Yes, that's the link.
I make sure to check the forums every couple of days (unless I'm in the field) so you can PM me here.
You can revert edits, but be sure to always leave an edit summary.
CKII Wiki
- Thread starter Meneth
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I make sure to check the forums every couple of days (unless I'm in the field) so you can PM me here.
You can revert edits, but be sure to always leave an edit summary.
Get it.
Cheers
Still i'd like some clarification on the earlier case, if possible.
1. Is trivia not allowed at all only not when unsourced?
I ask, as i probaly wouldn't have said a thing when it had the link to a picture of the mentioned library,
even though that still wouldn't prove that claim to be correct und could be nonsense, but being fully
unsourced was the no-no and fnal trigger for me.
I'm just curious.
2. In your edit summary on the great works page you said "No other trivia on page". Other trivia ?
Now i wonder what the other trivia is than the one deleted ?
I just find it confusing.
The questions are not intended as an annoyance.
Here, I pulled the Library Parliament of Canada image from wikipedia and compared it to the great work file for CKII.
- 1
- 1
@SolSys
Question on editing the Wiki
A page is up to date, but still appears not to, as it has
a) the "Pease help with verifying..." box on the right, despite me editing the current patch 3.3.5.1 in.
Should that not not appear if everything is fine ?
How do i change this ?
Should i enter "Timeless" instead or delete that part ?
b) the page is categorised at the bottom as "Potentially outdated".
How do i change that ?
Question on editing the Wiki
A page is up to date, but still appears not to, as it has
a) the "Pease help with verifying..." box on the right, despite me editing the current patch 3.3.5.1 in.
Should that not not appear if everything is fine ?
How do i change this ?
Should i enter "Timeless" instead or delete that part ?
b) the page is categorised at the bottom as "Potentially outdated".
How do i change that ?
The version tags only use major versions so in the above example you would write it as being under version 3.3.
- 1
Ahhh, i see that answers both questions.
Thanks. I updated the recently edited music_modding page accordingly.
All fine now.
I didn't know about the major patch.
Now that i looked again i saw it mentioned here
Template:SVersion - Crusader Kings II Wiki
Template:Version - Crusader Kings II Wiki
Crusader Kings II Wiki:Versioning - Crusader Kings II Wiki
Maybe i also misunderstood someth.........oh, now i read the links again.
So going by the Versioning page, the standard Template is said to be for the whole page, while Template S is said to
be for each section. Then why does the SVersion page talks of major patches, while the standard Template page
speaks of specific versions ? Shouldn't it be the other way round ? Err......a bit confusing. The S Version doesn't seem to work either.
I suppose the practical differentiation between the templates never became practice or so ?
Oh, i suppose "expansions" in Parameters refers to "major patch". Yeah that's not that intuitive...well not to me.
Anyway....
Err.....while i would appreciate a response, it doesn't appear required
and i can see that the pages were probablywork-in-progress or so and barely relevant anymore...so,...thanks for reading.
Cheers
The wikis use major patch versions only -- meaning only the first number after the decimal dote (not related to expansions).Ahhh, i see that answers both questions.
Thanks. I updated the recently edited music_modding page accordingly.
All fine now.
I didn't know about the major patch.
Now that i looked again i saw it mentioned here
but not in either of those, so that's why i might have missed it :Template:SVersion - Crusader Kings II Wiki
ck2.paradoxwikis.com
Template:Version - Crusader Kings II Wiki
Crusader Kings II Wiki:Versioning - Crusader Kings II Wiki
Maybe i also misunderstood someth.........oh, now i read the links again.
So going by the Versioning page, the standard Template is said to be for the whole page, while Template S is said to
be for each section. Then why does the SVersion page talks of major patches, while the standard Template page
speaks of specific versions ? Shouldn't it be the other way round ? Err......a bit confusing. The S Version doesn't seem to work either.
I suppose the practical differentiation between the templates never became practice or so ?
Oh, i suppose "expansions" in Parameters refers to "major patch". Yeah that's not that intuitive...well not to me.
Anyway....
Err.....while i would appreciate a response, it doesn't appear required
work-in-progress or so and barely relevant anymore...so,...thanks for reading.
Cheers
The Version needs to be set to the lowest SVersion tag on the page. It is done manually and is not an automatic process.
Not sure i understand/can follow fully, but it's all good, i'm fine.
I understood what's necessary.
Thanks
One more question please.
I wrote two comments in the discussion section on the page on my former now fixed issues, which are now superfluous.
Shall i delete these comments now or let them stand ?
It was also never really clear to me how the discussion section is supposed to work, respectively what it is intended for,
other than by making my own assumptions.
Last edited:
Leave them -- others might have had the same questions. Also, please sign your comments with ~~~~.
The discussion page is just for that -- discussing the page contents, be it asking questions or planning on how to netter update the page and so on.
- 1
Understood. I was just wondering as question most often don't get responses and i thought maybe it's intended as questions or suggestions to moderators and that something's not working as intended, but apparently not. Good then.
Signed the comments as well now.
Cheers
I've been unable to search for anything on the wiki. I keep getting this message, and it's been at least four days now. Any idea what's going on here?
- 1
Issues with a broken search result had been around since before christmas, i'm afraid.
Though i stil do get results for pages called the exact same as the search term, but no more search results as in pages that 'contain search word'.
Would like to see this fixed as well.
I had contacted @SolSara on the 19th and she said "a fix will be delayed for until after the holidays".
Now if that are swedish holdays i read it's quite common to extent them to the 10th of january, so today.
So maybe fixed in the next few days ? Hopefully.
Any news on this @SolSara ?
Last edited:
- 2
I don't work for Paradox so you tagged the wrong user here. I can't help you with this but maybe @DebbieElla can.
EDIT: I think you want to tag @SolSys here.
- 2
- 1
Yes, thanks for the heads up (and hope you are doing well @SolSara).
A fix should be applied before the weekend. I'll check the schedule again to be safe.
A fix should be applied before the weekend. I'll check the schedule again to be safe.
- 3
- 1
Oops. I'm sorry. Yes i wanted to tag SolSys.
Hmm...either mixed up names in the head or accidently selected the wrong name from the list when tagging.
Nevertheless, thanks for taking the time to respond and clear that up.
- 2