Source talk:True rumors

From NetHackWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Are we ordering this within the categories based on rumor number or resistance type? I think we should stick with rumor number. Lotte 01:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

IMHO, people who are looking for a specific rumour will use the search facility and won't care about the order, while people who are just browsing would prefer the more logical order. Having said that, I am not an admin here, just a veteran Nethacker. Ekaterin 10:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Some rumours are tough to explain. I have been using three question marks (???) as an indication that I'm not happy with the explanation of a rumour. I suggest that people not delete them unless they also replace the explanation with something more convincing. Ekaterin 19:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

"Zap yourself and see what happens" - at a guess, this comes from pre-Guidebook days when it wasn't obvious that you could zap yourself.
Similarly, "A wand of cancellation is like a wand of polymorph" probably just means that they can both be used on objects as well as monsters. Robin Johnson 21:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
The latter could mean that both cancellation and polymorph have the ability to change items into other items (e.g. scroll of foo into blank scroll). For the former, Ken Arromdee has stated that false rumors are actually worthless rumors, so maybe true rumors are not so much true as helpful. I guess zapping yourself could be helpful if you didn't know you could :-) --Jayt 22:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
"218. They say that eating a cram ration is a smart move." - Might be referring to a "cram session", i.e. a short intense burst of studying in order to get as much information into your head as possible. I noticed that out of all the "-ration" comestibles, cram rations are pretty solidly in the middle when comparing weight, and nutrition/time. Could it be that they're just the best overall ration? K-/C-rations are better nutr/time-wise, but you have to slaughter soldiers for them, which isn't always a viable choice when you're starving.--Xazak 14:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Potions rust monsters hate???

Logically the potion rust monsters hate would be oil, but I can't find any sign of that in the source code. Ekaterin 20:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Since oil reverses rust damage, and in D&D rust monsters eat rust for sustenance, it makes sense.

Merge with Rumor_messages

I've just updated Rumor messages with the changes between 3.4.3 and 3.6.1. I haven't touched this page as it doesn't have a version tag and I don't fancy trying to work out what it actually contains.

I have noticed that a merge header was added to the main page in 2010. Is there a process for mergers? Is this just waiting for someone to go through the (large amount of) original content on each page? Hoanwan (talk) 22:00, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Merging is infrequent enough that I don't think there's a process. Ultimately, yes, the main reason it hasn't happened yet is because no one so far has decided to go through and merge the original content. If someone wants to do part of the work, we could probably start making edits on the Rumor messages page, and stick a todo on it warning that it's incompletely merged with this one.
The main difference between the two pages is that this one groups them into topics, and the other one appears to just go through rumors.tru in order. Here's what I think a merged page should probably look like:
One large table with four columns: Rumor number (line in the file), rumor text, category (the way they're categorized on this page, probably taking the lowest-level subcategory), and annotations (for the purposes of merging, it's OK to leave them blank for rumors that have no annotation). The columns should be sortable, so readers can sort the table whichever way they prefer.
This does lose the multiple levels of categorization that exist on this page, but that's probably OK. The way this page is structured now makes it inflexible to change. --Phol ende wodan (talk) 01:07, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
I cannot wrap my arms around the hundreds of lines of work needed for updating and merge yet, but some thoughts after 30 minutes.
Lose the line numbers. Readers don't care, they sort by message, and search by message.
Mark the article title with a source version like "True rumors (3.6.7)". Not in the source namespace because this is annotations, not source code, but that is a judgement call.
Do not expend effort documenting false rumors. Of course if someone wants to write "False rumors (3.6.7)" it does not cost anything for it to exist except for their resources, so okay.
Right now this article is 100% 3.4.3 message line numbers and text (no one has changed the messages since before December 2015) and a mixture of 3.4.3 advice, 3.6.X advice, and likely wrong advice.
Categorization is nice. A sortable table is nice. I can see readers sorting on message text or sorting by category.
If I had a lot of time I would start a new page "True rumors (3.6.7)" and carefully review line-by-line imports from existing pages. is a risk.
Furey (talk) 05:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)