User talk:Rostygold

From Fallen London Wiki

This is the default talk page text.

Welcome to Fallen London Wiki![edit]

Hi, I'm an admin for the Fallen London Wiki community. Welcome and thank you for your edit to Engage in commerce!

If you need help getting started, check out our help pages or contact me or another admin here.

Please have a look at our Editing Guidelines for some important information on editing the wiki.

Enjoy your time at Fallen London Wiki!
FANDOM (talk) 02:23, April 9, 2020 (UTC)

A couple template tips[edit]

When IL doesn't have the image for a new item or quality, you don't need to manually specify the image in the page. IL has an image database at Module:IL/images, so if an image is missing you can add it there. Manually setting the image is intended for qualities where the image varies by level, like Profession.

You only need the {{Gain}}/{{Loss}} templates when there's a custom message for level changes that won't vary by player. For everything else, {{Increase}}/{{Drop}} (for pyramidal qualities) and {{Item Gain}}/{{Item Loss}} (for linear qualities and items) is your best bet.

For unlocks, make sure to use {{Unlock}}: it's visually equivalent to IL, but adds the relevant unlock category to the page.

For storylets, you don't have to use separate {{Options}}, you can just set the fields Option1, Option2, etc to the option name. If you need to rename the link in either options format, you can use the pipe template like so: |Option1 = Pagename{{!}}Link text

--Optimatum (talk) 15:29, April 13, 2020 (UTC)
Optimatum (talk) 15:29, April 13, 2020 (UTC)

Oh, so there has to be a separate module to call up the thumbnail images from the pages of items? Yeesh.
Rostygold (talk) 05:48, April 14, 2020 (UTC)

Unlock template[edit]

Hi, thank you for your active contributions!

I noticed that you tend to use the {{IL}} templates for the unlock requirements (the "Unlocked with" field of an Action, Card or Storylet templates). This template does not add the quality to its uses category. We have the {{Unlock}} template which will add the categories correctly.

One caveat to mention though: we don't use {{Unlock}} for the lock requirements (the "Locked with" field of an Action, Card or Storylet templates). Those still use the {{IL}} template
Mikey thinkin (talk) 07:13, April 23, 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the explanation.
Rostygold (talk) 07:38, April 23, 2020 (UTC)
Actually, I believe we should use {{Unlock}} for "Locked with" as well, for the same reason: because that way it adds the proper categories. Being a gate for an action is a use, whether it's "must have 1" or "must have none". Template:Storylet's docs say as much (admittedly, I made that change).
D0SBoots (talk) 03:20, May 13, 2020 (UTC)
I happen to agree but it's a discussion that happened once before (albeit cursorily).

Especially if we go about changing core templates it's worth confirming with Adnoam and Rahv7. It may be that we need a Lock template or a more generic Gate template or something....
Mikey thinkin (talk) 07:07, May 13, 2020 (UTC)

Trimming storylets[edit]

Just a quick note on your edits: I've noticed you've trimmed some text for storylets or actions. This is super helpful. But could you please also add Category:Trimmed when you do that? We need to adjust the history of that page afterwards and will never find it if you didn't set the category. Thank you!
Rahv7 (talk) 07:52, April 23, 2020 (UTC)

Rostygold (talk) 08:42, April 23, 2020 (UTC)

Ask whats going on[edit]

Thank you for the restructuring. I was getting seriously annoyed but didnt no how to restructure it like this and also didnt want to not record them

Asarta (talk) 11:05, May 12, 2020 (UTC)

Play around with the stuff with the UI - I know I did - and then look at the source editor. Learn by messing around with stuff.
Rostygold (talk) 12:24, May 12, 2020 (UTC)

Full-Grown Terror Bird[edit]

At The Hatching: What Emerges, you created two separate pages/outcomes for Nurture the creature that claws its way from your egg (Aged, Invigorated). What's your evidence that they're actually separate branches? From what's there, it looks like they're the same thing (i.e. it doesn't matter what specific augment you have, only that you have one.)
D0SBoots (talk) 03:22, May 13, 2020 (UTC)

I am quite sure I had two characters have Invigorated Aged Eggs, but with different augments. They turn out to be Full-Grown Terror Birds anyway.
Rostygold (talk) 03:57, May 13, 2020 (UTC)
Right, but why did you create two separate pages for that? Isn't that just a single result? (Fully Invigorated Aged Egg + any Augment -> Full-Grown Terror Bird)
D0SBoots (talk) 04:40, May 13, 2020 (UTC)
Yeah... Maybe I could just merge them together.
Rostygold (talk) 05:07, May 13, 2020 (UTC)


Whhy is Rostygold the most precious Tier 1 resource? I kind of have to ask with a profile description like that. Asarta
Asarta (talk) 15:20, May 14, 2020 (UTC)

Well into PoSI status, you would still be spending Rostygold, mainly to gain certain Favours - and it costs only 10 pieces where these options occur. Also, Rostygold is needed to convert Docks Favours into Expedition Supplies.
Rostygold (talk) 15:31, May 14, 2020 (UTC)
Asarta (talk) 15:33, May 14, 2020 (UTC)

Making assumptions about results[edit]

I noticed you sometimes add mechanical results for results that nobody has recorded yet, which strikes me as a bad idea for two reasons. First, of course, some assumptions may be wrong. (For example, the failure for duplicating a Vake head does not give Wounds.) Second, and more important IMO, is the potential to mislead. Even when some effects are all but certain, like item costs or progress for alternate paths through a story, wiki readers may not realize the information is incomplete. Likewise, a wiki editor might assume the data is complete and not add missing info.

Probably not a big deal, but it caught my attention.
Optimatum (talk) 06:26, June 29, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I am going to leave some things empty. A lot of things didn't happen the way I predicted.

I will leave things that I know are guaranteed though - like the Failure Increases for the Persuasive, Shadowy, Dangerous and Watchful rolls. If the gameplay instructions mention something is guaranteed, I am adding that too.

Also, item losses.
Rostygold (talk) 11:28, June 29, 2020 (UTC)

Faction Templates[edit]


I've recently created Templates for the Faction pages. As there however was some discussion about how they should look and their potential impact I've decided to put it up to the Community how they should look at User blog:Asarta/Faction Templates. Any contributions you could make would be greatly appreciated!

Asarta (talk) 15:06, July 5, 2020 (UTC)

What is your account? Where do you generally get all the text you add, from your own Journal or elsewhere?[edit]

See Header. 22:25, July 12, 2020 (UTC)

I'm not certain which account you mean Fandom or Fallen London?

# #* If you mean Fandom its the account under which you make edits on Fandom. You currently are either not signed in or haven't made one and therefore show up as an fandom user <your ip adres>. Fallen London wiki appreciates it if you could sign in because it allows us to more easily see who does what. For more information on Fandom accounts see w:c:Help:Create an account on Community Central; Fandom's overarching wiki. If you mean your Fallen London account its simply the account you created when you first started playing.
#* All the text we add is either seen by wiki editors in the game and written up immediately or recorded to write it later, or by other players who comment it underneath the article it belongs on and wait for an wiki editor to add it.
Asarta (talk) 08:03, July 13, 2020 (UTC)


Just found out that Wikia strongly suggests using the wikicode italics over html's <em>. Apparently it's something to do with accessibility?
Optimatum (talk) 03:33, July 22, 2020 (UTC)

I do notice that the em tags can cause problems if nested wrongly. The wikicode causes less issues; even if something goes wrong, it appears as two apostrophes.
Rostygold (talk) 05:04, July 22, 2020 (UTC)
It looks like when you use double-apostrophes, the Wiki generates italics tags <i> rather than emphasis tags <em>. These render the same in browsers, but in theory have different meaning. How much do you want me to write about semantic mark-up vs presentational mark-up? '
PSGarak (talk) 02:32, July 23, 2020 (UTC)

Concerning my confusing edit summary[edit]

I meant use anew line for each parameter in source code. They had simply written everything in one big pile which looked something like {{Action|Description=x|From=x|Game instructions=x|Unlocked with=x|Locked=x|Success Description=x|Success Instructions=x}}{{Gain|x}}{{Loss|x}} which is unreadable in the source editor. I'm sorry for the confusion
Asarta (talk) 13:45, July 28, 2020 (UTC)

Oh.... Okay.
Rostygold (talk) 14:20, July 28, 2020 (UTC)

Purging pages[edit]

When a page is acting up and you want to refresh it, Wikia includes a way of doing that: adding ?action=purge to the end of the url. It should be easier than making a null edit, since sometimes when you make null edits you actually change the source layout (example). It's not a big deal, but it's very slightly annoying to see edits that do nothing except mess with the source layout.
Cactusorange (talk) 19:41, July 29, 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I will remember this.
Rostygold (talk) 00:16, July 30, 2020 (UTC)

Images updating[edit]

I am new to wiki editing and adding a bunch of the new watchmakers daughter content, and I noticed that while all the new items have an image on their page, they display a ? image on the pages for options which grant the item or have an unlock/lock requirement of an item. Just wondering if you knew why they are dispalying that way, if they only display that way for me, and how to fix it.

Thanks in advance!
Xyrtranna (talk) 04:52, July 30, 2020 (UTC)

You need to update the Module:IL/images page.

Optimatum informed me about that some time ago, so I credit this to Optimatum. Of course, somebody else could have told Optimatum that.
Rostygold (talk) 05:02, July 30, 2020 (UTC)

Editing issues[edit]

I saw you saying you needed to blank a page as a work around to change it. Are you by any chance using the Classic Rich Text editor? That editor is known to cause bugs with more complicated code. I would advise using Source editor, at least on the types of pages where Classic causes a mess. It may even be wise to add the __NOWYSIWYG__ magic word on those pages to prevent anyone else from breaking them.
Tephra (talk) 02:25, September 18, 2020 (UTC)

It's the other way around. I had to use the Classic version to edit the table for Bones on the Assembling a Skeleton guide. The Source editor is having some problem compiling the code for the table.
Rostygold (talk) 02:57, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
Interesting, I've never heard of Source editor having bugs like that.

Could you explain what causes it to bug and what happens when it bugs?
Tephra (talk) 10:47, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
I can't seem to change the details in the rows for the table on the Assembling Skeleton (Guide)/Bones page. Either the source editor refuses to take the change, or some code is lost.

The work around is to wipe out the entire page first, and then restore the code plus any modifications.
Rostygold (talk) 11:37, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
I duplicated the page in a sandbox, but I can't break it using Source editor, could you attempt to break it in my sandbox version just so I can exclude it being the sandbox itself that is preventing it from breaking? I'd rather not have to experiment with an actual article page if I don't have to.
Tephra (talk) 12:48, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
There, I have tried to apply two changes of the same kind: changing "2-6" to "2 to 6 x". Neither change was applied, and instead the page duplicated the "|}" enclosure for each attempt at the end of the page.
Rostygold (talk) 13:01, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
That is strange, I can't replicate the bug. You are certain it is with Source editor that this bug happens?
Tephra (talk) 13:26, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
Yes. You can look at the edit history.
Rostygold (talk) 16:08, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
When I look at the history, I see Visual Editor...
Tephra (talk) 17:36, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
You could make a comparison between these two particular entries in the history listing.


Rostygold (talk) 23:51, September 18, 2020 (UTC)
Strap in, because this might get a little confusing...

I was finally able to replicate the bug. It is a Visual Editor bug, even though you switch to Source to edit the table, it is still the Visual Editor making the save and causing the bug.

If you select Classic Editor, apparently due to the code complexity, it actually forces you to use the true Source Editor rather than the artificial Source Editor you can use within the Visual Editor.

To edit the page without it bugging out, you have to use the true Source Editor, either by selecting Classic from the Edit drop down (which actually loads Source), or by setting your preferred editor to Source in your preferences.
Tephra (talk) 00:13, September 19, 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the solution that I am using now, after another editor told me that I should use the classic editor in Source mode.
Rostygold (talk) 00:21, September 19, 2020 (UTC)
Ok, unfortunately that's the only solution, but it's better than having to blank the page.

I'm not sure if the new Visual Editor will work better or worse when this wiki is migrated to the UCP.
Tephra (talk) 00:30, September 19, 2020 (UTC)

Hidden Balmoral Tracker Quality[edit]

The tracker quality that governs which Balmoral-related options appear where is entitled “Opening Balmoral” (roseblue.png) - the Balmoral Castle storylet has a requirement at 5, but I wasn’t able to track what branches set it to what values. Presumably Enter Balmoral and the Veteran Privy Councillor’s branches increment and have requirements for it.
Alanhuang122 (talk) 00:36, October 10, 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I will try to track them too. Keep in mind that I did not see any thus far.

How did you know the name anyway?
Rostygold (talk) 02:13, October 10, 2020 (UTC)
Oh… Oh… I get it now. It’s like the storyline that starts upon returning to Moloch Street from Jericho Locks for the first time.
Rostygold (talk) 02:20, October 10, 2020 (UTC)
I’d rather not go into specifics, but the information is given to the page, even if it’s not displayed.
Alanhuang122 (talk) 02:33, October 10, 2020 (UTC)
Oooooooh… You got a data-mining exploit? It’s okay, I understand. I knew a few exploits myself and I didn’t talk about them much.
Rostygold (talk) 02:41, October 10, 2020 (UTC)


Oops, thanks for correcting my gondalier mis-edit, I didn’t notice the difference between the two versions of gonalier!
Shaerys (talk) 17:38, October 11, 2020 (UTC)

You’re welcome.
Rostygold (talk) 23:32, October 11, 2020 (UTC)

Burrow-Infra-Mump conclusion[edit]

Don’t you think we need four different pages for “Listen to the Committee’s findings”? I.e. Isolationism/Ostentation, Isolationism/Humility, Evangelism/Ostentation and Evangelism/Humility?

Looks like they then redirect to three different storylets: Hellbound, Neither one thing or another and Churchbound.

And hellbound then gives you either Infernal church (unconfirmed) or Ccounter-church in the wild, neither-one-thing-or-another gives you Counter-church i.t.w. or Church i.t.w and churchbound gives you Church i.t.w. or Anglican church.

Looks like a lot of pages, but the alternative seems to be some confusing pages with lots of “depending-on-the-previous-page”.
WoWWiki-Faber (talk) 08:52, November 20, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I will come back to this later. I need to do this with my other characters to compare the differences befroe I consolidate
Rostygold (talk) 08:53, November 20, 2020 (UTC)
I will take a stab at it from what I know. You can change it around once you confirm it. It just seems very messy right now, but I didn’t want to get into edit conflicts with you, if you were working on it right now.
WoWWiki-Faber (talk) 09:00, November 20, 2020 (UTC)

Queen / Epaulette Mates[edit]

In recent revisions to Choose a queen mate & Choose an epaulette mate you added the success formula for Pawns to the failure results as well. Last I checked, the failure result had a flat 160 x Pawns for both, but it’s admittedly been a while since I checked. I’d change both to reflect this, but since I haven’t checked in a while I’m unsure whether you or somebody else has since observed the failure results to match the successes in the past couple of weeks.
Mzs42 (talk) 10:07, March 4, 2021 (UTC)

I got failures more than a few times already, and I did the math. It’s the same equation.
Rostygold (talk) 12:31, March 4, 2021 (UTC)
I got 160 pawns on failure with the epaulette just a few hours ago at APoC 0, so at least something is off.
Aximillio (talk) 15:00, March 4, 2021 (UTC)
Huh. Alright, I will revert it.
Rostygold (talk) 23:43, March 4, 2021 (UTC)

Recognise no memory[edit]

I saw that you created the page, and that you made a note, but my understanding is that the existence of the page is itself problematic, so I've deleted it out of an abundance of caution. Alan (talk) 03:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I understand. Rostygold (talk) 00:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)