STOWiki talk:Community portal/Archive07

From Star Trek Online Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive of STOWiki talk:Community portal.

  • Please do not edit this page!
  • If needed, direct any comments to the current talk page.
Discussion archives

Infoboxes/Tooltips on set pages[edit source]

What do we need to do in order to get the tooltips working again on set pages. Example of one that used to work Quantum_Phase_Catalysts Asanad (talk) 00:33, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Could you elaborate? I see the infobox/tooltips fine. SFC3 (talk) 03:29, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
The popup is not showing. They used too. The information is there but the tooltip is not popping up. If you look at the STOWiki:sandbox of the wiki. All 4 of those should have a tooltip that pops up when you mouseover. The only one that does there is the shuttle and I don't know why. On some pages the deflector will show but the others have not. Its been a while since I messed around here so maybe I'm missing the obvious. Maybe its a caching issue the deflector was working in some places and now it isn't. Asanad (talk) 19:47, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
While this should already be fixed, do you have your language settings set to anything other than "en - English"? There was a bug related to that in the past. If you're using another language setting, please try "en - English" and see if the tooltips start showing up again. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 00:09, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
I also noticed this on "Ship weapon nav" table template at the bottom of weapon articles. Most infoboxes there pop-up on mouse over, but there is a pattern where icons which have their article (of the same name) redirecting to a set page, won't pop-up infobox. I have "en - English" under settings. --Damixon (talk) 00:27, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
For example, [[File:Hangar - Elite Class F Shuttles icon.png]] showed correct infobox which pop-up on mouse over (It didn't had its own article). Once I redirected Hangar - Elite Class F Shuttles article to Hangar - Class F Shuttles#Hangar - Elite Class F Shuttles it showed infobox of Hangar - Class F Shuttles/Info (instead of elite variant of that hangar pet). After that I redirected Hangar - Elite Class F Shuttles to Test and [[File:Hangar - Elite Class F Shuttles icon.png]] no longer showed any infobox on mouse-over. --Damixon (talk) 00:51, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Nice good catch. It does seem to be related to the redirect on the original item page. I removed the redirect for Sol Defense Deflector Array and the infobox pops up on the set page and everything as its supposed to. Asanad (talk) 07:19, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes, TippingOver checks to see if the linked page is a redirect, and if so, it looks up the title of the page that redirects points to and uses that to determine where the tooltip should be. That was a requested update for Hearthstone Wiki. The feature can be shut off, but the setting isn't in our configuration utility right now. I'd have to file a ticket, and I doubt it'd be handled until after Labor Day. Just consider carefully, because unfortunately right now, it's either on or off for all links. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 20:47, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
So what are the options exactly? Turn this new feature off and it goes back to as it was. Which is the way they were all set up originally or what it is now where the tooltips do not work on pages with multiple items on them. How can we with TippingOver be able to get tooltips to work for each individual items on a page? We could just remove the Redirects but that would cause other issues with links/searching etc. Is there anything on this wiki even uses TippingOver? Asanad (talk) 22:41, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
All the tooltips use TippingOver. And that feature was introduced quite some time ago. The options are what I said; this feautre is default in TippingOver, but optional. I just don't have direct access to the setting currently. I have to file a ticket to get it changed, and with this being a holiday weekend, I don't know how quickly it'll get addressed. That's why I want to be sure losing this functionality isn't going to cause trouble. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 00:56, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Thats what I'm curious about, what is using TippingOver for tooltips. Looking at the suggestionbox when tooltips were first added STOWiki_talk:Suggestion_Box#Item_tooltips it was some sort of script that was similar if not the same to the one on neverwinter. In there you can see where it started for the redirect/Info page was setup for the set pages. I don't know how to use TippingOver for a tooltip. The only way I know is the way you originally setup and it seems that's the way everyone has been doing it as well. Asanad (talk) 02:25, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
TippingOver has fully replaced that script here, so it's used exactly the same way. This was done because the script broke when we began supporting HTTPS, and then again when we switched to HTTPS fully. Unlike the script, TippingOver handles those configuration changes smoothly without any intervention. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 03:14, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Gotcha, I thought that might be the case. So just turning off that option in TippingOver would put us back to business as usual. Which, as you said, will be a few days due to holiday etc etc. Asanad (talk) 04:37, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

System Location Maps[edit source]

With the not so recent expansion of the Alpha Quadrant, maps created by Tuptrek and placed on almost every system page are no longer accurate. I think it might be the best if we scrap that idea and delete the maps from all pages which have them, but I wanted to discuss it with you before doing anything. --PiralDorrm (talk) 15:56, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I see no reason to remove those. It is safe to assume that quite a bit of work went into them and they still show the correct locations. --Dukedom (talk) 06:58, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Nominations for administrator[edit source]

It's long past time to promote some experienced officers to the administrative team. I'm aiming to promote at least three experienced STOWiki editors to the position, and I've started by nominating Damixon, SFC3, and PiralDorrm.

If they choose to accept the nomination, editors may vote on the RfA pages linked below to show support or oppose their promotions as per STOWiki policy.

Please note that voting isn't open for a nominee until his or her RfA page is marked as "active." Once active, it will also show instructions for making your vote.

I'm not setting a closing date for the vote yet partly because I don't know if all three will accept, and partly because I may yet be contacting additional candidates. (I'll also add this to the sitenotice after at least one nomination is accepted.) oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 10:18, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations to the candidates for their nomination! Kind regards, Markonian (talk) 15:18, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
I've decided to set a closing date of Tuesday, September 12 for Damixon and SFC3's nominations in order to have active admins more quickly. It's the earliest I can set under the admin selection policy: two weeks after they accepted the nomination. This does not mean I've decided against further nominations, and my goal is still to promote at least three, so you may still see more in the days ahead. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 23:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
MediaWiki:Sitenotice shows September 22 as a closing date, which doesn't match the date in comments here. Actual end of vote for SFC3 and me should be tomorrow (12th). --Damixon (talk) 11:46, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Herp derp, indeed.
Also, after considering things for a while, I'm going to set PiralDorrm's to close the 15th. I've decided against further nominations for the immediate future, even though I think there are other good candidates. Three is, I think, a good number for the time being, but even though I've decided to delay for the moment, I'm still strongly considering the merits of making one or two more nominations. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 13:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
With no opposition to speak of, I've promoted SFC3 and Damixon to community administrator. Congratulations to both of you. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 17:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you fellow wiki editors for entrusting me the administrator rights. I will do my best to support you with my new toolbox, containing shiny instruments that can maintain good condition of this wiki. Note that this doesn't give me any editing privileges so don't hesitate to dispute my edits if situation requires it. I'll monitor the admin noticeboard, but you can also pm me, or post on my talk page if attention is needed. I really like editing here and still enjoy playing STO so I'm glad I could help. --Damixon (talk) 00:54, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
And with widespread support, PiralDorrm becomes the newest administrator. I'd like to thank all of you who voted for your input. This wraps things up for the time being. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 10:28, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks to all of you who voted. This wiki has come a long way since I first joined you, but a lot of work remains to be done. I'm happy to see that there are more active editors now. I look forward to continuing working with all of you. --PiralDorrm (talk) 13:46, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Deletions, deletions, deletions![edit source]

Hey all! First duty as admin is to delete all of the clutter/superfluous articles that just take up space - if you spot something please slap a "speedy deletion" tag on it. Thanks! SFC3 (talk) 00:33, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey there, and congrats on the promotion. I think streamlining is always a good idea, but I'm not entirely sure which kind of article you are referring to? Could you provide some examples? -- Tadayou (talk) 11:27, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Orphaned articles, blank pages, that sort of thing. SFC3 (talk) 21:40, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Wiki issues[edit source]

As you probably noticed, there have been issues on this wiki related to the aws migration. It has been happening across all wikis, and those are all known issues: pages taking +10 seconds to load, internal server error 500, 520, various cache issues - template still loading previous version after change was made, newly uploaded images sometimes load, sometimes don't, search errors or search auto-complete doesn't work, lock errors when uploading images.

I found an official response at gamepedia.slack by Alianin, one of the gamepedia wiki managers: "...We are actively fixing it. We've moved a 5 year old platform to a brand new host and all those configurations had to be recreated. We test and tweak as much as we can but sometimes there's still more tweaking to do until it's finally happy. Things will fully stabilize eventually but we'll have these blips until we get there. It'll happen sooner rather than later since the migration is fully done and we can now focus on the optimizations."

Its a bit annoying to edit at the moment so hopefully they fix it soon. --Damixon (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed something was wrong when I was editting earlier today. I thought the problem was on my end. Nevertheless, nice to hear someone's working on fixing it. --PiralDorrm (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Placement of Infoboxes[edit source]

I've noticed that sometimes infoboxes are placed inside a \Info subpage while other times it's directly inside of the page. Are there any guidelines for when to do either? There isn't any helpful information on the formatting guidelines, subpage guidelines, or the infobox documentation. Faleagawk (talk) 14:51, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Wiki guidelines and policies haven't been updated for years so we should probably do it at one point... Both can be used, there are no rules on when to put it directly on the page, and when to add it through /Info. Difference is, /Info will show a pop-up window on mouse over for icons and item names. When creating it through /Info subpage, add <noinclude>|nocat=yes</noinclude><includeonly>|nocat=</includeonly> at the bottom (before "}}" ) as we don't want to have infobox added into various categories. --Damixon (talk) 11:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Conversion from SMW to Cargo[edit source]

Due to ongoing performance issues with Semantic MediaWiki, we're looking at trying to switch wikis using it over to Cargo. As a preliminary step, I'm asking editors to double check to see if any templates you work with that use #ask, #show, #set, or #subobject are somewhere within Category:Semantics. It would also be helpful if all the Property pages are somewhere in there, and any Forms or Concepts that are being used, if any, would ideally be somewhere in there as well. (Basically, this will help me avoid missing anything when I start adding Cargo support.)

I don't have an ETA yet because we're working on certain issues with Cargo as well, and ideally I hope to have both running side-by-side for a while until we test output from Cargo in sandboxes first. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 18:35, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Just in case this is still needed, I have added Template:Dofficon to Category:Semantics - it uses #show. --Damixon (talk) 17:44, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Multiple pages for hangar pets[edit source]

I've noticed that articles for hangar pets have three separate pages for each quality. Should they stay that way, or would it be better to merge them into one page? Faleagawk (talk) 22:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I agree that they should be on one page. Something like I did for Hangar Pet/Class F Shuttles, but I wasn't sure if that was the best way to name the page - what do you think? --Damixon (talk) 22:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
I'm fine with hangar pets being in a subpage, but should the hangars themselves get their own stub page? Faleagawk (talk) 00:44, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
I'm all for this, making pet pages similar to the current layout of Hangar Pet/Class F Shuttles. We can just redirect Normal. Advanced, and Elite pages to the main Hangar pet page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SFC3 (talk · contr)
Also, should it be "Hangar Pets", or "Carrier Pets"? While vendors refer to them as hangar pets, the descriptions refer to them as carrier pets. Faleagawk (talk) 01:13, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
It's an anomaly. everything cryptic puts out via blogs calls them hangar pets for hangar bays. SFC3 (talk) 01:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
I've created Hangar Pet/Epoch fighters and put changes to the hangar page in the sandbox let me know if you have issues with either. Faleagawk (talk) 18:34, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
I prefer what you added to sandbox over the Hangar Pet/Epoch fighters, because it has all info on one page. This way we can just redirect [Hangar - Epoch Fighters] (and advanced+elite variant) to Hangar Pet/Epoch Fighters as SFC3 mentioned. Also, I like the table on Hangar Pet/Class F Shuttles so maybe it can be used for Epoch fighters hangar subpage - maybe below the intro text you added to sandbox, above the TOC. --Damixon (talk) 15:35, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Quick Links on Main Page[edit source]

Hi! Long time reader, first time caller. I would very much appreciate it if we could add Starship Mastery to the quick links section on the main page. T'would be handy! Delspaig (talk) 15:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Sure, we could add it under Starships. While we are editing the main page, does anyone have suggestion of any other articles that could be added or removed. For example, Endeavor System could be added to Endgame, while Small Craft could be removed from Starship section. Do we keep the current 3 rows, or we could go for 4 rows. Should we add Dominion ships, now that we are getting their faction? --Damixon (talk) 21:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
I actually had a few other ideas about things to add, but I straight up forgot them when I was adding the comment. There's definitely a number of things that I feel could benefit from adding though. Also, I'd say "yes" to Dominion ships, but only after VIL launches. 21:13, 17 May 2018 (UTC) E: this was me Delspaig (talk) 21:14, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Spoiler tag[edit source]

While it is best to avoid putting spoilers on the wiki for the first few weeks, sometimes it might be necessary. In that case, or if someone else has, I've knocked up a very basic tag so if someone is browsing and sees it, they can close the page before reading any further. Template:Spoiler Scientifictheory (talk) 22:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Awesome, that will be useful. We can remove those tags after certain period. --Damixon (talk) 22:46, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Hopefully they wouldn't be used too much. In terms of removal, I'd say we can consider most spoilers fair game after a month. But the big ones perhaps two (or when the next episode rolls out?). Probably when people start talking openly on the forums about it with no complaints.Scientifictheory (talk) 08:04, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

real startrek[edit source]

have any of you seen in a croud of people,people wareing startrek like uniforms? some of us have they point to the sky and then teleport up. we think it is a invetation to join them. The TDE that is the true federation of planets has sent out this invitation. All who wish to leve earth are invited to eather join a fleet crew or to live in peace on a colony planet in one of the distrectes without fear or war. TDE stands for TRANS DIMENTIONAL EMPIRE. there fleet of war ships will come to resque the Emperors son who is hidden on earth. The knowlage you have of startrek tec is close to TDE tec but instead of a worp core and worp drive they use trasn dimentional crystles in the trans dimentional drive that tears space time to be everyware and no ware at once. allowing travel and protection. he requires to know how many will need a ride ? Before the ships arive the one that is here is cloked and it is TDE5055. defender class. The future of the earth dose not have to be yours.

I haven't a clue what you're talking about, but please note this is a wiki regarding the video game Star Trek Online. Refrain from making further notes regarding conspiracy theories here. Thank you. SFC (talk) 16:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Weird template setup here[edit source]

For some reason, ever since I moved to a new PC, the template for this wiki has been kinda goofy - it's been kinda scrunched together, looking more like it's set up for mobile than a PC. And when I go to "Settings" to try and change anything, there's no settings to change. Am I missing something? Thanks, Joshmaul 18:51, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

That's usually the signs of a cache issue. Clear your cookies and see if the problem persists. Thanks. SFC (talk) 19:01, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
That did it, thank you. Joshmaul 03:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Automated Wiki Database[edit source]

I was talking with SFC, and he suggested I ask here. I'm working on the STOBuilds Automated Template, and one of the things I would like to do is be able to pull data from the STOWiki and populate a database with it; IE it'd go through all of the ships and be able to parse out the Bridge Stations, Weapon Loadouts, etc. I can handle the parsing, but I don't have a good way to bring in the raw data. I was hoping to get some ideas. Ideally, I would do this for Ships, Equipment, and maybe even traits and such. Then, anytime something is added to the wiki, it updates in the template. The real benefit is that the template can calculate all of the stats of a build, it just needs the raw data. I'm AKA TilorFire27 on Reddit. Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 20:11, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

This is an awkward time for trying to pull from the wiki. Currently, you might be able to somehow wire up a Semantic MediaWiki query somehow. (I'm not sure because I'm not entirely clear on what you're doing.) That would work for duty officers, ships, and traits, I believe, but I don't think anything else is set up through that. And the timing is awkward because there are still plans to switch all that to Cargo and uninstall Semantic MediaWiki here, so anything set up that way would have to be rewritten at some point. And that's the only data available in the kind of structured format you're probably thinking of for a DB of this kind.
Using a bot to pull each page's wikitext and parsing the arguments to the relevant template might be more stable since those templates shouldn't change that often, but you'd either have to make a custom module for a wiki bot such as pywikibot or whip something up yourself to use the MediaWiki API. And you wouldn't have any guarantee of specific data types since all template arguments in MediaWiki are just strings, so editors tend to treat them that way and may, for example, insert a note in a field you expect to be purely numeric. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 10:32, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Let's go with option B for Bot. How I would see that work is to set up the bot to either dump entire pages or just the "stats boxes" for each item, I'll use consoles for an example. I'd then parse the data using VBA/Excel, which is a programming language I am very familiar with, and dump the stats to a table, like X console has 20 EPG and 15 CtrlX. Then once I have a master list of equipment and stats for each piece, I'd be able to load that into my Google sheets spreadsheet calculator, where you choose your items and it tells you build statistics and possible performance. This would allow entering a build and comparing setups on the fly. I might even be able to take something like a site map full of links and just have some way to download the HTML for each page. Not 100% accurate, but right now I am manually entering over 600 items and have a list of over 400 ships that are also all manually entered. If that's going to be the easiest way to do this, I'll just keep slowly entering data. Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 11:11, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
When I saw "automated", I was assuming that would be pulling it on its own. If you just need to grab pages manually all at once, Special:Export will dump a XML file containing a bunch of page data from a given category, including each page's wikitext. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 13:39, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
I must say, That Special Export is exactly what I was looking for. That's an immense help. This is a huge boon to my project. Thank you greatly.Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
I know this has been a while since I last checked in, but I just started using the Cargo Tables and was hoping to find one for all the items in the wiki. I have two issues I have run into. First, there isn't a CargoTable for the Infobox. Second, not everything uses the Infobox. Are there any plans to update everything to Infobox? I got everything to work great for Personal/Rep traits and ships, but there aren't any for starship traits or equipment/items. Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 19:51, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
I just made this: Special:CargoTables/Infobox, if that is what you had in mind (if yes, any specific fields you need?) Personally, I don't plan to add infoboxes for starship traits, too much work. Can't tell for other editors here. Most of the equipment/items have an infobox, do you have an example of item without it? Btw. what project are you working on? --Damixon (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for making that! That's exactly what I need. I am still working on a form of build template that is automated, and these tables serve as a way to get that information automatically into a Google Sheets to then be put as dropdowns for filling out a spreadsheet. This will be extremely useful for just about everything we do over at STOBuilds on Reddit.Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 21:12, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Trait bug corrected[edit source]

Not sure this is the right place for it, but it seems the long standing trait reset bug (where your traits would be partially or completely wiped if you were flying a ship other than your own) that plagues missions like 'Sphere of Influence' and 'A Step Between Stars' appears to have been corrected as of 13 August, 2018. Should we bother noting that on each individual mission page or no? Carguy1701 (talk) 16:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

News RSS feed[edit source]

I have added News section to wiki main page to test how it looks so let me know if you want something like that on the main page. If you think it should stay there, let me know if there are any modifications you'd like to see. Currently it is limited to last 4 news that appear on website. --Damixon (talk) 14:28, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I like it. Great idea! --PiralDorrm (talk) 17:31, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
^ What he said. Carguy1701 (talk) 00:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the reply. Post below if you think it should have a different position on the main page. --Damixon (talk) 13:24, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Now that you say it, maybe switch places with the Upcoming section? --PiralDorrm (talk) 13:27, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
News is now above the Upcoming section. What do you think? I can't decide which is better. --Damixon (talk) 13:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
I think it's more logical now with "News" section (which will often contain articles about things happening this week) above the "Current and upcoming" (right now mentioning AoD which is not coming out for at least a month or two). But it's up to you. --PiralDorrm (talk) 13:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
True, it will more often have new info, compared to "upcoming section". Leaving it like this then, any other feedback is welcomed. --Damixon (talk) 14:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Tabber[edit source]

Should we merge weapons of same flavor on one page, similar like DanPMK did here? Some adjustment to weapon templates should be made, but I think it would look good. Anyone have opinion on this change? Also, are there any other pages we could implement tabber extension? --Damixon (talk) 20:31, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Was just going to ask this here today! I personally think it's great since it would condense the number of pages for each weapon type (making it more like an encyclopedia rather than a database) but the only problem is that, like with set weapons, the redirect breaks the infobox tooltips from showing on hover, which if we implemented this would affect almost every weapon on the wiki. Has there been any update on that? DanPMK (talk) 21:45, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Just saw it works now, awesome! I'm definitely in favor of merging them all now. The question now for me is, what should we name the pages. For example, for Bio-Molecular Phasers, which exist for both ground and space, should the articles be called Bio-Molecular Phaser (ground) and Bio-Molecular Phaser (space), or something like Bio-Molecular Phaser ground weapons and Bio-Molecular Phaser space weapons? or another suggestion? DanPMK (talk) 14:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Hm, can't decide. Maybe Bio-Molecular Phaser (ground) because it is shorter? --Damixon (talk) 15:47, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Although Bio-Molecular Phaser ground weapons is more clear that it is about ground weapons. --Damixon (talk) 13:01, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
How about Bio-Molecular Phaser Weapons (Ground)? SFC (talk) 14:32, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Sure, with "weapons (ground)" in lower case if possible: Bio-Molecular Phaser weapons (ground). --Damixon (talk) 15:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm somewhat leaning toward Bio-Molecular Phaser (ground), we will have several redirects to that page with more precise weapon name. --Damixon (talk) 21:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
I agree with Damixon, shorter name and most people will land via redirects indeed. DanPMK (talk) 23:53, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Check Corrosive Plasma (space) - page content is covered with one template so creation of these pages is simplified. I removed {{Ship weapon nav}} to make the page load faster (it is added as link under "See also" section). I still need to make an adjustment to console template. This is still work in progress so any ideas are welcomed. I know {{sw descr}} now looks odd on individual weapon pages, hopefully we merge these pages soon. --Damixon (talk) 18:44, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Need help here - Corrosive Plasma (space) page has the "Ship weapon nav" template, while Plasmatic Biomatter (space) is without one. Are you noticing any significant page load delay? I feel like Plasmatic Biomatter is loading slightly faster, but I need help with deciding if that is more important than having "Ship weapon nav" (table with weapon icons at the bottom of the page). Thank you. --Damixon (talk) 20:03, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Just visited the Plasmatic Biomatter (space) page. Wow, those tabs are amazing! Super-quick switching between weapon types. Can't compare it with the Corrosive one because that doesn't have tabs. Loads just like any other page. The tabs on Plasmatic B. (space) load as one page, i.e. tapping a tab does not cause a reload. Kind regards, Markonian (talk) 22:01, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Corrosive Plasma (space) should also have tabs, but maybe they were expanded until page was fully loaded. Can you double check? Thanks for your feedback. --Damixon (talk) 23:53, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
I re-checked. On the Corrosive page, the tabs don't appear at first, but the load after a while. Before they load, you see the beam icon, and below the other icon logos but no text for them. Then it loads to normal. Kind regards, Markonian (talk) 12:11, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Ok, if Plasmatic Biomatter loads noticeably faster, I'll follow that example for other space weapon pages. Thanks for your input. --Damixon (talk) 15:03, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Diplomatic orders bug. Help?[edit source]

Hi can anyone help me?

I've gone to the plateau of contemplation and it says i need to talk with the aide T'Pela, which I've done (She only says welcome), but the mission doesn't progress. I can talk to the ambassador but nothing happens and i can't talk to high priest Savin.

I've tried logging out, restarting the mission and restarting the game entirely but it doesn't change anything. Plz help. esolved an issue that prevented Vulcan characters from being able to proceed in "Diplomatic Orders" when speaking with Vulcan aide T'Pela.

Check the tomorrow's patch notes. If the issue still remains after, report the bug in-game or via arc page. Here it is: * Resolved an issue that prevented Vulcan characters from being able to proceed in "Diplomatic Orders" when speaking with Vulcan aide T'Pela. --Damixon (talk) 01:25, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Playable ship conversion from SMW to Cargo[edit source]

The playable ship semantics have been converted to Cargo, and I think I've ironed out the early mistakes. It looks like to me like they are functioning fine at the moment, but if you see any pages that should be displaying playable ship lists having any oddities like database or internal errors, or just anomalies or differences in the lists from before, please report them here. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 21:17, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Just when I was getting a handle on SMW. :P Looks good though! Is there a function to search for pages with a certain Cargo variable(?), similar to previous SearchByProperty? DanPMK (talk) 19:38, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Not specifically that I know of. There are just these three Cargo special pages as far as I know: Special:CargoTables, Special:Drilldown, and Special:ViewData. The last is probably the closest, but you need to be familiar with #cargo_query to understand how to use it. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 08:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Sci consoles are not showing up on the playableship table - mentioned here. Other things seem to be working fine. --Damixon (talk) 16:43, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
I couldn't find any errors in the code. Might have been fixed before I saw this. Right now, it just seems to be cache, so I have my bot forcing updates now. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 08:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
A variable was misnamed and it took a bit to propagate through once fixed, that was the source of that problem. Another problem I noticed is that it seems that ships with more than one "type" set aren't showing up in the playableshipsbytype template anymore, eg. the Warbird page has nothing in the Warbird Battle Cruisers section because those are all doubletyped, and they don't show up in the top table either. Should we look for a fix for this or would it be easier for me to just go through and specify a single type for each ship? DanPMK (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
But it seems Tulwar Dreadnought Warbird and other scimi variants are showing up on those table, although they have 2 ship types - no idea why D'deridex ships aren't shown there - something related to that ship type?. Also, I noticed if I want to call a ship by name, it won't show it if there is apostrophe in ship name (Vor'cha Battle Cruiser vs Temporal Light Cruiser):--Damixon (talk) 17:00, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Ship Rank Tier Hull  Hull modifier  Shield modifier  Fore weapons Aft weapons Can equip dual cannons? Console tac icon.png Console eng icon.png Console sci icon.png Ship Devices Hangar Bay slots Uni BOffs Turn rate Impulse modifier IR Cost
Ship Rank Tier Hull  Hull modifier  Shield modifier  Fore weapons Aft weapons Can equip dual cannons? Console tac icon.png Console eng icon.png Console sci icon.png Ship Devices Hangar Bay slots Uni BOffs Turn rate Impulse modifier IR Cost
United Federation of Planets,Dominion
Temporal Light Cruiser 1
Rank background icon.png
Lieutenant Rank icon (Federation).png
6 47438 1.375 1.175 5 3 4 4 3 4 Console - Universal - Ominous Device icon.png Lieutenant Commander TacticalCommander Engineering-Temporal OperativeLieutenant Commander ScienceLieutenant Commander Universal-Command 11.5 0.15 45 Special Requisition Choice Pack - Tier 6 Promotional Ship Choice Pack icon.png
These issues should be resolved once my bot runs finish up. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 21:16, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Tooltips will temporary stop showing after the MediaWiki upgrade[edit source]

A change in MediaWiki 1.31 breaks the version of TippingOver presently installed on Gamepedia. A new version should be rolled out soon after the upgrade (currently expected to happen tomorrow) which is expected to fix the problem. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 04:48, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Enterprise-F Bridge Layout[edit source]

Hi all, I am requesting any information/ pictures/ blueprints/ schematics/scribbles-on-a-napkin of the main bridge onboard the USS ENTERPRISE, NCC-1701-F (Odyssey Class). I've searched like mad, but I can't find anything showing the bridge's scale, dimensions, layout, etc. If some artistic soul has created an ENTERPRISE-F multi-level bridge layout, even without a scale, I would love to see it. I guess need to create something. Not sure what, a cgi drawing of my own, a diorama, something. I guess I'm feeling a Richard Dreyfuss kind of pull, or deep desire of having to create a physical model in my living room a la Close Encounters of the Third Kind! And I'm not smart enough to figure out the dimensions without blueprints.

I guess this request will fly in the face of the copyright issues I totally support and champion. Just asking for a taste if possible. If nothing can be shared, I'm cool with it and understand. Just had to ask.

Merry Christmas! Dan Dansst1 (talk) 17:49, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Imagine .......just starting out![edit source]

It may come as a surprise to many, but some of us are just starting out on our voyage to boldly go ......etc

I started out ,again (tried the game about 4 years ago or so)2 weeks ago, and I am a rear-admiral upper already. What I am finding hard to grasp is really what I should be doing on a daily basis. I have joined a Fleet, but have to say that communication is 'sparce', though they are vey helpful when prompted.

I have got to a part of the game where I am not strong enough to complete the current missions that I have in my log, but dont seem to be able to get much stronger just doing a bit of PvP daily. Please could somebody help me with a comprehensive list of 'Things to do' so I can proceed further.


Foundry being 'sunsetted'[edit source]

Not sure if this is the place for it, but I saw a couple posts on the game's Facebook page today about the Foundry being sunsetted. I'm taking that to mean that it's gonna be phased out. No information was given beyond that (it was going to be discussed in a streaming vid, but Cryptic has apparently being having connectivity issues on their end all day). Carguy1701 (talk) 03:19, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Left hand bar[edit source]

Just a note that the links under Star Trek Online, on the bar on the left, could probably do with revision. The foundry portal can be dropped, the faction portal should be updated to the Playable faction page and maybe there's more useful items than the duty officer list? Perhaps one of the ships articles as that would be highly trafficked? Scientifictheory (talk) 12:59, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree the main sidebar needs some changes - foundry link removed, and the link for faction portal updated. We could replace duty officer list with the Playable starship - although it is mentioned on the main page's Quick Link, it deserves the spotlighted position. Any other suggestions or ideas? --Damixon (talk) 13:39, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Experimental Weapons that can be fired while cloaked[edit source]

There don't seem to be any experimental weapons that can be fired while cloaked; this disadvantages folks like me who fly a Kor Bird of Prey and possibly others … I would like to as STO developers to offer such a weapon, could be mine- or torpedo-oriented.

Interesting idea, I suggest visiting the official STO forums where feedback like this could get a greater response, and hopefully dev will notice it. --Damixon (talk) 06:28, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Expanding the sidebar[edit source]

Hello, everyone. One of the little projects that has been in my backlog has been to expand the sidebars on the wikis I manage to include important and frequently accessed pages. This is good for seatch engine optimization because then these pages are effectively linked to from every page on the wiki, prompting search engines to pay more attention to them when they index the site. I'd like to have the community help me select what pages to include and what headings to put them under. Thanks in advance. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 21:04, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Nice idea. Is it possible to have two newest playable ship articles spotlighted? So when a new ship is released, it will take their place. Same for the newest lock box (currently Section 31 Lock Box). Other pages that could be included are most likely already part of the main page quick link: Reputation System, Playable starship, Lobi Crystal Consortium, Starship traits, Endeavor System, Set, Task Force Operations, Lore, Bridge officer and kit abilities, Damage type (space), Player rank, Infinity Lock Box, Age of Discovery. I'm not sure if all these deserve a place there, so a bit of help is welcomed. How many pages would go to the new sidebar? --Damixon (talk) 21:19, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
We should add direct links to all four of the playable factions (Fed, Klg, Rom and Dom). We could use their emblems, you click on them and it takes you to their page. While Damixon's idea about new ships and Lock Box is good, I'm somewhat against the idea of advertising the Lock Box on the Front Page. Links to new Reputation System, new C-Store ships, PvE Queues or Episodes might be better. --PiralDorrm (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm afraid the sidebar doesn't have any easy way to insert graphics. It's designed for simple lists of text links. (Look at MediaWiki:Sidebar to see how it works.) Admins can edit it for anything that would need to be actively maintained; that's an idea I hadn't actually thought of. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 16:35, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Then I'd rather if sidebar wouldn't need to be actively maintained - we can't miss with more general high-traffic pages. --Damixon (talk) 20:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Alright, added most of the suggestions. Swapped out Age of Discovery for Season and Infinity Lock Box with Current Lock Box. Feel free to make further suggestions. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 02:09, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Oops, I'll hold off on Lock Box for now. I overlooked the objection. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 02:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Looks good! If I have any more ideas on what to add, I'll tell you, but I think you've added all the important pages. Maybe just a link to Missions, although you can easily get to them through faction pages? --PiralDorrm (talk) 19:24, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
We can edit the sidebar via this page: MediaWiki:Sidebar. Also, Faction portal (present under the "Star Trek Online") could be moved to "Factions", or maybe even removed now that we have the new section with all playable factions). --Damixon (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Benefits For Life Time Subscribers[edit source]

When I started playing STO sometime around 2012 I wasn't sure about keep on playing it considering all the game and graphic bugs considering I was still playing World Of Warcraft with that subscrition. But when new content is releassed I return to see whats new. I payed the Life Time for STO and yet feel very impressed with the benifits. Sure I now get 500 Zen a month but thats just months of waitting before I feel like using it In the C-Store. So far I have already spent more money I really wish too in buying Master keys for lockboxs that give me nothing of the price value for digital content. I know I have spent over $500 just trying to get a ship from the lockboxs and still to this day yet have gotten one and feel like I been shot by a Disruptor repeatedly by Ferengis. Also after all these years Aenigma Nebula still haven't changed much at all being a quiet big useless zone for the privlage to enter but not wanting to go there being zero value going there. Why not setup Shops or Store for the people who payed Life Time to buy the Ship & Equipment directly instead of forcing loyal people in the Master Key gig. Doing so might convince others to buying Life Time subscriptions. Players can get what they want out of the game as well making a Zen profit. 00:39, 21 June 2019 Phoenix 357

Hey, lock box ships have ~0.05% chance to drop so don't expect to get what you want without opening a lot of boxes. Selling master keys on the exchange and buying a ship with EC might be a good alternative. Suggestions about LTS and other game content should be posted on the forums - devs won't notice your comment here. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). --Damixon (talk) 11:35, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

New Tribble in game[edit source]

There appears to be a new Tribble in the game now: the Grand Slam Tribble. Colored like a baseball, it grants a melee buff when petted. I had two of them show up in my inventory last night, WITHOUT having any Tribbles in my inventory prior to this. Someone else in the STO group on Facebook had it happen to them, so I don't know why that happened. They were obliquely referenced in the newspost about the 2019 Summer Event, as well. I created a new page for it but it's rough (and that's putting it mildly). Carguy1701 (talk) 15:18, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Info pop ups[edit source]

You've probably noticed a few weeks ago a few new info pop ups coming up for Factions, Races and Locations. I was trialling how well they work for these areas, starting with these areas and articles after crunching the numbers on the most linked-to articles (minus ships - that's very much owned by other editors so I try to steer clear of that and leave it to others). I figure the most linked-to ones are the ones to give the most benefit from pop-ups. They seem to give a good at-a-glance tooltip, but perhaps would be best to be smaller?

I've just been going over it again and figure I could finish up those three areas with the lesser-linked to articles in the same categories, to round them off, or go over the other categories. According to the numbers that would be currencies (ec, dilith, zen, vouchers xp points and so on), meta issues (bridge officer, exchange, player, warp core and so on) and NPCs. Just looking for a second opinion as to which might give more benefit.

Or are they annoying the hell out of you and hope to dear god no more appear?Scientifictheory (talk) 18:22, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I like those pop-ups for races, they are useful. If you have ideas to introduce more of them, go ahead.. not sure which ones would be the best choice. There are so many ships so it would be too much work to add info pop-up for each one. --Damixon (talk) 23:19, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Yeah I also like them. Don't think their necessary for ships, but could you try doing something for the Doff System? --PiralDorrm (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
That's a thought. There are a few elements that show on the most linked which I might start with. For individual doffs, that might take a while to get them all but might as well, I'll take a look once I've rounded off the other groups a bit more. Scientifictheory (talk) 13:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Doing it for all doffs might be too much work, but maybe for Department pages or something like that. --PiralDorrm (talk) 13:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Bug Hunt TFO[edit source]

Can you fix it. The explosive expert dude just vanishes leaving the team stuck there running around in circles then you have to abort the mission and wait an additional 30 minutes before your aborting penalty is gone before joining another TFO. Pretty lame.

Quick links on home page[edit source]

Some of these are a little out of date, and there are perhaps some pages that ought to be on there instead of others. Here's a list to get the ball rolling, although I think we can prune this back a bit further. I'm looking at making some general articles a little more like sub-portals to easily guide people to related articles (i.e. Player character) and some ground could be covered by similar work on the more exhaustive lists. Yet some other portals that are on the current list (i.e. Endgame) are currently a bit dead and honestly I don't think are worth redoing as they are not good group titles.


- Scientifictheory (talk) 12:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Communication on the wiki[edit source]

Hey everyone, I just want to point out that adding comments under Summary of each edit would help overcome potential confusions and disagreements. This should especially apply to reverting an edit without stating a reason - I myself got into an argument several times because I haven't given any explanation of my actions. From my experience, edits like that are never of personal reason, but a result of commitment to preserving the information accuracy - unfortunately it can be perceived negatively so I encourage people to use comments under summary/talk page/profile comments to make sure things are communicated properly. Check these useful sto wiki's guidelines: STOWiki:Assume good faith // STOWiki:Talk page guidelines, and also Reverting to see Wikipedia's guideline on that matter. We are in this project together so following these guidelines would benefit us all, in my opinion - it's not directed to anyone specific. --Damixon (talk) 22:03, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Help wanted with cataloging Bridges[edit source]

I've started to update the Bridge page, which has been derelict since 2012, and I've added a table to add to. If anyone wants to help in this endeavour, the page still lacks the pictures for: -Most Federation Bridges -All Klingon Bridges -All Romulan Bridges -All Dominion Bridges -Most Cross-faction Bridges

Any and all help would be greatly appreciated! --Impulsefibre731 (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

I've been experimenting with a new table system for the Bridge page, taking inspiration from Uniform. Does anyone have any improvements for it? --Impulsefibre731 (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
I think it looks good. I'd just remove that empty column between Name and Price, if you're not planning to add something to it. If you'll need any bridge screenshots, send me a message, and I'll see if I can help. --PiralDorrm (talk) 08:53, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Most, if not all, of the Free bridge screenshots are from 2010, so new ones are probably needed. Any new screenshots for those would be welcome! --Impulsefibre731 (talk) 16:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Hailing all editors who contribute to duty officer assignment documentation[edit source]

There has been a lot of discussion and disagreement over many points of handling these pages. We did just, not long ago, have a good discussion of standardizing titles for ship names, and now I'd like to try to jumpstart the same kind of thing with assignment pages, except more detailed to iron out most or all of the trouble spots. Please help out by contributing what you can to the discussion over at Template talk:Assignmentinfo#Current and best practices. Let's try to find some consensus on these issues among all the interested community, please. oOeyes User-Eyes-Sig.png 23:11, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Can I play Star Trek online in PS4 with split screen and two controls?[edit source]

I want to know if I can play Star Trek online in PS4 with split screen and two controls? If I can do that how can I do? I ask because I sow this video in youtube: star trek online split screen test

Spoiler tag[edit source]

I've modified the Template:Spoiler tag to allow for specifying what it is spoiling. Might not be much call for it in the end, but we have several airing tv shows now which may begin to rewrite game lore. If something becomes relevant to include as it works into the game that may vaguely spoil someone who hasn't been able to watch the new show yet then this gives some better options.

Also, it means we can specify that it the detail is from "Beneath the Skin" and it won't mislead people into thinking it is newer content if it is accidentally left on for a year.Scientifictheory (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

What's the consensus on spoilers, though? Is there a policy on them? How long is something considered a spoiler? And for what? And what exactly does it mean that we shouldn't include information for "recently released" things? After all, this is a wiki which should document things with full details. It seems counter-intuitive to leave things out, for the sake of whatever someone may individually perceive as a spoiler. -- Tadayou (talk) 17:13, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
I agree with you. Not much point in hiding something (especially new content), when visitors will most likely be looking for it. However, Scientifictheory has a point that the new episodes do spoil the end of Discovery S02. So, if we should put a spoiler tag on something, it should either be the pages for new missions, or for some of the NPCs appearing in them (such as Burnham, or Control). --PiralDorrm (talk) 17:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
In addition to DSC:2 and PIC, I think there is another category of spoilers on pages that one would not normally expect. For example: you look at Measure of Morality and you can expect spoilers for Measure of Morality. But you wouldn't expect them on Clauda as you didn't even know she was in there and if it has the full detail of what happens then that can easily catch someone off guard.Scientifictheory (talk) 21:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Ability Rework[edit source]

Well, I managed to pull just about everything I needed for some wiki data automating, but I noticed a big gap is the abilities template - it's not automated like the DOFF/Infobox ones are. I have started working on a "demo" version, but it might take me a few days to get up to speed on wiki-language. Help is appreciated, but not required - I don't want to burden the community here with extra work. I've created both a template and have started a demo page for it for "Let It Go", a BOff power that hasn't been added to the wiki yet. For now, I am calling the template TraySkill. You can see my progress and I'll reply back in a few days once I have pieced together a template I like and would want to propose (unless someone beats me to it). The end goal is to get this into Cargo for being able to pull a master list of abilities (primarily BOff powers) with minimal changes to the look and feel of existing power pages. I made sure to run this by DanPMK before "meddling", and will take no offense if it ends up being deleted.Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 20:41, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Module:Cargo updated to support TraySkill so it should work now: Special:CargoTables/TraySkill. Template you made can be adjusted to match/improve current ability pages so it's a good start, don't think it needs to be deleted. --Damixon (talk) 21:03, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I think it's a good idea. Maybe try making the table a little smaller? Also, while we're on the topic of Ability pages, should we have console and the ability on the same page, or should we continue separating them? --PiralDorrm (talk) 21:34, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
PiralDorrm, can't decide what is best - but in most cases ability description seen on the console's infobox gives all the needed information. We could add anything that is missing under notes on the console page. But if we decide to merge console and ability page, for Set articles I'd rather have abilities on separate pages. --Damixon (talk) 23:54, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
You're right. Set articles look good as they are now. Maybe it's best to leave it separated. --PiralDorrm (talk) 19:08, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
I tried adding text1 from infoBox to the Cargo:Module and to the infobox template, but its not showing up in the cargo table yet. I'd like to figure out what I am doing wrong so I can replicate similar on the ability template. I'm still working on the template, but haven't had as much time as I would have liked. Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 01:29, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Cargo table needed to be deleted and then created again - new field appeared after that. --Damixon (talk) 10:13, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
I hate to keep bugging you all on this, but I am still working out kinks. I added another field to the table, and I am not sure I am able to do the table refresh you could. I'd be happy to learn if you'd like to teach me. Otherwise, table needs another refresh.Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 13:55, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
It is not a problem. Do you have a delete option on Special:CargoTables? If not, it may be available to admins only. Table should show the new field now. --Damixon (talk) 18:50, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I do not have a delete option, looks like it is an admin power. Hopefully that's the last add I need. I've started populating powers that didn't have pages. I won't convert powers until you guys are OK with the new template. Happy to add anything you see as missing.Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 21:17, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I have updated the template as far as I think it needs. I have converted Distributed Targeting to my template, and a few other powers that didn't have pages. At this point, I wait for your permission to begin conversion.Blacksmith and Ninja (talk) 23:23, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Sure, looks good. It could need some adjustments for abilities that have boff (training manual) and player version (kit module). Battle Strategies for example: that is why there is/was "Used by" under detailed information. And table at the bottom also has additional row, although its style varies (Battle Strategies vs Stealth Module vs Fire on my Mark (Ground)). --Damixon (talk) 23:13, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Current & Upcoming Productions lacking console events[edit source]

The C&UP box on the homepage is lacking the console events - like right now, Borg Resurgence/Event Campaign I is winding down and the 10th Anniversary starts on the 3rd. --Ch00path1ng4 (talk) 23:47, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

It can be updated via Template:Events. --Damixon (talk) 10:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Crossfaction icon[edit source]

Combining every logo, now there are 6 of them, really doesn't work well, especially on the tiny Faction Khitomer.png logos but also slightly larger infobox ones. Now we have Khitomer acting as the alliance covering all factions, it might be worth adopting Faction Khitomer.png as the universal cross faction logo on the wiki. With time, it will become more familiar to players from outside the wiki and more easily understood. than a medley of logos. Yes, there is a lack of familiarity now, even with it being on a free ship, but it's not like there is a great deal of familiarity over the wiki's home made version. This may also be a good opportunity to revisit the color scheme we go with for cross-faction in infoboxes which at present usually just fed blue or grey. Might be worth matching Alliance grey with use of gold highlights where possible. Scientifictheory (talk) 15:05, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Those are two fantastic ideas! Using the Khitomer Alliance logo to represent all factions makes sense, because each faction is a member. Using Gold as color is also great because (1) it doesn't favor the 3 major powers (Fed/blue, Kling/red, Rom/green), (2) it looks "posh" (similar to Legendary-rated items), and stands apart visually (if we can make it look different from Cardassian & TOS yellows). Kind regards, Markonian (talk) 16:53, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
I've tested gold on grey and grey on gold in the episode nav. I think the former looks better, but it would make templates such as playableshipnav quite grey. I tried gold rimmed boxes btw, that looks awful. Perhaps text color could be overridden to gold if it looks too dull.Scientifictheory (talk) 07:06, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Start of the game (2409) is a year before alliance agreement is signed (2410), would that be a problem? Tiny cross-faction icon can be bumped from 16pxFaction Khitomer.png to, for example, 22pxFaction Khitomer.png - to make it more visible - this way both Faction Khitomer.png and Faction Khitomer.png are similar in size. --Damixon (talk) 11:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
I wouldn't think so, the timeline is pretty meaningless in game. Even aside from constantly being invited to jump ahead in the story, you could still play the Alliance Battlecruiser straight out of Starfleet Academy. The marketing materials, also, favour new content and symbolism far more than pre-Alliance times (which is now a minority of the game time). Besides, when you hit crossfaction content and ships, you're basically in the Alliance era. Scientifictheory (talk) 14:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
On sizes, even at 24px, if you didn't already know could you tell me what that red blot in the lower right corner of the icon was supposed to be? Icons should be clear and simple in order to easily convey their intended information. Even at infobox size, having several tiny icons in the corner of a tiny icon is not clear and simple.Scientifictheory (talk) 14:25, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
I agree that smaller details on the low-px icon can't be recognized, but as a whole it does the job. On ship pages it is somewhat larger so it is clearer. My concern is that the khitomer alliance icon visually still isn't established as something that would represent all playable factions. But maybe we should give it a try, now that devs are introducing more alliance stuff. --Damixon (talk) 07:21, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
I prefer the grey on gold version. It goes along nicely with the other faction colors and the gold-tone is unique enough to stand apart from other yellow factions. Kind regards, Markonian (talk) 19:42, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Awesome, can an admin update the factioncolor records? Scientifictheory (talk) 06:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Crossfaction ship pages would be quite dark with suggested grey variant because the website itself is dark. I think current grey is also good option because it is similar to the color of the Alliance Khitomer Crew Uniform. If I should choose between those two options on the All Episodes template, grey on gold gold on grey looks better (made a correction, gold logo is more visible when on grey). --Damixon (talk) 07:21, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Fine to run both versions I think, given both are in the logo. I think the darker grey to match what we have on the logo though? Personally, I also think the darker grey looks a bit more slick and less 404 than the light one. It will also contrast better with the gold. But not essential of course.Scientifictheory (talk) 12:55, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
A related point; I was hoping to be able to link the faction icons on the infoboxes so the hover-over works (and ideally, put special links so I can have "link={{{faction}}} content" which can then go to a dedicated tooltip saying "This content is playable only by x faction" rather than the standard "what is x faction" tooltips) but my test on missioninfo doesn't seem to link it. Is there a supression on linking in that part of the infobox I can't see? I presume there must be as you couldn't click to see the faction image page before.Scientifictheory (talk) 10:43, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

We need feedback on this; dark grey + golden border was added as cross-faction color on infobox, to see how it looks. Previously it was lighter grey with same border. See examples: Elachi Ornash Battlecruiser and Alliance Khitomer Crew Uniform. --Damixon (talk) 08:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

That actually looks better than I thought it would! But happy for us to go with a more conservative grey-all-round if others want.Scientifictheory (talk) 09:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Think the grey is too dark on things like the ship nav or mission nav. The gold border doesn't really work either (clashes with the other uniformly colored borders). I made the ship nav lighter and I think it looks better, doesn't clash with the legends tab anymore. Lemme know what you think SFC (talk) 14:18, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
I changed the infobox color to match the SFC's grey - should it stay this way or darker one was better? I'm not sure which one is better. --Damixon (talk) 14:55, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
I'm fine with that grey. I just think the default grey that was used before was a little too light and washed out. Both the darker versions are an improvement. On borders for the nav, I don't think it's too bad but I agree a block color is better. Gold I think stood out more from grey being used on lots of default/other segments but they grey adds uniformity with the infoboxes. Perhaps there is another way to apply gold highlights? (the dominion are the only section with a logo banner on the left. Perhaps that applied to all sections would work?) Happy to go with consensus there though.Scientifictheory (talk) 17:40, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
The yellow border looks neat. Given that the Khitomer Alliance is a unique faction in the game, it makes sense for it to standout and let players see at a glance that e.g. this particular ship is faction-agnostic. The gold icon pops nicely. Personally, grey is too drab a color to use en-masse, especially because the Wiki itself is dark/black by default. A silver KA logo on yellow ground might look friendlier or more cheerful. In any case, it's no deal-breaker and I'll go with the majority. Kind regards, Markonian (talk) 18:13, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

New Alliance icon suggestion[edit source]

Imageedit 28 7123718487.png

I made this it might be helpful - Jimahuculak (talk)JimahuculakJimahuculak (talk)

I think, the wiki aims to use only things representing official in-game assets where possible. RadioActivitii (talk)
Agreed, we shouldn't be inventing new things. The idea is for items to be recognisable.Scientifictheory (talk) 06:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

article that tracks revamps and facelifts?[edit source]

I was thinking that maybe there could be an article/page unto itself that is a comprehensive list tracking the model revamps, toon facelifts (like the forthcoming YOK facelifts for the Klingons) and such over the years, as well as the who did what.

Like there would be an entry "June 17, 2020 (PC)/July 16, 2020 (console) - T'Varo Light Warbird - geometry and material - Thomas Marrone" and "Martember 33, 2113 - Oberth-class - geometry and material - Tobias Richter and Thomas Marrone".

Something along those lines.

--Ch00path1ng4 (talk) 03:57, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a good idea. I don't think we have anything like that. You want to start it? We could link it from Playable starships page. --PiralDorrm (talk) 19:53, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
I shall! I'll give it the tentative title of Graphical Updates; it can always be changed later. --Ch00path1ng4 (talk) 23:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)