StrategyWiki:Staff lounge

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

Welcome to all users! This page is where you can ask StrategyWiki-related questions to the staff and senior community figures, and they will do their best to answer. If you want to raise a topic for discussion (rather than just ask about it), please use the community issues forum instead. New issues are entered here, with the most recent at the bottom of the page. If your question does not pertain to editing StrategyWiki (e.g. asking for hints or game-specific information), please ask on the guide's talk page or on the forums.

Please review the Table of Contents to see if your issue has already been raised; also check the archives (to the right) in case it was discussed some time ago.

To facilitate ease of browsing and replying, please:
 * 1) Place your question at the bottom of the list.
 * 2) Title the question (by placing the title between equals signs: ==Title==).
 * 3) Sign your name and date (by adding four tildes: ~ ).

Action RPG sub-genre
Hello. I created the Category:Action RPG page, as a sub-category of the Category:RPG genre. Can I ask to check if it's worth keeping it and add games in this category, or if it would be better to delete it? --Abacos (talk) 14:46, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * My view is that the Action RPG category really is just an RPG game with Action elements, which is satisfied by keeping it in both Action and RPG categories. The only other merged category I can think of is Action-adventure, which is wildly different from what we have as Adventure games (point-and-click). Maybe we need to start listing definitions of what each of these genres is so that it's clear for everyone. What would we consider the difference between an Action game and an Action-adventure game? -- Prod (talk) 15:08, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Good: writing down definitions to solve conflicts is exactly my philosophy (but I'm afraid it can sometimes be boring to read). I'll write what I consider my understanding of the definitions (see also: List of SNES RPGs).
 * I consider a Role-Playing (video) Game a video game that has the following three characteristics:
 * Interaction with NPCs and online players, and subsequent development of plot;
 * Freedom of exploration, and all dungeons accessed from an overworld (or they are interconnected);
 * Permanent upgrades of the attributes of the playable characters (often depending on Experience points and levels, but not necessarily limited to this).
 * I consider an Action game a game that lacks at least two of the three above.
 * I consider Tactical games as a completely separate genre (i.e. not RPG), since their archetype is chess.
 * Some sub-genres of RPGs:
 * According to the combat system, I sub-divide RPGs in two large groups: Turn-based RPGs and Action RPGs.
 * Turn-based RPGs can be further sub-divided in Japanese/Consolle style (emphasis on #1: plot) and American/Computer style (emphasis on #2: exploration and #3: "body-building").
 * I consider Roguelike RPGs those where dungeons are randomly generated (emphasis on #2: exploration), regardless of combat system.
 * In some RPGs, #3 applies not to the playable character, but to creatures that follow him (e.g. Pokemon). I minted the name "Breeding RPG" or "Herding RPG", but I never wrote it down before.

All this is my personal understanding, and it is susceptible of discussion at leisure. If my understanding of a genre or sub-genre is in conflict with its common definition, I think this could be the time and place to talk about all genre definitions. --Abacos (talk) 16:03, 26 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Before expanding further, we typically adhere to Wikipedia definitions, albeit with our preference to list the elements of the game rather than a unified genre name. For example, vs. . Wikipedia's action RPG definition is no better than us separating this category into the two elements, action and RPG. Most of the games discussed on the wikipedia page are hack and slash games, which we have a special category for because they are very defined. Games like the seikendensetsu (mana) series and tales series could be put into the unified "Action RPG" combined sub-genre. However, we come to a point where an important question arises: do we want our categories to be broad and inclusive, or exclusive and specific? We have typically kept them in larger, "parent" genres. Also, creating action RPG as a subgenre will create a few hundred edits to go through all of the games that have both action and RPG on their main pages. I don't really use our categories to search for games, so I can't decide what is most effective, or if it matters. The one benefit to sub-genres is that you actually get well-grouped titles so particular tastes in games can more easily be explored. Also, our DPL code inside the Genre template works best with smaller categories so you can compare similar titles' popularity. -- 17:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Prod, I believe it is time to reconsider our alternate, minimalistic, element-based categorization style (Action + RPG does not = Action RPG, though note that some games will still be Action + RPG). I think that sub-genres are more effective at helping people find similar games, and more accurate in classifying games. We should start each definitions on the category pages with what Wikipedia has, and then we can deviate to simplify and improve upon them, since we usually just have simple blurbs and a link to the full Wikipedia article. -- 18:23, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yea, I'm thinking the same thing. The original hope was to have intersections of categories provide the listings, but I'm not that big a fan of installing the Semantic extension. I agree that we should go the route of categories and sub-categories.  As for copying Wikipedia, I think we should map out what they have here first, and then discuss what we should do, since I'm not sure how well their top level categories were planned out.  -- Prod (talk) 02:07, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Significant image categorization policy changes
I rescind my claims. My claims in the beginning of the below discussion is unwarranted/illogical at this time. -- 15:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

As a result of the discussion on 's talk page between Procyon, RAP, Prod, and I, the consensus was to move the category overhaul discussion over here. Note that this discussion is fairly similar to the one above regarding the proposed change for the inclusion of more specific genre sub-categories. Ok, so what am I talking about?


 * Current policy
 * All guides have their own guide-specific image category. Clones and versions have their images in there too. Sub-categories are allowed, but optional.
 * We have broad image categories like and . I believe these were originally used so that  could be a category-only container.
 * We have ~19 broad categories.


 * Proposed revised policy
 * - no change, but necessary as this is our "primary" category of image categories. It is the one that matters. Sub-categories of this are one per guide.
 * All broad category (e.g. screenshot, sprite, box artwork, maps, models, icons, and artwork) images that do not have a guide-specific category should be under or something similar. Guide-specific images no longer need other broad categories. This new cat is a suggestion, as I assume we want to keep  clear of files. The rationale for the disbanning of broad categories revolves around their uselessness. I asked the question, "What benefit do broad categories have?" In comparison, small, specific categories help people find similar categories. This is why sub-categories of a guide-specific image cat will still be allowed. We aren't getting rid of categories, but those that add wasteful complexity here.
 * Instead of categorizing as screenshot, or sprite, a general description of the image type would suffice in the description. Many images already have this.
 * Achievement/Trophy images - do they need to be in the same category? Is there a time when searching for achievement images from all games is useful? Probably not. If necessary, just make a guide-specific image sub-category.
 * Controller buttons image category appears semi-useful for finding images, or we could just do a better job at listing all of the pertinent controller button images on their respective template documentation.


 * Oddities to address
 * Compilations: these guides can have their own image category. However, most of these will only have a few images in them (like the box artwork).
 * Versions: some versions, like Super Mario Advance, have their own image category (Category:Super Mario Advance images). This is allowed and probably for the best. Due to the amount of revisioning that occurs here, combining Super Mario Advance and Super Mario Bros. 2's image categories would just be extra work. There is always the possibility that in the future, we could have a more redundant system where guides are split out. Though differences between versions would be poorly addressed, players who focus on a single version (99% of players) would have a better, clearer, more simple guide. The rule of thumb should be "don't change the system if it is already complete". That said, if the image categories were combined to begin with (e.g. SMA images categorized under Super Mario Bros. 2 image cat, that would be fine, too.

This is version 0.01. Have at it! -- 00:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't want to get rid of all these other categories, since I think some can be useful. For example, tagging diagrams shows which images were created by users as opposed images out of the game.  Some of the other categories also have some useful descriptive properties. Although they can all just be part of the description, having categories standardizes the descriptions and makes them searchable.  Same for achievement images.  For controller buttons, I think a category is much more useful than listing them on the page.  Thinking back, I had actually started the categorization of the subcategories within the tagging categories since I didn't want to go through every MapleStory image and tag it appropriately when we first transwiki'd the guide.
 * For the guide-specific image categories, if there's a main page, there should be a guide-specific image category for it. The guide pages will already provide enough links about the connections between the games, the image categories don't need to.
 * I think we should make a few of the well defined image categories, as well as the guide-specific category, mandatory, but leave most of the other tagging categories optional. -- Prod (talk) 04:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * : For achivements/trophy achievement categories, I assume this is for system or service-wide achievements only like Apple's Game Center achievements or Steam achievements. Would this include in-game achievements? Currently, in Category:Achievement images, the description says: "Images of achievements for Xbox 360, Xbox Live Arcade, Steam and Games for Windows." --RAP (talk) 07:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * @: ok, one of my basic assumptions was that the categories were failing to sort by any useful way. I have been mistaken. I went to and it is ordered by game name, so that could be useful. Also, off topic, this is really handy for finding the seemingly huge percentage of broken gif thumbnails. RAP, you should take a look some time and scan through it one page at a time. Honestly, now I feel like my argument is completely invalid. Categories are useful and clear. -- 15:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * @: We should just change that sentence to include "in-game only achievements". RAP, if you find a category that needs some clarifying, like I edited on and, please post in the staff lounge. I think this topic doesn't need to be discussed or changed anymore. -- 15:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Redirect categorization and category total statistics issue
-- 20:00, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Case: Mega Man X uses to show the release date for the PSP remake, Mega Man Maverick Hunter X. Because the remake is significantly different and not just a title to be redirected, the redirect page has its own categories.
 * Problems:
 * The original 2D Mega Man X game is not on the PSP, but appears in the PSP cat. Two ways to fix: 1) (We do not want this): remove the use of, and to do that you have to remove all other uses of sys otherwise the infobox does not look uniform. 2) modify sys so no cat is generated. I modified sys with a "nocat" parameter we can use. Problem solved.
 * The PSP cat now has both games listed in it, which inflates its number of total games incorrectly. This is fine as long as we agree that we should increase the StrategyWiki:Guide completion total games lists with these additional redirect titles. Otherwise, we end up with more games in the category than in the total list, and it breaks the guide completion template and page.

Editing privileges for 77.251.240.152
I am really concerned about both the quality and quantity of the edits coming from the user at IP address 77.251.240.152. I'm sure all of the staff is aware of this. I don't feel that these edits significantly improve the quality of the guides that are altered. It was one thing when it was the addition of controller input, but simply adding shrunken down inline images of items, or boldfacing occurrences of the word "map" do not strike me as constructive, and personally, I feel lowers the quality of the guide. I would like to ask the staff for their opinion on this matter. The fact that the edits are aggravating to me personally is not reason enough to block him/her, so I would like to know how others feel about it. At the very least, I would like to propose that we block edits from the IP address, but permit the creation of an account from that address. How do the rest of you feel?


 * Control edits were helpful, but anon has not been wholly aware of the cleanup I have been doing. Slow to learn, no desire to be fully engaged. A ban for wasting our time is fine. We should give them an explanation of our requirements for this particular editor to continue editing here (e.g. registration is mandatory and other improvements in their guide editing). Registration will help them learn more quickly.
 * Inline images are great, btw. He may be referring to the section I added to SW:Guide, Guide/Polishing a guide. There I wrote about in-line graphics as being beneficial and desired. -- 18:18, 30 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I feel like it is fine that we let him continue. Although it "adds work", it is beneficial that anon is spurring us (me/proc/paco/whoever) to improve our guides where possible. I have been working on im in response to help ease the process of setting up guide-specific in-line image templates. -- 15:56, 5 May 2014 (UTC)