Subject: First edit done.
Author:
Posted on: 2016-10-24 15:46:00 UTC
Done almost all of the List of RC's, and am hoping to finish it off by Wednesday, then I'll move on to the rest of the wiki to see what can be done.
-
Potential Wiki changes by
on 2016-10-20 02:00:00 UTC
Reply
So when I was adding stuff on to the Wiki the other day I noticed that it has LaTeX (Pronounced Lay-Tek) compatibility. What this means is that using it I could go through the Wiki and make all the mathematics in it look nice (the biggest change this would bring would be the list of RC's where fractions and powers etc. would look correct). Figured I would bring this to people's attention and ask if said people don't mind this being done or not?
Storme Hawk -
First edit done. by
on 2016-10-24 15:46:00 UTC
Reply
Done almost all of the List of RC's, and am hoping to finish it off by Wednesday, then I'll move on to the rest of the wiki to see what can be done.
-
Huh, interesting. by
on 2016-10-24 17:07:00 UTC
Reply
So in source mode, the change appears to be setting the numbers between <math> </math> tags (which means anyone can do it on a one-off basis without needing to use a program—neat!). It should be fairly simple to change how that displays using the wiki's CSS. I'll give it a go right now, before I forget.
~Neshomeh -
Putting whole numbers in is relatively easy, yes. by
on 2016-10-24 22:50:00 UTC
Reply
However it's the fractions and powers etc. that are a bit more difficult. There's also a limit on what can and can't be put between the tags, which is why I haven't done RC Sp'Nüff(24), it doesn't like the ü and I can't work out how to make it either a) accept it or b) change the rest of the RC number to make it look alright, without replacing the ü with a u which is something I'd only do as a last resort. The only other thing I need to do is find out what symbol I can use to denote 'repeating' when a decimal is repeating some numbers in itself as I can't find the symbol I normally use.
-
Oh, here we go. Solution for umlauts, etc. by
on 2016-10-24 23:52:00 UTC
Reply
As per Wikipedia: \ddot{u}
I fixed it!
Sorry to keep spamming this thread with multiple replies. I'm kinda just nattering as I learn stuff. {= /
~Neshomeh -
Thanks by
on 2016-10-25 00:06:00 UTC
Reply
Why did I never think to look at Wikipedia?
I don't mind, I know how to use LaTeX stuff, but I don't necessarily understand it, so it's interesting as far as I'm aware anyway. -
I'm pretty good with latex stuff myself by
on 2016-10-30 20:54:00 UTC
Reply
Maybe we could show each other what we know sometime? ;-)
--Key is very sorry-not-sorry -
Hmm. by
on 2016-10-24 23:26:00 UTC
Reply
I don't suppose it would work to write it out in HTML as ü, would it?
Also, to avoid an edit war: Weasel and Dina's RC should display something like 0.19587.485, shouldn't it, reading "zero-point-one-nine-five-eight-seven to the power of point-four-eight-five"? The way I had it, it did, but with your latest change, I only see the decimal point in superscript, the following 485 in normal font (0.19587.485). Does it display differently to you?
~Neshomeh -
Weasel and Dina's RC number. by
on 2016-10-25 00:09:00 UTC
Reply
The original was 0.19587repeating485 I was using the superscripted . to denote the repeating whilst I worked out how to insert the proper symbol into the text (which I can now do thanks to Wikipedia).
-
Ohhh, okay. Sorry for interfering, then. {= ) (nm) by
on 2016-10-25 00:45:00 UTC
Reply
-
No Problem (nm) by
on 2016-10-25 01:08:00 UTC
Reply
-
Okay, I couldn't resist. by
on 2016-10-24 17:45:00 UTC
Reply
I poked a couple things on the list of RCs to see what would happen. Anyone CAN place and, with the right syntax, alter a "math" element. It just generates a new image according to parameters I neither understand nor know how to change, if it's even possible.
I assume the difference in font and size is deliberate, since this code is probably meant for setting off actual equations and such, not for mere aesthetics. It may not be meant to be changed?
~Neshomeh, seriously gonna leave this alone and do what she's supposed to be doing now. -
Or not. by
on 2016-10-24 17:28:00 UTC
Reply
On further inspection, elements with "math" tags are actually images with the class .tex and the alt text of whatever is set between the tags. This... is not something I can easily fix. I can change the height of elements with the class .tex, but that results in some of the fractions becoming too small to read, so it's not a good solution. Nor am I certain now that just anyone could set anything between "math" tags and expect a result. I might give it a try sometime, but not right now.
~Neshomeh -
General editing questions (also attn. Mattman and Dawnfire) by
on 2016-10-24 13:20:00 UTC
Reply
So first up general editing question, does anyone know the command to find out and/or change the size and font the wiki pages use? If not then the RC numbers are going to be a different size and font to everything else on the wiki. Which is also going to be a problem as I'm not maths-ifying the two RC's in "Not a Number/What Is This I Don't Even" that are phrases rather than numbers.
@Mattman, do you want me to maths-ify 1337 in the description of RC637R3K7M8? I can if you want.
@Dawnfire, in the RC list Edgar and Agen____t are in RC 2.1459 (Pie) but on their character pages they are in RC Pie-2,1459, which is correct?
Also the RC number for Luana Starlight and Orange Plaid is 27 ½.5 does anyone know if this is intentional or if it is just meant to be 27.5?
Finally, please correct me if I am assuming wrong, but several RC's have essentially two numbers associated with them, the string of digits and then in brackets a more succinct way of putting those digits (for example Des and The Librarian are in RC 0.4342944819 (log e)) I am going to put in both ways of putting the number, but if you only want one or the other then let me know and I will do it.
Storme Hawk
Who is remembering why he switched from LaTex to Word when it comes to mathematical typesetting -
Re: General editing questions (also attn. Mattman and Dawnfire) by
on 2016-10-26 18:21:00 UTC
Reply
So that would basically just be me not being consistent about formatting, rather than something important. Basically: Edgar and Agen____t live in RC 2.1459, which is also called RC Pie
because this one time I misremembered pi and got that, whereupon I decided it should be pie. And then it became their RC.No matter what, though, there should be a period, not a comma. Neither I nor they would use that notation. You can go with the first version, I guess? RC 2.1459 (Pie)?
~DF -
Thanks for the clarification (nm) by
on 2016-10-27 16:01:00 UTC
Reply
-
Re: Luana and Orange's RC number: by
on 2016-10-25 14:22:00 UTC
Reply
That's the number given in their single mission: "Finding a simple number like RC 500 was hard enough; finding RC 27 ½.5 was murder. It wasn't that it didn't exist, it did, but finding where it existed was the problem."
I can't imagine it isn't an intentional joke.
—doctorlit knows his old, obscure spin-offs -
Thanks (nm) by
on 2016-10-25 17:22:00 UTC
Reply
-
Additional Question by
on 2016-10-24 14:34:00 UTC
Reply
Sorry, only just found this out, otherwise I would have added it to the previous post.
There are several RC's whose Agents don't appear on the Glossary of PPC Character's or in any other page of the wiki. Is it OK if I delete them from the list (unless anyone claims them)? I'll list them all out below:
0.19587repeating485 – Agents Weasel and Dina
32C – Agents Aeram and Hale
37 – Agents El and Tater
58 – Agents Dez and Gon (although these have adopted 2 mini's)
69 – Agents Seren and T’Pira (Seren appears to be a different character from Dawnfire's Seren Sato, but I may be wrong)
95.94 (Molybdenum) – Agents Brian and Katie (Katie appear to be a different character from JulyFlame's Katie Cray and Brian appears to be a different character from Brian McMaolin, but I ma be wrong)
0220 – Agent Kit ‘Not the God’ H and Agent Treeleaf
256 – Agents Leas and Hane
434 – Agents Meilijk and Tak
612 – Agent Kurdah Graill
616 – Agents Nosferatu and Nazaruth
1024 – Agents Chigiri, Hikari and Seirei
1210 – Agents Eledhiel and McFarley
1881 – Agent Laurel (Who I'm assuming is not the Sue in Agent form)
4213 – Agents Kip and Beofre
7777 – Agents Maelor and Akhana
16186 – Agent Erena Lechenham
Storme Hawk -
Yeah, better to leave them all up. by
on 2016-10-25 15:16:00 UTC
Reply
A lot of these are characters I've archived, but haven't taken the time to put in the Glossary/make pages for yet, in case I run into more appearances for them later. (Those old RP LJs were like a giant crossover, you guys; it was kind of great!)
Anyway, a few links:
Maelor and Akhana, author unknown
Aeram, Treeleaf and Kit H. are all mentioned in Hawkelf's original site (though interestingly, not Hale; not sure if that was a co-written RC or if Hawkelf just never updated her site after conceiving Hale)
Dez and Gon by dragonlet, who also appear in the Alumia mission, I think?
Seren and T-Pira, author unknown
Leas and Hane are listed in the "other agents" section of the Handbook
Weasel and Dina, written by chem_nerd's sister
Nosferatu and Nazaruth I think were written by Oracle of Delphi—confirm, Nesh?
I'm pretty sure I've seen the name Beofre somewhere on LJ, too.
—doctorlit reserves the right to have made errors, as he is rushing this post out before work -
Nope, Blayze. by
on 2016-10-25 16:43:00 UTC
Reply
Nosferatu, Nazaruth, and Beofre belong to Blayze. IIRC, Beofre was actually created from a typo of his that I called out in a chat. Good times, good times. {= )
Incidentally, I think the H in Kit H. stands for Hawk. Her name is Kitty Hawk. Is funny. You laugh now. ^_~ I'm not sure where I came across that info, though. Might've been deviantART? There's a lot of good stuff there.
~Neshomeh -
Ah, blast me. by
on 2016-10-26 04:06:00 UTC
Reply
That's all I get for trying to rush a post out
beofrebefore work.
—doctorlit -
dragonlet! by
on 2016-10-25 16:13:00 UTC
Reply
dragonlet was awesome. Yeah, Dez and Gon are in Woodsprite, as is Laurel... and a whooole bunch of people who I doubt ever appeared in anything else outside that mission. Back before the days of profiles and PPC-themed writing samples, people would get Permission based on being decent fanfic writers, and then simply never say anything about their agents. It's only when they showed up in things like this that anyone ever heard of them.
And you can see the sort of descriptions I was clearly working from. 'Agent Alex: irritable pyro with a Pepsi habit, and dyed magenta hair.' 'Bane Dragontooth: jumpy vampire, has Issues with fuzzy cute things like rabbits and hobbits (and an Incident with the latter).' And that's probably all we'll ever know about some of them.
(I see Jenni Robinson shows up as Agent Generic of FicPsych... aye, it were a different time.)
hS -
Well. by
on 2016-10-24 14:57:00 UTC
Reply
I recognise RC Molybdenum and Agent Kit 'Not the God' H, so I'd rather you not remove them. Erena Lechenham is named (with RC number) in the first Playscripte. Agent Laurel appears on the Glossary, and has a link to her profile; did you not spot her?
More generally: the Wiki isn't the source of PPC canon, and it doesn't contain everything about it, despite various people's efforts. These agents were added by their creators, who we can assume had Permission; I don't think we have the right to take them off again.
hS -
Thanks by
on 2016-10-24 15:08:00 UTC
Reply
I'll definitely not remove any of those then. I couldn't find anything with Erena Lechenham in, and I must have missed the agent profile (and indeed the agent herself somehow) in the glossary for Laurel. So sorry about that.
I know the Wiki isn't the source of PPC canon, however I figured I would ask just in case anyway. I have also just read the top of the wiki article and realised it says "You may not remove RCs or agents from this list unless they are yours." Which, I guess makes this whole thing invalid, so once again I apologise.
Storme Hawk
P.S sorry for some of the typo's in my post, my laptop's keyboard is slowly dying and I'm not always picking up on the mistakes I am then making because of it. -
Question by
on 2016-10-20 23:05:00 UTC
Reply
Will it change the layout of the Wiki a whole lot, or just the mathematics?
-
Just the mathematics by
on 2016-10-21 01:39:00 UTC
Reply
All it really is is a bit of code that can be implemented. Much like how URL's and images are put into the wiki page LaTeX allows you to put proper mathematics onto the page as well.
-
Ah, I see. by
on 2016-10-27 17:34:00 UTC
Reply
It sounds like it'll make the Wiki look a lot neater. I say go for it!
Forgive my late reply I had a hard time finding the thread again. ^_^' -
Fine with me. (nm) by
on 2016-10-20 12:27:00 UTC
Reply
-
Apropos wiki changes... by
on 2016-10-20 12:21:00 UTC
Reply
Why do we have this page? Do we really need a list of LGBT characters in fiction?
And yeah, sure, LaTeX away. -
The page could probably be improved. by
on 2016-10-20 14:41:00 UTC
Reply
I'd start by renaming it "Homosexuality" and go on to develop the ideas discussed in the lead; when does writing a character as gay work, when doesn't it, etc. I could do without the list, personally, and Wikipedia is also doing the job—probably better than we are. We could link to that category instead of having our own, less adequate list taking up space.
Whatever happens, though, the list of gay/lesbian agents should stay.
I might make a separate page for bisexuality, too, since bi folks have their own challenges in real life and in (fan)fiction.
~Neshomeh -
FYI, went ahead and renamed the page. by
on 2016-10-20 23:20:00 UTC
Reply
I think it's just nicer to refer to the noun for the orientation, not the noun for a person and especially not the adjective form. Plus, fits in with the pages we have on Sexuality and Asexuality.
~Neshomeh -
I agree; consistency and niceness are good. (nm) by
on 2016-10-25 14:38:00 UTC
Reply
-
What about a list for... by
on 2016-10-20 16:29:00 UTC
Reply
Trans/nonbinary agents? Or are there not enough of those?
-
If there's a page for it... by
on 2016-10-20 16:36:00 UTC
Reply
... then pop a list on it. If there's not a page (what would you call it? I don't think either of those form a natural -ism construct; eh, I'm sure there's one out there), then decide whether the topic of nonbinariality is sufficiently important to the PPC to need a Wiki article. If so, write it... and then return to step one. ;)
hS -
Okay, page is now made. by
on 2016-10-20 21:09:00 UTC
Reply
Take a look, suggest changes, go nuts.
I took most of the words from the Gender Bending page since it's... not really gender bending. -
Question. by
on 2016-10-21 13:50:00 UTC
Reply
Actually, two questions:
1/ Page-related, in the list you give specific descriptions by the agents' names, but most (all?) of them don't appear in the text of the article theoretically describing the phenomenon. One even shows up as an acronym, which frankly sounds like a style of computer game to me. ;) I guess this isn't really a 'question' so much as a point to be improved.
2/ Wait, there's actually three questions. #2 is: you're using 'male' and 'female' as words for gender, and say that it's incorrect to describe someone as 'male in a female body'. What word structure would you suggest to describe the biological sex of someone's body, since it's... uh, actually quite significant in lots of contexts. (Take that as either 'would you personally suggest' or 'what's the accepted standard', as appropriate.)
3/ I only discovered the third question late. ^^ ... no, never mind, I followed a link and the third question went away.
Wait, I found another, and I'm veering quite far off topic here.
4/ Agen___t's article says that they 'refused to settle on a gender without knowing more about zirself and what genders even meant'. So... what does gender even mean?
(I could add more to that question, but choose not to prejudge the potential answer/s.)
hS -
Answer(s)! by
on 2016-10-21 17:31:00 UTC
Reply
1) I went ahead and made a few changes. Hopefully this is a bit better.
2) Personally, I prefer AFAB (assigned female at birth) for myself and I know others do as well, but YMMV.
3) Never mind, then? :P
4) When I first came out as genderfluid, I got a heck of a lot of questions asking "Well how do you know what gender you are?" and "What does X gender even feel like?" To which I would have to say, how would you describe color to a blind person? How would you describe what your own gender feels like? My personality doesn't change with my gender; I don't suddenly love football when I'm male, and I don't get the urge to wear makeup when I'm female. It's just kind of a gut feeling to me, though sometimes it takes me a bit before I figure out which I am today. Until then, it's just this vague sense of discomfort—kind of like wearing clothes that are just a tiny bit too small. It's quite annoying to be called "young lady" when I'd prefer "young man" or vice versa.
In all honesty, I'm probably the worst person to ask this question because even I myself have no idea what gender is to me, other than a gut feeling. *shrugs* Wish I could be more helpful than ramble a lot. -
"Like blue, but with a bit of red in it." by
on 2016-10-21 18:38:00 UTC
Reply
And I wouldn't describe what 'my gender' feels like - it's not something I consider terribly important.
There's a moment in (UK, original) Top Gear where they discuss the downside of having a moustache, which is: how could you think of anything else? "I'm going to the shop, and I have a moustache... I'm driving my car, and I have a moustache..." But gender... isn't a moustache, to me (has anyone ever said that sentence before? ^_^).
So I guess my follow-up question is: if the English language had a fully-functioning genderless mode, such that 'young person' was a way someone might address you, would you be annoyed by that in the same way you're annoyed by the gendered version? If gender is a partial moustache for you (ie, you're aware of it - whatever 'it' may be), how would you feel about it being...
... uh...
... shaved?
I think my simile got away from me.
hS -
In terms of the moustache: by
on 2016-10-21 18:53:00 UTC
Reply
Being agender is having no moustache for me. I don't care how people address me then because it's then that I don't really give a flying fig. And thankfully, that seems to be my default state; it's nice not to have to worry about it.
But then there are times when I have a moustache and I like how it looks, and times when the moustache is itchy and stuck on with superglue and it drives me nuts.
If that makes sense? -
This whole thread is my new favorite explanation of gender (nm) by
on 2016-10-30 20:44:00 UTC
Reply
-
PS sorry for incoherent ramblings. (nm) by
on 2016-10-21 18:40:00 UTC
Reply
-
Because I have no idea what happened. by
on 2016-10-21 18:43:00 UTC
Reply
The moustache got into my brain. "I'm writing about gender... and I'm thinking about a moustache. I'm making an analogy, and I have a moustache."
pls send hlp
hS & the imaginary moustache -
I have an actual moustache... by
on 2016-10-21 19:08:00 UTC
Reply
But I only think about it when I twirl the edges while thinking, or (obviously) I'm discussing moustaches.
-
On question 4. by
on 2016-10-21 15:38:00 UTC
Reply
Disclaimer: This is just my rambling opinion of the moment. I don't intend to speak for anybody else.
I've lately come to think that gender is basically, more or less, BS. It's almost entirely a social construct, and one that I personally have never really bought into. I mean... my body is female, I'm happy being female, but all the trappings of "traditional" femininity mean little and less to me. People are just people. They should be able to like what they like and be good at what they're good at regardless of their Xs and/or Ys. IMO, the sooner we all stop caring how people with certain bodies choose to express themselves through superficial fashion choices and whatnot, the happier we'll all be.
Screw gender, it's a dumb idea that's caused a lot of people a lot of heartache. Let's ditch it. {= P
~Neshomeh reserves the right to be wrong and change her mind. -
In all honestly... by
on 2016-10-21 15:57:00 UTC
Reply
... that's kind of where I am, too. And one possible answer to my question is 'people view men and women differently, and we should be allowed to choose which way we're viewed', which is perfectly valid, and the only one I can think of off the top of my head which I don't go 'uh what?' at.
But I'm also aware that other people can - on certain rare occasions - answer questions in ways I didn't expect. So I'm hoping for answers that fall somewhere between the above and 'well males like football and girls like flowers'.
hS
PS: Gender isn't even essential in writing, y'know... -
About the last one: by
on 2016-10-21 18:05:00 UTC
Reply
It's language-dependent. You wouldn't be able to pull off that trick in, say, Hebrew, or Latin, or Spanish, or (ancient) Greek.
-
Call for clarification. by
on 2016-10-21 12:12:00 UTC
Reply
To keep word order consistent, shouldn’t the sentence read either
Transwoman/transman work well if you have to specify, but there's usually no reason not to just refer to them as simply "woman" or "man"
or
Transman/transwoman work well if you have to specify, but there's usually no reason not to just refer to them as simply "man" or "woman"?
Or did I get Wikipedia wrong?
HG -
You're right, I fixed it. (nm) by
on 2016-10-21 17:32:00 UTC
Reply
-
Cool. by
on 2016-10-20 23:00:00 UTC
Reply
I was gonna suggest pretty much what you already did. This works for me—cuz yeah, it's not really the same thing as fanfic gender-bending, and discussing actual transgenderism under the heading of gender-bending feels a tad trivializing to me.
~Neshomeh -
Hm... I'm not sure. by
on 2016-10-20 20:27:00 UTC
Reply
We don't seem to have any trans agents that I can tell after derping through the wiki, though we have a number of nonbinary: Seung-Li Kim, Agen___t, Ix, and Castor Parwell (and a few who might or might not count, like the RMC, various AIs, and Laburnum). I don't think Time Lords who changed sex upon regenerating would count. :P
But yeah, four might not be enough to make a page over. -
Should we really have separate pages? by
on 2016-10-20 21:11:00 UTC
Reply
It looks to me that we can just have one page for LGBT agents and give each bit of the acronym its own part; it doesn't look to me like we have enough content for three pages.
-
Or... that works, too. by
on 2016-10-20 21:16:00 UTC
Reply
Now I feel kinda silly. :(
-
*one trans agent, sorry. (nm) by
on 2016-10-20 20:42:00 UTC
Reply
-
I think that page started as . . . by
on 2016-10-20 14:41:00 UTC
Reply
. . . one of the nuts-and-bolts bad slash pages. At some point, people started adding either their own agents, or characters from canons they liked. Because that is what fans do. It's ultimately harmless; all the actual content of the page is right at the top, so no one is hindered from reading it by the list. It interesting to see the breakdown, too: A lot more representation in anime/manga and web-based series than in the more mainstream media.
—doctorlit, possibly answering a rhetorical question -
Don't see why not. by
on 2016-10-20 04:48:00 UTC
Reply
I'd just be on the lookout for instances where the appearance of the number when written a certain way might be part of a joke. I can't think of any offhand, but it's the sort of thing I'd expect of mathematically inclined PPCers. {= )
~Neshomeh, not one of them. -
Sounds good to me. by
on 2016-10-20 03:13:00 UTC
Reply
Accurate number presentation is as important as spelling words correctly, after all!
—doctorlit 's father is a math teacher, so