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)

Harvest Moon series
I have a question about the Harvest Moon series, should the proceed/followed be the order the game released or by handheld systems go without the console systems and console systems go without the handheld systems, because a bunch have the series in order by date such as The Legend of Zelda series and Mario Party series aren't like that just wanted to see if I'm the only one who thinks that or not. - RodKimble (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2014 (UTC0)
 * I don't know enough about the Harvest Moon series specifically to comment on this, but it really depends on the series. In some cases (like the Zelda) series, the game's continuity isn't really clear, and the order of games is by release date.  In other cases, the games are meant to be split by system because the handheld versions are typically "side stories" or a gaiden (外伝), where the progress of the story doesn't flow directly from one system to the another.  I think in this case, NMH's argument is that if the games within the series are split by some header level in the series template, the followed by/preceded by order should follow what the template says.  That being said, there probably is some room for flexibility (as in allowed an in-universe followed by, as well as a chronological followed by).   Pro  cyon  03:19, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * We always create/lay out our series sequences in chronological order, by release date. However, in this case, it is not clear if the handheld games should be a sub-series (which would clearly keep them separate), or if we should revise the series template and put them all in one long order, like Mario. My initial assumption was that the handheld games were different, however, I have played the 64 game and I would assume that little to no continuity exists between any of the games. Harvest Moon. The handheld series does not need to remain. I see no evidence of a long chain of games. I do, however, see small series. E.g. The GB series (GB, 2 GBC, and 3 GBC), Wonderful Life pair, Friends of Mineral Town pair, DS/Cute, Islands pair. We could switch to chronological order, and the series template could be separated into groups like ungrouped or a series. It looks like I initially created the series template by copying Wikipedia's: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Harvest_Moon . I am not sure we should change anything. -- 16:23, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah, all Harvest Moon games seem to be different besides the few sequels, so it looks like chronological might be the way to go, though I've never played a console Harvest Moon so I wouldn't know about any major differences. By this point I would assume there aren't any. -- Wario Talk 23:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * To be honest, it would be nice if the Category:Harvest Moon page could explain the relationship (if any) between all of the titles. Then it would be easier to determine the correct course of action.  RodKimble, is that something that you think you could work on for us?   Pro  cyon  00:20, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok, I am fine with re-sorting the whole thing and getting rid of console delegation. At least we can decide on that and get working on it and see how it goes. Let's go chronologically unless someone comes up with a story. It will look weird because some of the pairs will have their titles separated. -- 00:47, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I can try my best I just have the console versions of Harvest Moon series I've only played some of the handheld versions Procyon. - RodKimble (talk) 01:46, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Don't worry, you don't have to play every game to work on the page. We all do research, whether it's on Wikipedia or somewhere else, before we type up descriptions for games and series.   Pro  cyon  02:20, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I have one more question on a Harvest Moon game, it says that Harvest Moon Online japan only game was closed on October 1st 2012 what does that mean. And is the only game that is on Windows, if that means that you can't play that game anymore should it be taken off.


 * No. Provide as much information as you possibly can about it, and tag the article with the Unplayable tag. We still want to capture as much information as possible for historical purposes, and so that people can see how this particular title fit in to the rest of the series.   Pro  cyon  04:43, 18 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Alright that's all I really know about Harvest Moon Online, because I really don't know that much about japan games but that's all I found about the game. And whoever did the Category:Harvest Moon great job I like it like that seems really organized to me at least.


 * Rod, I revised Harvest Moon to be by year. You can see some minor issues at the end of the 2000s that could use some cleanup (like the trailing dot). It was an incomplete revision. Also, Category:Harvest Moon hasn't had anything done to it since 2009 and is really lacking (it doesn't even have a series template on it). The list at the very bottom is the automatically alphabetized list that results from putting the category on each main page. -- 06:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I moved Harvest Moon: Frantic Farming to the 2000s, because everyone is saying it's a sequel to Harvest Moon: Island of Happiness. Also added Rune Factory 4 to the Spin-offs as well. - RodKimble (talk) 08:55, 25 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I moved the Rune Factory games to their own series; but they are a sub-series of Harvest Moon so you will see that in the Harvest Moon series template. -- 16:48, 26 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh yes definitely agree with that one there, saw it in harvest moon category it is looking good - RodKimble (talk) 06:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Strife
There doesn't seem to be any content here on Strife: Quest for the Sigil (Rogue Software, 1996). However, as the link indicates, there is ample information on the Doom Wiki, and there would be no legal problem with copying this here as (1) Wikias operate on the CC-BY-SA license, so as long as they are acknowledged they would have no problem with this; and (2) I wrote the walkthrough pages (mostly from scratch) and created all the maps, so I wouldn't need to obtain permission to copy those.

However, I'm wondering if there would be any ethical/social problem with respect to the culture of this wiki; some wikis have a problem with copying (even with editing of the copy), others don't, so I've decided to float the idea here before taking any action. — RobertATfm (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * We are completely cool with it, and actively encourage it. If you are interested in helping to bring that content over, we would be more than happy to have it.  Thank you very much for checking with us.   Pro  cyon  18:19, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * You may add the source to this list: Content import. Remember to add a link back to the source whenever you are adding info or images you copied. -- 22:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * If copying text from another wiki, and not all the contributions are yours, you need to either attribute the previous authors (or put a link to the original page/history) in the edit history of wherever the text is copied to. I would rather not encourage copying data from another wiki, but as long as attribution is preserved, there's no issue. All uploaded images here are assumed to be under fair use, unless explicitly tagged with something like GFDL. -- Prod (talk) 02:38, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Pharaoh/Walkthrough table issue
I don't know where to put this, but I've placed it here for a quicker response. :)

I checked on the wiki page just to see if it had been vandalised or the links changed at any point, but it appears that due to the left panel and the narrower layout, that the video links are lengthening the table and make the layout messy. Is there any way to fix this or is the wiki simply using a fluid layout so that the issue doesn't materialise on larger resolutions? --Super Sajuuk Talk Page 11:41, 12 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Please ignore this message, I've tinkered about with the page and fixed the layout problems. --Super Sajuuk Talk Page 12:01, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Footers in hub-style walkthroughs
This has come up in copying over the Strife walkthrough, and in the process editing it to conform to the style of this wiki (e.g. a "spoilerpages" tag at the start of the page, instead of a "spoiler"/"endspoiler" tag pair around the main body), because one major style difference is that this wiki uses headers and footers, whilst the Doom Wiki (where I originally saved this walkthrough) does not. This is no problem in games such as Doom where the progression is linear (except for the one level per episode where there's a secret exit), but in hub-style games there could be (and often are) multiple previous/next levels for each page. In such circumstances, is it OK to use multiple footers to cover all such combinations?

I tried looking at the Hexen walkthrough for guidance, that being the only other hub-type game I'm familiar with, but nobody has written one yet, so it looks like I'm blazing the trail here. See Strife/Town for how I've tackled this problem. — RobertATfm (talk) 08:30, 18 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No offense to you Robert, but that's... that's just terrible. Our Footer Navs provide the ability to specify custom nexts and custom prevs, but for what you need, those won't do.  I would not rely on the Footer Navs at all in this case, and write your own custom template.  You can either generalize it so that it can be used across titles, or make it specific to Strife.  But please, get rid of those Footer Navs, that's not at all how they were intended to be used.  Wherever possible, they should point to the linear progression of the Walkthrough for the player, but when that's not possible, they should just point to the next "chapter" of the guide, whether that chapter immediately follows the current page or not.  Pro  cyon  13:58, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I would suggest using a list of links to all the next locations, maybe as a table. But the Footer Nav is best to only use for the next most "obvious" (or recommended) path.  Generally we just match it to the ordering in the Table of Contents. -- Prod (talk) 14:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Because this problem is far from being unique to Strife, I think a generic template would be better than a specific one. One idea I've had is to make the prevpage and nextpage parameters conditional, so that if entered as "$hub" or some such, instead of a link to a page, the text "progress-dependent" (or equivalent) is generated. I'll try out this idea by creating a new template which is an edited version of , and testing that.


 * This problem is why (with the exception of Town and New Front Base, on the latter of which I used the standard footer although it's not totally applicable) I have so far only imported levels where the progression is strictly linear. — RobertATfm (talk) 16:01, 18 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually, it looks as if the existing template can be used the way I envisage already, by using "prevname" and "nextname" (unless those require the others to work). — RobertATfm (talk) 16:04, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The FN template is actually pretty flexible. Check out the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas guide for some more advanced usage. -- Prod (talk) 23:47, 19 May 2014 (UTC)


 * All of our walkthroughs are linear. If you haven't written Strife's to be linear yet, then you haven't expanded it enough. We often have walkthroughs that return to old areas. These are often included as sub-sections of a particular page where it is relevant. If an area is wholly explored again, sometimes we have a new page that says (revisited) or something in the title to indicate this second time returning to the location. See Chrono Trigger/Table of Contents for some visit notation. -- 16:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I disagree with the assertion that all of our walkthroughs are necessarily linear. They may be arranged linearly because that is the format which suites the site best, but the walkthroughs themselves need not necessarily be linear.  You can direct a reader to another page in the middle of one page, with the notion that they will return to that page eventually (or perhaps not).  I know I've done that in the Metal Gear walkthroughs because they are arranged by location, not by progression.   Pro  cyon  19:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I have seen some alternative walkthrough description methods that stray from the traditional "describe everything in narrative prose". I do like guides like The Legend of Zelda where the dungeons are split up and the walkthrough points out key points as the player goes through the areas. The best way to do a hub-style ToC per page would be to just make a little section like "Next areas to explore" and then use a bulleted list of the other pages to go to. The footer nav prev/next page links would be less important then, but could act with a secondary function of just pointing alphabetically to the next page, or in Strife's case, to the next map number in the sequence. -- 00:07, 23 May 2014 (UTC)