Talk:Main Page/2013

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive of the conversations during 2011 about the wiki as a whole.

Do not respond to these conversations, as they are stale and no longer read; this page is for archival purposes only, so we know what we were talking about.

Problem with images[edit]

Whenever I click an image I get a 404 error. - Anyone else got this as well?? Biggus Berrus (talk) 10:46, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Yup, I noticed the same problem. Odd thing is the thumbnails still work. --
Thirded. thumbnail fullsize --NotBrandX (talk) 14:51, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, that's suboptimal. Investigating. --Wikifag (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
The image still exists, but the wiki is throwing a hissy fit about them for some reason. Fix might be godawful. Brace yourselves. --Wikifag (talk) 14:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

The fix was completely unrelated to that horrendous bombing of the recent changes by maintenance script, which achieved effectively exactly nothing but wasting an arseload of disk space. Problem was to do with browser caching directives; the standard way to specify cache expiry times for static resources in nginx is to catch all URLs terminated by an appropriate file extension, but since mediawiki file URLs are terminated in the same way for the file they're showing, it was catching those and trying to set cache expiry times and things were going horribly wrong. I need to find a more accurate way to isolate the static files. Have reverted to non-caching setup for now. --Wikifag (talk) 17:16, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

You're doing the Emperor's work, son. --NotBrandX (talk) 22:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
If you can use regexes or some other kind of rule-based system, maybe you can have it set cache time X for files ending in .png and so on, unless they have "File:" in the name. Alternatively, you could make the rule set the cache time for URLs with "/images/" in them. --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 23:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I've configured nginx with location directives to grab /images/, /skins/ and /resources/, as those paths contain pretty much all the static resources in the form of images and javascript and whatnot that mediawiki wants to serve. It seems to be working fine now, although this latest optimisation does generally introduce the possibility that some people won't notice new versions of images until their cache expires; having images updated with new versions is actually really rare though, so it shouldn't really bother anyone. --Wikifag (talk) 16:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A Potential Page[edit]

A few guys on /tg/ want to preserve a Space Marine Chapter their making so that it doesn't "fade away" so to speak. Here's the link: I told them I'll try, but there's no promises. I don't even know if this is meant to be the place to ask Keeper of the War Angels 4:01, 3 April 2013

You don't even have to ask. See all the homebrew chapters? They got made in exactly the same way as your chapter, and we have pages on them because somebody though they were worth archiving. --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 17:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

So does that mean I can go along and do it myself? Keeper of the War Angels 4:57, 3 April 2013

Yes. Again, there's no need to ask anyone for permission -- the whole point of a wiki is that users are free to create and edit pages, so I'm not sure what you're asking about.
Check out the help pages, but especially Help:Editing and the Formatting Guidelines for details on how to make wiki pages. --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 21:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Tactica[edit]

With the new Warriors of Chaos book coming out today, I had a question regarding on how we're going to upload tactics for that book onto here. There are two options:

  • Stick to the current model for WFB tactics: update the current pages and get rid of the old stuff.
  • Follow the 40k model by copying the old page into a new article and update the current one into the tactica for the current book.

It's a bit odd that we have these different models for the different games. Which one's it going to be? Biggus Berrus 16:39, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I vote for option #2. Edition changes can really shake up how an army plays (see: Orks from 5E to 6E). --Dr. Thompson 16:30, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I would like to further suggest that, as more tactica pages get created, we keep up the "Xth Edition Tactics" part of the title, and have the regular "Tactics" link be a redirect to the most current edition (that way, we don't have to change all the links on every other page every time a new edition or codex comes out).

Speaking of "more tactica pages" getting created, we don't have entries for the Elysians, Death Korps of Krieg, Armoured Battle Group, Death Korps Armoured Battle Group, Tyrant's Legion, or Renegades and Heretics. The first four should probably be sub-pages of the Imperial Guard tactics; the Renegades and Heretics can contain all three variant lists (vanilla, Servants of Slaughter, Servants of Decay) since they share most of their units in common (the only differences are e.g. Servants of Decay get Plague Marines, etc.). --Not LongPoster Again 22:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I made a new page for the new tactica with working links. Please fill that one in. Biggus Berrus 11:02, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Frontpage edit request[edit]

The front page is locked, and currently has two screens of "news" that is over six months old. Could someone who has TEH POWAH move the 'quick links' and 'about' sections back to the top where noobs will see them without having to scroll down? --NotBrandX 14:16, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Old news is old. I think it should be organised as About -> Quick Links -> Conduct in descending order. --Dr. Thompson 14:48, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
The news is now new but I've put the quicklinks over it anyway, it will make it more accessible for new users.--Wikifag (talk) 02:27, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposal for a new namespace[edit]

As we all know, /tg/ loves its quests, but recently people have been making articles for quests and collective games (e.g. Hormissar Gaunt) that aren't even a day old, and I think it might end up cluttering the wiki with quests most people haven't heard about. Thus, I propose making a new Quest mainspace that would function similarly to the Campaign namespace and serve a similar purpose.--Newerfag 22:38, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Or just use the Campaign namespace. The only difference between campaigns and quests that I can see is basically semantic -- quests generally have however many fa/tg/uys are in the thread controlling a single character, as opposed to the one-to-one PC-to-player correspondence of most RPG groups, but otherwise the experience is the same. --Not LongPoster Again 01:23, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
That works too, although it may cause a bit of confusion, since some people still see quests as a gray area of sorts between an RPG and a "choose-your-own-adventure" book. I'll wait for second opinions before moving pages around, though.--Newerfag 02:23, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
In my mind, Quests and RPG games are separate things. I vote for a Quest namespace - the idea of quest threads is a /tg/ tradition, and deserves its' own meta-coverage. --Dr. Thompson 13:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
As of very recently I've created a Quest namespace (and a Story namespace while I was at it). The Campaign namespace is marked noncontent, meaning it doesn't show up in counts of legit articles or by random page loading, since it's just intended as convenient accessible storage for people running small games - quests, on the other hand, ideally involve a much larger portion of the userbase and as they run directly on the board they get a lot more exposure and therefore more attention than the campaign namespace was intended for.--Wikifag (talk) 02:31, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

We need a Templates and Infoboxes page.[edit]

It's quite difficult to find a particular template on the wiki if you don't know its' exact name. I have to find articles where they're used and look at the source, then search for the name. I think we need a page on the wiki dedicated to listing and linking to the various templates in use, to speed up and smooth over wiki editing. --Dr. Thompson 07:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I should clarify: I'd be happy to make the thing, but I don't know whether the wiki wants it. --Dr. Thompson 14:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

We've got redlinks to a "Help:Template" page, which strikes me as an appropriate place for such a list (infoboxes are templates). If/when I get around to that page, I'll give it such a list, or you could make the page yourself with only the list, and let the instructions for making your own templates and so on get added later. --Not LongPoster Again 21:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I made a sorted list with this. I may make it more useful as a library later if no one else does. I also did not include a few that would not fit in any sort of list.-- 22:19, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

A new item for the neckbeard section[edit]

Wouldn't it be nice if we added a link to Dungeons:_the_Dragoning_40,000_7th_Edition there? It's a nice homebrew and it might increase the visibility of the article in the wiki.-- 20:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

On the one hand, I'm not sure it's this wiki's place to "endorse" homebrews. On the other hand, we're already linking to AdEva from the front page, so we'd better figure out some principle(s) for determining which projects get a link there. I'm thinking that having a polished rulebook (as both AdEva and D:tD do) is a good criterion (and need not be the only criterion); anyone else have comments? --AssistantWikifag 04:51, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I vote against front-page promotion. We need to avoid favoritism, as we're meant to be a (theoretically) impartial wiki. Either we promote them all or we promote none, and promoting them all would reduce the front page to a horrifying slurry. --Dr. Thompson 14:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Fighting the Spam Gods[edit]

I've noticed on some of the spam bots that target this wiki, they seem to have no problem bypassing captcha's. Alongside the captcha, how about one of those 'Are you not a robot?' questions, but /tg/ geared? Maybe something like 'Matt _____ is the bane of our existence (fill in blank)' (Ive seen this on some forums, but I honestly don't know if this is even possible with a wiki) Might help cut down the spammers a bit. At least the non /tg/ related ones anyway. --Kerbobotat 00:17, 01 December 2012 (GMT)

  • I second this motion. It seems like there's another dozen of those gibberish spam pages each day, despite Captcha.--Dr. Thompson 07:07, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thirded. I'm an admin on another wiki, and I've seen something just like this. (Actually, it was worse- there were literally thousands of spambots; half of them copypasted passages from Twilight, and the other half wrote entirely in Chinese. At least the ones here post spam that makes sense.) The extension needed for the question thing is on this page.

If you can, try to install the Asirra captcha. It's image-based, so spambots will have a lot of trouble figuring it out.--Newerfag 07:21, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I actually tried to install Asirra before but I couldn't get it working properly. --Wikifag (talk) 03:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
The tricky part about anti-spam extensions is the balance between stopping spam and inconveniencing legitimate editors (including anons/IP addresses). The fact that questions cannot be automatically generated is also a hurdle (though if the questions are "niche" enough, that might not be such a big deal). Anyway, I'll email Wikifag about the idea (which should be straightforward, since we already have ConfirmEdit) -- the pace has definitely been picking up of late. --AssistantWikifag 21:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to have to prompt Wiki Control again regarding anti-spambot measures. The bots have stepped up their game and they've started to shift the spam around using redirects. Has an "are you a robot?" question been implemented? --Dr. Thompson 07:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

FYI, the redirects thing is not new to this wiki.
When I posted before, I emailed Wikifag about it with a couple of sample questions; he said he's working on it. He mentioned that he's got some other wiki maintenance tasks on his plate, including a software update; it may be that he will implement QuestyCaptcha during that downtime. --AssistantWikifag 19:14, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Twenty-eight updates in the past ten hours. Eighteen of them were new spam, spambots making accounts, or admins deleting spam. [sobs internally] --NotBrandX (talk) 03:36, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
As of just about now I've switched our captcha implementation to QuestyCaptcha and given it a couple of questions easily solvable from info on the front page. I'm slightly wary of making any questions that a newcomer would find harder to track down the answers to because I'm hopelessly inclusive, but we'll see how it goes. Questy will be great as long as nobody specifically targets our site.--Wikifag (talk) 03:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
One-hundred and fourty-five updates in the past twenty-two hours; none of them spam or spam-related. Tears of joy are streaking down my face into my neckbeard. --NotBrandX (talk) 01:25, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
I too am overjoyed. Thanks for implementing Questy along with the rest of the overhaul, Wikifag. --Dr. Thompson (talk) 05:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Works great. Though I was way overthinking the "What does /tg/ stand for" question. Biggus Berrus (talk) 11:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

aaaaand the spambots are back. This time creating new accounts and writing to their User:bluhbluh pages. I count twelve such attempts in the past three hours. --NotBrandX (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Edits for language/swearing[edit]

I've noticed lately quite a few incidences of unregistered users replacing or deleting "offensive" language (especially the word fag/faggot). Thus far I have mostly refrained from reverting the edits; the word doesn't offend me personally in the context in which it is usually used but apparently someone feels it is worth their time to remove it whenever they see it. What is the consensus on this, should we support this "cleaning up" or revert it back to the original text? --Sonicology 20:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

  • Whilst on the one hand the removal of particular offensive words doesn't really hurt anyone, this isn't Wikipedia. With the mountains of NSFW images and badly written but strangely boner-inducing fapfics, deleting words like 'faggot' seems utterly redundant, and ultimately is just editing for the sake of editing, which, IMO, should be prevented. But of course I'm no authority on the wiki so don't just take my opinion on it as the only one there is. --Luigi 00:03, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
    • My position on this is that if they're deleting it to improve the readability of the article then go nuts. If they're on some moral crusade and are just eviscerating articles without rewriting them then they can kindly go fuck themselves with a chainsword. --Petro 00:58, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
    • Yeah pretty much what Petro said, could you provide one or two examples of the language removal if you would be so kind Sonicology? It'd be good for us to see exactly how he's changing the articles. --Luigi 01:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
      • Sure, it's kinda hard to find them sometimes because they get buried under other edits but here are a couple of recent examples: [1] [2] --Sonicology 10:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
      • Thanks for those, yeah it seems as though he's just removing the rude language for the sake of the rude language, he doesn't make any efforts to clean up the rest of the article or improve anything else. So yeah, as Petro said, they can go fuck themselves with a chainsword. --Luigi 13:11, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
      • Looks like we are in agreement then, if I see these kind of edits again then I'll revert them. --Sonicology 08:34, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Homebrew Roundup 2: The Revengening[edit]

A while back I tried to clean up the homebrew section but it's grown so massive and unwieldy I didn't end up accomplishing much beyond updating some links and generally flailing around. I think we really need to discuss a better way to organize them as a whole. For one some things just need to get fucked. I know notability isn't a big thing here but some articles have absolutely nothing beyond a one sentence blurb saying, "/tg/ talked about this at one point!". If we can't find any info on those we should just clean them out since they aren't really adding anything of value. Beyond that organizing the remaining brews into fully functional games (Adeptus Evangelion), Mostly finished games (VeloCity) and settings that either have minimal or no effective rulesets (CATastrophe). It's already set up this way in theory but it nobody really bothers to upkeep it. --Petro 20:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Additionally how would people and by people I mostly mean User:Wikifag feel about hosting copies of homebrews here. It would make 1d4chan a better resource and elminate the scourge of broken links. On the other hand keeping them up to date would be a major PITA and the bandwidth issues could be prohibitive. --Petro 20:23, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
File:Engine Heart Deluxe form-fillable.pdfHosting local copies of /tg/'s homebrews is something I used to do myself, but I lost a bunch at some point and then I've not been particularly active and didn't pick it up again. But what I have done in the last day is configure the wiki to enable PDF uploads and added an extension to thumbnail them so they can be treated like images in most respects. What would normally be full-view is instead a link to the PDF entire. I uploaded Engine Heart as a test - see right. But basically, now there's nothing to stop anyone from uploading the PDFs themselves, and them slapping them on the appropriate pages.--Wikifag (talk) 02:13, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm working on uploading some PDFs. So far I have Engine Heart and CATastrophe up. People still genuinely don't seem to know that we host PDFs so it's more a job of advertising it. -- 00:00, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

It's tempting (for preservation's sake) to upload PDFs of out-of-print or otherwise unavailable games (like a certain game, or something more wholesome) but I want not to get our Wikifag into trouble. --NotBrandX (talk) 13:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

No that's a clusterfuck we don't want to involve ourselves in. Companies are pretty anal about defunct IP and it would likely bring a storm of DMCA notices at us. Better to stick to homebrews like the above mentioned. Plenty left, somebody upload Joints and Jivers! --Petro (talk) 22:14, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Category issue, again[edit]

On the Category:Stubs page Choppy is listed, implying its a stub, but on the page it is lacking a stub tag, and is not labeled as a stub in the categories. I saw that wikifag said on his talk page he might change the category system, although given my meager technical knowledge I didn't understand much besides that. If he hasn't changed the category system yet, I think whatever is causing the choppy to show up on the stubs category should be taken into account if possible.-- 05:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Erm... Help?[edit]

I'm thick, I'm stupid, Orks beat me at chess, I apologise in advance. I've tried to create an account to this, my most favourite website but I can't as I get Stuck on the security question and I can't seem to find it on the site. This is driving me to an almost Angry Marine state of RAAGE. Please could one of you neckbearded Elders please drag me kicking and screaming to where I need to go. I promise I won't bite.


For one thing, you can contribute just fine as an IP address (except for uploading images). Furthermore, there is more than one security question, so if you're stuck on one, you might try your hand at the other. In any case, if you look further up the page (in the section regarding spam), you will see where the admin has hidden the answers. My advice: think literally and look for trees instead of forests. --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 20:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Specifically the answer to either question can be found in the "About" section on the front page. If you still can't work it out then email me and I will laugh at you but tell you the answers, it's good enough proof that you're not a robot anyway. --Wikifag (talk) 15:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)


Need help smashing bad dm's campaign. The set up is D20 system pathfinder srd. If you want full story go to my talk, if not respond and we can chat. All professionals wanted.

1d4chan is not your personal army. If you don't like what your GM is doing, try talking to him. If that doesn't work, find a new GM.--Bjorn (talk) 05:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
I read it and basically it boils down to him being a whiny little bitch. Just ban the fucker and be done with it.--Newerfag (talk) 07:55, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I Think Something Broke[edit]

Is anyone else having a problem with 1d4chan defaulting to centering for text in all articles? It's making them dicking hard to read and I'd like to know if I'm having this problem in a vaccuum, or if everyone else is, too. -- Jaimas 09:59 AM, 11 October 2013 (EST)

Nope. I'm seeing text-align:justify everywhere, which comes from... no style sheet at all? Wait, I think there's some mediawiki javascript that creates style sheets on-the-fly every time I view a page, and apparently that has a 'text-align' setting set to '0' ? The mediawiki script tags are kind of a mess, difficult to read (thanks, PHP). --NotBrandX (talk) 17:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
How long has this been happening? What skin do you use (probably the default, but worth asking)? What browser? --Wikifag (talk) 21:06, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Since yesterday, default skin, Mozilla Firefox. -- Jaimas 12:27 AM, 12 October 2013 (EST)
I'm using Firefox and default skin and not noticing any problems myself. The only thing I've changed recently is that I removed the Kickstarter banner for my friend's project and put the ad back up top. It's possible I inadvertently messed something up when I did that but I'd expect it to be affecting everyone if I had. I think I'm soon going to be doing a mediawiki update which will involve resetting the skins anyway so if you can hang on until I get around to that we'll see if it fixes things. In the meantime, sorry about that. --Wikifag (talk) 11:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
It is fine, noble Wikifag. Thank you for your time! -- Jaimas 13:59, 13 October 2013 (EST)
I didn't understand this comment about mediawiki javascript right away. For me this problem was linked to not having javascript disabled. When I re-enable javascript, the text stops centering. -- Random User
OK. I was rather annoyed that all the text appears centered. I was going to play around with text justification and formatting to fix this. I'd really like to show off a few articles here to someone, so ... I turned on Javascript and logged in. Behold, everything is left justified again. TL;DR - it's a Javascript related issue. Web Browser: Firefox. Relevant add-ons: NoScript. -- FourierSeries (talk) 10:31, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Knights Inductor is turning into a shitstorm[edit]

There's been a lot of conflict regarding the status of the Knights Inductor and all of their related pages, and since nobody is willing to budge on the issue I can imagine a lot of edit wars breaking out over it. To stop the problem before it begins, I strongly suggest locking all KI-related pages at the very least, if not simply purging them from the wili. The talk pages are already devolving into name-calling and ad hominems, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Left unchecked, it's only a matter of time before the edit wars begin.--Newerfag (talk) 00:25, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

There has been no name-calling or edit wars as far as I can see, and it's remained fairly civil. I don't see what the problem is. Pages should never be locked because of perceived fears of possible future edit wars or bitching. -Anon
Barely. The reception of the pages as they are now are cold at best and an overwhelming majority of people on /tg/ want anything relating to the KI to be completely erased. The fact that their writers obstinately refuse to accept criticism (in fact one just made a big show about how he was quitting 1d4chan forever) is certainly not a good sign by anyone's standards. The whole thing is ticking time bomb now. -Another Anon

How can I delete?[edit]

There's two pages I'm marking up for deletion: Redemption of the Reasonable Marines and Codex - Aprior Guard that I made. The former for me not going to put any content in there and the latter because I'm probably not going to be working on it. And Codex - Star Fangs as well since I'm essentially renaming that as Codex - Scary Marines for clarification. Remoon101 (talk) 14:47, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Deleting a page is admins-only. You mark a page with the "delete" template, and whenever Wikifag or AssistantWikifag come through, they will see it and delete it (or they won't -- they're fairly diligent about deleting spam pages, but it's a toss-up if they go after other pages). On the other hand, if you want to rename a page, you can do that on your own -- mouse over the little arrow between "View history" and the search bar at the top of the page, click the "move" link, and go to town (see Help:Move). --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 15:01, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the help, I appreciate it Remoon101 (talk) 15:32, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

recent changes[edit]

Okay, so when you look under recent changes, theres these red and green numbers. What exactly do they mean? Sorry about my stupidity, but I really have no idea.

It shows how many total characters that edit has added or removed (green means the character count has increased, and red means it has decreased). It's a rough indication of the magnitude of the edit -- a few dozen characters up or down is probably a sentence or two being re-worded, spelling fixes, that sort of thing (though it could also be a major revision that just happens to use the same number of characters as before), while a change of a couple thousand indicates a substantial rewrite (or massive blanking, for a large drop). --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 13:31, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Music page?[edit]

I had an idea for a page for 40k races that links music thats good to listen to while reading/painting/modeling/doing anything related to a certain race? Like under the space marine section it would have gregorian chants or something, under dark eldar would be industrial and NIN, chaos would probably be metal, orkz are...I dont know, ska and punk I guess since theyre space skinheads. Just an idea, what do you think? --

Go head dude. Music is very personal-taste though, so be prepared for people hating on you for liking what they don't like, maybe even /mu/tants telling you to go mcfucking kill yourself. Aim for the broadest appeal, and good luck. --NotBrandX (talk) 19:09, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[edit]

When I confronted this user about his removal of the word "rape" from multiple pages of the wiki, I received a deranged rant about how we somehow supported "rape culture" and were somehow misogynist for using the word "rape". I suggest he be banned at once, as he has made it clear that he will make no positive contributions to the wiki. --Newerfag (talk) 01:34, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Pahahahah oh my fucking god I just went to that guys talkpage and it is fucking hilarious! Jesus christ he's like a walking cliché. Yeah though I agree he should be banned if he's gonna keep editing words he doesn't like. --Luigi (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
If he's a troll, he's an extraordinarily convincing one. Best ban him anyway to be safe. Then slap a giant disclaimer on the front page explaining the concept of satire in the most condescending way possible.--Newerfag (talk) 18:45, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


Saw interest in the List of Quest Threads page, decided to do some tidying-up. It's good that articles about quest-threads are in their own Quest:* namespace, though it's a little irritating to get a list by going to Special:AllPages. I've tagged the articles (not sub-articles) with Category:Quests so that there's an easier way to find them. --NotBrandX (talk) 19:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Mobile Devices[edit]

Hey there, a stupid question - anyone else having problems with viewing the site on mobile devices? So far I've tried 3 different handhelds (iphone, nokia and ipad) and the only thing displaying on a page is the "Ads by Project Wonderful" and "Privacy policy About 1d4chan Disclaimers". No text, nothing. However however however! Managed to find a very roundabout way to access the site by caching the page in google and viewing it with "Text-Only version" (since neither of my handhelds has the option to disable images for their browsers. Stupid corporate scumbags).

On a desktop everything works just dandy by the way. Only the mobiles have this crap. PapaPenguin (talk) 15:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

It works just fine on Android.--Newerfag (talk) 14:03, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I can confirm that it works on Android (Galaxy S2), both with Firefox and the native "Web" app. Have you (PapaPenguin -- please sign your talk-page posts going forward, by the way) tried using multiple browsers on your mobile devices? I don't know if Apple permits heresy against Saint Jobs, er, alternate browsers on their devices, but there is an old version of Firefox for mobile that supports Maemo (assuming that you're talking about the Nokia N900, or is your Nokia a Windows phone?), and I don't know about Opera. --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 15:04, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

It works fine on kindle fire HD, using silk browser. did you try setting it to web view? I had the same problem until I changed it from mobile view to web view.

^ My bad, had to read how to sign. Err, my Nokia is pre-Dark Age of Technology E72 :P Yeah, it's old, and AFAIK its browser is the default Nokia Browser for symbian. I'll see what other browsers that thing can support. Thing is though, about a month ago everything ran perfectly. PapaPenguin (talk) 15:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Not sure what's changed since then. Wikifag sometimes moves the ad on the top to the bottom, to plug a /tg/-related kickstarter up top, but he's done that before and changed it back without causing any issues -- unless maybe he messed up something this time, but I feel like that would cause more problems. Do you not even see the sidebar?
Well, like someone said earlier, if your browser has an option to render pages differently, try that, and it also looks like there are versions of Opera Mobile and Opera Mini that support Symbian. You might also try contacting Wikifag directly (he has a gmail account under that name) to try to hammer out what, if anything, has changed. I hope this works out. --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, UC Browser seems to work just fine, but there definetely is a problem with Safari, just borrowed a few of my friends' phones and pads to check. Anyways, thanks for checking. PapaPenguin (talk) 12:53, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Notability rule proposal[edit]

Lately I've seen a whole bunch of pages covering topics that don't seem to have much to do with /tg/ or lack enough popularity to justify their presence on the wiki. While this is indeed a wiki for /tg/-related topics, there's no point in allowing it to be clogged by abandoned homebrews and half-finished settings. Therefore, I propose that we implement some kind of notability rule similar to that used by Wikipedia (, albeit modified for our purposes so that unproductive settings, homebrews, and the like are culled as necessary.--Newerfag (talk) 07:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia's "notability criteria" have absolutely no reason to exist. All these rules do is discourage contribution and the creation of new articles. Oh no, there's a page about something that I don't think belongs! Let's delete it, lest we run out of web pages. Because having more wiki articles clogs the wiki. Both of these claims make no sense: it's so damn easy to ignore a wiki article. It's even easier than ignoring a thread on 4chan! Just don't go to that page. Don't link to it (hell, most users on 1d4chan don't link pages at all in the first place). Does it hurt you to know there's a page on this wiki that is incomplete, abandoned, or unrelated? Why do you want to delete pages that other people have worked to create? Maybe you can try improving on them instead? Add them to categories, create templates, clean up grammar, link more wiki pages to them? 4chan, and 1d4chan by extension, are NOT Serious Fucking Business. Besides, who's going to enforce these rules? If you're going to have them, then someone will have to enforce them: otherwise they are at best meaningless, and at worst used to get rid of stuff people don't like just because they don't like it. Strong disagree, and also stop blanking articles unless you're replacing them with better content. --Zecro (talk) 08:00, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
If this is about the Halo pages, I beg to differ. They were cancerous from the very beginning and should have not been made in the first place. Making a codex page themed on the Covenant is one thing, but those pages are big enough to qualify as their own wiki now. --Newerfag (talk) 08:18, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
So what? --Zecro (talk) 08:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I thought this was the /tg/ wiki, not the Halo-40k crossover bullshit wiki.-- 08:29, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

The situation has now been resolved. Let's refrain from letting it happen again.--Newerfag (talk) 08:59, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Notability criteria seem rather against the spirit of the wiki, although I do see where you're coming from. Alternative suggestion: if a page on a setting, etc. is still in a WIP state but hasn't been edited in a certain amount of time (a week?), it's fair game for deletion. It would help to solve the problem of half-finished, abandoned pages. As for the pages about Halo weapons and stuff... I agree that they should be deleted; they're nothing to do with /tg/ and, while a page on Halo is fine even if it's long, we don't need any more (unless it's stuff like the Covenant codex, or how to use Halo as a Dark Heresy setting or something). I mean, there aren't multiple pages on the characters and items of My Little Pony or Homestuck.--Soundifex (talk) 09:55, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. Perhaps I should have found a better way to express myself than I did earlier.--Newerfag (talk) 18:44, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

New breed of spambots[edit]

New spambots started today; they seem to be able to answer the quiz questions, and one of them even 'fixed' their spam being erased. See GeorgettaPrimea -- NotBrandX (talk) 23:04, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

  • Well fuck, after taking a peek at the User Creation Log (, there's loads of very bot-ish names popping up there, and a massive increase in the last couple of days. Worrying indeed --Luigi (talk) 01:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
  • I've seen that one way of cutting down on the spam is to put a limitation on new users that keeps them from editing their user page without making at least ten edits to the mainspace pages first. (CAPTCHAs might also be a good option as well. I've found that is all but impossible for most spambots to figure out.--Newerfag (talk) 04:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Just caught another one- they're adding the spam to their talk pages instead of the main user page now.--Newerfag (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2013 (UTC)