# Wiki Discussion Thread



## Cride5 (Sep 4, 2009)

Since there's been a lot of activity on the Speedsolving Wiki recently, I thought it might be an idea to start a thread specifically for discussing questions/issues/edits to the Wiki.

For discussions relating to particular pages it is also possible to use the 'discussion' tab to start an on-Wiki debate. Posting in this thread however, will probably get a more timely response


----------



## James (Sep 4, 2009)

I think it would be very useful for external links to open in a new tab or window.


----------



## Cride5 (Sep 4, 2009)

Are you using firefox? If so, use your scroll wheel to click a link and it'll open in a new tab. If you're not using firefox, click here 

I personally don't like sites telling me when I want a new window/tab. I'd rather choose to open a tab myself. I'm not sure where everyone else stands on this tho...


----------



## brunson (Sep 4, 2009)

Cride5 said:


> I personally don't like sites telling me when I want a new window/tab. I'd rather choose to open a tab myself. I'm not sure where everyone else stands on this tho...


+1 It's actually an ongoing battle on our internal tools site. I don't want the apps opening new windows unless I tell to, explicitly.


----------



## JBCM627 (Sep 4, 2009)

Cride5 said:


> Are you using firefox? If so, use your scroll wheel to click a link and it'll open in a new tab. If you're not using firefox, click here


Ctrl+click will open a new tab/window in most browsers. Unless you use a mac, then it "right"-clicks. Aaaaaahahahaha...

Interesting to know this under debate. I'm never sure whether to have external links open in a new window or not when I work on webpages...


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Sep 4, 2009)

Cride5 said:


> Are you using firefox? If so, use your scroll wheel to click a link and it'll open in a new tab. If you're not using firefox, click here



If you ARE using firefox (or IE for that matter,) you should probably click here


----------



## Asheboy (Sep 4, 2009)

Ethan Rosen said:


> Cride5 said:
> 
> 
> > Are you using firefox? If so, use your scroll wheel to click a link and it'll open in a new tab. If you're not using firefox, click here
> ...



I think you meant here.

What are the criteria to let you edit the SpeedSolving wiki?


----------



## Cride5 (Sep 4, 2009)

Asheboy said:


> Ethan Rosen said:
> 
> 
> > Cride5 said:
> ...



Well, this is really what its all about, its just no contest 



Asheboy said:


> What are the criteria to let you edit the SpeedSolving wiki?



All you need is an email address. Just register an account and verify your email, then you're free to log in and start editing.


----------



## Cride5 (Sep 4, 2009)

*Puzzle Shops - Entitlement to Advertise*

There have been some strange edits on the Front page in the puzzle shops list recently. A shop was removed, then re-added. I'm not sure who did what or why, but there's clearly a conflict of interest. 

I've added some info on the main page's discussion page, but if anyone has opinions on this, please discuss...


EDIT: There's also some discussion on which methods class as 'speedcubing/FMC', ie. should Roux fall under this category? Discussion is here if anyone is interested.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Sep 4, 2009)

Cride5 said:


> EDIT: There's also some discussion on which methods class as 'speedcubing/FMC', ie. should Roux fall under this category? Discussion is here if anyone is interested.



Yes, it should. It is speed, and is very good for FMC (if you know 5 cycles or ELL).


----------



## Cride5 (Sep 10, 2009)

*Wiki Category Re-organisation*

OK, loads more edits today! All named methods now have their own pages, and all higher level pages (such as 3x3x3 Speedcubing Methods) have been made into categories. The root level methods category is called Methods, and includes _every_ method mentioned on the Wiki, as well as a list of categories to allow filtering of the methods list. I've also moved the method list table to this category page since the purpose of the two pages were the same.

If you're adding new methods to the Wiki, be sure to add them to the relevant categories so that they automatically appear in the category hierarchy.


----------



## Cride5 (Sep 11, 2009)

*New Method Templates/Images*

A new info-box template has been added to the 3x3x3 method pages. At the moment it contains an image, and the following information about each method:

 Proposer(s)
 Year Proposed
 Alternative Names
 Variants
 Number of Steps
 Average number of Moves (by a competent speedsolver)
 Purpose(s) (what its used for)

If you can think of other method info which should be in there please let me know and I'll update the template.

Also, if you're knowledgeable about a particular method, could you have a look at the method info-box and add/ammend any missing or incorrect data. Here's a list of all the methods which currently have an info-box. Cheers 


EDIT: Added infoboxes for 2x2x2 Methods


----------



## Cride5 (Nov 26, 2009)

*New Puzzle Shops Page*

The main page puzzle shops list has started to grow a little to large and is cluttering the main page, so I've created a puzzle shops page for links, info and reviews of various puzzle shops. If you know any other shops, please add to the page, or if you've had a lot of experience with an existing shop feel free to add info/reviews.

I've reduced the shops list on the main page so that only the main/popular shops are displayed. If there's a shop which you feel should be on the main page and isn't then let us know.. cheers.


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 2, 2010)

*Breaking-up of cube hardware page*

I'm planning on re-organising the puzzle hardware stuff so that each brand of cube/puzzle has its own page (with pics, links and reviews). Puzzles will be organised by brand and type via the categories system, and will still all be accessible from the 'puzzle hardware' parent category. Discussion here.

Before I go ahead and make the changes, does anyone think this is not a good idea, or are there any comments/suggestions?


----------



## Muesli (Feb 2, 2010)

Cride5 said:


> I'm planning on re-organising the puzzle hardware stuff so that each brand of cube/puzzle has its own page (with pics, links and reviews). Puzzles will be organised by brand and type via the categories system, and will still all be accessible from the 'puzzle hardware' parent category. Discussion here.
> 
> Before I go ahead and make the changes, does anyone think this is not a good idea, or are there any comments/suggestions?


Similar to Pentrixter's thread? Awesome.


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 3, 2010)

Musli4brekkies said:


> Cride5 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm planning on re-organising the puzzle hardware stuff so that each brand of cube/puzzle has its own page (with pics, links and reviews). Puzzles will be organised by brand and type via the categories system, and will still all be accessible from the 'puzzle hardware' parent category. Discussion here.
> ...



Exactly. Pentrixter actually put some of his material up on the wiki, but it needed to be expanded and broken down into a full section with multiple pages/categories etc. This is now largely done. See details here.

A few more things remain to be done, and a lot of new 'stub' pages have been created, but the infrastructure is now there to add a lot more detail to the puzzle hardware section.


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 4, 2010)

Okay, think I've done all the updates I'm prepared to do for now. Most puzzles and manufacturers are covered to a basic level, with images, links, ratings and brief descriptions.

Key pages which are really in need of more information are:

LanLan - Needs any info on the manufacturer and a description of the LanLan 2x2x2. I couldn't find any details about the LanLan company online.
Type-A - Currently quite a confusing mess. Requires clarification of the different types and differences between them. Information on the manufacturer of Type-A's would also be useful.
If anyone has info and can find the time, updates to these two pages would be very useful. 

I can't encourage updating of the hardware pages enough. With the vast numbers of cubes available, and relentless flow of new models and versions it will require constant updates from the community to keep it comprehensive and up to date. The more contributions, the better a resource Wiki becomes..


----------



## qqwref (Feb 4, 2010)

It would be cool to have a page that just listed a link (or two or...) to every major puzzle in every brand, knockoffs or not. I could contribute some popbuying/c4y links.


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 4, 2010)

qqwref said:


> It would be cool to have a page that just listed a link (or two or...) to every major puzzle in every brand, knockoffs or not. I could contribute some popbuying/c4y links.



Great idea. I guess providing a full description and images for _every_ puzzle from _every_ manufacturer is probably infeasible, but certainly a simple list with links to each puzzle should suffice.

In addition, for more common puzzles it'd be nice to have a list of links to shops which sell them on-line. It would hopefully reduce the instance of "WTB xxx?" threads!


----------



## qqwref (Feb 5, 2010)

Well, I mean, not just a link to a place to buy a 3x3, but a direct link to a type A cube, type B, type C, and so on. With some retailers it can be really hard to find particular cubes (i.e. popbuying labels the type F2s as "SE" or something like that) so a set of links to specific types would probably be very useful.


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 5, 2010)

You mean like this? (see Type-F or Type-FII)


----------



## qqwref (Feb 5, 2010)

The type F2 stuff looks really good, yeah. I'm not sure about the B and F things though since those return 0 and >100 results respectively. I think it would be better to have specific product links than search links


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 5, 2010)

Not sure I follow. Are you using the Wiki search to find each of these products? If so, then the issue was probably using "Type B" rather than "Type-B". Should be fixed now though ... give it a shot. If you're looking for a page of links to all 3x3's look here. This is a subcategory of Puzzle Hardware..


----------



## iSpinz (Feb 5, 2010)

I'm trying to post a score on this page, but I cannot make the lines of text to look like this:


Spoiler



Resistance to pops: 10
Resistance to lock ups: 9
Ability to cut corners: 9.5
Speed: 8
Average score: 8
Overall score: A

Weight: 3 ounces Average weight.
Need to break in: No
Feel: Crispy, Quiet
Best Tension: Tight
Lube: The Maru lube.



Help?


----------



## qqwref (Feb 5, 2010)

Cride5 said:


> Not sure I follow. Are you using the Wiki search to find each of these products? If so, then the issue was probably using "Type B" rather than "Type-B". Should be fixed now though ... give it a shot. If you're looking for a page of links to all 3x3's look here. This is a subcategory of Puzzle Hardware..



I have no clue what you're talking about. I'm referring to the links at the start of the Type-B and Type-F paragraphs - they are linking to a c4y search, but neither link actually brings up a list of the cubes it is supposed to.


----------



## blakedacuber (Feb 5, 2010)

you should make a section where people can vote for there favorite cube so newbies and experienced cubers alike can see the most popular cubes so they might buy them and try them out


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 5, 2010)

iSpinz said:


> I'm trying to post a score on this page, but I cannot make the lines of text to look like this:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...



Wiki text allows the use of some basic html tags, these include <br/> (linebreak). So you can use that as a line break.

On another note. The ratings system on the Wiki was supposed to be 'democratic' in the sense that the ratings displayed are based on community consensus, rather than a single person's opinion. That's why this thread exists, and why the current ratings on the wiki are taken from that. I do appreciate your effort to make ratings, but they would be more useful added to the ratings thread where they can be combined with other ratings.

The current system of using a ratings thread works, but is a bit labour intensive. I think perhaps a ratings wiki extension could be in order to make ratings more 'automatic'.



qqwref said:


> I have no clue what you're talking about. I'm referring to the links at the start of the Type-B and Type-F paragraphs - they are linking to a c4y search, but neither link actually brings up a list of the cubes it is supposed to.


Oh, I see! These came from pentrixter's original contribution and are eons old. I didn't think to actually check them. They are removed now. I think using a 'where to buy' list is probably better since it allows multiple shops to be linked to, and multiple colours/versions to be linked to. Sorry for the initial confusion. I thought you were referring to the wiki search feature!



blakedacuber said:


> you should make a section where people can vote for there favorite cube so newbies and experienced cubers alike can see the most popular cubes so they might buy them and try them out



This is a nice idea, and there have been polls to that effect on the forum itself. The only problem with this is that the 'most popular' cubes are constantly changing over time as new cubes come out, so a system like this would quickly become out of date and not represent _current_ opinion. Currenty (some) cubes are rated individually, based on the results of the cube ratings thread. This is hopefully more informative since it gives a breakdown of opinions on specific characteristics of each cube, which shouldn't really change with the rise and fall in popularity of specific models.


----------



## iSpinz (Feb 5, 2010)

Cride5 said:


> iSpinz said:
> 
> 
> > I'm trying to post a score on this page, but I cannot make the lines of text to look like this:
> ...


Should I remove it then?


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 5, 2010)

iSpinz said:


> Should I remove it then?



Well, I doubt it'll be very harmful to just keep it there for now, but I'd encourage you to post your ratings in the ratings thread too. I'm maintaining a ratings spreadsheet which calculates averages for each puzzle. Once at least four ratings exist for a specific puzzle a ratings infobox will be added to the wiki, like this. 

I hope you don't mind, but if/when there are at least 4 ratings for the Maru, I'll post an infobox with these results. Don't think your information isn't valuable though, its just that everyone information is just as valuable, and aggregating this kind of data gives the best overall picture 

EDIT: I've tidied up the formatting a little..


----------



## iSpinz (Feb 5, 2010)

Ok, sure.


----------



## Stefan (Feb 5, 2010)

Cride5 said:


> The current system of using a ratings thread works, but is a bit labour intensive. I think perhaps a ratings wiki extension could be in order to make ratings more 'automatic'.



I intend to do something like that... would like to talk with you about it tomorrow (going to bed now).


----------



## PHPJaguar (Feb 9, 2010)

Are the PLL images generated from VisualCube?


----------



## Lucas Garron (Feb 9, 2010)

PHPJaguar said:


> Are the PLL images generated from VisualCube?


No, POV-Ray.


----------



## PHPJaguar (Feb 9, 2010)

Thank you. Can I upload them to a server to use on my website?


----------



## Lucas Garron (Feb 9, 2010)

PHPJaguar said:


> Thank you. Can I upload them to a server to use on my website?


Sure. http://archive.garron.us/temp/PLL_images.zip has more if it helps, even if I should just regenerate some pretty ones in Mathematica.


----------



## Thomas09 (Feb 9, 2010)

I'd like to say that the new rating system is really useful.


----------



## daniel0731ex (Feb 9, 2010)

ok im gonna be spending my day editing the type A page now. be suprised after i finish.

(im literally putting EVERYTHING i could find about this cube in that page, including the history.)


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 9, 2010)

daniel0731ex said:


> ok im gonna be spending my day editing the type A page now. be suprised after i finish.
> 
> (im literally putting EVERYTHING i could find about this cube in that page, including the history.)



Great to hear!  From what I've seen in the forums you clearly have a lot of knowledge on the subject. Do you know what the real name of the manufacturer actually is? It would be nice to have that as the page title rather than "Type-A".


----------



## Stefan (Feb 9, 2010)

Let me try as well:

Guojia or 国甲 (which google translates to "Country A") you can see it in the logo:






And the website:
www.国甲.com
or
http://www.guojia3.com/

Correct? Something to add?


----------



## daniel0731ex (Feb 9, 2010)

StefanPochmann said:


> Let me try as well:
> 
> Guojia or 国甲 (which google translates to "Country A") you can see it in the logo:
> 
> ...




perfect. 
but the meaning of the name is something that you need to understand the language to know. i have put the origin of the name in the page, i just need to finish up the last bit before submitting. (i might not finish all the description for all the cube today, but i'll edit them bit by bit later on.)


----------



## MistArts (Feb 9, 2010)

StefanPochmann said:


> Let me try as well:
> 
> Guojia or 国甲 (which google translates to "Country A") you can see it in the logo:
> 
> ...



Yes, 国 is country/nation and 甲 means first/A (or shell).


----------



## daniel0731ex (Feb 9, 2010)

MistArts said:


> StefanPochmann said:
> 
> 
> > Let me try as well:
> ...




hey, long time no see! 
hey apple, where've you been?


----------



## daniel0731ex (Feb 10, 2010)

btw i personally don't like having a rating system in the wiki. "Rating" is a very subjective thing, i don't think it's appropriate for an encyclpedia


----------



## MistArts (Feb 10, 2010)

daniel0731ex said:


> MistArts said:
> 
> 
> > StefanPochmann said:
> ...



Apple? I was still here; I just don't post as much.


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 10, 2010)

daniel0731ex said:


> btw i personally don't like having a rating system in the wiki. "Rating" is a very subjective thing, i don't think it's appropriate for an encyclpedia



Yes it's subjective, in the same way that many reviews are. However, it represents the cumulative opinion of many which is probably more reliable than the opinion of a single individual. I personally find it useful to have.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Feb 10, 2010)

Yo Cride...wanna fix ELS+CLS?


----------



## aronpm (Mar 14, 2012)

Sahid Velji said:


> Bump.
> What does this article have to do with speedsolving?


 
Absolutely nothing. I tried just now to delete it but I don't think I have the permissions to do that.


----------



## pjk (Mar 16, 2012)

It has been deleted.


----------



## Joël (Mar 20, 2012)

I just wanted to bring this to the attention of those who edit the wiki frequently:

Today I stumbled upon the wiki-page for the ZZ-method, and unless I missed that Zbigniew also came up with EOline, it looks false to me.

The method that Zbigniew (and simultaneously Ron) proposed is described here: http://www.zborowski.republika.pl/expert3x3x3method.html. That page doesn't mention EOline.

As I understood it, others (I don't know who) have develloped the idea of EOline (please correct me if I am wrong), in order to be able to use a ZB-ish method, without too many ZBF2L algs.

P.S.: pjk, I still can't use the wiki when I am logged in to speedsolving  *cries*


----------



## Kirjava (Mar 20, 2012)

I think you're wrong Joel. 

The page you are linking to contains information on the ZB method alone, so wouldn't contain information about EOLine. ZB was documented and created before ZZ, so it's no surprise that you find no information on it there. ZZ and ZB are really unrelated methods.

However, without a source for initial EOline development by ZZ I cannot back up that idea.

EDIT: Someone who can read polish should check here; http://wayback.archive.org/web/20070815000000*/http://speedcubing.com.pl/nooks_zz.htm

Google translate;



> 2 zz speedcubing system
> This is a total revolution in the sphere of stacking cubes. Forget most everything I ever knew about solving (in terms of these known systems).
> The whole thing started in 2004 in Amsterdam during the Official European Championships when Ron (van Bruchem) showed Josef (Jelinek) method of stacking cubes, which are oriented in a first step all (twelve) edges. I only he copied "bacon", but that enough for me. I knew that this approach will be the future speedcubingu.
> A characteristic feature of all variants described below is that the problem nieergonomicznych movements leave behind in the initial phase, and we anticipate these movements entirely in preinspekcji. In the following arrange ankle movements restricted to RUL (Class RULDF2B2).
> ...



Looks like he thought up EOLine after seeing Ron do EO before CFOP.


----------



## Joël (Mar 20, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> I think you're wrong Joel.



Looks like you are right!  My mistake, then


----------



## Athefre (Mar 20, 2012)

Joël said:


> As I understood it, others (I don't know who) have develloped the idea of EOline (please correct me if I am wrong)


 
The earliest and only other I know is Ryan Heise.

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/message/5114


----------



## qqwref (Mar 31, 2012)

Hi! I don't usually contribute anything to the wiki, but I noticed that we don't have a good list of parity algs. So I went and found a whole bunch of parity algs on the forum and dumped them here:

http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_Parity_Algorithms

Because there are so many and alg.garron seems to be broken for me (not to mention the {{Alg}} template not doing 4x4x4 cases properly afaik), I didn't bother to make it very pretty. If anyone's interested in 4x4 parities, please feel free to heavily reconfigure the page. Just remember to include as many different algorithms as we know - like how the PLL page is structured.


----------



## shubhayankabir (Apr 1, 2012)

How do you upload an image to the Wiki??? I'm trying to add a new alg for swapping D corners on the 2x2!


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

the wiki is knackered


```
Warning: imagejpeg() [function.imagejpeg]: Unable to open '/home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/images/thumb/c/c7/ThomBarlow.jpg/93px-ThomBarlow.jpg' for writing: Permission denied in /home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/includes/media/Bitmap.php on line 339

Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: Permission denied in /home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/includes/GlobalFunctions.php on line 2176

Warning: wfMkdirParents: failed to mkdir "/home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/images/thumb/archive/c/c7/20120508220958!ThomBarlow.jpg" mode 511 in /home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/includes/GlobalFunctions.php on line 2179

Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: Permission denied in /home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/includes/GlobalFunctions.php on line 2176

Warning: wfMkdirParents: failed to mkdir "/home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/images/thumb/archive/c/c7/20120508220513!ThomBarlow.jpg" mode 511 in /home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/includes/GlobalFunctions.php on line 2179

Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: Permission denied in /home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/includes/GlobalFunctions.php on line 2176

Warning: wfMkdirParents: failed to mkdir "/home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/images/thumb/archive/c/c7/20120508220400!ThomBarlow.jpg" mode 511 in /home/patjk/public_html/speedsolving/wiki/includes/GlobalFunctions.php on line 2179
```

I've had problems uploading or editing files for a while now.


----------



## pjk (May 9, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> the wiki is knackered
> 
> 
> ```
> ...


What exactly did you do to get this error so I can try to replicate it? Let me know of all the "problems uploading or editing files" that you've had for a while now.


----------



## Kirjava (May 9, 2012)

Patrick Jameson appears to have stopped certain errors from happening, but I still can't edit this specific file properly. 

The various errors were caused by me trying to delete a file or upload a new one. It still doesn't work properly


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/File:Sébastien_Auroux.jpg

bump for moar info


----------



## pjk (May 14, 2012)

I am going to upgrade the wiki and move it off the vB hack this week. Please hold on this for a week.


----------



## Kirjava (May 14, 2012)

thanks for the updates!


----------



## pjk (May 17, 2012)

So the hack I was using to integrate vBulletin and MediaWiki has been removed. The hack basically allowed seamless browsing between the wiki and the forum (and the rest of the site), and also merged logins (such that if you were logged in on speedsolving.com [vB], you would already have an account and be logged into the wiki [MediaWiki]. However, this will no longer be the case.

Although this hack worked well, in general, it has also caused several issues. It stopped being developed, and has become uncompatible with the recent versions of vB and MedaWiki. Because of this, it makes sense to no longer use it, upgrade vB and Mediawiki, and continue to the develop both without worrying about a third party hack. 

I've backed up everything, and have removed the hack. Please let me know what errors you're now getting, and if the previous errors you mentioned are still occuring. I will be upgrading to the latest MediaWiki version soon. You may notice the Wiki link is not in the Navbar atm. I will get that back up soon once we ensure things are working okay.


----------



## pjk (May 21, 2012)

I've upgraded MediaWiki to the latest version, 1.19. Please let me know of any issues.

I see on the homepage that "Puzzle Hardware" and "Other Puzzles" are now red, meaning the page doesn't exist. Not sure if this is an issue from the upgrade or not. Can anyone confirm?

Thom: Are you still having issues?


----------



## aronpm (May 21, 2012)

pjk said:


> I see on the homepage that "Puzzle Hardware" and "Other Puzzles" are now red, meaning the page doesn't exist. Not sure if this is an issue from the upgrade or not. Can anyone confirm?


Page log says that the pages were deleted by Macky


----------



## macky (May 21, 2012)

aronpm said:


> Page log says that the pages were deleted by Macky


Yeah, I edited for a long time and couldn't do it any more. I'll fix it.


----------



## Ickenicke (May 21, 2012)

I can't log into the wiki. My speedsolving password doesn't work. I can't get details by e-mail beacuse my account at the wiki doesn't have an e-mail registred. I can't register a new account with the name Ickenicke, beacuse there is an account with the name that already exist. Can you fix it pjk?


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (May 21, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> I can't log into the wiki. My speedsolving password doesn't work. I can't get details by e-mail beacuse my account at the wiki doesn't have an e-mail registred. I can't register a new account with the name Ickenicke, beacuse there is an account with the name that already exist. Can you fix it pjk?


 
I'm having this problem aswell.


----------



## pjk (May 21, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> I can't log into the wiki. My speedsolving password doesn't work. I can't get details by e-mail beacuse my account at the wiki doesn't have an e-mail registred. I can't register a new account with the name Ickenicke, beacuse there is an account with the name that already exist. Can you fix it pjk?


 


MaeLSTRoM said:


> I'm having this problem aswell.


Click Forgot Password and get a new one. Let me know if that works.


----------



## Ickenicke (May 21, 2012)

pjk said:


> Click Forgot Password and get a new one. Let me know if that works.



No.



> There is no e-mail address recorded for user "Ickenicke".


----------



## pjk (May 21, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> No.


I've added you to the usergroup "users". Try it now.

What is happening is the accounts are still created from the hack. Also check capitalization.


----------



## Ickenicke (May 21, 2012)

I created a new acconut with the name Ickenicke1 instead.


----------



## Ickenicke (May 21, 2012)

I got a new problem!

I did tested some different skins in the wiki and now all pages looks like this:








I can't do anything. The only thing I can do is to click on speedsolving banner and I come to the forums instead.


----------



## pjk (May 21, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> I created a new acconut with the name Ickenicke1 instead.


That is fine since you can edit, but it doesn't help solve this problem.



Ickenicke said:


> I got a new problem!
> 
> I did tested some different skins in the wiki and now all pages looks like this:
> [image]
> ...


Was this the setting in your wiki preferences? I did notice a lot of leftover skins that I need to remove. For now, I've disabled changing skins in preferences.


----------



## Ickenicke (May 21, 2012)

pjk said:


> That is fine since you can edit, but it doesn't help solve this problem.



No, you are right. 
But for me it doesn't matter if my username is Ickenicke or Ickenicke1.
Hope you can solve the problem!





pjk said:


> Was this the setting in your wiki preferences? I did notice a lot of leftover skins that I need to remove. For now, I've disabled changing skins in preferences.



Yes it was in wiki preferences. (Appearance)


----------



## Kirjava (May 21, 2012)

pjk said:


> Thom: Are you still having issues?


 
works now! ty bbz ilu


----------



## pjk (May 22, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> Yes it was in wiki preferences. (Appearance)


Do you still have this issue or is it fixed? Clear your cookies and restart your browser if so.


----------



## Ickenicke (May 23, 2012)

pjk said:


> Do you still have this issue or is it fixed? Clear your cookies and restart your browser if so.



It is fixed!


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 24, 2012)

What, where did the mega-tableof methods go?
That was the ultimate, concise reference to get anywhere, quickly.

Is there a way we can keep the old and still implement the new way of categorizing, or are there concerns regarding keeping the old?

Personally, I loved the mega-table.


----------



## macky (May 24, 2012)

StachuK1992 said:


> What, where did the mega-tableof methods go?
> That was the ultimate, concise reference to get anywhere, quickly.
> 
> Is there a way we can keep the old and still implement the new way of categorizing, or are there concerns regarding keeping the old?
> ...



I started reorganizing things, or sometimes more adding a parallel organization structure, modeled after Wikipedia. The table you mention has been moved to [wiki]List of methods[/wiki]. I will place a link to it in the top of [wiki]Category:Methods[/wiki]. We could also place a link on the Main Page to both the category and the list.

If you want to help, reply on and watch this page: [wiki]Project:General discussion[/wiki].


----------



## Carson (May 24, 2012)

For individuals' pages, is there a way to generate the age based on the date provided under "born"? Since this currently is being entered manually, many pages are incorrect: example.


----------



## macky (May 24, 2012)

Carson said:


> For individuals' pages, is there a way to generate the age based on the date provided under "born"? Since this currently is being entered manually, many pages are incorrect: example.


 
We need to implement something like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Birth_date_and_age. Anyone want to take the lead?

In general we should be able to find most functionalities we need already implemented on Wikipedia.


----------



## pjk (May 29, 2012)

A couple updates:
I'm trying to filter out all the issues with the current setup:
1) Spam. I've implemented quite a few anti-spam hacks, but bots are still getting in. I'm working on this. 
2) Login issues. Keep in mind that your speedsolving.com login is *NOT* your wiki login. The wiki is a separate site so you'll need a separate account. However, since the databases were merged at one point, if you never had activated your account, it will say that that your username already exists, and if you try to recover your password it will say there is no email with your account. If this happens, please send me a PM with your wiki username and I will reset your password for you (and then you can add your email address).

Lastly, Macky has been working hard to make the wiki better. If you have something of value to add, please feel free to help out. There is an entire section on the lower right of the wiki homepage on "How to Contribute".


----------



## IAssemble (May 30, 2012)

pjk said:


> A couple updates:
> I'm trying to filter out all the issues with the current setup:
> 1) Spam. I've implemented quite a few anti-spam hacks, but bots are still getting in. I'm working on this. Crazy how bots have got past CAPTCHA.
> 2) Login issues. Keep in mind that your speedsolving.com login is *NOT* your wiki login. The wiki is a separate site so you'll need a separate account. However, since the databases were merged at one point, if you never had activated your account, it will say that that your username already exists, and if you try to recover your password it will say there is no email with your account. If this happens, please post your wiki username here in this thread and I will remove your wiki account so you can create a new one with your same username.
> ...


 
Please remove my wiki account "IAssemble" so that I can create a new one with the same username. Thanks.


----------



## pjk (May 31, 2012)

IAssemble said:


> Please remove my wiki account "IAssemble" so that I can create a new one with the same username. Thanks.


Done.


----------



## IAssemble (May 31, 2012)

pjk said:


> Done.


 
Many thanks.


----------



## ThomasJE (Jun 2, 2012)

pjk said:


> 2) Login issues. Keep in mind that your speedsolving.com login is *NOT* your wiki login. The wiki is a separate site so you'll need a separate account. However, since the databases were merged at one point, if you never had activated your account, it will say that that your username already exists, and if you try to recover your password it will say there is no email with your account. If this happens, please send me a PM with your wiki username and I will reset your password for you (and then you can add your email address).
> 
> Lastly, Macky has been working hard to make the wiki better. If you have something of value to add, please feel free to help out. There is an entire section on the lower right of the wiki homepage on "How to Contribute".



Could you please remove the wiki account named 'ThomasJE', so I can create a new account with the same username. I'm planning on clearing up the 4x4x4 Parity Algorithms page and making it look nicer.


----------



## pjk (Jun 5, 2012)

ThomasJE said:


> Could you please remove the wiki account named 'ThomasJE', so I can create a new account with the same username. I'm planning on clearing up the 4x4x4 Parity Algorithms page and making it look nicer.


PM sent.


----------



## ThomasJE (Jun 5, 2012)

pjk said:


> PM sent.



Thanks.

I've cleared up the 4x4x4 Parity Algorithms page. If there are any mistakes, or anything that may need adding, then feel


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Jun 5, 2012)

ThomasJE said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I've cleared up the 4x4x4 Parity Algorithms page. If there are any mistakes, or anything that may need adding, then feel


I appreciated your effort, but I did a major cleanup which I thought you were saying you did. For all of the algorithms, I omitted duplicates. Only for the impure algorithms, I omitted some mirrors and inverses. If someone wants to add them back, feel free to do so (it's just a couple of algs to add back in). But PLEASE, put the mirror, inverse, cube rotations, or any other variation of the same algorithms underneath the original algorithm. As you guys will see, I put (v2), (v3), etc. (which stands for version 1, version 2, etc.) next to different variations of the same algorithms and kept all variations TOGETHER.

Also, I didn't just delete all of the algorithms qqwref posted at the very end of the article. I just deleted duplicates. Well a few variations of that last list I deleted because they are still the same algorithms and are no faster or preserve more than the algs there. If we wanted to list all variations, the number of algorithms would be in the thousands! So I tried to keep it as brief as possible, but by no means did I delete that many of them.

I think I covered every item qqwref initially mentioned. However, some feel that the OLL Parity algorithms look better in SiGN notation. If that's the case, then please delete the WCA Notation copy and replace it with SiGN Notation. There is no need to have duplicates!

There are very few double parity algorithms (impure ones for reduction). We should add more of those for sure.

I deleted multiple duplicates of Frédérick Badie's algorithm, as I didn't see why there had to be 8-10 different variations (of those 10 or so, maybe more, some were duplicates).

I was going to add more ELL cases, but maybe another day. Anyone can add more ELL cases (meaning the two adjacent edge cases and unoriented PLL Parity, etc.)

I hope everyone likes my edit, and that we can move to the next step in perfecting this page.


----------



## ThomasJE (Jun 6, 2012)

Wow, that looks good! That's how I kind of wanted the page to be like. Also, why do we need algorithms that don't preserve F2L? Parity is usually peformed after F2L, so algs that mess up F2L are useless really.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Jun 6, 2012)

ThomasJE said:


> Wow, that looks good! That's how I kind of wanted the page to be like.


Thanks.


ThomasJE said:


> Also, why do we need algorithms that don't preserve F2L? Parity is usually peformed after F2L, so algs that mess up F2L are useless really.


Well, I don't see any real use in algs that don't preserve F2L either, but the algorithms I found in the past like this (and even more importantly, cuBerBruce's algs which are currently posted on that page, well, except for three which I found) are, I guess, just interesting. I mean, the 15 BQTM algs of cuBerBruce's are pretty neat. Besides some individuals using, say, the second (17,13) algorithm for Petrus, I guess it's important to have these algorithms posted in the wiki because it gives everyone appreciation for the standard algorithms which preserve more and are only a few moves longer. I'm sure you have seen the parity threads that have gone on, at least in the time I've been a member. On more than one occasion, people were wondering if there is a possibility of shorter parity algorithms to exist. I mean, we don't have an official cube explorer for the 4x4x4. cuBerBruce has done some impressive work to get around this, and I of course have done so on many levels myself (which I feel privileged to do for my fellow cubers, and I'm sure cuBerBruce is very proud of the accomplishments of his brute force searches). I guess at the end of the day, we (and whoever does constructive writing and/or makes contributions which make it on this page in the wiki) should hope that we provide speed optimal and move optimal solutions of all kinds so that everyone's needs will be met, whether it is for practical use in solving, curiosity, a look into the theory, or just to have a deep appreciation for the parity algorithms we have.

And just as an example (not that you mentioned algorithms for the checkboard pattern 4-cycle), but...

Even an algorithm like [f2 u' r2 Uw2 S': r] has its purpose (besides being the optimal algorithm BHTM and BQTM, we can still learn from it). As I have posted on the comments of a youtube video, if anyone wants to argue that parity algorithms are unintuitive, they should study this algorithm[f2 u' r2 Uw2 S': r] and reconsider. It doesn't matter how many moves it takes you to get slice r to look like it does after f2 u' r2 Uw2 S', as long as you can make slice r look like that, then you're in business. Simply observing how same color centers swap with each other when the extra quarter turn is finally ready to be executed is such a simple concept, it's beautiful. When I started cubing, and even after I found optimal solutions to various cases in different move metrics, I was always thinking to myself, "there must be a simpler concept of how to handle parity, even more so than my methods." I didn't find this algorithm right away (heck, I just found that early this year!), but the idea behind the algorithm is so simple that, once a cuber sees it and understands its one message, then the fear of parity should vanish forever. Easy to understand parity algorithms for, the pure edge flip, for example, clearly do exist: [f2 u' r2 Uw2 S': r] [Rw: [U' f' U, B2] ]. Sure we can just do a quarter turn and then solve back everything, but that's not really looking at the problem head on (at least, not to me. That's just doing something to bypass the "big problem" of having deal with the consequences of an odd permutation in the inner layers. That approach is like saying, "since my computer program has a bug, I'm going to start over," instead of trying to debug the code and actually learn how to prevent mistakes like that from happening again).


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Jun 8, 2012)

I did a major addition the the 4x4x4 Parity Algorithms page. I'm sure there are more algorithms (whether brief in btm or BQTM or fast) which can be added. Those who blindsolve can add any other parity algorithm categories (if there are any others).


----------



## ThomasJE (Jun 8, 2012)

I've done an overhaul on the VOP Method page. I've made the page neater and added a lot more algs. I think all that needs adding is a link to Guimond OLL algs that DON'T affect the V. If there is anything else that needs to be added/changed, then feel free to edit, but please keep the general layout the same.


----------



## Eazoon (Jun 8, 2012)

I just wanted to mention that you must not mix up fact and opinion. I saw on the v-cube 5 page somthing like 
"the v-cube 5 is better than shoungshou 5x5 which has bad outer layers". I fixed it but I hope there aren't many more things like that.


----------



## pjk (Jun 24, 2012)

Just wanted to update the guys working on the wiki: I'm trying to combat this spam anyway I can. I have a few ideas to try since they are clearly getting around the CAPTCHA, but I have a huge plate atm and it will take be a couple weeks to work on this. For now, blocking and deleting posts when they come up is the best that can be done. Thanks for working on this.


----------



## pjk (Jul 14, 2012)

I just got rid of the CAPTCHA because bots are clearly getting around that, and implemented a more difficult one for new account creation (try to create an account to test it). We'll see if this helps. Thanks guys for moderating that and keeping it clean.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Jul 27, 2012)

After many hours of work, I have finished my edits for the 4x4x4 parity algorithms page, and the 3x3x3 PLL page.

The 4x4x4 parity algorithms page should be explanatory. Although I have added quite a few new categories of algorithms, I'm sure there are some more which people can add. More external links perhaps?

For the 3x3x3 PLL page (if you ever intend on editing the 2-cycle PLLs, please read...I spent a lot of time organizing the chaos from before!),


Spoiler



I have sorted all previously existing 2-cycle algorithms in the following manner.

-I have numbered algorithms based on which algorithms were originally listed first. Their directly related algorithms (which might have been in the middle or even at the end of the list) have been grouped with them.

-If it wasn't in the wiki already, I have added versions of the previously existing algorithms which have no wide turns or cube rotations from every single algorithm listed in the wiki and made that the first version of related algorithms. That is, the algorithms are grouped into groups which shows which algorithms are directly related at some level or another.* Advantages*: Although not all of the first versions in the algorithm groups are fast, it is ideal to keep them so that people will not make the mistake of accidentally adding duplicates. In addition, people might like to add more versions to a group of algorithms from the first (non speed optimized version alg.). IN ADDITION, it's easy to link them to their decompositions.

-Speaking of decompositions, I have added commutator/conjugate decompositions of the first version alg in each group because they might give insight on how these parity algorithms can be constructed. For most even permutation algorithms, such decompositions might not be so straight forward (because it was actually easy for me to at least pinpoint --in the majority of the algorithms--where the extra quarter turn actually is executed). I will leave the decompositions of the rest of the PLL cases to others in the future.

-The first version of the algorithms is the only version which is guaranteed to solve a cube completely after executing the alg. to the corresponding case image (of course, the decompositions are decompositions of the first algorithms, so they too are guaranteed to completely solve the cube...). The rest of the versions (v2,v3,..etc.) may need U, U', U2, y, y', or y2 (or a combination of U and y) to restore the cube to the starting position and have the cube solved entirely. But I noticed this was done before for many of the algorithms, so I made an effort to omit all last U turns or y cube rotations to shorten the algs. Again, the first versions and their decompositions do not have the last U turns omitted (if the last turn involves U).

-For the symmetric J, N, and R Perms, all algorithms are now evenly distributed among each. If, for example, Ja had some additional algorithms (or additional forms of the same algorithms) which Jb didn't have, then I added those algorithms to Jb. In addition, the algorithms from Ja directly correspond to that of Jb, Na to Nb, and Ra to Rb.

*How to keep these algorithms organized:*
- If you add an algorithm to Ja, please add its mirror to Jb, even if you don't think it's as fast. (Same for Na and Nb). If you add an algorithm to Rb, please add its mirror + y2 cube rotation to Ra.
- If you add an entirely new algorithm to one of the 2-cycle PLL cases, do not put it in an existing group: make a separate group.

*For those who wish to move algorithms around.*
You may move the algorithms for a 2-cycle PLL case around in any order you wish. Just make sure that you do not exchange algorithms between groups! Keep all algorithms in their groups so that people in the future will be able to know which algorithms are directly related/only optimized differently. You may move the entire group around, though.

However, if you do move around algorithms or groups, renumber everything please. Also, if you affect Ja, Na, Ra, also affect Jb, Nb, and Ra in the same manner, so that the only main difference between algorithms in either symmetry is a mirror (mirror + y2 cube rotation for Ra between Rb...that is, unless the case image for Rb or Ra is rotated to be just the mirror of the other).


The main reasons I did this organization was to help reduce the amount of duplicate algorithms added in the future, show how few "unique" algorithms that are in the wiki for most of the 2-cycle PLLs (maybe someone can add more unique algorithms from other sources easier now and be sure that they are not duplicates of what's already in the wiki), illustrate how 3x3x3 parity algorithms can be represented using commutators and conjugates, and to make the number of algorithms under Ja equal the number of algorithms under Jb, Na to Nb, and Ra to Rb (in doing so, there is actually more variety for future cubers to try).

EDIT:

Also, I wasn't lazy. I double checked all links, algorithms, and decompositions, and all are correct. You can double check to see if the algorithms I claim to be directly related (I put them in the same group) if you wish. But I have double checked that as well.


----------



## ThomasJE (Aug 5, 2012)

http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Smerbia

:confused:


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 5, 2012)

ThomasJE said:


> http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Smerbia
> 
> :confused:


Maybe it's a cipher?


----------



## ThomasJE (Aug 5, 2012)

cmowla said:


> Maybe it's a cipher?



But what does it have to do with cubing?


----------



## qqwref (Oct 12, 2012)

Something is broken on the wiki. I can't upload some images. I am getting errors like this:

Could not create directory "mwstore://local-backend/local-public/c/c0".

Also, there are two huge (>2MB) images uploaded by Pestvic that can't be deleted because they throw similar errors.


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Oct 12, 2012)

qqwref said:


> Something is broken on the wiki. I can't upload some images. I am getting errors like this:
> 
> Could not create directory "mwstore://local-backend/local-public/c/c0".
> 
> Also, there are two huge (>2MB) images uploaded by Pestvic that can't be deleted because they throw similar errors.



Your images have been uploaded fine, check the recent changes...
What are the images by pestvic, I'll try deleting them a bit later.

EDIT: I embedded the images in the wiki page you were making, so they should show up. If not, try clearing your browser cache. Also, why is one of them ParityPLLtwo.png instead of ParityPLL2 ? (just for organisational purposes. its messy :b)


----------



## qqwref (Oct 12, 2012)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> Your images have been uploaded fine, check the recent changes...


No, you don't understand. I tried to upload images up to about #12 before I gave up. The ones you see are the only ones I could get to upload.



MaeLSTRoM said:


> Also, why is one of them ParityPLLtwo.png instead of ParityPLL2 ?


Because it was throwing an error like that when I called it ParityPLL2. I also tried some variations on the name. I could only get it to upload when I called it ParityPLLtwo. I also got an error when trying to rename it back to the proper name.


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Oct 12, 2012)

O.
I dont really know then :/


----------



## SLAVKO4996 (Oct 14, 2012)

Hello how can I submit or publish my own forum here? I have a new formula to calculate the Rubic's cube permutations.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Jan 16, 2013)

qqwref said:


> Because it was throwing an error like that when I called it ParityPLL2. I also tried some variations on the name. I could only get it to upload when I called it ParityPLLtwo. I also got an error when trying to rename it back to the proper name.


I had trouble loading images too. Renaming didn't help me either, unless I shortened the image name (some took several attempts). For the images that did upload but couldn't be added to the page, I uploaded a new/slightly modified version of those images (that is, I cropped a little off of one side of the image, and then I uploaded again so that it wouldn't complain that there is already an existing copy of the image file uploaded). 

Speaking of which, for those who haven't looked at the 4x4x4 parity algorithms page recently, I have made a lot of changes in the order of things, added more algs., etc., and I have just successfully finished adding case images for all defined cases and general images for general cases. I've edited that page so many times! I hope that this was my last edit for the time being.


----------



## kunparekh18 (Jan 16, 2013)

3x3 cube page in Hardware Section is blank! Please fix it ...

Sent from my A75 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Apr 6, 2013)

This is just an experiment, but I have just made a variation of Template:Alg mainly for the 4x4x4 parity algorithms page.

Let me know what you guys think. I mainly did this because many of the algorithms wrapped to the next line, and many were not that long movewise, just that WCA notation expanded the string length by a little to much to be on one line.

And, although I mention all of this and the following in the Template:Alg4 page,

now all move counts are in their own column instead of /(SQTM,STM) after the algorithms (which appeared in the applets too).


----------



## Ollie (Apr 6, 2013)

cmowla said:


> This is just an experiment, but I have just made a variation of Template:Alg mainly for the 4x4x4 parity algorithms page.



Me likey! How did the Mensa talk go, by the way?


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Apr 6, 2013)

Ollie said:


> Me likey! How did the Mensa talk go, by the way?


Cool that you like it, but I think your confusing two Chrises here. I bet you were thinking of cmhardw, so you still have to ask him about that!


----------



## Ollie (Apr 6, 2013)

cmowla said:


> Cool that you like it, but I think your confusing two Chrises here. I bet you were thinking of cmhardw, so you still have to ask him about that!



Haha, you're right, I think my eyesight's going :fp


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Apr 9, 2013)

I just added another column for author name in the template, and I have given the author's name for all algorithms that I am pretty sure were the original founders or were credited for finding them at some point in time (more than 4 years ago). Algorithms that have been left with "author" means that either I did not find it by hand or using a solver (and I don't know who did) OR I did find it, but I wasn't positive (or I was positive) that I wasn't the first to actually find it.

For those who actually found these algorithms (especially in the PLL parity section), don't hesitate to give credit to your name, and if you've given it a name (which I doubt), then add that too. When I have "Alg_1" etc. for the name, that is only for organizational purposes, and that can be replaced with a real name, should it be your algorithm and you have named or wish to name it.


----------



## googlebleh (Jun 7, 2013)

How does one go about editing/adding stuff to the Wiki? It bugs me that I have to visit Jessica Fridrich's website or the Probability thread every time I want to give the probability of an OLL/PLL case.


----------



## kp (Jun 7, 2013)

googlebleh said:


> How does one go about editing/adding stuff to the Wiki? It bugs me that I have to visit Jessica Fridrich's website or the Probability thread every time I want to give the probability of an OLL/PLL case.



You register an account, and then the "edit" button will appear at the top of the page, above the heading.


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Jun 7, 2013)

googlebleh said:


> How does one go about editing/adding stuff to the Wiki? It bugs me that I have to visit Jessica Fridrich's website or the Probability thread every time I want to give the probability of an OLL/PLL case.



Make an account on the wiki, since it's separate to the forum logins. Then choose the page you want to edit, and click edit while signed in. On the edit page there is a link on how to edit wiki markup if you're not already familiar with it.
Although, if we're adding probabilities to cases, it might be wise to go an edit the template. I'll look into doing that instead, might be a bit easier, but for now feel free to add it somewhere sensible.


----------



## kp (Jun 7, 2013)

Oh, by the way, I tried registering, and it only worked when I answered "What is the current fastest single solve for 3x3 Rubik's Cube?" as *5.66*. Perhaps an admin could update that.


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Jun 7, 2013)

kp said:


> Oh, by the way, I tried registering, and it only worked when I answered "What is the current fastest single solve for 3x3 Rubik's Cube?" as *5.66*. Perhaps an admin could update that.



I've flagged the issue, we'll just have to wait for someone who is able to change it to do so.


----------



## FJT97 (Jun 30, 2013)

Hello
I found a mistake in the OLL list:

The second c-shape OLL, the last algorithm:
This algorithm is wrong...
if you change the last F in a F' it would be the right one for the first c-shape....

I hope you can understand this gibberish....


----------



## Brest (Jun 30, 2013)

FJT97 said:


> Hello
> I found a mistake in the OLL list:
> 
> The second c-shape OLL, the last algorithm:
> ...



Fixed


----------



## FJT97 (Jun 30, 2013)

Brest said:


> Fixed



You missunderstood me like i believed....

R U R2' U' R' F R U R U' F' This algorithm stands now in the list of "seein headlights" but it has to move to the list of "city"!


----------



## ben1996123 (Jun 30, 2013)

FJT97 said:


> You missunderstood me like i believed....
> 
> R U R2' U' R' F R U R U' F' This algorithm stands now in the list of "seein headlights" but it has to move to the list of "city"!



there's nothing stopping you from fixing it, you know


----------



## FJT97 (Jul 1, 2013)

How i can fix it?


----------



## ben1996123 (Jul 1, 2013)

FJT97 said:


> How i can fix it?



make an account on the wiki and click edit on that page


----------



## FJT97 (Jul 1, 2013)

okey this is now edited, but not by me...

but i found another issue... *sry*

In the create an account process i had to put a confirmation code. The question was: "What is the current fastest single solve for 3x3 Rubik's Cube? See here to find answer" I tried typing in 5.55 cause that is the fastest, isnt it?
But that was wrong. The right answer was 5.66, the old fastest time... I dont think that i can edit this as well, so i write it here...


----------



## AvGalen (Jul 1, 2013)

FJT97 said:


> okey this is now edited, but not by me...
> 
> but i found another issue... *sry*
> 
> ...


Seems like a variable that needs to be updated, or maybe the answer should be 4.41 (hides)


----------



## HavoCentral (Jul 16, 2013)

Why are number 2, 7 and 10 on the PBL page the exact same case?

Number 25 makes no sense at all. 
Number 49-53 is just (Rotation) F2 R2 F2 (AUF).

2x2 PBL algorithm database needs cleaning up. Most of these are the same case with rotations, which could be written before the algorithm anyway(which most of them do). There should only be 5 cases + rotations, and each case could have a page with all those cases, instead of 50+ cases.


----------



## Schmidt (Jul 16, 2013)

HavoCentral said:


> 2x2 PBL algorithm database needs cleaning up....



y'	r L u2 R' U' R u2 L' U r'	10	10	12	3	

if small letters=rotations, the cube is back to solved when the alg is done

x L y2 R´U´R y2 L´U x´


----------



## HavoCentral (Jul 16, 2013)

Talking About This Page



Schmidt said:


> y'	r L u2 R' U' R u2 L' U r'	10	10	12	3
> 
> if small letters=rotations, the cube is back to solved when the alg is done
> 
> x L y2 R´U´R y2 L´U x´



I understand that. There are only 5 PBL cases for 2x2. Cases 6-56 are just the first 5 with various cube rotations. So instead of having 56 separate cases. There should be 5 PBL cases and subsections under that case for the rotations or compile the algorithms for each case in one list with appropriate cube rotations.

All cases should be from Yellow on top White on bottom perspective. You have the 5 cases Bar-Bar, Diagonal-diagonal, Bar- Diagonal, Bar, and Diagonal. If you include upsidedown cases, you have three more, bar or diagonal on bottom and a reverse bar-diagonal. So at the most only 8 cases are needed to show every algorithm, AUF are needed before and after each case, as well as cube rotations and they can be noted as such instead of making an entire case for a U AUF.

Example 1
Example 2 - List 9 moves as smalled when R2 F2 R2 AuF would solve.
Example 3 Worse case of example 2

These are a few of the most pointless cases to be listed. Cases 47-52 are the EXACT same case as case 1.


----------



## Schmidt (Jul 16, 2013)

My point is that small letters should not be used to describe 2x2x2 algs. That's why I quoted your clean up remark.


----------



## HavoCentral (Jul 16, 2013)

Schmidt said:


> My point is that small letters should not be used to describe 2x2x2 algs. That's why I quoted your clean up remark.




When did i use small letters to describe them? I didn't. For example Case #8 is just case #3 with a y' cube rotation. Therefore, it should not be a separate case. Otherwise there would be over 60 different PLL cases for 3x3, if we continue to use the 2x2 database logic.


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 16, 2013)

The external link addition security question has an incorrect answer.

Just thought I'd let y'all know =x


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Jul 16, 2013)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> The external link addition security question has an incorrect answer.
> 
> Just thought I'd let y'all know =x



I've flagged this up, but I don't have the power to change it, it's at a higher level than even admin because its a very basic wiki feature, so I can't get to it.



HavoCentral said:


> 2x2 PBL algorithm database needs cleaning up. Most of these are the same case with rotations, which could be written before the algorithm anyway(which most of them do). There should only be 5 cases + rotations, and each case could have a page with all those cases, instead of 50+ cases.



The Alg database, isn't part of the wiki, and again, those of us on the wiki have no power over it unless it's been given separately. I agree that it does need to be cleared up a bit though.


----------



## HavoCentral (Jul 17, 2013)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> The Alg database, isn't part of the wiki, and again, those of us on the wiki have no power over it unless it's been given separately. I agree that it does need to be cleared up a bit though.



Who is over it?

Also, the 2x2 page needs a link to the database, as well as the broken links removed. Most of the cubic puzzle pages have broken links.


----------



## SilentSolver (Dec 26, 2013)

*Wiki Image Not Displayed*

Hello, on the SpeedSolving Wiki the image for 'A Permutation : a' is not there, instead it's a long string of the code that may have an error in it. Not sure if this is an isolated incident in my case, but thought I would bring it to your attention.


----------



## SilentSolver (Dec 26, 2013)

Awesome glad I could help 



cmowla said:


> Thanks, I fixed it (and I mentioned your username in the edit comment for pointing it out ). ( "}}" was missing after "|text=" for some reason).
> 
> EDIT:
> It looks like wiki edtior Arnav singh deleted those }} by accident in his last edit. (Be careful and always preview your edits, Arnav singh).



Just out of curiosity what programming language do you guys use? I'm an aspiring computer geek and want to learn as much as I can. Sorry for this being off topic :/


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Dec 26, 2013)

SilentSolver said:


> Awesome glad I could help
> 
> 
> 
> Just out of curiosity what programming language do you guys use? I'm an aspiring computer geek and want to learn as much as I can. Sorry for this being off topic :/



If you mean for the wiki, its the standard mediaWiki Markup, used on Wikipedia etc. This is a good reference if you're interested in learning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing


----------



## pjk (Jul 24, 2014)

Just a heads up that I am aware that the wiki is down. Working on it.


----------



## pjk (Jul 28, 2014)

Note that we have temporarily disabled editing until we resolve our current database issues. I will update once I re-enable it.

Edit: wiki is active and able to be edited again. Please let me know if you experience anymore issues.


----------



## Millet (Oct 11, 2014)

Does anyone have issues with the thumbnails of all cases in the wiki?
Speedsolving Wiki

All the thumbnails show up all messed up, heres a screenshot i took:



It seems to look like this across all the cases, whether it is OLL, PLL or ZBLL.. Anyone else having the same issue?


----------



## TDM (Oct 11, 2014)

Millet said:


> Does anyone have issues with the thumbnails of all cases in the wiki?
> Speedsolving Wiki
> 
> All the thumbnails show up all messed up, heres a screenshot i took:
> ...


I'm getting the same as you.


----------



## guysensei1 (Oct 11, 2014)

TDM said:


> I'm getting the same as you.



Cool, the H perm is a PLL skip


----------



## Renslay (Oct 11, 2014)

It's because the page switched from HTTP to HTTPS, and the problem is already reported. See in this thread:
https://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?49755-Speedsolving-com-now-uses-HTTPS
https://www.speedsolving.com/forum/...w-uses-HTTPS&p=1023120&viewfull=1#post1023120


----------



## ketchuphater999 (Nov 5, 2014)

The last alg for OLL 43 on the wiki shows this:

"(y') R U l' U' (' U' r U x'"

Notice the " (' "


----------



## martinss (Nov 11, 2014)

To PJK, (or any wiki admin)

I saw you start up a bot to clean the wiki (BlockandNuke to delete spam articles.) You accidentaly some pages that aren't "spam article" but you did not restored ALL of them : (see spoiler)


Spoiler



(as 
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Triangle
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Substep_Infobox 
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Mock_Cross
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Antoine_Cantin 
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Canadian
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Callum_Hales-Jepp 
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Examinx
and maybe some others).


 I don't know if you didn't have enough time or if you didn't see them... (That's why I'm writting this.).

Moreover, you restored some templates pages (as Template:Cube_state_Infobox). They are not working as templates anymore. (see Cross_cube_state)


Please restore my account too.



Spoiler



User:Martinss

This user is currently blocked. The latest block log entry is provided below for reference:

07:03, 5 November 2014 PJK (Talk | contribs) blocked Martinss (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of indefinite (Martinss) (Blocked through Special:BlockandNuke)




Thanks !


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Nov 11, 2014)

Looks like all the pages edited by TChowcubes got nuked in the process, I've restored some more of the pages that have content. I've also unblocked your account but it looks like there might be a 24hour block on the IP.

(Not PJK but I do have wiki admin)


----------



## pjk (Nov 12, 2014)

Yeah, that was an issue on my end, apologies, it won't happen again. I've restored most of them. If we missed any, please let us know. Thanks.


----------



## martinss (Nov 12, 2014)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> I've also unblocked your account but it looks like there might be a 24hour block on the IP.



Thanks a lot !



pjk said:


> I've restored most of them. If we missed any, please let us know.



You missed that :


Spoiler



https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Triangle
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Substep_Infobox 
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Mock_Cross
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Antoine_Cantin (restored by MaeLSTRoM)
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Canadian
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Callum_Hales-Jepp 
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Examinx
Templates pages (as Template:Cube_state_Infobox) are not working as templates anymore (see Cross_cube_state).


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Nov 12, 2014)

Admittedly I didn't restore those because I didn't think they were really needed. A couple are just empty (CHJ)/redirects(Canadian) that can be fixed with fixing links in other pages, and the rest don't have enough content to warrant their own pages atm(Mock Cross), or are sufficiently fringe to not be needed (examinx, people aren't really that interested and it can just be mentioned in tera/petaminx pages etc)


----------



## ketchuphater999 (Nov 13, 2014)

What do the decompositions mean on the alg wiki?


----------



## pjk (Dec 3, 2014)

Has anyone who was working on the AlgDB been able to get it working with 1.23?


----------



## martinss (Mar 26, 2015)

Gallifrey said:


> What do the decompositions mean on the alg wiki?



Decompositions mean writting an alg with commutators and conjugates sothat it is easier to understand...


----------



## martinss (Mar 26, 2015)

I just edited List of Skewb methods on the wiki (previous revision was List of Skewb methods & oldid=23568)
Should I create a new page for each method (as for the 3x3x3) ?


----------



## pjk (Apr 17, 2015)

Millet said:


> Does anyone have issues with the thumbnails of all cases in the wiki?
> Speedsolving Wiki
> 
> All the thumbnails show up all messed up, heres a screenshot i took:
> ...


This issue has been fixed. If it happens again, please post here. Thanks.


----------



## irontwig (May 6, 2015)

Does anybody else find this very silly: "The USA [...] is one of the largest countries in North America."

https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/USA


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Jul 3, 2015)

It has been almost a year since I updated the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wiki page, but I made several (small) edits yesterday. As I say in the introduction, "Thanks to the work of Tom Rokicki and Ed Trice in 2014", I found that the shortest odd parity fix (which preserves the centers) for the 4x4x4 is *7 STM*.

In addition, I finally looked at the Yahoo Groups and found some interesting parts of cubing history. One of which I was not expecting. This is regarding PLL parity algorithms. Specifically, Clément Gallet found 19 15 move diagonal corner swap algorithms with his solver in October of 2006. Of course, many of these algorithms are equivalent by wide turn equivalences, and thus I added only "unique" algorithms to the wiki with the exception of r2 2F2 U2 b2 D' r2 U2 b2 U f2 R2 D2 B2 l2 U, for which I can easily see that Michael Fung used to find the algorithm, r2 2F2 U2 f2 U' r2 U2 f2 U f2 R2 U2 F2 r2 U, which has been accredited to his name. (I included Clément Gallet's wide turn equivalent to give him partial/most credit for Micheal Fung's version to be fair.)

Interestingly, I found two base algorithms which begin with a turn of a perpendicular face such as:
f2 2R2 D2 l2 U b2 D2 l2 D' r2 B2 U2 L2 b2 U'
versus Clément Gallet's favored (and thus the most well-known) 15 move diagonal corner swap algorithm:
r2 2F2 U2 f2 D r2 U2 f2 U' f2 L2 U2 B2 l2 U.

I was hoping to find some algorithms that solve the adjacent corner swap case, but I didn't find any. (Not from his solver, anyway).

Lastly, I also have added several more external links.

It's really interesting (sad) that there is no link to this wiki page on the en.wikipedia.org Rubik's Revenge page!

Almost 120k views on this page. I'm honored! If anyone has any suggestions to better this page, please feel free to comment. I tried my best to give credit where credit is due, as you can see.


----------



## shadowslice e (Jul 18, 2015)

How do you get a link to link to a page that already exists? For example in [wiki] The Meyer Thread[/wiki], none of the pages come up and the links to the page don't work either.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Jul 19, 2015)

shadowslice e said:


> How do you get a link to link to a page that already exists? For example in [wiki] The Meyer Thread[/wiki], none of the pages come up and the links to the page don't work either.


I'm not sure what you mean. The link to the Meyer Method wiki page works just fine (and it comes up from searching for "Meyer Method" in the wiki search as well), and the external link therein to the Meyer Thread works as well.


----------



## shadowslice e (Jul 19, 2015)

Christopher Mowla said:


> I'm not sure what you mean. The link to the Meyer Method wiki page works just fine (and it comes up from searching for "Meyer Method" in the wiki search as well), and the external link therein to the Meyer Thread works as well.



Thanks but nevermind. It turns out I capitalised one of the letters that was not in the title of the page (The Meyer Method vs. Meyer method)

Ps. Thanks Randomno


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Feb 6, 2016)

Although I didn't make the time to calculate the probabilities that Lid requested for PLL parities, just seeing his complete PLL parity page that he linked to in that probability request post and seeing that Michael Fung's website is down (here's a saved version on web.archive where you can still actually download all of his documents, amazingly), I thought it would be about time to add the remaining (missing) PLL parity cases to the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wiki page.

I will grab algorithms from Lid's site, Michael Fung's PLL parity document, Frederick Badie's, and perhaps make some of my own. If anyone else has made some algorithms for these cases, please post them or a link to them here, or pm them to me. As always, I will give credit where it is due.
Now, my question is, what should the case images be? I have modeled a corner swap and a 3-cycle of edges case and modeled it in 5 different ways, and I grabbed Lid's case image (#6). *Note that I will make the case images the same size as the images currently on the wiki. So don't let the size dictate your decision, but rather the "design" itself.*

In order to be consistent with the case images that I have put on that page, I give my voters the option to choose from #1-5 (because I want the last layer to be the white face, in order to be consistent with the rest of the case images on that page).

Note that I colored the corners which are to be swapped dark gray, and the dedges which need to be cycled medium gray. *Should I NOT include arrows, I will mention in which direction they need to be cycled in order to be solved.*

(So images #1-5, which are currently without arrows, could be easier to pick a case than with arrows, because only the three gray dedges either need to be cycled clockwise or anticlockwise, which is something that can be stated above the case image.)

So, please tell me which case image (out of #1-5) you like, and by looking at Lid's (#6), if you think it still needs permutation arrows or is sufficient as is?



In addition, may I ask if it is necessary to include case images to all cases? That is, is it necessary to include case images to cases both which the three dedges need to be cycled clockwise and anticlockwise, or is one sufficient, knowing that all you need to do is take the inverse of the given algorithm to solve the inverse case?

I am more in favor of not including _all_ cases because I did not for either of the 4-cycle of dedge or 4-cycle of wing edge cases on that page (it's LONG enough as it is), but I thought I would ask this as well.


----------



## TDM (Feb 6, 2016)

Christopher Mowla said:


> ~



Personally, for me, I'd prefer to have the top face a solid colour. Since parity PLL is more likely to be useful for speedsolving than much else, knowing which edges are cycled (and in what direction) isn't usually needed for fast recognition; having simpler images (with a single colour on U) would be clearer.

Of the image designs in the selection you have there, I think either 4 or 5 would be best. Probably 4. Since these are for 4x4, having images similar to what the cube will actually look like would make the most sense to me. You've also talked about consistency of image size and colour in your post; 4 is closest to the other images on the wiki page. 5 is also an okay option since some people will find it easier to spot patterns and recognise cases on a 3x3. Pairing up the edges looks a little weird to me.


If you were to have these in a table, which I think is ideal, then including images for all cases would be good. I think it would be good to avoid having them listed one after another, as is the case with most of the wiki page: it seems to be a bit disorganised to me, even if it is in a sensible order. Tables are much neater and look better.

Having said that, perhaps having a separate page for Parity PLL could be better, listing the cases one after another as on the normal PLL page (and current 4x4 parity page). People who are looking for algorithms for speedsolving may not want to go to the current page since there are so many algs; keeping them separate could encourage more people to use the page and add to it. There would also be more space for images.


----------



## Sa967St (Feb 6, 2016)

Christopher Mowla said:


> Note that I colored the corners which are to be swapped dark gray, and the dedges which need to be cycled medium gray. *Should I NOT include arrows, I will mention in which direction they need to be cycled in order to be solved.*


I agree with TDM that the U face should be a solid colour. I think more people would find it simpler to learn recognition if the images looked like what the 4x4x4 case would actually look like. 



Christopher Mowla said:


> So, please tell me which case image (out of #1-5) you like, and by looking at Lid's (#6), if you think it still needs permutation arrows or is sufficient as is?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: images


I like #2 the most because it eliminates all the clutter and is one of the easiest/quickest to relate back to a physical 4x4. #4 is a close second, but I like how #2 looks cleaner.




Christopher Mowla said:


> In addition, may I ask if it is necessary to include case images to all cases? That is, is it necessary to include case images to cases both which the three dedges need to be cycled clockwise and anticlockwise, or is one sufficient, knowing that all you need to do is take the inverse of the given algorithm to solve the inverse case?
> 
> I am more in favor of not including _all_ cases because I did not for either of the 4-cycle of dedge or 4-cycle of wing edge cases on that page (it's LONG enough as it is), but I thought I would ask this as well.



I think it would be nice if the inverses and reflections were explicitly listed near the "original" cases for the sake of completion, with or without the images. That way anyone looking up a case can find the algorithm directly on the page.


----------



## Robert-Y (Feb 6, 2016)

I'm also in favour of #2. It kinda implies that the reduction phase has been completed and that the centres and edges are supposed to remain "intact".


----------



## Lucas Garron (Feb 7, 2016)

Christopher Mowla said:


> Note that I colored the corners which are to be swapped dark gray, and the dedges which need to be cycled medium gray.



That sounds like it's geared to a particular kind of recognition method, and a particular way about thinking about the case. Can you color them symmetrically to avoid that?

Apart from that, either 2 or 4 makes the most sense. Can you to the average, where you color the dividing line gray?


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Feb 7, 2016)

Thanks for the feedback, everyone.



Lucas Garron said:


> That sounds like it's geared to a particular kind of recognition method, and a particular way about thinking about the case. Can you color them symmetrically to avoid that?


Sure, I can color the corners and dedges the same shade of gray. I didn't think about that.



Lucas Garron said:


> Apart from that, either 2 or 4 makes the most sense. Can you to the average, where you color the dividing line gray?


Is something like this what you're looking for? (Instead of coloring the dividing line in on the non-white color portion of each dedge gray, in general, I colored them a lighter shade of that same color.)

If it is, but you want me to use a lighter (or darker) shade of the given colors, let me know.


Spoiler


----------



## clement (Feb 7, 2016)

Hello everyone.

I don't have a strong opinion on which image type to use. I would use option 4 for a standard 444 image.
Regarding parity permutation cases, I ran my recent program on them and came up with the following algorithms.
A few notes first:
- it searches in Single Slice Turn Metric, which is not very speedcubing friendly. I cannot change it easily because it is inherent of the solving method used (for exemple sometimes I'm allowed to do inner slice quarter moves (2F) but not the corresponding outer slice quarter move (F))
- I only print algorithms that beats or equals known algorithms in SSTM
- I didn't reduce to canonical algorithms, sorry
- I used http://hem.bredband.net/_zlv_/rubiks/4x4/444pllpar.html for the PLL+p notations

*PLL W*

15 L2 U F2 L2 F2 U F2 2L2 U2 F2 L2 2L2 F2 U2 2L2
15 L2 U F2 L2 F2 U F2 2L2 U2 F2 R2 2R2 B2 D2 2L2
15 L2 U F2 L2 F2 U F2 2L2 D2 B2 L2 2L2 F2 U2 2L2
15 L2 U F2 L2 F2 U F2 2L2 D2 B2 R2 2R2 B2 D2 2L2
15 L2 U F2 L2 F2 U F2 2R2 U2 F2 L2 2R2 F2 U2 2R2
15 L2 U F2 L2 F2 U F2 2R2 U2 F2 2L2 R2 B2 D2 2R2
15 L2 U F2 L2 F2 U F2 2R2 D2 B2 L2 2R2 F2 U2 2R2
15 L2 U F2 L2 F2 U F2 2R2 D2 B2 2L2 R2 B2 D2 2R2

*PLL O*

13 2L2 U2 2F2 U' 2L2 2F2 U 2U2 2F2 2U2 2L2 U2 2L2
13 2L2 U2 2F2 U' 2L2 2F2 U 2U2 2F2 2L2 U2 2L2 2U2
13 2L2 U2 2F2 U' 2L2 2F2 U 2U2 2F2 2L2 D2 2R2 2D2
13 2L2 U2 2F2 U' 2L2 2F2 U 2D2 2F2 2D2 2L2 U2 2L2
13 2L2 U2 2F2 U' 2L2 2F2 U 2D2 2F2 2L2 U2 2L2 2D2
13 2L2 U2 2F2 U' 2L2 2F2 U 2D2 2F2 2L2 D2 2R2 2U2

*PLL P*

17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2


Spoiler: related



17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 R2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 R2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 R2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 R2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 R2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 R2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 R2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 R2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 L2 2L2 F2 2F2 L2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 L2 2L2 F2 2F2 L2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 L2 2L2 B2 2B2 R2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 L2 2L2 B2 2B2 R2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 R2 F2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 R2 B2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 R2 2R2 F2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 R2 2R2 F2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 R2 2R2 B2 2B2 L2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 R2 2R2 B2 2B2 L2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2 L2 F2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2 L2 B2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 L2 2L2 F2 2B2 L2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 L2 2L2 F2 2B2 L2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 L2 2L2 2F2 B2 R2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 L2 2L2 2F2 B2 R2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 R2 F2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 R2 2F2 B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 R2 2R2 F2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 R2 2R2 F2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 R2 2R2 2F2 B2 L2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 R2 2R2 2F2 B2 L2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2 L2 F2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2 L2 2F2 B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 U2 F2 2L2 F2 U2 2L2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 U2 F2 2R2 F2 U2 2R2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 U2 B2 2L2 B2 U2 2R2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 U2 B2 2R2 B2 U2 2L2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 D2 F2 2L2 F2 D2 2L2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 D2 F2 2R2 F2 D2 2R2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 D2 B2 2L2 B2 D2 2R2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 D2 B2 2R2 B2 D2 2L2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 L2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 L2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 L2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 L2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 L2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 L2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 L2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 L2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 R2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 R2 F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 R2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 R2 F2 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 R2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 R2 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 R2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 R2 B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 L2 2R2 F2 2F2 L2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 L2 2R2 F2 2F2 L2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 L2 2R2 B2 2B2 R2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 L2 2R2 B2 2B2 R2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 R2 F2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 R2 B2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 2L2 R2 F2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 2L2 R2 F2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 2L2 R2 B2 2B2 L2 F2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 2L2 R2 B2 2B2 L2 B2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2 L2 F2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2 L2 B2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 L2 2R2 F2 2B2 L2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 L2 2R2 F2 2B2 L2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 L2 2R2 2F2 B2 R2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 L2 2R2 2F2 B2 R2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 R2 F2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 R2 2F2 B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 2L2 R2 F2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 2L2 R2 F2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 2L2 R2 2F2 B2 L2 F2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 2L2 R2 2F2 B2 L2 2F2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2 L2 F2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2 L2 2F2 B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 U2 F2 2L2 F2 U2 2L2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 U2 F2 2R2 F2 U2 2R2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 U2 B2 2L2 B2 U2 2R2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 U2 B2 2R2 B2 U2 2L2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 D2 F2 2L2 F2 D2 2L2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 D2 F2 2R2 F2 D2 2R2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 D2 B2 2L2 B2 D2 2R2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2R2 D2 B2 2R2 B2 D2 2L2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2L2 U2 F2 2L2 F2 U2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2L2 U2 B2 2R2 B2 U2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2L2 D2 F2 2L2 F2 D2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2L2 D2 B2 2R2 B2 D2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2R2 U2 F2 2R2 F2 U2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2R2 U2 B2 2L2 B2 U2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2R2 D2 F2 2R2 F2 D2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2R2 D2 B2 2L2 B2 D2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 L2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 R2 B2 2R2 F2 2F2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 R2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 R2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 R2 B2 2R2 B2 2B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 R2 U2 F2 2L2 F2 U2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 R2 U2 B2 2R2 B2 U2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 R2 D2 F2 2L2 F2 D2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 R2 D2 B2 2R2 B2 D2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 L2 2F2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 L2 2B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2F2 2L2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2L2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 R2 2F2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 R2 2B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2B2 2R2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 U2 F2 2L2 F2 U2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 U2 F2 2L2 F2 U2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 U2 B2 2R2 B2 U2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 U2 B2 2R2 B2 U2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 D2 F2 2L2 F2 D2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 D2 F2 2L2 F2 D2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 D2 B2 2R2 B2 D2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2L2 D2 B2 2R2 B2 D2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2F2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2R2 U2 F2 2R2 F2 U2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2R2 U2 B2 2L2 B2 U2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2R2 D2 F2 2R2 F2 D2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2R2 D2 B2 2L2 B2 D2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 R2 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 L2 2F2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 L2 2B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2F2 2R2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2R2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 R2 2F2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 R2 2B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2B2 2L2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 U2 F2 2R2 F2 U2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 U2 F2 2R2 F2 U2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 U2 B2 2L2 B2 U2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 U2 B2 2L2 B2 U2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 D2 F2 2R2 F2 D2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 D2 F2 2R2 F2 D2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 D2 B2 2L2 B2 D2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2R2 D2 B2 2L2 B2 D2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 2F2 L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 2F2 R2 F2 2L2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 2F2 L2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 2F2 R2 F2 2R2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 2B2 L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2L2 2B2 R2 F2 2L2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 2B2 L2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L F2 2B2 2R2 2B2 R2 F2 2R2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 L2 2L2 2F2 2L2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 L2 2R2 2F2 2R2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 L2 F2 2L2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 L2 F2 2R2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 2L2 R2 2B2 2R2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 F2 2F2 R2 2R2 2B2 2L2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 2F2 2L2 F2 L2 F2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 2F2 2L2 F2 L2 B2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 2F2 2R2 F2 L2 F2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 2F2 2R2 F2 L2 B2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 L2 2L2 2B2 2R2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 L2 2R2 2B2 2L2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 2L2 R2 2F2 2L2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 R2 2R2 2F2 2R2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 R2 F2 2L2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 L2 B2 2B2 R2 F2 2R2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 L2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 R2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 L2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 R2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 R2 F2 2F2 R2 F2 2L2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 R2 F2 2F2 R2 F2 2R2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 R2 2F2 2L2 F2 R2 F2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 R2 2F2 2L2 F2 R2 B2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 R2 2F2 2R2 F2 R2 F2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 R2 2F2 2R2 F2 R2 B2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 R2 B2 2B2 L2 F2 2L2 2F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 R2 B2 2B2 L2 F2 2R2 2F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 L2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2L2 R2 B2 2R2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 L2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 R2 F2 2L2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 2B2 L2 F2 2L2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2L2 2B2 R2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 2B2 L2 F2 2R2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2F2 B2 2R2 2B2 R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 L2 2F2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 L2 2B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 R2 2F2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 R2 2B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2F2 2L2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2L2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2R2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2B2 2R2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 L2 2F2 2L2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 L2 2B2 2L2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 R2 2F2 2R2 2F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 R2 2B2 2R2 2B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2F2 2R2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2R2 2B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2L2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2B2 2L2 2F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 2F2 L2 F2 2L2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 2F2 R2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 L2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2L2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 2F2 L2 F2 2R2 F2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 2F2 R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 L2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 R2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 L2 2L2 2B2 2L2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 L2 2R2 2B2 2R2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 L2 F2 2L2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 L2 F2 2R2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 2L2 R2 2F2 2R2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 F2 2B2 R2 2R2 2F2 2L2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 L2 2L2 2F2 2R2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 L2 2R2 2F2 2L2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 2L2 R2 2B2 2L2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 R2 2R2 2B2 2R2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 R2 F2 2L2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2F2 B2 R2 F2 2R2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2B2 2L2 F2 L2 F2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2B2 2L2 F2 L2 2F2 B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2B2 2R2 F2 L2 F2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 L2 2B2 2R2 F2 L2 2F2 B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2L2 2F2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 L2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 R2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 F2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 L2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 R2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 2F2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 2F2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 B2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2L2 B2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 R2 F2 2B2 R2 F2 2L2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 R2 F2 2B2 R2 F2 2R2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 R2 2F2 B2 L2 F2 2L2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 R2 2F2 B2 L2 F2 2R2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 R2 2B2 2L2 F2 R2 F2 2B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 R2 2B2 2L2 F2 R2 2F2 B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 R2 2B2 2R2 F2 R2 F2 2B2 2L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 R2 2B2 2R2 F2 R2 2F2 B2 2R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 2R2 2F2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2F2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2F2 2R2 F2 2R2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 L2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2L2 R2 B2 2R2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2L2 B2 2R2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 F2 2B2 2R2 F2 2R2 F2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 L2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 R2 F2 2L2 F2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 2F2 B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 F2 2F2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 F2 2B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 B2 2R2 2F2 B2 R2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 B2 2B2 2L2 F2 2L2 B2 L2
17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2B2 2R2 B2 2B2 2R2 B2 2L2 F2 R2


16 2U2 D' B2 L2 U 2U2 L2 D' B2 U R2 U R2 U2 2D2 R2
16 2U2 D' B2 L2 U 2U2 L2 D' B2 U R2 U R2 2U2 D2 L2

*PLL C*

17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 L2 2B2 L2 2L2 2B2 2R2 F2


Spoiler: related



17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 L2 2B2 L2 2R2 2B2 2L2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 L2 2B2 2L2 R2 2F2 2L2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 L2 2B2 R2 B2 2L2 2F2 2L2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 L2 2B2 R2 B2 2R2 2F2 2R2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 L2 2B2 R2 2R2 2F2 2R2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 F2 2L2 2B2 2L2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 F2 2R2 2B2 2R2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 2L2 2B2 2L2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 2R2 2B2 2R2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 R2 2F2 2L2 R2 2F2 2R2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2F2 R2 2F2 R2 2R2 2F2 2L2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 L2 2F2 L2 2L2 2F2 2R2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 L2 2F2 L2 2R2 2F2 2L2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 L2 2F2 2L2 R2 2B2 2L2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 L2 2F2 R2 B2 2L2 2B2 2L2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 L2 2F2 R2 B2 2R2 2B2 2R2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 L2 2F2 R2 2R2 2B2 2R2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 F2 2L2 2F2 2L2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 F2 2R2 2F2 2R2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 2L2 2F2 2L2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 2R2 2F2 2R2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 R2 2B2 2L2 R2 2B2 2R2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2B2 R2 2B2 R2 2R2 2B2 2L2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 L2 2B2 L2 2F2 2R2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 L2 2B2 R2 2B2 2L2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 L2 2L2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 L2 2L2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 2B2 2L2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 R2 2F2 R2 2F2 2R2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 R2 2R2 2F2 R2 F2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 R2 2R2 2F2 R2 2F2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 2R2 F2 R2 2F2 R2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2F2 2R2 B2 R2 2F2 R2 2F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 L2 2F2 L2 2B2 2R2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 L2 2F2 R2 2F2 2L2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 L2 2L2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 L2 2L2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 2F2 2L2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 R2 2B2 R2 2B2 2R2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 R2 2R2 2B2 R2 F2 2F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 R2 2R2 2B2 R2 B2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 2R2 F2 R2 2B2 R2 2F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2L2 2B2 2R2 B2 R2 2B2 R2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 L2 2B2 L2 2F2 2L2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 L2 2B2 R2 2B2 2R2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 L2 2R2 2B2 R2 F2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 L2 2R2 2B2 R2 2F2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 2L2 F2 R2 2F2 R2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 2L2 B2 R2 2F2 R2 2F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 2L2 R2 2F2 R2 F2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 2L2 R2 2F2 R2 2F2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 2B2 2R2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2F2 R2 2F2 R2 2F2 2L2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 L2 2F2 L2 2B2 2L2 B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 L2 2F2 R2 2F2 2R2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 L2 2R2 2F2 R2 F2 2F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 L2 2R2 2F2 R2 B2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 2L2 F2 R2 2B2 R2 2F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 2L2 B2 R2 2B2 R2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 2L2 R2 2B2 R2 F2 2F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 2L2 R2 2B2 R2 B2 2B2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 2F2 2R2 F2
17 F2 L2 B D B' R2 B D' B' 2R2 2B2 R2 2B2 R2 2B2 2L2 B2



*PLL M*

16 U 2U2 B2 D L2 U' 2D2 L2 B2 D' R2 U' R2 U2 2U2 R2
16 U 2U2 B2 D L2 U' 2D2 L2 B2 D' R2 U' R2 D2 2D2 L2

*PLL K*

14 2L2 F2 D R2 D' L2 D R2 D 2R2 D2 L2 F2 2L2

*PLL 17*

17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2F2 U2 L2 2B2 L2 U2 2F2


Spoiler: related



17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2F2 U2 R2 2F2 R2 U2 2F2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2F2 D2 L2 2B2 L2 D2 2F2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2F2 D2 R2 2F2 R2 D2 2F2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 2L2 2B2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 2R2 2B2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2F2 R2 2F2 2L2 R2 2F2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2F2 R2 2F2 R2 2R2 2F2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2B2 U2 L2 2F2 L2 U2 2B2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2B2 U2 R2 2B2 R2 U2 2B2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2B2 D2 L2 2F2 L2 D2 2B2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2B2 D2 R2 2B2 R2 D2 2B2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 2L2 2F2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 2R2 2F2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2B2 R2 2B2 2L2 R2 2B2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2B2 R2 2B2 R2 2R2 2B2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2F2 L2 2B2 L2 2F2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2F2 L2 2B2 R2 2B2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2F2 L2 2R2 2B2 R2 2B2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2F2 2L2 R2 2F2 R2 2F2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 2B2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2F2 R2 2F2 R2 2F2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2B2 L2 2F2 L2 2B2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2B2 L2 2F2 R2 2F2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2B2 L2 2R2 2F2 R2 2F2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2B2 2L2 R2 2B2 R2 2B2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 2F2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2L2 2B2 R2 2B2 R2 2B2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2F2 L2 2B2 L2 2F2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2F2 L2 2B2 R2 2B2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2F2 L2 2L2 2B2 R2 2B2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2F2 R2 2F2 L2 2B2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2F2 R2 2F2 R2 2F2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2F2 R2 2R2 2F2 R2 2F2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2B2 L2 2F2 L2 2B2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2B2 L2 2F2 R2 2F2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2B2 L2 2L2 2F2 R2 2F2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2B2 R2 2B2 L2 2F2 2L2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2B2 R2 2B2 R2 2B2 2R2
17 U F2 L2 B D B' L2 F U' F 2R2 2B2 R2 2R2 2B2 R2 2B2



*PLL S*

18 2U2 F2 B2 U F2 U2 L2 D 2D2 R2 U2 F2 D' 2D2 B2 U2 B2 L2
18 2U2 F2 B2 U F2 U2 L2 D 2D2 R2 U2 F2 D' B2 U2 B2 2D2 L2

*PLL Q*

17 2U2 D F2 U R2 U2 2U2 F2 D' F2 U L2 D2 B2 U' 2U2 R2

*PLL X*

18 L2 U2 F2 D B2 2U2 D' F2 L2 F2 D B2 D 2U2 R2 D2 F2 2D2

*PLL 22*

17 2U2 F2 U2 L2 U' L2 U2 L2 F2 U F2 2U2 L2 U2 F2 2U2 L2


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Feb 7, 2016)

Nice algorithm set, Clément! I will surely include these and any others that you happen to find over time!


----------



## rachmaninovian (Feb 7, 2016)

Chris, if I actually use these algorithms, I'd like to have #4, with all solid colors on the top, meaning none of the cubies should be greyed out. Of course permutation arrows would be fun, but I actually think that many recognize patterns by blocks and not permutations per se.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Feb 10, 2016)

Hi everyone,

I just submitted the update to the wiki. Check it out!

*If anyone wants to know why I chose the letters that I did to represent each permutation, I can make a brief (unlisted) video of me drawing the symbol via the permutation arrows.* Besides the actual letters, I tried to follow the PLL wiki page convention which says that a cw edge cycle is labeled as the "b" permutation, and vice versa.

I may try to find algorithms in the future for some of these cases from time to time.

Interestingly, in the process of me trying to create algorithms to some cases, I found (2L e2 2R' e2)3, as well as decent algorithm to what I have labeled as the "C Perm".
*Ca*
2L 2R U2 x U' L U' R2 U L' U' r2 U2 x' U2 2L' 2R' U' (21,16)

And its mirror
*Cb*
2L' 2R' U2 x' U L' U R2 U' L U r2 U2 x U2 2L 2R U (21,16)

As far as move count, Alexander Ooms algorithm for Ca is l2 U F2 U' B2 U F2 U 2L2 U2 B2 l2 U', which is (21,13). So I matched his alg's block quarter turn move count, but I'm pretty sure my alg is faster.



clement said:


> *PLL P*
> 
> 17 U R U' L U2 R' U L 2L2 F2 L2 2L2 F2 2F2 2L2 F2 2F2


This is really interesting. It's a (20,14) algorithm, which breaks the previous records in both block half turns and block quarter turns! You, sir, are indeed a legend!


----------



## shadowslice e (Mar 7, 2016)

How do you add the Method/Substep description boxes?


----------



## Shiv3r (Apr 5, 2016)

Question: to me, it seems impossible to create a new page(gonna make a page for a method my friend's working on)


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Apr 23, 2016)

200k views of the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wiki page! 

I intend to add more external links, but I was wondering if I should do it in the form of a "narrative"/historical account (since a lot happened in a relatively short time frame, and there seems to be little activity nowadays), where I link to a variety of threads in the words of the sentences themselves?

That is, I change the list of external links into paragraph format, because as of right now, they are "organized" but, at the same time, you have to view each one and read the thread to see what the particular significance of discussion it was.

What do you all think?


----------



## Christopher Mowla (May 29, 2016)

Just to give an update to recent changes to the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wiki page, I have added a unoriented 4-cycle of dedges section (for both cases)
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_Parity_Algorithms#Four_Dedges_.28Unoriented.29

In addition, I have added all move optimal single slice half turn algorithms for the following cases.
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_Parity_Algorithms#15_STM_Solutions
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_Parity_Algorithms#Adjacent_2-Swap
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_Parity_Algorithms#Opposite.2Fdiagonal_2-Swap


----------



## Nikhil Soares (Dec 28, 2016)

Hi I am Nikhil Soares and I recently broke the Megaminx OH UWR with a time of 2:09.67 . The proof can be found on my YouTube channel named " Cuber Nikhil ". Please tell me how to get it recognised on the Speedsolving Wiki "List of UWRs " page.


----------



## 1973486 (Dec 28, 2016)

I updated it 10 minutes after you made the original post...


----------



## Nikhil Soares (Dec 28, 2016)

1973486 said:


> I updated it 10 minutes after you made the original post...


Umm... What do you mean by 'Update' ?


----------



## 1973486 (Dec 28, 2016)

Nikhil Soares said:


> Umm... What do you mean by 'Update' ?



Look at the UWR list


----------



## Nikhil Soares (Dec 28, 2016)

1973486 said:


> Look at the UWR list


Thanks a lot!!! I'm really happy! 
So from now if I break the record again then I have to post the time on this thread?
And by the way what is your real name?


----------



## shadowslice e (Dec 28, 2016)

Nikhil Soares said:


> Thanks a lot!!! I'm really happy!
> So from now if I break the record again then I have to post the time on this thread?
> And by the way what is your real name?


I don't think this is a place to share your real name in general. Also, you could just create an account


----------



## Nikhil Soares (Dec 31, 2016)

NEW MEGAMINX OH UWR SINGLE AND AVERAGE!!!
SINGLE - 1:54.57
AVERAGE- 2:03.57
Please update this in the speedsolving wiki in the 'List of unofficial works records' page. 
Both records broken by Nikhil Soares (me)
On 29th December 2016.
Video proof-https://youtu.be/oz5zHolGpcE


----------



## shadowslice e (Dec 31, 2016)

Nikhil Soares said:


> NEW MEGAMINX OH UWR SINGLE AND AVERAGE!!!
> SINGLE - 1:54.57
> AVERAGE- 2:03.57
> Please update this in the speedsolving wiki in the 'List of unofficial works records' page.
> ...


You know you can update it by yourself right?


----------



## Nikhil Soares (Dec 31, 2016)

W


shadowslice e said:


> You know you can update it by yourself right?


What!!?? How?


----------



## shadowslice e (Dec 31, 2016)

Nikhil Soares said:


> W
> 
> What!!?? How?


Create a wiki account and then you can do it.


----------



## peculiargoldfish (Jan 5, 2018)

I noticed on SS Wiki that a lot of cubers' ages haven't been updated for years. 

I'm not an expert in MediaWiki. Is there a possibility of making a template on the SpeedSolving Wiki which would automatically update cubers' ages (since the infoboxes include an AGE parameter), and how could that be done?


----------



## pjk (Aug 23, 2018)

I've upgraded the Wiki to 1.31 today so a few minor corrections may be needed. Please edit as you notice issues.


----------



## Gomorrite (Aug 23, 2018)

I got an internal error trying to update the list of unofficial world records.


----------



## pjk (Aug 23, 2018)

Gomorrite said:


> I got an internal error trying to update the list of unofficial world records.


What is the error exactly you're getting? I just edited the page twice with no errors. Please let me know the process so I can try to replicate.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 24, 2018)

I guess you're aware that we can't login to make edits


> *Internal error*
> 
> [W4AOJzMDChO5ttydglk-ygAAABw] 2018-08-24 13:54:48: Fatal exception of type "Error"



and that the 4x4x4 parity algorithms page isn't loading?

EDIT:
Okay, it looks like the 4x4x4 parity algorithms page is back up, and I guess you're handling the internal error.

Thanks! Also, I like the new look!


----------



## pjk (Aug 24, 2018)

Christopher Mowla said:


> I guess you're aware that we can't login to make edits
> 
> 
> and that the 4x4x4 parity algorithms page isn't loading?
> ...


Can you make edits now?

Fixed the issue with the 4x4 page, was an issue with the PHP memory limits. Let me know of any other issues. Thanks.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 24, 2018)

pjk said:


> Can you make edits now?


I still can't log in. There's a different internal error now:


> *Internal error*
> 
> [[email protected]] 2018-08-24 15:45:49: Fatal exception of type "Error"


----------



## 1973486 (Aug 24, 2018)

peculiargoldfish said:


> I noticed on SS Wiki that a lot of cubers' ages haven't been updated for years.
> 
> I'm not an expert in MediaWiki. Is there a possibility of making a template on the SpeedSolving Wiki which would automatically update cubers' ages (since the infoboxes include an AGE parameter), and how could that be done?



Since I only just saw this, yes it is possible. I don't know if it requires ParserFunctions or not (I checked a couple of templates from other wikis and they used them) but either way PJK installed ParserFunctions a few years ago so it should be fine. I just don't remember the most efficient way to make a template like that. Wikipedia's template code for age is this.


----------



## pjk (Aug 25, 2018)

Christopher Mowla said:


> I still can't log in. There's a different internal error now:


Should be fixed now, please check. Let me know of any other issues.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 25, 2018)

pjk said:


> Should be fixed now, please check. Let me know of any other issues.


You are correct, it is fixed. I have no edits to do at the moment, but I will let you know of other issues. (But you probably got everything.)

Thanks.


----------



## pjk (Aug 25, 2018)

Christopher Mowla said:


> You are correct, it is fixed. I have no edits to do at the moment, but I will let you know of other issues. (But you probably got everything.)
> 
> Thanks.


Go ahead and test making edits, uploading files, etc. to make sure all functionality works okay. Please do report any issues you have. Thanks!


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 25, 2018)

pjk said:


> Go ahead and test making edits, uploading files, etc. to make sure all functionality works okay. Please do report any issues you have. Thanks!


Oh, I spoke too soon.

I guess I might just abbreviate 4x4x4 parity algorithms page as 4^3 PAP.

So:

I went ahead to try to edit the 4^3 PAP, and it gave me this error message.

*However*, I tried again in a few seconds, and then I was able to make the edit that I was trying to make (in the exact section I wanted to make it in the first time). In addition, the preview feature works (if you needed to know that as well). There's no security question before adding a new url like there was in the past though. (Just in case you needed to know that.)

Since you asked, I also uploaded a new image (success). I also put that in an edit on the 4^3 PAP (success). Then I removed it (success).


----------



## pjk (Aug 25, 2018)

Christopher Mowla said:


> Oh, I spoke too soon.
> 
> I guess I might just abbreviate 4x4x4 parity algorithms page as 4^3 PAP.
> 
> ...


Fixed, that was an issue that I created that happened to be exactly as you were testing, bad timing. Let me know if it happens again.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 25, 2018)

pjk said:


> Fixed, that was an issue that I created that happened to be exactly as you were testing, bad timing. Let me know if it happens again.


It looks like you fixed it. I tested trying to edit the entire page, main sections, and subsections, and I didn't get that error anymore.

Thanks.


----------



## pjk (Aug 28, 2018)

Today I've setup a new responsive theme that came out with Mediawiki 1.31. 

Right now it looks good, but the OLL page, for example, on mobile doesn't look great as the images are too small. Let me know your feedback and please assist with resolving any formatting issues. Thanks.


----------



## cubeshepherd (Aug 28, 2018)

Could/would someone mind explaining to me how the UWR's work on the wiki page? And what I mean by that is in regards to the solves/times that do not have videos. I know that not to many people care to much about the UWR's, but if someone were to get sub UWR in a particular event how would you go about adding in there times/knowing if someone got the said time? I am sure that it is primarily based on being Honest (which I find to be great and wonderful to see) but for the doubters/those that are skeptical with it, how does that all work? 

Thank you very much in advance for you help.

Lastly, Does anyone know what the UWR's are for Master Pyraminx Ao50 and Ao100?


----------



## 1973486 (Aug 28, 2018)

UWR page is a bit of a mess IMO.



cubeshepherd said:


> if someone were to get sub UWR in a particular event how would you go about adding in there times/knowing if someone got the said time?



If you got the time or believe the person who got the time you just edit the page



> I am sure that it is primarily based on being Honest (which I find to be great and wonderful to see) but for the doubters/those that are skeptical with it, how does that all work?



Community consensus. Or more basically whoever reverts it back more (if there's any actual conflict). Tymon (the pyra WR holder) recently posted some ridiculous pyra times on Facebook like a 1.8 Ao100 IIRC. They were added to the UWR page but I later removed them due to lack of plausibility and no one has since added them back as far as I know.


----------



## cubeshepherd (Aug 29, 2018)

1973486 said:


> UWR page is a bit of a mess IMO.
> If you got the time or believe the person who got the time you just edit the page
> Community consensus. Or more basically whoever reverts it back more (if there's any actual conflict). Tymon (the pyra WR holder) recently posted some ridiculous pyra times on Facebook like a 1.8 Ao100 IIRC. They were added to the UWR page but I later removed them due to lack of plausibility and no one has since added them back as far as I know.


Thank you very much for the reply. That helps a lot. The other question that I forgot to ask is; How do the events without real scrambles work, when being added? (events such as Master Pyraminx, and a lot of the other events in the "Other" section). Are they all hand scrambled or are there proper scrambles for each event? 

If there are proper scrambles for the events, does anyone know where I can find Master Pyraminx scrambles? Or what do you think would be the best way to scramble Master Pyraminx, other then by just hand scrambles?

Sorry for all the questions, but I am just trying to see how this all works,especially since I have been practicing a bit of Master Pyraminx, so if I should ever in the future get sub UWR for it, I would like to make sure that I am doing everything right. Thank you very much for your help and answers.


----------



## AvGalen (Aug 29, 2018)

cubeshepherd said:


> If there are proper scrambles for the events, does anyone know where I can find Master Pyraminx scrambles? Or what do you think would be the best way to scramble Master Pyraminx, other then by just hand scrambles?






mentions "To scramble this thing i have used the standart WCA pyraminx scramble, including tips + some random moves to mix up the smaller edges"


----------



## cubeshepherd (Aug 29, 2018)

AvGalen said:


> mentions "To scramble this thing i have used the standart WCA pyraminx scramble, including tips + some random moves to mix up the smaller edges"


Hey @AvGalen, thank you for the video. To be honest I completly forgot to look on YouTube about Master Pyraminx scrambles or if anyone had info on that (which is like how could I forget) but never the less thank you for that. 

So to follow up on your post, would that way of scrambling work then for anyone that practices/wants to practice Master pyraminx? I ask because I would like to be clear on that, and I am thinking about maybe having a "Race to sub x Master Pyraminx" thread, but before I post anything on that, I would like to make sure that I have the correct scrambles.

I guess that last question I have in regards to the scrambles is; Does anyone have a better idea of scrambles or a better way of scrambling the Master Pyraminx? I think that the way Fyodor does it in the video is great, but I just want to check.

Sorry for all of these and the previous questions, but I do sincerly appreciate all your help and time with this. This is all new to me (regarding UWR's and scrambles for Unofficial events), and so I just want to make sure that I have doing things the right way, and not making a mistake.

EDIT: Yay! Another question : )
If I were to do another Ao50 or Ao100 on Master Pyraminx (with the way of scrambling as I mentioned above) would anyone have any objections to me adding those times to the Wiki UWR page, since there is nothing there at the moment? Thanks


----------



## AvGalen (Aug 31, 2018)

I think you worry too much about making "official rules" for "unofficial events" 
I would just do handscrambles and sometimes I get a 3 minutes and sometimes I get a 1:30. Of course I am not aiming for the UWR but just messing around while watching a movie. In general I think UWR's don't need official scrambles


----------



## pjk (Sep 5, 2018)

The AlgDB on the wiki isn't compatible with PHP 7+. It needs to be updated for the latest PHP and Mediawiki 1.31. Can anyone help fix it?
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Special:MediawikiAlgDB


----------



## Mike Hughey (Sep 6, 2018)

Just to let everyone know, I think I've more or less fixed the AlgDB problems. Let me know if you still see any issues there.


----------



## pjk (Sep 6, 2018)

Mike Hughey said:


> Just to let everyone know, I think I've more or less fixed the AlgDB problems. Let me know if you still see any issues there.


Thanks Mike. I forgot how useful the AlgDB has been over the years, great to have it working again:
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Special:MediawikiAlgDB


----------



## cuber314159 (Sep 29, 2018)

Can someone please edit the NxN puzzle grid to include up to 33x33.


----------



## pjk (Dec 6, 2018)

The wiki has been a great resource for the community over the years. In effort to make the wiki more useful to newcomers, we need to make a few new articles and improve some of the existing ones. Firstly, what are you thoughts on the main page of the wiki here?  Should we put more intro articles at the top like notation, how to solve links, etc.?

Here are a couple pages that we should work to improve to help new comers understand speedcubing and answer the most common questions:
Intro to speedcubing - needs to be improved and updated.
FAQ - we should clean and update this page with the latest questions and answers (and links).
Youtube cubers - update with new channels and the latest/greatest of Youtube cubing.



cuber314159 said:


> Can someone please edit the NxN puzzle grid to include up to 33x33.


Can you link to what you're referring to exactly?


----------



## Thom S. (Dec 6, 2018)

pjk said:


> nk to what you're referring to exactly



I assume he means the grids featured in Pages like This one


----------



## Hazel (Dec 10, 2018)

How does one create a Wiki article? I would like to create one regarding the 3x3 subset EODF/EODB.


----------



## pjk (Dec 10, 2018)

Thom S. said:


> I assume he means the grids featured in Pages like This one


I see 33x33 on that grid. A new page can be created by clicking on red links.



Aerma said:


> How does one create a Wiki article? I would like to create one regarding the 3x3 subset EODF/EODB.


In the search bar, type in the title of the page you want to add, and when the search comes up, if a page doesn't exist, a link will come up to create the page:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Starting_a_new_page
Let me know if you need further help. Note you need to have an account and be logged in, which takes just a few seconds.


----------



## qwr (Aug 29, 2019)

I noticed the 3x3 OLL and PLL pages don't feature authorship or comments, like the 4x4 parity page does.
The 3x3 page uses Template:Alg while the 4x4 parity page uses Template:Alg5 which supports author and algo name but doesn't display like in fixed width. https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Template:Alg5 

Do you think it's worth asking the community to try to track down who invented each algorithm? 
Also I think it's helpful to mention comments, like some anti-sune algorithms are simply inverses of the sune algorithms.


----------



## aerocube (Aug 29, 2019)

qwr said:


> I noticed the 3x3 OLL and PLL pages don't feature authorship or comments, like the 4x4 parity page does.
> The 3x3 page uses Template:Alg while the 4x4 parity page uses Template:Alg5 which supports author and algo name but doesn't display like in fixed width. https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Template:Alg5
> 
> Do you think it's worth asking the community to try to track down who invented each algorithm?
> Also I think it's helpful to mention comments, like some anti-sune algorithms are simply inverses of the sune algorithms.


would tracking down whoever invented the alg be that easy and possible? also i'm pretty sure anybody can edit the wiki,if you see some info you think should be added you can add it yourself


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 29, 2019)

qwr said:


> I noticed the 3x3 OLL and PLL pages don't feature authorship or comments, like the 4x4 parity page does.
> The 3x3 page uses Template:Alg while the 4x4 parity page uses Template:Alg5 which supports author and algo name but doesn't display like in fixed width. https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Template:Alg5
> 
> Do you think it's worth asking the community to try to track down who invented each algorithm?
> Also I think it's helpful to mention comments, like some anti-sune algorithms are simply inverses of the sune algorithms.


First of all, I am glad that you appreciate my effort in implementing this template (and writing the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wiki page). This is a very good question, and aerocube gave a pretty good TLDR answer.

Now, the longer version . . .

Your inquiry about the 3x3 OLL and PLL pages is not so straight-forward to do without a fuss from the community (let alone be free from major guesswork and let alone be nearly (if not entirely) impossible). I will explain in more detail below why such detailed documentation exists (and can exist *without a fuss from the community*) for 4x4x4 parity algorithms but not for 3x3x3 algorithms.

I went out of my way to make Template Alg4 and Template Alg5 primarily to encompass the longer 4x4x4 algorithms; but I also decided to include authors because, unlike 3x3x3 algorithms, *the majority of 4x4x4 algorithms listed on the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wiki page required specialized knowledge (which most people do not have nor care to acquire) to create*. So naturally there are fewer people who are knowledgeable enough to find short (or maybe even move optimal) and/or speed optimal 4x4x4 parity algorithms, as they, more often than not, must at least in part be found by hand (2-gen is one example of an exception -- they can be found exclusively with computer searches, as the search space for 2-gen is far less than allowing all turns).

Since move optimal 3x3x3 computer solvers are time-feasible to use and are readily accessible, it's impossible to attribute a 3x3x3 algorithm (OLL, PLL, COLL, etc.) to an author, as doing so would not do the other hundreds (if not thousands) of other authors justice (despite that if someone finds an algorithm entirely with _someone else's_ 3x3x3 solver, some would think that that individual should not claim credit for the algorithm). Don't get me wrong, this subset of move optimal 4x4x4 parity algorithms, for example, can actually be found indirectly with a 3x3x3 optimal solver (as I explain in the yellow box). Therefore, the majority of them are not attributed to a specific author because there are quite a few people who have done searches using that technique to find such algorithms. But this number of individuals is far fewer than those who have found algorithms to cases for popular 3x3x3 sub-steps.

Current 4x4x4 move optimal solvers are pretty much incapable of finding some of the move sequences I attributed my name to on the 4x4x4 parity algorithms page *in our lifetime*, for example (but that 18 move single dedge flip algorithm was found by my custom written 4x4x4 parity algorithm solver), and almost all "algorithm bars" which attribute an algorithm to an individual cite the first post which the algorithm was released publicly on the internet.

All in all, 4x4x4 parity algorithms (in general) have been found in brief 4x4x4 parity algorithm exploration "renaissance bursts" within the last 20 years. On the other hand, algorithms for cases in popular 3x3x3 sub-steps can (and are) being found (*and refound*) all the time by various members of the community.

In closing, I have a few honorable mentions when there was more than one (independent) founder of a 4x4x4 parity algorithm. "Lucas Parity", one of the most popular 4x4x4 parity algorithms to date, was provably found by two different authors (as I explain in the *Interesting Note* in this part of the introduction of the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wiki page). Kåre Krig and I also provably (and independently) found the same 4x4x4 parity algorithm (Rw' U R' U2 R U' Rw' U2 Rw' U2 Rw' U' R U2 R' U Rw') in this section. (If you follow the posts, you will see why this is "provably true" (undebatable)).

Maybe you can see now why such an analysis is not doable for 3x3x3 algorithms found for the *most popular* sub-steps for solving the *3x3x3*! Such an analysis (which would most certainly involve more than two independent authors) would need to be conducted; and even if it was conducted, it would be debatable (for reasons already mentioned).


----------



## qwr (Aug 29, 2019)

Christopher Mowla said:


> Your inquiry about the 3x3 OLL and PLL pages is not so straight-forward to do without a fuss from the community (let alone be free from major guesswork and let alone be nearly (if not entirely) impossible). I will explain in more detail below why such detailed documentation exists (and can exist *without a fuss from the community*) for 4x4x4 parity algorithms but not for 3x3x3 algorithms.



If we want to draw an analogy to mathematics we can use "first known appearance". It will undoubtedly take some web and book digging but I believe it's worth it to try some kind of attribution at all (even if debated) then leave it unattributed. Unfortunately I am new to the community so I don't know the history and others will be able to contribute more.

If I had to guess many basic CFOP algorithms can first be traced back to 1979 with David Singmaster 1982 by Jessica Fridrich and Mirek Goljan shown here http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/fridrich/system.html I am happy to attribute these algorithms to Fridrich and Goljan. What do you think?

I suspect Singmaster's notes are the first reliable source to exist at all. (https://maths-people.anu.edu.au/~burkej/cube/singmaster.pdf is a fascinating read if you are interested in the math) I would attribute the first U perms, Z perm, A perms, X perm (H perm) to him. Singmaster cites some very old books and preprints but I think citing him is a good first approximation.

Addendum: I think most in the community don't care about the history of algorithms so I don't think there will be a fuss.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 30, 2019)

If you want me to modify Template Alg5 (well, make a *copy* of it and modify that) so that you can make the edits you desire, let me know of which parameters you would like. To make matters simplest, you can just draw what you want the entire "algorithm bar" to look like, and I can go from there.

For example, I can easily shorten the space allotted for the algorithm itself (to encompass the shorter length of 3x3x3 algorithms -- *just specify how many characters you want it to be able to take (including spaces) without it wrapping to two lines*) and remove the "{{wide}}" parameter (which really just would take a "Y" for "Yes, this 4x4x4 parity algorithm can be executed with wide turns and still preserve the first three layers" or "N" for "No, this 4x4x4 parity algorithm cannot ...".

Or I can leave this parameter in, but rename it to "{{regripless}}" (or something else) for which you can pass the same arguments "Y" or "N". (But, as I mentioned in the documentation of Template Alg5, you don't have to pass any arguments in these parameters).

I would of course remove the "WCA" parameter, as SiGN and standard 3x3x3 notation are the same. (No need to have to input the algorithm twice, if the notation being displayed is the same one which can be interpreted by alg.cubing.net.)

In short, I am willing to help you with making a new template, but *I am not* going to be making any edits to those pages because I've had my fair share of edits to the PLL page being undone completely (many hours of work). But by all means, you are more than welcome to experiment.


----------



## qwr (Aug 30, 2019)

I don't have any concrete plans for modifying the template currently. My only gripes are that the template isn't fixed width which hinders readability and aesthetics (ex. https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_parity_algorithms#Opposite) , and the page is too long to navigate comfortably (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Very_long).

To be technical, I would go as far as to say that instead of having each algorithm line/row be its own template, each special section like a link to alg.cubing.net should be its own template, and then the data is organized in a standard wikitable. This would solve the issue of width alignment. The reasoning goes that since we are creating lists of algorithms, they fit naturally into a tabular structure. The template has the advantage of specifying key-value pairs which may make entering new data easier. A wikitable has the interesting advantage of being possibly sortable by column. 

For the 4x4 parity page in particular I think there should be shortcuts to the common algorithms people are looking for when speedsolving: 
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_parity_algorithms#Opposite 
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_parity_algorithms#1_flip

There should be a distinction between "speedsolving" algorithms and "theoretical interest" algorithms (which are more exhaustive) 
Who decides the category I'm not sure.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 30, 2019)

qwr said:


> I don't have any concrete plans for modifying the template currently. My only gripes are that the template isn't fixed width which hinders readability and aesthetics (ex. https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/4x4x4_parity_algorithms#Opposite)


If you can, go revisit the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wikipage. I have modified Template Alg5 so that all "algorithm bar" (tables) have fixed column widths. The problem is, the page background itself is not wide enough to encompass the length of the "algorithm bars". So it doesn't look ideal. (This is why I thought it was best to keep it like I had it, but if you think that having all algorithm bars aligned like this makes it worth it, then I can keep it this way.)

(If anyone knows how to change the background width (if it can be done), let me know how.)


----------



## qwr (Aug 30, 2019)

Christopher Mowla said:


> If you can, go revisit the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wikipage. I have modified Template Alg5 so that all "algorithm bar" (tables) have fixed column widths. The problem is, the page background itself is not wide enough to encompass the length of the "algorithm bars". So it doesn't look ideal. (This is why I thought it was best to keep it like I had it, but if you think that having all algorithm bars aligned like this makes it worth it, then I can keep it this way.)
> 
> (If anyone knows how to change the background width (if it can be done), let me know how.)



It's a lot better than it was before. I'm pretty sure some space can be saved in the name width and if needed also abbreviating common authors (ex. CM, C. Mowla, or Mowla for Christopher Mowla)


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 30, 2019)

qwr said:


> It's a lot better than it was before. I'm pretty sure some space can be saved in the name width and if needed also abbreviating common authors (ex. CM, C. Mowla, or Mowla for Christopher Mowla)


Okay, I will keep it this way. Also, I will look into that.

Note that I also reduced the fixed algorithm column length, because when viewing the page on my iPhone 6 (sideways/landscape view), I can just see the hyperlinked algorithm length ordered pair (BQTM, BHTM) to tap/click on it to see the animation. But if you have a suggestion for the fixed length (it's currently at 525px), let me know.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Aug 30, 2019)

I will have to revert my changes for the time being, as from this point, algorithms are not displayed.

Once the issue is resolved (or if someone sees an error in Template Alg5's implementation which is causing this), I will change it back.


----------



## qwr (Sep 10, 2019)

Is there a page on 4x4 last two edges for edge pairing?


----------



## Zeke Mackay (Sep 19, 2019)

qwr said:


> Is there a page on 4x4 last two edges for edge pairing?



u' R U R' F R' F' R u
There's the only alg you need


----------



## shadowslice e (Apr 2, 2020)

So, there are a few of us who have decided we're going to try to clean up the wiki. So far, we have an excel document containing our thoughts on all the articles. If you would like to contribute to the wiki, please pm @PapaSmurf for editing access. If you decide to vandalise the doc, you will be removed without warning. If you are too inactive once the plan goes into effect, you will be removed.

If you don't want to commit, but still want to raise an issue or disagreement with the indicated decision, feel free to pm one of the document contributors.

We'll also likely be keeping an eye on edits and new articles from now and require them to be of a certain standard (if the article is not up to standard, we'll dm you asking to fix it. If this isn't done, it will be removed.

We'll add any further updates later on in this thread. Feel free to ask any general questions below too.


----------



## pjk (Apr 2, 2020)

shadowslice e said:


> So, there are a few of us who have decided we're going to try to clean up the wiki. So far, we have an excel document containing our thoughts on all the articles. If you would like to contribute to the wiki, please pm @PapaSmurf for editing access. If you decide to vandalise the doc, you will be removed without warning. If you are too inactive once the plan goes into effect, you will be removed.
> 
> If you don't want to commit, but still want to raise an issue or disagreement with the indicated decision, feel free to pm one of the document contributors.
> 
> ...


Great to see people want to contribute to the wiki. Why not start making the edits mentioned in the spreadsheet instead of noting it in the sheet? Anyone can contribute to the wiki at any time. 

As for removing pages: avoid removing pages unless absolutely necessary. It's good to keep old pages for reference if nothing else.


----------



## brododragon (Apr 2, 2020)

Could a new section be added got methods called "developers"? There are a lot of people that have unknowingly reinvented methods, but developed it more. Also, there are multiple wiki pages with the same method but by different people. Could we remove those and add the reinventors name to the 'History' section if they didn't develop it and 'developers' if they did?


----------



## shadowslice e (Apr 2, 2020)

pjk said:


> Great to see people want to contribute to the wiki. Why not start making the edits mentioned in the spreadsheet instead of noting it in the sheet? Anyone can contribute to the wiki at any time.
> 
> As for removing pages: avoid removing pages unless absolutely necessary. It's good to keep old pages for reference if nothing else.


At the moment, I'm mostly using the doc to prioritise what to do and allow anyone to object. Most of the articles which we want to delete are pages such as this and this which have no real useful info on them. If the articles have anything useful, the information on them will be moved to an appropriate larger page (denoted as S in the doc). An example of this would be something like this which would be better placed on a this page as it would make indexing or research easier as well as eliminating stub articles. Another example would be methods which create extra pages for each of their steps without any real reason.

No deletion will take place without the consensus of a supermajority (at the moment, we're considering all but one need to vote for deletion) and most pages will be turned into subsections if at all possible.


----------



## pjk (Apr 3, 2020)

shadowslice e said:


> At the moment, I'm mostly using the doc to prioritise what to do and allow anyone to object. Most of the articles which we want to delete are pages such as this and this which have no real useful info on them. If the articles have anything useful, the information on them will be moved to an appropriate larger page (denoted as S in the doc). An example of this would be something like this which would be better placed on a this page as it would make indexing or research easier as well as eliminating stub articles. Another example would be methods which create extra pages for each of their steps without any real reason.
> 
> No deletion will take place without the consensus of a supermajority (at the moment, we're considering all but one need to vote for deletion) and most pages will be turned into subsections if at all possible.


Sounds great! The more people contribute, the better it is for everyone. Post here if you need more help so others can jump in too.


----------



## pjk (Apr 4, 2020)

brododragon said:


> Could a new section be added got methods called "developers"? There are a lot of people that have unknowingly reinvented methods, but developed it more. Also, there are multiple wiki pages with the same method but by different people. Could we remove those and add the reinventors name to the 'History' section if they didn't develop it and 'developers' if they did?


Sure, go ahead and add this if you see fit. The power of the wiki is the whole community can contribute without distinct permission.


----------



## qwr (May 18, 2020)

As a reminder, people can use the Discussion / Talk pages for documenting or proposing changes to individual pages. (This is heavily utilized in other MediaWiki based wikis) That way it won't get lost in a separate forum thread.


----------



## qwr (May 28, 2020)

Also how many times will I have to type Robert Yau when adding algorithm links? Is there a edit minimum before becoming trusted?

Also: I cannot edit the talk page of F2L. It says there's an edit conflict when I'm clearly the only one editing the page.
If an admin can help sort this out that'd be great.


----------



## mitja (May 28, 2020)

Zeke Mackay said:


> u' R U R' F R' F' R u
> There's the only alg you need


That’s actually the only alg ( and its reverse) you need for the full cube( including 3x3 algs)


----------



## ProStar (Jun 1, 2020)

I'd like to suggest a rule where you cannot create a wiki page for yourself or a method you created. I've seen several wiki pages that really have no reason to exist, with the sole editor being the person the page is about/the inventor of the method. Also maybe a standard for a person to qualify for a wiki page? I recently saw a page for someone(only editor being the person the page is about), and when I looked it didn't really seem like they deserved a wiki page. They didn't have an outstanding number of subscribers on youtube, and the only notable WCA results were:

top 200 3x3 single
top 50 OH single

Both of which are great, but nothing else was noticeably amazing. Most of the "accomplishments" listed were getting close to a state record


----------



## Sub1Hour (Jun 1, 2020)

ProStar said:


> I'd like to suggest a rule where you cannot create a wiki page for yourself or a method you created.


I agree with making a page for yourself but making a page for your own method should be allowed since the creator of a method would know the most about the said method, at least during the early years of the existence of the method. Maybe some sort of screening should be required but overall as long as the method is either A: Viable or B: Very un-orthodox/"funny" (For example, CFinity) the creator should be able to upload a wiki page about it (speaking of which, should I make a page for True Freestyle and Partial Freestyle?)


----------



## ProStar (Jun 1, 2020)

Sub1Hour said:


> I agree with making a page for yourself but making a page for your own method should be allowed since the creator of a method would know the most about the said method, at least during the early years of the existence of the method. Maybe some sort of screening should be required but overall as long as the method is either A: Viable or B: Very un-orthodox/"funny" (For example, CFinity) the creator should be able to upload a wiki page about it (speaking of which, should I make a page for True Freestyle and Partial Freestyle?)



There's nothing wrong with him editing it, but I feel like he shouldn't just be like, "Yeah I think this is a good idea ima make a wiki page about it," the actual creation of the page should be done by someone else because it's a good/funny method, not because the creator wants to feel cool that his method is on the wiki


----------



## Sub1Hour (Jun 1, 2020)

ProStar said:


> the actual creation of the page should be done by someone else because it's a good/funny method,


Well, is TF and PF for mega considered "good"?


I'm still not used to your new pfp


----------



## ProStar (Jun 1, 2020)

Sub1Hour said:


> Well, is TF and PF for mega considered "good"?
> 
> 
> I'm still not used to your new pfp



I've never heard of it, and I'm not good at mega so I wouldn't be a great judge lol


----------



## Sub1Hour (Jun 1, 2020)

ProStar said:


> I've never heard of it, and I'm not good at mega so I wouldn't be a great judge lol


Something I came up with since I was already kind of using it since I did not do that great of a job sticking to Balint. Basically, its "Freestlye" as the name suggests, here is the post I made proposing it.


Sub1Hour said:


> Partial Freestyle and True Freestyle. These are megaminx methods, and as the name applies, integrate freestyle techniques. I was using Balint for a while but I found myself straying off the path and then I figured, why not just do a freestyle solve. The entire solve aside from LL and Star (at least for TF) has no structure and you do what you want. The difference between Partial Freestyle (PF) and True Freestyle (TF) comes with the F2L. In PF, you always do F2L completely before working on any S2L. In TF you can build blocks and sides before you are done with F2L. A PF Solve would have 4 steps. Star, F2L FS2L (Freestyle S2L), LL. Now TF, that's where the fun begins. After star, you can basically do whatever you want. A TF solve would have 4 steps as well, but instead of having F2L and then FS2L, you would do F2L + S2L Building. I think this method would be harder to use then PF but it would also potentially cut down on move count. I have not found anything on the Wiki like these 2 methods and I have been "accidentally" using them for a while now, so I figure I might as well share them with the public. Let me know if something like this already exists before I make a fool of myself


----------



## ProStar (Jun 1, 2020)

Sub1Hour said:


> Something I came up with since I was already kind of using it since I did not do that great of a job sticking to Balint. Basically, its "Freestlye" as the name suggests, here is the post I made proposing it.



It looks kinda cool, but I think(again, I'm not that great of a judge) that the freestyle nature will make extremely challenging lookahead, making the TPS much lower(kinda like Roux, but I dunno if this has the movecount advantage), especially in TF. I'd try reposting it and seeing what other people think though. Although I feel like because it's just freestyle, there's really nothing to put on a wiki page. The method is literally just: intuitively solve everything except one layer using any technique you want, then normal LL


----------



## Sub1Hour (Jun 1, 2020)

ProStar said:


> It looks kinda cool, but I think(again, I'm not that great of a judge) that the freestyle nature will make extremely challenging lookahead, making the TPS much lower(kinda like Roux, but I dunno if this has the movecount advantage), especially in TF. I'd try reposting it and seeing what other people think though. Although I feel like because it's just freestyle, there's really nothing to put on a wiki page. The method is literally just: intuitively solve everything except one layer using any technique you want, then normal LL


That's fair. I think the move count would theoretically be much lower but the lookahead would be much harder. I'm gonna go ahead and tag the best megaminx solver I know and see what he thinks. @CuberStache, Analysis!


----------



## Athefre (Jun 1, 2020)

I completely disagree with the idea that someone shouldn't be able to create a page for their own method.

Reason 1: A creator has the ability to make a good looking page. Sure there are people creating pages that aren't well-made. However, there are also people creating pages that are great. Look at my A2 method page. It is one of the most detailed pages on the wiki. Look at my Transformation wiki page. It is also extremely detailed. Look at any of my pages and its the same level of quality.

Reason 2: Obscurity. For around five years I stopped posting on this forum and was just visiting a few times a week. I recently started posting again and now three of my developments have other people being praised as geniuses for developing them. All of my work was in various posts on the forum and I didn't put them on the wiki. Why didn't I put them on the wiki? Because of this view that a creator shouldn't do that. I was afraid of what people would think. And look now. It has "hurt" me. I developed things back then that people weren't interested in or thought weren't possible for people to implement in speedsolves. It was incredibly frustrating to know that I have something good then all of my hard work faded into obscurity. People didn't care. Then a few years later someone else re-develops and they now get credit for it. They re-developed because they didn't know about my developments and no one put them on the wiki for me. If I had put the developments, and my name, on the wiki I would today have my name associated with these things that many people are now using in speedsolves.


----------



## ProStar (Jun 1, 2020)

Athefre said:


> I completely disagree with the idea that someone shouldn't be able to create a page for their own method.
> 
> Reason 1: A creator has the ability to make a good looking page. Sure there are people creating pages that aren't well-made. However, there are also people creating pages that are great. Look at my A2 method page. It is one of the most detailed pages on the wiki. Look at my Transformation wiki page. It is also extremely detailed. Look at any of my pages and its the same level of quality.
> 
> Reason 2: Obscurity. For around five years I stopped posting on this forum and was just visiting a few times a week. I recently started posting again and now three of my developments have other people being praised as geniuses for developing them. All of my work was in various posts on the forum and I didn't put them on the wiki. Why didn't I put them on the wiki? Because of this view that a creator shouldn't do that. I was afraid of what people would think. And look now. It has "hurt" me. I developed things back then that people weren't interested in or thought weren't possible for people to implement in speedsolves. It was incredibly frustrating to know that I have something good then all of my hard work faded into obscurity. People didn't care. Then a few years later someone else re-develops and they now get credit for it. They re-developed because they didn't know about my developments and no one put them on the wiki for me. If I had put the developments, and my name, on the wiki I would today have my name associated with these things that many people are now using in speedsolves.



There's nothing wrong with editing the page, I'm saying you shouldn't create your own page. It shouldn't be the creators choice whether or not the method is good enough to have a wiki page, but the people's choice


----------



## Owen Morrison (Jun 1, 2020)

Athefre said:


> I completely disagree with the idea that someone shouldn't be able to create a page for their own method.
> 
> Reason 1: A creator has the ability to make a good looking page. Sure there are people creating pages that aren't well-made. However, there are also people creating pages that are great. Look at my A2 method page. It is one of the most detailed pages on the wiki. Look at my Transformation wiki page. It is also extremely detailed. Look at any of my pages and its the same level of quality.
> 
> Reason 2: Obscurity. For around five years I stopped posting on this forum and was just visiting a few times a week. I recently started posting again and now three of my developments have other people being praised as geniuses for developing them. All of my work was in various posts on the forum and I didn't put them on the wiki. Why didn't I put them on the wiki? Because of this view that a creator shouldn't do that. I was afraid of what people would think. And look now. It has "hurt" me. I developed things back then that people weren't interested in or thought weren't possible for people to implement in speedsolves. It was incredibly frustrating to know that I have something good then all of my hard work faded into obscurity. People didn't care. Then a few years later someone else re-develops and they now get credit for it. They re-developed because they didn't know about my developments and no one put them on the wiki for me. If I had put the developments, and my name, on the wiki I would today have my name associated with these things that many people are now using in speedsolves.


What methods did you invent that others took credit for?


----------



## Athefre (Jun 1, 2020)

ProStar said:


> There's nothing wrong with editing the page, I'm saying you shouldn't create your own page. It shouldn't be the creators choice whether or not the method is good enough to have a wiki page, but the people's choice



But no one ever created pages for anything I developed. So there would be nothing for me to edit. Which means no one knew about them and so someone else re-developed. The same thing could happen to others that has happened to me. I had to create pages myself recently, years later, to restore the credit. A developer shouldn't have to be afraid of someone else getting credit.

If the people don't think something on the wiki is good, then it can be ignored or deleted. I disagree that something being good is the people's choice. Things change over time. Something once seen as not good can eventually be seen as incredibly useful. Look at EOLR. Roux users were only using a few cases 8-10 years ago. Now every Roux user is learning a lot of it. Also look at the Meyer method. No one was using that years ago. It wasn't seen as a good method. Now it has some popularity among Roux users.



Owen Morrison said:


> What methods did you invent that others took credit for?



The concept of transformation, the 2x2 method (A2) that it applies to, and I also fully developed Roux 4a+4b which is now called EOLR. Back then Roux users didn't care much about using a lot of 4a+4b because they thought it was too difficult. Only a few people used a few cases. Another thing, kind of minor, is LEG-1, which I was the first to develop. I became less active then a couple of years later someone else re-developed. There is also another thing I've noticed many people using which may be an expanded version of something I developed. There was no negative intent on the re-creators' part, they just didn't know.


----------



## Hazel (Jun 1, 2020)

Athefre said:


> I completely disagree with the idea that someone shouldn't be able to create a page for their own method.
> 
> Reason 1: A creator has the ability to make a good looking page. Sure there are people creating pages that aren't well-made. However, there are also people creating pages that are great. Look at my A2 method page. It is one of the most detailed pages on the wiki. Look at my Transformation wiki page. It is also extremely detailed. Look at any of my pages and its the same level of quality.
> 
> Reason 2: Obscurity. For around five years I stopped posting on this forum and was just visiting a few times a week. I recently started posting again and now three of my developments have other people being praised as geniuses for developing them. All of my work was in various posts on the forum and I didn't put them on the wiki. Why didn't I put them on the wiki? Because of this view that a creator shouldn't do that. I was afraid of what people would think. And look now. It has "hurt" me. I developed things back then that people weren't interested in or thought weren't possible for people to implement in speedsolves. It was incredibly frustrating to know that I have something good then all of my hard work faded into obscurity. People didn't care. Then a few years later someone else re-develops and they now get credit for it. They re-developed because they didn't know about my developments and no one put them on the wiki for me. If I had put the developments, and my name, on the wiki I would today have my name associated with these things that many people are now using in speedsolves.



This is valid! And in your circumstance, I do agree that you should have been able to.
The issue comes with people making wiki pages for methods that are bad, have been made before, et cetera, which would make the wiki littered with the standard Roux/CFOP hybrid along with any other method pages that really shouldn't be there. I'd say that anybody should be able to make a wiki page for their own method _as long as_ it's the general consensus among people that the method is deserving of its own page.


----------



## Cuberstache (Jun 1, 2020)

Sub1Hour said:


> That's fair. I think the move count would theoretically be much lower but the lookahead would be much harder. I'm gonna go ahead and tag the best megaminx solver I know and see what he thinks. @CuberStache, Analysis!


Freestyle S2L is basically what the best of the best do. The efficiency is really good, especially taking advantage of good blockbuilding cases. I've been trying to freestyle my S2L more and more during the quarantine with some success. The lookahead is obviously more difficult and that's the only problem with it. As for full freestyle, the main problem is that S2L blocks have to go "on top" of F2L pairs. If you're going to build a yellow S2L side, both yellow F2L pairs basically have to be done or you'll have to do some awkward preserving.


----------



## Owen Morrison (Jun 1, 2020)

CuberStache said:


> Freestyle S2L is basically what the best of the best do. The efficiency is really good, especially taking advantage of good blockbuilding cases. I've been trying to freestyle my S2L more and more during the quarantine with some success. The lookahead is obviously more difficult and that's the only problem with it. As for full freestyle, the main problem is that S2L blocks have to go "on top" of F2L pairs. If you're going to build a yellow S2L side, both yellow F2L pairs basically have to be done or you'll have to do some awkward preserving.


Should I have a pattern in how I solve my S2L or should I start it on whichever part is easiest? I am just now getting serious about Megaminx and I want to start out with good habits so I don't have to change them later.


----------



## qwr (Jun 4, 2020)

ProStar said:


> I'd like to suggest a rule where you cannot create a wiki page for yourself or a method you created. I've seen several wiki pages that really have no reason to exist, with the sole editor being the person the page is about/the inventor of the method. Also maybe a standard for a person to qualify for a wiki page? I recently saw a page for someone(only editor being the person the page is about), and when I looked it didn't really seem like they deserved a wiki page. They didn't have an outstanding number of subscribers on youtube, and the only notable WCA results were:
> 
> top 200 3x3 single
> top 50 OH single
> ...



I think if an individual has any top 50 WCA result then they can justify having a wiki page. It's not like the wiki is running out of room and if someone is top 50 global they are probably in the top 5 or top 10 of their country. I lean towards top solvers of any country (not just US or whichever country has lots of solvers) should be acknowledged with a page.


----------



## ProStar (Jun 5, 2020)

I also think we should have a set list of WBs(the events) and not just make new ones so you can "have a WB". I mean, looking at the wiki page, here are just a few:

3x3 with nose
3x3 with face
2x2 with socks on hands
2x2 with socks on hands BLD

all of these are honestly ridiculous. I think we should have a list of UWRs, including:

Huge cubes
Other OHs
Master Pyra
Redi
Other FMCs
15 & 8 puzzle
2BLD & huge BLD
BLD OH
WF and other WF events
Rob's challange & variants
Guilford & Mini & OH

Obviously this isn't a complete list, but just a few examples. I just don't think we should have these ridiculous events added by someone just to say they have a WB


----------



## Cubingcubecuber (Jun 5, 2020)

ProStar said:


> I also think we should have a set list of WBs(the events) and not just make new ones so you can "have a WB". I mean, looking at the wiki page, here are just a few:
> 
> 3x3 with nose
> 3x3 with face
> ...


But tomorrow I was gonna finally get to doing a stupid event


----------



## xyzzy (Jun 5, 2020)

ProStar said:


> I also think we should have a set list of WBs(the events) and not just make new ones so you can "have a WB". I mean, looking at the wiki page, here are just a few:
> 
> 3x3 with nose
> 3x3 with face
> ...


While we're on the topic of pruning the UWR page: singles and mo3 for anything that takes less than a minute should be completely removed.

No 444 single, no 555 single, no 3BLD mo3 (fight me), no OH single, no mega single, no clock single, no kilominx single, no feet single, no 222 wf mo3, no pyra wf single/mo3, no skewb wf single, no Ivy Cube wf single, no 2OH single, no 4OH single, no skewb OH single/mo3, no squan OH single, blah blah blah I'm not going to type out the whole list.

Relays don't get to count unless they're done standalone (no multiple-counting a 2-7 relay under 2-5 and 2-6 as well). I'd even go as far as to say relays shouldn't count unless there's video of the scrambling process as well—I suspect people often selectively re-scramble bad scrambles, which is _obviously cheating_. (I've seen Kevin Hays done this on his livestreams.)

Scrap the Redi Cube results currently on the wiki for using bad scrambles. The Pentacle Cube results are _incredibly_ fishy too, but I don't have hard evidence.


----------



## ProStar (Jun 20, 2020)

User Ganc2 has created a bunch of new WB events, all having to do with X with socks on hands. Due to my previous post I think it's easy to tell that I think that's ridiculous, but I have a different point. Today he updated the 4x4 with socks on hands record to 49 seconds, in the description saying he used Beginner's Method with LBL. It's basically impossible to get a time like that with LBL and beginner's(not to mention socks on hands which makes it slightly harder to turn), so I'm pretty sure it's fake, leading me to believe that possibly some of his other solves are fake


----------



## qwr (Jun 20, 2020)

Perhaps an admin should lock or semi lock the page. Or maybe there should be a section with video evidence? I have no doubts about Max Park's times but everyone else you have to take with have some skepticism


----------



## ProStar (Jun 20, 2020)

qwr said:


> Perhaps an admin should lock or semi lock the page. Or maybe there should be a section with video evidence? I have no doubts about Max Park's times but everyone else you have to take with have some skepticism



I think it should be deleted, about 99% of the records are either fake or for a stupid event


----------



## 1973486 (Jun 21, 2020)

I gave up trying to "moderate" the UWR page years ago. Honestly it looks better than I expected. Still too many stupid events and too many formats of the sensible ones though.

People often want to know what the UWR of an event is, so it's natural to make a list of these for easier reference. But when you try to regulate such a list you realise there's no point even trying.

I'm not sure what the best solution is. If it continues in its current state it will eventually list every conceivable combination of event and restriction, in however many formats necessary to grant someone the UWR they need to feel special by having their name on the page. There'll also be a questionable Pyraminx average by an ID-less nobody who will re-add it if anyone dares to remove it. And if you try to answer someone's question by referring to the list, some top cuber tell you that they beat that months ago, and that the entire page is useless.

Maybe deletion _is_ the best option...


----------



## qwr (Jun 25, 2020)

also idk what the point of the thread is because it's just a less organized (harder to search) version of this https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Speedsolving.com_Wiki:General_discussion and afaik the wiki admins don't even read this.
I propose this thread be locked since it duplicates where discussion should be taking place, the wiki talk pages itself.


----------



## ProStar (Jun 26, 2020)

qwr said:


> also idk what the point of the thread is because it's just a less organized (harder to search) version of this https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Speedsolving.com_Wiki:General_discussion and afaik the wiki admins don't even read this.
> I propose this thread be locked since it duplicates where discussion should be taking place, the wiki talk pages itself.



No one reads the talk pages because you can't see that they've been changed


----------



## qwr (Jun 26, 2020)

ProStar said:


> No one reads the talk pages because you can't see that they've been changed


 that's what watchlists are for


----------



## RedstoneTim (Jun 27, 2020)

qwr said:


> also idk what the point of the thread is because it's just a less organized (harder to search) version of this https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Speedsolving.com_Wiki:General_discussion and afaik the wiki admins don't even read this.
> I propose this thread be locked since it duplicates where discussion should be taking place, the wiki talk pages itself.


Wiki admins do read this thread, but most of the time they either don't have anything valuable to contribute or aren't even needed for the discussed changes. The wiki is a community effort and if most people agree that for example UWRs should contain video evidence, the community can do that on their own. If the admins don't agree, they'll tell you.
This thread is useful for longer conversations or simple questions since people usually check the forums more often than the wiki and because otherwise, the talk pages would get too big. I agree though that most of the time, talk pages are a better alternative since they're more structured.


----------



## ProStar (Jun 27, 2020)

qwr said:


> that's what watchlists are for



I only get notifications if someone posts on my talk page


----------



## qwr (Jul 16, 2020)

I added some square-1 products based on some quick internet searches and memory https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Square-1_(puzzle_type)#Product_History

If any cubing historians want to add references or add products, please do. Idk if this wiki supports citations but it really should, as otherwise any historical info has no backing.


----------



## qwr (Jul 16, 2020)

@RedstoneTim since you are one of two active admins, can you fix the issue where I can't edit the talk page for F2L? https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/wiki-discussion-thread.15298/page-12#post-1374865


----------



## 1973486 (Jul 16, 2020)

You should clarify it's Talk:First Two Layers, not Talk:F2L


----------



## RedstoneTim (Jul 17, 2020)

qwr said:


> @RedstoneTim since you are one of two active admins, can you fix the issue where I can't edit the talk page for F2L? https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/wiki-discussion-thread.15298/page-12#post-1374865


As far as I know, it's sadly not possible to edit the page. The F2L talk page probably belongs to the pages which were subject to vandalism about two years ago. (Click here for more info.) As of now, we don't know of a way to fix this since not even pjk himself is able to edit those pages. If one of you is able to help, please contact pjk because I'm sure he'll be very glad when this finally gets fixed.


----------



## qwr (Oct 14, 2020)

@pjk I strongly think there should be a method of doing citations. There are a lot of cubing facts that deserve to be properly cited. I think MediaWiki has this by default?


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Oct 14, 2020)

Isn't this the page that you all say cannot be edited?


----------



## qwr (Oct 14, 2020)

Christopher Mowla said:


> Isn't this the page that you all say cannot be edited?



no, I was talking about the talk page https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Talk:First_Two_Layers


----------



## qwr (Oct 22, 2020)

qwr said:


> @pjk I strongly think there should be a method of doing citations. There are a lot of cubing facts that deserve to be properly cited. I think MediaWiki has this by default?



I found out it can be done like `*<span id="cite_note-1">(1) [http://www.mefferts.com/page.php?lang=en&amp;theme=about_uwe About Uwe Mèffert &amp; Meffert's Puzzles]</span>` however a dedicated ref tag would be nice.


----------



## pjk (Oct 26, 2020)

Thanks for the feedback, please report any other issues you may find and I'll work to resolve them.



RedstoneTim said:


> As far as I know, it's sadly not possible to edit the page. The F2L talk page probably belongs to the pages which were subject to vandalism about two years ago. (Click here for more info.) As of now, we don't know of a way to fix this since not even pjk himself is able to edit those pages. If one of you is able to help, please contact pjk because I'm sure he'll be very glad when this finally gets fixed.


When I edit it I get:








Screen Shot 2020-10-26 at 3.43.25 PM.png


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




Are there other pages also having this issue, or is this the only one?



qwr said:


> @pjk I strongly think there should be a method of doing citations. There are a lot of cubing facts that deserve to be properly cited. I think MediaWiki has this by default?


Yes, you can add citations. Please feel free to propose it and begin making this changes. This is all a community project.



qwr said:


> I found out it can be done like `*<span id="cite_note-1">(1) [http://www.mefferts.com/page.php?lang=en&amp;theme=about_uwe About Uwe Mèffert &amp; Meffert's Puzzles]</span>` however a dedicated ref tag would be nice.


Feel free to create the needed tag.


----------



## qwr (Oct 26, 2020)

pjk said:


> Are there other pages also having this issue, or is this the only one?



the only one I know of.



pjk said:


> Feel free to create the needed tag.


I searched it up and the tag should come with mediawiki as part of the extension called cite. I haven't tried the tag yet. However what's weird is that the editor is a plaintext window while wikis usually have tools in an editor toolbar like for adding headers, table of contents, references, etc.


----------



## pjk (Oct 27, 2020)

qwr said:


> the only one I know of.
> 
> 
> I searched it up and the tag should come with mediawiki as part of the extension called cite. I haven't tried the tag yet. However what's weird is that the editor is a plaintext window while wikis usually have tools in an editor toolbar like for adding headers, table of contents, references, etc.


I can install the cite extension if you want to use it. No one has requested this before yet.

As for the plain text editor, I thought this was normal. Was it only a recent new version that has the upgraded editor?


----------



## qwr (Oct 27, 2020)

pjk said:


> I can install the cite extension if you want to use it. No one has requested this before yet.
> 
> As for the plain text editor, I thought this was normal. Was it only a recent new version that has the upgraded editor?



it's better than the standard way now of just pasting the link or using the span tag.

idk if the plaintext editor is normal or not. Having dedicated toolbar for formatting would make editing a nicer experience, especially for people without prior mediawiki experience.


----------



## pjk (Nov 9, 2020)

I will add these in the next update. Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## ABCubeTutor (Dec 23, 2020)

hi, 

i know very little about wiki editing, i'm learning as i go...

i created the ABCube Method page, and i'm trying to get it to look uniform to the other pages.

i uploaded an image to go in the information box, (it is Formulas.png )


when i created it, the info said to use *|200px|thumb|left|alt text *to get a thumbnail

i tried to put the image in the box, but when i click page preview, whatever i do it just shows the full size image, taking up the whole page.

what am i doing wrong? what do i try next? 

thanks


----------



## RedstoneTim (Dec 23, 2020)

ABCubeTutor said:


> hi,
> 
> i know very little about wiki editing, i'm learning as i go...
> 
> ...


Could you send an image of how it looks for you and describe more exactly how you want it to look?
This is how it currently looks on my side, which is similar to how the images on the other method pages look:


Spoiler: My view







Edit: I've tried to improve the pages about you and your method by adding info boxes, links and more formatting. I hope that there aren't any issues with the edits, otherwise feel free to tell me.


----------



## ABCubeTutor (Dec 23, 2020)

RedstoneTim said:


> Could you send an image of how it looks for you and describe more exactly how you want it to look?
> This is how it currently looks on my side, which is similar to how the images on the other method pages look:
> 
> 
> ...



Redstone Tim, thank you so so much. a friend helped me resize and reupload to get the picture correct yesterday afternoon. the problem i was running into was the image being huge and causing the info box to be the size of the entire page. so, that's fixes.

how awesome of you to clean up the formatting, and making the pages sparkle. 

however, i made a bit of a mess in getting the correct image to load, in that i uploaded two other images that don't work, and not knowing how to delete them, 

think you can delete for me or teach me how to delete the two irrelevant images? they are called Formula and Formulas2


----------



## RedstoneTim (Dec 24, 2020)

ABCubeTutor said:


> think you can delete for me or teach me how to delete the two irrelevant images? they are called Formula and Formulas2


Are they still showing up for you? Because I already deleted them yesterday.


----------



## ABCubeTutor (Dec 29, 2020)

RedstoneTim said:


> Are they still showing up for you? Because I already deleted them yesterday.


thank you!


----------



## ProStar (Dec 29, 2020)

Ah yes, why didn't I think of this before?


----------



## qwr (Jan 17, 2021)

Is the cite tag added yet?


----------



## qwr (Jan 25, 2021)

Is it useful that we could list for every nxn cube, every release from a major company ever produced? I thought about doing it for 2x2 as a reference.


----------



## qwr (Feb 9, 2021)

btw @pjk gmail puts the speedsolving wiki watched emails in spam because the email author field is suspicious or something


----------



## pjk (Feb 10, 2021)

qwr said:


> btw @pjk gmail puts the speedsolving wiki watched emails in spam because the email author field is suspicious or something
> 
> View attachment 14868


Yes, this is a known issue due to the server IP. Will resolve on the next update.


----------



## Michal Robaczyk (Mar 1, 2021)

Hey I just created an account on the speedsolving wiki and I would like to contribute. I have major experience in wiki editing (I'm admin on Civilization Wiki).

First thing I would like to contribute to is to unify images for alg cases. Is there any reason why we can't use visual cube from Lucas Garron? Static images are harder to maintain and there are tousands of them (plus mostly uncategorized).

Thanks for answers


----------



## RedstoneTim (Mar 1, 2021)

Michal Robaczyk said:


> Hey I just created an account on the speedsolving wiki and I would like to contribute. I have major experience in wiki editing (I'm admin on Civilization Wiki).
> 
> First thing I would like to contribute to is to unify images for alg cases. Is there any reason why we can't use visual cube from Lucas Garron? Static images are harder to maintain and there are tousands of them (plus mostly uncategorized).
> 
> Thanks for answers


Welcome to the Speedsolving Wiki! It's great to have someone here with experience, the wiki really needs more editors like that.
On the issue about images, do you mean VisualCube by Conrad Rider? Because Lucas Garron has done quite a lot of useful programming, especially for cubing.js, but I don't think that he made any image generator, at least not one which would be easily embeddable into the wiki.
Assuming that you mean Conrad Rider's VisualCube, I definitely like your idea. Unused, uncategorized or missing images have always been a problem, replacing them with VisualCube links is definitely a good idea. I think the main reason as to why this hasn't been done yet is just that firstly, no one really had that idea before and secondly, it's a lot of work to remove all the images. There are thousands of images and it's a huge effort to replace all of those with the VisualCube links. (I do have image links for some, but that's only the few pages I added myself.) I'm definitely for doing that, especially for all new cube images added in the future, but the porting process will take a long time for sure.


----------



## Athefre (Mar 1, 2021)

If links are used, we have to hope that they all still work if something changes. Some of my old development posts here on the forum have issues loading the VisualCube image links. If everything on the wiki is changed to links and something goes wrong, that would be a lot of links to fix or we would need some kind of system for fixing everything at once.


----------



## Michal Robaczyk (Mar 1, 2021)

I meant Conrad Rider, sorry for the mistake. Maybe it would be possible to put the visual cube code on the speedsolving wiki server to not be dependant on external site stability?

And yes, I imagine that the process of replacing the images will be tedious (this is a perfect task for a bot though, but i dont have a bot account on this wiki). Maybe I could first do something else like categorization, infoboxes, nav boxes?


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Mar 1, 2021)

If you all do this, *please do not touch the images on the 4x4x4 parity algorithms wiki page*. There are several images in there which _cannot_ be generated with visual cube. (They are more detailed and/or labelled in a way which Visual Cube does not do.) And although it appears that the images which look like last layer view on there were generated from Visual Cube, they were not. I colored those manually. But I guess those could be replaced with links to Visual Cube (since they look very similar to what Visual Cube outputs), but *just to be safe*, please don't touch any of the images on that page.

Thanks!


----------



## qwr (Mar 1, 2021)

If you use visualcube then the results should all be cached. Otherwise you'll be using server processing any time anyone wants to load any image.


----------



## Scollier (Mar 1, 2021)

Just created a speedsolving wiki account and for the life of me, I could not figure out how to create a page for our team's atropos method. Could someone assist me and tell me how to create a page?


----------



## DNF_Cuber (Mar 1, 2021)

Scollier said:


> Just created a speedsolving wiki account and for the life of me, I could not figure out how to create a page for our team's atropos method. Could someone assist me and tell me how to create a page?


I don't know. I can't even confirm my email. (the real reason I am writing this is to call you mike)


----------



## Athefre (Mar 1, 2021)

Scollier said:


> Just created a speedsolving wiki account and for the life of me, I could not figure out how to create a page for our team's atropos method. Could someone assist me and tell me how to create a page?



Just type Atropos into the search bar. It will then say that it can't find a page called that and ask you if you want to create a page. Then you can copy the contents of another method's page and use that as a template.


----------



## Michal Robaczyk (Mar 2, 2021)

I see that in the algdb we already use visual cube that is deployed on the speedsolving wiki server, for example this one:


https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=w&size=160&pzl=2&stage=ll&view=plan&case=RU2R2U%27RU%27R%27U2FRF%27


----------



## bcube (Mar 2, 2021)

Michal Robaczyk said:


> Hey I just created an account on the speedsolving wiki and I would like to contribute. I have major experience in wiki editing (I'm admin on Civilization Wiki).
> 
> First thing I would like to contribute to is to unify images for alg cases. Is there any reason why we can't use visual cube from Conrad Rider? Static images are harder to maintain and there are tousands of them (plus mostly uncategorized).
> 
> Thanks for answers



Do you think animated simulators would be more meaningful/useful to the end user than static images?

If not, please ignore the rest of this post.

If yes, let me tell you that I was thinking about replacing some images with simulators since 2015 on the wiki (but actually never did that mainly from 2 reasons)....

As for 2x2x2 - 6x6x6 cubes (and Supercubes), I personally would love to see AnimCubeJS on some wiki pages instead of (or together with) images.

Some concerns are not a problem for AnimCubeJS, including:
- easily embeddable into the wiki (I suppose)
- possibility to put the code on the speedsolving wiki server to not be dependant on external site stability 
- the results should all be cached


----------



## lawofthecube (Mar 19, 2021)

Hi, I think the fung and anti-fung icons are messed up in the OLL Wiki!?

Can somebody fix that, I was using the icons for a training sheet then I saw this...




Pretty sure ...lol


----------



## Cubing Forever (Mar 19, 2021)

No they aren't messed up. Ig some of the algs are messed up.


----------



## lawofthecube (Mar 19, 2021)

Cubing Forever said:


> No they aren't messed up. Ig some of the algs are messed up.



Lol...



I fixed them, everything is ok now, nothing to see here ...



Everyone move along...lol


----------



## Cubing Forever (Mar 19, 2021)

lawofthecube said:


> Lol...
> 
> View attachment 15192


I missed that lol


----------



## qwr (Mar 19, 2021)

personally I don't like how the diagrams look with the florian holes. I like the traditional visualcube diagrams more


----------



## lawofthecube (Mar 19, 2021)

qwr said:


> personally I don't like how the diagrams look with the florian holes. I like the traditional visualcube diagrams more



But did the visualcube get the fung right...lol


----------



## qwr (Mar 19, 2021)

lawofthecube said:


> But did the visualcube get the fung right...lol


you know what I was curious so I looked into exactly when the images were changed 
which appears to have been all done in September 24-25 2020 by @ArbishAli for whatever reason.

you can see the old diagrams (which weren't made by visualcube I think) for Fung and anti Fung were correct 






OLL Algorithms - CFOP Speedcubing Cases - Speedsolving.com Wiki


Orientation of the last layer algorithms for the CFOP speedsolving method.




www.speedsolving.com










File:O39.gif - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com









File:O40.gif - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Mar 21, 2021)

@pjk , I have just added a *Quick Navigation* section at the beginning of the 4x4x4 Parity Algorithms wiki page. I believe you hinted that I do this *3 years ago* when I wrote the *Introduction*, but I guess late is better than never!

(@Everyone, If I missed anything, let me know!)


----------



## pyrapyravince (Mar 29, 2021)

Can someone help me in making this page? Cuz everytime i try to make it says someone is already editing it. Cross is a very important step and should be documented.


----------



## RedstoneTim (Mar 29, 2021)

This sadly is a well-known issue that can't be fixed (as of now).
The Cross page and some other articles (like the ones about Gilles Roux, the wiki itself and the First Two Layers talk page) were vandalized in 2018. Some pages apparently worked again later, but others, like the Cross page, remain vandalized up to now, which is why it's showing editing conflicts despite no one else actually editing the page.
There currently doesn't seem to be any workaround (though if you know one, definitely tell pjk!), so the pages had to be moved. The old Cross page is available at Cross/old_revision while the page about Roux is at Gilles Roux/old_revision.
The best that could be done would be to get a different name, but there aren't any other generally accepted names for Cross and even if there were, searching for Cross in the search bar still gives you that broken page, so it's not a perfect workaround.

Also a small thing: For next time, please write anything related to the wiki in the Wiki Discussion Thread. It's not forbidden to create a new post or anything, but most wiki admins are subscribed to that thread, so you'd get an answer more quickly.


----------



## pyrapyravince (Mar 29, 2021)

RedstoneTim said:


> This sadly is a well-known issue that can't be fixed (as of now).
> The Cross page and some other articles (like the ones about Gilles Roux, the wiki itself and the First Two Layers talk page) were vandalized in 2018. Some pages apparently worked again later, but others, like the Cross page, remain vandalized up to now, which is why it's showing editing conflicts despite no one else actually editing the page.
> There currently doesn't seem to be any workaround (though if you know one, definitely tell pjk!), so the pages had to be moved. The old Cross page is available at Cross/old_revision while the page about Roux is at Gilles Roux/old_revision.
> The best that could be done would be to get a different name, but there aren't any other generally accepted names for Cross and even if there were, searching for Cross in the search bar still gives you that broken page, so it's not a perfect workaround.
> ...


how about making a new page called "The Cross"?


----------



## qwr (Mar 30, 2021)

I feel like there should be quick links to OLL and PLL parity which is what most people are looking for. I use the lucasparity which is pretty old by now so maybe the popular alg has changed


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Mar 30, 2021)

qwr said:


> I feel like there should be quick links to OLL and PLL parity which is what most people are looking for. I use the lucasparity which is pretty old by now so maybe the popular alg has changed


You mean you there be links _only_ to those two? (Because the links to both are right there at the top.)


----------



## qwr (Mar 30, 2021)

Christopher Mowla said:


> You mean you there be links _only_ to those two? (Because the links to both are right there at the top.)


oh yeah I guess it is in quick navigation. I think the page still may be too long and possibly should be split up into subpages.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Mar 30, 2021)

qwr said:


> oh yeah I guess it is in quick navigation. I think the page still may be too long and possibly should be split up into subpages.


Well, the table of contents is there too for more in-depth quick navigation. But what do you suggest?


----------



## RedstoneTim (Mar 30, 2021)

pyrapyravince said:


> how about making a new page called "The Cross"?


I guess that's an option, but the issues I have with this are that it's not perfect because "Cross" still gives the old page, people will continue asking why the article is used and since it just doesn't fit the style of the wiki. I also don't know how we would apply that to the Gilles Roux page.
I've thought about calling it "Cross (substep)" and "Gilles Roux (person)", but it also doesn't fix the first issue.


----------



## qwr (Mar 30, 2021)

have you tried to ask the mediawiki support desk? they're very knowledgeable about these kind of wiki issues


----------



## RedstoneTim (Mar 30, 2021)

qwr said:


> have you tried to ask the mediawiki support desk? they're very knowledgeable about these kind of wiki issues


I think the admins found a "solution" on the MediaWiki website which sadly didn't work, but I'm not sure if they ever contacted the support desk since I wasn't active back when the vandalism happened. Maybe @pjk knows more? I think it's definitely a good idea to contact them, thanks for pointing that out, since even if they couldn't help then, perhaps a solution exists now.


----------



## qwr (Mar 30, 2021)

my wild guess based on what I know of databases is that there is some database lock somewhere and it needs to be manually fixed because it still thinks the page is being edited.


----------



## ArbishAli (Mar 31, 2021)

They are correct now.


----------



## pjk (Oct 16, 2021)

I noticed all the URLs are broken here @Lucas Garron :





Algorithm Database - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com





These links:


http://alg.garron.us/?scheme=brogwy&cube=2x2x2&stage=&animtype=solve&alg=R2+U-+R2+U2+y+R2+U-+R2



Where do they forward now? Can you setup a 301 redirect for these, or let me know the updated URL structures? Thanks.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Oct 16, 2021)

pjk said:


> I noticed all the URLs are broken here @Lucas Garron :
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Someone recently asked me about this, and I didn't realize we had it. https://alg.cubing.net supplanted alg.garron.us in 2014, but I never added a redirect because I didn't think there were any significant links actively using it.

At this point, I'd recommend switching to Twizzle:

Remove the scheme param (alg.cubing.net never supported it properly, Twizzle doesn't support it yet).
Change cube= to puzzle=
Change animtype=solve to setup-anchor=end
The alg param uses normal URL param encoding (e.g. the prime symbol is not converted to -)
Example: https://alpha.twizzle.net/edit/?puzzle=2x2x2&setup-anchor=end&alg=R2+U'+R2+U2+y+R2+U'+R2


----------



## pjk (Oct 20, 2021)

Lucas Garron said:


> Someone recently asked me about this, and I didn't realize we had it. https://alg.cubing.net supplanted alg.garron.us in 2014, but I never added a redirect because I didn't think there were any significant links actively using it.
> 
> At this point, I'd recommend switching to Twizzle:
> 
> ...


Thanks for the detailed reply. I'd suggest adding the redirects anyway for any misc. links posted over the years that are broken. Is there any downside to doing the redirect? I'll work on updating the structure on the wiki soon.


----------



## pjk (Oct 20, 2021)

Lucas Garron said:


> Someone recently asked me about this, and I didn't realize we had it. https://alg.cubing.net supplanted alg.garron.us in 2014, but I never added a redirect because I didn't think there were any significant links actively using it.
> 
> At this point, I'd recommend switching to Twizzle:
> 
> ...


Do you still use the stage parameter? I see you made the redirects work, great. I've also just updated the URL structure, see here for example:





Algorithm Database - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com





Here is an example output:
https://alpha.twizzle.net/edit/?puzzle=2x2x2&stage=&setup-anchor=end&alg=y2+R2+U+R2+U2+F2+U+F2

Let me know of any other changes/suggestions. Thanks @Lucas Garron


----------



## Lucas Garron (Oct 20, 2021)

pjk said:


> Do you still use the stage parameter?



Yep, those should be essentially the same!
Not all stages work for all puzzles yet, but at least 3x3x3 should be working.


----------



## qwr (Oct 23, 2021)

I don't think I mentioned this earlier but who replaced the perfectly readable previous images with these bubbly piece horrors 





OLL Algorithms - CFOP Speedcubing Cases - Speedsolving.com Wiki


Orientation of the last layer algorithms for the CFOP speedsolving method.




www.speedsolving.com


----------



## Cubing Forever (Oct 23, 2021)

qwr said:


> I don't think I mentioned this earlier but who replaced the perfectly readable previous images with these bubbly piece horrors
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah those look awful. Also we need to clean out many of the useless algs(like R U2 R' U2 R' F R2 U' R' U' R U R' F' for antisune(lol))


----------



## CubeRed (Oct 23, 2021)

qwr said:


> I don't think I mentioned this earlier but who replaced the perfectly readable previous images with these bubbly piece horrors
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It actually was like that for a long time.


----------



## qwr (Oct 23, 2021)

CubeRed said:


> It actually was like that for a long time.


it was decent looking for a much longer time than this nonsense


----------



## CubeRed (Oct 23, 2021)

qwr said:


> it was decent looking for a much longer time than this nonsense


What was it like before? I didn't know ss wiki for a long time but it was like that for a few months.


----------



## qwr (Oct 23, 2021)

CubeRed said:


> What was it like before? I didn't know ss wiki for a long time but it was like that for a few months.


Used to look reasonable, if a bit lacking in color






The nonsense appeared to start with @ArbishAli for unknown reasons and at the very least no community input in Discussion






User contributions for ArbishAli - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com









Difference between revisions of "Template:OCLL" - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com









Revision history of "OLL" - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com









OLL Algorithms - CFOP Speedcubing Cases - Speedsolving.com Wiki


Orientation of the last layer algorithms for the CFOP speedsolving method.




www.speedsolving.com






As bad as it sounds I think certain pages need to be protected or semi-protected on wikipedia because over the years the alg pages have become an indiscriminate dumping ground of algs (not even good ones).


----------



## Reirto-RRNF (Jan 17, 2022)

Well some day ago CFOP page content is completely changed to "CFOPwasStolen" and moved to a page that have long name, well all of it already reverted and the user did it is banned
Well yesterday the same person make new account and did the same to CFOP page again which replace the content that reveal that user is the same person and move the page to "You cant catch me now !" and other new account that the creation time is is 1 hour before the user that did replace CFOP page for 2nd time move ZZ page to "Bad than Roux and CFOP"
And recently there new account that replace 4Z4 page content to "Remember,ZZ44 is better than this method." and move the page to "ZZ44 is best for ZZer -JamUKHacker-" page"

There 2 new account named "4z4destroyer" and "Ukhacker" that maybe is alt account of those user


----------



## RedstoneTim (Jan 17, 2022)

Reirto-RRNF said:


> Well some day ago CFOP page content is completely changed to "CFOPwasStolen" and moved to a page that have long name, well all of it already reverted and the user did it is banned
> Well yesterday the same person make new account and did the same to CFOP page again which replace the content that reveal that user is the same person and move the page to "You cant catch me now !" and other new account that the creation time is is 1 hour before the user that did replace CFOP page for 2nd time move ZZ page to "Bad than Roux and CFOP"
> And recently there new account that replace 4Z4 page content to "Remember,ZZ44 is better than this method." and move the page to "ZZ44 is best for ZZer -JamUKHacker-" page"
> 
> There 2 new account named "4z4destroyer" and "Ukhacker" that maybe is alt account of those user


Thanks for noticing that so quickly and taking care of it! Everything should hopefully be back to its original state now. In case I overlooked anything, don't refrain from pointing it out.


----------



## Platform (Jan 30, 2022)

h bisogno di aiuto per aggiungere dei casi nella wiki. Con il metodo che propongo posso creare i casi line e in seguito risolverli e vorrei aggiungere nella wiki i casi che creano i casi line.
MEtto in allegato un documento sia in italiano che in inglese.

_Può aiutarmi a creare una nuova pagina wiki di un metodo? Il mio metodo crea il blocco 1x1x3 e nel prossimo blocco di risoluzione.
Contact me on priviate for create Page wiki._

ioreate this Page in Speedsolving Wiki





Platform - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com


----------



## j727s (Jan 30, 2022)

cool, can you pls post an example solve? and im not sure the guide at the bottom works


----------



## qwr (Sep 1, 2022)

I tried to upload some new images for the Alpha / type A article and the thumbnailer is very broken






File:Alpha-v cubicle white.webp - Speedsolving.com Wiki







www.speedsolving.com





I have also made a bunch of suggestions for the wiki above that have pretty much all been ignored. Is the wiki not being maintained any more?


----------



## 1973486 (Sep 1, 2022)

Probably because of the webp format. And yes, I don't think anyone is really maintaining it. You could ask pjk about it.


----------



## RedstoneTim (Sep 3, 2022)

qwr said:


> I tried to upload some new images for the Alpha / type A article and the thumbnailer is very broken


I sadly can't do anything against that, so I could only recommend you, as @1973486 has already done, to contact pjk as he has control over the whole software side of the wiki.



qwr said:


> I have also made a bunch of suggestions for the wiki above that have pretty much all been ignored. Is the wiki not being maintained any more?


I have to admit that as of now, @Billabob is more or less the only active admin when it comes to actual wiki content. I've personally only been checking the wiki for vandalism in recent times due to a lack of time and frankly also interest.
Especially currently, the wiki is mainly used as a dumping ground for methods and unofficial records which, after a lot of discussions and incidents, have proven difficult to moderate (e.g. the wiki is supposed to be a collection of cubing knowledge by the community, but some also insist that this means that it needs to cover virtually everything, including the smallest and most insignificant methods, which I ultimately have to agree with but which also messes with the wiki's quality).
The wiki either needs a reform in some areas (which could definitely be done if enough motivated people came together to create sufficient discussion like back in 2020) or the minor moderation we're currently at.
As I've probably said countless times, the wiki is a community effort and if a project (as long as it's not something the admins have to disapprove of) receives enough traction within the community (like the new OLL images which, despite every normal user being able to, no one has touched presumably because there haven't been enough opinions on what the community would prefer), it can be realized and will likely receive help from moderators as well (if they are even required for it, that is.)
So, if there's anything that needs changing, here's the place to discuss it, hold votes etc. I'd be glad to help, and don't refrain from pinging me if there's a problem, but really it's the whole user base who maintains the wiki and not only the admins.
I see that I should've started a discussion about issues like the OLL images and I will try to show some more engagement on my side in the future, but on the contrary I'm also not going to perform a full revamp without at least having talked to some people about it beforehand.


----------



## Billabob (Sep 7, 2022)

Wholeheartedly agree with RedstoneTim. He's been holding the fort for a few years but the Wiki doesn't get much vandalism these days, at worst we get pages/edits of questionable enough quality that I feel the need to revert/rewrite them. 

Checking the wiki's recent changes every day or so is my only connection to the speedcubing community at this point, unfortunately I cannot dedicate any more time than that. Apologies for the lofty claims earlier in this thread. As it stands, my moderation for the UWR page is restricted to removing obviously fake records (0.02 second times) and removing certain records such as 3x3 single and the shorter 2x2 averages. The wiki inherently runs on trust and with the current implicit standard of absolutely 0 proof required (nobody who practices enough to get a sub-3 single is recording every single solve), it seems infeasible for our Wiki skeleton crew to enforce a more complex policy.


----------



## qwr (Sep 7, 2022)

Billabob said:


> Wholeheartedly agree with RedstoneTim. He's been holding the fort for a few years but the Wiki doesn't get much vandalism these days, at worst we get pages/edits of questionable enough quality that I feel the need to revert/rewrite them.
> 
> Checking the wiki's recent changes every day or so is my only connection to the speedcubing community at this point, unfortunately I cannot dedicate any more time than that. Apologies for the lofty claims earlier in this thread. As it stands, my moderation for the UWR page is restricted to removing obviously fake records (0.02 second times) and removing certain records such as 3x3 single and the shorter 2x2 averages. The wiki inherently runs on trust and with the current implicit standard of absolutely 0 proof required (nobody who practices enough to get a sub-3 single is recording every single solve), it seems infeasible for our Wiki skeleton crew to enforce a more complex policy.


My issue has never been with outright vandalism, but with the gradual degradation of the quality of articles like the OLL and F2L pages, which have become dumping grounds of questionable algorithms. In fact when I first used the wiki in 2010 it already wasn't clear which algorithms were the best, so I ended up learning suboptimal OLLs lol. Also the unnecessary and ugly replacement of OLL images by @ArbishAli still is there. 

For example there are only two or three good algorithms for these OLLs, and I don't believe the wiki should become an every algorithm database.


----------



## ender9994 (Sep 7, 2022)

It would take a bit, but we could pair down to 5-ish algorithms (I believe 2 -3 are too few) by holding polls for each case, then instead of just providing one giant list, the first few could be numbered based on their ranking. 

One thing to consider is the different value that some of the algorithms may hold to different people. I might only need 2 algorithms for the above case (1 and 2 handed), while others may want 4 extra algorithms to account for each mirrored case.


----------



## qwr (Sep 7, 2022)

ender9994 said:


> It would take a bit, but we could pair down to 5-ish algorithms (I believe 2 -3 are too few) by holding polls for each case, then instead of just providing one giant list, the first few could be numbered based on their ranking.
> 
> One thing to consider is the different value that some of the algorithms may hold to different people. I might only need 2 algorithms for the above case (1 and 2 handed), while others may want 4 extra algorithms to account for each mirrored case.


We can simply take the top algorithms of speedcubedb, including special cases for OH, big cubes, FMC if needed


----------



## Billabob (Sep 8, 2022)

Yeah I agree the algorithm pages need redoing. I've had to rearrange them before when overzealous editors add their own algorithms to the top of the list, so the top algorithms should (?) be the most viable. A cull would greatly improve the quality of the page. I remember the 4x4 OLL parity page being incredibly confusing when I was starting out so that should be sorted out too...

Aside from the concerns about seeking permission/popular support, I don't see an issue with the new OLL images. They read well and the colour brings life to the older designs.


----------



## RedstoneTim (Sep 8, 2022)

qwr said:


> My issue has never been with outright vandalism, but with the gradual degradation of the quality of articles like the OLL and F2L pages, which have become dumping grounds of questionable algorithms. In fact when I first used the wiki in 2010 it already wasn't clear which algorithms were the best, so I ended up learning suboptimal OLLs lol.


I definitely agree with this. The algorithms on the wiki are very outdated and - if inexperienced beginners are excluded - likely more often added to than actually used. The main issue here, at least in my opinion, is that the effort to update them using the current system is just not worth it considering the better alternatives which exist nowadays.



qwr said:


> Also the unnecessary and ugly replacement of OLL images by @ArbishAli still is there.


Do most people want them removed? Because if so, we can definitely do that since it's really not much.



qwr said:


> For example there are only two or three good algorithms for these OLLs, and I don't believe the wiki should become an every algorithm database.


In fact, we already do have an algorithm database which, while less frequented, is the perfect place for storing all algorithms one could possibly find.
The wiki pages are definitely not the right place for that.



qwr said:


> We can simply take the top algorithms of speedcubedb, including special cases for OH, big cubes, FMC if needed


This is definitely better than having an extra sorting mechanism and ending up like AlgDb.net after a while.
One idea I had quite some time ago (ironically with AlgDb.net back then) was that the algorithm lists should be completely under the responsibility of some other website that could keep them updated, now SpeedCubeDB as you mentioned, which would mean that the wiki would just show an automatically updated list with the top algs, but could forward you to the website with all of the algorithms. I'm still not really sure about the programming that would be required for this though.



Billabob said:


> Aside from the concerns about seeking permission/popular support, I don't see an issue with the new OLL images. They read well and the colour brings life to the older designs.


That's also the problem I'm facing since it appears that, as of now, the majority of users don't seem to care or actually do agree with the new images, at least judging from the fact that nothing has been undertaken against it on the page itself.


----------



## Billabob (Sep 20, 2022)

@pjk Why was this user able to edit the main page? It's protected so only admins can edit it. https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Gehan

He was also using this account to mass-blank pages: https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/S1RHATTERS

Fortunately it's just some child so it wasn't hard to revert everything and block the accounts. Will keep an eye out.


----------



## Christopher Mowla (Sep 20, 2022)

Billabob said:


> I remember the 4x4 OLL parity page being incredibly confusing when I was starting out so that should be sorted out too...


Out of curiosity, did you view the page since I added the Quick Navigation section at the beginning? And if so, how do you propose it be changed? (BTW, I have heard several people say that it is one of the best pages in the wiki. So I'm surpised to hear the other extreme.)


----------



## Billabob (Sep 21, 2022)

Christopher Mowla said:


> Out of curiosity, did you view the page since I added the Quick Navigation section at the beginning? And if so, how do you propose it be changed? (BTW, I have heard several people say that it is one of the best pages in the wiki. So I'm surpised to hear the other extreme.)


Hi Chris - I hadn't and I appreciate the introduction. I agree it's one of the best, most comprehensive pages on the Wiki but as a new cuber the sheer amount of information was overwhelming and it was unclear where to find a general-purpose OLL parity algorithm. The quick navigation section is a major improvement and lead me right to the information I was after. I retract my original complaint, thanks!


----------



## qwr (Sep 21, 2022)

I think most people are interested first and foremost in single dedge flip alg ("OLL parity"). I always went with lucasparity but that might not be the most popular alg these days.


----------

