User talk:Random-storykeeper

RE:RS-3K has a request
Sure, you can have it back. It's not like I'm strongly against you having your admin status back. -- 22:59, December 15, 2013 (UTC)

RE:RE TS
We never reached a consensus on that, as only two people voted. Also, I tried to do that, however, it became an enormous amount of work, as I had to get a lot of full URL's for images, and that wasn't easy. I think I'll open another forum topic regarding the situation, as I find it's just a lot of work to port the main page over to the fan fiction wiki. -- 17:01, December 16, 2013 (UTC)

RE: References
Thanks, I do try to reference blog posts and such when information can be interpreted as speculation. Adding the dates is a good idea, as well as standardizing the citation format. Shall we create a forum? --  16:26, December 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we should probably wait a bit. From what you told me, I imagine the template having a few parameters.  The first would be the type of citation (blog, tweet, etc.), the second would be the link to the reference, the third would be the title of the reference (if applicable), then the fourth and fifth would be date posted and the date accessed, respectively.  The template would use switch-case statements to filter this information and create a citation.  Does this sound good?  --   22:51, December 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha, that's okay. I pretty much realized that ref tags wouldn't work right after I added them.  If you want to change the template at all, feel free to.  So far I only made blog and Twitter citations, but it's really easy to add more types.  --   02:01, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

RE: AvatarWidget
If you need help, let me know. It's on my to do list to write a documentation page for that.  Sim533 I can agree with the case sensitive words, I see what I can do about it. But I have to keep in mind that about 60 avatars already use the template. About the ID's: I shall not change these in words or abbrevations. The point is, Nitrome also uses theses ID's. Using the same ID's makes it easier.

I have been thinking too about making a compact design, but have to keep a lot in mind too. There are a lot of restrictions that I need to keep in mind. I had a tabbed view in mind, but the idea doesn't meet all the restrictions.  Sim533
 * I can help with the design if you need help. 15:33, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * The case Sim used for the template parameters is called camel case, and it is actually more consistent with general programming practice. --   16:52, December 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ooh okay I didn't know that but since most of our parameters use all lowercase it might be wise to do the same for the rest of the wiki. 19:59, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * In reply to the Id's: Go ahead and find a little bit experience of HTML anchors before thinking that abbrevations would be better instead of ID's. Looking at the future, there will be alot of avatars that fall into the same category. How big is the chance that these will end up with the same abbrevation. How funny will it be if somebody uses the same abbrevation? I'm also looking forward to the point that the wiki can use these ID's. Now, we cannot, but at the future I think it could be. I support the ID's, simply like that.  Sim533


 * Ok, I got it. I was thinking you wanted to use new abbrevations to link to the avatars. I see what I can do. --Sim533


 * Maybe you could just make a reference chart for avatars and their respective IDs. --   21:03, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Inactivity
Do you know what could have happened to Nobody? Usually he edits everyday, but he's inactive since the 21th. 20:13, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know why I asked you, I guess I'm too impatient sometimes. xD 20:23, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Chat tags
AnimatedCartoons updated his script, but the updates don't seem to work. Maybe re loading the js?

--09:48, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Hi! Talking time! :-)
OK. But I prefeer answer in other´s profile, because if I answer in my profile, the other can not know I answered him/her :) Superyoshibros20 (talk) 10:15, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

RE:RE:Uploading errors
I knew I couldn't replace a JPG with a PNG, so I tried uploading a new photo. So, well, I guess Ayernam was right! 19:49, December 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay, I just saw your message on his talk right after I posted mine. So much for trying to help. 19:58, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Overlapping definitions
Because if obstacles harm you, they are considered hazards. And if hazards can be enemies, well, we can completely replace Category:Enemy with Category:Hazards. Yes, you are right about your definition of obstacle, however, if it is harmful, it falls under being a hazard.

Enemies are more different than hazards in that enemies move around and generally can perform much more actions than hazards. I don't agree with hazards being a specific type of interactive object, as I wouldn't consider hazards to be interactive in that they harm the player, as using this, couldn't practically everything be considered interactive objects? -- 01:21, December 30, 2013 (UTC)


 * If a hazard harms "the player", is this not a form of interaction? To interact means to have an effect on something. Hazards interact with the player by harming them, usually on contact. This is how the player interacts with them... 07:56, December 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * We use categories to help the readers, but if we're going to set some exact and concrete rules, we could say eveything is just interactive objects, even the main character, because it moves when you press the keyboard. I agree with Nobody. 11:11, December 30, 2013 (UTC)


 * But why not...I mean, everything fits into a "General" category and we don't categorize everything under there, right? I elaborated more on NOBODY's talk page, but the notion would be to tag with page with the most specific category only. Games and their genres would be a separate issue altogether. I didn't really use this to say we should redo our category structure, but rather to make it simpler to define the terms and their characteristics if they are based on one another. 19:28, December 30, 2013 (UTC)


 * I like what RSK said on NOBODY's talk page, in terms of categorizing game components. I also agree with using the most specific category for an article.  For convenience, here are the general definitions RSK gave, in a sort of "category tree":


 * Interactive object - an entity that can have a direct or indirect effect on the character
 * Hazard - an interactive object that causes harm or potential harm to the character
 * Enemy - a life-like hazard that is capable of attacking the player
 * Obstacle - an interactive object that is specifically designed to prevent the character from passing through it
 * All we have to do is determine how far a game component goes down a branch of the tree. When the component has reached the end of a branch, and it cannot be moved to the next branch because it does not fit those qualities, it stops and receives that category.  Sort of like taxonomy, actually.  Does this make sense?  --   22:55, December 30, 2013 (UTC)


 * Are you talking to me or NOBODY? It seems understandable to me, and you've explained it quite clearly. 01:02, December 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * I was talking mainly to NOBODY and Santi. --   17:32, December 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ayernam. -- 01:54, January 4, 2014 (UTC)

Forum policies plz?
Hey, would you be up to writing a policy page (or perhaps would it be manual of style?) for the Forums? Some things that need to be included in it are who is allowed to close forums, how to open a forum topic, archiving forum topics after they are closed (if that goes), how to reply on a forum topic with ::, etc.

You don't have to do this, it's just that I'm pretty bad at writing up this formal stuff, and you seem to like to? do a lot of policy-type-page writing.

Thanks,  19:09, December 30, 2013 (UTC)


 * Sure, but that probably won't happen for a while. (Manual of Style is for proper formatting of mainspace pages. You don't have to outline a specific format for forums. :D) I was actually in the midst of writing a policy page for images, which I put on Nitrome Pixel Love Wiki, though I probably won't be finishing that for a while. If there's something specific you want to see on this page you want written, just let me know. Or you could look at some other wiki's image policy pages just to get an idea of how it should be presented.  19:35, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

...
Y U jinx my js? Now I gotta go change my js page... :P 23:55, December 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * Your awesomeness was simply meant to be shared. 23:59, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

RE:U maek fun of mee
Yeah, I didn't actually know what to put for that one... It was a stupid question and I really wanted to delete it... 18:21, January 2, 2014 (UTC)


 * I would move it to Forum:Nitrome Discussions, unless you plan on archiving threads there, too. (It could be messy, but I don't know if that's what your intention was.) 06:02, January 4, 2014 (UTC)

RE:Overlapping definitions + Paraphrase please
Yes, hazards do interact with the player by harming them, which I believe I overlooked because, although they do interact, hazards effect the player by always causing loss of health, while interactive objects never cause the player loss of health by objects present on the interactive object.

Yes, interactive objects can cause loss of health by the interactive object forcefully pushing the player into a wall or into hazards, however, this is different from hazards in that hazards are harmful on contact. Also, your idea about "all pages are only categorized by their most specific category", and your definitions of categories, I agree with.

However, if your definitions are used, would this require having to replace or change the classification of certain pages? Changing the categories of pages with dual categories would be okay, but what I'm asking about are pages with single categories. Sorry for the late response.-- 01:55, January 4, 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Pufflesrcute (talk) 06:35, January 4, 2014 (UTC)