I'm loving the work gone into this wiki and refer to it often. However, as a newbie I've noticed that at a first glance (and sometimes even a second or third) it's hard to tell if a page is refering to a Card, a Storylet, an Item, or something else. It may be because I am getting ahead of myself (self-confessed link-surfing addict), but as you've all done so well with the templates I was wondering it it would help to have a generic category phrase (eg. 'A Bronze Opportunity Card.' or 'A Golden Storylet.') before the description.
Of course time has made me a total n00b at hi-tech wiki work (it all used to be so simple!) so I may have overlooked an OBVIOUS sign somewhere that shows what the page refers to (other than the category box at the bottom of course). The n00biness is also the reason for my paranoid questioning rather than just going for it and editing the templates (which I'm more than happy to do).
Anyhow, let me know if you think it's a reasonable idea or a brain-fart ^_^
Hey Aximollio and Echo Bazaar folks!
We’re reaching out to a few of our top communities, hoping to get you on board with the migration to the new infobox markup. And we have tools to help!
‘’’Why we’re doing this’’'
Simply put: Most current infobox structure translates very poorly to mobile experiences, and indeed any device that doesn’t use desktop-style displays. On desktops and laptops, they often look amazing. The problem is that Wikia’s traffic is trending mobile.
We partnered with the Wikia community to create this new markup to make sure that your hard work can be displayed on mobile devices (as well as any future technologies) easily and without any new coding conventions. It’ll take some effort up front, to be sure, but we’re here to help, and the work you put in now will pay for itself tenfold in the future.
‘’’Tools we’ve designed to ease the process’’’
We’ve enabled two new features on your community. One is a tool for migrating the “old” infobox code to the new markup. It identifies templates on your wikia that look like infobox templates and places a box on the right rail of the template page. When you click the “Generate draft markup” button in this box, it opens a new tab containing a draft of your infobox using the new markup.
The second is a new feature on Special:Insights that will highlight which infoboxes on your wikia have not been migrated to the new infobox markup. It’s fairly intuitive - you can click on the infobox title link itself to see the old markup, or simply click the “Convert!” button on the right, which performs the same action as the “Generate draft markup” button.
Have you actually checked whether any such infobox is used by the respective communities? The lack of response here may very well be caused by the fact that this wikia does not use infoboxes of any kind. In fact, I only checked this message because a nonsensical and apparently dysfunctional message appears whenever I edit templates, and I'd love to get rid of it :)
On a somewhat related note, is there a way of disabling wikia's mobile skin? It's completely messing up our pages and the end result is incredibly far away from the experience you're trying to build.
You are absolutely correct, there are no infoboxes on this community. I apologize for that. But it's good awareness for all users to know about wikia in general, so the post isn't totally useless! For the mobile skin question and the dysfunctional message appearance question, please head over to Special:Contact, just so we can keep things streamlined here and that the right person can get you the help you're looking for. Happy Friday!
Do you think it's a good idea to make subcategories for cards that appear only in a certain area? Took me a while where to find this information, and I know now that it appears on some location pages. But the first place I looked was the Card category page and there were several subcategories but not this, I think it might be more intuitive to find for some people (like me ^^).
It's not just you. Most of it is clatter. Just saying "this option is not worth it" adds nothing to documenting the option (which is what a wiki is about) and doesn't really faciilite discussion (especially without explanation or details).
Discussing whether an action is worth it or not should be on FBG's forums, not on a wiki (and even moreso on a non-official, fan-maintained wiki).
Perhaps create a new wiki guide of "actions not worth it according to user X" and put all of this there in a single page? :-)
The problem is that the Redirect template uses the "Redirects To" field as a name of a page to which it should link. This doesn't allow the usual trick of providing a link but overriding the link's name. So, for example, I can't use the Redirect template to link to: "[[A mysterious envelope 2014 (2)|A mysterious envelope]]".
I guess we can change the template to not assume that the field contains a full link name of another page, and modify the currently 93 pages using this template accordingly by adding "[[" and "]]" tags in their Redirects To field.
Yes, I think that might be the best suggestion. In this case, I think we can also merge Seek advice from Madame Shoshana 2 and Seek advice from Madame Shoshana, because the other option is retired. We'll have to mention it in the 2013 section on the historical page, though; because this is a change that is reflected on a lot of other cards as well.
Aximillio wrote: There's an option to use a redirect field in the action template as well; this removes success title and such entirely.
I was now playing with the Redirect field of the Action tempalte - more approprioate for an action which redirects than the Redirect template itself (as it hides the needless and empty Success section of the action).
Can you add a new optional field to the Action template - "Redirect Appearance", to serve the same purpse for Actions?