User talk:Erica - Revision history

Erica at 04:07, 20 February 2012

2012-02-20T04:07:31Z

Ais523: /* Thanks */ new section

2012-02-19T06:50:02Z

‎Thanks: new section

Tjr: /* Remaining monster data */ thanks

2012-01-11T22:08:33Z

‎Remaining monster data: thanks

Erica: physical -> weapon

2011-10-02T05:29:28Z

physical -> weapon

Erica at 23:25, 24 September 2011

2011-09-24T23:25:16Z

Tjr: /* Remaining monster data */

2011-09-24T15:37:19Z

‎Remaining monster data

Tjr: Remaining monster data

2011-09-24T15:24:48Z

Remaining monster data

Qazmlpok: /* nocorpse on undead */

2011-09-20T17:38:36Z

‎nocorpse on undead

Tjr: replacement corpses

2011-09-20T12:28:01Z

replacement corpses

Erica at 03:42, 20 September 2011

2011-09-20T03:42:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:07, 20 February 2012
Line 45:		Line 45:

	There's a thread about this earlier, but I'd like to thank you for your work on the wiki myself, too. The topic about the difference between the old and new wikis came up in RGRN, and I realised you've done more for the quality of the information in the wiki than pretty much anyone else here. All those small corrections really add up, and it's leading to a great product overall. [[User:Ais523\|Ais523]] 06:50, 19 February 2012 (UTC)		There's a thread about this earlier, but I'd like to thank you for your work on the wiki myself, too. The topic about the difference between the old and new wikis came up in RGRN, and I realised you've done more for the quality of the information in the wiki than pretty much anyone else here. All those small corrections really add up, and it's leading to a great product overall. [[User:Ais523\|Ais523]] 06:50, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
		+	:Thank you so much. I'm happy to be able to help! --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 04:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:50, 19 February 2012
Line 41:		Line 41:
	::I think I took care of most of the "Physical" attacks. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 05:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)		::I think I took care of most of the "Physical" attacks. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 05:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
	::: Thank you for all your edits. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 22:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)		::: Thank you for all your edits. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 22:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Thanks ==
		+
		+	There's a thread about this earlier, but I'd like to thank you for your work on the wiki myself, too. The topic about the difference between the old and new wikis came up in RGRN, and I realised you've done more for the quality of the information in the wiki than pretty much anyone else here. All those small corrections really add up, and it's leading to a great product overall. [[User:Ais523\|Ais523]] 06:50, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:08, 11 January 2012
Line 40:		Line 40:
	:I haven't tried to update the monster attacks yet, except when I noticed that the numbers were wrong. But that would definitely be something I could work on when I'm done with the frequencies. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 23:25, 24 September 2011 (UTC)		:I haven't tried to update the monster attacks yet, except when I noticed that the numbers were wrong. But that would definitely be something I could work on when I'm done with the frequencies. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 23:25, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
	::I think I took care of most of the "Physical" attacks. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 05:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)		::I think I took care of most of the "Physical" attacks. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 05:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
		+	::: Thank you for all your edits. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 22:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:29, 2 October 2011
Line 39:		Line 39:
	Both lists are at [[Template_talk:Monster]]. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 15:24, 24 September 2011 (UTC)		Both lists are at [[Template_talk:Monster]]. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 15:24, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
	:I haven't tried to update the monster attacks yet, except when I noticed that the numbers were wrong. But that would definitely be something I could work on when I'm done with the frequencies. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 23:25, 24 September 2011 (UTC)		:I haven't tried to update the monster attacks yet, except when I noticed that the numbers were wrong. But that would definitely be something I could work on when I'm done with the frequencies. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 23:25, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
		+	::I think I took care of most of the "Physical" attacks. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 05:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:25, 24 September 2011
Line 38:		Line 38:

	Both lists are at [[Template_talk:Monster]]. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 15:24, 24 September 2011 (UTC)		Both lists are at [[Template_talk:Monster]]. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 15:24, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
		+	:I haven't tried to update the monster attacks yet, except when I noticed that the numbers were wrong. But that would definitely be something I could work on when I'm done with the frequencies. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 23:25, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 ==Remaining monster data==
-Using [[Special:ReplaceText]], I've compiled a list of monsters that still use the "old" non-numeric monster frequency. Does your script correctly account for weapon attacks? A lot of pages list them as "physical", which is different.
+Using [[Special:ReplaceText]], I've compiled a list of monsters that still use the "old" non-numeric monster frequency. I can't just indiscriminately search-and-replace those because of the ambiguities you described. Does your script correctly account for weapon attacks? A lot of pages list them as "physical", which is something different.
 Both lists are at [[Template_talk:Monster]]. --[[User:Tjr|Tjr]] 15:24, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:24, 24 September 2011
Line 33:		Line 33:
	:::Looks great, thanks.		:::Looks great, thanks.
	:::Tjr, The type of corpse could be set, something like 'oldcorpse=human' or 'oldcorpse=elf' instead of just a boolean, and have that show up as "leaves an old <text> corpse". I'd say the special turn undead cases aren't worth mentioning, as to my knowledge only aligned priests have any special behavior with turn undead or stone to flesh. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 17:38, 20 September 2011 (UTC)		:::Tjr, The type of corpse could be set, something like 'oldcorpse=human' or 'oldcorpse=elf' instead of just a boolean, and have that show up as "leaves an old <text> corpse". I'd say the special turn undead cases aren't worth mentioning, as to my knowledge only aligned priests have any special behavior with turn undead or stone to flesh. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 17:38, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	==Remaining monster data==
		+	Using [[Special:ReplaceText]], I've compiled a list of monsters that still use the "old" non-numeric monster frequency. Does your script correctly account for weapon attacks? A lot of pages list them as "physical", which is different.
		+
		+	Both lists are at [[Template_talk:Monster]]. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 15:24, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:38, 20 September 2011
Line 31:		Line 31:
	::Is there some good way to specify what corpse it leaves?		::Is there some good way to specify what corpse it leaves?
	::BTW, is it worth adding to the infobox some monsters reanimate as something entirely different, e.g. temple priests turned undead to zombies or stone-to-fleshed to non-temple priests? --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 12:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)		::BTW, is it worth adding to the infobox some monsters reanimate as something entirely different, e.g. temple priests turned undead to zombies or stone-to-fleshed to non-temple priests? --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 12:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
		+	:::Looks great, thanks.
		+	:::Tjr, The type of corpse could be set, something like 'oldcorpse=human' or 'oldcorpse=elf' instead of just a boolean, and have that show up as "leaves an old <text> corpse". I'd say the special turn undead cases aren't worth mentioning, as to my knowledge only aligned priests have any special behavior with turn undead or stone to flesh. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 17:38, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:28, 20 September 2011
Line 29:		Line 29:

	:I was not sure about whether or not to add nocorpse=1, but I like your idea; I will work on this in a few minutes. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 03:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)		:I was not sure about whether or not to add nocorpse=1, but I like your idea; I will work on this in a few minutes. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 03:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
		+	::Is there some good way to specify what corpse it leaves?
		+	::BTW, is it worth adding to the infobox some monsters reanimate as something entirely different, e.g. temple priests turned undead to zombies or stone-to-fleshed to non-temple priests? --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 12:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:42, 20 September 2011
Line 27:		Line 27:
	== nocorpse on undead ==		== nocorpse on undead ==
	I noticed you added nocorpse=1 to the vampire [lord] infobox. While true according to monst.c, this is still misleading; vampires ''do'' leave corpses, just not vampire corpses. Zombies and mummies act the same way, leaving corpses of their base type rather than a 'dwarf mummy corpse'. nocorpse=1 should be removed; if you'd like you could modify the template to include something like 'specialcorpse=1'. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 03:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)		I noticed you added nocorpse=1 to the vampire [lord] infobox. While true according to monst.c, this is still misleading; vampires ''do'' leave corpses, just not vampire corpses. Zombies and mummies act the same way, leaving corpses of their base type rather than a 'dwarf mummy corpse'. nocorpse=1 should be removed; if you'd like you could modify the template to include something like 'specialcorpse=1'. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 03:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	:I was not sure about whether or not to add nocorpse=1, but I like your idea; I will work on this in a few minutes. --[[User:Erica\|Erica]] 03:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)