We once talked about the icon for this template, Meneth. I preferred the existing one with clock which you don't want to use because of its eye-catching color. I made one in blue . Perhaps you like it. – Lillebror (talk) 11:45, 5 December 2014 (CET)
Second parameter for the scope
I would like to add a second optional parameter which specifies the scope of this template.
Example for the use with
The following table may contain outdated information that is inaccurate for the current version of the game. The last version it was verified as up to date for was 1.6.
Example for the use with a transcluded infobox:
The following infobox may contain outdated information that is inaccurate for the current version of the game. The last version it was verified as up to date for was 1.6.
Form British Nation
Please help with verifying or updating this infobox. It was last verified for version 1.29.
By uniting our political development domestically and extending our influence beyond our borders we will be able to reinforce our position in world affairs and transform into one of the foremost European powers, the British Empire.
Great Britain does not exist.
If the country is AI-controlled then it:
If London (236) is part of the HRE, but the country is not a member then:
If Great Britain:
- Seems like a good idea to me. Will it default to something sensible until everything is updated to new layout? Dauth (talk) 10:19, 15 July 2015 (CEST)
- Sounds good to me. Should default to "section" as usual if the parameter isn't set. ~ Meneth (talk) 11:50, 15 July 2015 (CEST)
- Oh and I hope (one of) the reason(s) you want this is so that the versioning can be put in the bonus table itself so that editors no longer have to worry about "is this table actually up to date? How do I version the section it is in?" ~ Meneth (talk) 11:54, 15 July 2015 (CEST)
Infoboxes for events, decisions and missions
With the last change of this template it is possible to add a versioning info above an infobox. But now I think this solution can be improved.
- What do you think about an integration of the SVersion call into the infoboxes?
- What is your opinion about a placement of the versioning inside the box, not above as at the time?
- If placed inside, an error message about the missing versioning.
At the moment only the page has a versioning. If you want to update a page you have to do this as a whole. For pages with many infoboxes that's a lot of work. These ideas should help to split this work. ... – Lillebror (talk) 13:40, 13 October 2015 (CEST)
- Nice idea. Work can be split with version inside infobox, but more is generated. Updating version of not changed list would require to update version of every event. But it is likely worth it. Now, if you want to generate some work, what would you think about adding hidden parameter for every file, for a technical name such as "aow_events.29". Then perhaps each event could be automatically linked in the Event IDs with the actual version added in new column. It would make a great tool for keeping events p to date and let them be moved more freely between lists. Would need a complicated bot to maintain though. Puchacz (talk) 16:50, 13 October 2015 (CEST)
- More work is generated?
- If paradox changes something, the wiki has to be changed, too. This is work.
- If nothing is changed by a new patch, you have not only to change the versioning of the page but also the infobox versioning. That's true, but this can easyly done by search and replace. If an event for example is changed by a new version, you have to edit the event anyway. Changing the infobox versioning is then not significant. – Lillebror (talk) 08:53, 14 October 2015 (CEST)
- I'd say use your own judgement. If something is never going to change because it is a general description instead of documenting the game, then it can be timeless. Dauth (talk) 11:26, 19 September 2017 (CEST)
- It varies for me, but ultimately depends on the section's length [broken to points when became too ]:
- If it is a rather short section [2-3 lines] then I'll prefer to leave it without a tag of its own and use the parent's tag for it.
- If there are several small sections that I could put under one "main" section with one tag then all the better.
- As for timeless I prefer to use them on pages with not directly related to gameplay -- dev diaries, patches, general "portal"/information pages etc.
- I also leave out tags if a section is a summary of another page/section [accompanied with a main/see also].
- I find that version tags on a bunch of consecutive small sections makes them messy and unreadable after a version bump. Hope this helps. ~ SolSys (talk) 14:37, 19 September 2017 (CEST)