User talk:Psi-ragnarok

Re: Augustgrad Gates
Hi Ragnarok,

When referencing, it's easiest to use the citation index. I just went there and copied-and-pasted the appropriate reference. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) contribs 23:21, March 4, 2017 (UTC)

Critters vs. Neutral Units
Please note that these aren't synonymous. Neutral units are ones that will actively engage the player, critters, even if they have HP, are grouped as critters if they're only there for decoration.--Hawki (talk) 08:34, March 14, 2017 (UTC)

Images
Okay, I've made a habit of cleaning up after your images, so I'm going to request the following things to make my life easier:


 * Use a correct code. Your images have always had ".jpg.jpg." You only need one jpg.


 * Categorize them.


 * Place them in articles - a lot of time, you haven't used a left alignment which has resulted in the image being pushed down the page due to a template. So, for instance, if you want it on the left, do something like JohnDoe SC1 Art1.jpg

Thanks.--Hawki (talk) 07:21, March 26, 2017 (UTC)

RE: Tal'darim Symbol
Na, unless we confirm that the Aiur Tal'darim used that symbol we can't really attribute it to them. The way they laid it out the Aiur Tal'darim are similar to how several groups have called themselves "Spartans" over the course of history, but that doesn't make them connected or show they used the same symbols. As it stands only Nyon's branch used that symbol, and the emoticon confirms that his by being named "Nyon Tal'darim."

Though we haven't gotten any responses yet I'm ok with leaving that symbol with Nyon's allegiance and in battles where Nyon's sect of the Tal'darim were fighting. This does raise the question of do we want to give Nyon's Tal'darim their own article but I'm leaning on it being unnecessary. --Subsourian (talk) 16:58, April 7, 2017 (UTC)


 * I had a similar theory and gripe, and I asked them about it in one of the Q&As and simply got the answer "you'll find out in LotV why the Tal'darim couldn't just give the Keystone to Raynor." The problem was in that same panel Waltros also said "the Tal'darim we've seen in all of the games are the same Tal'darim, they are the ones who are serving Amon and enacting his will."


 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwJ_e2d9AFI


 * (the first few questions are the only real important ones)


 * So Nyon is working for Amon, that much is confirmed. To date we still don't have a clear answer as to why the WoL Tal'darim opposed Raynor when both were working for Amon, but more evidence points to them being the same faction (in spite of it not making sense) then to them being a rebellious faction. We know Nyon went crazy, but we don't necessarily have evidence he was a renegade. I'd like to ask them at BlizzCon if they can clarify that (if I can get a ticket this year since they don't seem to be doing any SC lore panels where I can submit questions grumble grumble), but until then we can only go with what we know from the games and interviews. --Subsourian (talk) 18:20, April 7, 2017 (UTC)


 * I actually kind of like the second theory about Duran wanting to test Raynor, or maybe even just have him arm up in preparation to kill Kerrigan. Since Moebius was funding Raynor, it could have been a way to ensure he didn't just dump everything into operations specifically against the Dominion in things like counter-insurgencies and information campaigns and actually bulked up his army enough to take on Char. In a way that makes sense. I wish we saw more of Narud's schemes in WoL.


 * My own personal theory was that Nyon and his followers were a lot of the "weak" of the Tal'darim who had gone insane as Alarak mentioned, and Ma'lash wanted to throw them into the grinder to thin out the weakness of their armies, much like Alarak did with Ji'nara's forces in NCO. The disobedience could have been a struggle between Narud and Ma'lash, and since Narud knew that the Tal'darim would be upset if Amon's orders involved sparing the weak he just allowed the events to play out. And that could feed into your own theory.


 * Sadly I missed round two of BlizzCon tickets so I can't try to find Waltros to clarify. :( I have a feeling they had an idea somewhere in the middle of all of these theories but it just never came across clearly. --Subsourian (talk) 02:22, April 10, 2017 (UTC)

Edits
I've run out of time to clean up your edits, but please...


 * Categorize them correctly. You're leaving them to be put in the "StarCraft protoss units" category, when they're SC2 ones.


 * Put the unit box under the game unit section, not above it.


 * It would be preferred if you copy-pasted the unit box template vertically rather than use it horizontally, as it makes editing much easier.--Hawki (talk) 05:18, April 29, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Purifier Scout
Whoops I thought that was you on the article talk page. In any case, as it stands we don't know if the two are connected, since one is a canceled unit and Purifier is a common word for non-Purifier protoss things (the canceled Purifier unit and purifier beam). Unless we find out more about that canceled unit best to keep it separate, especially since that was for a game before the Purifier race was a thing. I most certainly we think we should make a lookfor template noting that it's not the same as the co-op unit. --Subsourian (talk) 03:44, April 30, 2017 (UTC)

NPC vs. Campaign
There seems to be some confusion on the distinction, so I'll elaborate:


 * NPC: Present in the campaign, but not controllable by the player - usually as an enemy-only unit.


 * Campaign: Controllable by the player in the campaign.

A unit/structure can be categorized under both if their access differs per campaign. The scourge nest is an example, as it would be categorized under NPC for HotS (never directly controlled), and campaign for co-op (as it's a structure used by Zagara).--Hawki (talk) 00:40, May 16, 2017 (UTC)


 * If the unit is friendly but not player controlled, it would still count as NPC. The special ops dropship and armored personnel carrier are examples of this.--Hawki (talk) 01:21, May 16, 2017 (UTC)

Picture Location
Are you using the source editor? The default one is more user friendly but doesn't give as much flexibility for things like picture location. I can usually just move them to a specific line in the source editor. --Subsourian (talk) 23:14, May 25, 2017 (UTC)

Photo Comment
Good work with adding photos, just a few quick comments:

1. I know you've been having trouble with avoiding stacking, not sure if it's the editor you're using. But in source try to make sure they aren't directly on top of one another.

2. With really short articles try to avoid adding too many photos, especially ones with unitboxes. Too many and it either gets stuck under the unitbox or makes the text harder to read. In those cases just stick to ones really relevant to the article, and if you think one is more relevant replace the previous one. The same goes for very tiny subsections with photos already in them.

3. I'm not sure the capabilities of the other editor, but if possible try to move some of the images to the left side once and a while if possible or if there's too many images. Priority should be to keep the text readable so just make sure it isn't bending it into weird angled, but also we don't want to have blocks of images.

Other than that, keep up the good work. --Subsourian (talk) 18:04, May 27, 2017 (UTC)

NPC/Campaign Category Changes
Just letting you know since this was a pain in the ass for me to figure out too:

If you want to change the NPC and Campaign categories you have to do it from the UnitBox. There is are flags like campaign and npc that automatically puts the article in the category (A unit box with protoss and npc checked will autoadd to Protoss NPC unit). You can add articles to the category without them but if you try to remove an article from the category without taking out the x form those flags in the unitbox it'll automatically readd the article to those categories. --Subsourian (talk) 00:17, June 3, 2017 (UTC)
 * If you put an x beside "nocat" you can just add your chosen categories. 00:42, June 3, 2017 (UTC)
 * Huh, I actually didn't know that. That's helpful. --Subsourian (talk) 00:48, June 3, 2017 (UTC)

Quick NPC Comment
Reading back on what Hawki told you I can see why you thought Wrathwalkers are NPC since it does fall under that category as he defined. Regardless I'll discuss that with him because by that logic any unit that shows up in a campaign that the race doesn't get to play is NPC. Just wanted to let you know you weren't wrong based off of the description provided, we just need to define it a bit better. Its one of those categories made before the amount of campaigns and Co-op Missions made it a more complicated matter.

EDIT: Looking back you absolutely were right based on how we handled old campaign only units, so yeah I'll change these back, sorry about hassling you with that. Still worth discussing making the categories clearer.--Subsourian (talk) 15:07, June 7, 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh keep in mind I didn't mean to sound like I'm lashing out, my tone just may come out harsher over the internet. You do a lot for this wiki and I appreciate the effort you put in.


 * On the topic of the brutalisk, you're right. You'll note the same thing happens for vultures and golaiths if you look on their page, and that also I reverted my changes to the wrathwalker and havoc pages to what you had and put them as NPCs. I still think we should reexamine the category in general or at least leave a note saying it's campaign only units that show up non-playable, but until the powers that be say to change it you're right on all accounts and it does function the same way. --Subsourian (talk) 19:22, June 8, 2017 (UTC)

Supplicant
Hawki took care of it. I actually had initially just moved it down below Overview section before I saw that Hawki readded it to the top (so I just removed mine because it was redundant), but now it seems to be in the right place. But yeah I saw what you were doing. --Subsourian (talk) 02:16, June 13, 2017 (UTC)

Infobox Problem
We're working with converting to the new portable infoboxes and having some issues, that's what most of everyone elses edits lately have been regarding. For now let it be and hopefully we'll have it fixed soon, we may have to start using either html code or putting in brackets but we're working behind the code to get it fixed. --Subsourian (talk) 01:04, June 16, 2017 (UTC)


 * When playing around with Fenix (dragoon), apparently our guinea pig, I saw this if I use color names. If I use HTML codes, or some color templates (I only have template: black, white and lightpink) I didn't see any issues. The new template prioritizes the race color strongly, and doesn't recognize color names, only HTML names, which is why I have those few color templates. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) contribs 01:35, June 16, 2017 (UTC)