Template talk:UWP

Galaxiad Update Proposal (2015)

I am recommending that a Galaxiad update be implemented at some point in the near future.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2015 (EST)

Solomani Rim War Update (2007)

I have added a "Solomani Rim War" heading, to handle Traveller20's period of 993. This is a time period much too late to be under the First Survey, yet it's still too early for the Second Survey. My edit has only changed the display on this page, and has not been replicated to UWPs in the Wiki. If someone more knowledgabe about Wiki can do the necessary editing, I (and other fans of the T20 / Solomani Rim War setting) would sure appreciate it!

It took forever, but it seems to work now - without breaking all the other worlds in the meantime... Travalv 17:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I have changed the default date of Classic Traveller data from 1120 to 1115. This avoids controversy due to GURPS Traveller/Rebellion divergence, and also avoids the problem of worlds that were damaged by the Rebellion by 1120, but not in 1115.

A case can be made that the actual "Classic Traveller baseline" should be 1105, pre-Fifth Frontier War. Travalv 18:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Nice update, Travalv! Gruffty 20:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Updates (2007)

(This is a continuation of a discussion on the Template talk: InfoboxSystem page.)

I would love to update this template to incorporate the extended system information. The PBG number, the primary (and other stellar types), bases, trade codes, and other extended information. We had one user request (see Projects) the extended UWP include the written version (like the GURPS Traveller: Behind the Claw, and GURPS Traveller: Rim of Fire) of the UWP codes. It would also be nice to get rid of the Template: UWPAmber and Template: UWPRed, instead incorporating a "zone" parameter. And, to be complete, Rindis asked if we could add a notation that there is a system writeup for this world.

The difficulty is, if the UWP template is to support mulitple era's, some of this data changes while others of it does not. And does do not in a manner that allows for easy translation from the Extended system sector files to the UWP template. Tjoneslo 00:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you, with some fancy programming cause a row's background to go yellow or red if an optional parameter for that line was "A" or "R"?

I'm thinking you might also do a footer for the UWP box that could contain the gas giant, belt and star data. At that point, all that's missing is the population multiplier, which also varies by time (not sure what to do about that). The same footer might be a place to stick a system link, when/if it exists.

And while I'm making grandiose plans for everyone's time, I'm thinking it would be best for the UWP template to carry the header data directly. It would be a lot of work to convert everything over, but it would allow people to use the World and WorldS templates as personal taste and context decide, and SectorWorlds2 can use the actual UWP template to create its links, which should be a lot easier to manage in the long run.

I also think it would be nice to emulate the GURPS written out data. I consider it a lower priority than, oh, good maps (^_^), but it can also contain data that the UWPs don't have, such as the climate type. On the other hand, Traveller would generally use kilometers for planet diameter, and GURPS users (who are used to seeing it spelled out) would expect miles, so there's other issues to work out before such a project. --Rindis 17:38, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Tjoneslo/UWP is an updated UWP template. It includes a travel zone (which changes the header color), primary, GGcount, and belts. If you want to play with this on your own pages include the template {{User:TJoneslo/UWP|<parameters>}}.

I'm not sure what you mean in the second paragraph by: "the UWP template to carry the header data directly"? Tjoneslo 18:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The header has the world name, subsector, sector, and hex number data. Currently this is done by inputing a World template into the name entry. Since World is also used by SectorWorlds2 (and it's offspring SubsectorWorlds2) to generate its link list, World cannot currently be used outside of those headers, even though it would be nice to in some places. So, either we need a copy of World to use instead, or UWP should do the work itself, instead of putting a template in a template. The reason why I suggested the latter is that SectorWorlds2 et al should be trying to identify world articles, and a UWP template should be the true marker of that.

Also, looking at your update tinkering, my idea was to have a set of optional parameters, like "zc" which could be ignored or included. In your example "zc=A" would color the row for Classic Traveller yellow, instead of the header. That way, you can have a multi-era listing with just the appropriate lines marked amber or red. (Or, you may realize this, and you're still proof-of-concepting the programming of colors....) In my head, the header area would be bigger and more prominent than the colored rows, but I just realized that HTML table format makes that pretty hard to do. --Rindis 20:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The real limitation on using the {{World}} vs. {{WorldS}} templates is in only the world articles themselves. The question is does a given world article "belong" in one sector or another, depending upon links. My current Bot programming skills are not up to the task of editing the >1000 world articles.

Doing background colors for the era UWP's isn't difficult, the question becomes should the default (ie no zc parameter implying green zone) background be green or white? And if we don't use the title bar to indicate travel zone, what color should we set it to? and do we want to use that color to indicate habitability (e.g. green for untainted atmosphere, yellow for a tainted one, red for none, exotic or corrosive one). Tjoneslo 02:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. I had the idea that it was looking for the template itself. Entries only show up with use of the World template, and will show up multiple times with multiple uses of the template, so I figured you're sniffing out uses of the template.

My thought is a white background for when there's no travel advisory (green) to keep things from getting too colorful. I hadn't really considered what the header color should become, but matching my scheme for the maps is a possibility (just use light blue for icecaps instead of bordering around white-it can't border anything else, so it'll still work. Though... what color to used for an asteroid belt? Grey? --Rindis 18:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The Template:SectorWorlds2 is looking for three things: Does an article belong to Category: Worlds, does the article link to the page where the template is located, and does the article include a Template: World where one of the parameters matches the first parameter to the SectorWorlds2 template. All of these must be true in order to show up in the list. Tjoneslo 19:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

<--De-indenting

Ah, ha. My proposal would be to have the data put into fields in UWP, instead of overloading "name" with the use of World, and have SectorWorlds2 hunt for the appropriate parameter inside the UWP template. Sounds like you have to insist on correct order, but hey....

Or, it is probably best to just create a duplicate of World. The idea is to be able talk about a nearby world in a world article that happens to be in an adjacent sector. The world template gives the listing with both subsector and sector which are both meaningful at that scale. Of course, I think it'd be nice to have a World template that gave subsector but not sector, but I can construct that myself if I ever get loose from maps enough to start worrying about world entries.

Though, I just realized. Part of the problem is with the current warnings, I had gotten the idea that part of the limitation was that World could only be used in the appropriate (world) article. This means using it in subsector and sector articles should be fine.

And another note: The struggles with zoning have eclipsed the system link idea. I'm currently thinking of an optional parameter to provide a link to that article at the bottom of the new footer. --Rindis 19:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

One of the reasons the Manual of Style (and other sources) asks to use the Template: World only in the UWP template, and use the Template: WorldS everywhere else is consistency within the wiki. You can use the World template within other articles without causing problems. The layout of the World and WorldS templates follows the Traveller's author guidelines. If you would like to create a new World template, please try to create something which matches these guidelines.

I'll add the system link parameter to the UWP template. Tjoneslo 20:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, good to know. The proposed template would be the "World/Subsector" format (Which I haven't seen around...). Now my thoughts on usage inside a subsector article are: if the world is in the current subsector, just use it. If it is in a different subsector of that sector use the new one. If it is in an adjacent sector, use World. If it is in a more distant sector use WorldS. Much the same should be applicable in a world article as the infobox will establish the local sector and subsector.

Just looked at the trade-code colors. Eo/Fl - The red is going to be a bit dark for dead links (which shouldn't happen often). :) Wa - also a bit dark for live links - I actually recommend you use the current blue for Ic. Ic - works, but is much darker than what I use on the maps, I recommend a really light blue. If you can point me at the HTML color charts I've seen around here and can't find right now, I can even give you my specific thoughts on it. --Rindis 21:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Colours (use the British spelling) Tjoneslo 22:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Of... course. ^_^; Something like 80ffFF for Ic. "Imperial red" for Eo, the current Ic for Wa. You might also want something like F0F0F0 for Va, just to pop it from the background white. --Rindis 22:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)