Page 1 of 2

Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 15th, 2017, 5:41 am
by Apple Bottom
Since edits on the wiki are still limited to accounts with the "trusted" flag, and since there's often some delay between new editors' request for the flag and it being granted, I thought it might be good to have a thread where people can suggest edits to the wiki, so that someone who's already able to edit the wiki can do them.

So, here it is!

  • If you have any edits you'd like to see made, post 'em below. Please identify the page, and tell us exactly what you'd like changed.
  • If you are able to edit the wiki and want to help out by implementing these edits: GOOD! Please take the usual care when editing, and don't feel compelled to make edits if you're not comfortable doing so.

Post your edit suggestions below!

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 15th, 2017, 7:09 am
by Saka
Should credits be given? If so, how?

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 15th, 2017, 7:12 am
by Apple Bottom
Saka wrote:Should credits be given? If so, how?


I'd just put a link to the post in which the edit was suggested in the edit summary, myself. Something like this:

"Add volatility - suggested by Apple Bottom, http ://conwaylife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=48851#p48851".

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 15th, 2017, 12:44 pm
by AforAmpere
Should pattern min and max rules be updated to Non-totalistic rules? It would show a better scope of the rulespace that it covers in my opinion.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 15th, 2017, 4:20 pm
by Apple Bottom
AforAmpere wrote:Should pattern min and max rules be updated to Non-totalistic rules? It would show a better scope of the rulespace that it covers in my opinion.


This would break the "number of rules" calculation as it's currently done, at the very least. Perhaps we could keep totalistic and non-totalistic rules separate in the infoboxes, or integrate the min/max non-totalistic rules a pattern will work in into the article text instead.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 21st, 2017, 7:14 pm
by M. I. Wright
Hi! Can the last paragraph of One cell thick pattern#Spaceships_and_oscillators be updated to reflect the existence of toroidalet's discovery from last year? (And perhaps mine+Wojowu's, if deemed notable enough)

EDIT: brilliant, thank you :)

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 22nd, 2017, 6:10 am
by Apple Bottom
M. I. Wright wrote:Hi! Can the last paragraph of One cell thick pattern#Spaceships_and_oscillators be updated to reflect the existence of toroidalet's discovery from last year? (And perhaps mine+Wojowu's, if deemed notable enough)


Excellent additions, both of them. Thanks!

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 23rd, 2017, 1:23 pm
by muzik
Can a catagolue link to the spaceship on Gems be added to its picture?

Also, can a link to the rule with the c/2068 spaceship be provided, in case I ever get around to making a page on said rule?

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 23rd, 2017, 1:48 pm
by Apple Bottom
muzik wrote:Can a catagolue link to the spaceship on Gems be added to its picture?


Done.

Also, can a link to the c/2068 spaceship be provided, in case I ever get around to making a page on said rule?


Which one is that?

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 23rd, 2017, 1:51 pm
by muzik
Apple Bottom wrote:
muzik wrote:
Also, can a link to the c/2068 spaceship be provided, in case I ever get around to making a page on said rule?


Which one is that?

This .

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 23rd, 2017, 1:54 pm
by Apple Bottom
muzik wrote:This .


Here you go, that's xq2068_k4rjvvk4z21bedb.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 23rd, 2017, 4:17 pm
by muzik
Isn't there a script that can generate the apgcode for a pattern?


Also, can the amount of did you know items on the main page be updated?

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: August 23rd, 2017, 4:36 pm
by Apple Bottom
muzik wrote:Isn't there a script that can generate the apgcode for a pattern?


Yes, there is. This is what I'm using.

Also, can the amount of did you know items on the main page be updated?


It could...

But that sort of discussion is more appropriate for the Tiki bar.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 9th, 2017, 4:19 pm
by Naszvadi
In mathematics, simplified or novel proofs usually count as new discoveries. For example, emulating Turing-complete structures via filling a CA with a periodic oscillating pattern (, which tiling is altered on a finite part only to not become fully periodic - ) yields that the automaton itself is logically universal. So such emulations (like embedding Rule-110 (or referred as W110) as I did many times) has this corollary. In some well-known outer-totalistic life-like CA, at least for some promoted ones, I'd be glad if the patterns or deeplinks could be inserted into Unit cell article. The same applies to patterns included with Golly

Topics:
The last is somehow a cuckoo-egg, it is a CGoL-pattern, but also fully compatible with 3 other outer-totalistic rules. And it is Glider-less, and just like the alien rules' W110 emulations, contains only a very small number of component types and reactions.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 22nd, 2017, 5:42 am
by Rhombic
I'd like to know how to determine whether a rule would deserve its own page. There are some odd rules that went terribly "out of fashion" with their own pages (like Goat Flock, for instance). They tend not to be miraculously different rules from, say, Movostill 3, for which many interesting turners and conduits have already been developed.

So here is my question: does a rule like* Movostill 3 deserve its own page as of now?

* Guns, conduits, sufficient unique behaviour and/or well-explored complexity, shows unequivocal potential for future discoveries either for conduit-construction (UC) or for other reasons.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 22nd, 2017, 11:00 am
by Apple Bottom
Rhombic wrote:I'd like to know how to determine whether a rule would deserve its own page. There are some odd rules that went terribly "out of fashion" with their own pages (like Goat Flock, for instance). They tend not to be miraculously different rules from, say, Movostill 3, for which many interesting turners and conduits have already been developed.

So here is my question: does a rule like* Movostill 3 deserve its own page as of now?

* Guns, conduits, sufficient unique behaviour and/or well-explored complexity, shows unequivocal potential for future discoveries either for conduit-construction (UC) or for other reasons.


My gut feeling is that a rule has attracted a nominal level of interest and investigation in the Life/CA community, it can get a page of its own. Of course the main focus of the LifeWiki is Conway Life -- but a single page for different rules that sums up the most important results, lists the most important patterns etc. should be fine.

Just my 2 bits, of course.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 25th, 2017, 9:23 am
by LaundryPizza03
On the page List of rules investigated on Catagolue/Isotropic non-totalistic, "B3/S2ae3aeijr4-cknqy" is known as Niemiec's Rule 0. There are 7 other variants, but at least some of them are explosive.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 25th, 2017, 10:53 am
by Apple Bottom
LaundryPizza03 wrote:On the page List of rules investigated on Catagolue/Isotropic non-totalistic, "B3/S2ae3aeijr4-cknqy" is known as Niemiec's Rule 0. There are 7 other variants, but at least some of them are explosive.


Thanks. I've made a note in my data files, so it'll be named next time those tables are updated. If you can see any other rules missing their proper names, please let me know.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 25th, 2017, 1:06 pm
by danny
B2e3aceij5-ijr/S23-a4 should be named Movostill 3 , I think.

Also can I be trusted? My username on the wiki is danny
EDIT: Also, B3/S234w is not alife, but B3/S234iw is. There appears to be two rules named the same thing, but the latter is correct.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 25th, 2017, 7:15 pm
by Apple Bottom
danny wrote:B2e3aceij5-ijr/S23-a4 should be named Movostill 3 , I think.


Thanks, noted.

Also can I be trusted? My username on the wiki is danny


Of course. Consider it done!

EDIT: Also, B3/S234w is not alife, but B3/S234iw is. There appears to be two rules named the same thing, but the latter is correct.


Interesting. Yeah, you're right, there's two. I unfortunately don't track where I got the names from, but I'll just remove the former for now.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 25th, 2017, 10:31 pm
by A for awesome
Apple Bottom wrote:
EDIT: Also, B3/S234w is not alife, but B3/S234iw is. There appears to be two rules named the same thing, but the latter is correct.


Interesting. Yeah, you're right, there's two. I unfortunately don't track where I got the names from, but I'll just remove the former for now.

Here's the post introducing alife.

Also, for posterity's sake, it appears that LifeViewer makes the same aliasing mistake and it's running the patterns as B3/S234w instead of B3/S234iw.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 25th, 2017, 10:33 pm
by Majestas32
x = 7, y = 3, rule = alife
obobo$3ob2o$5b2o!


It seems that rowett made a mistake and the "alife" rule in LifeViewer is actually B3/S234w and not B3/S234iw.

EDIT: Wait seriously ninja'd by 2 minutes?

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: December 26th, 2017, 12:36 am
by rowett
Majestas32 wrote:... the "alife" rule in LifeViewer is actually B3/S234w and not B3/S234iw.

Thanks both for reporting. This is fixed and will be in the next released build.

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: January 10th, 2018, 5:37 pm
by muzik
Should we have a page for every single still life under 14 or 17 cells?

Re: Suggested LifeWiki edits

PostPosted: January 10th, 2018, 6:10 pm
by dvgrn
muzik wrote:Should we have a page for every single still life under 14 or 17 cells?

To me that seems like an awful lot of clutter in the Still Life category, for the "under 17 cells" option especially. Wouldn't that be something over 5,000 new articles?

But it would be kind of nice to have some kind of a "home page" for each still life, even if most of them won't get used or visited much (or at all). Maybe the Catagolue page for each <17-bit still life would make a good standard go-to location.

Would it make sense to put a Python utility script in the next version of Golly, that opens the appropriate Catagolue page based on the current selection? Nowadays that would give us pretty direct access to a glider synthesis for the selected still life, even if it won't always be quite up to date.