Minor error/s

Posted in

#26 by atlantima
2012-08-24 at 03:02
< report >g1465 looks like the html got messed up.
#27 by yorhel
2012-08-24 at 06:13
< report >g1465 fixed.
#28 by silence
2012-08-24 at 11:41
< report >Voting mechanism seems to be broken... When I vote for a vn, my vote counted in the statistics, but it's absent in the list of voters. For example, I voted 8 points for this vn. Do you see my name in the list?
#29 by gabezhul
2012-08-24 at 11:44
< report >I guess that's because your list is hidden.
#30 by silence
2012-08-24 at 11:49
< report >Oh, so it's hidden even from me? xD
#31 by atlantima
2012-08-26 at 22:06
< report >g741 - Due to Wikipedia changes, the article this links to now refers to the years 80-89 AD instead of 1980-1989. It needs to point to link instead.

Also, g1368 links to the 1920s article instead of 1940s.

And I forgot to put g1474 as a child tag of g148.Last modified on 2012-08-26 at 22:28
#32 by echomateria
2012-08-27 at 19:57
< report >Fixed :)
#33 by silence
2012-09-02 at 13:05
< report >Don't you think that Trauma is incorrect title for that trait? This trait can be easily confused with "Injury", as long as the trait hierarchy is not displayed in the character's profile. Therefore, I propose to rename it to "Psychological trauma".
#34 by takata
2012-09-29 at 04:39
< report >Three things I am not privileged to edit myself:

- Shouldn't g761 be a child tag of g610? Same thing for g764 and g619.


- The description for g1443 seems to be confusing "heros" with protagonists and other male characters. Fortunately only 12 visual novels have used this tag. Should we create a "protagonist with eyepatch" tag, and add the relevant visual novels to that?

Looks like:
The protagonist has the eyepatch for v729 and v4429.
A hero has the eyepatch for v8095.
A supporting character has the eyepatch for v2626 and v860.

For the other tagged visual novels, I can't be sure.


- Lastly, g1385, g1386 and g1387 do not seem to be linked to any visual novels. Can someone delete them?Last modified on 2012-09-29 at 04:48
#35 by PabloC
2012-10-06 at 19:11
< report >Shouldn't g623 be a child tag of g82 (and consequently - g738 of g83)?
And the same for g1300 and g183.

EDIT: On second thought, giant insects are more like g988, so maybe g1300 should be left independent as it is.Last modified on 2012-10-06 at 19:14
#36 by horseband
2012-10-07 at 02:37
< report >@pabloc
That would basically mean nearly single child tag of g84 should be put under it's respective child tag of g381.

I guess I don't see the need or benefit to moving them from rape to Sexual Content by Participants. It's describing a specific type of rape, hence it's under the Rape parent tag. It might mess with how people search for rape novels too.

Also g381 seems to be mostly for just describing the makeup of sex, not the consensual-ness of it. Granted there is the two "Consensual Sex of" tags but they seem to be there mostly because there is nowhere else better to put them.

Just thought I'd throw my two cents in. In the end it doesn't really bother me if that change goes through I just thought that they are fairly separate "branches" of tags and combining them might be a bit strange, IMO.Last modified on 2012-10-07 at 02:41
#37 by PabloC
2012-10-07 at 17:55
< report >@horseband
No, they definitely should stay under the rape parent tag. I wasn't thinking about moving them, but about additionally putting them under respective g381 tags, because well, Yuri rape IS Yuri.

Also no, not all child tags of g84 specify the participants, so not all of them can be put somewhere under g381.
On the other hand, those tags that do say who is involved in the rape scenes (that is: g623, g738 and both g178, g987 as well), could ALSO be put under tags classifying sexual content by participants (respectively: g82, g83 and g988). Unless we want to keep g381 tags as consensual only.
Well, it doesn't really bother me too, I just thought about it because adding both g623 and g82 seemed a bit redundant.

And when I'm at it, I'm not an expert in that field, but I guess that g1170 should be under g83.Last modified on 2012-10-07 at 17:56
#38 by echomateria
2012-10-10 at 13:57
< report >Psychological Trauma >> check
Mecha Pilot Heroine & Mecha Pilot Protagonist >> check
Protagonist with Eyepatch >> check
- Lastly, g1385, g1386 and g1387 do not seem to be linked to any visual novels. Can someone delete them? >> No reason to
Yuri Rape & Yaoi Rape >> check
And when I'm at it, I'm not an expert in that field, but I guess that g1170 should be under g83. >> that defeats the whole purpose of their distinction I guess.
#39 by smelvertising
2012-10-10 at 14:23
< report >Just noticed: g1385 has a typo
African Protag>OIN<st
#40 by echomateria
2012-10-10 at 18:12
< report >Eyes like a hawk, fixed. :)
#41 by takata
2012-10-12 at 14:24
< report >"African" tags:
If you don't delete tags just because they're unused, at least make g1386 a child tag of g839. It looks out of place where it is now. Same thing for g1385 and g838. Not sure what to do with g1387.

Pilot tags (g610 and g619):
Maybe the description should be updated to mention aircraft, spacecraft and mechas, much like the driver tags (g762 and g763) specify the vehicle types covered.
#42 by atlantima
2012-10-12 at 21:15
< report >Hm, but I'm thinking the "country of origin heroine" tags shouldn't even be under "foreigner heroine". For example v102 has Italian heroines, but since it takes place in Italy, they are not foreign.
#43 by echomateria
2012-10-12 at 23:32
< report >Moved the tags.

Foreigner tags are from the perception of Japanese, since 99% of the games here are, so they work in the normal circumstances. But if more people take a concern about this we can change them into something else.
#44 by silence
2012-10-13 at 05:37
< report >The "Shop Clerk" trait resonates with the "Vendor" trait, don't you think? We have to delete one or combine them.
#45 by echomateria
2012-10-13 at 08:45
< report >Moved Shop Clerk under Vendor.
#46 by takata
2012-10-16 at 18:56
< report >This seems to have become the thread for random mod-restricted maintenance.

I notice a lot of traits under Clothes>Other that could be categorised better. I suggest:

1. Making Necklace, Armband, Cuffs and Bracelet child traits of Upper Body Clothing.

2. Removing the Cross trait. Cross Necklace already covers every character with the Cross trait.
If you want a trait for characters that carry a cross, but don't wear it around their neck, an "Items>Cross" trait could be used (but it doesn't exist yet).

3. Making Ankle Bracelet a child trait of Lower Body Clothing.Last modified on 2012-10-16 at 18:57
#47 by tiglath
2012-10-16 at 21:20
< report >Okay, I don't know if it's an error or I'm just being stupid, but I can't upload an image when editing a character info.

I go to Image -> Upload new image, browse, point to an image on my drive (it's jpeg format, 250x300), click open and... nothing happens. Help?
#48 by takata
2012-10-16 at 21:58
< report >
I go to Image -> Upload new image, browse, point to an image on my drive (it's jpeg format, 250x300), click open and... nothing happens. Help?
After you click "open", the file root for the image should appear in the "Upload new image" field. Then you have to type something in the edit summary field, then click "submit". I don't think your image will be uploaded until you click "submit".Last modified on 2012-10-16 at 21:58
#49 by barfboy
2012-10-17 at 06:47
< report >I created the Cross trait under 'Clothing - Other' because there's people who have cross earrings c8669 (in this case she also has the necklace so it's rather moot), or have crosses on their clothing c5161 and calling it Items - Cross is absolutely silly. She's not carrying a cross, she has it on her clothes. Well, ok bad example, she IS carrying a cross but you get the point. Crosses can be design elements of clothing that are neither necklaces nor 'items'.

Removing the trait goes against exactly what I created it for. One of the moderators chose to have it be the parent trait of Cross - Necklace for their own reasoning. I can't argue with their decision because it's accurate.

If we want to create child traits for Cross - Earrings and Cross - Clothing I can see that working too. Removing the trait will force me to create it again out of necessity.

edit: I went ahead and made two new traits - Cross Earrings and Cross Design. I will wait to see if they meet approval.

Hopefully that will clear up some of the confusion.

edit2 addendum: A better example is the girls from Triptych v537 especially the girl in center where none of her crosses are items, necklaces, or earrings and yet she's covered in crosses

linkLast modified on 2012-10-17 at 10:44
#50 by takata
2012-10-17 at 13:36
< report >Hm.... Looks like someone did a large reorganisation of the Clothing>Other meta trait. I'm not sure what to think of it yet.

What should we do with Cross occurences with no religious significance? Ex. c34. I'm disinclined to put them under the "Clothes > Accessories and Others > Religious Clothing and Accessories" meta trait since that would contradict the meta trait's description. ...or maybe we could change the meta trait's description.

I think Cross earrings needs to be a child trait of Cross, and Cross needs to be a meta trait. It also looks like there's a technical glitch with the Items > Cross trait. o.o

Idea:

Meta trait: Clothes > Accessories and Others > Religious Clothing and Accessories
Description: These are the traits for clothing or accessories with religious signifiance or religious symbolism.

Meta trait: Clothes > Accessories and Others > Religious Clothing and Accessories > Christian
Description: These are the traits for clothing or accessories with Christian significance or symbolism.

Meta trait: Clothes > Accessories and Others > Religious Clothing and Accessories > Christianity > Cross
Description: A Christian cross is a part of this characters clothing or accessories.

Trait: Clothes > Accessories and Others > Religious Clothing and Accessories > Christianity > Cross > Cross Design
Description: This character has a Christian cross as part of the design of their clothing.
Aliases: Cross motif
Examples: c34, c5161Last modified on 2012-10-17 at 17:04