MTG Wiki:Admin noticeboard

User Conduct and High-Priority Issues

This page is for reporting and discussing incidents that require the intervention of administrators. Any user may post here, but please remember to sign and date all contributions with four tildes (~~~~).

---

 

 Please Report

• Infractions against our Rules and Policies, especially:
  • Severe lack of civility and/or personal attacks
  • Three-revert rule (3RR) violations
  • Article vandalism
• Any technical issue requiring immediate attention

 

 Wiki Representative

RheingoldRiver

talk • contribs

 

 Bureaucrats

Yandere-sliver

talk • contribs

HolyCrap WOTF

talk • contribs

 

 Administrators

Hunterofsalvation

talk • contribs

Neoheart

talk • contribs

RivalRowan

talk • contribs

RudleyDudley

talk • contribs

---

Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

Need Help Making An Edit

I tried to edit the Vehicle page to include the line "though it was accidentally leaked in an article a few weeks prior, with the comment about vehicles being quickly deleted from the article after publication." at the end. I was told that I couldn't do it because it's a new user putting a link in the header of the article. (I'm guessing it's referring to the link that's already there?) I was told to contact the admins about this, so that's what I'm doing. --64.69.158.250 01:53, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with such a protection on editing, but I split most of the text into a lower heading. Try that? Also, if you could, please try to find a citation for the edit you made on energy counter as well. Thanks! --Corveroth (talk) 02:26, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Link references: Template:DailyRef creating bad links (404)

See talk:Chaos for description and examples. See also suggestion by Yizumi at Template talk:DailyRef. FluttershyDev (talk) 00:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

This is a known issue on Wizards' end. For now, as can be seen from those example links, there's no obvious way to translate old URL fragments to the newer format. The information just isn't there. I don't think we have a practical recourse except to wait for them to fix their problem. --Corveroth (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Support for TOC limits

See MediaWiki talk:Common.css. Thrawcheld (talk) 11:59, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Move request: Lords

Please move Lords to Lord, which was a creature type and should be left as it appeared on cards, Lord. --Magic Mage (talk!)

Move request: Races

Races to Race. Thanks. --Magic Mage (talk!) 20:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Template request: Plainlist

Wikipedia's Plainlist would allow the current version of Template:Neowalkers to be written in wikitext. However, it requires some minor stylesheet additions. –Psithief (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Also removes one of the few legitimate reasons to use <br>, which I'm all for. Thrawcheld (talk) 09:42, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Sidebar navigation update request

The MTG Judge Wiki link in the left sidebar is broken. Currently links to http://wiki.internationalmagicjudges.net/index.php/Main_Page. Should be http://wiki.magicjudges.org/. I believe this change requires admin rights. --Adlally (talk) 20:25, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

That's actually beyond my technical skills (i.e. I can't find the template). Maybe one of the other mods? --Hunter (talk) 10:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The link has been updated as requested. --Ten19 (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Bot Creation

I am interested in creating a bot to help with the repetitive tasks associated with updating rules pages. The bot, or at least its first version, would have a list of all rules that changed in the most recent version, and would edit pages that don't need to be changed to show that they are up to date. It would also create a list of all pages that do need to be updated. The help wiki said to coordinate with the admins, but I'm not really sure what else I should do. Murgatroid99 (talk) 15:38, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me, but I'm not the technical one. Let's wait a bit if some of the other mods will chime in. Thankks for all the good work, anyway! --Hunter (talk) 04:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Silence seems to be agreement. I think you should try out your idea. --Hunter (talk) 04:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

So, what should I do now? If I make a bot account, can you give it bot permissions or something? Murgatroid99 (talk) 05:20, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I made the account RuleUpdateBot. Can it have bot permissions? Murgatroid99 (talk) 17:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Navbox Templates

What issues are currently preventing the Navbox and collapsible Navbox templates from rendering decently? Is there anything I might be able to do to fix them, so that we can opt out of reliance on custom tables? In a similar vein, why does this wiki lack a Navbox with columns template? I think that would be the ideal solution to the Neowalkers template request above. Corveroth (talk) 07:38, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

again, I don't have the wiki tech knowledge to understand your question. Lets wait a bit if other mods can update you. On the other hand, any help or improvement is welcome! --Hunter (talk) 05:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Who should be contacted regarding this issue? Corveroth (talk) 18:00, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Sigilbaram --Hunter (talk) 06:29, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

I've got these templates partially working now, between having Scribunto at all, and a shim to make the modern Wikipedia version of the templates work with our older version of Scribunto. I'm not sure we'll get 100% functionality without updating that extension. In addition, we would need to add the following block of CSS to a global stylesheet to properly style them - though, if that's simply not an option, it should be possible, with enough work, to integrate the style code directly into the module. --Corveroth (talk)

.navbox{border:1px solid #aaa;width:100%;margin:auto;clear:both;font-size:88%;text-align:center;padding:1px}.navbox-inner,.navbox-subgroup{width:100%}.navbox-group,.navbox-title,.navbox-abovebelow{padding:0.25em 1em;line-height:1.5em;text-align:center}th.navbox-group{white-space:nowrap;text-align:right}.navbox,.navbox-subgroup{background:#fdfdfd}.navbox-list{line-height:1.5em;border-color:#fdfdfd}.navbox th,.navbox-title{background:#ccccff}.navbox-abovebelow,th.navbox-group,.navbox-subgroup .navbox-title{background:#ddddff}.navbox-subgroup .navbox-group,.navbox-subgroup .navbox-abovebelow{background:#e6e6ff}.navbox-even{background:#f7f7f7}.navbox-odd{background:transparent}table.navbox{margin-top:1em}table.navbox table.navbox{margin-top:0}table.navbox + table.navbox{margin-top:-1px}.navbox .hlist td dl,.navbox .hlist td ol,.navbox .hlist td ul,.navbox td.hlist dl,.navbox td.hlist ol,.navbox td.hlist ul{padding:0.125em 0}.navbar{display:inline;font-size:88%;font-weight:normal}.navbar ul{display:inline;white-space:nowrap}.mw-body-content .navbar ul{line-height:inherit}.navbar li{word-spacing:-0.125em}.navbar.mini li span{font-variant:small-caps}.infobox .navbar{font-size:100%}.navbox .navbar{display:block;font-size:100%}.navbox-title .navbar{float:left;text-align:left;margin-right:0.5em;width:6em}.collapseButton{float:right;font-weight:normal;margin-left:0.5em;text-align:right;width:auto}.navbox .collapseButton{width:6em}.mw-collapsible-toggle{font-weight:normal;text-align:right}.navbox .mw-collapsible-toggle{width:6em}

help?

Greetings from China. We are a small group of mtg player. We are planning to start a wiki in Chinese language for our local players. We intended to start our wiki by translating some of the contents on this wiki. Is this ok for the contributors of this wiki? We will express our thanks on the front page of the wiki and we can exchange wikilink once our wiki is in shape. Thanks! TFIshCustard (talk) 07:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi there. It seems a good idea to me, but it's not my call to make. I've asked the owners of the wiki to give their opinion. --Hunter (talk) 07:28, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! TFIshCustard (talk) 07:34, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Well...is there a yes or a no? _TFIshCustard (talk) 03:29, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

They gave no reaction. I see no harm, so I would say go ahead and good luck! --Hunter (talk) 05:01, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Scribunto/Lua Support

Is there any chance this wiki might install the Scribunto extension?[1] Given access to Lua, there are some neat things that could be done - for example, by mirroring the plaintext version of the Comprehensive Rules[2], a simple Lua function could programmatically and efficiently extract the section matching a given numeric index, which would greatly reduce the labor involved in keeping uses of the CR Template up to date.Corveroth (talk) 18:00, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

That's a question for te the technical guys and girls. I'll try if I can reach them. --Hunter (talk) 05:56, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I was not getting notices for this for some reason. I can enable this extension for you guys if you want. --Sigilbaram (talk) 16:33, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that would be nice, thank you. Corveroth, I trust you on this. --Hunter (talk) 19:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

That would be excellent, and thank you both. I'll look into putting it to use next time I have some free time. Corveroth (talk) 00:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

The extension is enabled now. --Sigilbaram (talk) 15:21, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Do we have the option of moving to a newer version? The Wikipedia navbox/navbar templates appear to rely on 1.25, while we're running something like 1.23 (not 100% sure of that, since Special:Version doesn't state the number; I'm guessing based on behavior). If not, I'll trial and error my way back through the history of WP's templates/modules until I hit something compatible. --Corveroth (talk) 19:52, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Move Request: Keywords

Can an admin move Keywords to Keyword ability? This would make the page title more consistent with keyword actions and ability words, and remove the false impression that all keywords are keyword abilities. Furthermore, it removes the redirect-to-category currently present on the Keyword abilities page. Corveroth (talk) 18:32, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Good call, done. --Hunter (talk) 05:54, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Card tooltips

Is there a reason that we do not or cannot show card tooltips, like the forums do? --Corveroth (talk) 00:08, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Ironically I just did a bunch of JavaScript dealing with this for another wiki. I can bring it over here as well. --Sigilbaram (talk) 01:03, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. I thought you guys had more card data locally here, but it seems like you link off site for cards? --Sigilbaram (talk) 19:57, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

The cards are linked to magiccards.info throw the tag <c>card</c>.--Tuamir (talk) 21:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Digging at the source for the forums, it looks like they're using their database at [3] rather than the outsourcing we've got running. Maybe we ought to check in over on that side of matters and see if there's a dedicated maintainer there who can help bridge the gap... with the state of things here, I'm going to offer a guess and say that this smells like we got left behind while the forums upgraded years ago. --05:19, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I'll ask into how the forums do it and if there is a way we could get some of that functionality over here. --Sigilbaram (talk) 15:46, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I asked the dev team about this and they said it seems possible, at least in concept. They are busy at the moment, but they will take a look at it when they get a chance. --Sigilbaram (talk) 19:01, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

You rock! Thank you again. --Corveroth (talk) 19:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Template: Test

Template:Test should be unprotected. --Corveroth (talk) 21:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Done, we had a mod in the past who was very protective --Hunter (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! --Corveroth (talk) 06:22, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Correcting Information on Double Strike Page

Hello, admins! A user reached out on social media stating that they attempted to correct information at http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Double_strike#Rulings, but the edits were reversed multiple times. Please view the content of his Facebook post here to see the information he is referring to. I've sent him a link to this Admin Noticeboard so he can see your response. Thanks! BriannaMCR (talk) 23:38, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but as one of the users most active in editing rules-related articles, I'll offer some thoughts. I assume that the edit in question is this one by an anonymous user earlier today, though it appears to be the only such edit and was reverted just once, with no evidence of edit warring. The original (and after the reversion, current) version of the article is not, in fact, wrong at the bullet point edited. A quick search of relevant source material turns up a ruling closer to that edited in by the anonymous user, but I cannot disprove that the original version of that bullet point is not also a directly quoted ruling (this implies some problems with sourcing, but that's not quite the immediate issue). Another issue is that the edit in question also introduces a lengthy quotation from the Comprehensive Rules, possibly constituting citation overkill. The page already transcludes a substantial portion of that quote via our Template:CR in the "Rules" section above. If the rules quote was truly needed, we'd prefer to use that template, but this is an issue of style, rather than substance.

If I might shift in perspective from a wiki editor to a player of Magic, both versions of the page are substantially correct in their interpretation of the rules. To say, as the current version does, that damage from the first step "will be considered when determining how much damage can trample through", implies the more narrow case stated by the anonymous user, that "the complete attack value of the attacking creature can be fully assigned to the defending player". The second statement is a special case of the first (applying only when combat damage was sufficient to destroy all blockers) and does not capture the technical terminology we would hope for in a rules article (the edited version describes only a single blocking creature, when multiple blocking creatures are possible and common; there is no such thing as "attack value", the characteristic in question is "power"). As the user describes on Facebook, the rules are indeed crystal-clear (well, by this game's standards, at least).

I hope, anonymous user, that you're not unduly discouraged by this reversion. If you feel that I've missed some critical detail, please respond, or if there's some nuance not being adequately captured in the article, please, feel free to edit again! And if you'd like to register here, I'd be happy to use a name more personal than "anonymous user". --Corveroth (talk) 00:50, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I think Corveroth summed it up nicely. The anonymous user is very welcome to state his arguments on the talk page. --Hunter (talk) 06:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

i was the one that did revert it because 1) it does insert the text from the rules that was already on the page above, and 2) it does change the rulings section that was from wizards gives to us in the ReleaseNotes --Hanmac (talk) 09:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

That page has two sections: the "Rules" section and the "Rulings" section. Any exact cite of the Comprehensive Rules should go in the "Rules" section. That has been the way chosen in all the other pages. --Tuamir (talk) 11:58, 9 January 2016 (UTC)