Getting the miniature library up to date again, who wants to help?

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

  • I recently updated some broken image URLs because the seller's webstore changed, got approved no issue.
    It isn't that hard to ctrl C/ctrl V previous entries and edit them is it and any user input is one less task for 'the officials'. I noticed however that, as mentioned before, many old GW entries are excluded and in one case wasn't approved or deleted afterwards. While I support focusing on alternative suppliers I'm not behind shunning any reference to the GW catalogue, in part also because of the new player and 2nd hand market...

    One last thing, not even all miniatures seem to be listed, while contemplating making a DE QS army I looked up dark raiders -a core choice- to see them not listed. Could be good to go over the list and at least provide entries for all, even if just GW, however I'm quite sure alternatives exist.
    “Fantasy is hardly an escape from reality. It's a way of understanding it.”
    ✧✧✧ Make Greenskins great again ✧✧✧
  • Konrad von Richtmark wrote:

    Any edit by a lay member must already be approved by a mod to go live.

    If a prominent Project member like Bugman doesn't know how the Miniature Library works, what chance does a line member have to know? A clear indication that the information does not flow.
    It is correct, I don’t know how this works, mostly as I don’t work in that area. That is normal for a manager though looking into an area that isn’t his own.

    People being spiteful on a forum I am all well aware of.

    If someone wants to put something together I am quite happy to put it up in the news
    http://www.bugmansbrewery.com - The largest most informative Fantasy Dwarf website on the net, covering every dwarfers needs from forum to tactics, balls to ships!

    Advisory Board

    Head of Public Relations

    Bugmans Brewery Owner (Dwarven Holds)

  • yes, it is a bit of a problem for us moderators too.
    i can approve changes, and i often do so (couple of yours yesterday, right KvR?), especially when made by people i tend to trust.
    but when the change is presented to us for approval, we only see the code structure, not the compiled result. so i have no way to truly check the contents before approving.

    this should be improved upon. not sure how to do this, but probably giving Mod rights to someone who's working on the library and let that person take care of all users edits would be the best way.
  • Bugman wrote:

    Klexe wrote:

    I think that everybody can edit is an error.
    The syntax will be all over the place or some stuff removed etc.



    For example KoE entry of Dukes and paladins is full.

    This means For a new entry one old has to be deleted.... Which one?
    I would agree, anyone editing could also see some nasty people doing a massive delete
    There is a change log and something looking like a version tree, any damage can be undone as @Shlagrabak said. Having it open has advantages and will be needed for sure.
    HR wants a small official team, so we will rely on many librarians outside the official team to work on the libraries.

    Konrad von Richtmark wrote:

    Any edit by a lay member must already be approved by a mod to go live.

    If a prominent Project member like Bugman doesn't know how the Miniature Library works, what chance does a line member have to know? A clear indication that the information does not flow.
    And this, the library should be safe enough. Double updates before a mod approves are a bigger concern.

    I would rather say it is a good sign of decentralization. :D

    The new syntax already contains more information at the top of each library entry. We could add the information there. This is the only place you will visit for sure when checking if an entry is already there. And it does not require the user to hover over a link, so it will be seen every time.
    We already add a link for suggestions.

    example in SE Blade Dancers: "If you have a suggestion: link"

    Because we will need many librarians, I plan to use the existing "models for ... " threads and want to link them in each library. Generating more talk, exposure and use simply needs the community.
  • DiaLogical wrote:

    I recently updated some broken image URLs because the seller's webstore changed, got approved no issue.
    It isn't that hard to ctrl C/ctrl V previous entries and edit them is it and any user input is one less task for 'the officials'. I noticed however that, as mentioned before, many old GW entries are excluded and in one case wasn't approved or deleted afterwards. While I support focusing on alternative suppliers I'm not behind shunning any reference to the GW catalogue, in part also because of the new player and 2nd hand market...

    One last thing, not even all miniatures seem to be listed, while contemplating making a DE QS army I looked up dark raiders -a core choice- to see them not listed. Could be good to go over the list and at least provide entries for all, even if just GW, however I'm quite sure alternatives exist.
    Not accepting GW links would be a problem. I assure you the task is to collect it all. Can you PM me the specific entry to take it out of this discussion?

    Right now only very few lists are being actually updated. It is a lot of work, we will get there. Volunteers welcome. :D
  • piteglio wrote:

    yes, it is a bit of a problem for us moderators too.
    i can approve changes, and i often do so (couple of yours yesterday, right KvR?), especially when made by people i tend to trust.
    but when the change is presented to us for approval, we only see the code structure, not the compiled result. so i have no way to truly check the contents before approving.

    this should be improved upon. not sure how to do this, but probably giving Mod rights to someone who's working on the library and let that person take care of all users edits would be the best way.
    Yes, a couple changed were made by me yesterday. After posting in this thread, I realized I should follow my own suggestions :P

    If I had to design the Miniature Library system from scratch (and had minions to do the work for me), I would do something like the following:

    -The Library has a database where each entry is an object with a number of properties, at least the following: Name of the miniatures, name of the company, link to where to buy them, and link to a picture of the miniature. Other things like random comments, scale, material etc are optional.

    -The Library is automatically generated from said database, grouped into folders by army book entry much as it is now. This is the part that is on the website, that lay users can browse.

    -Lay users can suggest additions to the library, changes to entries, and removal of entries (this is relevant if they notice some miniatures are no longer available). There is a "suggest library entry" button somewhere in the folder, taking the user to a webform where the user inputs the properties of the entry. At each existing entry, there are buttons for "suggest change" and "suggest remove". The former also takes the user to said kind of webform, the latter just sends a suggestion for removal, with a possible way to input a comment.

    -Moderators thus get to review every suggestion individually, and don't have to look through the whole folder.
    Sunna is not with the big battalions, but with the ones whose parts move with the best coordination.
  • New

    EoS Heavy Infantry seems rather cluttered. Slightly different entries by the same manufacturer (e.g. Gamezone Imperial Halberdiers I - IV) could be consolidated into a single entry. The same would go for EoS Light Infantry.

    I could consolidate those a bit, because there are new plastic boxes by Warlord Games that should be added.

    I'm just asking because I know you've been refreshing the library quite a bit, and would not want to pee in anyone's cheerios by undoing their work.
    Sunna is not with the big battalions, but with the ones whose parts move with the best coordination.
  • New

    I think the Sylvan Elves is up to speed, so If you want to make some edits, I would try and mimic the layout and style there. @Little Joe can correct me if i'm wrong though.

    Head of Lectors

    Quick Starter Team

    "...take a step back and remember that we are playing a game where we roll dice and move little people around the board."

    - Grouchy Badger

  • New

    Konrad von Richtmark wrote:

    EoS Heavy Infantry seems rather cluttered. Slightly different entries by the same manufacturer (e.g. Gamezone Imperial Halberdiers I - IV) could be consolidated into a single entry. The same would go for EoS Light Infantry.

    I could consolidate those a bit, because there are new plastic boxes by Warlord Games that should be added.

    I'm just asking because I know you've been refreshing the library quite a bit, and would not want to pee in anyone's cheerios by undoing their work.
    Hey thanks for asking and offering to help with that list. According to the 2nd post EoS is still open and looking for a librarian, so yes sure, go ahead.
    I attached the current SOP for the template on how to sort and organise a list, it would be awesome if you could give me feedback on it if you want to give it a try.

    If you have trouble with images or anything else, just drop a message here.

    In general we will need a lot of help, most of it organised in this thread and the "models for ..." threads in each army section on this forum. The libarry is by the people for the people.


    kisanis wrote:

    I think the Sylvan Elves is up to speed, so If you want to make some edits, I would try and mimic the layout and style there. @Little Joe can correct me if i'm wrong though.
    Mostly a few format updates left to do.
    Files
  • New

    Konrad von Richtmark wrote:

    Sure, I can take care of EoS. SOP looks good, I will try to follow it. It would make it more manageable though if I got the needed rights to make edits without having them go through a moderator :D
    Well, I still have 2 slots open for behind the scenes, you can join the team if you want to go full on for the task.

    There will be a structure to give all involved equal rights and a tight system for decisions. The backend gives you the rights to update and not need mods.