User talk:Soranin

Welcome to the Order, Soranin!

Welcome to the Assassin's Creed Wiki! We hope you enjoy your stay, and we look forward to working with you!

Have you something to say?

You can always ask our beloved administrators! Our local staff members can always lend a hand! You can also visit the wiki's community portal! We also have the Discord if you're ever in the mood for a chat! You can also check out the blogs, where you and other contributors can voice out your opinion.

We seek unity, stability and order.

Not sure where to start? You can always help out by sharing what you know on some of our stubs. Got some useful pictures? Share them with us on these articles. Got a useful concept for an article? Why not help out in some articles in need of a revamp? Always remember to sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~) to avoid any confusion between users. You can also refer to the wiki's help pages if you're ever in doubt. Please remember to read our wiki policies to avoid gaining any unnecessary attention.

We wish you safety and peace on your future endeavors. Happy Editing!

Feel free to contact me on my talkpage if you need anything. Master Sima Yi (talk) 21:04, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Italy Database

Hi Soranin,
Great job on the Database charts. Just a minor correction here: in the Locations tab for the ACII table, you linked to "Database: Castel Sant’Angelo" instead of "Database: Castel Sant'Angelo". The difference in apostrophe style (see the source coding) changes the page title. Also, the former page is a duplicate.
--Darman (talk) 00:04, April 21, 2016 (UTC)

Never mind, Nesty got it. Again, great job on the tables. --Darman (talk) 13:50, June 23, 2016 (UTC)

Shanties

Hey Soranin,
I see you listed the sea shanties from Rogue missing their lyric transcriptions. Having found the required sheets, do you mind if I were to write them up, or is it a "personal project" of yours?
Hope to see you around again, --Darman (talk) 19:20, October 23, 2016 (UTC)

Hey Darman,

I'll start with sorry for not seeing this message for more than 3 years. Life got real hectic real quick for me. On a more positive note, I have them all transcribed. Little late to the party but I'm hoping it's the thought the counts.

Hope to be around for longer this time, Soranin (talk) 21:51, April 20, 2020 (UTC)

Hello again!
Wow, what a throwback. Haha, don't worry about missing my message. I figured that if you hadn't seen it, I wouldn't bother you if you'd chosen to simply drop out once you were done with your pages of interest. It would've been well within your right; we all have limits. Honestly, it's good you added the songs now, as I have since wiped my Rogue save file to start clean, and I'm busy with Odyssey anyways. Thanks for the update, though, even if late, and hope to see you around. – Darman (talk) 01:05, April 21, 2020 (UTC)

Proto-Assassins & Proto-Templars

Hey, I just opened up a discussion on our usage of the terms "proto-Assassin" and "proto-Templar". It's a long read, but I think is very important for us to clear this up because our wiki has been rather inconsistent about it, and we could cause some serious problems with it down the line. If you had the time, could you offer your input on it? Thanks. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:49, May 4, 2020 (UTC)

Will do, Sol! - Soranin (talk) 00:52, May 4, 2020 (UTC)

Re: An Encyclopaedic Tale blog post

Bwahaha! A wonderful read! Quite a rousing tale for such a Sisyphean struggle. I knew there were at least some socks, but 82?! I'm flattered that you felt my edit skirmish was important enough in the larger battle to include in your story. Given Batalex 34's history of refusing to admit defeat and making ever more socks, will the blog post be updated as new expected casualties continue to mount? – Darman (talk) 03:20, May 10, 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! Yeah, I keep updating it, it amuses me greatly. :) - Soranin (talk) 13:41, May 10, 2020 (UTC)

I don't know if you're still updating the blog, but I thought I'd tell you there have been a few more "casualties" in the last 2wks (see the Block Log). Among the dead are Thor28654, CaptainSpain, and Alex3478, all identically obsessed with Easter eggs. Some of the others may count, but I don't know their edit habits well enough. (Wasn't one fixated on Layla?) – Darman (talk) 03:45, June 9, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been tracking them, but life is kinda getting in the way of me updating the tale. As soon as I can, I'll write more of our great saga xD - Soranin (talk) 18:07, June 9, 2020 (UTC)

Brazilian religion

I saw your edit to the infobox of Brazil, and actually, I had meant for the Religion field to indicate the presence of a religion not its status by the government. I had feared that it might be misinterpreted as referring to the state or official religion though. I've thought about how it might be reworded, such as "common religions", but the way the infobox is automatically formatted causes the word to be awkwardly cut-off when it is that long. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 05:30, May 10, 2020 (UTC)

Ahhhh. Well, I'm sorry to have confirmed your fears of misinterpretation. Hmm. Is "main religions" also too big? - Soranin (talk) 13:40, May 10, 2020 (UTC)

AC: Rebellion bios

Here you go. I think that's all, atm, but not 100% certain. Just tossed them into a sandbox to have them up and available. Sadelyrate (siniath) 10:06, June 25, 2020 (UTC)

AC Rebellion Weapons/Armor

Just thought I'd let you know in case you missed it, the plan for Rebellion weapons and armor with different tiers (Master, Fine, etc) is to lump them together in small-scale versions of the generic weapons pages like "Sword". See "Poignard" and the "Ritualistic Xiphos" for examples. – Darman (talk) 03:05, September 21, 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up that sandbox edit. I didn't know you had put out an open offer to everyone for help, as I haven't joined the Discord (just too much to keep tabs of), so I thought Blinx347's edit, however well-intentioned, was overstepping. Sorry for the confusion. – Darman (talk) 14:00, October 11, 2020 (UTC)

No problem! As I said, it's good knowing you got my back. - Soranin (talk) 14:12, October 11, 2020 (UTC)

I know you asked the community for help with the gear pgs, but just watching your activity over the past few days, you're doing damn well by yourself! – Darman (talk) 00:20, October 15, 2020 (UTC)

OOU writing

I wasn't sure yesterday if I should point this out, but many or even most of the new pages you've created use OOU language that highly implies gameplay. For example, this sentence comes up a lot: "With sufficient funds and resources, users could upgrade the [equipment], increasing its usability while also displaying finer craftsmanship." Even though we might imagine that the sentence isn't false from a realistic and lore-based standpoint because after all, Spanish Assassins could upgrade that piece of equipment to improve it, the way it is phrased doesn't sound very natural outside of a gameplay perspective. Since I know you're trying your best and your forte in tables, and that you mean to leave the writing up to other users, I don't wish to hammer on this and give you additional stress. It's good that you have provided us with sentences which we could work with, but it's just that I will also have to go through every one of these pages and correct that wording, and it might reduce our labour if you discovered a way to word it in a less gameplay-like way in advance? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 16:18, October 13, 2020 (UTC)

Not sure but he might be writing from the perspective of someone IU playing the Abstergo Entertainment product. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 16:23, October 13, 2020 (UTC)

That's an interesting possibility though it would open up a whole bag of other complications we'd have to consider or look over. We must also wonder if it is better to describe these items from the perspective of a consumer of the Abstergo Entertainment product or from the actual perspective of the Spanish Assassin. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 16:28, October 13, 2020 (UTC)

Forgot to add another point. You also always use the word 'craft'. In real-life, this isn't typically the best verb to use across all things one makes, even if it can all be generalized as 'crafting'. For example, I think we typically say we weave an article of clothing or we forge a suit of armor. I'm not sure about pouches, bags, belts, and the like, but what I'm trying to say is that a strict adherence to a formula tends to produce the gameplay language that our wiki strives to avoid. Writing from an in-universe perspective means situating oneself outside of that gameplay and figuring out how best to phrase our descriptions in a way that would fit that subject in a realistic setting. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 16:25, October 13, 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, wanted to add one other comment because I don't want to make Sora have to agonize over precise wording in the future either. I understand that for the sake of efficiency, it was also easier to just set an exact wording template and use that for all these new pages, especially since Sora's focus was on laying the grounds for the pages and the tables. I guess it is also more efficient for me to then pick up after him and revise all the pages one by one. So, just take these as notes for future reference to be mindful of if you can. :P Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 16:44, October 13, 2020 (UTC)

That particular wording wasn't mine to be honest. It came from one of Darman's edits to one of the early pages I did. I adopted it because I thought it was better than the single line descriptions I'd been using prior to it. I can just go back to my single line descriptions if that's easier to fix. (it goes like "The BLANK was a BLANK used by the Spanish Assassins in the 15th century.") - Soranin (talk) 17:22, October 13, 2020 (UTC)

Hello, yes, I wrote the excerpt that's now across a number of pages. I'd tried to write it from a broad in-universe view without being like a walkthrough, but looking back, my descriptions sound too neutral. Sorry for having it be the reason we have to rewrite so much. – Darman (talk) 17:40, October 13, 2020 (UTC)

Your only fault was making it so good I decided to adopt it, Darman :P - Soranin (talk) 18:35, October 13, 2020 (UTC)

Tabbers vs tab view

I did a "preview" edit of Noob's personal files, and so far as I can tell, <tabview> still functions under the new UCP format, even when looking through the page history. I know you spent time copy/pasting the text into <tabber>, but if tabview doesn't seem to be corrupted by the UCP move, can I revert it to how it was before? Or will it be wiped in a later update? – Darman (talk) 22:40, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

They are gonna discontinue it later, sadly. The direct quote from them is "Under Fandom's UCP platform, use of TabView will be limited as Fandom intends to discontinue the extension." - Soranin (talk) 23:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Ugh. I hate this new system, it looks all janky and is incredibly unintuitive after years of being accustomed to the legacy format. Why ever did they change it? I know they said it was for security or somesuch in their blog post, but couldn't they update that without compromising visual layout? I doubt we'll get it back unless there's significant outcry, because that same blog post also said they'd only revert if there was a code problem implementing it. Speaking of UCP, I've immediately found two issues while browsing.

1. Do we really need [Category:Abstergo Entertainment files] if tabview will be rendered moot in imminent future?
2. Every use of {{WP-REAL}} invisible. It's in the page code, but you can't click it. Regular WP links in page are fine, but not that one.

I'd usually ask if you/Staff had any ideas what we could do, but it's still too early to know as literally every user is forced to adapt to this on the run. – Darman (talk) 00:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Tell me about it! Lacrosse even joked "ah, so fandom owned by Ubisoft confirmed!" My only saving grace is I've been using the source they hide in user preferences and that's basically the same as the source mode we had yesterday. So, on the issues:

1. Probably not, but with everything breaking today I hadn't had the time to propose deletion
2. Lacrosse noticed that too, I have a fix ready in my code sandbox, I'm just waiting for DarkFeather to merge it. What happened was we use "position:absolute" for that template. This update makes it render beneath the column of "recent activity".

The only good thing about this update was that it was today and not on November 10th. Could you imagine? - Soranin (talk) 00:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Haha! Sadly, I'd grown quite accustomed to the Visual Editor. I can still do source, but it feels different. I'll mark the Abstergo files pages and category for deletion, then. Also, I notice that we have some new category, "[Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls]", and that link dropdowns in the new Visual don't show the full titles available. Like, typing "[Category:Abstergo Entertainment" doesn't show the "employees" or "files" end bits, as in literally "Category:Absergo Ent...files". In any case, yeah, having this in Nov. would've been worse! Better for us to get somewhat used to it in the 2wks before than have disaster upon release. – Darman (talk) 00:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I've noticed that new category, it's related to Navbox subgroup template, but I haven't been able to figure out why it happens yet. At least, since it's template based - fix the template and everything will fall into its place. Or so I hope.

The galleries being wonky though, that I can't fix :/ UCP bug that they never managed to fix. But since that's on them, I'm gonna focus on things I can do :) - Soranin (talk) 01:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

AHA! Managed to fix the category problem. The cat page still shows a bunch of pages but the pages themselves don't have it anymore. - Soranin (talk) 01:19, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Galleries were skewed? All pgs I've seen so far with them seemed OK. Maybe it's a rolling update, hasn't fully kicked in for all pgs. Well, we do what we can. It's how volunteer editors work, anyway! – Darman (talk) 01:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Eivor

still waiting for response.FFMaverick01 (talk) 14:41, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Been answered already. - 14:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC)