IIWiki - Premier Encyclopedia for the Roleplaying Forums

[Kyrusia]

We strongly prefer people do not manually import templates from Wikipedia given that some templates are exceptionally dependent on transclusions or adjoined templates, which can sometimes lead to issues when they are manually imported without the templates they depend upon also being imported, in turn leading to more maintenance on our end. This is why we have given out administrative citations for players that have repeatedly done this in the past - combined with the fact it is explicitly prohibited by Standard Six.

If you have a template you would like to have imported, please contact an administrator directly so it can be imported using the tools we have at our disposal to do so (allowing us to import all of the templates a given template might, in turn, rely upon).

No one reads the standards! Anyways, I pulled over the Template:Infobox bicycle race, Template:Motorsport venue, and Template:motorsport championship in the past few days.

They all work independently but you might check them out. Sorry if this causes you inconvenience, wasn't aware there was protocol to follow and I'm not OOC friends with you guys like I was with the admins in the wikistates days (which made it a lot easier to get temps ported) so I figured I'd just transfer them over myself.

Wasn't trying to stir up trouble.

Reading the actual Standards and Conventions of the website tends to help prevent these sort of things, given it outlines the rules and expectations each player agrees to by utilizing the wiki.

Regardless, I'll look over them; I haven't heard about any particular issue arising from the manual imports yet, so I doubt there has been any noticeable issue, much less a cascade.

[Valipac]

No one reads the standards! Anyways, I pulled over the Template:Infobox bicycle race, Template:Motorsport venue, and Template:motorsport championship in the past few days.

They all work independently but you might check them out. Sorry if this causes you inconvenience, wasn't aware there was protocol to follow and I'm not OOC friends with you guys like I was with the admins in the wikistates days (which made it a lot easier to get temps ported) so I figured I'd just transfer them over myself.

Wasn't trying to stir up trouble.

Reading the actual Standards and Conventions of the website tends to help prevent these sort of things, given it outlines the rules and expectations each player agrees to by utilizing the wiki.

Regardless, I'll look over them; I haven't heard about any particular issue arising from the manual imports yet, so I doubt there has been any noticeable issue, much less a cascade.

Everyone knows you just click "agree" to whatever T&C a website requires and then proceed to ignore the actual contract!

I'll drop by iiwiki's IRC chan if I need a template ported in the future though, thanks for being understanding.

[Grand Britannia]

Fellas, question.

How do I make a page searchable by the acronym of its name? Like when you look up FBI on Wikipedia and you get their page.

[Kyrusia]

Fellas, question.

How do I make a page searchable by the acronym of its name? Like when you look up FBI on Wikipedia and you get their page.

That is accomplished with a redirect page. If it's an exceptionally common acronym or initialism, I would advise against it, since it's likely the redirect will be edited to redirect to a disambiguation page of various things that acronym could represent.

[Grand Britannia]

Fellas, question.

How do I make a page searchable by the acronym of its name? Like when you look up FBI on Wikipedia and you get their page.

That is accomplished with a redirect page. If it's an exceptionally common acronym or initialism, I would advise against it, since it's likely the redirect will be edited to redirect to a disambiguation page of various things that acronym could represent.

Alrighty, thank you mister.

[Layarteb]

Question on the bullet points in the infoboxes. This one below is from the ship one as found on this page.

(Image)

If you notice the ones highlighted first are large and blue and indented whereas the ones below it and downward are black and smaller. I don't know of anything I did differently on the way the text was entered as to why these should be different. Is this something hard coded to the infobox itself?

^ hey still curious about this one if anyone has any insight.

[Celibrae]

Totally not a bump

Cos it's a tag

[Maltropia]

Totally not a bump

Cos it's a tag

Well that's a real shame, 'cause tags are spam in a way that bumps aren't.

[Chkalovsk]

Will individual nations get their own II page upon request/automatically?

Like how regions do

O.O

[Maltropia]

Will individual nations get their own II page upon request/automatically?

Like how regions do

O.O

Neither regions nor nations get IIwiki articles automatically. It's easiest just to make them yourself.

[Post War America]

I have a quick question regarding edits.

It would appear that someone took a relatively generic category page (In this case Category: Armored Fighting Vehicles), and has made something specific to their nation, I was wondering if it would be possible to make it a more generic page without incurring the wrath of the staff.

[Chkalovsk]

Will individual nations get their own II page upon request/automatically?

Like how regions do

O.O

Neither regions nor nations get IIwiki articles automatically. It's easiest just to make them yourself.

What?

http://www.nationstates.net/region=azeria
http://nswiki.org/index.php?title=Region/Azeria

I didnt make that o.o

[The Akasha Colony]

Neither regions nor nations get IIwiki articles automatically. It's easiest just to make them yourself.

What?

http://www.nationstates.net/region=azeria
http://nswiki.org/index.php?title=Region/Azeria

I didnt make that o.o

That's not IIWiki. That's NSWiki.

[Santheres]

I have a quick question regarding edits.

It would appear that someone took a relatively generic category page (In this case Category: Armored Fighting Vehicles), and has made something specific to their nation, I was wondering if it would be possible to make it a more generic page without incurring the wrath of the staff.

While that page probably shouldn't be categorized the way it is, that's really not "making it specific to their nation." Yes, you can remove the category if you don't feel it's appropriate. You can also add categories as you see fit.

Neither regions nor nations get IIwiki articles automatically. It's easiest just to make them yourself.

What?

http://www.nationstates.net/region=azeria
http://nswiki.org/index.php?title=Region/Azeria

I didnt make that o.o

NSwiki is a separate website.

[Chkalovsk]

What?

http://www.nationstates.net/region=azeria
http://nswiki.org/index.php?title=Region/Azeria

I didnt make that o.o

That's not IIWiki. That's NSWiki.

OHHHHHHHHHHH

Thank you for clarifying.

[The Akasha Colony]

I have a quick question regarding edits.

It would appear that someone took a relatively generic category page (In this case Category: Armored Fighting Vehicles), and has made something specific to their nation, I was wondering if it would be possible to make it a more generic page without incurring the wrath of the staff.

While that page probably shouldn't be categorized the way it is, that's really not "making it specific to their nation." Yes, you can remove the category if you don't feel it's appropriate. You can also add categories as you see fit.

I've been wondering if there was any interest in trying to improve the use of tags in the wiki, as it continues to expand. I've noticed a lot of articles that don't have tags or only a few nation-specific ones, and some are wrongly tagged. I'm not advocating that tags be added to pages against the author's wishes, but perhaps a way to make the list of major available category tags more visible so people know they're available. It would also reduce the number of potential duplicate categories of similar wording. The AFV tag mentioned for instance is not even close to an exhaustive list of AFVs on IIWiki (and I didn't even know it existed when I wrote mine).

And perhaps on a separate note, defining what should be in some of the more ambiguous tags, like "Category:Military," which currently has armed forces pages, vehicles, and even weapons. I admit to being one of those who's dumped a lot of pages into that category.

It's probably come up before in IRC or something, but it's been something that's been nagging at me for a while.

[Celibrae]

Totally not a bump

Cos it's a tag

Well that's a real shame, 'cause tags are spam in a way that bumps aren't.

It isn't spam if I was under the influence.

[Post War America]

While that page probably shouldn't be categorized the way it is, that's really not "making it specific to their nation." Yes, you can remove the category if you don't feel it's appropriate. You can also add categories as you see fit.

I've been wondering if there was any interest in trying to improve the use of tags in the wiki, as it continues to expand. I've noticed a lot of articles that don't have tags or only a few nation-specific ones, and some are wrongly tagged. I'm not advocating that tags be added to pages against the author's wishes, but perhaps a way to make the list of major available category tags more visible so people know they're available. It would also reduce the number of potential duplicate categories of similar wording. The AFV tag mentioned for instance is not even close to an exhaustive list of AFVs on IIWiki (and I didn't even know it existed when I wrote mine).

And perhaps on a separate note, defining what should be in some of the more ambiguous tags, like "Category:Military," which currently has armed forces pages, vehicles, and even weapons. I admit to being one of those who's dumped a lot of pages into that category.

It's probably come up before in IRC or something, but it's been something that's been nagging at me for a while.

Indeed. I would like to see some more generic tags (I do have something of an obsession with adding as many tags as possible to my pages for the sake of organization), but because I'm not staff I cannot move the AFV thing to something more generic without violating the rules.

Edit: Come to think of it a lot of tags are trapped under the Category: Equipment of Doomingsland that would be better served if it were released to the whole wiki.

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Category:Equipme ... omingsland

[The United Dominion]

I've been wondering if there was any interest in trying to improve the use of tags in the wiki, as it continues to expand. I've noticed a lot of articles that don't have tags or only a few nation-specific ones, and some are wrongly tagged. I'm not advocating that tags be added to pages against the author's wishes, but perhaps a way to make the list of major available category tags more visible so people know they're available. It would also reduce the number of potential duplicate categories of similar wording. The AFV tag mentioned for instance is not even close to an exhaustive list of AFVs on IIWiki (and I didn't even know it existed when I wrote mine).

And perhaps on a separate note, defining what should be in some of the more ambiguous tags, like "Category:Military," which currently has armed forces pages, vehicles, and even weapons. I admit to being one of those who's dumped a lot of pages into that category.

It's probably come up before in IRC or something, but it's been something that's been nagging at me for a while.

Indeed. I would like to see some more generic tags (I do have something of an obsession with adding as many tags as possible to my pages for the sake of organization), but because I'm not staff I cannot move the AFV thing to something more generic without violating the rules.

Edit: Come to think of it a lot of tags are trapped under the Category: Equipment of Doomingsland that would be better served if it were released to the whole wiki.

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Category:Equipme ... omingsland

Where in the rules does it say you can't fix improper categorization as a normal user?

[Post War America]

Indeed. I would like to see some more generic tags (I do have something of an obsession with adding as many tags as possible to my pages for the sake of organization), but because I'm not staff I cannot move the AFV thing to something more generic without violating the rules.

Edit: Come to think of it a lot of tags are trapped under the Category: Equipment of Doomingsland that would be better served if it were released to the whole wiki.

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Category:Equipme ... omingsland

Where in the rules does it say you can't fix improper categorization as a normal user?

I believe it falls under don't edit somebody else's page without permission.

[Maltropia]

I'm no admin, but the Standards and Conventions seem to have this covered -

No editing of another user's article(s) without permission, except to correct an error (such as a typographical error, improper categorization, or Standards violation), or as a part of a sanctioned anti-violation/anti-vandalism unit.

Emphasis mine. I would think that a generic category should not be monopolised by one nation. Just because Maltropia has a road, doesn't mean the Category:Roads should fall entirely within Category:Transport in Maltropia. My preferred solution would be a Category:Roads in Maltropia, as a subset of both the aforementioned categories - that is to say, making a category for X in Nation_Y or Xs of Nation_Y.

[Post War America]

I'm no admin, but the Standards and Conventions seem to have this covered -

No editing of another user's article(s) without permission, except to correct an error (such as a typographical error, improper categorization, or Standards violation), or as a part of a sanctioned anti-violation/anti-vandalism unit.

Emphasis mine. I would think that a generic category should not be monopolised by one nation. Just because Maltropia has a road, doesn't mean the Category:Roads should fall entirely within Category:Transport in Maltropia. My preferred solution would be a Category:Roads in Maltropia, as a subset of both the aforementioned categories - that is to say, making a category for X in Nation_Y or Xs of Nation_Y.

So what you are saying is that it shouldn't be a problem if one denationalized they category? Would that also include category description or not?

[Solm]

I'm no admin, but the Standards and Conventions seem to have this covered -

Emphasis mine. I would think that a generic category should not be monopolised by one nation. Just because Maltropia has a road, doesn't mean the Category:Roads should fall entirely within Category:Transport in Maltropia. My preferred solution would be a Category:Roads in Maltropia, as a subset of both the aforementioned categories - that is to say, making a category for X in Nation_Y or Xs of Nation_Y.

So what you are saying is that it shouldn't be a problem if one denationalized they category? Would that also include category description or not?

Yes. We frown on nations appropriating generic terms to nation-specific purpose. If someone created a page titled, "Military," that was solely about their own nation's military, we would move that appropriately or create a disambiguation page. Likewise, generic categories that are categorized to a nation-specific page can be removed. Now, it would be nice if someone recategorized the Equipment of Doomingsland page for him so they were both generically tagged and nation-specific tagged (i.e. http://iiwiki.com/wiki/D1L95 stays as a generic AFV, but also added to a new category, "Doomingsland AFVs"), or at least sent him a TG to let him know so he can do it himself.

If people want to start an effort to better standardize, categorize, and make accessible the categories, then I would be happy to create and prominently display a "tag cloud" of sorts will all the top-level categories.

[Post War America]

So what you are saying is that it shouldn't be a problem if one denationalized they category? Would that also include category description or not?

Yes. We frown on nations appropriating generic terms to nation-specific purpose. If someone created a page titled, "Military," that was solely about their own nation's military, we would move that appropriately or create a disambiguation page. Likewise, generic categories that are categorized to a nation-specific page can be removed. Now, it would be nice if someone recategorized the Equipment of Doomingsland page for him so they were both generically tagged and nation-specific tagged (i.e. http://iiwiki.com/wiki/D1L95 stays as a generic AFV, but also added to a new category, "Doomingsland AFVs"), or at least sent him a TG to let him know so he can do it himself.

If people want to start an effort to better standardize, categorize, and make accessible the categories, then I would be happy to create and prominently display a "tag cloud" of sorts will all the top-level categories.

I would be more than happy to denationalize the categories on the Equipment of Doomingsland page, and inform him that he can add his own national tags. It would also be lovely if you did make that tag cloud, though I would understand if that's just too much work.

[Kyrusia]

I'm no admin, but the Standards and Conventions seem to have this covered -

No editing of another user's article(s) without permission, except to correct an error (such as a typographical error, improper categorization, or Standards violation), or as a part of a sanctioned anti-violation/anti-vandalism unit.

Emphasis mine. I would think that a generic category should not be monopolised by one nation. Just because Maltropia has a road, doesn't mean the Category:Roads should fall entirely within Category:Transport in Maltropia. My preferred solution would be a Category:Roads in Maltropia, as a subset of both the aforementioned categories - that is to say, making a category for X in Nation_Y or Xs of Nation_Y.

This is correct.

Any user is, broadly speaking, permitted to correct errors, even on another user's page; the litmus has generally been that players only run afoul of this when they change the actual content of another user's page. As an example, changing the phrase, "The Empire of Examplestan is on The Continent of Examplarctica," to, "The Empire of Examplestan is on the continent of Examplarctica," (emphasis added) would be accepted; changing it to, "The Empire of Examplestan is on the continent of Ihaetexamplestan," however, would not be. In certain cases, this falls to a judgment call; in those instances, unless it directly decreases the site's readability or egregiously violates the S&C, we will generally side with the original syntax and context of the article more often than not.

In the case of an over-specified category (and categories in general): categories are, strictly speaking, mechanical "articles," and not generally treated as the intellectual property of any one player or group of players; in the past, we have forced differences in categorization to conform to standards similar to Wikipedia's, but we cannot be everywhere at once. This is why, ideally, we rely on a level of willingness to correct minor errors when they are found (such as mis-categorizing, typographical errors, syntax errors, etc.).

In the event a player sees something and isn't sure whether it should be corrected, they are advised to report it directly to an administrator's talk page on IIwiki, where it is more likely to get responded to quickly, rather than here.