Difference between revisions of "User talk:EasterlyIrk"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
EasterlyIrk (talk | contribs) m |
(→Multiplication signs) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
In the edit summary of [https://nethackwiki.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=DNetHack_artifacts&diff=126324&oldid=126323 one of your recent edits] to [[dNetHack artifacts]], it states that "we're not doing that" in reference to using multiplication signs (×) rather than the letter x to indicate multiplication. Would you mind pointing me to the discussion where this was agreed on? It seems someone forgot to add it to the [[NHW:Style guide|style guide]]—the closest thing is "Consider consulting Wikipedia's Manual of Style", which [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Mathematics#Multiplication sign|prescribes the use of × over x or *]]. If NHW users have decided on a different convention, our style guide should be updated to reflect that. — [[User:Ardub23|Ardub23]] ([[User talk:Ardub23|talk]]) 22:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC) | In the edit summary of [https://nethackwiki.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=DNetHack_artifacts&diff=126324&oldid=126323 one of your recent edits] to [[dNetHack artifacts]], it states that "we're not doing that" in reference to using multiplication signs (×) rather than the letter x to indicate multiplication. Would you mind pointing me to the discussion where this was agreed on? It seems someone forgot to add it to the [[NHW:Style guide|style guide]]—the closest thing is "Consider consulting Wikipedia's Manual of Style", which [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Mathematics#Multiplication sign|prescribes the use of × over x or *]]. If NHW users have decided on a different convention, our style guide should be updated to reflect that. — [[User:Ardub23|Ardub23]] ([[User talk:Ardub23|talk]]) 22:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC) | ||
| − | I axed that since I've been going over a lot of these artifacts recently (side note - there may be a couple more changes incoming regarding actual gameplay stuff, I'll try to stick to the style guide). In all honesty, it's mostly for ctrl-f reasons. Some of the artifacts it actually matters a lot whether they're 2x or not, and I like being able to find all of the 2x ones immediately. | + | :I axed that since I've been going over a lot of these artifacts recently (side note - there may be a couple more changes incoming regarding actual gameplay stuff, I'll try to stick to the style guide). In all honesty, it's mostly for ctrl-f reasons. Some of the artifacts it actually matters a lot whether they're 2x or not, and I like being able to find all of the 2x ones immediately. |
| − | I'd be happy to discuss this more, I'm "rikersan" on IRC or discord. Try #nethack-hardfought on freenode. | + | :I'd be happy to discuss this more, I'm "rikersan" on IRC or discord. Try #nethack-hardfought on freenode. |
| − | --[[User:EasterlyIrk|EasterlyIrk]] ([[User talk:EasterlyIrk|talk]]) 22:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC) | + | :--[[User:EasterlyIrk|EasterlyIrk]] ([[User talk:EasterlyIrk|talk]]) 22:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC) |
| + | |||
| + | ::If the issue is ease of finding artifacts that have a certain attribute, I think there's got to be a better solution, one that doesn't come at the cost of looking less professional. If each artifact had its own page, it'd be easy—we could just put them into categories like "Artifact weapons that deal double damage". But I think we can agree that the eight zillion non-vanilla artifacts aren't all notable enough to have their own articles. | ||
| + | ::The other solution I thought of is to put them all into a great big table with sortable columns, which would make finding shared attributes even easier than Ctrl-F. The only problem I see with that is there may be too many different attributes people might want to sort by, meaning lots of columns. That could possibly be mitigated by having abbreviated column headers—a column labeled "W", for instance, for "wishable" (with a key above the table to explain the abbreviations). Then each artifact could just have ✓ or ✗ in that column. | ||
| + | ::What do you think? Any other ideas? — [[User:Ardub23|Ardub23]] ([[User talk:Ardub23|talk]]) 20:53, 24 July 2019 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:54, 24 July 2019
Multiplication signs
In the edit summary of one of your recent edits to dNetHack artifacts, it states that "we're not doing that" in reference to using multiplication signs (×) rather than the letter x to indicate multiplication. Would you mind pointing me to the discussion where this was agreed on? It seems someone forgot to add it to the style guide—the closest thing is "Consider consulting Wikipedia's Manual of Style", which prescribes the use of × over x or *. If NHW users have decided on a different convention, our style guide should be updated to reflect that. — Ardub23 (talk) 22:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
- I axed that since I've been going over a lot of these artifacts recently (side note - there may be a couple more changes incoming regarding actual gameplay stuff, I'll try to stick to the style guide). In all honesty, it's mostly for ctrl-f reasons. Some of the artifacts it actually matters a lot whether they're 2x or not, and I like being able to find all of the 2x ones immediately.
- I'd be happy to discuss this more, I'm "rikersan" on IRC or discord. Try #nethack-hardfought on freenode.
- --EasterlyIrk (talk) 22:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
- If the issue is ease of finding artifacts that have a certain attribute, I think there's got to be a better solution, one that doesn't come at the cost of looking less professional. If each artifact had its own page, it'd be easy—we could just put them into categories like "Artifact weapons that deal double damage". But I think we can agree that the eight zillion non-vanilla artifacts aren't all notable enough to have their own articles.
- The other solution I thought of is to put them all into a great big table with sortable columns, which would make finding shared attributes even easier than Ctrl-F. The only problem I see with that is there may be too many different attributes people might want to sort by, meaning lots of columns. That could possibly be mitigated by having abbreviated column headers—a column labeled "W", for instance, for "wishable" (with a key above the table to explain the abbreviations). Then each artifact could just have ✓ or ✗ in that column.
- What do you think? Any other ideas? — Ardub23 (talk) 20:53, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
