| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | ==Proposal for section organization== | | ==Proposal for section organization== |
| − | I put up an initial proposal for organization of sections and order of content, <s>the main thing that contradicts to the current state is: '''Summary/introduction before infoboxes'''. This is the default on Wikipedia and other wikis, it makes sense. On desktop, the order of infoboxes/summary won't matter, but on mobile devices it does. A short summary says much more about a topic to a new user than an infobox.</s> | + | I put up an initial proposal for organization of sections and order of content, the main thing that contradicts to the current state is: '''Summary/introduction before infoboxes'''. This is the default on Wikipedia and other wikis, it makes sense. On desktop, the order of infoboxes/summary won't matter, but on mobile devices it does. A short summary says much more about a topic to a new user than an infobox. |
| | -- [[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:02, 1 July 2018 (CDT) | | -- [[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:02, 1 July 2018 (CDT) |
| | | | |
| | I'll have to correct myself here actually. Wikipedia will always put infoboxes first, but as they serve a different version of the page to mobile, they will hoist the first paragraph above the infobox. This isn't something we can implement, so we might just have to live with infoboxes being the first element. --[[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:25, 1 July 2018 (CDT) | | I'll have to correct myself here actually. Wikipedia will always put infoboxes first, but as they serve a different version of the page to mobile, they will hoist the first paragraph above the infobox. This isn't something we can implement, so we might just have to live with infoboxes being the first element. --[[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:25, 1 July 2018 (CDT) |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Article joining/splitting==
| |
| − | To which extent should we merge closely related item articles ([[Filter]] and [[Cartridge]] are good current examples imo), and/or should we split up other items/structures ([[Atmospherics]] is a good candidate, where one kit makes multiple structures)? -- [[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:38, 4 July 2018 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Article names==
| |
| − | Hopefully an easier decision to make than the one above: When we have 1:1 in-game item to article representation, we need to be more consistent in naming. Should we always use the name from the English translation in the game? One notable instance is ingots (in-game, the naming scheme is [[Ingot (Iron)]], we actually have them as [[Iron Ingot]]). I also believe we have a mix of "Kit(Thing)" and "Thing" articles which don't necessarily represent the current in-game names. The important part is to aim for consistency.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Would it be worth it to comb through and rename them all over the wiki? -- [[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:38, 4 July 2018 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : +1 to keeping a 1:1 consistency with in-game names. We can always create other 1:1-named articles for other languages as well and create a navbox or links for moving between them. Not sure what MediaWiki offers out of the box for multi-language support. [[User:Eearslya|Eearslya]] ([[User talk:Eearslya|talk]]) 17:16, 19 July 2018 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == Ore and Ingot Naming ==
| |
| − | There is a need for a naming schema for ingots and ores, as well as common redirects.
| |
| − | There's two main options:
| |
| − | <div class="row"><div class="large-6 columns">
| |
| − | '''Following In-game English translation'''
| |
| − | * Ore: [[Ore (Iron)]]
| |
| − | * Ingot: [[Ingot (Iron)]]
| |
| − | </div><div class="large-6 columns">
| |
| − | '''Following current scheme'''
| |
| − | * Ore: [[Iron Ore]]
| |
| − | * Ingot: [[Iron Ingot]]
| |
| − | </div></div>
| |
| − | I'd really prefer following the in-game names for most things (read or join the discussions above) --[[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 17:01, 19 July 2018 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : Again, completely agree with using 1:1 naming conventions for items. [[User:Eearslya|Eearslya]] ([[User talk:Eearslya|talk]]) 17:16, 19 July 2018 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === Redirects ===
| |
| − | Then there's the question of where [[Iron]] should redirect - to the ore page, or the ingot page?
| |
| − | --[[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 17:01, 19 July 2018 (CDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : Something ambiguous like <code>Iron</code> should probably just have a disambiguation page. [[User:Eearslya|Eearslya]] ([[User talk:Eearslya|talk]]) 17:16, 19 July 2018 (CDT)
| |
