Difference between revisions of "User talk:Maksim-Smelchak"

From Traveller Wiki - Science-Fiction Adventure in the Far future
Jump to: navigation, search
(Categories for Rule of Man and Second Imperium worlds? (2017))
(Use the TL template, not TL links please (2018))
 
(13 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 96: Line 96:
 
----  
 
----  
 
Thinking ahead is often a better solution that coming behind. An ounce of prevention...
 
Thinking ahead is often a better solution that coming behind. An ounce of prevention...
 +
* If need be, I will make all of these corrections myself. You needn't worry about that. I input most of those and I will fix them if need be.
 
* Welcome.
 
* Welcome.
 
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 07:36, 20 November 2017 (EST)
 
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 07:36, 20 November 2017 (EST)
Line 274: Line 275:
 
I haven't broached that with Adie yet, but the codes would not work well in the Fringe since he is using a different technological paradigm. His realm is less advanced than Charted Space.
 
I haven't broached that with Adie yet, but the codes would not work well in the Fringe since he is using a different technological paradigm. His realm is less advanced than Charted Space.
 
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 13:05, 2 January 2018 (EST)
 
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 13:05, 2 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
== Use the TL template, not TL links please (2018) ==
 +
Please use, or leave, the use of the [[Template:TL]], and don't use the TL links. First the TL template creates the correct links, second it does the formatting correctly. Thanks.
 +
: - [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 15:18, 13 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
----
 +
Why? The TL-9 type works just as well.
 +
* Why, in your opinion, is it better?
 +
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 15:20, 13 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
----
 +
:: The two reasons mentioned above. The template creates correctly formatted links, which is not apparent with the link setup. Second, it creates links to the correct page(s) as needed. It's also the standard used in the wiki.
 +
: - [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 15:23, 13 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
----
 +
Thank you for your advice. Much appreciated
 +
* The ''TL template'' is not longer the standard used in the wiki. It's now an optional choice.
 +
* It's no longer the default. It is certainly still permitted.
 +
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 15:26, 13 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
----
 +
[[User:Tjoneslo|Thomas]], please explain why how the ''TL template'' benefits you in detail?
 +
* Can't the goods template count the TL for you?
 +
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 15:43, 13 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
----
 +
:: The [[Template:TL]] is designed, like all of the text expansion templates to ensure the layout, formatting, and links included in the wiki all follow a consistent standard. They exist to make contributors work easier and simpler.
 +
:: The current format of the Template links only to the [[Technology Level]] page. I have noted you were re-arranging the Technology articles. I wasn't sure if you had completed that work to the point where I could update the template to link to the correct pages. Where would you like the template linked to? I noted there is, for example, a [[TL-1]], a [[TL:1-3]], and an [[Ur-Tech]] article. Where is the correct place for the template to link?
 +
:: - [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 17:17, 13 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
----
 +
Thomas, you mentioned a consistent standard. What is that consistent standard?
 +
* I lack your time as an administrator here, but I haven't noticed too many standards.
 +
 +
The TL pages are all arranged now, but need further development.
 +
* The TL pages should link to their appropriate 3-TL groupings called a ''Epoch''. [[Technology_Level#Chronological_Periodization]]
 +
 +
SEE:
 +
* [[Proto-Tech]]
 +
** [[TL-0]] [[Found Tools Period]]
 +
* [[Ur-Tech]]
 +
** [[TL:1-3]] [[Tool Making Epoch]]
 +
** [[TL:4-6]] [[Division of Labor Epoch]] 
 +
** [[TL:7-9]] [[Processor Epoch]]
 +
* [[Stell-Tech]]
 +
** [[TL:10-12]] [[Gravitics Epoch]]
 +
** [[TL:13-15]] [[Biologicals Epoch]]
 +
** [[TL:16-18]] [[Artificials Epoch]]
 +
* [[Ultra-Tech]]
 +
** [[TL:19-21]] [[Matter Transport Epoch]]
 +
** [[TL:22-24]] [[Transformations Epoch]]
 +
** [[TL:25-27]] [[Psionics Epoch]]
 +
* [[Dei-Tech]]
 +
** [[TL:28-30]] [[Trans-galactic Epoch]]
 +
* [[Omni-Tech]]
 +
** [[TL:31-33]] [[Pocket Universe Epoch]]
 +
* [[Post-Technological Period]]
 +
** [[Singularity]]
 +
 +
So TL should be linked by level. TL's 1, 2 , and 3 go to [[TL:1-3]] and so on and so forth.
 +
* Each Technological Epoch has a name for its tech and various other names that mostly correlate with canon publications.
 +
* There were gasps o those were filled in. And not just by me. Rob and Marc have also named some of the TL groupings.
 +
* Some groupings such as [[TL-0]] count as both a TL or an AGE as well as an EPOCH.
 +
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 17:24, 13 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
:: I've updated the Template:TL to link to the correct articles. This will help encourage the correct standards of use. Thanks. [[User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] ([[User talk:Tjoneslo|talk]]) 17:53, 13 January 2018 (EST)
 +
 +
----
 +
Thanks. We really need to find a way to communicate better. We can do a better job of this.
 +
: - [[User:Maksim-Smelchak|Maksim-Smelchak]] ([[User talk:Maksim-Smelchak|talk]]) 17:54, 13 January 2018 (EST)

Latest revision as of 17:54, 13 January 2018

Capitalization of words in article titles (2017)[edit]

I'm looking to update more of the unwritten wiki rules in the manual of style, and it contains the following:

Article capitalization: Unless the name of the article contains a proper noun, only the first word should be capitalized.

I've been trying to create new article following that rule, but since you keep moving them to articles with Initial Capital Letters, I figure we should update the rule. That rule comes from Wikipedia via English language use in articles, so need to at least try to explain why. So do you have a reason or are we just codifying my bad habit of poor naming practices from the early days of the wiki? Tjoneslo (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2017 (EDT)


I think this is subjective thing. I've mainly policed it to keep it consistent.

  • We now have thousands of articles and I am not enthused to update one way or another.
  • I know what the other wiki does from my days there.
  • I also come from an MLA background, which is different from Chicago School...
  • I am open to discussion, but the idea of updating everything makes me cringe.
  • I already know that the sectors that have been previously entered will eventually need updating. So far, I have pushed forward with newer materials so there is a baseline from which to update /further edit worlds. It's harder to start from scratch than get someone to modify existing material.
  • We're partners on this, one way or another, and your opinion is very important to me.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:56, 28 October 2017 (EDT)

I bring up Wikipedia because it is likely, as we attract new contributors, that they, like you and I, will have experience with Wikipedia or other wiki's and their rules for formatting and style.

One of the issues you've brought up to me on several occasions is the unwritten rules of the wiki. So I'm trying to address them by ensuring we're in agreement on what they should be, and make them written rules.

My strong preference is to update the articles to be consistent with the existing rules. This is work I'm willing to take on.

If you find the inconsistency between naming styles for article as I, very slowly, update them, we can come up with a plan to address that to.

But since you are very reluctant to have the articles updated, I wanted to discuss updating the rule in the Manual of Style. Since it would be different from many of the other wiki's which new contributors would likely be familiar with, I would like to explain why.

Tjoneslo (talk) 10:12, 29 October 2017 (EDT)

I am open to change and update, I just dread doing it.

  • I have personally entered and updated thousands of worlds, established baseline articles for much of the OTU, and continue to plug away at it. It's worthwhile but time-consuming.
  • I really appreciate what you do and that work is invaluable.
  • What I want more than anything else is to create an encouraging culture, not the old grognards dumping on each other and newcomers. I would like to see us grow into an encouraging and inspiring community.
  • By all means, let's update after we work out a plan together. I think that your goods work is invaluable and any future interstellar economics work will invariably be based upon the foundation that you have laid by synthesizing various Trav versions.
  • I am mostly focused on building a community, expanding our possibilities through discussion with the publishers, and laying a foundation to help us link to and expand to the Trav Map.
    • That mostly gets channeled into developing new product and supporting those who write it.
  • Thank you for all that you do and that you have done. I never what to lose sight of your immense contribution.
  • It's mostly the two of us right now, building this thing out. Sky's the limit. All ideas open. I am leaving your goods articles alone the best I can resist since I recognize that you are exploring new ways to do things, and knowing you, they will be better than what we currently have.
  • I really don't want to be locked into the ways that the other wikis do things. I've seen a lot of it degrade into crudola.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:30, 29 October 2017 (EDT)

Thomas, I have been reviewing your inquiry and I still think you make very valid points. I have spoken about this matter with a number of members of the Inner Circle and also other fans.

I still think that using "Title Case" (All Caps For All First Letters) rather than "Sentence case" (Front cap only) is a better choice. It also happens to be a choice used by a number of the Traveller periodicals. The Travellers' Digest, Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society, and Challenge all predominantly used this style. I realize that the mainline wiki uses a different style, but I think we are best cleaving to Traveller tradition in this matter. I realize that there are plenty of exceptions within Trav literature.

  • You are of course welcome to use whatever style you wish for your future published products. I am very willing to put an edit moritorium on all goods files when you are close to publication so you can have things exactly as you want them. We can discuss details when you are ready to do so and closer to publication.
  • I also want to mention that in the course of updating periodical files, I am noticing a number of goods that lack articles. FYI.
  • Thank you for your inquiry. I owe you one as usual.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 15:36, 3 January 2018 (EST)

Categories for Rule of Man and Second Imperium worlds? (2017)[edit]

Is there a reason why we have a two categories for the Category: Rule of Man worlds and Category: Second Imperium worlds? Since they are the same thing shouldn't we have only one category for this? Tjoneslo (talk) 12:11, 18 November 2017 (EST)


Will respond later.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:41, 18 November 2017 (EST)

Same question about Category:Ziru Sirka worlds and Category: First Imperium worlds. I figure we should have one policy for all the categories.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 21:54, 18 November 2017 (EST)

I built in that redundancy to cover either base depending if Marc shows a later preference.

  • It's easier to have a choice and put in up front. Much easier to pare down later.
- 22:44, 18 November 2017 (EST)

I am confused. That does not sound to me to be an ideal way to set Wiki policy. In my conversations with Marc, he always seemed to be an easy going guy. So I'm trying to find a consistent policy we can explain.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 08:00, 19 November 2017 (EST)

I'm running around crazy this weekend (...giving several lectures and a keynote), but I'll kick this out quickly:

  • Why not emulate Marc's easygoing nature then? Why not ease up on it yourself?
  • Is there any reason why both can't exist? What are your compelling reasons why they can't? Are those reasons overwhelmingly important?
  • I believe in redundancy, accessibility, preservation, and synthesis. Those are values that I express heavily.
  • I am also discovering that when it comes to Traveller, I am a structuralist. You have some elements of that thought too. We're both compulsive as well.
  • I applaud your effort to find a consistent policy we can explain. Thank you.
  • By the way, you did some very neat work with the atmosphere page. My compliments to you. I need to run for now.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 12:40, 19 November 2017 (EST)

This wasn't an immediate problem. So thank you for taking time from your busy weekend to address it.

In addition to all my other fine qualities, I dislike duplication. I find it causes confusion and problems. In this case Category:First Imperium worlds has 2195 articles, whereas Category:Ziru Sirka worlds has 623 article. Similarly, Category:Second Imperium worlds has 2319 articles, and Category:Rule of Man worlds has 2325 articles.

I also dislike solving problems more than once. However we end up solving this, I never want to have to go through two categories with 2000+ entries to find the small set of differences. I absolutely never want to ask anyone else to do it either.

But like I said, this isn't an immediate or pressing problem. I am working on a solution to make simple changes to many articles all at once. So I would like think about this, come to an agreement about how to address it, make sure we never have to solve it again, and fix it once.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 21:18, 19 November 2017 (EST)

Thinking ahead is often a better solution that coming behind. An ounce of prevention...

  • If need be, I will make all of these corrections myself. You needn't worry about that. I input most of those and I will fix them if need be.
  • Welcome.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 07:36, 20 November 2017 (EST)

Order of parameters in templates (2017)[edit]

In Nushilii you reorder the template parameters into alphabetical order. I prefer you leave them in the order the values appear in the infobox. It makes finding and updating them easier. Because the parameter names and titles are not the same it’s hard to make sure the correct field is updated. It also provides a second confirmation of which parameter is being changed. Tjoneslo (talk) 16:07, 8 December 2017 (EST)


Let's re-order the template then.

  • And either make the names or titles match or otherwise make it more user-friendly for people not trained as we are, as superusers.
  • If you explain how your second confirmation of which parameter is being changed, we can find a way together to make it user-friendly for you, me, and others.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:42, 8 December 2017 (EST)

In Template:Animal, the fields are currently laid out following the recommendations from the T5 Core Rules. How should we re-arrange or rename the fields so they follow your requirement of being in alphabetical order?

The second point is some people use visual layout to track which values go with which parameters. So Body Shape the parameters in display order are:

|size = 
|stance =
|length = 
|profile = 
|mass = 

Which matches the layout of the final display. So it becomes easy to see and understand that if you fill out the first field in the group, the value goes in the first field in the Body Shape section. The second parameter goes into the second field, and so on. Regardless of the name. So this encourages the less sophisticated users to understand where the parameter values go, and how to match the names to what shows up in the final article. The idea of mapping names and values that can be arbitrarily rearranged is one of those items that confuses new people. Tjoneslo (talk) 20:35, 8 December 2017 (EST)


In that case, just ad a vertical bar in-between section to make it easier to read by eyeball.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2017 (EST)

My point is the order of parameters within the group should be in visual order. Tjoneslo (talk) 10:07, 9 December 2017 (EST)


You have my blessing for what it is worth. I want to get along with you. We just think very differently. Thanks for consulting me.

  • You are doing invaluable work, which is appreciated by me.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:12, 9 December 2017 (EST)

Thank you for taking the time to consider my proposal. I know you are quite busy. Tjoneslo (talk) 12:25, 9 December 2017 (EST)

Equipment entry text (2017)[edit]

Is there any way I can ask you to please stop re-writing the equipment entries. When you spend the time to write entries the results are great, they work well. But these changes are not as great, and I keep putting them back to make sure they look as good as possible for the final book publication. Thanks.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 18:57, 18 December 2017 (EST)

Which are the details you don't care for?

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2017 (EST)

It's not a specific detail, but rather the general idea of trusting me to have these entries edited to a good standard. I have these in a good, but not perfect, state and your reverting the changes I find disruptive. Tjoneslo (talk) 20:14, 18 December 2017 (EST)


I absolutely trust you and I will help you compile a master document with exactly your stylistic preferences before you are ready for publication. But I keep the master file here stylized in a certain way based upon a large amount of feedback from publishers, fans, and referees. That's what a master editor does.

  • We all agree to the merciless editing that is written into the wiki. Myself, very much included.
  • If you want, we can create a daughter publication in the drop box to account for whatever your preferences may be.
  • I very much appreciate all that you do here at the wiki. Your legacy is quite awesome and still growing. Thank you.
  • I am going to assume that you will want to add entries for image, caption, and mfg (manufacturer).
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 07:20, 19 December 2017 (EST)

The entire point of the project is a demonstration the wiki is a source of high quality, publication ready, content. So the wiki is my master document.
  • You are telling me the wiki can't support a variety of stylistic preferences?

Tjoneslo (talk) 08:17, 19 December 2017 (EST)


No, I am not telling you anything.

  • I am not your boss. I only ask you things sometimes.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 18:40, 19 December 2017 (EST)

"Merciless editing" should be a rarely used option, not a default state of addressing article changes.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 19:54, 19 December 2017 (EST)

I agree. It's a good thing that I almost never use that option except for with a very small minority of changes.

  • Why did you and others establish that policy?
  • Otherwise not telling you what to do. Sorry.
  • My policy is of cooperation and collaboration with you except where what you do runs over the work of others.
  • Badmouthing those with whom you work very infrequently engenders cooperation.
  • They are just stylistic differences for the most part, but there is a reason for them.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 07:22, 20 December 2017 (EST)

The "If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will," line below the edit box comes as part of the default Mediawiki installation, which in turn comes from Wikipedia. If we don't like the statement, and the policy it implies, we should decide what the new statement and policy should be. The text can be updated as needed.
My problem with your current article style definition is it is too narrow. I understand the desire of people, none of whom are contributors, to have a better wiki to read. But there really can be a broader set of permissible styles for articles that still meets the ideal of a readable wiki.
- Tjoneslo (talk) 08:09, 20 December 2017 (EST)

Thank you for your comments.

  • Interesting to learn the default setting that the original wiki team decided on. Thanks for sharing it.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:06, 20 December 2017 (EST)

I'm just confirming you are refusing to consider expanding the writing styles allowed in the wiki articles to other than the ones you write. Tjoneslo (talk) 19:26, 20 December 2017 (EST)

Please consider this to be non-confirmation.

  • Everything is open to discussion and consideration.
  • There are many styles present at the wiki.
  • You know how to get ahold of me when you are ready to seriously talk.
  • I recommend waiting until you are calm and collected and not focused on hostility.
  • Wishing you well.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:31, 20 December 2017 (EST)

Well that clears that up. Thanks for your feedback. I look forward to working with you further on this project. Tjoneslo (talk) 19:49, 20 December 2017 (EST)

Back at you.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:50, 20 December 2017 (EST)

Updating the older world articles? (2017)[edit]

In the T5SS emails you indicated that you had completed the process of creating world articles for all of the imperial sectors. Did you have a plan to update the articles you did initially? For example, the template on Moolly (world), and I'm quite sure the rest of Zarushagar Sector entries, are very much out of date from the current world format. Tjoneslo (talk) 06:49, 21 December 2017 (EST)


Yes. Want to help after you finish Dag to the format that you have chosen?

  • My next big astrographic goal is to put down baseline entries for the Solomani.
  • I might change it around if one of the developers has need of other data first.
  • I haven't put concrete dates on those tasks yet. I stay flexible as much as possible.
  • Adie is also coming along in his development.
  • And Mongoose has lots of plans for next year.
  • What are your future goals, Thomas?
  • Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 07:38, 21 December 2017 (EST)

My big project for the next year is gettingTraveller Wiki Equipment Archive book done. The order of processing for this is:

  • Finish a pass of the existing articles to update to formatting standard and initial writing.
  • Do a pass through the T5 Core Rules book to make sure I have everything from that book and all the references are updated correctly.
  • Work through as many of the images as I can find and update the wiki articles with them. Also do a second writing/editing pass of the articles.
  • Archive the articles in the book. Send around for feedback.

Other projects include:

  • The Dagudashaag sector updates. I'm about 2/3ds done with that.
  • A number of smaller wiki updates and cleanup projects
  • The upgrade of the wiki software. I have a few new extensions to add during the update that ought to add some interesting functionality.
- Tjoneslo (talk) 09:17, 21 December 2017 (EST)

Thank you for sharing.

  • Happy Holidays!
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 11:59, 22 December 2017 (EST)

Re Dagudashaag updates, are the Ziadd minor human race now canon? The Minor Human Race list says yes, but the Ziadd article, she say no.

Alagoric (talk) 06:06, 1 January 2018 (EST)

The precise definition of Canon is sometimes fluid, but to the best of my knowledge, yes they are. Some of the Signak-GK material (like the Ziadd) got an unexpected boost from non-canon to canon because it was used in the T4 adventures.

- [User:Tjoneslo|Tjoneslo]] (talk) 07:33, 1 January 2018 (EST)

Yes, they, the Ziadd, are canon. I agree with Thomas. He speaks authoritatively on this issue with much experience.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 07:57, 1 January 2018 (EST)

Thank you, appreciated.

Alagoric (talk) 14:28, 3 January 2018 (EST)

Ht and Lt trade classification changes (2017)[edit]

I noticed you changed the text on the Ht and Lt trade classifications from the text we agreed upon. Can you enlighten me as to the reason for the change? Tjoneslo (talk) 20:48, 31 December 2017 (EST)


I will get back to you later. Thanks for your inquiry.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 23:23, 31 December 2017 (EST)

Previous discussion: Forum:Trade classification: Ht and Lt. Tjoneslo (talk) 20:34, 1 January 2018 (EST)

Thank you. We're probably better off using Mongoose codes in the Mongoose manner.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 11:49, 2 January 2018 (EST)

Does this include not using them for world articles outside of the Milieu 1105 and OTU charted space (e.g. Distant Fringe)? Tjoneslo (talk) 13:02, 2 January 2018 (EST)


I haven't broached that with Adie yet, but the codes would not work well in the Fringe since he is using a different technological paradigm. His realm is less advanced than Charted Space.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 13:05, 2 January 2018 (EST)

Use the TL template, not TL links please (2018)[edit]

Please use, or leave, the use of the Template:TL, and don't use the TL links. First the TL template creates the correct links, second it does the formatting correctly. Thanks.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 15:18, 13 January 2018 (EST)

Why? The TL-9 type works just as well.

  • Why, in your opinion, is it better?
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 15:20, 13 January 2018 (EST)

The two reasons mentioned above. The template creates correctly formatted links, which is not apparent with the link setup. Second, it creates links to the correct page(s) as needed. It's also the standard used in the wiki.
- Tjoneslo (talk) 15:23, 13 January 2018 (EST)

Thank you for your advice. Much appreciated

  • The TL template is not longer the standard used in the wiki. It's now an optional choice.
  • It's no longer the default. It is certainly still permitted.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 15:26, 13 January 2018 (EST)

Thomas, please explain why how the TL template benefits you in detail?

  • Can't the goods template count the TL for you?
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 15:43, 13 January 2018 (EST)

The Template:TL is designed, like all of the text expansion templates to ensure the layout, formatting, and links included in the wiki all follow a consistent standard. They exist to make contributors work easier and simpler.
The current format of the Template links only to the Technology Level page. I have noted you were re-arranging the Technology articles. I wasn't sure if you had completed that work to the point where I could update the template to link to the correct pages. Where would you like the template linked to? I noted there is, for example, a TL-1, a TL:1-3, and an Ur-Tech article. Where is the correct place for the template to link?
- Tjoneslo (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2018 (EST)

Thomas, you mentioned a consistent standard. What is that consistent standard?

  • I lack your time as an administrator here, but I haven't noticed too many standards.

The TL pages are all arranged now, but need further development.

SEE:

So TL should be linked by level. TL's 1, 2 , and 3 go to TL:1-3 and so on and so forth.

  • Each Technological Epoch has a name for its tech and various other names that mostly correlate with canon publications.
  • There were gasps o those were filled in. And not just by me. Rob and Marc have also named some of the TL groupings.
  • Some groupings such as TL-0 count as both a TL or an AGE as well as an EPOCH.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 17:24, 13 January 2018 (EST)
I've updated the Template:TL to link to the correct articles. This will help encourage the correct standards of use. Thanks. Tjoneslo (talk) 17:53, 13 January 2018 (EST)

Thanks. We really need to find a way to communicate better. We can do a better job of this.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 17:54, 13 January 2018 (EST)