Templates with an indication of the shortcomings of the article are somehow usually indicated at the top, or in sections with flaws. In addition, moving the template to the top was for me the designation - did I correct the templates and categories in this article or not.
For the life of me I cannot figure out why this template is not working properly. I haven't changed it, but I did make an exact copy of it and called it "Test Infobox" and then entered both templates on my Sandbox page with the same data. The Test template appears to pick up all the parameters, but the other one does not.
If you don't mind, I am going to temporarily delete the current template and re-create it with the same code. I don't know if that will do it, but I'm willing to try.
Just wanted to check with you to make sure you knew what I was doing. If it doesn't work, I'll send a help request to Fandom staff.
For better clarification, I added a third example in my sandbox which is a copy of the code on the Dragonsdawn page.
You can notice the issue in two ways depending on which Editor you use.
1. If you use the Visual Editor, when you double click within the template area, you'll get a pop-up box that allows you to enter the parameters. When you do that for the third example, you don't get all the parameters that are in the template. However, if you double click within the template area of the second one (which is for an exact copy of the template code but saved as "Infobox Test", you get all the parameters.
2. If you use the Classic Editor, you edit infoboxes by hovering your mouse over the template area and selecting either
Edit" or "Delete" that appear in s pop-up. When you hover over the third template on my sandbox, you DON'T get the "Edit" option. Yet when you hover over the second template, you do. Once again, this is the same code, just on a different page.
This is what I have found frustrating.
This may have happened when someone tried to convert the template to the new Portable style and you reverted it.
Oh, unexpected difficulties! It really needs to be resolved, but I can’t help with anything. I am editing only in Sourse editor. All I can say is that I did not use the automatic transformation of the template, but I wrote the whole code myself (well, I could just copy some of the code from the Infoboxes of the Holds or the Weyrs).
In the following line of the Template, right after the word 'Story', there was a string of 3 ASCII characters that was throwing everything off:
| type = <!-- Novel / Short Story / Anthology / Accompanying / Game / Other -->
The three codes were:
226 â 128 € 142 Ž
The source editor wouldn't display anything in their place so the text appeared to be normal, but when I copied the source into a separate text editor I got a message that there were unrecognizable ASCII characters.
There are two types of Master in a crafthall: a Master Crafter (in the Harpercraft this a Master Harper, Master Singer, Master Archivist), who is higher ranking than apprentices and journeymen / journeywomen, and a Craftsmaster, who is in charge of all things relating to that particular craft (in the Harpercraft this a Masterharper, in the Smithcraft this a Mastersmith).
I understand that your question is related to the corrections in the articles of Kalvi and Hegmon and how I determined who of them is who.
In the novel, Kalvi is called the chief or head of engineers - a position corresponding to the Craftsmaster before the introduction of the system of Crafts.
asked Kalvi, chief of the mechanical engineers
“Master Kalvi,” and he bowed courteously to the head engineer,
Hegmon is not even called a Master, just "Hegmon". The assumption that he is a Master is made from his activity - creating a new wine grade, his personal representation at the meeting and the attitude of the Lords towards him as an equal, which would not have been if he had been an journeyman or, especially, a apprentice.
Kizan and his wife are present at the meeting together with other Craftmasters and Lords, so at least one of them is the Craftmaster of Fishercraft (shipmasters belongs to this craft). Cherry is young, and her behavior is not like a leader, unlike Kizan. In the end, we get him as a Craftmaster, and she's just a crafter "shipmasters".
By the way, the woman green rider is not a Weyrwoman. She is the usual dragonrider. Weyrwoman status is exclusively for golden horsemen. Head - senior Weyrwoman, the rest of the golden riders - the junior Weyrwoman.
Hi, I wanted to thank you for cleaning up my edits. I have done most of my editing at the Doctor Who wiki, and the rules are very different here, so I am slowly learning my way here. I have been taking note of your corrections to my edits so I can start making the correct edits.
You write articles and decorate them almost correctly - it's already good)
And sometimes I forget to do some of the details myself, all at once you will not remember, especially with the characters' articles everything is rather difficult. I'll get to them only when I finish with the Crafts.
Hi, I'm aware that Hoyle and Wickramansingh are real people and their theory is real. I created the pages from redlinks that someone else had put on the List of characters in The Chronicles Of Pern: First Fall page. I don't have a problem with deleting the pages for Hoyle and Wickramansingh.
I do think that we need some kind of page for the theory, though, since it's mentioned in both The P.E.R.N. Survey and Dragonsdawn as possible sources of thread. Links to wikipedia are fine, but isn't it better to keep people here on this wiki instead of sending them somewhere else?
Links to the pages of these characters are very few, their significance is extremely low. Anyway, articles about Hoyle and Wickramansingh contain absolutely identical information about them from books and do not contain personal biography. The article on the theory will also repeat this information. What about the making of an article about the theory:
describing the theory in it
mentioning the scientists ("Hoyle" and "Wickramansingh" links to make redirects to theory)
and in the article mention that they are real people and the real theory, referring to Wikipedia?
In this case one article will cover all three concepts. And this will allow the reader to choose, get acquainted or not in more detail with these concepts on a third-party resource.
What is the copyright in terms of the main background image. I would like to make use of it on a non-profit making website. The page will not be available to the general public, only to a few friends who I give the password to.
With my reduced availability to properly administer the Pern Wiki, I think that it is best that you be given Bureaucrat status. I will still be available to monitor vandalism and answer questions, but my role as an editor and day-to-day adminstrator will diminish.
Please feel free to take over 100% of the administration and direction of the Pern WIki. I'll be here in the background if you need me.
Thanks for all your help and I wish you the best. Maybe someday there will be a Dragonriders of Pern Movie or TV series, and if that happens, you will be very busy and may find that there are some folks that will want to help you out.
Thank you for your confidence. So far I can not be as active as I was earlier because of the birth of the child and participation in a long contest event, but I follow the updates on this wiki every day and continue to think about upgrading the structure of the Crafts.
By the way, I tried to explain my vision of the structure of articles about crafts in the guide, including categories articles for craftsmen (because of which there were some problems). I would ask to see and evaluate it, and, if necessary, propose changes.
The Pern Wiki is not going anywhere... Just remember (and promise) to return when you can. I'll try not to make too many changes during your "vacation". I'm looking forward to you ideas on the main page re-design - it is kind of stale right now.
Discussions are built in the manner of Twitter. I do not use such services, I'm not used to it. By the way, it so happened that I'm not present on the projects, who are widely used Discussions and do not have experience in using them.
In general, I have a negative attitude towards the discussions, I prefer the Forum.
The reason I asked is because I came across this on the Fandom Community Central page about Forums. It doesn't say when, but the Forum system will be phased out and replaced by Discussions.
As of November 2016, it is not possible to enable Forum on communities where it is not already in operation. The newer conversation feature Help:Discussions is gradually being released across the Fandom network, and content from Forum will be migrated to Discussions. Ultimately Forum will be fully retired as a feature.
I know that there are a lot of things to do to set up Discussions, so I'm going to start learning about it on other sites. I like Forums too, but I want to have a better understanding of how to administer the Discussions system.
Yes, I know that forums promised to disable everywhere, but on many projects it is used quite actively. In any case, I do not think this will happen soon. Start to study Discussions now - are a good idea.