Welcome to Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum! Log in and join the community.

User talk:Madness

From Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum
Jump to: navigation, search

--Rabs I noted them as minor edits... such as correcting spelling mistakes. I don't see how they need citations.

--Jonru 10:49, 22 May 2008 (CEST)Welcome to the Lexicanum! I'm a sysop here (kind of administrator) so don't hesitate to ask questions :)

To answer, at the time of creating the categories I believe there weren't that many weapons/equipment/vehicles etc. articles created and as such the categories weren't necessary. Breaking them down could be a better way of doing it than we have at the moment but I'd need to seek approval from higher authorities for such an alteration.

Thanks and happy editing :) --Jonru 18:26, 15 October 2007 (CEST)

Well, Upper Command has approved the idea and said go for it. Basically what they want is a main category for each race called 'X Technology', so Ork Technology, Eldar Technology etc. and Imperial Technology, which will encompass everything Imperial so we won't be splitting it up into several smaller ones like Imperial Guard Technology and Space Marine Technology as many things would need to be put in several categories. From then on they would like to see a category for weapons, vehicles and equipment specific to each race, so Ork Weapons, Ork Vehicles and Ork Equipment. Same goes for the Imperial stuff as well. Do you want to do this or would you like to leave it to me? Cheers--Jonru 22:40, 15 October 2007 (CEST)

User pages

I don't believe the site is against using pages like that. Why would we be?

Coordination

Hy, you seem to be quite eager to improve the Lexicanum. Well go for it, but please hear a couple of my advices:

  • 1) Sort images that you upload. This way we can be sure that there are no duplicates, and replace bad images with better one (and delete very bad ones).
  • 2) Don't create too many articles and sub-categories. Too much means confusion and too many little articles should preferably consolidated into fewer but better ones.
  • 3) Please take a look at this Link. Irulan 19:24, 26 April 2008 (CEST)


It's ok. The problem of writing instead of speaking face to face is that no one can know if someone is serious, furious, joking or otherwise. I'm not mad (quite the contrary) and I'm glad that you joined the Lexicanum. Serious contributors are always needed and always welcomed. Irulan 21:41, 26 April 2008 (CEST)

CSS alterations

I've proposed the IE fix (ok I admit to using it, but that's because i haven't put firefox on yet as just rebuilt laptop :P) and i'll also propose the TOC one but I was wondering if you could provide an example for when the ref gets url-expansion so I can see how much it will impact us. If i'm just being blind then sorry :P Cheers--Jonru 11:44, 28 April 2008 (CEST)

The toc does look better, but it wasn't until i looked in firefox that i noticed the difference. I'll put it up for nomination now. Cheers--Jonru 11:58, 28 April 2008 (CEST)
BTW would it be possible to move the hide option on the TOC up to the right hand side of the title? that would save a heck of a lot of space. Cheers.--Jonru 12:00, 28 April 2008 (CEST)
Wow thats excellent, thanks! I've implemented both and they appear fine in firefox and ie7. You'll probably have a better way of testing than me tho (as i'm meant to be revising for final exams...ever!) Cheers--Jonru 12:31, 28 April 2008 (CEST)
Urgh, helps to properly refresh doesn't it... ie7 is still a little bit scewed i'm afraid, i.e. buttons are over page name.--Jonru 12:36, 28 April 2008 (CEST)
YES! Thats the one! Thanks so much for making that work, it makes IE7 bareable (though I wont be using it now :P). Woohoo! I wouldn't have a clue where to start for this sort of thing so don't put yourself down! Right, must revise now :P Cheers!--Jonru 12:46, 28 April 2008 (CEST)
Yep that one works too! Thanks :)--Jonru 12:48, 28 April 2008 (CEST)
Good god lol you fix it before I have a chance to comment! It's working now though. Nice work! Cheers--Jonru 13:21, 28 April 2008 (CEST)
  • gaping mouth* ok thats something I can't change myself lol, I believe one needs access to the server, but i'll chuck it across to those who can help! Don't expect a quick response though! Presumably this would remove the need for *:first-child+html #content{margin-top: 6em!important;}. Well, I presume I can't change it... not being that well versed in programming/css/wiki structure beyond basics lol.--Jonru 14:22, 28 April 2008 (CEST)

Portal images

I responded to your message at User talk:Rlyehable. --Rlyehable 03:36, 2 May 2008 (CEST)

Template

Hy again Madness. We have to decide which template we are going to use (or we risk of forgetting about this issue). Please go to the Imaterium and choose the one you like the best. If you have any further improvements requests, now would be the best time to place them. Irulan 16:08, 3 May 2008 (CEST)

Firefox is what I use. :) In truth is seems to work in the Immaterium but it truly doesn't (it is impossible in this template). A clearer example would be the Black Templars. The middle row is made up with three lines: "Fortress-monastery:", "name of the F-M", "miniature" (actually miniature title field). As such they are bound to have the same size. Another thing that has an impact over the size of the fields is how much you write into them. The more someone writes the likelier it is that the fields in question enlarge. See the "Current Chapter Master" and "Current Chapter Strength" fields in the Black Templars (it also depends if you have a large screen or not). Irulan 18:44, 4 May 2008 (CEST)

There is something strange with the template. Go to Disciples of Caliban. The image of the symbol is larger than the image of the miniature. I think that it is better that they have the same size. Irulan 21:13, 12 May 2008 (CEST)

Congrats

Hey it was a team effort! But time to celebrate me thinks. It's been a lot of effort to finish that off, but now things can start improving, especially with the implementation of those smaller templates for multi-linking. Thanks for all the effort :)--Jonru 00:23, 12 May 2008 (CEST)

Portals

Ok, with the majority of the IWs out of the way, could give you me an estimated time for implementation of your portals? I don't think we need approval from the de-lex because portals aren't meant to be the same. If you do one then I can probably pick up and help along the way if that would help. Cheers--Jonru 00:35, 12 May 2008 (CEST)

Wow that was simpler than I thought it was going to be. My attempt is: Portal:Dark Eldar but be prepared to be sick when you see the colours. I'm not so great at that bit...--Jonru 11:58, 12 May 2008 (CEST)
Ooo that portal is a bit better now. Thanks!--Jonru 12:21, 12 May 2008 (CEST)
Sure i'll have a go at them. I wasn't online all afternoon because i was on a train going back to my uni home from my home home. Back now though (obviously)!--Jonru 19:16, 12 May 2008 (CEST)

RE:Hi

Thanks for the message man, i'll try and figure out what it all means, I don't really add too much to these kinds of pedia sites but when i do figure it all out i'll add them, thanks for the heads up --Squalukal 16:22, 18 May 2008 (CEST)

Yeah I have just been going mad now trying to put most of the Characters i know into the right categorys and its rewarding to see the results haha. Thanks dude.--Squalukal 16:51, 18 May 2008 (CEST)

Jonson Info

Thanks for pointing that out, I missed it in my daily rounds lol. It's dealt with now. Thanks again.


Battle barge

Thank on the battle barge thing

Cite section

I responded to your question at Template:Cite section. --Rlyehable 20:22, 24 May 2008 (CEST)

Uncategorised templates

Hey, do you think something like Category:Portal Design would be suitable for the portal style templates? Most of the uncategorised templates would go in this. Cheers--Jonru 00:04, 26 May 2008 (CEST)

Template:Otheruses

I have asked a question at Template talk:Otheruses --Rlyehable 03:17, 28 May 2008 (CEST)

Hey Madders (:P)

Well, I had a feeling this might be coming along some time or another. Personally I have no control over who becomes a sysop etc. as I wasn't made a bureaucrat all that time ago. I was thinking of asking Inq S and co about having another promotion session (you see i've seen the coming and going of 2 sysops already in my time). Another one or two sysops would be good because, as they say, it's lonely at the top (well the top of this wiki anyway). I'm beginning to find (and I'm sure you have seen) that I can't handle running this wiki entirely by myself, you and others have been putting in a fair bit of work with greeting members and getting them to do the right thing which is technically my job. I don't have the required amount of time always (or stamina sometimes) to complete that section of my responsibilities especially. But anyway, I will make a discussion on the forum on the topic and if you really want the position then you will have my backing. As for the slumber, well, it's something I've possibly got a little too used to. Any support I can give I will.--Jonru 09:25, 28 May 2008 (CEST)

Yeah I copy, haven't had enough time to study it properly yet though. First impressions are it looks good. I'd prefer the title of the page (the one under the article/discussion tabs) to be smaller like it was before, it looks too prominent to me. I'll come up with some comments later.--Jonru 00:13, 31 May 2008 (CEST)

Oops

I was a little careless in that, i just copied and pasted the line above it and then modified that, but i forgot to erase farseer.

Slumber

No matter what you think, the Sysop-Level is not slumbering. We are just occupied with the German lex and as nobody from the regular staff is into the technical side of the job, well, we concentrate on other things ;) You will realize (sooner or later) that demands on the administrative side will be normally met quite swiftly, i.e. everything which an Bureaucrat has the power to do. For the technical stuff you know who to contact, there's 0 chance for me to do anything about that. --Inquisitor S. 17:19, 1 June 2008 (CEST)

You can't add somebody with technical insight if there isn't any one. The staff was recruited from fluff fanatics and actually you are the first user I ever met with interest/ skill for the mechanisms behind the wiki :D --Inquisitor S. 18:13, 1 June 2008 (CEST)

Sysop

Hereby you are informed that you have been elevated into "Sysop" status as requested by Jonru. Act responsibly, good luck and welcome to the staff :) --Inquisitor S. 11:35, 2 June 2008 (CEST)

Congrats :)--Jonru 17:26, 2 June 2008 (CEST)

Images

You told me to add images to a category, how does one do that? --Drake2 18:07, 8 June 2008 (CEST)

Mediawiki

Hey Madness, could you give me a (very) brief overview of what you did to the common.js and monobook.css files? It's more out of interest than need to know :) Cheers--Jonru 00:02, 9 June 2008 (CEST)

Ok, sounds cool to me. Just to let you know I'm going on holiday today until late Thursday so don't expect to see me until then :) Trip to Disney Paris with my girlfriend :D Hope everything runs smoothly for you :)--Jonru 09:13, 9 June 2008 (CEST)

Citation

Ah, thank you. I tried {{Citation Needed}} and then thought that maybe I could get away with just putting it in superscript. Thanks a lot, though. --Judah 08:44, 9 June 2008 (CEST)

Thunderfire Cannon

Thanks for fixing that --Judah 15:48, 10 June 2008 (CEST)


No Lead Tag

Does Lexicanum have an policy requiring a lead? It is not in Lexicanum:Guidelines. I am not saying it is a poor idea, just it should be added to the guidelines if required.
With many of the articles on Lexicanum being less than a couple of paragraphs long, I would suggest that this tag not be applied to short articles or ones already marked witht the Stub tag. --Rlyehable 06:08, 12 June 2008 (CEST)

Thank you for your reply. (User talk:Rlyehable#Guidelines) --Rlyehable 13:57, 12 June 2008 (CEST)

I return

Hail, I return from Disney and a good holiday it was. Did I miss anything good/bad?--Jonru 09:54, 14 June 2008 (CEST)

Hi. Yes the holiday was great, bit of a shame to come home but hey, can't live the disney life forever! My girlfriend got a little excited by it all, especially when she got photographed with Eeyore (her favourite character... ever) but we did feel a little odd not having a child in a pushchair! Amusingly the guy at our pool seemed to want to do a deal with me to keep my friend himself and I could go home with my girlfriend... which I found a little odd and scary lol. I'm sure he meant nothing by it but that person seems to have trouble with relationships... Anyway! Back to life i suppose!--Jonru 11:28, 17 June 2008 (CEST)

Sorry Madness...:)

but ive accidently added a dead end to the dead end pages sorry! since your working on that area, could you please delete it for me, as i don't seem to know how... Much Appreciated! --Endeavour 23:43, 22 July 2008 (CEST)

Announcement

Sometime in the not-so-far future all fan-made pictures that are outside user-pages will be removed or replaced. This for example includes all DoW fan banners, pictures from mods, deviantart, models not painted/ converted by GW staff and generally all fan-work. If something looks like fan-work to me but is missing a proper source it will be removed, too. Exceptions are made for maps and colour schemes. The reasons for this somewhat harsh treatment is that these pictures may provide a wrong image as they are based on or represent subjective and non-sanctioned interpretations which have no place in an encyclopaedia. During this process I will also have a look into the picture categories and as I am currently organizing that in the German 40K lex we might have to discuss some issues. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 14:29, 30 August 2008 (CEST)

Status

Still alive? In the very near future it will be one year since your last sighting... --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 14:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'm still alive, I just lost intrest in the project due to both an outdated mediawiki and faulty theme, I'm an OCD perfectionist dork, and those things tend to stress me terribly. Also the lack of a working chain of command and slow reaction to support requests ticked me off a little. Sorry about that. Did you need anything else? --Madness 15:52, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Nope, just had a look at the sysop list. Regular maintenance and review of the status, nothing special, thanks. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 16:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
->New Lexicanum Forum. Can't do anything about technical issues, that's Odysseus domain. And for a chain of command... it's user -> sysop -> bureaucrat which works more or less. Don't see a problem there. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 22:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Madness?

This is madness? NO! THIS IS SPARTA!

[[1]]

Cats etc.

It is far more easy for us to keep a track of what exists category wise when all the categories begin with the same word (Weapons (Imperium) for example). The other way round there could be be Imperial Weapons, Imperium Weapons etc. which would be in many different places in the category list, whereas anything that is different from the Weapons (Imperium) system will be easier to find (I think). Basically I took the idea from the German lex and expanded it. Also I'm not sure why you had the bot (AWB I presume) remove the kroot weapons from the Weapons (Kroot) category??? Ps how the heck did you get the bot to work lol.--Jonru 09:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah got the awb to work in the end, though a bit of a botch lol. Now for the cat tree...
I thought that having a weapons section per faction was easiest as it was fairly clear as to the structure and easy to decide where to put the weapons. I was going for weapons used/carried by miniatures/available to carry in codex etc by race except for humans. I think Tau Empire is a weird one because it isn't a faction or a race specifically, it's more of an entity. I think the current category list has issues because it mixes race and faction as if they are interchangable (surely there should be a human category with Imperial, Chaos and Other humans in it with daemons having their own section under chaos?). As for Tau and Kroot, I made them part of Tau Empire because they are, but they are separate races within the empire and as such got their own weapons category. I don't know. Maybe the 4th version of what you said is for the best. I think the big change was mainly to sort out some of the inconsistancies in the article categorisation.
As for bots, i've got no idea how to make it into bot status, but i'll make one of my own. Cheers--Jonru 13:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Right, so Chaos, Eldar, Imperium, Necrons, Orks, Squats, Tau Empire and Tyranids as top level categories, each with their own weapons etc categories. Is that what you mean?--Jonru 14:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
List should be complete, just went down the current list. We should probably have a top level 'other' category as well.

Eldar Image

Well, it's not high quality, so delete it if you have no use for it.--Genestealer, Magus 19:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Alaric

Can you look at the Justicar Alaric page and see if it is too much? Respectfully.--Alpheus 2320, 23 June 2009(CEST)

Redirect

I had no idea how to do a redirect. Thanks--Alpheus 1627, 27 June 2009(CEST)

Mind-scrubs

I'll see if I can think up a satisfactory description of the process, however, my 40k knowledge is garnered from the novels, computer games and what online sources I can find, none of which have ever given much insight into mind-scrubbing. --ENDR

Short articles

Hey, just replying the comment left on my talk page. Are you referring to the articles that concern texts like the Apocrypha of the Nightbringer and the Pax Psykana? If you want, I can add information on the context of those texts in the novel like "Father Librarian Jonas Uriele told Sister Ptolmea that the spidery creatures on Rahe's Paradise match those of the Necrons in the Apocrypha of the Nightbringer" but thats all I could add to that as there is little else there :-/ Also could you tell me more about these aggregation articles? Are these basically a single article with multiple short topics in them? -- C'tan 18:00, 24 July 2009

Permitted Material on Lexicanum

Please read this page: Lexicanum permitted material and let me know what you think. I want to be sure of the direction of this site before contributing more. --Talad 09:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)