User talk:Dekkappai

(Archive 1: Feb-Aug 2008: Return to BP, Prophecy begins Filmography dev't)
(Archive 2: Aug 2008: Finish Film template discussion)

Question

...to a native speaker: Let's assume a model has worn man different bras. And let's assume every bra of hers has an article on Boobpedia. How would you call a list of her bras in her article? Braography?

Ah, no, that doesn't work. There may be bodies and other clothing included. I think there isn't a nice neologism we could find for that?

Prophecy 23:20, 4 August 2008 (EDT

You mean her birth year? Yes, it's linked automatically by the biobox. Prophecy 23:40, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

ofseries is actually meant only for episodes of TV serials for example. But it can also be used for Boku no Oppai. It appears in GOLU-09, too, after the type at the top of the infobox parameters: Video (Boku no Oppai). It is not necessary to have it in a filmography line though I think. It should be sufficient if you have all the title data, company and ID. Prophecy 00:14, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

Hm... Perhaps not a bad idea. By the way, the notes column will be filled with those affiliate links and view on demand and stuff... On pages like Lucy Love, for example. I'll think about it. Prophecy 04:22, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

• You may be right about the Notes field. I do not like the affiliate links either. I do not like the "Big tits pictures / movies of" section. It's irritating and misleading. When I was a simple Boobpedia visitor, I never clicked on those links, because I learned after the first trial that it was only affiliate links NOT leading to the promised big tits pictures / movies of the model I was reading the article of. So this section was even contraproductive. Besides, the spaces around the / are wrong and bad typography. I removed the big tits pictures / movies section in every single of my articles. I have a list of websites the model worked with, this is honest, because it says: This is the website the model appears on. I put the affiliate links in there, because I do understand that Boobpedia needs this. I guess there aren't many donors. Boobpedia has to live somehow.
• But back to our Notes column: Installing an extra column for affiliate links is more than I want to grant. Besides, the filmography table cannot take more columns. Even now you said that some columns are squeezed if you view them with a low screen resolution. So I thought the best way to make it possible to include them when needed was to put them into the notes field. Remember: You are not obliged to put any affiliate links there. But I saw it in many of the "standard" pornstars pages like Lucy Love that VOD links have been added after a quite a few films by the admins. And this is ok. If a visitor wants to view scenes of the film, he can; and why not have the site pay Boobpedia for leading visitors to their VOD site. And: Especially the Lucy Love filmography is edited constantly, some editors thoroughly collect the films she participated in. If we want our clean and fancy filmography style to be used there, we have to offer the possibility to add the affiliate links. Besides, on Anna Semenovich#Cinema, I used the column for adding the role she was playing in the film (because I did not want an extra column for this either) and the IMDb link. I think we should just consider it as a multipurpose field where users can put things they'd like to appear in the filmography, but which don't have a field elsewhere.
• Different thing: Apparently yuo copied the data from {{Beneath the Valley of the Ultravixens}} to {{Up!}} without changing all parameters. :-) Now both films have partly the same data.
• Please archive this talk page too, except this last section. It has become huge just in a few days, but I think most work is done. It's difficult to load, therefore I removed the example filmography of Russ Meyer from this page too. Prophecy 14:05, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

Ok, look Faster Pussycat up in the print source, and compare with other sources if possible. If you change it back to 1966, please be sure to change the year in August 6, too! August 6 appears on the Boobpedia Main page tomorrow, in the right box, as "Today in boob history" (appears if a page for the day exists). So it would be nice if we were correct. :-) Prophecy 15:28, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

Need help

Hi Dekkappai,

could you have a look at Tango II (bra)? It's my first bra article which is not only a stub - but I'm not quite satisfied with my grammatical and rhetoric style, above all in the "Reception" section. Perhaps you as a native speaker may go through the article and make suggestions if the wording or style appears strange to you. Feel free to edit.

Thanks in advance

Prophecy 09:21, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

Ah, and one more question: "Reception" means how people like it, but I'm also looking for a section title like "circulation", "speading", "diffusion" containing facts about who wears a bra. Some bras are very widespread among Score models, but do not appear in other pictorials at all. Some are only worn by European models, and some are really spread all over the world. Any suggestions? Prophecy 09:34, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for now, I'll go through your changes later, have to leave for a while. Looking forward to your suggestion concerning the "circulation" of a bra. :-) Prophecy 09:36, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

Ah! Distribution? Or can this be confused with distributors selling it in different countries? Prophecy 10:26, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

Thanks! :-) About models who wear: No, that doesn't work. I already have a list like this in the infobox. I meant it more in a general way. It seems for example that Score has bought some bras and garments for their models which they give to them at each and every occasion (I hope they wash them in the meantime), but no one else has been seen wearing them. Strange... The wearers can be classified not only by model, but also by geographic boundaries (ok, certainly a pure British bra is worn mostly in Britain), and, as I said, by websites. I thought distribution was possible, analog to Gauss distribution and stuff... :-( Prophecy 13:25, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

This is a fine idea. I think we both forgot that there are still articles wrapped around our infoboxes and that the infoboxes do not need to contain every available data on the film... Prophecy 14:36, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

Clearall

I see. I get this sometimes, when the headlines go through the biobox for no reason. Alright I'll revert it. Apara 03:09, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

Uschi

Hi Dekkappai,

ah - first one question that tortures me since the day we correspond:

• Looking at many of the film titles in your Japanese filmographies,
• recognising the constant appearance of some syllables in most big breast related Japanese film titles
• and finally applying some general linguistic contruction rules

- dare I try a translation of your name? He who loves big boobs? He who'd have big boobs if he was a woman? He who tells you "Don't bother me with boring crap, I want to look at my tits"?

Er - regards

Prophecy 07:00, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

Yes, and your questions and problems:

1. Too many templates in Uschi's page?

Well, that's what we are testing here. It's only you who includes such big and complete filmographies in articles, so testing your articles is the best way to test the funtionality of the film template in general. So far it seems to work better than I thought. Just calling User:Dekkappai\Uschi today went incredibly quick and caused no problems at all. But we do not have enough test results so far. So please proceed like we agreed earlier: As soon as you notice severe server performance loss, stop adding film templates. Add only one filmography at once and look how it works; do not add filmographies to several articles at the same time. If something happens, we are able to better locate the article which caused the trouble. And now the crucial question: What did you do two days ago when the server crashed again? I did nothing; I had Boopedia open but did not call a page or edit for several hours. When I returned to my computer, I could not call any page anymore. I looked into the recent changes, but there was nothing particular. So perhaps someone has tried to save a big template or article, caused the crash, but the crash happened before the article could be logged. I did not see you working on Uschi before the crash, so I suppose you didn't do anything that could have caused the crash either?

First experiences with long filmographies: Although Uschi's page was easy to call, saving it resulted in a zero-sized reply again. Not severe, because changes are mostly saved in this case, but an indicator that the server starts to have problems. If it's only when you save the page, it's ok, because just browsing through tha page caused not problems at all. But I really do not know what will happen with some of your ultra-long Japanese film lists. Perhaps you'll have to break them into subpages. Not that they'd cause any trouble for readers browsing through them - but it would become hard for you to edit them if you get error messages all the time.

But after all, we are not even able to say if it really was the number of templates on Uschi's page that caused the slight error, or just the "general situation" and the server just wanting to hiccup a little bit. We have to test more, but carefully.

2. Including Up! in the filmography messes up everything that follows

Sure. The template itself was messed up. When I called it, the preview was not visible, only a rudimentary #if: statement. I deleted the two country templates that were in the alternate title field, and everything worked fine. I think they were in there from former times, when the film templates did not exist yet. I'll have to test if the new version of the country template works at all with the film templates. Little excursion: You know that wiki tables are made of |'s. However, template code statements contain |'s too, but with a totally different function. So if you include a template with code-|'s in a table with table-|'s, the server might interprete the |'s belonging to the code as belonging to the table - which instantly messes up the whole table structure of course. This might have been the reason, but I'm not sure. I'll test this when the new nationality and country templates are there. So far everything with Up! is fine again; I included it in your filmography. As there are several 1976 films, please check if I puit it at the right place.

3. Protect links

See what I meant with affiliate links in the notes column? They exist, and we have to deal with them. Only that I did not expect them to appear on a page like Uschi's. The problem is:

• Normal editors are not allowed to add new protect tags. Which is the case if you create your user subpage Uschi from scratch.
• Normal editors are not allowed to remove existing protect tags. Which would be the case if you created your subpage without protects and then replaced the original filmography with your own one.

I really do not like these protect tags. They aren't even used consistently. I know they are set by admins to protect affiliate links from being removed; but in the last time, it was more the normal editors who added the affiliate links to their articles than the admins taking care of that. Which means that the big part of Boobpedia users understands how important the affiliate links are and rather adds the links instead of removing them. We seem to be more sensible than Wikipedia editors. Especially when I looked at a simple Wikipedia article yesterday, only by chance, and opened the history: Every second edit was some IP number idiot adding words like "suck your dick" "fluffy farts fly away in far farting forthcoming filth fuckers" (that already being invented and too intelligent for these apes) or whatever. But I understand that we need these tags to protect important paragraphs or links from being deleted.

Enough said. What can you do?

• Write your filmography on the Uschi subpage.
• Do not add neither protect tags nor any notes at all.
• Paste your new filmography into the original title without deleting the original filmography.
• Move the protect tags, i. e. the notes wrapped by the protect tags, from the original into your new filmography.

You see, moving them around is not harmful, as long as

• the content between the protect and /protect tag is not changed
• no protect tag is deleted.

That's the only way it works.

If you have any further questions, just ask. :-)

Prophecy 08:42, 8 August 2008 (EDT)