User talk:Gringer1

Reasons for changing things you added
Dear Gringer1,

I recently have announced to remove one of your pages, about the august 18 update. You can move it to your own blog or something if you like to keep it. But this should not be part of an encyclopedia like wiki about this game.

Also i removed your contribution to the quest list, because it was already there the bonus, but was in an earlier sentence.

Thanks for the time and effort though, hope to see more of you.

Thanks for adding the new items to this wiki. I do hope more people will hop in and add their known information. Also good to see you have picked up the template information and changed it accordingly.

It's nice to see the creators finally got even higher priced items available for selling. But i am afraid the price to get this recipe is quite a steep one.

Thanks again for the information you added. To me it seems you are quite acquinted with editing on wiki's. Is that so?


 * Yes, I've had a fair amount of experience. Mostly on wikipedia. Gringer1 (talk) 01:51, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

Improving pages, need some help.
Hi,

Seeing you have added valuable information to this wiki, i wanted to improved it even more by expanding the research cycles to confirmed versions. It is a lot of work however and maybe you can help.

I have a file which has all the info in it but i cannot give it out over the wiki, so if you like, please drop me an e-mailso i can send this file to you and you can help fill in the details.

Would be awesome if you would help me out with this. I very much appreciate every part you added, so if you decline, no problems there.


 * Have seen your attempt at making it easier to get the research cycle done. I don't think this is working out great. I have made you admin so you can play around more and access more places on this wiki.



Research line pictures
They are very good. I LOVE them.

But i think the template infobox item is getting the pictures put down because of coding.

We have to think up a way to incorporate this research line picture.

Is it hard to create these for items? Can you explain me how so i can help out there?


 * Hi, sent you a linky to the research and item images, maybe you know of an easy way to get them all on the wiki as a batch (e.g. using a bot). Gringer1 (talk) 17:14, September 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello, inserting the images seperately might be the best choice at the moment. So that is a good call.


 * Here's why: The programming that actually worked on the wikia was a select structure, meaning I needed to enter blocks of code for every possibile outcome. Due to combinations, the number of outcomes was pretty slim, which is good for the programmer, there were around 40 blocks of code, which is huge.


 * In order to determine which picture to display for each individual item, I don't remember the number of items, say 30 taken 8 displayed a time 260C8 (nCr), that'd be... that's still a half million, it's probably less but not few enough for human patience. Just consider using a higher level language for a nice counting structure ;) or insert the pictures individually as mentioned by Gringer1, I like that idea. I need to be off for the rest of the day but I don't mind helping later.
 * Due to a major increase in workload recently (in my private life), i think i really could use every single hand of help in this matter. So please do give a hand. As far as i remember there are about 500 items enlisted at this wiki.
 * Due to a major increase in workload recently (in my private life), i think i really could use every single hand of help in this matter. So please do give a hand. As far as i remember there are about 500 items enlisted at this wiki.


 * Ok. There's a small error in the calculation I made, that's actually how many lines it'd take to see any 8 items from whichever item you're currently on. But essentially, the same program would require 1 block of code for every item, so 500 select blocks, if they're all unique pictures.


 * If BotTraveler still has bot status I can insert the properly formatted image links for each individual page in one sitting, even before the image is actually uploaded. Images can be uploaded any time, Gringer1 could do that, as long as they're all the same format, ResearchTree_Item_Name.png. How does this sound? This is also the easiest way. If the research changes in-game at any point, you'd need to update the images.
 * I'm uploading them as I type (using my own bot, my first foray...). The image names that I've uploaded have been sanitized to remove apostrophes and convert dashes to underscores. For example, "Hand-of-god" -> "researchTree_Hand_of_god.png", "Paladin's sabatons" -> "researchTree_Paladins_sabatons.png". I suppose the image pages could be renamed to be more wikicode friendly, so you could just do something like [[File:researchTree_.png]] . Gringer1 (talk) 02:39, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * I tested to see if image redirects worked (and they did). I've now added redirects for the unsanitized names to redirect to the sanitized names for both picture and research trees. This seemed easier than trying to replicate perl's 'tr' function in infobox code. So for some images there is now one picture with two different filenames. Gringer1 (talk) 04:01, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes that'll work. I'll copy what you did in your last edit. [[Image:researchTree_.png|200px|left|thumb|Research tree for ]] I'll get started if this sounds alright.Oh. last point, are these being inserted directly at the beginning of the page? That's very easy for the bot to manage.
 * Yes that'll work. I'll copy what you did in your last edit. [[Image:researchTree_.png|200px|left|thumb|Research tree for ]] I'll get started if this sounds alright.Oh. last point, are these being inserted directly at the beginning of the page? That's very easy for the bot to manage.


 * Hmm, I'm not sure about the positioning. If it is at the beginning of the page, then it could just be put into Template:Infobox_item. I'm not convinced that's the best option though -- it looks a bit cluttered at the moment. Gringer1 (talk) 02:54, September 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Beginning, end, or at a specific text on the page that is definitely there (before, after, or as a replacement).
 * I can add a new template name somewhere on every page and leave the details to sombody else, then someone could edit the new template if the size or float value needed to be changed.

(reset indent)

I agree with David (Gringer1) that the current way the information is presented is not ideal.

I would love to see the research lines being written down too, and if there is a template added (Which i prefer) to add both the research picture and lines into. I also know there is a mass upload page somewhere where you can upload 20 items at once. Will have to search on community central if you want to know, i am very short on time right now, so really cannot help. Will also have a completely filled out weekend, so not much of me there either. Thanks guys for this tremendous improvement of the wiki. I am sure you two can come up with a good looking solution which also is easy to maintain and to understand for not so advanced users.


 * It seems like all the images I checked out are already there. I made this template, it avoids displaying at all if the image link isn't there. I want to make sure someone likes where the image should go on the page first though.


 * The current scheme is it would be directly to the left of {{Template:Infobox_Item which would put it at the same vertical level as it.


 * Take any changes into consideration, removing some text from item pages would allow the displayed info to take up less space.


 * {{User:ActiveUnique/SigReal|17:01,9/21/2012}}


 * I'm going to start adding a template directly before the old infobox template tomorrow. It will be a container for parameterless templates, which allows adding or removing other templates to that location.


 * "ItemPageModule" is straightforward sounding enough. Name suggestions are welcome before it's added.
 * {{User:ActiveUnique/SigReal|01:27,9/23/2012}}


 *  done 
 * Template addition complete. A future cleaning sweep may be necessary because I noticed pages which included |image= ...jpg or so inside the item infobox, and if someone typed a wikilink around those images they were probably erased.


 * Items that were quest rewards were intentionally skipped. They aren't perfect yet (check attribute seed to see what I mean). But the rest of the pictures are as good as I imagined them when I was still playing *nods*.
 * {{User:ActiveUnique/SigReal|01:11,9/24/2012}}

Incorrect research tree lines
I see that the research trees visual representation is not always accurate. For instance the one sword is noticably wrong. I saw that David also added a whole new mega page with all items on it, the cost for construction and research. WOW! It's a massive work, needs some polishing (suggestion: see at improvements) but it's great! If you Active could add that template, that would be very very nice. Would be nice to have the written research lines included into the template somehow too. Don't know if that is somehow possible.


 * The research that was already typed out will just stay on the item page. Adding the pictures will squish the text toward the center a little bit though. I'll be busy during weekdays and won't be able to add comments then, I'll get the bot ready to run now.


 * Is there any chance of being more specific about what is 'noticeably wrong' with these representations? The full data tables and the images are generated from the same merged CSV data table (I can give you a link to my google drive location, if necessary). Do you have an issue with the final step, where the majestic ring does not appear to be a pre-requirement of the one ring? I suppose I could do another backtracking step to tease out those requirements. Gringer1 (talk) 22:29, September 23, 2012 (UTC)
 * Funny tough, that you uploaded this picture yourself showing otherwise. So which one is it?
 * Okay, so it appears that you *do* have an issue with the final step, and want the full requirements for every child item in the research tree, rather than just the full requirements for the specific item. This will make items such as Long sword a lot more ugly, and requires further backtracking, but I'll see what I can do. Gringer1 (talk) 23:22, September 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * I am always open for discussion, and i am not the person to say this has to go or that has to be done. But i think the wiki being a sort of encyclopedia on the game, it should contain correct information.
 * Maybe you can make it with those large amount of child items a sort of * = contains more requirements, and that the requirements are clarified in the text based research cycle?
 * As you may have found out too, at long sword the pictures text is impossible to read. Maybe enlarge the picture for readability?
 * Just food for thought.
 * The images do show correct information, just not complete information -- the arrows previously went in one direction with no backtracking. I've since added all the parents of all the children (spouses of the item, if you like), which does 1 level of backtracking for the children and deals with the particular issue that you have mentioned.
 * The text under the pictures is readable at the native resolution of the image. The images are there so that you don't need to click through, but you can click on the image to see it at its full resolution. Gringer1 (talk) 01:30, September 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * After going through the images, there is at least one "correct/complete" requirement (or whatever you choose to call it) that doesn't make sense. If you look at File:ResearchTree_Soldiers_sword.png, you'll notice that Long sword is a prerequisite of Soldier's sword, but it is also a prerequisite of Rapier, which is itself a prerequisite of Soldier's sword. The direct path from Long sword to Soldier's sword is unnecessary. I get the feeling that edgebee didn't try to find and remove such situations in their research tree. Gringer1 (talk) 01:30, September 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Considering this again, even the one level of backtracking used makes the images more confusing, not less. Consider Long sword, and the situation I've just mentioned. Both Soldier's sword and Rapier appear on that research tree, but there is no link between them. Slicer is a prerequisite of Vorpal sword (a spouse of Long sword, if you like), but slicer has Dagger and Gladius as prerequisites, both of which also appear on that image with no link. Sure, I can add the links in for things that are on the image, but by your descriptions it sounds like if any links go into an item, all links should go in, which could potentially bring in other images that would further clutter up the research tree. As an example of this, Talisman of fear appears on the Elemental pendant research tree as a spouse, depends on Amulet of evil protection (present in the image), but also Dread stick (absent from the image). Gringer1 (talk) 01:46, September 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Point taken. Edgebee messed up their part (where not ;) ) and since it normally isn't visible, it isn't an issue for them either. Skip the adding as i asked for. Thanks for looking into this.
 * Considering this again, even the one level of backtracking used makes the images more confusing, not less. Consider Long sword, and the situation I've just mentioned. Both Soldier's sword and Rapier appear on that research tree, but there is no link between them. Slicer is a prerequisite of Vorpal sword (a spouse of Long sword, if you like), but slicer has Dagger and Gladius as prerequisites, both of which also appear on that image with no link. Sure, I can add the links in for things that are on the image, but by your descriptions it sounds like if any links go into an item, all links should go in, which could potentially bring in other images that would further clutter up the research tree. As an example of this, Talisman of fear appears on the Elemental pendant research tree as a spouse, depends on Amulet of evil protection (present in the image), but also Dread stick (absent from the image). Gringer1 (talk) 01:46, September 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Point taken. Edgebee messed up their part (where not ;) ) and since it normally isn't visible, it isn't an issue for them either. Skip the adding as i asked for. Thanks for looking into this.

Swords and Potions 2
Swords and Potions 2 is in beta on Kongregate, should we add things to the wiki now or once it is public?
 * It's public on edgebee, but I have heard it is quite a different game (haven't played it yet). A wiki would probably help -- I noticed that there is already an edgebee-driven wiki that has a bit more information than the S&P1 wiki, but perhaps not as much as would be provided by a wiki that was more free to edit. Gringer1 (talk) 00:55, June 10, 2013 (UTC)