NationStates

Maltropia wrote:If you can create a table, you can create a sortable one, more or less. Instead of class="wikitable" you want class="wikitable sortable" and that's about it. See this table for an example.

Thank you, though I figured out the problem I was having with it. I tried that, couldn't see it on the preview and thought that the sortable functionality wasn't going to show up at all. Now that the edits is complete I can see the sortable. Thanks though.

Ujang wrote:Ermm..... sorry for intruding... but I wanna ask somethimg.... is there any chance that a template like "This is a part of series of..... " like this in Soviet Union's Wikipedia existed in IIwiki?

The only equivalents I've seen on iiwiki are those that are made by the players themselves.

Ujang wrote:Ermm..... sorry for intruding... but I wanna ask somethimg.... is there any chance that a template like "This is a part of series of..... " like this in Soviet Union's Wikipedia existed in IIwiki?

If you view the template's page you'll see that it's mainly built out of Template:Sidebar with collapsible lists, which does exist on Iiwiki.. There's also Template:Politbox, which seems to lack documentation. Look at Template:Politics of Amalfi for an example of how to use it.

Which election template would be most appropriate to use in the case of a general election (consisting of all branches of government)? Would it be appropriate to use multiple?

Post War America wrote:Which election template would be most appropriate to use in the case of a general election (consisting of all branches of government)? Would it be appropriate to use multiple?

An article called "(X) general election, 2016" is usually used for parliamentary systems. Elections for separate branches in a presidential or semi-presidential system, even if they're part of the same general election, are usually split into separate articles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_presidential_election,_2012
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_legislative_election,_2012

Maltropia wrote:

Ujang wrote:Ermm..... sorry for intruding... but I wanna ask somethimg.... is there any chance that a template like "This is a part of series of..... " like this in Soviet Union's Wikipedia existed in IIwiki?

If you view the template's page you'll see that it's mainly built out of Template:Sidebar with collapsible lists, which does exist on Iiwiki.. There's also Template:Politbox, which seems to lack documentation. Look at Template:Politics of Amalfi for an example of how to use it.

Oho~ this is what I'm looking for~ Thanks!

How would one infobox an election for a bicameral legislature? Would that require multiple pages?

Post War America wrote:How would one infobox an election for a bicameral legislature? Would that require multiple pages?

That's how it's done on Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ions,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ions,_2016

Santheres wrote:

Post War America wrote:How would one infobox an election for a bicameral legislature? Would that require multiple pages?

That's how it's done on Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ions,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ions,_2016

Fair enough, I did see a single US election page, but it looks like that was based on an infobx unique to elections in the US. Alright, many thanks, and hopefully I won't encounter further issues that would require me to inquire more about election boxes.

Post War America wrote:

Santheres wrote:
That's how it's done on Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ions,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ions,_2016

Fair enough, I did see a single US election page, but it looks like that was based on an infobx unique to elections in the US. Alright, many thanks, and hopefully I won't encounter further issues that would require me to inquire more about election boxes.

I recall a bicameral election thread that just did (Lower House Seats)/(Upper House Seats). For example;

Party 1 - 55/155
Party 2 - 45/145

EDIT: Also I'm getting a 502 while trying to get on, is it serverside or just on me?

The site appears to be down again.

Great Kauthar wrote:

Post War America wrote:
Fair enough, I did see a single US election page, but it looks like that was based on an infobx unique to elections in the US. Alright, many thanks, and hopefully I won't encounter further issues that would require me to inquire more about election boxes.

I recall a bicameral election thread that just did (Lower House Seats)/(Upper House Seats). For example;

Party 1 - 55/155
Party 2 - 45/145

EDIT: Also I'm getting a 502 while trying to get on, is it serverside or just on me?

A 502 for me aswell. Any update from the sites admin?

Socialist Mercanda wrote:

Great Kauthar wrote:I recall a bicameral election thread that just did (Lower House Seats)/(Upper House Seats). For example;

Party 1 - 55/155
Party 2 - 45/145

EDIT: Also I'm getting a 502 while trying to get on, is it serverside or just on me?

A 502 for me aswell. Any update from the sites admin?

Still seems to be down. Don't know if it went back up between then and now.

isitdown is telling me the site has been down for over a week, a look in my history for all iiwiki results tells me that may be the case, as the last time I opened was the 27th which apparently gave me a 502 error though I don't recall that.

Koerwechen wrote:isitdown is telling me the site has been down for over a week, a look in my history for all iiwiki results tells me that may be the case, as the last time I opened was the 27th which apparently gave me a 502 error though I don't recall that.

...seems glitchy on their end.

IIwiki was still fine for me yesterday evening.

Koerwechen wrote:isitdown is telling me the site has been down for over a week, a look in my history for all iiwiki results tells me that may be the case, as the last time I opened was the 27th which apparently gave me a 502 error though I don't recall that.

I was on it yesterday. Isitdown is malfunctioning.

Koerwechen wrote:isitdown is telling me the site has been down for over a week, a look in my history for all iiwiki results tells me that may be the case, as the last time I opened was the 27th which apparently gave me a 502 error though I don't recall that.

As with others, I was also on IIwiki and actively editing it yesterday.

502 Bad Gateway for me

Can't y'all just hold a New Year's Fundraiser so that you can finally get that much-coveted larger server?

And it's back up.

Thanks to the IIwiki staff for another job well done!

*leaves Christmas carol*

Tinhampton wrote:Can't y'all just hold a New Year's Fundraiser so that you can finally get that much-coveted larger server?

Or we can make uploads above 500 KB (non-Wikicommons) require payment (or an IIwiki Gold membership, with a fee of $29.99 a month).

Luziyca wrote:

Tinhampton wrote:Can't y'all just hold a New Year's Fundraiser so that you can finally get that much-coveted larger server?

Or we can make uploads above 500 KB (non-Wikicommons) require payment (or an IIwiki Gold membership, with a fee of $29.99 a month).

I can see why that may be applicable for use if the images are only to be viewed inside an article, but what if we have large files, like maps, that we want to make viewable (their details able to be examined clearly) when clicked on as well?

Yugoslav Memes wrote:

Luziyca wrote:Or we can make uploads above 500 KB (non-Wikicommons) require payment (or an IIwiki Gold membership, with a fee of $29.99 a month).

I can see why that may be applicable for use if the images are only to be viewed inside an article, but what if we have large files, like maps, that we want to make viewable (their details able to be examined clearly) when clicked on as well?

...and that is how IIwiki gets that big server.

Yugoslav Memes wrote:

Luziyca wrote:Or we can make uploads above 500 KB (non-Wikicommons) require payment (or an IIwiki Gold membership, with a fee of $29.99 a month).

I can see why that may be applicable for use if the images are only to be viewed inside an article, but what if we have large files, like maps, that we want to make viewable (their details able to be examined clearly) when clicked on as well?

Please do not upload large map files to IIWiki. They have no place there - we are not an image hosting service, and they are not necessary for wiki articles.

As for holding a drive for a new server - no, that wouldn't work because we can't ever downgrade, so if we manage to get enough for the new server for the next year, I have no way of knowing if we're going to succeed again the year after (and the year after that...). It needs to be a consistent payment, not lump sums all at once in the year. It also requires me to figure out a good way to host and run the drive and make sure payments are secure. I don't have the time for that - and since the money for the site comes out of my wallet, it has to be done by me.

I also will reiterate that the imgur extension still works, and is ready to go for anyone to use. It's easy to use, means that you're not uploading photos to iiwiki, and works for everything except infoboxes as far as I can tell.

Yugoslav Memes wrote:

Luziyca wrote:Or we can make uploads above 500 KB (non-Wikicommons) require payment (or an IIwiki Gold membership, with a fee of $29.99 a month).

I can see why that may be applicable for use if the images are only to be viewed inside an article, but what if we have large files, like maps, that we want to make viewable (their details able to be examined clearly) when clicked on as well?

Upload larger files to wikicommons

Great Kauthar wrote:

Yugoslav Memes wrote:I can see why that may be applicable for use if the images are only to be viewed inside an article, but what if we have large files, like maps, that we want to make viewable (their details able to be examined clearly) when clicked on as well?

Upload larger files to wikicommons

I love this idea as well.

More use of Commons would be great.