Category for Templates
Someone please add all the templates here: Category:Templates --Belea2008 Hail eSouth Africa! chat with me 09:57, 7 July 2008 (BST)
- Solved! --Belea2008 Hail eSouth Africa! chew the fat 23:37, 7 July 2008 (BST)
- Belea2008, can you add the templates you've made on your page there too? Or create a page/category for templates specific for editing like the deletion, stub, neutrality, etc. templates? It makes it so much easier to find them and edit pages as well. Thank you.
- -- Esteban Rasta Lion Delgado 03:08, 9 August 2008 (BST)
- To add a template to that category just add "<noinclude> [[Category:Templates|name_of_template]] </noinclude>" to that template page. Hmmmmm.... I think this is general for all categories.... I mean you can create or add pages to any category using that command line. I did not do that myself because I use the Category feature very rarely. On second thought, I do not use it at all... :D I suggest to ask for a second opinion on this one... --Belea2008 Hail eSouth Africa! chew the fat 23:40, 10 August 2008 (BST)
I've made a more in depth infobox template about companies using the wiki model.
-- Esteban Rasta Lion Delgado 03:04, 9 August 2008 (BST)
Template:Evil it is. Make sure you don't post it on anything serious. Oh, and I apologize if you live in Canada.
--TheSupernatural Who wants to be a Supernatural?The SaNdBoX 17:20, 17 August 2008 (BST)
Hi! I have been trying to do a City template by modifing the country one, but without success. It seems I don't get how Templates work for editing them.
Anybody wants to help? Thank you!
--Sandtux Pakistan prevails TALK|HIST 16:44, 21 August 2008 (BST)
- Paddyohale referred me to regional template and I already experimented with it. I didn't find it listed at Category:Templates. Are they listed in another place? --Sandtux Pakistan prevails TALK|HIST 20:40, 21 August 2008 (BST)
- Solved issue ;) --Sandtux Pakistan prevails TALK|HIST 23:46, 21 August 2008 (BST)
Please write what you did - Specify the purpose of your modification
Please use the field under the edit box to specify what you did to the page. --MiniBill chat with me 22:09, 6 July 2008 (BST)
- Not as easy as it sounds... besides, sometimes I'm too busy for that. --TheSupernatural Who wants to be a Supernatural? 03:47, 10 August 2008 (BST)
- You don't have to write a full story about what you did.... you only have to give some minor details of what you did.... for others to understand what your modifications are and if they are minor, improving, changing, upgrading, uber edits and so on..... Look at Special:RecentChanges at what other people comment when they are editing to get an idea how you can give clues of what your changes are without using many words. Have fun at editing! --Belea2008 Hail eSouth Africa! chew the fat 22:54, 10 August 2008 (BST)
- I noticed that there are quite a number of editors that do repeated edits on the same article within a few minutes (in addition without description). Do you guys think that it would make sense to go to the user talks of such editors and ask them kindly to use the preview function or to make edits after the 1st one minor? DaLe 00:15, 31 August 2008 (BST)
- But what if they are not minor edits? I accept that most people will do this out of habit (and because they can't be bothered to tick one more box), but if there is a serious mistake then it shouldn't be marked as minor.
- Paddyohale Feedback? 00:17, 31 August 2008 (BST)
- Of course if there is a mistake it shouldn't be marked minor. What I wanted to ask is if you guys are ok with the fact that some average editors edit the same article 3x or more times within 10 minutes? And I mean 1 editor doing this at a time. These edits seem to be mostly minor, and some of these edits could have been avoided if any of these particular editors would have used the Preview function. I personally would prefer the Recent Changes list to be a bit more compact, but if you guys don't care about it, so won't I. :) DaLe 00:26, 31 August 2008 (BST)
- Ah, you see I do use the Preview function, but I still don't always spot everything on a first lookthrough - especially if I've written a large chunk of text for the page...
- Paddyohale Feedback? 00:34, 31 August 2008 (BST)
- Special:Preferences - Recent changes
- Days to show in recent changes: 3
- Number of edits to show in recent changes: 500
- Hide minor edits in recent changes: Maybe
- Also, "Watchlist" - I use it a lot to check on some pages that I'm interested in....
- And yes, it is a good idea to remind people from time to time that they should use the "Preview" function.
- So, go for it! Have fun... --Belea2008 Hail eSouth Africa! chew the fat 00:33, 31 August 2008 (BST)
- Ah cool, thanks! "Enhanced recent changes" rocks! :) I might point out to newer users the edit box and Preview function, but I won't be persistant about it. DaLe 01:06, 31 August 2008 (BST)
- Yeah, Enhanced Recent Changes is much more useful. Especially during edit disputes, when the Recent Changes is normally flooded with reverts of the same page. - –Dr. AgentChieftain “PPP!” B / C / D / F / P / S 09:55, 31 August 2008 (BST)
- Voting Country: +1 (4 in favor)
- Voting eCountry: -1 (2 in favor)
- +1 I think that, inside the wiki we should refer to Erepublik countries as Country, not as eCountry (e.g. Italy, not eItaly), your opinions? --MiniBill 17:49, 8 July 2008 (BST)
- +1 Fully agreed. We are supposed to be in the game and we are using the names that the countries have in the game! I don't know what people who say "eCountry" is thinking! They keep mixing between game and real life..sad. --Aryamehr talk 18:52, 8 July 2008 (BST)
- +1 Agree also. The game is supposedly our reality.... so not needs for the "e" things. --Belea2008 chew the fat 23:18, 8 July 2008 (BST)
- -1 Disagree. If your opinion is Game = Real Life, so you wipe out all Roleplay ! I vote for eCountries ! --Tigran Jamiro Come and Chat
- What are you talking about? You are playing a game called Erepublik. You write articles for the things going IN Erepublik. You don't see a country named "eIran" in Erepublik but in Erepublik you see a country named "Iran" so when you write articles for EREPUBLIK you talk about IRAN which is a country name in EREPUBLIK. Understand? :) --Aryamehr talk 04:01, 9 July 2008 (BST)
- I want the in-game countries to be e-countries. I want an eIran and an eFrance :) --Tigran Jamiro Come and Chat
- +1 It doesn't say eUSA in-game, so why should it say eUSA here? --TheSupernatural Who wants to be a Supernatural?The SaNdBoX 17:22, 17 August 2008 (BST)
- -1 In my personal opinion you should Add e to countries to show your talking about the countrie's in eRepublic and not in RL, otherwise people might think your talking about RL countries instear of the eRepublic countries. - Mark Vernon
- Where will you talk about RL countries in the wiki? --Mini "Template boy" Bill wanna chat? 14:15, 1 September 2008 (BST)
I'm using this wiki too much
- "limit=1305" - nice! - I didn't thought at this, edit the limit in the address of the page. :P --Belea2008 Hail eSouth Africa! chew the fat 01:25, 21 July 2008 (BST)
- This is my edit number 1599! wow... --Mini "Template boy" Bill wanna chat? 14:23, 1 September 2008 (BST)
Can we have a category for all media, and then media in each country? --Emerick 07:51, 29 July 2008 (BST)
- *head asplode* Too complicated, at least for me... --TheSupernatural Who wants to be a Supernatural? 06:31, 2 August 2008 (BST)
- Can't we just use the template to automagically add categories? --Mini "Template boy" Bill wanna chat? 20:33, 21 August 2008 (BST)
Fictional - y/n
This has nothing to do with /v/akistan i am just curious how much fictional things can/should will be written? for instance certain countries who say they produced this, that, done things they havent done, titles they don't have, etc etc.. things that according to the erep staff can confuse players. I don't really mind I just want to know if like.. only real things that happened in Erepublik should be written or how much fictional or what kind of fictional things can also be written..? --Aryamehr Flag of Iran talk 21:22, 30 July 2008 (BST)
I vote Yes. I have written 2 fictional articles ( My Biography and the Portugal Defense Center). But I think fictional content should be allowed but with certain rules. For example there should be a template on the fictional articles that warns users that that content is purely fictional. At least that's what I did in mine. Also I believe fictional content is good because it allows players to have some fun. DrogbaPT Hail ePortugal! Drogy man
- Definitely. I agree that fictional things increase fun or this so called "roleplaying" but I was just curious how far you can go with fictional things. --Aryamehr Flag of Iran talk 14:49, 31 July 2008 (BST)
I think fictional content can go as far as imagination lets you :). DrogbaPT Hail ePortugal! Drogy man
I personally think if an Erepublik wikipedia user already exists than a page relating to him should be directed to his userpage.
example: [honestly]. I think fictional works should not be allowed unless it is something like religious belief or similar, or simply an over-exaggeration of an event. rufushonestly
I see your point Honestly but if you allow religious belief you should allow everything DrogbaPT Hail ePortugal! Drogy man
I am not sure if merging each person's articles with that's person's user page is the best way to go, since wiki users can be politically and otherwise active in Erepublik. Eg. check Yugi and Czech History on the presidential term. None of these two articles are fictional in itself, yet there we have two opposite statements. Where are the limits for people to post personal opinions (regardless of the Yugi issue) in non-"fictional" articles? DaLe 01:08, 22 August 2008 (BST)
Would it be possible for us to have a Reflist template like on the main Wikipedia? It would help immensely for formatting references in long articles that have links to eRep articles and the like. I just had a quick attempt at copying the code from Wikipedia but I couldn't get it to work, I'll have a look later to see if I'm missing something obvious. -- Paddyohale Feedback? 15:01, 31 July 2008 (BST)
- Great idea. Someone more experienced than me should add this as the Iran page has a lot of references and it looks ugly to have it that way. --Aryamehr Flag of Iran talk 17:11, 19 August 2008 (BST)
- This needs some changes in the code that runs the wiki if I understood correctly, like for collapsable headers, so I guess it's not easy to do
- Anyway, I'll try and do something --Mini "Template boy" Bill wanna chat? 20:34, 21 August 2008 (BST)
Erepublik Official Wiki:Jargon
How about a glossary of slang, for the newer players to get acquainted with the forums?
I know this might be horribly abused, but you can protect the page and have all entries added by consensus. You can also make rules for their addition, like a few sources where the term is used.
- Belgiuming or Pulling a Belguim - to take over a country through a coup
- COOL CHANGES - server downtime, or a negative term for a glitch
- Double Spaniard or Double Swede - semi-derogatory term for a Spaniard or Swede
- Giftbombing - giving a gift to a defeated soldier to prevent the use of a hospital
- Headless chickens - The Erepublik staff, taken from their default downtime page
- Kebabs or Kebab eaters - Spanish slang for Pakistani citizens, popularized by Kartalon
- Multi - A second non-SO account created by another user for cheating
--AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star T / H / E 02:37, 6 August 2008 (BST)
- /v/aki and /v/akistan - derogatory term for Pakistan and their citizens; sometimes considered offensive
--TheSupernatural Who wants to be a Supernatural? 03:05, 10 August 2008 (BST)
- I have a strong suspicion that it involves someone being banned. --AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star T / H / E
- Should it not be -
- Pulling a Belgium - to take over a country in a planned merger
- Pulling an Ireland - to take over a country in a forced political coup
- Paddyohale Feedback? 20:15, 6 August 2008 (BST)
- That is more accurate for the events, but people on the forums call a political coup a Belgium. Nobody says that Spain is Pulling an Ireland in Mexico, but they do say that they pulled a Belgium. --AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star T / H / E
Well that is a strange one.
Calling it pulling a Belgian or something similar would teach newbies false history (in that it was a political coup that resulted in the Belgium - UK merger).
I like the other slang terms anyway.
- Skinny Bones Jones Write me. 00:27, 8 August 2008 (BST)
- We can indicate that it's not historically accurate. That's not really a problem. --AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star T / H / E
Official Region Naming Policy
When I started creating the UK's regional pages, I made the Wiki link point to the "official" (in-game) REGIONAL NAME, not the city name (unless, of course, they are the same - e.g. London). So the city of Liverpool, for example, links to the North West of England region. This helps avoid confusion as we are using the "regional" name for the "regional" page - and it is very unlikely that two regions in different countries will have exactly the same name.
Now I notice that other countries have started moving their regional pages to the CITY NAME, not the regional name - e.g. Rouen. My question is this - should we have an official eRep Wiki policy for naming regional pages? Should we name them all after the City or the Region?
Also, following on from this, is it worth moving all the regional pages into subpages of the National article? So [[North West of England]] would become [[United Kingdom/North West]]. This helps in case we ever do have the case of two regions in different countries having the same name, as we can now differentiate between them.
Paddyohale Feedback? 18:01, 11 August 2008 (BST)
Yeah, I've helped a little with that in the USA. --TheSupernatural Who wants to be a Supernatural? 03:27, 16 August 2008 (BST)
- "It is very unlikely that two regions in different countries will have exactly the same name." - there is only one - Galicia
- About cities and regions - don't quote me on this, because I'm not sure - but I think the idea is that, at some (very distant) point, to have more than one city for a certain region.
- I don't think we need a policy for naming pages of regions/cities. I think that every nation is free to organize their country pages and the pages related to them (cities, regions, programs, etc.) as they wish.
- "So [[North West]] would become [[United Kingdom/North West]]." I personally like this kind of organization (if a page is related only to one other page - to make a subpage out of it), but it is not a must. Like I said, everyone is free to organize pages as they like.
- --Belea2008 Hail eSouth Africa! chew the fat 13:15, 16 August 2008 (BST)
- Looks like we're gonna have to change the Wiki a lot when V1 comes out. We might even half to alter some templates :O --TheSupernatural Who wants to be a Supernatural?The SaNdBoX 23:32, 16 August 2008 (BST)
- Altering templates shouldn't be too difficult, but renaming and/or redirecting pages will be simple. I'm not sure what would need to be changed yet (I don't know that much about V1), but it's not going to be too difficult - we can always undo any cock-ups :P.
- Paddyohale Feedback? 00:51, 17 August 2008 (BST)
- Remember we have a Bot :) --Mini "Template boy" Bill wanna chat? 20:36, 21 August 2008 (BST)
||“ Jag känner en bott ”
I would like to pose an issue about conquered countries... It seems that as a country is conquered, most of the information on the wiki page goes away. I disagree with this, just because a country has been absorbed into another doesn't mean it never existed. I think the info box information should change and a notation should be made at the very top of the page that the country was taken over by X country during XY war. But other than that, the information should remain. This will also make other changes in the map - especially rebellions and independence movements in the future of the game easier. What do you all think? --Q J Lincoln 02:02, 27 August 2008 (BST)
- Agree completely. (Rufus)Honestly 02:34, 27 August 2008 (BST)
- As do I, very strongly Esteban Rasta Lion Delgado
- Well it looks like I have a job ahead of me! Maybe this way I will earn my UberEditor Stripes! --Q J Lincoln 15:16, 27 August 2008 (BST)
- Me too. --Sandtux Pakistan prevails TALK|HIST 21:17, 27 August 2008 (BST)
Admin involvement in the Wiki
Where do you think Admin involvement should start? In what cases? --Belea2008 Hail eSouth Africa! chew the fat 17:50, 30 August 2008 (BST)
- An unbiased adjudicator's stance. First name Judge. Last name Dredd. --Senor Schlong 17:53, 30 August 2008 (BST)
- Only in cases where the users are unable to resolve something themselves. See: that trivial edit war over alexis bonte that just happened. --Parsley Magnet 17:54, 30 August 2008 (BST)
- I agree with Parsley Magnet ----Altnabla 18:06, 30 August 2008 (BST)
- After everyone has agreed on what needs to be done, and no sooner. For example, after consensus has been reached. Also, there should be more people with access to administrative tools. - –Dr. AgentChieftain “PPP!” B / C / D / F / P / S 17:57, 30 August 2008 (BST)
I think it should start in these two cases:
- Where users agree but an administrator is needed (e.g.: deleting pages)
- In flame/edit wars, to give a neutral, or at least fair, POV to stop them --Mini "Template boy" Bill wanna chat? 20:57, 31 August 2008 (BST)
Shouldn't it be an Erepublik page with a basic explanation of what it's the game, as an introduction for someone who's only searching "What's Erepublik"? --Sandtux Pakistan prevails TALK|HIST 01:24, 25 August 2008 (BST)
- Yeah that's a good idea.
- --TheSupernatural Who wants to be a Supernatural?The SaNdBoX 03:47, 29 August 2008 (BST)