Star Wars The Old Republic Wiki talk:Community portal

New background
I told you I would let you know if any design changes are coming, and this one is fairly minor, but I thought I'd keep my promise and let you know. I'm going to be adding a stafield background to replace the solid black. It won't be a hugely noticeable change, just a few stars peeking out around the edges. You can see the image here --Wynthyst 04:03, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I like the image. It fits us; we're all a bunch of space-cases anyway. :D


 * Let me know if you need any help rolling out any changes. With the lifting of the NDA I'm going to start actually documenting the game, but I also want to go through some time and define all the tables and infoboxes wothin the project as present classes within the CSS. That way anyone can change, in its entirety, how they see the site when logged in. -- Heaven&#39;s Agent 04:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

License templates
I made the changes Heaven's Agent requested to the image license templates I started this week. You can see a preview of the templates currently in my sandbox. Feel free to look them over for any mistakes I missed or any other changes anyone wants to request. Additionally, I posted proposed code for MediaWiki:Licenses at the bottom of the sandbox. &mdash; Eyes   17:18, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I have concerns that some of the parameters used don't correspond to what's already present on the project, which will result in incompatibilities once an existing template is redirected to its equivalent within your structure:


 * The "usage" parameter should instead be "use"
 * The "desc" parameter should instead be "description"


 * I'm also concerned that in order to omit a parameter in the display, one has to delete that parameter from the code entirely. It should be possible to simply leave a parameter blank and have it be omitted from the output. This is an especially useful consideration for those new to wiki editing, who may be learning how to do things by simply copying code from an existing article and changing it as needed. By leaving all possible parameters within the code, such newcomers are better able to understand the full extent of what a template can accomplish. This is how I got my start in wiki editing, and is extremely useful for those who are naturally self-taught learners. -- Heaven&#39;s Agent 17:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought it might be an advantage to have an empty value hide a row when it isn't relevant while removing the parameter would select the default.
 * And I set this up so that users are much more likely to refer to the directly-linked documentation first rather than another image page they'd have to find the right template on, especially given most of them will put the template on there through the license dropdown. I know few users understand how the license dropdown works; I only learned it fairly recently myself. Remember, it's going to put the template there with no parameters at all; that's why I added the feature of each template linking to its documentation anyway. It seemed the best way to handle what the software makes awkward in the rare special case you need to modify those parameters.
 * So what you're talking about is some very rare one-off case where someone copies code from an existing image page with a few missing parameters, which is likely to be a rare event among what's already special cases. Too much overengineering is a bad thing; you stop getting things done. Don't forgot too about the benefits of being a wiki: new users aren't alone--there's usually some experienced users lurking about.
 * Anyway, I'll bot the changes to the parameter names while waiting for a response on this. (The other change just might be bottable too.) &mdash; Eyes  [[Image:User-Eyes-Sig.png|link=User talk:Eyes]] 18:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * If I couldn't have copy/pasted and edited, I wouldn't have started wiki work in the first place. You say they can look at the documentation, but a new contributor doesn't necessarily know to look for this. Additionally, expecting users to ask for help is not realistic; human beings are prideful, and not everyone is willing to admit they can't figure something out on their own. I wouldn't have, and I believe the vast majority of wiki editors are this way; someone has to have a certain level of confidence in his or her writing ability in order to author articles for everyone to see and potentially critique. Having to humble oneself and ask for help, even before they can author an article, can run counter to this personality.


 * It's not a rare one-off case, nor is it a case of over-engineering. It should be a rather simple change that might help bolster our numbers. I understand this isn't how your mind works, but when creating something for use throughout the project it's important to consider how others might do things, and account for those differences in perspective and method. -- Heaven&#39;s Agent 18:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Remember, the dropdown doesn't care about the template's parameters: what it puts on the page will be  (or whatever template is relevant), so I had to devise another way to help new users figure out how to add the parameters. Putting the "View documentation" link on the template was my solution. Additionally, on the templates that explicitly ask the user to edit the page to add details (like Template:Fair use image), I have additional links to the template documentation on the same line as the requests. So, yes, this is a special case where the situation you describe is rare. Let me tell you from experience what we'll actually see as opposed to the very unlikely scenario you're asking me to complicate seven templates (and any other derived templates) for:


 * User doesn't add any license template at all. The current design of the MediaWiki software provides only one solution to this: community vigilance. Hence the experienced users reaching out to the user as opposed to waiting for any unlikely request for help.
 * User selects the license from the dropdown and never gives it a second look. Again, same solution as above is the only one possible under the current design of the software.
 * User clicks edit before going to the documentation and sees no parameters there because the dropdown doesn't include them when it inserts it. Current design of the software gives me no options except to hope they back out and see the documentation link.


 * So you've accused me of not only failing to consider the new user, you're suggesting I'm incapable of it. Guess what, I was new once too, and I know how much I learned before I ever learned that the MediaWiki image licensing system was based on templates. So you're asking to cover a situation based on the idea that someone is going to learn template usage through the licensing system (that's not rare? really?), yet is going to miss the links to the documentation that explains every parameter (if this is how they're learning templates, the chances of them not stumbling over the documentation in this case is ridiculously low), and will never at any point be offered a helping hand if they stumble (it's a sad state of affairs on a wiki if a new user having obvious difficulty has to ask for help).


 * Sorry, not going to go back and add several #ifs each to seven templates and the core template documentation to handle a case that (for this system) is probably going to happen as often as a full planetary alignment and whose addition cannot prevent the need for community vigilance. I have too much to do to cover every edge case in every design I end up doing, and I learned a wonderful phrase recently: "The perfect is the enemy of the good," and perfect isn't attainable here without changes in the software itself anyway. But if someone else really feels it's that important despite the effort I've already made to help new users to cover this one edge case, that's fine by me, because that's the beauty of wikis. &mdash; Eyes  [[Image:User-Eyes-Sig.png|link=User talk:Eyes]] 20:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, if you won't do it I will. I've hesitated to do so thus far out of respect; they're your templates, something you designed and brought with you from elsewhere. That said, I firmly believe this functionality is a necessary component to templates. There are too few community members willing to contribute to a wiki project in the first place. It's our role as experienced contributors to go above and beyond to help newcomers become accustomed to editing; we don't need additional barriers to new contributors, especially when rival projects exist that are competing with us for those same individuals.


 * You keep going back to the documentation and the automation. What you fail to realize is that a new contributor may not have any clue what these are, or how they apply. I didn't become aware of these things until nearly a year after I began editing, and if I had been aware they wouldn't have really helped me anyway. I'm a heavily visual learner; seeing, mimicking, and expanding up what's already in place is how I understand concepts and improve my abilities. Statistically speaking this is actually a fairly common learning style.


 * I'm sorry, I tried to say the following nicely but you didn't catch on. Coding a template so that the only way for a parameter to be omitted is to exclude that parameter entirely is a cop out. It's lazy design. It's not much more difficult to write a template that omits a parameter when it is left undefined. You are failing to consider the different ways that different people learn. So what if the copy/paste method does end up being a one-off case? If it enables even one user to become familiar with wiki editing and start contributing to this project, it's worthwhile. Additionally, since we are aware of this now, it's something we should address now. When you design something for general use, you need to consider as many different usage situations as possible. To refuse to do so, for whatever reason, is nothing less than short-sightedness. -- Heaven&#39;s Agent 21:36, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Are the Photos from this Website allowed in Videos?
Hi, im going to do a sorta video of SWTOR, and i was wondering if i was allowed to use these photos from this Website, ofcourse with Credits. Can any1 answer this question? ;) From Sebberdreng


 * Well, most of the images used here don't belong to us, and as such ours isn't the permission you need. Most of them are obtained from official information releases, in this case from the official Star Wars: The Old Republic home page. They have their own usage permissions for allowing others to utilize their images, and it is these permissions you'll have to work with. That being said, crediting the source and owner of any images you utilize own will go a long way toward validating their use.


 * For anything else, you'd need to ask on an individual basis. Some images hosted here are unique works that have not been released under a general usage license. others have been, and it would be fine for you to utilize them so long as you respect that license. I guess before we can answer your question fully, we'd have to ask what images do you want to use, and what exactly is this video going to entail? -- Heaven&#39;s Agent 13:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Mission article layout
Moved to Forum:Mission article layout

Multiple results on DB
How do we want to handle DB links to NPCs with multiple results? There's 5 results when searching for Orgus Din. -- 15:29, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've been going with the most relevant and/or most correct DB article I can find. The DB is fairly unoptimized at the moment, something that I'm sure will be corrected in time, so for now our options end up being not linking to the DB at all, or simply linking to the best fit.


 * That being said, we're always going to have some instances where there is duplication. Certain NPCs, such as Master Orgus, do appear in multiple locations. The database is going to list each appearance separately. I believe we, on the other hand, should strive to consolidate these appearances into a single article for the character. Perhaps the best choice is to link to the search results that you provided above, Alainin. -- Heaven&#39;s Agent 15:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

The merge was botched, at least with regards to KOTOR. Either fix this and shape up re: KOTOR, or make a separate KOTOR wiki
When I looked at the discussion for the Fandom site people were saying that it should be merged with the Gamepedia version because this version was allegedly more complete and informative.

Well, apparently "Merge" meant "Everbody ditch the Fandom site and make Gamepedia accounts but not actually bring any information over". Because this site doesn't even have what paltry coverage of the original KOTOR games and classes the Fandom site did.

Either fix this mess and shape up in general re: KOTOR coverage, or make a separate KOTOR wiki so that people will actually give it due attention. ZeldaTheSwordsman (talk) 08:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Hey there! I would suggest making a new wiki specifically for KOTOR, as it was always a small part of the fandom TOR wiki. Feel free to also take information from the archived wiki if you do end up making one. ExiledRival (talk) 01:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)