Factorio talk:Editor noticeboard

From Official Factorio Wiki
Revision as of 20:22, 2 November 2017 by Xunie (talk | contribs) (Documenting the Blueprint String Format on the wiki?: new section)
Jump to: navigation, search

0.15 update plan

I'm thinking of updating the Oil Processing page to reflect to 10x change in 0.15, and I'm a little unclear on the update policy. It says "For major changes to existing entities, update the pages to 0.15 info and move the 0.14 info to a small paragraph", which sounds like I should go ahead and do it; but also "As of stable release, fully update the page's text and exact values," which implies that I shouldn't update the values until the stable release. Phasma Felis (talk) 20:22, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

I am also unclear of the policy. Should we mark removed features as archived or wait until the full release? Igwb (talk) 08:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Mark them as archived but don't remove things from the page until 0.15 is stable. -- Bilka (talk) - Admin 09:57, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Total raw recipes

Some of the "Total Raw" recipe fields are wrong right now. For example Processing Unit and Rocket part aren't decomposing their ingredients at all. I posted on the forum (https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=47617) but thought I should ask here as well. Are these fields getting automatically written by something? If so, can you point me to the script so I can try to fix it? If not, should I just manually edit the ones that I see are broken? Grumphrey (talk) 19:35, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Hey there grumphrey, we ran a tool by a community member that updated recipes to 0.15 automatically, and it's possible that it may have left some raw recipes unchanged. The tool isn't recurring, so go ahead and change the values manually to the fixed ones. --Gangsir (talk) - Admin 21:18, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
The errors in the files I was using have been found and fixed, so I updated all the infoboxes to the correct values. I should be able to update the technology infoboxes tomorrow. -- Bilka (talk) - Admin 19:57, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Research icons

I'm gradually adding the new ranks of research bonuses (e.g. Mining productivity (research) but have hit a snag with the icons. once we hit double figures, the text overlay on the icons wraps i.e.

Mining productivity (research).png

would be good if it used a smaller font - I'm guessing after a bit of digging around that means defining a smaller version of .factorio-icon-text (ideally dynamically selected depending on how much text to overlay). Also not sure how best to do the infinity symbol - it is as simple as using the ASCII ∞ symbol or will that get screwy in the code? Paulbrock (talk) 09:41, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, so I've found 'navbox-icon-text' that allows me to do this:

Mining productivity (research).png

But if you look at the code its pretty messy. Is there a better way?

Monitor links

Just to avoid some confusion I thought it would be useful to have a list of what should remain present on the following pages:

For both of these my question is as follows: Which links/files should remain on the page?. The editor noticeboard says there should be some on there but doesn't mention which ones those are, so to prevent some confusion an answer would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Df1229 (talkcontribs) (Please sign your messages with --~~~~)

I've clarified further on the page itself. It's a pretty long list, but as the page says, just monitor from your perspective. If you check once, and then check later and there's a new page, look into it to see if it should be fixed. It's difficult to specify exactly what to do, as its different for each case. Essentially, if a ton of new pages appear there, or if a page from the main namespace (something like iron plate) appear, fix it. :) --Gangsir (talk) - Admin 13:58, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Expensive Mode

Hi all,

new here (to the Wiki, not Factorio). Below is kind of a random issue I noticed on the Wiki. If there's a page where these should be dumped instead of here (Some sort of list of pages people noticed are missing or might want added, perhaps with option to discuss?), then I apologize for cluttering up this page.

Now then, what I came here to say: I just noticed that there does not seem to be a page for "Expensive mode" at all, even though it's in the infoboxes of all recipes. (I also looked at the pages for related terms like Crafting and generic searches like "mode" or "recipe" - still nothing. The term as written is not even mentioned once in any of the full version history pages back through 0.10. For all this Wiki shows you, "Expensive mode" might as well not exist except as a mysterious infobox toggle.).

It seems conceivable that new(er) players would want to look up the term to see what exactly it entails. (I too am not completely clear on how it works, even though I'm not exactly a new player.)

While I don't have the information needed to write the page, I could probably look it up somewhere (forums?); but even if I could write it - should I? Or is there a particular reason that Expensive mode (or Normal mode) does not have a page?

Also, I'm not sure whether this level of documentation (half-page post) is appropriate given the relative importance of the issue at hand. In plainer English: I know I tend to be a windbag, so if it's TLDR, let me know. :)


Mike --Misacek01 (talk) 01:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, this is currently the right page to note such things here on the wiki. You can also contact us wiki admins on the discord server linked on the main page, in the wiki-work channel.
The expensive recipes were added in version 0.15 and are apparently not directly mentioned in the changelog. Some info regarding them could be found on the world generator page, and I now also added a small note to crafting. The expensive recipes themselves don't warant a whole page, they are just another configuration option when you start a new game. -- Bilka (talk) - Admin 08:26, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, I appreciate the info, your edit, and the indication of what does and what doesn't warrant a page that it provides. --Misacek01 (talk) 20:58, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Math rendering


I was wondering whether it might be possible / practical to enable this wiki to display Mediawiki math markup (<math>...</math>). I realize this is not primarily a math-oriented site, but Factorio is basically a math-driven game (at least if played at any kind of non-beginner level), and from time to time the ability to display a simple equation would be useful.

I'm not a programmer and don't have much of an idea as to what enabling math would entail, but according to the documentation here, it might be as simple as enabling "$wgUseTeX = true;" in the wiki's "LocalSettings.php".

I've been using the <code>...</code> tags for an ersatz math highlight, but they're not really meant for it and the readability isn't the best. On the other hand, with the math rendering enabled, Mediawiki can run the majority of the professional-grade TeX markup language, which should be more than good enough for any math needed here.

If there's a particular reason math is disabled on Factorio Wiki, I'll understand, but if there isn't and if it's not too much of a bother in terms of work required, might I ask an admin to consider enabling it?


--Misacek01 (talk) 15:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

This definitely sounds useful. However, for this to work we'll have to install https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Math . Sadly I didn't have the time to ask HanziQ to do it today. You can expect the extension to be installed and configured on Wednesday, but I'll let you know again when you can use it. -- Bilka (talk) - Admin 19:42, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, that's great! Wednesday is perfectly fine. :) --Misacek01 (talk) 11:00, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Documenting the Blueprint String Format on the wiki?

What's the word on doing this? This'll make the info a bit easier than random posts on forums spread around the internet. Since the format may not internally be "standardized" or "final", I think a bit of caution is healthy about this. But considering the format has a version number inherent in every blueprint now (last I heard), it might still be feasible to document. --Xunie (talk) 20:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)