| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:PowerSlave: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StanTheMan (talk | contribs) |
Clonehunter (talk | contribs) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
So, I've redone the whole page with better screen shots and detail. But I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong with the formatting. I didn't see anything special on the page I was using a s abase, but I'm understanding this. Could someone help, please? Thanks. --[[User:Clonehunter|Clonehunter]] ([[User talk:Clonehunter|talk]]) 18:37, 1 July 2015 (EDT) | So, I've redone the whole page with better screen shots and detail. But I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong with the formatting. I didn't see anything special on the page I was using a s abase, but I'm understanding this. Could someone help, please? Thanks. --[[User:Clonehunter|Clonehunter]] ([[User talk:Clonehunter|talk]]) 18:37, 1 July 2015 (EDT) | ||
: It's not too bad, you certainly got the image thumbnails and text downpat; You've simply forgotten some formatting code and tags - The Table of Contents code | : It's not too bad, you certainly got the image thumbnails and text downpat; You've simply forgotten some formatting code and tags - The Table of Contents code with the full break line clearing near the top (Ex. <nowiki>__TOC__<br_clear=all></nowiki>) (this is stated on your talk page as well). Also Level 1 headings (<nowiki> =Example= </nowiki>) for the different weapon types, which I figure you should use if you have a page with three or more different types/groups of weapons and also categorization at the bottom of the page (Ex. <nowiki>[[Category:Video Game]]</nowiki>). I've fixed it up properly for you - Make note of the changes I've done and you should be fine for the most part on future pages. Also consult the [[IMFDB Style Guide]] for further help. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 22:52, 1 July 2015 (EDT) | ||
:: For the record, what is your basis for the S&W Model 24 ID? I only ask because unless it's specifically mentioned as that model (or that it only uses .44 Spls) it could easily be practically any N-frame S&W revolver. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 23:01, 1 July 2015 (EDT) | |||
:::Whoops, sorry about the categories, and yah I saw the bit on my talk page. Another one I forgot. Also, wasn't sure about the categorization of the page as there were so few weapons. As for the rationale, is was the closest match I could find, but I agree it is a bit vague, and probably could be any of those. --[[User:Clonehunter|Clonehunter]] ([[User talk:Clonehunter|talk]]) 23:09, 1 July 2015 (EDT) | |||
:::: No problem, like I said, just keep it in mind next time and you should be game, the rest of it looked fine. As for the S&W ID - We don't have much to go on given the graphics detail, but the gun does look to have a bull barrel (ruling out the .357 Magnum N-frames), and doesn't seem to have a cylinder gap (which would rule out the .44 Spl-only Model 24). That leaves the .45 Colt version of the [[Smith & Wesson Model 25]] and the [[Smith & Wesson Model 29]]. Of those two, I'd go with Model 29 - The features (what we can discern anyway) fit, and of course is it somewhat better known as well, I figure it's a safe bet. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 23:21, 1 July 2015 (EDT) | |||
::::: Alright, lets do that. I've never been great with revolvers, though I had simply passed the lack of the gap as the artist just filling in pixels. I'll keep the rest in mind, too. Thanks! --[[User:Clonehunter|Clonehunter]] ([[User talk:Clonehunter|talk]]) 23:48, 1 July 2015 (EDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 03:48, 2 July 2015
Been a fracking long time since I've worked with this kind of wiki layout. Needs to be cleaned up. I'll finish adding weapons later, though I'm not sure on all the identities, like the Revolver. I just kinda matched it up with the best lookalike. --Clonehunter 14:56, 20 May 2012 (CDT)
- If you need any help on weapons ID feel free to ask some admins for help. I am sure someone will help you fill out the page.--phoenixent 15:48, 20 May 2012 (CDT)
- Thanks. I'm guessing I can find them at the forums? The M60 pic seems to match up with the console pickup sprite (Now pictured), but I'm still guessing on the revolver.--Clonehunter 17:57, 22 May 2012 (CDT)
Nothing to add here, but Jesus does this game take me way back. I'd forgotten it even existed. --DeltaOne 17:42, 20 May 2012 (CDT)
Okay now
So, I've redone the whole page with better screen shots and detail. But I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong with the formatting. I didn't see anything special on the page I was using a s abase, but I'm understanding this. Could someone help, please? Thanks. --Clonehunter (talk) 18:37, 1 July 2015 (EDT)
- It's not too bad, you certainly got the image thumbnails and text downpat; You've simply forgotten some formatting code and tags - The Table of Contents code with the full break line clearing near the top (Ex. __TOC__<br_clear=all>) (this is stated on your talk page as well). Also Level 1 headings ( =Example= ) for the different weapon types, which I figure you should use if you have a page with three or more different types/groups of weapons and also categorization at the bottom of the page (Ex. [[Category:Video Game]]). I've fixed it up properly for you - Make note of the changes I've done and you should be fine for the most part on future pages. Also consult the IMFDB Style Guide for further help. StanTheMan (talk) 22:52, 1 July 2015 (EDT)
- For the record, what is your basis for the S&W Model 24 ID? I only ask because unless it's specifically mentioned as that model (or that it only uses .44 Spls) it could easily be practically any N-frame S&W revolver. StanTheMan (talk) 23:01, 1 July 2015 (EDT)
- Whoops, sorry about the categories, and yah I saw the bit on my talk page. Another one I forgot. Also, wasn't sure about the categorization of the page as there were so few weapons. As for the rationale, is was the closest match I could find, but I agree it is a bit vague, and probably could be any of those. --Clonehunter (talk) 23:09, 1 July 2015 (EDT)
- No problem, like I said, just keep it in mind next time and you should be game, the rest of it looked fine. As for the S&W ID - We don't have much to go on given the graphics detail, but the gun does look to have a bull barrel (ruling out the .357 Magnum N-frames), and doesn't seem to have a cylinder gap (which would rule out the .44 Spl-only Model 24). That leaves the .45 Colt version of the Smith & Wesson Model 25 and the Smith & Wesson Model 29. Of those two, I'd go with Model 29 - The features (what we can discern anyway) fit, and of course is it somewhat better known as well, I figure it's a safe bet. StanTheMan (talk) 23:21, 1 July 2015 (EDT)
- Alright, lets do that. I've never been great with revolvers, though I had simply passed the lack of the gap as the artist just filling in pixels. I'll keep the rest in mind, too. Thanks! --Clonehunter (talk) 23:48, 1 July 2015 (EDT)
- No problem, like I said, just keep it in mind next time and you should be game, the rest of it looked fine. As for the S&W ID - We don't have much to go on given the graphics detail, but the gun does look to have a bull barrel (ruling out the .357 Magnum N-frames), and doesn't seem to have a cylinder gap (which would rule out the .44 Spl-only Model 24). That leaves the .45 Colt version of the Smith & Wesson Model 25 and the Smith & Wesson Model 29. Of those two, I'd go with Model 29 - The features (what we can discern anyway) fit, and of course is it somewhat better known as well, I figure it's a safe bet. StanTheMan (talk) 23:21, 1 July 2015 (EDT)
- Whoops, sorry about the categories, and yah I saw the bit on my talk page. Another one I forgot. Also, wasn't sure about the categorization of the page as there were so few weapons. As for the rationale, is was the closest match I could find, but I agree it is a bit vague, and probably could be any of those. --Clonehunter (talk) 23:09, 1 July 2015 (EDT)