User talk:Nebulous Maestress

From Stardew Valley Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This is Nebulous Maestress's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Nebulous Maestress.
  • Sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
  • Put new text below old text.
  • Be polite.
  • Assume good faith.
  • Don't delete discussions.

Charging vs. Powering Up

Thank you for keeping the language of the wiki consistent across all relevant pages. I can see that the issue was important to you, and you've made a clean sweep of changing things. Well done!

One of my concerns in reverting the original edit was in translating the term -- the wiki exists in 12 languages, several of which have already translated "charge" or "charged" into their native language. I don't speak any of the other languages, so I can't carry the changes through to the other wikis. I don't suppose you speak any language other than English?  :D margotbean (talk) 15:34, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

I am a native English speaker. I can speak some other languages, but it's been eons since I had to write. Especially at the level of trying to wordsmith/fine-tune content. So I'm inclined to think my time is better spent ensuring that the English content is accurate.
Also, I wanted to say that I appreciate all the time you spend patrolling edits -- I know it's a never-ending thankless chore, but it does make a difference. Keep up the good work! Nebulous Maestress (talk) 02:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure it's realistic to expect the other languages to be straight translations from the English wiki. In fact, I'd expect that most have made contributions and philosophical decisions that might be useful to compare with the English wiki. Maybe I'll read other versions of some of the articles (like Fishing; do I dare?) to find out. Tom Haws (talk) 06:04, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Hay

I see that you're determined to update the English wiki, but I must advise that you cease making these changes. The cascading changes across the other wikis would be substantial, and in my opinion aren't justified. I understand you feel that Hay needs its own page, but we can make changes on the Animals page, and refer to other pages as necessary. At the very least, changes of this magnitude are normally discussed on the talk page first. Thus, I'm going to be reverting the changes, but I appreciate your hard work and desire to make the wiki better! margotbean (talk) 17:37, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

The english-language wiki can't be held hostage by the fact that there are other versions. The fact is that readers of translated wikis know that the primary-language version is always the most up-to-date. If they're interested in getting comprehensive information or checking whether the translated version is missing information, they will always go to the primary-language wiki. That's why links to other languages exist in the sidebar. Therefore the top priority should be making sure that the primary-language version of the wiki has the most comprehensive and accurate information possible. Wikis are meant to be edited, not be preserved in some stale, out-of-date format just because a minority of the readership wants the convenience of reading an exact translation of the stale version of the page.
In any case, I'm stopping. I'll check back in and see what's been decided in a few days, or whenever real life gives me another chance. Nebulous Maestress (talk) 17:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
This discussion really belongs on the talk page for Hay or Animals, but I'll respond here. The magnitude of changes across pages in 12 wikis for this particular change don't justify it. We need to have a balance between keeping the English wiki up to date and giving translators a fighting chance to keep up. All the information about hay can be added to other relevant pages without disturbing one of the basic mechanics of the wiki, the name template. A few days off isn't going to change that. margotbean (talk) 17:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Really it belongs on the Admin Noticeboard as part of a general discussion of what wiki policy should be. Because the details of the specific page are completely secondary -- your only objection is that other language wikis will have to be edited. In any case, you're the one who started the discussion here.
Plus, what justification is there for treating me like a vandal and blindly reverting everything I just did? Regardless of where the content is, pages should link to the article Hay not use a link to Animals#Food. Otherwise why even bother to have a redirect?? And why reinstate a note on Wheat saying that the effect of Golden Scythe needs to be verified when I just said 'confirmed in code that Golden Scythe has no effect'. I'm completely closing my browser after this before I notice some other petty detail that's just going to make me even more irritated and disillusioned with this wiki. Nebulous Maestress (talk) 18:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
The Admin noticeboard is not for edit disputes. You are free to contact the Admin Katzeus on his talk page or on the official forums for that purpose. margotbean (talk) 18:48, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
I've just realized that perhaps we have two very different views on whether edits replacing Animals#Food with Hay are fundamentally correct. From my point of view, those replacements are so obvious they don't need explanation; they are completely non-controversial replacements that should be made per WP:R and WP:NOTBROKEN (e.g., redirects to article sections should never be bypassed). Is it possible you're instead saying that those link fixes are incorrect, "substantial" and/or need to be discussed first? Since when does there need to be a discussion about whether to follow established decades-old wiki policy?
Basically, I'm not aware of any reason why edits such as https://stardewvalleywiki.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=Desert_Trader&curid=9342&diff=99008&oldid=97335 shouldn't automatically be reinstated. Nothing you have said so far explains this revert, and I believe a clear explanation is warranted. Nebulous Maestress (talk) 02:43, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
This isn't wikipedia, and I've already given the reasona for the edit reversions. margotbean (talk) 05:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
Nebulous, as a former WP editor myself, I think all your reasons make sense, as do the WP policies. And I happen to agree that Hay should have a page to itself. There is a lot of info about it, and that info ought to have its own page as the connecting point. Distributing it around other pages does not make organizational sense.
Despite all, however, we must consider that this wiki has neither the editing, nor administrative, nor translation resources that WP does. Margot can be authoritarian in her control of the wiki, and is doing so now. And I don't say she's always right. At least, I disagree sometimes. However, she has comprehensive knowledge of this wiki, and the resources that keep it going. And I have repeatedly seen her authority shut down actual abuses or ill-advised changes by less skilled editors. I don't think this wiki has the human resources to be as fully devoted to policy controls as WP, but I know it needs the same kind of protections, and I see no recourse but to resort to moderator authority. I would say Margot does very well over all, keeping on top of a heaping load of work to deliver a functioning wiki for a huge set of fans. I hope you can see that if it causes us a little personal discomfort occasionally, that's preferable to seeing a steady slide into unusability. I'd urge you, who definitely know how to do many things well, to stick around, even if only to observe for a while. Or poke into past activity. The issues here are not always as obvious as they seem at first look. Butterbur (talk) 07:43, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe the shortage of human resources could be solved by making more good faith editors into moderators or admins and letting things get a bit messy for a while. This isn't Wikipedia, but Jimbo Wales knew how to harness dabblers (dilettantism) into an astonishing workforce. Tom Haws (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Welcoming committee
  • Arbitration committee
  • Mediation
  • ... ?

Tom Haws (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Been there. Done that. And I'm less impressed than you seem to be with the results. Good solid ideas on paper, but only as effective in practice as the people involved. The early (best) contributors began to bail out nearly 10 years ago. I hung on longer, but ..... My opinion sure, but I'm not alone. Butterbur (talk) 07:12, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Since you said "10 years", I assume you are talking about Wikipedia. Needless to say, I am less jaded than you are. The durability of the Wikipedia content (it hasn't devolved into nonsense) stands as an incontrovertible monument to the vision and leadership of Wales. Maybe I am younger (53) or not. :-) And that's okay. Everybody is different, and I am happy to do some of the above. Or fade away. I am still very much in the investigation/evaluation phase of my relationship with Stardew Wiki.Tom Haws (talk) 07:05, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
I see Stardew Wiki as a major success that has nowhere to go but up. Primarily, I see a potential role for it as a gathering and clearing place for all the Stardew Valley resources of varying utility and credibility out there: Strategies, Walk-throughs, Tools, Calculators, Web apps, Calendars, etc. Stardew Valley Wiki is really the natural hub for it all. But only if it has leadership that can handle such a fearsome thought. Tom Haws (talk) 07:05, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Well, just one thing: "jaded". You're off base there. Experienced, yes. Just because my experience does not match your opinion, it does not mean I am jaded. And I stand by what I said: I am not alone in my views. And also for the record, I have no argument with Wales. I have said little, and I intend to leave it that way. Don't read your own ideas into my comments. I'm leaving it with: I am not impressed with the results of the Wikipedia experiment. I reserve my reasons to myself. Butterbur (talk) 04:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Another thing, if you're willing to consider it: you are younger - I am 68. We may both speak very much as adults. I'm glad you're still "evaluating" this wiki, only because I'm certain you have the ability to contribute - not because any evaluating has much value. A wiki is only so good as the sum of its contributions, however it is run. Contributors are people, and every person has faults, weak points, and points of failure - say it how you will. I do not except myself, nor anyone. It is a universal. The only real question is how we treat each other when we do fail. All the "expecting" and "holding to high standards" I see everywhere around me so prevalently does not assist anything. As you "evaluate", consider if bothering to do so helps. I find that "showing", "suggesting", "discussing", etc are much more effective. Wikis are naturally cooperative. You will not always get your way - none of us do. And how much we can help is going to be dependent on others. Consider what you want to do in light of that. Hope this helps. Butterbur (talk) 14:55, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Butterbur. (And apologies, Nebulous Maestress, for cluttering up your page.) I just need to be sure this isn't a toxic place for me to be. That wouldn't do anybody any good. That's why I am keeping my distance very cautiously. There's plenty of other Stardew Valley meta play (work) that can be done, and it's more healthy for everybody if I focus most of my efforts where they are most fruitful. Tom Haws (talk) 23:42, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
And thanks for your reply, Tom. I understand, especially about toxicity. I play this game. And I play at editing this wiki. That's as much as I want, but I do notice things and make corrections that are useful, and I benefit also because I like to use the wiki myself. I've grown to dislike ambition of most sorts, finding it leads so often to aggression. Fruitful is sweet, and won't grow in bitter ground. So your direction looks sound, and your caution is only prudent. But we must also cultivate the soil we grow in. May yours be fertile. Butterbur (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
And thanks for the loan of your page, Nebulous. Butterbur (talk) 04:26, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Foraging Percentages

Could you provide references for the percentages you added to the Foraging page (and the Crocus and Sweet Pea pages). What do they mean?

  1. x% of all forageables spawned on the map will be that item
  2. there is an x% chance this item will spawn each day
  3. there is an x% chance this item will spawn at the start of a new week
  4. something else

If you could explain how you arrived at the calculations and provide a code reference, that would be great. One reference per table heading for the Foraging page would be enough, please don't add a reference to each item individually.  ;) Thanks, margotbean (talk) 01:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

They mean "x% of all forageables spawned on the map will be that item". They're based on the info in Data/Locations.xnb, which is processed by Object::spawnObjects. I've renormalized all the numbers to sum to 1 (the raw data in Locations.xnb doesn't always sum to 1). Forest Farm map is handled completely differently: it's in Farm::DayUpdate (if Game1.whichFarm==2). I'll work on adding this info in a more polished form to Foraging -- but it might not happen until after dinner. Nebulous Maestress (talk) 01:51, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
I've realized that adding references to the Foraging page will create problems on the seasons pages, since they transclude sections of Foraging. If/when you work out a code reference, the seasons pages will each need a references section added to avoid creating errors. margotbean (talk) 16:12, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

ClearWaterDistance

Hi! I am putting this here so you get a notification, and you have been involved in these disucssions before. I have modified one of my personal mods to print the values of clearwaterdistance taken directly from the rod, along with the current co-ordinates of the bobber. I have put some screenshots here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bct5FGj6Z0z1ziCMjqS2EExqqgaatiYAIHKlPDjBAho/edit I believe I have included the tiles I believe you were referring to in the fishing strategy talk page. I believe this proves the accuracy of the fishing distance images I put together, but would appreciate a sense check if you don't mind and have time. Can you please confirm that these are the tiles you were talking about? BlaDe (talk) 09:05, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Template Rewrites

I'm assuming anyone who notices this message has already realized that I've been making a bunch of changes in the template namespace... and might be wondering what's going on. The biggest motivator is to optimize templates for porting to other languages. But there's also some general refactoring, minor new features, merging redundant/repeated code, etc.

I've been toying with bits of this for a while, but I felt it was time to move forward when I contemplated how to port an edit like this revision to the other languages. Only a miracleworker (e.g., margotbean!) would be able to meticulously and accurately make that set of edits a dozen times over. I like to code, meaning I'd rather spend a month coming up with some universal automated/code-based way to fix something instead of a few hours hand-copying the information.

So what I'm proposing is writing templates so that the main body of the template is exactly identical on every wiki -- all the language-specific details are handled in the first dozen-odd lines of the template. Which means porting a new revision should be possible with a single cut-and-paste operation that replaces everything below the translation section.

I'm implementing this idea via heavy use of the Array extension. It allows me to define all the language-dependent strings at the top of a template. And it also allows me to implement some automatic translation-type capabilities -- to make it so that the seasons template, for example, can recognize the english or german names for the seasons equally easily on the german wiki.

Most of the edits I'm making shouldn't really make a difference to endusers/what's displayed on wiki articles -- yes, the insides of the template are really different, and I'm adding new features/arguments here and there. But it should all be backwards-compatible. The one big scary edit that will be the grand finale to the fireworks show will remove a huge chunk of Template:Infobox. Which should only result in cosmetic-type tweaks here and there. But if it has disastrous effects somewhere, please let me know (and if necessary revert Infobox to the previous version).

I have already been experimenting with these templates on the german wiki, so I think most of the obscure details have been worked out. I think they're working pretty well, and are at the point where I need more eyes looking out for strange anomalies, as well as feedback. So feel free to let me know what you think.

(By the way, it will probably take a few days for all wiki articles to actually get regenerated using the new templates. I'll be going through previewing/purging pages to trigger immediate tests). Nebulous Maestress (talk) 23:51, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Fish size/quality table

Morning/Afternoon. Do you mind moving your fish size and quality change to your user page? Quite often i direct people to it, and it would be easier to find there.BlaDe (talk) 20:02, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm guessing you mean the table at Talk:Fishing Strategy#Full Equation Predictions?
I've also found myself pulling it up at various times (e.g., when checking what size/quality fish are possible in the Submarine), making me wonder whether it belongs on the Fishing Strategy page in some form. But I know it needs to be more self-explanatory before doing that, which will take a bit of effort. So copying it to my user page is probably a good quick fix. Nebulous Maestress (talk) 21:01, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Perfect. Much easier to direct to!BlaDe (talk) 21:38, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
I use your table all the time, I actually have a copy without all the fish size info bookmarked. It's great work, even if you are the only person who cares about the fish size part of it. Slimer (talk) 00:57, 14 September 2020 (UTC)