Template talk:Infobox flag

From YPPedia

This template is for flags on all of the oceans. To use, first copy and paste the following into your flag's page.

{{Infobox flag|

Next, fill in each parameter with your flag's information, placing it between the equals sign and vertical bar/pipe ("|"). If your flag doesn't have an organized political system, put "no" for "organized" and leave "organization" blank. If your flag has an organized political system, put "yes" under "organized" and briefly describe its organization under "organization". If your flag owns an island, type the number of islands it owns for the "numberofislands" parameter and fill in the island's full name under "islandname1" (and islandname2, islandname3, islandname4 if necessary). If your flag doesn't own an island, type "zero" under "numberofislands". For the update fields, use the numeric day, month, and year without any leading zeros. For the 19th of January, 2006, for example, the fields would be:

After the double bracket— }} —that closes the template, you can write anything you like about your flag. Don't worry about fancy formatting or linkage; there are plenty of people willing and quick to edit.

Most importantly, we want each flag to have a brief history about it. If your flag has taken part in an exciting blockade, or has suffered losses in a vicious war, write about it.

Thanks! —Yaten

Defunct, dormant, or disbanded flags

To mark a flag as defunct, switch {{Infobox flag| on the first line of the infobox to {{Infobox flag(defunct)|

Troubleshooting the template

If it doesn't seem to be displaying correctly, first check the following things:

  • Make sure all of your linked monarch or crew names have an opening and closing set of tags ([[ and ]])
  • Make sure you have the required fields filled in: organized (yes, no), numberofislands (zero, one, two, three, four), and oceanname (Azure, Cobalt, Midnight, Sage, Viridian)
    • If you are on more than one ocean, use two separate infoboxes using the table info below
  • Make sure you have not accidentally deleted the | that separates each variable
  • Make sure there is an opening and closing tag for the template ({{ and }})

If you still can't get it to work after checking those things, leave a note on the flag's talk page asking for help (don't forget to put something like "infobox help" in the edit summary) and someone will be happy to give you a hand with it.

Using more than one Infobox flag on a page

If you're using more than one infobox flag template on a page, put it into a table using the following table code:

{| border=0 style="float:right;"

This will stop the edit links for sections from being all over the place.

Defunct flags

Can we get a short info box for defunct flags? I'm not sure it needs much, but it'd be nice to have it much the look/feel of the regular infobox. --Barrister 13:47, 4 August 2005 (PDT)

I threw something together and pray that it will work. Template:Infobox_flag(defunct) --Feegle 16:40, 22 August 2005 (PDT)

What do we need to see in a flag/crew to mark it defunct? Is having all it's members dormant good enough? Klostro 11:37, 20 May 2008 (PDT)

Certainly a flag/crew that has all of it's members dormant can have it's yppedia page marked as defunct. You can also then add a reason parameter in the infobox stating that the crew/flag is dormant rather then the default that states it as defunct or dormant. -- Cedarwings (talk) 14:51, 20 May 2008 (PDT)

Fame rating info

The crew infobox already has a section for Fame, why not have one for flags as well? --Thunderbird 15:00, 31 August 2005 (PDT)

I believe it's a mistake to have a fame section in the crew infobox. If you need this information, you will need it for an in game type purpose & will need it to be the most current. Fame bounces too much for it to be a good thing to track in official infoboxes.--Guppymomma 15:08, 31 August 2005 (PDT)
I agree with Guppymomma. For crews and flags near the edge of a fame bracket, this value may change quite frequently. It should be removed. --Barrister 18:10, 31 August 2005 (PDT)


I see alot of flags adding Royalty members into the main half of the page, maybe there should be a royalty section added to the info box? -Jacktheblack

That would certainly be symmetrical with the crew field for senior officers. I think we shied away from it initially because some of the Viridian flags had dozens of royalty. I just checked, and it looks like that's no longer an issue. The downside is that there's well over a hundred flag pages using this template. Adding a field would mean that we should edit all those entries, even if it's just to say we'll fill in the field later.
I'd like to hear other opinions before we change this. --Barrister 08:22, 3 November 2005 (PST)
I'm about to go through and update this template anyways - do we want to add Royalty as well? Does this version of Mediawiki support default parameters (A recent addition, IIRC)? --AtteSmythe 11:36, 9 January 2006 (PST)
Well, if you're changing them all anyway, go for it. But don't add a "Titled" section. Also, I don't think the current version of Mediawiki that we're using supports default parameters. If they do, I don't know how to define them. --Barrister 11:54, 9 January 2006 (PST)
Tested. Assuming I put it in properly (according to [1]), we're not running 1.6. Since I have to edit every flag anyway, I'll just put in the default as part of the edit. --AtteSmythe 12:09, 9 January 2006 (PST)

I added a royalty section to the template but was reverted by Barrister. The change would take 30 seconds to implement with very little harm. There should not be a titled section as some flags have between 50-100 titled members and would just be esthetic. I think only Royalty needs to be represented. The break that occurred when I added royalty was cosmetic..it just put the word royalty members...so the reversion was in my opinion a bit drastic...perhaps the default variables should've been added and have people adjust as they go. Royalty is pertinent to a lot of the flags...so this is definitely significant for historical purposes.

Personally, I'd be leaving template changes and other policy decisions to sysops and bureaus. They have established procedures in place for amendments that affect a large number of the population. --Redbeardsage
Too much work right now me thinks - Would mean tredging through the flag pages adding it in. There is a way to implement it as an optional field as some flags have no royalty - using sub-templates. I'm wary of adding to the key infoboxes right now. --Sagacious 07:00, 22 March 2006 (PST)
The harm comes from the fact that the version of mediawiki we run still has no option for default paramater values; you need to pass a value for every variable otherwise the template spits garbage back at you. With your change, on each of the 230 odd pages that use this template, they would each display "Royal(s) {{{royalmembers}}}" until somebody went in and added the royalmemebers value to each page. Subtemplates are even worse when no value is passed; just take a look at a badly formated crew page to see what happens there.
If this is something you want to see done you should also take on the task of fixing all the pages that will break with the introduction of this change. I'd reccomend going through all the flag pages and adding royalmembers=| first, and then changing the template. Filling in the information can be done later during regular cleanup duty.--Fiddler 07:15, 22 March 2006 (PST)
Ahh ok so sub-templates wouldn't work in this instance... --Sagacious 07:26, 22 March 2006 (PST)
Crap. I knew I forgot to do something when I changed the "Last updated on..." :( --AtteSmythe 11:13, 22 March 2006 (PST)
My reasoning for reverting the change (I'm the one who did it, if you check the history) was that sure, adding Royalty had been discussed. But you only bothered to update ONE page using the template, leaving all of the others to be a mess. Changing a template does not take just 30 seconds, since all of the pages using it have to be updated too. Adjusting the defunct flag box took me somewhere around 20-30 minutes, and I only had about 34 pages to check and fix. Tasks involving this infobox would take a lot longer. --Thunderbird 12:08, 22 March 2006 (PST)
When I've got a spare 7 hours or so, I might have a bash and edit it and update all the pages. I will either add a |royalty= none | tag to every flag page and let the pages be updated as people can, or I'll spend even more time and check all the flags against the game and add all the royalty in. Either way it's a time consuming job. --Sagacious 12:13, 22 March 2006 (PST)
Yeah, it is. Get a tabbed browser if you don't already have one. Go to the Template's "What links here" page, and just go down the list, opening into new tabs. Fix a page, tab over, and work on the next while the previous one's still transferring. Worked for me. Probably will take a couple hours, though, unless you're really focusing on it. --AtteSmythe 23:53, 22 March 2006 (PST)
Whatever you do, don't use royalty=none unless you know the flag has no royalty. Just leave it blank or put a note that it needs to be filled in, otherwise there will be accusations of incorrect info blah blah blah. --Guppymomma 06:56, 23 March 2006 (PST)
Got me a tabbed browser (God bless *Cheer* IE7!). What would make the job easier is if browsing Flag info in a web browser was possible without knowing the ID code. I hate the way the ability to highlight crew/flag pages in-game is so irregular and rare. --Sagacious 00:45, 23 March 2006 (PST)
The easiest way I've found is to be in the game at the same time, and pull the flag's info page from yohoho.log. (If that made no sense, there's a better description on my user page). Also, "what links here" does not link to all of the flag pages... No idea why, but there will be a small chunk that will have to be found and fixed by going though the flag category (ack).--Zava 06:29, 23 March 2006 (PST)
I'm not really a fan of adding this section. It just seems like it will be more work for little to no reward, and yet another section of information that has to be checked when updating. --Fannon 10:38, 23 March 2006 (PST)

More than four islands?

How should one handle a flag owning more than four islands? Narya on Sage controls Cromwell, Descartes, Greenwich, Halley, Lincoln, and Wensleydale. Ruddigore 08:33, 5 April 2006 (PDT)

It's probably time to create a second flag template for use by flags holding 5 to 8 islands. If we try to re-tool this one, we'll have to update every single flag page, and that's a bad idea. --Barrister 09:47, 5 April 2006 (PDT)


The 'Month' tag which replaced 'Infobox crew' when auto-converting number dates to text is booched, for April at least. It won't accept 04, but will accept 4. --Sagacious 14:43, 8 April 2006 (PDT)

It's not booched. We're following a standard, having multiple standards means we'd require more pages for this, which I think is unnecessary. --Thunderbird 15:12, 8 April 2006 (PDT)
Can we not use the old standard of including the 0's. --Sagacious 16:41, 8 April 2006 (PDT)
I prefer not to use leading zeroes. In general (not just for wikis), they should only be used when there's no way around it. --Barrister 16:47, 8 April 2006 (PDT)
For this implementation, there's pretty much no reason to use a leading zero. Most people don't think to use the 0 and it would be a bother to have to add that kind of correction to the ones that already need tending to. --Guppymomma 17:17, 8 April 2006 (PDT)


Not all flags have a monarch. I propose adding a {{hasmonarch}} field (defaulting to yes), and if it says no, it just writes "No monarch" into that field. Because it looks kinda silly now with the way it's done. --Thunderbird 21:03, 30 June 2006 (PDT)

We might as well take advantage of all this default value stuff. Unless it breaks the template, anything that makes it simpler to use is a good thing, I think. --Emufarmers 21:18, 30 June 2006 (PDT)
Support. This default stuff is most excellent. --Barrister 21:54, 30 June 2006 (PDT)
Wow, we have default parameters now? When did that happen? --AtteSmythe 21:37, 1 July 2006 (PDT)
The other day when they migrated hardware/software or something for the forum, they gave us a shiny new updated Mediawiki as well :) --Guppymomma 21:38, 1 July 2006 (PDT)

Can we get the "has monarch" option documented? Thanks. --Therack 01:20, 19 March 2007 (PDT)

Default values oddity

So I was noticing the infobox on The Phantom Fleet was broken due to not having a value for number of islands which I thought was odd, but I fixed it anyhow. Then I came over here and saw that it did indeed have a default value but it didn't seem to be in action (check the diffs from the last two edits). Anyone have an idea what's up with that? --Guppymomma 09:01, 25 August 2006 (PDT)

The problem was that the parameter was there, and essentially filled in (though filled in with a blank space). The default value only comes up if the parameter is left off. --Thunderbird 09:39, 25 August 2006 (PDT)
I've seen this, too. We could probably put in an expression to check whether the string is blank or not, but that's a little bit beyond my wikiskills right now. The problem, I think, is that folks grab the empty template code from the usage instructions, then fill in what they need, and don't remove the rest. --AtteSmythe 09:54, 25 August 2006 (PDT)

Images, Policies, Royalty, Title, and Flag Description


Maybe someone could improve what I did here. It just has a couple of little bugs...

My own flag, DarkBlaze, uses it, so you can see it in action :-)

--ROCKAB88M 00:18, 12 November 2006 (PST)

Ok, my thoughts: I've been considering an optional element for an image, intended to be used for flag portraits or flag images. I hadn't decided if they were useful enough to even propose yet, though since you've done it, this is probably not a bad time for that discussion. There's precedent (c.f. Silver Dawn). Image credits should remain on the image's page, not the infobox. Royalty/Titled lists would be better served in a collapsible box like the one Captain N made for Moonlit. Flag description belongs in the article text, IMO. --AtteSmythe 11:31, 13 November 2006 (PST)
The image 'credits' aren't very big and they're not really credits because all you get to say is the designers name. It is also optional. In fact the whole flag bit is optional.

And I want to know, despite my continued efforts to state facts about what I've done, people continue to present their opinons on them as facts not thoughts. Image credits should/Royalty/Titled lists would be better served/Flag description belongs in the article text

I prefaced it with "My thoughts." That should clarify to you that everything following it is my opinion. And I realize it's optional, but it remains my opinion that that is the sort of information that belongs in the article body, or the image article, not the flag infobox. The purpose of the infoboxes (and this isn't my opinion, but what I've gathered from my work on them and conversations with their designers) is that they're to provide at-a-glance information. --AtteSmythe 22:23, 13 November 2006 (PST)

Founded date

For the sake of consistancy, I think that the flag template should have a founded date like that of the crew template. Like the crew template this is something that does not change, but would let the world know how long the Flag has been around. --timberscout 22:23, 30 January 2007 (PST)

Agreed. -- Faulkston 09:44, 10 June 2007 (PDT)
Double agreed. --Muffynz 12:23, 10 June 2007 (PDT)
Tripled, and bumped. -- Thefirstdude (t/c) 22:51, 30 June 2007 (PDT)
Added. --Thunderbird 01:28, 5 April 2008 (PDT)

Remove Infobox Toaster Link

Can we get the link down the bottom of the page removed.... PTG's domain is currently a porn placeholder page...

The link to infobox toaster has not yet been removed. Sysop, pretty please? --Arminius 14:03, 18 March 2007 (PDT)

And while you're at it, could you please, please do the stuff discussed here? :/ -- Thefirstdude (t/c) 14:09, 18 March 2007 (PDT)

Error in usage for templage

In the template usage flagid is misspelled as fladid -- Vorky 05:25, 11 April 2007 (PDT)

All fixed now. -- Cedarwings (t/c) 09:07, 11 April 2007 (PDT)

Flag ID

As some people aren't sure how to find their flag ID should an instruction section be added for that in the Optional Parameters area? --Matt121493 03:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I would say yes, because it is a very common question from new users. That was my first question I asked when I started to actively edit the wiki :) I actually have a small section on my user page about finding flagids if you would like to look. --Addihockey (talk/contribs) 04:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

A new flag box for the crimson ocean?

With allys and wars disabled should their be a new flag box to remove these options from the flag box? --randompanzy 23:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

No need to have a new box. We'll just get it to disregard those parameters if ocean=Crimson. Shouldn't be a tough fix. -- Cedarwings (talk) 23:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Awesome thanks Amoyer :) --randompanzy 23:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Now I just need to figure out what I've done wrong as Allies and Wars aren't appearing for any ocean. Hmm. Have a look at the example and the template. I used the following changes to the template but there seems to be a problem.
{{!}}- - style="vertical-align: top;"
{{!}} '''Allies'''
{{!}} {{{allies|}}}
{{!}}- style="vertical-align:top;"
{{!}} '''Wars'''
{{!}} {{{wars|}}}
Any suggestions on how to fix it. I'm sure I missed something. -- Cedarwings (talk) 00:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
What you want is {{#ifeq:{{{oceanname}}}|Crimson|| etc - you need the blank parameter right after the Crimson, because you want it to do all that if the ocean is not Crimson.
While we're modifying the flag infoboxes, though, can I make a suggestion to do away with the Outdated flag article sub-templates? My syntax is probably gonna need checking here, but what we'd need to do is replace the line
{{Infobox flag/{{{updateyear|2005}}}/{{{updatemonth|12}}}}}
{{#ifexpr:(abs(({{CURRENTMONTH}}-{{{updatemonth}}}))>3) or (({{CURRENTYEAR}}-{{{updateyear}}})>=1)|[[Category:Outdated flag articles]]|}}
Whew. This would evaluate within the template itself to see whether the page was last edited greater than three months or a year ago, and it'd mean we wouldn't need the little sub-templates that need updating every month. Like I said, though, I'm not certain on the syntax, but it looks right. --Belthazar451 03:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
sniped :( --randompanzy 03:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Nice formula. And yes it works. Although it would really be [[Category:Outdated flag information]] but that's a minor fix. This change could then also be made to {{Infobox crew}} (Usage). I'm also copying in comments regarding pointing to a "family ocean" rather then just Crimson as a specific ocean to leave room for future red oceans to be added to a list. -- Cedarwings (talk) 20:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I was going to mention it'd work for crew information as well, but forgot. Unfortunately, I just realised the logic breaks down if the page was last edited in the first three months of the year, because a month before January (say) is December the previous year, which'd mean it would evaluate to true. So far as I can figure out, the best solution is to change the expression to:
which is a bit more streamlined anyway. --Belthazar451 22:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

(undent)Something to keep in mind is that if Crimson is successful it may not be the only family ocean, so however you do this it should be expandable to recognize all red oceans.--Fiddler 12:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Good point. I propose the use of a template like User:Alfwyn/Sandbox/Template:Familyocean, that way only one place would need to be updated if a new family ocean opens (supposing we need the distinction in other places too). --Alfwyn 12:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I'm obviously missing something. Either I called the template wrong or there is an error in it and I'm not counting out either option. -- Cedarwings (talk) 21:50, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
It looks like it is the = in the text to be replaced, the switch doesn't like this. --Alfwyn 22:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Simple solution: put "3=" at the start. --Belthazar451 22:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, this fixed it. It wasn't the switch, but simply changing the parser function to a template and the named paramater syntax of templates. --Alfwyn 22:17, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the case for any template - the first equals sign in a parameter indicates to the template that everthing before the equals is the name of the parameter. Subsequent equals signs don't have that problem, which is why explicitly calling the parameter by name (or number) makes the problem go away. You'll notice that some of the image tags (which call a forum thread URL containing an equals) also have an explicit parameter call. On a side note, sorry for pushing in like that. --Belthazar451 22:23, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

(undent)With help, changes have been made to this template such that for family oceans, the allies and wars parameters are not displayed. Also, the way in which the Outdated flag information category was applied such that templates are no longer required to be created each month. This change in the way the category is applied was also changed in {{Infobox crew}} (Usage). -- Cedarwings (talk) 23:41, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I also set the allies and wars parameters to have a default of ''None''. It won't have an effect in most cases, as having a blank parameter present is enough to suppress the default value, but (to give an example) for special flags like the BK flags who never have wars or allies, it allows us to omit the parameters and thus streamline the page code a bit. --Belthazar451 06:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

More on flagid

So, we've currently got a ifdef expression checking if there's a flagid parameter and only putting the link if there is. Do we want to insert a function in the FALSE case that inserts a category (say Category: Flag articles with no flagid) if they haven't added their flagid? Ditto for the infobox crew's crewid. Of course, it won't pick up on invalid flag IDs, or ones where they've stuck "yes" or "no", but it will help us find the ones that are missing altogether. --Belthazar451 21:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds useful to me. We could check for empty or non-numerical values with something like {{#iferror:{{#ifexpr:{{{flagid}}}>0}}|[[Category:foo]]}}. What would be a good name for a category that lumps together pages with templates that could need looking after ? Just one category would be easier to check on a regular basis. --Alfwyn 17:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Missing in usage notes: hasmonarch

  • hasmonarch (yes/no (defaults to yes)) If set to "no" None will be shown as monarch.

Edit at will and please add to the usage notes. --Kamuflaro 10:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Hasmonarch is for the Infobox flag (defunct) template. That's why it's not included here. :) --Addihockey (talk/contribs) 14:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Actually the hasmonarch parameter is recognized by this template too. From the source:
| '''Monarch'''
| {{Infobox flag/hasmonarch-{{lc:{{{hasmonarch|yes}}}}}|monarch={{{monarch}}}|monarchcrew= {{{monarchcrew}}}}}
I'll add it to the usage. --Alfwyn 14:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Oh really? Well, you learn something everyday. --Addihockey (talk/contribs) 14:50, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Alfwyn. It's possible to have an active flag without a monarch. --Kamuflaro 19:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Sure it is. See Vilya on Jade for an example. Not sure what happens if such a flag wins an island though (who is governor, who gets the deeds ?). --Alfwyn 20:21, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Someone gets designated - perhaps the person who drops the chest. Vanguard on Viridian doesn't have any problems. --Belthazar451 21:03, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


What is the reason that this parameter is spelled out ("one", "two", ...) instead of simply using the number (1, 2, ...) like any other template? To make matters more confusing, 0 is a valid alternative to "zero" and is even used as the default value in this template. But things break if this is changed to 1 (see [2] for a recent example of confusion). --Alfwyn 19:28, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Another confused editor [3]. I propose to move the spelled out subtemplates ("one", ...) to their digit representation equivalents ("1", ...) for consistency reasons. Leaving the resulting redirects in place will ensure we don't have to edit all the flag pages, the new usage should just be the preferred way (I'd hunt down and change existing documentation). --Alfwyn 12:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
I support this, because it just confused the heck out of me too. Chupchup 02:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Escape mechanism for image name

Currently if two flags with the same name on different oceans display a portrait, they share the same image name. A workaround is to use a disambiguated name as the flagname, but this is undesireable otherwise. A possible fix to avoid this would be to include the ocean name in the image path, but that would require too many uploads and there would still be the possibility of a clash in the case of past flags. So I propose a new optional paramter to be used in the clashing cases. There are two alternatives I'd consider, example uses are below, the resulting image name would be the same in both cases.

  1. imagedisambig=Ice
  2. imagename=Flags-Sampleflag (Ice).jpg

The first alternative makes it less easy to mess up the image name, while the second is a little bit more general and could be used to cure other problems (like silently converted characters during image upload) that may crop up in the future too. Any thoughts on this?

This change would apply to the crew infobox and the two defunct versions too. --Alfwyn 15:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

My thought would be to make the image name use the page name for the image, as presumably the portraits already follow that, and it would require no extra parameters to remember. --Thunderbird 21:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
That would guarantee the uniqueness of the name. But we would then have to hunt down cases like Jinx (flag) were the image doesn't folllow the page name because it doesn't clash with another flag. Not sure how many cases that would be. --Alfwyn 22:08, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Counting flags with (*ocean* flag) and (flag) in their names, I get 28. --Thunderbird 03:14, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I have the vague feeling that there are quite a bit more cases. Did you count cases like The Black Hole (Viridian)? And then there are of course crew articles and defunct flag and crew articles. --Alfwyn 14:54, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

how many Islands, max?

According to this earlier conversation, this template should be able to handle up to eight (8) islands for any one flag. However, that is not specifically addressed in the "usage" for the template.

Since the template proper is protected, I'm asking that someone with the appropriate permissions please update the usage to specifically address how to handle flags having more than four islands, and to please also specify the maximum number of islands owned that this template can handle, whenever you have the spare time.

Thanks in advance! -- Franklincain (t/c)

Strictly speaking, the template should be made able to display as many islands as is needed - and actually, it's currently capable of displaying ten. I mean, if (though that's a rather big if) a flag manages to get more islands, are we going to go "too bad, you've gotta give one back"? I don't think it's really worth making a specific note of. --Belthazar451 14:04, 18 June 2013 (PDT)

Lowercase heading

This template and {{Infobox crew}} (Usage) say "{flagname/crewname} at a Glance". Is there some reason why "Glance" is capitalized? It goes against our informal Manual of Style. I suggest lowercasing it here and there alike. In addition, {{Infobox crew}} (Usage) contains several fields which are title case as well: "Senior Officer(s)" and "Flag Affiliation". There may be others that are not shown in the documentation. Let's lowercase all of these in one fell swoop. Chupchup 22:16, 27 July 2013 (PDT)

moar islands

Could someone add islandname11 and islandname12, please? --Budclare2 01:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Better go up to 15 this time, so we hopefully won't have to pester an admin again for a while... --Budclare2 21:41, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, 15 would be nice since Babylon got 14 islands now. lol. Gunnerfreak on Cerulean 12:59, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
For the record, I haven't done this yet, as I think it's starting to get a little too big. I think there should be a cap on the number of islands shown. --Thunderbird 23:41, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Faction parameters?

I'm thinking it'd be nice to see what faction an Obsidian Ocean Flag is in? Gunnerfreak on Cerulean 16:08, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Last updated

The date format for "Last updated on..." is dmy, but uses a comma. This is contrary to Wikipedia MOS:DATE convention, which uses no comma in dmy date format. Chupchup 13:49, 26 July 2021 (UTC)