Help Convert Module Pages to the New Module Library

What We’re Doing

We are now converting module pages from the old Module Library to the demo setup of the new Module Library. We’ve done our best to programatically convert old pages to new pages, but the variation in how the old pages are formatted means human intervention is needed in some cases.

There are a lot of module pages—over 3100 at the time I’m writing this—and each one needs to be checked. This isn’t a job I can tackle myself. We need your help.

What To Look For

Every module page listed in the old index ought to be in the new index. If one is missing, that’s something I want to know.

Sort order: You will not find that the sort order is the same between the two indices. This is significant for modules starting with a non-alphanumeric character or with an English article (a, an, the). Modules in the new index are sorted from the first alphanumeric character which is not part of an article in English—the way you’d conventionally expect items to be sorted. For example, A Gleam of Bayonets is under A in the old module library, but under G in the new one.

So, what’s on the module pages?

Here’s an example: Old New

If you compare the two, you can see that basically everything on the old page is on the new page somewhere. Files for download are separated into packages on the new pages. If there are several versions of the same module, they should all be in one package. If there are multiple modules which are not the same, they should be in separate packages.

The things specifically which I’ve found to be problems are:

  • Missing maintainers
  • Missing module files
  • Modules that should all be part of one package ending up spread across multiple packages
  • Module version numbers which weren’t deduced properly from filenames
  • Multiple completely different modules on the same page: We’d previously smashed together all modules for one game onto one page; I want to know which pages are like this.
  • Potentially one might find conversion problems with the free text, but to my surprise that’s worked quite well and I’ve spotted only a few, which are fixed already.
  • Box image size: Some modules have huge images for their box image. That’s a systematic problem, not something to fix individually, so I don’t need to know which modules are afflicted with that.

How to Help

Here how you can help:

  • Announce some range of modules that you’re taking, so that we don’t duplicate effort. (E.g., say that you’re taking all the modules starting with O. Please don’t sit on a large range of modules that you can’t complete in a day or two.)
  • Make a list of module pages with problems, and post that list here. The list needs to have enough detail so that I can figure out at a glance what the problems are when I look at the pages. Unless a problem is quite subtle the description can be as simple as “missing module” or “package grouping”.

E.g.,

Across 5 Aprils: missing module

is an entirely adequate problem description if what I’m supposed to see is that some module which was on the old page for Across 5 Aprils is not present on the new page.

If you see other problems—especially anything which appears systematic—please also call them out. We can’t fix things of which we’re not aware.

Pages Already Checked

  • 0-9
  • A-Z

Pages Remaining to Check

Done!

Pages checked are listed in the order of the old index. This is important, to ensure that we have not missed anything in the old index.

Dipping my toe into this with modules starting “Co…” on the wiki.

The ones I’ve looked out so far all have “Lorem ipsum…” descriptions, does that need to be flagged up for each module ?

1 Like

No. That’s placeholder text you will find on every page. Please ignore it.

1 Like

What’s the approach for re-direct pages in the existing catalogue?

I mean pages for Expansions where the Expansion module or extension is on the main game page. e.g Combat Commander series, I notice the expansion pages are missing, or I couldn’t find them. Is that intended?

1 Like

Please note them as missing for now.

I would like to help, but I have little idea of the workload involved, and my available time. The comment that we should not “sit on on a large range of modules that we can’t complete in a day or two”, gives the impression that it will all be finished before I can my first ten pages!

I have taken a look at some pages - particularly for the “The Burning Blue” module that I have worked on myself, and the most obvious issue I see is that all pages contain the “Lorem Ipsum” text that presumably stands in for something else, but I don’t know what that should be.

“Comments” seems to have been turned into “Readme”. I assume that this is the case everywhere.

In “The Burning Blue” an inconsistent naming of the filenames has caused three different versions to be listed equally (and inconsistent numbering has caused the timeline to go awry too).

I can probably compare about 10 pages during the next few days. Let’s say I take “The Ba” to “The Bu” in the old index.

1 Like

This will only go quickly if we get a significant number of volunteers. What I want to avoid is someone claiming a block of module pages and then holding us up by disappearing for a few weeks.

It’s placeholder text. Please ignore it. See above.

Yes. This is intended.

1 Like

OK, I’ll start on “The Ba” to “The Bu” in the old index. Where should I place my comments on these module? Here in this thread?

1 Like

Yes, here. Thanks.

I’m working on V now.

1 Like

B5CCG: package grouping. And I’m aware of one player list correction (not myself).

1 Like

I’m working on U now.

I’m starting on the first page of 50 "T"s (in the new library) now (“T.I.M.E Stories” through “Terrible Swift Sword”).

1 Like

Haha, the very first one (“T.I.M.E Stories”) has a weird issue: the older module version and extensions are only listed on the Discussion/Talk page in the wiki, and so got lost in the conversion.

2nd one (“TablaPeriodica”) has no files attached in either version–should it be deleted? The wiki page was created 3 years ago and then not touched since (except a typo fix by uckelman recently).

“TAC AIR” has screwy version numbers, causing one old version (“v3.02”) to end up missing on the new page, and the wrong version listed as the current (should be “v3.2”, instead is “v3.11”).

“Taifa: Intriga y guerra en la Hispania Medieval”:

  • module is listed as version “1.0” in wiki, but version “3.0.0” in new library.
  • Wiki has no screenshots, new library has unrelated screenshot (appears to belong to “Stellar Conquest” module).

“Talisman” & “Talisman (3rd Edition)” are missing from the new library, but I assume that’s a deliberate choice since both wiki pages say the copyright holder has requested that VASSAL modules not be hosted there.

“Talon”: it seems a shame that the extensions are getting listed in their own package, “Files”, in the new library, instead of staying associated with the module version they belong with (which is clear from the table organization in the wiki).

“Tammany Hall”: like “Talisman”, the wiki page has a message saying the module cannot be hosted; however, unlike “Talisman”, there is still a page for it in the new library (with no files, but no message about not being able to host it, either).

“Tank Commander: North Africa” and its variants have a “Change Log” section before the “Comments” section in the wiki, which is showing up in the new library as a “Change Log” header immediately after the “Readme” header, then the (possibly empty) contents of the “Change Log” section, then the contents of the “Comments” section with no obvious break. It looks wrong, especially where the “Change Log” section was actually empty (such as “Tank Commander: North Africa (Crusader Mk II)”).

“Tank Duel: Enemy in the Crosshairs”: version “1-06” missing from new library, probably because there is also a version “1-6”.

I’m done for now; I’ll try to finish my initial batch of 50 modules later this week.

1 Like

If the Maintainer is completely different between the 2 pages, should we assume that’s because the username changed and you somehow figured out the new username, or should we be pointing out these cases (the example I’m looking at, “Tactics II”, the maintainer is PRodgers (pat-jody-rodgers at hotmail dot com) in the wiki, but Oltimer in the new library)?

I’m noticing that some pages in the wiki have file descriptions in weird places, which are getting lost in the translation. For example, “Tactiques Napoleon - Battle of Eckmuhl, April 21st 1809” has descriptions of the files in the “Filetype” column of the “Files” table.

1 Like

I see that some are checking the old index, and some the new. I think this is unfortunate, because it will mean that some work will be done twice. as this is a conversion check, the old index should be checked, because any modules that are not in the old index, are not converted, whereas old index items that are not in the new index is a problem.

I have gone through old index “The Ba” to “The Bu”. I note in general that screen shots are now placed under Readme. but I assume this is intended.

The Balkan Wars: Prelude to Disaster, 1912-1913
Maintainer and contributor (two different persons) have been replaced by a single user name (who might, or might not, be one of those two).

The Barracks Emperors
Nothing to note.

The Baton Races of Yaz
Nothing to note.

The Battle for Iwo Jima
Readme section: Link is broken

The Battle for Jerusalem 1967
Nothing to note.

The Battle for Normandy
“Length” has been converted from “Long” to “unknown”
Author of V2.0 has been changed from Joel Toppen to “Tim M”
Inconsistent naming of the module versions has placed the latest at the bottom

The Battle of Adobe Walls
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Agincourt
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Armageddon: Deluxe Edition
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Austerlitz, December 2, 1805
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Blenheim, 1704
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Borodino: Napoleon in Russia 1812
Inconsistent naming of the module versions has placed the latest at the bottom

The Battle of Brandywine
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Camden, S.C.
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Corinth: Standoff at the Tennessee, October 3-4, 1862
“Length” has been converted from “Long” to “unknown”
Inconsistent naming of the module versions has made a mess of the sequence of modules

The Battle of Fontenoy, 11 May, 1745
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Guilford Courthouse
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Lobositz
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Monmouth
The latest version 0.19 is missing

The Battle of Monmouth (1982)
Inconsistent naming of the module versions has placed the latest at the bottom

The Battle of Moscow : The German Drive on Moscow, 1941
The screen shot is missing (HTML remnant to be found under Change Log)

The Battle of Prague
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Raphia
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Saratoga
Nothing to note.

The Battle of Tanga 1914
Nothing to note.

The Battle of the Alma
Nothing to note.

The Battle of the Bulge (3053)
The same problem with module names and sequencing

The Battle of Wakefield
Nothing to note.

The Battles of Bull Run: Manassas – June 1861 and August 1862
Nothing to note.

The Battles of Mollwitz 1741 and Chotusitz 1742

The Battles of the Seven Days
“Length” has been converted from “Varies” to “unknown”

The Bells Toll for Madrid: Franco´s Offensive against Madrid, Oct-Nov 1936
Nothing to note.

The Big Push: The Battle of the Somme
Nothing to note.

The Blitzkrieg Legend: The Battle for France, 1940
“Length” has been converted from “Moderate” to “unknown”
Even though the module file naming has been consistent, two package entries have still been created, and the oldest version has still managed to be on top.
The author of the page has placed a lot of Change Log stuff under Comments (now Readme), but this is an editorial problem, not a conversion problem.

The Boss
Nothing to note.

The British Way: Counterinsurgency at the End of Empire
“Length” has been converted from “Medium” to “unknown”

The Burning Blue
“Length” has been converted from “Long” to “unknown”
Inconsistent number of file names and versions have made a mess of the package listings, but at least the newest is on top.
Email has disappeared from entry under Readme.
There is also a lot of stuff under Readme that belongs to Change Log, but this is an editorial issue.

2 Likes

I can take the rest of old index “The” over the next few days - and eventually also the rest of “T” but that will probably go into next week.

1 Like

Non-numeric lengths have all been converted to “unknown”, intentionally. I don’t need to know about them.

I would suggest that rather than losing the information, you could convert the most common non-numerical lengths to something more meaningful. I would suggest “short” to be “1-2 hours”, “medium” to be “3-4 hours”, and “long” to be “more than 4 hours”.