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

User talk:Bobmath

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

Welcome to Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum! We hope you will contribute much and well. You will probably want to read the [Lexicanum:Help help pages]. Again, welcome and have fun! Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 09:59, 7 October 2018 (MDT)


The audio books and the short stories are two physically different products (one is a CD/mp3/ audio, the other a print product (or ebook, too?)). Therefore it should presumably be discussed if they should be described in one or more articles. For example other books were turned into abridged and unabridged audiobooks with different contents... --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 11:54, 29 October 2018 (MDT)

Sure, thanks for pointing that out. I think you're referring to (for example) me redirecting The Lightning Tower (Audio Book) to The Lightning Tower (Short Story). In that case, we don't really have any information that differentiates between the audio and the short story. If anyone wants to add some, they can expand the redirect to a full article. Reasonable? Bobmath (talk) 12:03, 29 October 2018 (MDT)
I guess it is partly reasonable ;) Nevertheless I felt like raising the issue just so that we know what we do. I think (should be verified) that for example Wikipedia handles it like this: If a literary work is the main and original "product" the article deals with this book (or whatever form it has) and then simply lists the different other media the work was turned into in the same article. And for example if a major movie was done based on the book it gets its own article. BUT the thing is also that we (should) have list articles for example about audiobooks and then I am not so sure anymore if a separate article for the audio "derivative" of a book shouldn't have its own article as somebody wanting to read up on the short story might not be terribly interested in technical details of the audio production such as voice actors, formats etc.? That is a bit the problem of making a mix between a background but also a product wiki...--Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 12:21, 29 October 2018 (MDT)

Blackstone Fortress miniatures

Since you seem to be the main guy uploading images and I don't know if anybody notice my comment on the talk page here's the links to the images for every Blackstone Fortress miniatures directly from the WH40K website.

These images should have a better resolution and less artefacts than the images(with transparent background) you currently have.--Ashendant (talk) 12:15, 27 November 2018 (MST)

Thanks for pointing that out. The images from warhammer-community.com have generally better resolution, but not everything is present there. I'll take a look at them. Bobmath (talk) 12:20, 27 November 2018 (MST)


PAGENAME is a usable tool-key that save you from mistakes when creating new articles based on the text from the old ones. Don't needed to change it everywhere.--Darkelf77 (talk) 11:23, 8 December 2018 (MST)

Using PAGENAME outside of templates is silly and results in badly worded sentences when the page is dabbed. I will scrub it out wherever I find it. Bobmath (talk) 11:26, 8 December 2018 (MST)
It's silly to try to change them all. There are really a lot of such using in articles and people who will create new articles will still add this tool.--Darkelf77 (talk) 11:36, 8 December 2018 (MST)
Which is why I'm only fixing them when I have something else to change on the page. You people need to learn to use commas properly. Bobmath (talk) 11:39, 8 December 2018 (MST)
And a lot of everything else, yes :) Especially it concerns me, fe in gramma and such things. So the fixing is generally welcome.--Darkelf77 (talk) 11:48, 8 December 2018 (MST)
FYI, if you're creating a page and want to autoinsert the pagename without leaving a little turd behind, you can use {{subst:PAGENAME}} Bobmath (talk) 10:29, 11 December 2018 (MST)
Then I (and possibly all other Adepts) just didn't know about that difference between {{subst:PAGENAME}} and {{PAGENAME}} and thought that {{PAGENAME}} just copies the name of the article and not appeal to some Template. Seems you are right. I'll try to use it when will create a new articles based on the old ones. For example - for planets.--Darkelf77 (talk) 11:59, 11 December 2018 (MST)
It's a general mechanism that works with any template. Kind of obscure. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Substitution Bobmath (talk) 12:16, 11 December 2018 (MST)

About Anthologies

Proposition. Wouldn’t it be better to leave '(Short Story)', '(Novella)' and '(Novel)' in the lists of works included in the anthology? Thus, it is immediately clear which work exactly which form each book belongs to. Now we must bring mouse cursor over every subject to find out (for example to find novella between the list where a lot of short stories). I certainly do not insist, but it seems to me that it was more convenient.--Darkelf77 (talk) 02:55, 23 December 2018 (MST)

Also It would be good to hear the views of other adepts of Lexicanum...--Darkelf77 (talk) 03:06, 23 December 2018 (MST)
I agree with Darkelf77 on both points. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 04:38, 23 December 2018 (MST)
Yes, I thought about that. I ended up taking the dabs off because I thought they looked a bit messy, but I suppose you're right. Bobmath (talk) 08:45, 23 December 2018 (MST)

Titan Legions template(s)

Hi there. I noticed you have been removing the existing templates from the Titan Legion pages. Any particular reason for that? Thanks for getting back to me on that. Cheers! --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 12:58, 1 March 2019 (MST)

Not sure what you mean. This type of edit? The Legion pages had no template, just ad-hoc table formatting. Where there was useful information in the table, I reformatted it into a template. Where the table was basically empty, I just removed it. Or maybe you were referring to something else? Bobmath (talk) 13:14, 1 March 2019 (MST)
.Yes, I meant table, mental slip of the tongue. Tables like that were introduced originally to give similar pages a uniform layout. So that one always could see the most important info at a glance. And if info was missing at the time, well, one could immediately see that for example it was/is not known what the homeworld was/ is. What is the advantage of getting rid of the table? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:41, 1 March 2019 (MST)
I didn't think a table full of Unknowns was adding anything to the page except visual noise. But if you think it's a good thing to have, I can easily go through and add a template to all the Titan Legions. Bobmath (talk) 14:02, 1 March 2019 (MST)
I kinda like for example the boxes in Wikipedia that give me one-glance overview. If you feel like it, a nice template could be useful. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:11, 1 March 2019 (MST)
Looking over the Legio pages, it seems that I removed some infoboxes in cases where I probably shouldn't have, so thanks for bringing this up. I also changed the template so it will float over to the right if there are no images. I think this reduces clutter on the page, but if you don't like the inconsistency, I'll change it back. Bobmath (talk) 15:33, 1 March 2019 (MST)
  • I think perhaps the Knight Houses articles could use the same treatment - I believe a bunch of those had tables that were removed, too. KazilDarkeye (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2019 (MST)
    • Ah, good idea. Bobmath (talk) 16:27, 1 March 2019 (MST)
Could you please link to one of those floating template examples? Thanks. And I agree that probably Knight Houses are a good category to expand such a treatment to. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 04:25, 3 March 2019 (MST)
Legio Absolutium, House AdamantBobmath (talk) 09:55, 3 March 2019 (MST)
Thanks. Not super-enthusiastic about the way portal template and Legio/House template look spatially in relation to each other. I wonder if they can be somehow integrated into each other? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:51, 3 March 2019 (MST)
Every portal/infobox combo looks similar. Bobmath (talk) 16:17, 3 March 2019 (MST)

Still doesn't look ideal, even if it affects all templates ;) --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 03:12, 4 March 2019 (MST)

Image edits/ Category

Heya, your addition of the categories is appreciated. Just wanted to let you know that I did not forget to add them, just working batch wise on them as the stupid upload template doesn't let me add the category directly where it should go (=at the bottom). Cheers. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:56, 18 March 2019 (MDT)

No worries. Doesn't really matter that much where the categories go on image pages, but yes, the upload template isn't ideal. Bobmath (talk) 08:57, 19 March 2019 (MDT)
I do know that from a technical point of view the exact placement of the category is of minor importance, but my bureaucrat's eye starts twitching when things are not where I think they should be. And since in the beginning when we did not have those fields to fill they always went to the bottom... ;) --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 10:56, 19 March 2019 (MDT)
Yeah, I generally move them down there if I look at the page source. But if I don't look... it doesn't bother me. Bobmath (talk) 11:47, 19 March 2019 (MDT)
Since you already started I trust you to finish the Dark Eldar (card game) pic categorization ;) --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 12:53, 20 March 2019 (MDT)
It's no problem. I have a system. Bobmath (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2019 (MDT)
Does it go beyond the Tool for uncategorized images? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:55, 20 March 2019 (MDT)
Yes, Special:UncategorizedFiles is just the beginning. Bobmath (talk) 14:07, 20 March 2019 (MDT)
What's the rest? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:18, 20 March 2019 (MDT)
Unbelievably ugly. Basically, it does semi-automated mass category moves. Bobmath (talk) 15:15, 22 March 2019 (MDT)

Image uploads/ resolution

Aloha, I noticed that your (recent) image uploads (Genestealers) are all in quite high resolution, presumably the original one. And I wondered if for mere painted minis (so not maps or images with tiny text etc) 1000x1000px was really necessary... --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 02:54, 14 April 2019 (MDT)

What would you suggest as a more appropriate resolution? Bobmath (talk) 08:33, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
I just tried 500x500px and in my opinion this is sufficient. It also reduced the filesize to below 100kb which I normally consider a good size to aim at. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 10:40, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
At 500x500, you're losing a lot of detail (head tattoos, weathering chips on the guns, etc), and generation loss also degrades the image significantly. The original images are only 115 to 135k, so it seems like a large cost in image quality for only about a 20% savings in file size. But if you want to write up some guidelines for image size, then be my guest.
If you want to talk about excessive image file size, the poster child would be File:MasterOfExecutions.png at 450k. The original is only 66k, but it's in webp format, which isn't supported by our wiki software. Arguably, I should have transcoded it to jpeg; a quality setting of 75 produces a 66k file. I've noticed that some editors frequently transcode jpegs at very high quality, which results in an unnecessarily large file. Bobmath (talk) 11:24, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
I can still clearly see the tattoos at 500px ;) Also one should keep in mind we are not really there to serve as a painting guide, the images serve purely illustrative purposes. But I agree that 135kb is not super-excessive, it was the 1,000 px that caught my attention.
I also agree that a list of image requirements should be elaborated (for example banning PNG..., but also recommendations on file size, cropping, freeware tools etc.)
File:MasterOfExecutions.png is in my crosshairs as are in fact all user contributions by "Axelhanson", but I started with the oldest ones first. Uploading new, smaller versions of his images is just one of the measures taken. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 11:32, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
Yes, you can see the tattoos, but the finer detail becomes very blocky. I feel like whatever size GW is routinely posting (on games-workshop.com and warhammer-community.com, for example) should be considered "reasonable." If I can get a better quality image by going there instead, I won't bother looking here. Once in a while they slip up and post an image that's much larger than the norm; in that case, go ahead and scale it down.
I think you would have less trouble with users like Axel if there were clearly posted guidelines for everyone to follow. When such things are handled only through talk, it's easy for someone to feel like they're being singled out and hassled. Bobmath (talk) 11:54, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
Let's not mix up different issues here. People should not come here because they are looking for shiny pictures but because they are looking for background info, that is the stated purpose of the Lexicanum. And the images we use (which in my opinion are often too many in one article anyway) should mainly serve to add some nice elements to the articles. And as you said, just because GW posts a pic in wallpaper resolution I do not see any added value in keeping that resolution for the Lex.
As for the need for help pages I agree we would need some proper ones, but since nobody ever seems to bother... I am willing to contribute but sure as hell I will not do that on my own. Not that in the case of an obvious labile character as Mr Hanson this would have prevented the conflagration we witnessed. He was talked to nicely in the beginning. He was talked to less nicely after several repetitions. And then out of the blue a month after I had even last posted something to his talk page he went ballistic, singled me out specifically and was actively looking to get his fingers stamped on. So that particular guy had it coming. And after his niceties he can consider himself lucky that (for the time being) he only got one month suspension to get his act together again. Quite lenient actually ;) --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 12:10, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
I'm sure other editors would be happy to contribute to updated help pages if there was an officially-encouraged project to do so. Out of curiosity, where is the "stated purpose of the Lexicanum" actually spelled out? Bobmath (talk) 12:28, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
Also, I completely agree that Axel's behavior was inexcusable. Bobmath (talk) 12:47, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
I am sure it was spelled out somewhere, someplace, this place is a maze and has been reworked so many times... And quite honestly some English admins did some stuff in the past that diverged quite extensively from the German Lex and was not sanctioned... But I can assure you (because I was there) that the Lexicanum was explicitly founded and planned (well, grand word for this organized chaos ;)) to mainly deal with what is (was) known as "fluff". Over time it has expanded into other areas, yes. And I still dream of actually creating a miniatures catalogue within it, so clearly we are not strictly limited to background. But to put things to a rest: Let us agree that we generally try to take the GW pics at the resolution given if it is not an excessive resolution and size? And that a good file size for a normal pic should be somewhere around 100kb max. (give or take 25%)?
As to "officially encourage a project" I am not exactly sure how to do that. In the past we had a forum where many of these things were planned but the user structure and habits have changed so much over the years that this seems not to be very practical anymore. I mean just look at the low level of activity on the corresponding (now BoLS) forum. So maybe I just open a brainstorming session on the general Help talk page and we go from there? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:58, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
--> Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum talk:Help <-- --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:05, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
It sounds like we basically agree on things. I don't usually feel like an image is too big until it starts to get close to 200k, but 100k is probably a reasonable suggestion. Is disk space a problem for the Lexicanum? Maybe other folks would like to discuss it. I don't know how the Lexicanum folks like to communicate with each other. If you mean this Forum, it's closed to new users. Bobmath (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
I think this new page (Lexicanum talk:Help) may serve as a mini-forum for any purpose and general discussions. As for images, 100-150kb should be appropriate, in my opinion.--Darkelf77 (talk) 16:05, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
Disk space was sometimes an issue in the past, but that was before BoLS, I don't know how the situation is there. But for the sake of playing it safe it is never completely wrong to have an eye on those issues. In any case we seem to be more or less on the same page concerning file sizes. Do you see any practical reason to continue allowing to use PNG and some of the more exotic file formats? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 22:33, 15 April 2019 (MDT)
PNG is like anathema for me :( Too big and clumsy--Darkelf77 (talk) 02:13, 16 April 2019 (MDT)
PNGs of photographs are dumb, unless you really need transparency. However, JPG is terrible for line drawings; compare File:Ibraesil Rune.jpg and File:Ibraesil Rune.png. The only purpose of GIF any more is for simple animations. Bobmath (talk) 08:44, 17 April 2019 (MDT)
Well, I don't know, but I remade this png and this what I've got File:Ibraesil Rune2.jpg. I think it's OK. Though turned out bigger than original png, hmmm...--Darkelf77 (talk) 11:47, 17 April 2019 (MDT)
It's not as egregiously ugly as the original jpg, but the compression artifacts are quite visible. Bobmath (talk) 15:25, 17 April 2019 (MDT)
BTW, jpegrescan takes the size down to 7k. Bobmath (talk) 15:30, 17 April 2019 (MDT)
Hmmm. Agreed. May be in case of emblems png really can be used. May be other adepts also add something?--Darkelf77 (talk) 02:11, 18 April 2019 (MDT)


Talk:Space_Marines_Camouflage_Schemes#Unhappy - suggestions? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 10:44, 21 May 2019 (MDT)

Weblinks as sources

Hello, please check this (as detailed here), thanks. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:48, 26 August 2019 (MDT)

Yes, I see the Department of Redundancy Department has been hard at work on that link format, and the Department of Selective Enforcement is zealously applying it... sometimes. Bobmath (talk) 08:07, 27 August 2019 (MDT)

Citations in tables

Warhammer_40k_-_Lexicanum:Citation#Citations_in_tables.--Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:40, 28 August 2019 (MDT)