Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kogan Loloklam]

*Right after Boatmurdered.

No, before Boatmurdered, in lieu of boatmurdered, and a few "what is boatmurdered"s in there too. Boatmurdered is a 2d fortress, and any 200 year segment of a generated world has more interesting tales to tell than boatmurdered. The rosy color you see is history. What we have now is better.

[SirHoneyBadger]

*Right after Boatmurdered.

No, before Boatmurdered, in lieu of boatmurdered, and a few "what is boatmurdered"s in there too. Boatmurdered is a 2d fortress, and any 200 year segment of a generated world has more interesting tales to tell than boatmurdered. The rosy color you see is history. What we have now is better.

(If you explain the joke, it ruins the effect.)

[Tarran]

Here is an example of the template in use. Personally, I think it worked better when it was on the bottom, centered, and less wide than the body text, especially since it makes the body text too cramped like this (and messes up formatting when you "show" it), but the concept is good.

Yeah, It should be all the way at the bottom (even bellow the stone template), and be centered. since the average DF player just wants to play the game. Not even remotely caring about the stone in real life.

Now. It would be even better if it instead has a link to a Wikipedia article, since the Wikipedia articles are gigantic.

[Squirrelloid]

I haven't had occasion to look up geological articles on Wikipedia, but here are two examples of medical articles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acute_stress_reaction  I was looking this one up for a novel I was writing.  Maybe some can grasp the starting paragraph, where they usually "summarize" whatever the article is supposed to be about, but I was hit with a wall of text and sort of faltered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crush_syndrome  This one I looked up because someone mentioned "crush syndrome" right here on the forums.  The start is better, but when I hit "pathophysiology" I had to start following all the links and try to figure out what they were saying actually caused it.  This is how it usually is for me with wiki articles - in order to understand half of it, you have to open 5 more articles just to understand the terminology.

I didn't find either article confusing, and I am not a doctor.  The first paragraph of each was a fairly concise description that seemed accessible to everyone, if rather abbreviated.  Most of the body of the text (intro or non) was also perfectly understandable to at least a basic level of comprehension without going out of my way to look things up.  Admittedly, it helps when you can parse latin and greek derived words into roots, because then you can make sense of them in a rough way.  But that's generally true of medical and scientific writing.  eg, nephrotoxic isn't a word I was formerly familiar with, but the sense is clear from its roots.

The problem of course is that articles about medical conditions (or anything really) need to get technically complex if they are to give an accurate description of the subject.  To expect that you will perfectly understand the nuances of a medical disorder simply from reading an encyclopedic entry about it and nothing else is ridiculous - having to read additional pages should be *expected* since you have to gain the necessary background knowledge to understand the topic.

Your complaint is like expecting to understand string theory without an understanding of quantum mechanics or general relativity.  It simply can't be done at any meaningful level.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

Now. It would be even better if it instead has a link to a Wikipedia article, since the Wikipedia articles are gigantic.

And the wikipedia articles being gigantic is one of the reasons why the additional real life flavor information ought to be in the DF wiki, as this allows selecting the exciting bits and leaving behind the really detailed details.

Deathworks

[SirHoneyBadger]

Hi Deathworks!

I kind of like all the extraneous flavor stuff, although I agree that something that isn't actually present in the game shouldn't be presented as such.

Maybe some kind of color code thingy could be used to show/compare relevancy?

Also, heavier use of

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

spoilers

could reduce the apparent size of the wiki articles, without actually chopping every little thing.

[Nexii Malthus]

Maybe some kind of color code thingy could be used to show/compare relevancy?

Also, heavier use of

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

spoilers

could reduce the apparent size of the wiki articles, without actually chopping every little thing.

G-Flex showed a link to an example of this a single page back:

It helps you play the game, too, if you learn what things are what and how they're correlated, in realistic terms, since the game tends to reflect them.

Here is an example of the template in use. Personally, I think it worked better when it was on the bottom, centered, and less wide than the body text, especially since it makes the body text too cramped like this (and messes up formatting when you "show" it), but the concept is good.

[SirHoneyBadger]

Maybe some kind of color code thingy could be used to show/compare relevancy?

Also, heavier use of

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

spoilers

could reduce the apparent size of the wiki articles, without actually chopping every little thing.

G-Flex showed a link to an example of this a single page back:

It helps you play the game, too, if you learn what things are what and how they're correlated, in realistic terms, since the game tends to reflect them.

Here is an example of the template in use. Personally, I think it worked better when it was on the bottom, centered, and less wide than the body text, especially since it makes the body text too cramped like this (and messes up formatting when you "show" it), but the concept is good.

Yes, it's exactly the same, minus the color-coding and the spoilers...?

Although I do like the putting things in clearly labled boxes idea. It looks stylish, as well as professional, and it's immediately recognizeable. However, I've got concerns that it might become a little clunky if heavily implemented (those boxes do take up quite a bit of space), not to mention slightly intense in terms of technical implementation and the learning-curve (maybe it's extremely easy to pick up, but it's still adding another skill requirement to the "casual" wiki editor's skillbase.).

Color coding might take people a little bit of time to pick up the meaning of, but once you learn that "real life = blue", it's not hard to read it, or to write it.

Spoilers are pretty self-explanatory (and can also come with further explanation as needed).

[Draco18s]

Archives? Huh? Did you miss the big green box on top of the article with the version numbers in it?

G-Flex: I'm not sure what you're referring to. I'm talking about the DF Wiki main page.

...Really?  You can't find this box?

[SirHoneyBadger]

Archives? Huh? Did you miss the big green box on top of the article with the version numbers in it?

G-Flex: I'm not sure what you're referring to. I'm talking about the DF Wiki main page.

...Really?  You can't find this box?

You mean the one on this page?

http://dwarffortresswiki.net/index.php/Main_Page

...Oh wait.

Where is it?

It's not there.

Thus rendering your argument completely pointless since, as clearly stated above in the post you quoted and yet didn't bother to read, I was referring to the main page of the wiki. 

[SIGVARDR]

You might want to put a poll up,on here or on the wiki,so that people can decide one way or the other about this topic.
Personal opinion: real world info should be included.Helps immerse yourself in the game and provides some learning while your at it.

[Nexii Malthus]

...Oh wait.

Where is it?

It's not there.

[Sizik]

*coughreadthethreadcough*

As a related point, I think all subjects on the wiki that are defined in the raws should have their raw information in their wiki article.

[Wirevix]

stuff

Actually, I've found that it is possible to explain the contents of such articles, once they are understood, in layman's terms.  It is possible to tell someone in brief, and without extrapolating Latin or Greek roots, what "crush syndrome" entails.  Sure, you won't be able to diagnose it from such an explanation, but that's not exactly what we're asking for here.  My idea of a summary for "crush syndrome," for example, would be something along the lines of "A kidney-failure-inducing syndrome caused when bloodflow returns to pressure-damaged muscles, releasing muscle-destroying chemicals."  That's what I got out of the article once I'd followed enough links.  And if that's wrong, then I suppose you can confidently say you are smarter than I, therefore that makes you more worthy, and my personal difficulties have nothing to do with anything.

[Squirrelloid]

stuff

Actually, I've found that it is possible to explain the contents of such articles, once they are understood, in layman's terms.  It is possible to tell someone in brief, and without extrapolating Latin or Greek roots, what "crush syndrome" entails.  Sure, you won't be able to diagnose it from such an explanation, but that's not exactly what we're asking for here.  My idea of a summary for "crush syndrome," for example, would be something along the lines of "A kidney-failure-inducing syndrome caused when bloodflow returns to pressure-damaged muscles, releasing muscle-destroying chemicals."  That's what I got out of the article once I'd followed enough links. 

Wait, didn't it say basically that?  I mean, sure, it used some 10 cent words instead of 1 cent words, but expanding your vocabulary is good for you, and I'm guessing they chose 10 cent words because they had a more specific meaning that was more accurate.  It would be easier to point out the flaws in a 'layman's rewritten version' if it was something I had technical expertise with.