Witcher Wiki:Admin noticeboard

From Witcher Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

The Admin noticeboard is one way through which users can notify administrators of issues needing administrative attention. While users are welcome to directly contact specific administrators (especially if they are seen to be active), posting here can be an easier and quicker way of ensuring that at least one admin will notice an issue and respond to it promptly. Remember to sign (using four tildes: ~~~~) when posting an issue.

Before posting an issue here, please consider the following:

  • This page is for reporting wiki issues. Please post discussions on the talk page.
  • Post only issues that require administrative action, i.e. blocking vandals, protecting pages, restoring deleted pages etc.
  • Do not post deletion requests here. Deletion requests should be made by adding {{delete|reason for deletion request}} to the top of the target page, which will then automatically mark the page as a candidate for deletion.
  • Do not post issues regarding content disputes. Try making a request for comment instead.
  • Mediation requests between users should only be made once a resolution could not be reached between users.
  • For issues regarding the use of this wiki, please see our help center.

In case of vandalism, posting about it here is low priority. Revert it first, anyone can do so. If the vandal created a new page, tag it for deletion. Assume good faith and consider leaving a message on that user's talk page to explain the reason. Post here only if the user has made several disruptive edits and/or persists despite a warning. Always avoid a revert war with the vandal; it is far better to wait until an admin has a chance to intervene. If a user must be reported here, please use {{user}}, preferably as the topic subject/headline.

Current Issues[edit source]

Font and background layout[edit source]

Hi all,

I just come here wish to get and provide more information about Witcher 3. Yet the font is too small and the transparency background really made it hard to read and write. Especially for long time read. I feel my eyes are very uncomfortable.

May you consider to change the layout to make the whole site look more comfortable?

I have tried to use the browser to make the font bigger. Yet it will come out with chaos layout. And can't solve the transparency background issue.


You can change the background transparency with your personal css, as well as making the font larger. I can put something there for you right now and you can fiddle with it as required. — Game widow ( talk ) 11:18, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Game widow. You made the modification for me. N○ wander I feel much better while edited the page a little while ago.
However this only work on the center page. The left and upper list are still small :(
So I guess the browser font ++ are the only way I can use. Even though that will break the layout...
Besides, I'm curious. No one else feedback this problem? Since the transparent background and small font were rarely used on knowledge base website. I guess there may be a lot of reader feel uncomfortable with the design? And this may push them to go to other place to gather & contribute information.
Paioshau (talk) 16:09, 17 August 2018 (UTC)paioshau

Failed to create discussion page[edit source]

Could not create discussion page[edit source]

I was trying create a discussion page on the Witcher Script page. Alas, the system refused to create it. Exact error message was:

  • Error: This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: Prevent creation of unwanted new pages

I believe the content was constructive, even though it had to contain some external links. It pertained to my previous edit of the main Witcher Script page.

Gqxidzjqmj (talk) 07:21, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Chances are that you tried to copy in a large amount of text, or text constaining an external url. You must first make a few smaller edits (or edits without links) to establish "trust". Then you should have no problem creating that talk page. One approach is to create it incrementally. — Game widow ( talk ) 11:20, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
That worked. Thanks. — Gqxidzjqmj (talk) 11:31, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Probably CSS issue with sorting arrows[edit source]

I have noticed that the arrows for sorting in tables are underneath the cell heading text, so it looks a little cluttered. See for instance XP. First I thought it had something to do with GPL-generated tables, but this page is "hardcoded" and it's still there. The table appears correct when I untick padding: 0.2em for .skin-hydradark .wikitable th. That makes the table wider of course, it has to for the sorting arrows to show, but unless the tables are very wide, I don't think width should be a problem (perhaps on mobile?). — Pangaearocks (talk) 13:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing that one out! I'll definitely check other Wikis and their tables! Thank you! — Encredechine (talk) 07:43, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Manual of Style[edit source]

It's kind of both scary and impressive to look over the history of articles all over the place, because then you realise that basically everything on the wiki has been created by Game widow. Therefore a manual of style probably hasn't exactly been needed. However, do you have some notes or something that we could put into such a page? I looked yesterday and couldn't find a Manual of Style, and then looked over the pages for some of the popular wikis, like WoW and ARK. I basically wonder how one should go about things if we were to expand more on a host of articles. Such as writing more about quests, items, abilities and so forth. What structure to use, if there are set terms to use for this, that and the other. Often there is brief intro (roughly speaking, this is an item in TW3), the journal entry (usually a big section for quests), and then related items/quests and suchlike - plus the infobox.

Admittedly I tend to bite over more than I can chew when it comes to wikis, and then my soul is eaten up in the process :-| But it would be pretty cool to have more info about "stuff", perhaps especially quests and abilities, even monsters, and have more of a guides section somewhere. The impression is that many people have become interested in the game again, it has probably gotten new sales as well, so it might be good timing. And as touched upon elsewhere, I'd absolutely hate to see this wiki put to death by forwarding the address to your new overlords or something like that. We can read between the lines. — Pangaearocks (talk) 22:44, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

More monster data[edit source]

Have not been able to extract the XML files myself (and holy mercy how frustrated that whole process left me on Linux), but by sheer coincidence I came upon probably the most recent version via the Ghost Mode discussion thread. That finally allowed me to have a glance at all that magic, to see what more data can possibly be entered into the wiki. From what I can gather there is info about monster resistances, vitality/essence (health), and increases per level - plus a ton of other stuff. Naturally, it's not straight-forward to enter this into the wiki, not least because stats vary somewhat depending on if the monster is alone, in a group, or a boss/deadly.

But I wanted to raise the topic here and hopefully get some feedback or ideas for how this can possibly be done. Looked around the ARK wiki the other day, and came upon for instance this page. Those people are a lot more skilled, and the wiki uses advanced Lua modules/scripts and the Cargo extension. Would be cool to have, but... *groan*. I've been down that road several times. It's long and brutal. Getting that cool slider bar thing for monster data would probably be difficult, but could we try to expand some on the data we have on our wiki? How could we best go about it? Thoughts?

Some of this could apply to items and probably other topics too, but perhaps monster would be the most sensible starting point. — Pangaearocks (talk) 10:29, 1 February 2020 (UTC)