User talk:AmbientArchitecture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] A welcome from Sango123

Hello, AmbientArchitecture, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy editing!

-- Sango123 (talk) 23:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

[edit] Changing usernames

According to Wikipedia:Changing username, you can only be renamed to an account that does not exist. If you would like to list yourself under Wikipedia:Changing username#Requests to usurp an existing account with no edits, feel free. However, please note that there are no guidelines yet for handling such requests. Regards, Sango123 (talk) 17:08, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I've followed your suggeston and sumbitted my request to have User:AmbientArchitecture moved to User:Aldaron. AmbientArchitecture 21:45, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Since bureaucrats currently cannot fulfill your request, you'll need to wait when (and if) it's possible in the future. Regards, Sango123 (talk) 23:24, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox Game

Hi! I notice you've added a BGGID parameter to {{Infobox Game}}. I'm uneasy about this for a few reasons:

  • It's a duplication of effort, given the {{bgg}} family of templates.
  • It's inflexible; many games have different BGG IDs for the different editions, and some articles cover families of games rather than the games themselves.
  • There are a few wikipedians who regard BGG links as linkspam - see Wikipedia talk:Counter Vandalism Unit/Archive 3#HELP!. I'm not one of them, and I for the moment the consensus is against them, but promoting the BGG links outside the external link section might fuel their arguments.

I haven't reverted your edits; instead I've matched the style against the equivalent IMDB ID section from {{Infobox film}}, whose existence is probably the best argument in favour of the parameter. But, given I'm among the most pro-bgglink wikipedians and I'm uneasy about it, I think it's probably best to discuss this on the template's talk page. See you there. Percy Snoodle 09:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Your changes make sense. I like the idea of matching the style with the equivalent IMDB ID section from {{Infobox film}}. I personally don't buy any of the arguments against it, and even if they had merit, I'd counter that the usefulness of providing the link outweights the objections. AmbientArchitecture 13:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

What's the reasoning behind the 'sup' change, whatever that is? This again seems to radically decrease usefuless. AmbientArchitecture 14:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Now what you did originally -- and your arguments about "inflexibility" and "duplication" -- makes more sense to me. It's not really a different mode of use, but different functionality altogether. What your doing is more akin to citations or a jump to a list of references, while what I was trying to do was simply to provide the BGG ID for the game specified in the title of the article, along with a like to the corresponding article on BGG as a convenience. You should continue to evolve the latter as you wish (as bggxrefs), I've reinstated the former (as bggid) as I originally intended it. I've also reduced the importance of both by making them smaller and putting them at the end with footnotes, which seems more in keeping with some of the issues you brought up initially. (See Carcassonne for an example of both in use.) AmbientArchitecture 17:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ẏstari Games

Hi there. I'm the author of the article Caylus. Why did you change all occurrences of Ẏstari Games to Ÿstari Games? I cannot find any mention of the company's name spelled with a Y with diaeresis, only Y with dot above. If you don't mind, I'm going to change it back, unless you can find some sources that show the other spelling. Thanks! --Che Fox 05:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

It's a compromise: Y with dot above appears as a box in most browsers. Change it back if you like, but be aware that to most readers that will convey less, rather than more, information. AmbientArchitecture 14:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
I would rather add {{SpecialChars}} than present incorrect information. Would you be okay with a link to Template:SpecialChars? --Che Fox 16:22, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
On second thought, we could also use {{unicode|Ẏ}} (Ẏ) to force Internet Explorer to use the correct font. I've tested this, and it displays correctly in IE 6 on Windows XP. I'll make this change. --Che Fox 16:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
OK. I created {{Ystari}} which emits {{Unicode|Ẏ}}stari Games when called with no parameters, and {{Unicode|[[Ẏstari Games]]}} when called with any parameters. Let me know how it looks; it should be working in IE now. --Che Fox 16:59, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Looks great. Nice solution! AmbientArchitecture 01:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox Game

Sorry, I should have left an explanation on the discussion page. I just thought it made the infobox more readable to have footnotes left-aligned rather than a center-aligned. Maybe that's not too significant, so if you feel otherwise, feel free to revert it. Grimhelm 21:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Meeples

Fair point about distinguishing between pigs, builders and others, but this is an encyclopaedia article rather than a ruleset - it's of no real use as a means to resolve obscure ruleset disputes, so any careful avoidance of "follower" seems misplaced. I think it's reasonable to sacrifice some logistical clarity in order to keep the article in line with the game's official wording, and to maintain an encyclopaedic tone. (It feels a bit like opening an article about mosquitoes by saying that they're colloquially known as "mozzies", and then going on to refer to them as that throughout.) --McGeddon 03:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

See my reply. AmbientArchitecture 03:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Meeple is a colloquialism - if the rules never use it, then it should be easy enough to write an encyclopaedic article that doesn't use it either. And it looks like we're getting there if we only really need to use the word once, outside of quote marks. I've only played Builders and Traders a couple of times, so don't really know the game well enough to make any bold edits, but how about changing "placing player's meeple" to "basic follower of the placing player"? --McGeddon 05:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Try thinking of it this way: if the game rules refer to the peice as a "follower", then somebody who hadn't played any of the expansions would be confused by the wored "meeple" appearing in its place. Also, if they are indeed different only in the rules and are physically the same piece, wouldn't it be easier to avoid this whole conflict and add a footnote stating that "The followers are often referred to as "meeples" because of minor rule differences between expansions."? Ahudson 18:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
See my reply. AmbientArchitecture 19:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unacceptable behaviour

AmbientArchitecture, further to the requested move at Talk:German-style board game, you have solicited votes on boardgamegeek. This is unacceptable - I quote from Wikipedia:Sock puppets:

"It is considered highly inappropriate or unacceptable to externally advertise Wikipedia articles that are being debated, or where one wishes to stir up debate, in order to attract users with likely known views and bias, in order to strengthen one side of a debate and influence consensus or discussion. It's also inappropriate to invite "all one's friends" to help argue an article. Advertising or soliciting meatpuppet activity is not an acceptable practice on Wikipedia. "

I am not sure what the next step is here - perhaps you would like to comment on the Talk:German-style board game page? Percy Snoodle 14:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure the policy you cite applies. I simply asked an informed community to contribute to a discussion that was clearly uninformed. I have no stake in this other than improving the quality of Wikipedia and my purpose was simply to engage a group that has relevant information. My purpose was not "to stir up debate, in order to attract users with likely known views and bias" but simply to encourage people with relevant and informed views to have a say. The question at hand is, after all, "what do people call these games" -- this seemed a pretty straightforward way to answer that question. If it is truly Wikipedia policy to prohibit such discussions, then, I will certainly post a message on the thread on BoardGameGeek asking users there to withdraw their posts. AmbientArchitecture 14:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
It's my belief that it is - note that the policy states "It is considered highly inappropriate or unacceptable to externally advertise Wikipedia articles that are being debated, or where..."; your intentions are not at issue - buty all means seek another opinion. Percy Snoodle 15:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, the policy, as written, clearly states that one's intentions are relevant.
The policy states only that it is inappropriate to externally advertise an article (either currently being debated or where one wishes to stir up a debate) if the advertisement is done "in order to attract users with likely known views and bias, in order to strengthen one side of a debate and influence consensus or discussion". AmbientArchitecture 15:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, your first post reads "Hurry and stop them!" - which is definitely an example of "in order to strengthen one side of a debate". Percy Snoodle 15:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
If you knew "The Geek" you'd know that it's just as likely to have the opposite effect: they're an argumentative bunch!
I suggest we put this to rest. Remove your warning and let the debate continue. I think you're getting a lot of useful information that will help answer the question that we're all trying to answer. AmbientArchitecture 15:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
For the most recent example: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/114139 "Poker legislation - take action" which didn't exactly have BGG users jumping in with support for the original poster's plea. However I agree the "hurry up and stop them" does kind of make your case a bit of a challenge. (Sorry.) Anyway the thread's off the public lists now I think. --61.68.61.239 09:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC) Joe Grundy
No need to apologize. My post was indeed provocative; but its intent was to get knowledgeable people involved, not to influence the outcome (there's no way to do that on BGG, as both the contributions here and the thread you cite demonstrate). If my intent had truly been to violate the rules that Percy cites, posting on BGG would have been one of the last things I'd have tried! AmbientArchitecture 14:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but I don't buy the reverse psychology argument for a second. Your intentions are clear; if you were inviting debate, you'd have said "please join the discussion" not "Hurry and stop them!". Percy Snoodle 14:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
On Board Game Geek?! I think not. Anyway, what next? How can we wrap this up? AmbientArchitecture 16:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
I have requested a third opinion since it doesn't look like we're close to any sort of agreement. Percy Snoodle 20:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello; I am writing to offer a third opinion on this matter. To the best of my recollection I have never previously conversed with either Percy Snoodle or AmbientArchitecture.

Advertising a Wikipedia debate is highly inappropriate (and sometimes unacceptable), regardless of the intended crowd the advertisement is meant to draw.

Had the original post read something to the effect of "this discussion is in need of informed opinion from both sides of the issue", then this matter would likely be a non-issue. However, the "hurry and stop them" post was quite inappropriate, and a violation of WP:SOCK.

AmbientArchitecture: I believe it would be appropriate, as you offered initially, to write a follow-up post indicating something to the effect that your initial post was in error and that if anyone wishes to contribute anything further to the debate, he/she should be fully aware of Wikipedia guidelines and policy first. If you are willing to do this, I feel that no further action needs to be taken in this matter. --AbsolutDan (talk) 21:02, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Done: I've amended the original post, so that readers see the warning from the start. AmbientArchitecture 21:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm happy. Percy? --AbsolutDan (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Sounds OK to me. Thanks very much, and thanks also to AmbientArchitecture for the amendment. Percy Snoodle 07:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox Game

I've replied to your comment on my talk page. Percy Snoodle 06:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I've put up a section on the template's talk page so that you can discuss Down10's edits there. Percy Snoodle 08:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh - while I'm at it, thanks for creating Ur 1830BC - I've been hoping someone would for a while. I think with a tiny bit more fleshing out, it might make a good Did you know? candidate. Percy Snoodle 09:32, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Moving a Page?

If you feel it's appropriate, go ahead with the page move. Just keep in mind to comply with Wikipedia:Naming conventions. Regards, Sango123 21:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations

Greetings! After a long period of discussion and consensus building, the policy on usurping usernames has been approved, and a process has been set up to handle these requests. Since you listed yourself on Wikipedia:Changing username/Requests to usurp, you are being notified of the adopted process for completing your request.

If you are still interested in usurping a username, please review Wikipedia:Usurpation. If your request meets the criteria in the policy, please follow the process on Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. Please note that strict adherence to the policy is required, so please read the instructions carefully, and ask any questions you may have on the talk page.

If you have decided you no longer wish to usurp a username, please disregard this message. Essjay (Talk) 12:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This message delivered by EssjayBot. Please direct any questions to Essjay.