Subject: Call for clarification.
Author:
Posted on: 2016-10-21 12:12:00 UTC
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
Maybe we could show each other what we know sometime? ;-)
--Key is very sorry-not-sorry
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
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).
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.
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
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
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
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
That's all I get for trying to rush a post out beofre before work.
—doctorlit
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
Will it change the layout of the Wiki a whole lot, or just the mathematics?
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.
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. ^_^'
Why do we have this page? Do we really need a list of LGBT characters in fiction?
And yeah, sure, LaTeX away.
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
Trans/nonbinary agents? Or are there not enough of those?
... 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
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.
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
But I only think about it when I twirl the edges while thinking, or (obviously) I'm discussing moustaches.
It's language-dependent. You wouldn't be able to pull off that trick in, say, Hebrew, or Latin, or Spanish, or (ancient) Greek.
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
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.
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.
Now I feel kinda silly. :(
. . . 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
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.
Accurate number presentation is as important as spelling words correctly, after all!
—doctorlit 's father is a math teacher, so