User talk:Furey

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hi, Furey! Welcome, and thanks for joining NetHackWiki!

• The How to help and Style guide pages are excellent starting points.
• Special:Recentchanges is a great first stop, because you can see what other people are editing right this minute, and where you can help.
• Questions? Need help? You can ask at the Community Portal, the forum, or on the discussion page associated with each article! Just remember to sign those posts with four tildes: ~~~~. That will expand to create a signature.

You can put {{NAOplayer|NAO player account}} on your user page to link to your NAO player account. Capitalization matters.

We are really happy to have you here, and look forward to working with you!

This is an automated greeting.

-- New user message (talk) 03:46, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

NetHack tips

Re: the extra bags of holding and TNNT - it's possibly worth mentioning that you might want to ferry additional bags to the swap chest later for clanmates. Your call ultimately. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 00:48, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

• Good idea! Doing it now. Furey (talk) 04:35, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Artifacts

Just tossing you a line during your quest: I'll be trying to impose some proper formatting on the artifact article during the merge - in the event you have any business you wanted to take care of, I can probably handle it for you! --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay I've moved on from the artifact article, go ahead and have at it. -- Furey (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Role difficulty and noversion

I'm not sure I agree with your latest edit to Role difficulty – for example, I think Valkyrie is somewhat more difficult relative to the other roles in 3.7 compared to 3.6, and Wizard may have become easier. Ais523 (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll revert it. Furey (talk) 16:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

... Other Languages

Hi Furey!

Nice that you active editors are keeping the "Other Languages" page up to date. Thanks! I wonder, though, if it's not going a little too far to update all the source code links to 3.6.7, when NetzHack for example is based on 3.6.1. Probably not critical ... but when 3.7 comes out, that strategy might lead to nonsense; the differences may get too great. Netzhack (talk) 07:10, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

I think you're right. The regular rules for source code versioning really don't work here. The Netzhack section should be based on whatever NetHack version you forked, and then stay at that version until you re-base (which would be a major event.) So, question 1: should I just roll back about 7 edits? And then question 2: what should the article look like? My view is that it should say "NetzHack is based on NetHack 3.6.1" and then this section can have 3.6.1 refsrc's and a note not to update them. But you're the expert. What do you think? Furey (talk) 07:31, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Your suggestion sounds good: versions need to be mentioned now anyways, as the stuff is getting on in age. Tell you what; don't worry about it and I'll take care of it when I get a minute. And I'll put a note on the talk page for the other localizers to look at their stuff with the same idea in mind. Netzhack (talk) 08:24, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

I'd feel better if I rolled back those 7 edits, then the article would be in a good state again. Is that okay with you or would you rather I just leave it alone now? Furey (talk) 08:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Go ahead! Netzhack (talk) 08:29, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Rollback done. Apologies for the bad edits. Furey (talk) 08:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Not "bad", just several years too early :) Netzhack (talk) 08:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Regarding userspace-to-mainspace moves

Just for sake of record: If you actually use the move tab at the top of the article, you can port your work directly to the mainspace and preserve the edit history - the way you did it is fine enough, and I'll be deleting per your request. but having the edit history readily available is generally more convenient for admin-level matters in the long-term.

You're not in trouble or anything, just filling you in so you know. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 08:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. This was the first time I worked in userspace. Another one coming up though (attack type). Furey (talk) 11:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Do you really need to bump decade-old threads with trivial edits?

It clutters the "Active Discussions" on the front page. Kufat (talk) 15:47, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

They aren't trivial. These pages are broken, and I'm fixing them. Also, calls to {{function}} and {{sourcecode}} are inherently wrong, and we are likely to move away from those templates as new NetHack releases drop.

That said, cluttering the front page is a real drawback. I'll see if I can make "Active Discussions" ignore certain edits. Or I could batch these all up and have one round of clutter instead of doing one at a time when I have moments. Meanwhile, I'll suspend for a week, to give other readers and editors a chance to comment. Furey (talk) 16:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Appreciate the reply. I get what you're saying, but I honestly don't think it's a problem if links from ancient forum threads go stale. Your call, of course. Kufat (talk) 21:16, 3 July 2024 (UTC)