User talk:Tourorist

LEAVE A NEW MESSAGE

Welcome

Hello there and thank you for that nice extensive amount of clean up. And welcome to the VDC!--Gear 14:31, 28 Aug 2007 (PDT)

Thanks and hello to you too. :] --Tourorist 02:33, 6 Sep 2007 (PDT)

Spaces in header formatting

You do know adding those spaces in headers doesn't really help anything...—ts2do 22:49, 30 Sep 2007 (PDT)

It is meant for editors, to aid article navigation. --Tourorist 22:54, 30 Sep 2007 (PDT)

Just looks darn pretty. its like mapping, as clean as you want, the player will never see that.--Gear 22:51, 30 Sep 2007 (PDT)

Cleanup

Hi there. Thanks for cleaning up my articles here, but I might just ask you not change my spelling of wierd to weird ... it looks wierd to me to see it spelled like that :P --Daedalus 04:38, 1 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Sorry, I've been on an auto-pilot with edits for the past hour or so. Judging by the nature of it, I probably shouldn't have touched the Trivia section in the first place, my bad. --Tourorist 05:21, 1 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Inaccessible. I can finally spell that word =) --Baliame 16:42, 1 Oct 2007 (CET)

It's more the changing of the spellings that you're marking as typo's - words like wierd are spelled that way where I come from, so it just looks a bit odd someone changing all my spellings and calling them typos. Nothing big, just something to keep in mind though. --Daedalus 08:09, 1 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Cool. :) --Tourorist 09:23, 1 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Weird is always spelled weird, it's just weird to spell it any other way...anyways, it really doesn't contribute anything to add those spaces in, editors can easily survive without them, and I was brought up to not use them...also please hesitate from changing headers' capitalization; titles are always capitalized for most words—ts2do 08:28, 1 Oct 2007 (PDT)

I am using the Wikipedia convention for capitalization in headings. As for spaces, I've been in the space-added camp ever since I started practicing wikido, so it would be mighty hard for me to stop now. :] --Tourorist 09:21, 1 Oct 2007 (PDT) (srsly, can't stop now)

Haha, Wikido. Your Wikido is good, grasshopper! Soon, you will learn the ways of the ancient Spam Catchers of the Wikido! --Daedalus 05:30, 2 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Yeah, but I would much rather have Master Lane cast a proper protection spell or two over our entire village. :] --Tourorist 04:10, 4 Oct 2007 (PDT)

3D modeling programs

Thank you for cleaning up and moving around all the pages I was exhausted after rewrting the main article even thoug it is small :P --Wolf 17:15, 3 Oct 2007 (PDT)

There is still quite a bit of work to be done there though, both, on content and presentation side of things. --Tourorist 04:10, 4 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Clean up

Hey thanks for cleaning up my mod page, and now im going to steal your message bar!--Gear 07:04, 19 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Good times. :) --Tourorist 07:05, 19 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Indeed!

"Looks empty"

FYI, you can look at a page's History to see what's existed on it previously. Like this. :-) --TomEdwards 14:39, 26 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Was I right in labeling it up for deletion, or should the articles like this serve as a redirect page for the original source? BTW, what body typeface do you use for TSR, looks a bit washed out to me now (v, w, x, y in particular). --Tourorist 00:46, 27 Oct 2007 (PDT) (Don't tell me it's the new C-line of shitfonts from Vista)

You were right, I just thought I'd point out a Wiki feature you didn't know about. (Nice work on the XSI page incidentally. I was looking at it before coming here. :-) )

I use Calibri, a new Office 2007/IE7/Vista font, with fallbacks to Tahoma and generic sans-serif. Not sure why it might appear washed out...do you have any of the MS apps/OS I just listed installed? How's Cleartype set up? --TomEdwards 14:10, 28 Oct 2007 (PDT)

I think, the XSI article is too crowded with links to work well with standard formatting anymore. We could try binding each group of links to its own table, or even putting the whole article inside a two-column table.

I do have the new fonts, but I don't use ClearType smoothing (under Display>Appearance>Effects...), and that seems to be the problem. Nevermind then, I'll deal with it or end up switching. --Tourorist 03:00, 29 Oct 2007 (PDT)

Snowball Source cleanup

Just saying thank you for helping to clean the page. -FittyYen

You are welcome. --Tourorist 08:00, 28 Oct 2007 (PDT)

A thank you

I would like to thank you for fixing up the Decloak article. Looks a lot more professional now! --Townsend22 03:42, 25 Nov 2007 (PST)

My pleasure. Welcome to the VDC. --Tourorist 03:56, 25 Nov 2007 (PST)

Notes of appreciation and general praise

Good job on fixing up the "Your First Map" tutorials, and thanks! :) --Etset 05:42, 9 Feb 2008 (PST)

Wow, a personal note from the high priest of Welcoming Committee. Seriously, how would you ever survive without my stylistic nitpicks? ;)

You've been on an editing rampage ever since you joined us here two months ago, so all thanks must go to you. Good job, man! --Tourorist 05:58, 9 Feb 2008 (PST)

Aw shucks *embarrassed*... Thanks! Just trying to make this a better place, one edit at a time!

And you're right! I can't go without your stylistic nitpicks, which I look up to when on my "rounds" around here :D Really, it does makes sense to me to add those extra spaces on the headers, and to avoid having Titles Written Like This, Making It Seem That Capitalizing The First Letter Of Each Word Somehow Draws The Reader's Attention! :) --Etset 06:45, 9 Feb 2008 (PST)

See also & information hierarchy

Thanks for the cleanup of some recent docs. I agree with all except one thing in the Entity Doc pages: I had deliberately moved the "See also" links into the "Description & Usage" bit at the top of the page, because they seemed more relevant to the other contents of that section. My reasoning is this:

• Because of all the (highly repetitive and poorly documented) keyvalue material on every entity page, I often find my brain goes numb if I try reading beyond the Description ;-)

• Very often the "See also" links are actually "Stuff You Should Read Before You Read This Page!". Links to sibling entities, comparable entities, tutorials, relevant articles, etc. should be part of the "Introduction and Orientation" to the entity properties - not relegated to the foot of the page into a kind of "further reading" section.

• For Example: An Entity Doc like info_node contains very specific data, and is not really the best place to try and explain, say, how nodegraphs work - better to read the (excellent) nodegraph article first, then look at info_node if necessary. In a sense therefore, info_node's property data is a footnote to the nodegraph article - not the other way around.

• Using this hierarchy logic, I can't think of any cases where a list of Entity Properties Keyvalues would require a "Further Reading" section, unless possibly to delve into the Entity's Source Code ?

Does that make sense ? --Beeswax 06:07, 16 Apr 2008 (PDT)

PS as an after thought I posted this as a suggestion at Talk:Entity_Article_Template#See_also_.26_information_hierarchy where it might get wider attention (?) --Beeswax 06:41, 16 Apr 2008 (PDT)

I agree, in case of the Entity Article it's more convenient to have related articles listed or embedded as part of its description, because the information thereafter is mostly template-based. However, because elsewhere, as an article section, "See also" is consistently at the end (except where "External links" are present), doing otherwise breaks the VDC convention, which is about helping you locate the relevant information quickly where you'd usually expect it to be.

Then again, Entity Article as it is now (a single-column listing) definitely requires a layout makeover to improve its readability (the ability to quickly extract specific entity information, to be precise). So the problem will probably resolve itself once we update the layout. --Tourorist 03:52, 17 Apr 2008 (PDT)

"See also" is consistently at the end (except where "External links" are present), doing otherwise breaks the VDC convention, which is about helping you locate the relevant information quickly where you'd usually expect it to be.

That is certainly true for designing the layout of printed documents, which must be scanned by eye. However, long webpages must be scanned by scrolling up and down them, (oh my poor aching hand!) which is why an anchor-linked TOC is so useful. You could move the "See also" section anywhere on the page and it would still be instantly locatable using the TOC. Browsing long webpages is like trying to read a book through a magnifying glass. Ideally each section (eg "Description") would be a single "screenshot" - so you can read and re-read everything in that section just by moving your eyes, without having to link or scroll around the document. The top of the page is what the reader first sees when he navigates to the page; the first question it needs to answer is "Is the information I want on this page or somewhere else?" ... IMO --Beeswax 08:03, 17 Apr 2008 (PDT)