Öhm, I guess the page need to be recreated for a change in the adress?
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/dota2/RaidCall_Dota_2_Cup/The_Revenge/IX should be 4 not 9... That´s one stupid little mistake.

shz

Germany2687 Posts

December 28 2012 04:54 GMT

#862

On December 28 2012 11:11 Hondelul wrote:
Öhm, I guess the page need to be recreated for a change in the adress?
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/dota2/RaidCall_Dota_2_Cup/The_Revenge/IX should be 4 not 9... That´s one stupid little mistake.

You could just recreate the page with the correct title and replace this with a request for deletion: {{deletion|for=REASON}} or move it to the right name (not sure if you can without editor rights).

I would have done that for you, but if it's called "The Revenge 4" and not "The Revenge IV" I would move it to .../The_Revenge/4 instead of IV. Could you clarify this?

tofucake

Hyrule19240 Posts

December 28 2012 05:16 GMT

#863

we have a move template, shz

shz

Germany2687 Posts

December 28 2012 05:21 GMT

#864

On December 28 2012 14:16 tofucake wrote:
we have a move template, shz

Oh, right.

{{move|NEW NAME}}

But finding someone on IRC to move it is faster most of the time, at least if it's an error, and not a opinion on how it should be namend.

Hondelul

1999 Posts

December 28 2012 09:51 GMT

#865

Would have created it with 4 instead of IV but there are already the predecessors http://wiki.teamliquid.net/dota2/RaidCall_Dota_2_Cup/The_Revenge/II so I wanted to keep it in line.

http://wiki.teamliquid.net/dota2/RaidCall_Dota_2_Cup/The_Revenge/IV I think I got it.

Will try IRC next time but I thought it´s not that important. And (if I did it right) that moving is really easy. The big warning let´s you hesitate though ^^

Edit: Btw, I would prefer it with 1-4, too. Makes much more sense, but moving the other old pages is imo out of my permission and only one page being different seems wrong.

moskonia

Israel1448 Posts

January 08 2013 20:51 GMT

#866

Hey I have made some changed to the 4gate page, but it says its pending approval, so if anyone can check it and approve it would be cool. It had some parts that were outdated / not true, so I have to change it, dunno if I posted this comment at the right thread though.

pPingu

Switzerland2892 Posts

January 08 2013 22:58 GMT

#867

Thank you for taking the time to edit the page

Don't forget to put upper cases to units and buildings as indicated here!

http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Liquipedia:Style_Guide#Upper_and_lower_case

moskonia

Israel1448 Posts

January 09 2013 01:26 GMT

#868

On January 09 2013 07:58 pPingu wrote:
Thank you for taking the time to edit the page

Don't forget to put upper cases to units and buildings as indicated here!

http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Liquipedia:Style_Guide#Upper_and_lower_case

Thanks I will look into it!

EDIT: already made a few changes because of the page u linked me

Blisse

Canada3710 Posts

January 09 2013 03:22 GMT

#869

Sorry, not sure if anyone noticed this, but for the Fantasy Proleague, when we had that option to automatically generate the team BBCode, it was broken for players like Speed, sSak and Shy, at one point (list not comprehensive), since the player (I think) switched names in SC2, but Liquipedia still keeps the old one.

Not sure if this has anything to do with Liquipedia though.

This is an example from the first page of FPL.

(T)

Speed

ChapatiyaqPTSM

France1887 Posts

January 09 2013 08:41 GMT

#870

It's not Liquipedia, it's the Team Liquid Progaming Database.
TLPD Feedback Thread

Also, see this thread (Broken FPL Player Links) for your problem.

Blisse

Canada3710 Posts

January 10 2013 02:45 GMT

#871

On January 09 2013 17:41 ChapatiyaqPTSM wrote:
It's not Liquipedia, it's the Team Liquid Progaming Database.
TLPD Feedback Thread

Also, see this thread (Broken FPL Player Links) for your problem.

I posted it before he made the thread, but thanks anyways. At least it's on the agenda.

Trasko

Sweden983 Posts

January 10 2013 14:18 GMT

#872

Hi!
Okay. So I have a question regarding the sidebar of the StarCraft II Liquipedia. Would it be possible to add another link under the "Competition Scene" section that says "Country" or something like that. I've recently started updating all the pages within the "SC2 Community/Country" pages, and they were really out of date. I think the reason for this is that they get minimal publicity, when they actually are really interesting pages to read!

I am also trying to change all the pages there to a suitable "Liquipedia" standard. I have so far done thorough work with two countries; Sweden and China. I was wondering if anyone could check and see the format I've used is okay, so that I can continue with some other countries. Because first of all, the Swedish page didn't exist at all (honestly a surprise considering their magnitude in the SC2 world ^^) And the chinese wan was just a really short stub. Would this format be acceptable for each individual country page?

iMAniaC

Norway703 Posts

January 13 2013 10:58 GMT

#873

I saw that you'd done a huge rewrite on the Chinese scene, but I haven't had time to read and approve it until today. Sorry for the delay :/ I hate it when great edits get bogged down waiting for approval but that's the way things are sometimes. However, great job, Trasko! That's definitely how I'd like the country-pages to look like! So in answer to your question, yes, definitely, keep it up!

I'll poke the other LP guys and see if we can't get the Country pages linked to from a better location

asaed

United States1412 Posts

January 19 2013 01:37 GMT

#874

The Defense 3

This is minor: Group B has HWA colored in red as if they are eliminated and mtw as Yellow as if they are for sure advancing. This isn't accurate, as if HWA beats Next, then they will tie and play a play-off game.

Similarly, in Group D, NaVi looks like they are locked in to advance in the first/upper bracket because they are colored Green, but they also have to play a playoff game with Team 3DMax who is mistakenly colored Yellow as if they are for sure advancing in the lower bracket.

I have tired to make these edits several times, and they keep getting changed back. Can someone please explain why this isn't being handled or fixed? This is obviously small, but this detail was fixed by community members (me) and then never accepted. Am I doing something wrong?

EDIT: The reason I bring this up (yes, very minor) is that I would like to contribute more to Liquidpedia, because I regularly keep up with the Dota 2 eSports scene, but having your changes corrected back even though I feel like I am making accurate updates... well, I just don't understand and want to know how I can actually help/what I'm doing wrong.

Thanks

salle

Sweden5554 Posts

January 19 2013 02:39 GMT

#875

Four Group B it looks like you're right with the tied rules, they will play a head to head.
Usually tournaments ignore one on one ties by checking the group match they played and picking the team that one between the two. However this is not how The Defence does it, but I think this might be the reason someone reverted your change.

Same for Group D

A great tool to ensure that other editors see what you see is if you correct a mistake, you can use the summary field to point out why it was wrong, helping the person who did the initial mistake to see what it was they had missed, or allow a third party to check what you say and approve it quicker.

asaed

United States1412 Posts

January 19 2013 04:28 GMT

#876

On January 19 2013 11:39 salle wrote:
Four Group B it looks like you're right with the tied rules, they will play a head to head.
Usually tournaments ignore one on one ties by checking the group match they played and picking the team that one between the two. However this is not how The Defence does it, but I think this might be the reason someone reverted your change.

Same for Group D

A great tool to ensure that other editors see what you see is if you correct a mistake, you can use the summary field to point out why it was wrong, helping the person who did the initial mistake to see what it was they had missed, or allow a third party to check what you say and approve it quicker.

Great thank you--I was wondering how to do that in the corrections. Summary field... will do