StrategyWiki talk:Community Portal

This talk page is for discussion of general community issues. To start a new thread, insert a new subheading above the rest. Resolved threads removed one day thereafter. You can find them in the history.

Console Naming Convention

Looking at the StrategyWiki:Categories page, it looks to me like we're lacking a clear naming policy for consoles. My concern is that the systems will not have consistent names; some systems will have the name of the company that developed it prefixed (for example, Sony PlayStation) and some will not (for example, simply PlayStation). Unfortunately this is a somewhat confusing issue because so many people are used to saying the full, developer-prefixed name of the system.

I personally think that we should avoid prefixing the company name wherever possible. There are some systems for which it is obviously appropriate, like on many Nintendo Systems ("Nintendo Entertainment System", "Super Nintendo Entertainment System", "Nintendo 64"), but if the name is recognizable enough without the company name, we should drop it, leaving for example names like "Genesis" or "PlayStation 3".

Please let me know what you think. --Doozer 17:06, 10 January 2006 (PST)

Art/Screenshot of the Week

Feel free to suggest. Upload all of your candidates and post them on the talk page for Main_Page. --Echelon 02:47, 8 January 2006 (PST)

Question

I was noticing that there's no link to talk at the top of the page or an "+" for adding new sections. Are they in the other, wikipedia styles? or are they in a part of the preferences I havent found yet? It would be great if they were there by default -JinFX 18:27, 7 January 2006 (PST)

The talk page is on the right in the Toolbox under 'Discussion'. I'm not sure about the '+' though. Jackhynes 18:30, 7 January 2006 (PST)

The problem is that the Community Issues is not under the Talk namespace, so you won't see the '+'s , you wont seem them unless you login either too.

O, I forgot the + is only in the talk pages.--JinFX 01:42, 8 January 2006 (PST)

Registered users only

After having a few vandals deface articles already, I've configured the software to only allow registered users to edit pages. Does anyone see any problems in this? --Echelon 18:04, 6 January 2006 (PST)

• Actually, I much prefer this prerequisite. I often forget to login, and the system serves as a much-needed reminder. ^_^ Spiritsnare Flux 07:10, 9 January 2006 (PST)

Glitched pages?

After trying to add the WIP template to Yoshi Touch & Go, I realized it took me to the blank page Yoshi Touch which is not the page I want to see... --Sakurina 17:03, 27 December 2005 (PST)

It's Dreamhost's fault--they have mod_security enabled. I'll try to take it off. --Echelon 20:23, 27 December 2005 (PST)

Can't fix. PHP as CGI doesn't get the PATH_INFO array, and I can't hack apache to use MediaWiki's fix. [1] We'll have to do without them for now. Bummer. --Echelon 20:54, 27 December 2005 (PST)

Do you mean the pathinfo() function or the $_ENV['PATH_INFO'] environment variable? pathinfo() takes an argument and does return an array but the environment variable should not be an array. I am running PHP as CGI on Dreamhost and I am able to access the PATH_INFO env variable correctly. There is some more info here [2] about this issue as well - does that help at all? --Midblue 07:27, 6 January 2006 (PST)

Now I can't seem to be able to access Yoshi Touch & Go at all... it takes me to Yoshi Touch. I'm kind of hoping it isn't gone... I did type all that stuff out... and now the issue is cleared up, awesome. --Hack 23:35, 27 December 2005 (PST)

• hack, It isn't gone. I have the source from the page. --Sakurina 19:52, 29 December 2005 (PST)

Styling conventions?

I'm trying to make a couple pages (mainly the front page and community portal) more readable, but shouldn't the guides have some sort of styling/readability standard to respect? --Sakurina 17:03, 27 December 2005 (PST)

• You know, perhaps we need to make a page discussing StrategyWiki readability standards or something. Spiritsnare 19:50, 2 January 2006 (PST)
  • Well, there seems to be 2 different styles so far. The 'book' style that is more of a walkthrough (see Zelda: Majora's Mask) , and the 'FAQ' style that is just a single page with information thrown onto it (see Mario Kart DS). Surely both formats can be improved upon, but for now the styles seem fine. --Hack 12:14, 3 January 2006 (PST)
    • It does seem that there are two styles of page. Obviously not all games will require the "book format", though I really like that format the best. "faq" format is best suited for racing games, puzzle games, and the like. Conventions for both must be established, though right now I am concerned most with the "book format" conventions (and that is what I am working on most). --Echelon 20:41, 5 January 2006 (PST)
      • I don't really like the "book format" layout; it seems a little unweildy, somehow. Maybe the OoT FAQ just hasn't been totally implemented "right" yet, but the way it's split up doesn't make much sense to me. If you're going to go as far as to start breaking the thing up, the main walkthrough should be split up as well, to allow direct access to specific dungeons/areas - and I'd have the ToC on the "front" page. I'd have taken out the ASCII art, too - some of it looks passable, but other bits aren't lining up right and it looks pretty bad, IMO. --Aniki21 11:58, 6 January 2006 (GMT)
        • What you saw was something that was copied directly from GameFAQs without permission--we have since removed it. We'll be doing exactly as you say, creating a page for each area or dungeon. As of yet, we have yet to complete the Zelda article, but it will serve as a future reference point. --Echelon 18:55, 6 January 2006 (PST)
  • As for a page discussing standards, we can make one once they're established. --Echelon 20:41, 5 January 2006 (PST)
    • StrategyWiki:Standardization -- it's not much, but we can work on it. --Echelon 02:29, 10 January 2006 (PST)

Preventing *vandals* from posting spoilers

This will no doubt be important in the future, but how will we prevent someone from editing any page and posting spoilers in them? Should we lock guides when they're completed? I wish there were a way to mark pages as protected yet still allow edits, then we could manually approve edits made to guides that are already complete. --Echelon 21:26, 5 January 2006 (PST)

• I suppose preventing spoilers will be quite difficult without some type of moderation. Maybe we should stick with a 'trust' policy for now, hoping that people won't throw spoilers in any place. If it gets out of hand then we can start protecting specific/completed guides, like how Wikipedia takes protective action when vandalism occurs. --Hack 02:53, 6 January 2006 (PST)

• What about a dedicated page for hints? Much like the way Universal Hint System is layed out, you only get the amount of hints you need. But this may get out of hand too. --RandomSkratch 09:44, 6 January 2006 (PST)
  • My concern with that model is that someone could still come along and edit any hint page with "Darth Vadar is Luke's Daddy!!!11" etc. I personally hate spoilers, and I would certainly hope that no one ever has a ruined experience with a game because of our wiki. Anyway, I'm still not certain quite how to deal with this. --Echelon 12:24, 6 January 2006 (PST)
    • Gee, thanks for spoiling it for me! ;) --nonesuch
      • For starters, maybe a ban on the first blatant offense? (Blatant as in just editing a post to insert spoiler(s) in.) --Spiritsnare Flux 07:21, 9 January 2006 (PST)
        • The first time I see blatant vandalism, I will probably issue a temp editing ban and leave a note on the user's talk page about it. --Doozer 10:53, 9 January 2006 (PST)

• If you give forewarning about the Spoilers, and go "Heyo, there are spoilers here" exactly how would it be bad to have spoilers? Wouldn't it be the fault of the illiterate son of a gun who didn't see the mighty SPOILER ALERT? --ArlanKels
  • No, my fear is that vandals would deliberately edit spoilers to make them noticable on the main page or introduction for the guides. This would obviously be a bad thing. --Echelon 18:01, 6 January 2006 (PST)
    • Vandalism is going to be impossible to completely avoid, but hopefully people will begin watching the recent edits for changes. Right now it shouldn't be too hard to catch vandals and deal with them, since there aren't many pages yet. As the user base grows, however, users are going to have to start policing themselves. --Doozer 21:32, 6 January 2006 (PST)

• What about codes for games (all weapons, full health, etc)? Are these considered spoilers / unfitting for this type of wiki? --RandomSkratch 13:08, 7 January 2006 (PST)
  • Codes are not really spoilers but should be placed in their own section of each guide. --Doozer 17:22, 7 January 2006 (PST)

• Remember, there will be more "good" editors then "bad" ones, and because anonymous editing is not allowed on StWi, very few will jump through hoops to be a minor nuisance.

So, like Wikipedia, StWi should have a spoiler template that prints out the very simple "[b]Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.[b]" when inserted into an article, so readers will be forewarned. If a vandal comes along and changes it, those watching the page can come back, fix it, and suspend/ban the vandal. For more information on how wikipedia does this, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spoiler_warning --Tapo 16:24, 7 January 2006 (EST)

• I've already created a {{Spoilers}} template but it's probably a little too garish for normal use. I think I'll tone it down a bit. --Doozer 17:22, 7 January 2006 (PST)

Wikibooks

As I have just been doing, I suggest people go onto http://en.wikibooks.org, look around for strategy guides, and put them on strategywiki. They're license and format compatible, but they're aren't a lot of them. Ones that do exist need work.

As a sidenote, the Total Annihilation wikibooks article would make a very good "book format" guide on Strategywiki. Could someone convert that? I gotta get back to work. :P --Tapo 10:32, 6 January 2006 (EST)

If you want to see all the Wikibooks that could be used the category is here there may also be some more wiki format walkthroughs that we can use at Wikicities.com. Jackhynes 08:30, 6 January 2006 (PST)

On a completely off-topic note, Wikibooks has been considering moving all game-related books elsewhere. This is the subject of a heated debate at Wikibooks [3]. --Echelon 19:00, 6 January 2006 (PST)

Talk

a) You need to add some sort of a menu to find games.
b) Why am I able to edit this?

a) I agree - very difficult for new users to find or add any other games other than those listed under collaborations.

b)This is a wiki and therefore can be edited by anyone. This page is a discussion page for, I'm guessing, the developement of this website. To see a fully functioning wiki see http://en.wikipedia.org . Jackhynes 08:08, 6 January 2006 (PST)

c) This is a great idea. However, with only one page per game, how are we going to deal with multiformat games? I know that we could say 'press the action' button instead of 'press A', but it would probably deter some users. There's a chance to make a really incredible Wiki here, we just need to lay some ground rules before it takes off. Thanks, I'll register soon.

I'm also not sure how this will be tackled. There may be some kind of template augmentation - if anyone has the skills? Jackhynes 08:20, 6 January 2006 (PST)

Why not make the first page people click to a disambiguation page, where it just says click here for the PS2 version, here for the Xbox version, and etc? --Slacker 08:44, 6 January 2006 (PST)

• Thanks everyone for the suggestions. Considering that we've just started, there are still lots of different aspects to work out. With everyone's help, we should be able to figure this all out.

Games list/directory. As a fix for now, to find games, you can check the Works in Progress page. Any games that include the WIP template will be displayed there. Sooner or later we'll get to creating a more in-depth category system, maybe to include platforms, etc.

Multiformat games. That is going to be somewhat difficult. Besides throwing them into specific categories, I suppose everyone can just be told to add something to their title. Maybe for example: Resident Evil 4 (GCN). Or something like that. A disambiguation page is good as well. --Hack 09:48, 6 January 2006 (PST)

Why don't you just create category sections, so that for example Resident Evil 4 would be [Category : Action-Adventure, Horror, Playstation 2, Gamecube]? You could then just make links on the main page to say [search by system] or [search by genre], which would just lead to a disambiguation page that collects specific categories. --Mr Saeba 16:30, 6 January 2006 (PST)

Site Navigation

This site looks like a good idea! However, as a user visiting the main page, there's no way at all to get to guides apart from a search. Tagging guides with a platform category and linking to those from the main page would help. -- Mithent 09:25, 6 January 2006 (PST)

• Yeah this is an excellent point. I came here looking for a list of games but was unable to find it. Categories like Genre and System would be a plus. Finally with regards to the search feature, any way of making a firefox search plugin for this site? --RandomSkratch 09:48, 6 January 2006 (PST)
  • Firefox plugin? Maybe in the future. --Echelon 21:48, 6 January 2006 (PST)

• Sorry Echelon, I don't know if I was completely understood. In Firefox, at the top of the screen on the right hand side, there is a little dropdown for quick searches on specific sites. Google, dictionary, wikipedia, etc. I was inquiring about one for this site. --RandomSkratch 13:02, 7 January 2006 (PST)

• Done. The categories are now listed on the main page. --Echelon 21:48, 6 January 2006 (PST)

Your best bet to make this a little more navigable is to add prominent links to the categories page on the Main_Page.

Also, you should create categories for the various platforms and assign the articles to the proper system. You could then include those links on the main page (click here for Xbox, here for PS2, etc) instead.

--Slacker 08:43, 6 January 2006 (PST)

The problem with this is that the games are mostly exactly the same apart from the button control. If there was a PS2 version and an Xbox version of the same game neither article would get the full attention it should have. If there was one version then all efforts would be put into making it the best it could be. If there were 5 different platforms for the game and a user found that he knew a certain aspect of the game then it would only be placed in his platform of choice and the other platforms would suffer because of it? Although I cannot think of an easy solution. Jackhynes 09:18, 6 January 2006 (PST)

Most games are the same, across different platforms, aside from control schemes. Which I why I think everything should just stick to a single guide, and to include sections that go over differences (controls, special features, etc.). --Hack 09:48, 6 January 2006 (PST)

I agree with that. It will make for a better overall article. Jackhynes 11:24, 6 January 2006 (PST)

That's what we'll do then. --Echelon 17:57, 6 January 2006 (PST)

Yes but there are some games that have the same name but are completely different. Even sometimes the same platform might have a game with the same name as a different game on that platform (I'm thinking PC here) but it's a totally different game. So it would be best if there was a guideline on how to handle those situations.

In that situation, we'll do a disambiguation. A handheld Spiderman game is different than a console one, so we'll specify the name of the platform in the article title if it warrents it. --Echelon 17:57, 6 January 2006 (PST)

New Guide?

Hi, I'm fairly new to the Wiki system. I've been using Wikipedia as a resource for many years, however have never been involved in editting. I'd love to contribute to this project, however I don't know how to add a new game-guide. (Seems like I can only edit existing ones.)

• To create a new guide, you can do it 2 ways:
  • 1) Edit an existing page, and create/follow a link to a non-existant page. For example, I could create a link to Mario Kart Double Dash on the Mario Kart DS page (remember there is no MKDD page). I can then click that MKDD link, and it will take me to a blank page where I can edit it and create the page.
  • 2) Type the page into the address bar. Let's say I want to create a page for Shadow Hearts. I would simply type this in to the address bar: http://strategywiki.net/wiki/Shadow_Hearts -- that would bring me to a blank page where I can edit it. Note: Replace Shadow_Hearts with the name of the game/article you want to create. An underscore _ is basically a space, so the Shadow_Hearts URL would display the article title as Shadow Hearts on my newly created article.

After editing a blank page, it is automatically created. --Hack 09:15, 7 January 2006 (PST)

Okay, thanks for that. And as an extra note, will there be an IRC chat or forum so that we can communicate other than this? I am very familiar with forum software, especially phpBB, and if you don't want it hosted here taking up the bandwidth, I can host it.

• There is an IRC channel (info on the homepage). As for a forum... well thats what Talks are for. Although some type of forum might be later needed. --Hack 10:03, 7 January 2006 (PST)

Series Guide?

Should there be guides for game series (Zelda, Final Fantasy, Warcraft...)?

I think so. It remains to be seen how we'll accomplish this, however. I'll be working on Ocarina of Time first, followed by Majora's Mask. At that time I'll find a way to link the Zelda games together. --Echelon 13:25, 7 January 2006 (PST)

Perhaps we should think of incorporating Wikipedia entries for the game series in some fashion? Either a link or the actual article might work. StrandOfLight 01:37, 8 January 2006 (PST)

While we're not an informational database on games (there's already a wiki just for that, and there's also wikipedia), we can incorporate any GFDL materials. I would suggest that we use what we can while still maintaining a mostly-strategy guides policy. Some background information can be nice, but let's not import purely informational articles about the history of, say, Mario Bros. At least that's my two cents. Echelon 02:10, 8 January 2006 (PST)

On that note, I recommend an "external links" section for single-page guides or "More information" page that includes "external links" for games in the book format.

Ooo I like colons. Anywho, check out Final Fantasy or Zelda. Are those what you're talking about? You could always include extra pages relating to what links them all together, etc. -- ArlanKels

Console Designation in Title?

Should there be a standard for including console names in game titles? There are often differences between the each console's edition, so perhaps we should create a Disambiguation page for each multiple-console title? Perhaps the title listing in every index page can link to the disambiguation, with "Title Name (Console)" for the actual item. If the differences are extremely minor, then perhaps a single guide page, and a separate "Differences" section or page. Thoughts? --StrandOfLight 01:55, 8 January 2006 (PST)

• Yeah, this is most definitely what we shall be doing. If the differences are minor, there will only be an addition of a "versions" page. If the games are entirely different, however, they will be in the wikipedia-style disambiguation. Good to state it for the record. We should put this in our policy somewhere. --Echelon 02:05, 8 January 2006 (PST)
• Aside from game controls, special moves (fighting games), and cheat codes; do any games actually exist where the plot is different from system to system?--RandomSkratch 14:28, 8 January 2006 (PST)
  • Sometimes a title can be deceiving. Note many movie- and TV-licensed games appear on many consoles including handhelds. King Kong is one example. The Game Boy Advance version of that is most certainly different from the Xbox 360 version. We should have one guide for each version of the game that is distinct enough from the other guides to need completely new information. However, there are times when a game is mostly the same but not quite. Silent Hill 2 is one example; when it came out for the Xbox it had some additional content, if I remember correctly. That should be included in the "Silent Hill 2" guide but the fact that a section only applies to one version should be noted. --Doozer 20:47, 8 January 2006 (PST)
• Should we implement this right away then, in terms of renaming all of the existing guides? Also, should we start recording this sort of policy in StrategyWiki policy pages? --StrandOfLight 19:35, 9 January 2006 (PST)
  • I just started StrategyWiki:Standardization. I won't be able to edit it until tomorrow afternoon, but by all means feel free to jump in. We need some standards in place. --Echelon 02:30, 10 January 2006 (PST)

Standards & Conventions

I think it's better to start addressing the issue of standards and conventions sooner rather than later. So, some of my initial suggestions:
We should try to model information on Controls after a game's instruction booklet. Buttons should be in bold, and each function (if there is more than one) should be separated by a semicolon (;), with any side-notes about the control below and bulleted. See the Ocarina of Time page for a good example.
Pictures should be relevant, important, and kept to a minimum. On the SSB.M page for example, the pictures of Mario, and Bowser crushing Kirby seem unnecessary to me, and they both have poor, uninformative captions. We should concentrate on informative pictures like maps first, I think.
Objectivity needs to be kept in the guides while opinions like "Ness is the best character known to date" need to be kept out.
Spelling and grammar need to be checked by everyone before they edit something, at least by just copying the text into MS Word and looking for any misspellings (that's what I do). Please also check capitalization of things like "Gold Skulltula."
Although the strategy for the beginning of Ocarina of Time is more interesting to read than a simple "go here, do that", I think we should consider whether our primary purpose is to entertain, or provide useful information. Text like "but Link knows deep inside that this was not to be the happy day his friends would expect it to be" is unneeded and, even worse, is completely made up. No one knows what Link thinks, so don't write about it.
-- Ashandarei 16:37, 8 January 2006 (PST)

Everything you bring up is very, very timely and couldn't have been better stated. The last statement was especially important, as that was more or less my fault. I'll get to work and address these issues, especially the editing standards which will need to be delt with ASAP. --Echelon 01:53, 9 January 2006 (PST)

• • On that first note: maybe we should develop an blank image of a controller have people use that template to make a image for Controls...because informative visuals are good. ;) --Spiritsnare Flux 07:16, 9 January 2006 (PST)
    • I would really like it if we did that. But we've got to find some good diagrams. --Echelon 11:44, 9 January 2006 (PST)
      • Perhaps we should use high quality scans of the controller diagrams in the manuals. A high-res scan, then clean it up in Photoshop/GIMP, and use it as a standard on all "Controls" pages. I think it would also fly under fair use laws. --StrandOfLight 19:48, 9 January 2006 (PST)
        • That would be great!! I can't get them myself, but three cheers to someone who does! What a teriffic way to do it. --Echelon 01:59, 10 January 2006 (PST)

Developer Pages?

Do we want pages for developers/publishers and the like? Right now I don't think there are any, but I think it would be a necessary addition. --Poody

• I think that's a great idea. I've been thinking of getting started on those but hadn't gotten around to it yet. If you want to begin making pages for publishers/studios then by all means please do! --Doozer 23:28, 8 January 2006 (PST)

Services category

Alright. So this new 'Services' category. I find it simply redundant. Having categories to name specific services is just going a little overboard. I mean, for example, Xbox 360 games from the Arcade service can only be played on the Xbox 360, so we don't need to add another category that just reminds us of that fact. Having the game guide categorized to the Xbox 360 platform is more than enough. While you can certainly mention on the game page that its available from a specific service(s), there is no need to further categorize them by the service(s). Any thoughts? --Hack 12:53, 9 January 2006 (PST)

• I wholeheartedly agree with you. Not only are we adding too many categories--we're not giving them much thought. I think any new set of categories should be discussed by the comminity to judge their effectiveness. Maybe one day we will implement something like this. For now, however, I do not think it will happen. --Echelon 12:56, 9 January 2006 (PST)
• I think it should be limited to gamesystems only and nog to the software on the system that alawys something to be played. An xbox 360 live arcade game is still an Xbox 360 game.
  • Services, Number of Players, and Resolution have been removed. We do not need to further complicate the categorization of game guides. Please do not create them again. Work with the categorizes that have already been created. --Hack 20:02, 9 January 2006 (PST)