User talk:ExarionUniverse

From Yugipedia
Jump to: navigation, search

REBD errata page[edit]

The gray is added automatically by Template:Errata table, only in cases where there is no change to the field in question (e.g. the card's name) in either the previous or the next erratum. This is meant to show that a given field is not relevant at all for a given set of preceding/current/following errata, and is done instead of simply not displaying that field in cases where not displaying it isn't possible without messing up alignment of other info for the erratum, or just leaving a blank box. In all cases where the field does change, gray is not applied. In particular, it should not be manually applied to errata pages. As things are, this makes Card Errata:Red-Eyes Black Dragon inconsistent with other errata pages.

To put it another way, imagine that the only errata for REBD were this erratum and the following one where it is renamed to expand "B." to "Black" - in that case you would not expect the name to be shown in gray, and it would not be. ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 21:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I understand it now, although I still think there should be a way to point out that there was no name change between its first and second errata, I mean, between the original and the first ones, there was a change, then between the first and the second ones, there was no change at all, but that cannot be pointed out because between the second and the third ones, there was a new change. I just did that because I believed that detail should not be overlooked, also, I am very dedicated to editing errata pages since whenever there is a new erratum, not only do I add it to the page, but also I check all the other previous errata of the card to correct any mistakes made by other editors or something they overlooked, and more often than not, it is not a waste of time. Anyway, your explanation was very clear, so I will follow that pattern of editing from now on. Thanks. ExarionUniverse (talkcontribs) 02:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
What you're talking about would be solved if errata were properly separated out so that only two errata were compared at a time, instead of the "continuous stream" method that's always been used here. This is a change I've actually wanted to make for years, but unfortunately it's not so easy since most errata pages will have to be edited by hand to disentangle the changes appropriately (probably the only ones that won't have to be edited like that would be ones for cards that have only ever had a single erratum). There are also questions around presentation, and also around actually entering the info code-side, that I've not figured out (though I haven't given it a huge amount of thought either). ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 07:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Oh I see, it would be too troublesome to make that huge change to the pages. I agree with you. ;) ExarionUniverse (talkcontribs) 10:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Not necessarily too troublesome, but lots and lots of work, to the point we'd want to be reasonably sure what we were doing before starting on it. ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 13:37, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Speaking of errata pages, there are some issues I have noticed when viewing them on a phone using desktop view. Would you like me to tell you about them here, or maybe I can create a topic about it on your talk page? (I am not so used to how topics should be discussed yet.) ExarionUniverse (talkcontribs) 17:20, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Here is fine.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are display issues with errata pages on mobile in general; the way they're implemented isn't mobile-friendly, but there's not much in the way of good options to improve the situation AFAIK. ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 02:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
I see. It's just that they aren't displayed the same way they are on PCs, as they present alignment imperfections depending on the amount of card text, but they are perfectly fine to read nonetheless. Just some aesthetic details. ExarionUniverse (talkcontribs) 11:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)