11,917
edits
User talk:Tiddlywinks/Archive 3: Difference between revisions
User talk:Tiddlywinks/Archive 3 (view source)
Revision as of 20:41, 29 January 2017
, 29 January 2017→GO November update: new section
Tiddlywinks (talk | contribs) |
Nescientist (talk | contribs) (→GO November update: new section) |
||
| Line 1,626: | Line 1,626: | ||
::I agree on the technical part. Thank you for attempting to address the issue. I referred SnorlaxMonster to this discussion, although I was considering moving it entirely to either article's talk page. The articles still mention GameShark as a utility for backing up a save. GameShark isn't a brand owned by Nintendo so I find it a little comical that they come across as a more legitimate way of preserving a save file than does replacing the battery, which is non-invasive code-wise. GameShark is obviously non-invasive hardware-wise, but even though you preserved a save file this way you'd still need to replace the battery anyway (which the article correctly states). I'm probably repeating myself but one solution could be to change the wording "{...}''will'' cause any current save file to be lost" to something tad milder. For example "Since it powers the save file, interrupting the power by removing the battery will cause any current save file to be lost '''unless the memory remains powered by external means'''." --[[User:Black Eagle|Black Eagle]] ([[User talk:Black Eagle|talk]]) 16:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC) | ::I agree on the technical part. Thank you for attempting to address the issue. I referred SnorlaxMonster to this discussion, although I was considering moving it entirely to either article's talk page. The articles still mention GameShark as a utility for backing up a save. GameShark isn't a brand owned by Nintendo so I find it a little comical that they come across as a more legitimate way of preserving a save file than does replacing the battery, which is non-invasive code-wise. GameShark is obviously non-invasive hardware-wise, but even though you preserved a save file this way you'd still need to replace the battery anyway (which the article correctly states). I'm probably repeating myself but one solution could be to change the wording "{...}''will'' cause any current save file to be lost" to something tad milder. For example "Since it powers the save file, interrupting the power by removing the battery will cause any current save file to be lost '''unless the memory remains powered by external means'''." --[[User:Black Eagle|Black Eagle]] ([[User talk:Black Eagle|talk]]) 16:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC) | ||
:::I'm sorry, I can't really get past the simple fact that I just don't like that suggestion. I don't know how to express "why" that is well; all I can really think is that is seems redundant. If you wish, I'd advise you to indeed bring it up on one of the article's talk pages for wider input, or take it to a higher staff member. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 17:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC) | :::I'm sorry, I can't really get past the simple fact that I just don't like that suggestion. I don't know how to express "why" that is well; all I can really think is that is seems redundant. If you wish, I'd advise you to indeed bring it up on one of the article's talk pages for wider input, or take it to a higher staff member. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 17:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC) | ||
== GO November update == | |||
If you're there real quick: We don't want to add a line to species pages the way we added lines to move pages, right? (Stats have changed, in case you didn't know. And there's no dedicated GO section at species pages.) | |||
How about I update the stats at species pages (minus those that lack an image), invent some new params along the way (for pre-November stats), and when you've made up your mind on how you want to display the changes (footnote/tooltip/..), you (or anyone who can) updates the template accordingly? Seems more flexible than just outright adding a tooltip (which I don't think is an ideal solution anyway). [[User:Nescientist|Nescientist]] ([[User talk:Nescientist|talk]]) 20:41, 29 January 2017 (UTC) | |||