks. :) That is very helpful in my continued editing of Crew pages. I hope no one minds that I have adopted them as my little corner of the wiki. I have been more or less working to update and make them standard.--Kgarrett1969 09:43, 28 September 2006 (PDT)

Absolutely not! Editors taking a personal interest in specific areas of the wiki is what keeps the concept working. We have folks monitoring the cleanup category, pirate articles, etc., and it's very appreciated! --AtteSmythe 09:52, 29 September 2006 (PDT)

Cleanup

When a pirate page is tagged for cleaning up, it does not necessarily mean it requires a portrait, as the pirate in question does not have one. I tagged that particular page because it is a mass block of text that would benefit from grammatical adjustments and formatting to be in line with the standard pirate page, visible at YPPedia:Sample_pirate_page. --Featherfin 18:27, 29 September 2006 (PDT)

User talk:Marginaal

That's a bit harsh of a first message to leave a user with only three edits. In the future, you may want to advise them that it's inappropriate content and direct them to the Sandbox.--Fiddler 08:01, 5 October 2006 (PDT)

Perhaps, but besides being meaningless it also conatains profanity which is a violation of ToS.--Kgarrett1969 08:06, 5 October 2006 (PDT)

You may also find the {{test}} template suitable for these purposes. I highly recommend including it with a subst: to reduce confusion.

As to profanity, I didn't see any. I think it's obvious the user was just being silly instead of trying to be offensive, and warnings should be spoken to that level. --Ponytailguy 11:30, 5 October 2006 (PDT)

Couple of comments

Ahoy, thanks for attempting to salvage some crew pages from deletion. For reference, we generally keep public statements as they are found in game, unless there is something that creates wonky formatting, such as Zackie's revolution.

Also, to answer your question on... some defunct crew talk page, if you see a deletion notice on a crew/flag page, please simply note it on the talk page rather than deleting the tag for it. This is simply to keep consistency in policy to prevent encouraging new users to remove notices at their whim.

Lastly, we generally prefer to have a "blurb" of sorts at the beginning of each article. You seem to be moving it all below public statements and titling it history. Unless a history is more than 3-4 sentences, we keep the entire thing up top with the public statement at the end. If it is a long history, we still leave a blurb up top as an intro of sorts to the crew, then with the entire lengthy history under a section. If any of that makes sense, yay for you for understanding my rambliness.

Keep up the work! --Fannon 15:51, 6 November 2006 (PST)

I'd like to point out that by moving the introductory blurbs you risk lessening standardisation rather than increasing it, as including a blurb at the start of crew pages has been the practice since the YPPedia's formation of a policy on pirate pages and is in line with the standard layout as demonstrated here. Moving the two lines on every crew page in an external encyclopedia is almost superfluous as it clogs up the recent changes page, and also makes it more difficult for users to access a crew page and find information that isn't present ingame. The crew statement etc are all visible ingame; often the YPPedia serves as a historical record for crews rather than for a phone book. Furthermore, making such alterations means that the crew pages become more like advertisements for crews as the crew statement is the initial text greeting the reader - having the neutral voice of the YPPedia through the statement of facts such as the founding of the crew is more in line with the rest of the YPPedia's content. Also, labeling such brief introductions as history is slightly misleading given the historical content of pages such as Pirates of the Damned and Ransack Marauders. By not creating an additional subheading, it prevents crew pages from forming a contents table with no content above it. Public statements aren't considered official content and therefore should be given lesser priority within an article than factual historical content such as name changes and founding dates and details.

Thanks for having the interest in the YPPedia and the drive to want to improve crew pages, I'd suggest perhaps improving and expanding upon pirate articles, or indeed other pages rather than crew articles, given the changing nature and quantity of such articles. --Featherfin 10:27, 7 November 2006 (PST)

Pirate page trophies

Just a heads up - the trophies can be easily accessed by clicking the Viridian link just under your portrait, which is why Fiddler removed them yesterday and why they'll probably get removed again soon.

If you want to discuss this with him, feel free to start up a discussion about it with him. --Piplicus 10:20, 30 December 2006 (PST)

This is now an official policy on YPPedia:Policies and guidelines. Discussion should be at YPPedia talk:Policies and guidelines. --Barrister 21:53, 30 December 2006 (PST)

Article merges & deletion

Please take care of the link changes by clicking on the "What links here" thingee in the toolbox to the left of an article you want to mark for speedy deletion. If you could take care of http://yppedia.puzzlepirates.com/Special:Whatlinkshere/Dioses_Y_Demonios I'll zap the article. Thanks! -- Guppyspacecase

Whups, just now noticed I forgot to sign! Thanks for fixing those links. I've zapped the old article now. --Guppymomma 09:06, 12 May 2007 (PDT)

Yellow Pages

Ahoy! Take note of the Yellow Pages policy that crews on the list need to have a link. When you updated the entry for Falcon's Fury, you removed the link (though it was a dead link, I think the domain expired awhile back). This caused that entry to become ineligible for the Yellow Pages, so I have since removed it from the Midnight section. --Thunderbird 16:01, 15 May 2007 (PDT)

Deletion tags

Hidey ho. There's no need to create a talk page for an article for the article & the talk page to be deleted unless it's a controversial non-speedy deletion request. It's enough if you just mention the reason in the edit summary (like for Flying Dutchmen you could just use "tag for deletion, real article exists at The Flying Dutchmen"). --Guppymomma 11:03, 16 May 2007 (PDT)

I think my head just exploded reading your description. :) Your handling is just fine, I'll swing by and delete. --Guppymomma 14:29, 16 May 2007 (PDT)

Crew infobox date templates

The "missing" crew infobox date templates that you added were actually deleted a couple months ago since they were no longer needed. One of the Yppedia admins had gone through and updated all of the out of date crew pages. I have deleted these templates again. -- Cedarwings ^(t/c) 16:30, 1 June 2007 (PDT)

Messages to users

Ahoy! Please make sure you put messages to users on their talk page. I moved to message you left for Goodfels to the talk page. -- Cedarwings ^(t/c) 11:54, 7 June 2007 (PDT)

No worries mate! It was just a reminder more then anything else.  :) -- Cedarwings ^(t/c) 12:25, 7 June 2007 (PDT)

No worries, I figured my hitting rollback would painlessly restore the page so you wouldn't have to go into the history. That guy is obviously out of control there. I just blocked him for a week to ponder his actions. Thanks for keeping an eye open. --Guppymomma 07:39, 8 June 2007 (PDT)

Patience

Ahoy! Your time and efforts with the Yppedia are appreciated but I ask that you give all users a little more time with the pages they are working on before jumping in to make an edit or tag their page for cleanup. If you read over the Editors' Code of Conduct you will see it talks about waiting for at least 15 minutes after the last edit has been made before fixing, cleaning up, or just tagging their page. If you wish to help them along and have the time, I have tracked them down before on their home ocean and helped them that way or even left a message on their user talk page. I find that with new users the cleanup tags can especially be threatening and a user that encounters a Edit conflict message can be very confusing. Fair winds and keep up the good work. -- Cedarwings ^(t/c) 10:42, 8 June 2007 (PDT)