About the wiki.

[Dominus Arbitrationis]

I think you guys just need to learn how to spell. Grape is spelled like that, not like "g cuddly hug". Maybe now that I've taught you the correct spelling, you will be able to type it.

(This is intended to be humorous)

[Pumpkin]

 

What's the thing with the forum filter changing something to "cuddly hug"??
Can you imagine how weird it can be for someone that doesn't speak English fluently?

(translation of "cuddly" made me even more confuse...)

Anyway, seeing you having fun around the filter was actually fun...
Do you remember ASDF movies? "The funniest thing you've ever seen, from very far away"? It's exactly like that. Or seeing friends laughing about a private joke you don't understand: you laugh too, but you don't know why exactly.

[paeniteoazrael]

The word was scrapes. It was changing the internal portion of the word.

[Draco18s]

What's the thing with the forum filter changing something to "cuddly hug"??
Can you imagine how weird it can be for someone that doesn't speak English fluently?

The forum is filtering certain inappropriate words, such f*ck and (as we've discovered) r*pe.  The "joke" comes from the fact that the former was filtered to "hug," so the latter is a more forceful "cuddly hug."

This is also responsible for turning "kitchen" into "i am spam" and "skin care" into "watermelon."

[paeniteoazrael]

So from what I can see, there are three issues with automating ship stats updates:

1st, the reference data does not contain the common name of ships (so created templates would need to use the short or object name)
2nd, the knowledge cost reference data does not contain the short or object names of the ships, so it would have to manually entered
3rd, modules and module based ships add in new complications that are not particularly easy to deal with, since there is no flag related to being a module.

Otherwise, all the following attributes can be (relatively) easily automatically updated, though it would require relinking current ships to new templates with short or object names.

Description   Ship Cap   Ammo Type   Armor Type   Immunities   Bonuses   Attack Power   Attack Range   Reload Speed   Health   Armor Rating   Speed   Engine Health   Single Ship DPS   Ship Cap DPS   Armor Piercing   Metal Cost   Energy Cost   Time To Build   Cap Metal Cost   Cap Energy Cost   Cap Build Time   ShotsPerSalvo    Mark Level

Knowledge can't be automated (unless it is included in future reference files with accompanying short or object names) and any modules would generate their own page and can't be included in ship information (unless future reference files introduce a module flag).


EDIT: Oh, and any time the mass update is run, something like 3000 edits would be performed.

[Traveller]

Would there be any objections to a scorched earth policy about outdated strategy material?  While it would be nice in an ideal world to fix everything that's wrong, I feel like it would be more useful to outright delete it on sight (like every reference to astro trains using dark matter shots).

Definitely looking forward to having updated ship info, I find the wiki way easier to reference than the in-game reference so I lean on it a lot and missing ship pages is no fun.

[topper]

Would there be any objections to a scorched earth policy about outdated strategy material?  While it would be nice in an ideal world to fix everything that's wrong, I feel like it would be more useful to outright delete it on sight (like every reference to astro trains using dark matter shots).

Definitely looking forward to having updated ship info, I find the wiki way easier to reference than the in-game reference so I lean on it a lot and missing ship pages is no fun.

Maybe the wiki needs version-based namespaces like the Dwarf Fortress wiki has? The old material can stay, and the new material can be ported for large new versions? (not more than once per expansion)
I'm sure people play old versions of AI War less than DF, but still.

[Dominus Arbitrationis]

Maybe the wiki needs version-based namespaces like the Dwarf Fortress wiki has? The old material can stay, and the new material can be ported for large new versions? (not more than once per expansion)
I'm sure people play old versions of AI War less than DF, but still.

The problem I see with that is how easy it would be for a search engine to give outdated information. What I think might work would be something like what http://www.paradoxian.org/eu3wiki/ uses. They have a little box in the corner of every page saying for which expansions the article is up to date for, which makes it easier for the end user to know if that article will work, or if it might not.

Would there be any objections to a scorched earth policy about outdated strategy material?  While it would be nice in an ideal world to fix everything that's wrong, I feel like it would be more useful to outright delete it on sight (like every reference to astro trains using dark matter shots).

Definitely looking forward to having updated ship info, I find the wiki way easier to reference than the in-game reference so I lean on it a lot and missing ship pages is no fun.

As much as I want to keep the outdated information for reference, I definitely think its a good idea to nuke it. It really only confuses people who are new to the game and probably irritates them to no end.

So from what I can see, there are three issues with automating ship stats updates:

1st, the reference data does not contain the common name of ships (so created templates would need to use the short or object name)
2nd, the knowledge cost reference data does not contain the short or object names of the ships, so it would have to manually entered
3rd, modules and module based ships add in new complications that are not particularly easy to deal with, since there is no flag related to being a module.

Otherwise, all the following attributes can be (relatively) easily automatically updated, though it would require relinking current ships to new templates with short or object names.

Description   Ship Cap   Ammo Type   Armor Type   Immunities   Bonuses   Attack Power   Attack Range   Reload Speed   Health   Armor Rating   Speed   Engine Health   Single Ship DPS   Ship Cap DPS   Armor Piercing   Metal Cost   Energy Cost   Time To Build   Cap Metal Cost   Cap Energy Cost   Cap Build Time   ShotsPerSalvo    Mark Level

Knowledge can't be automated (unless it is included in future reference files with accompanying short or object names) and any modules would generate their own page and can't be included in ship information (unless future reference files introduce a module flag).


EDIT: Oh, and any time the mass update is run, something like 3000 edits would be performed.

I'm thinking that the bot would need to put the information in a table like they currently are, then whatever information isn't known, it puts {{huh}}. Would that be possible? I think we might need to have the bot take a bit of time between each edit to avoid overloading the server. Perhaps like Wikipedia's bot rules, or more likely something less strict.

[paeniteoazrael]

Definitely! It will take me a bit to make the bot anyways (and I'd need to do testing) but it could easily throw in something a template or just a simple string for stuff it doesn't/can't know. Another bot could add a "This article needs information added" template to the top of the page so that helpful editors can add the manual information (and remove the template). A wait timer could easily space out the requests.

[Pumpkin]

Removing or keeping outdated data? Well, for strategy, I would vote for NUKE THEM FROM THE ORBIT, but maybe it's because I would apply this politic to all strategy page in the wiki. While this extremity sounds like bringing more pain than solution, maybe just nuking the obviously outdated strategy pages is fine.

However, for outdated raw data, I would like to keep them, at least for some times, before we can update them. For example, in my front page proposal, I linked some old pages like metal, energy & knowledge, and also the very interesting (albeit dusty) armor page.

And yeah, I should dedicate more time to the wiki.

[Imago]

I strongly endorse nuking outdated information.

If anyone really cares about keeping it around it should be centralized to a single historical mechanics page, not scattered through the up-to-date pages to confuse new players.

[Dominus Arbitrationis]

Honestly, if someone wants to see outdated information, they can freely view the history of every page on the wiki and what it looked like then. That feature is amazing for stuff like that!

[Pumpkin]

So nuking outdated info doesn't entirely destroy it? Wohoo! Let's nuke them all!!!

[Pumpkin]

Speaking of wiki, I stumbled across the DNode page. It mention trojan DNodes that removes metal. Is this still true? Or does it need to be removed from the DNode page?

Also, I can't find how to delete. Maybe I'm not allowed to. I wanted to remove the old energy page, while the new one is now up to date.

[Dominus Arbitrationis]

So nuking outdated info doesn't entirely destroy it? Wohoo! Let's nuke them all!!!

Nothing you do can't be undone, its amazing! Now on to the nuking!

Also, I can't find how to delete. Maybe I'm not allowed to. I wanted to remove the old energy page, while the new one is now up to date.

To effectively delete it, replace all content with #REDIRECT[[AI War:Energy]], which takes it to the new energy page. Just replace whatever is in the brackets with where you want the page to point, and have fun! Also, regular users can't delete because it hides the page from the view of non-administrators which makes it harder to restore. Not by much though, since it just requires an administrator to click a couple of buttons but still.