Talk:Main Page

Merge Volatiles Pages

--Bloby: Currently there are two pages referring to the same gas: Hydrogen and Volatiles. They should probably be merged. Note that these are distinct from the item Ice_(Volatiles). The merged page should probably be "Volatiles", because although the gas is referred to as H₂ in game, it is never called hydrogen, and its reaction with oxygen is clearly not that of hydrogen. Because of the name, I didn't realize the reaction didn't produce water vapor until I tested it. I suspect the inconsistency here is that the developers changed their mind about volatiles at some point and haven't fully switched over yet.

--Ipottinger (talk) 06:24, 22 October 2019 (CDT) I agree that the content should be merged into a single page. I would suggest that both the Hydrogen and Volatiles links on the Main Page remain with the Hydrogen page converted to a page-redirect to the merged Volatiles page. ("#REDIRECT [[Volatiles]]" as page's sole content) This is because, as you noted, the game in its current "early access" state is itself confused about the naming. New players may come looking for info on Hydrogen, not realizing that it and Volatiles are one-in-the-same. As you also noted, labelling Volatiles as H₂ is equally misleading. I'm hoping that, sometime in the future, Hydrogen proper is (re?)introduced and Volatiles becomes Methane CH₄ or some other hydrocarbon.

I believe this has some relation to the way the game separates items and gasses. Originally, the name of the gas was Hydrogen, but the name of the ice/ore was Volatiles. Now there is no mention of Hydrogen in the game, it's only Volatiles (even though it is labeled H₂ by some parts of the game). I will go ahead and merge the pages. --Sunspots (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2019 (CDT)

Kit and Item Nomenclature

--Ipottinger (talk) 20:24, 18 October 2019 (CDT) As the wiki stands currently, kit and item papes with actual content do not share a consistent, predictable naming scheme. The names of wiki pages often do not match the name of the item in-game. (See Gas Tank Storage vs. Canister Storage) I would like some input on what a good nomenclature for entities of the game would be, it being mindful that in the future new entities will most likely be added, and that one day the wiki might expand to cover mods that add their own unique entities.

In an earlier attempt to alleviate the problem of inconsistently named pages, I reorganized the Main Page to harmonize its links with the in-game names of items, then created page-redirects to bounce each link to the appropriate (often incorrectly named) content page. This is only a band-aid over an open wound. To heal, content must be moved from their incorrectly named pages to replace the correctly named redirect pages.

The schema I used for the Main Page links is "«ItemName»" for items not created from kits. and "Kit («KitName») «ItemName»" for those that are, with the sole exception of "«Kit () «ItemName»" used when kit and variant names were similar enough to seem redundant to include both. Similarly, any new pages I created used the same naming schema minus the "«Kit () «ItemName»" contraction. I also adopted the "Guide («ItemName»)" or "Guide («SubjectName»)" for community-authored (opposed to user-authored) guides. (See Guide (Airlock) and Guide (Farming))

I devised the above naming schema for the Main Page links with two goals in mind:

1. Make it clear, especially for new players, what items are available. (I've been banging my head against a wall trying to accomplish something only to find out later that there is an item that does that very thing)
2. Make it clear which items are derived from kits and what those kits and items are titled. (While watching an online video, I saw a nob mounted above a desk, but I can't find either in any of the fabricators)

For the Main Page reorganization, I made an assumption that I am now concerned is incorrect, that assumption being it might be possible for two different kits to produce two different variants that share the same name.

• If the assumption is true, then keeping future updates or mod's in mind, it is necessary to prevent page-name collisions by prepending the kit's name. (Example: the current pipe-based "Kit (Gas Mixer) Gas Mixer" vs. a future mod-provided "Kit (Advance Atmospherics) Gas Mixer", an Electrolyzer/Filtration sized device that will take several input gases and mix them to order consistently regardless of input temperatures or pressures)
• If the assumption is false, then every item must have a unique name and therefore will reside on a matching uniquely named wiki page, no kit-name prepending required.

It seems to me now that the game has been constructed such that every item must have a unique name. I will try to confirm this with someone in authority on Stationeers' Discord. If confirmed, I will accept responsibility for the mistake and make the necessary corrections to the Main Page and the redirects it depends upon. Thus, pages like "Kit (Atmospherics) Air Conditioner" will become simply "Air Conditioner".

--Bloby: This all seems reasonable. From my experience digging through the game files, I think that items need to have unique internal names, e.g. "StructureCompositeCladdingAngledCornerLong". However, these are mapped to names the user sees through the localization system. So the previous cladding is "Composite Cladding (Long Angled Corner)" in English, and "Revêtement Composite (Long coin incliné)" in French. So it might be possible that the user sees two items mapped to the same name. It seems like the developer is avoiding this, though.

Kit Pages

For items that are produced as a kit, there are links both for the kit and the resulting item. In many cases, only one of these links points towards an existing page. I propose that we merge pages for items that are produced by the same kit, as is currently done in Kit (Lights), and use page redirects for the sub items, as in Kit (Lights) LED. Edit: I've done this for the manufacturing and atmospherics sections. If no one objects or reverts those, I'll continue to the other sections later.

Secondarily, on this main page, I think we should only mention "Kit" if there is more than one item related to that kit. E.g., "Kit () Fabricator" could be simplified to "Fabricator", but lights would keep their kit notation: "Kit (Lights) Diode Slide" and "Kit (Lights) LED".

Are there any objections to this?

--Ipottinger (talk) 22:28, 15 October 2019 (CDT) :: I was the one who separated them out, with kits that currently only produce one item denoted as "Kit() ItemName" and kits that already produce multiple items denoted as "Kit (KitName) ItemName". I think the kits and the resulting items they produce deserve separate pages. All kits share the same set of properties (stackable, stack-siZe, cost of fabrication) that are separate for the items they produce (construction steps, power requirements, data properties). The two states, kit vs. item, are distinct. I value consistency and hope to produce a template for kits that will provide a predictable format for their shared information. Similarly, I'm studying the collection of items to see if a template can be made to cover them as well. See: Kit (Door) vs. Composite Door and Blast Door. I've been a bit busy but I do intend to get that done. Can I ask for a bit of time, patience and maybe some help?

--Bloby (Edited): I see what you mean about the different properties, and agree that it needs to be clear that the kits and their constructs are different. That said, I'm not sure that the best way to achieve that is to have separate pages for them: this would result in more than 100 new pages often containing only a few sentences of information. Your point that we should be consistent across items is well taken, and so maybe the best way to deal with this is to give each item one page. The infobox for the kit (the actual item) could be put at the top of the page, with the constructs as subsections (and separate infoboxes) below. Otherwise you're putting the constructs (not an item) on even footing with the kit (an item). The Atmospherics page is a good example of this. The exact templating scheme could be adjusted to reflect this; for example, it might be worth having differently styled boxes for items vs constructs. Does this sound reasonable?

--Ipottinger (talk) 19:29, 16 October 2019 (CDT) The Atmospherics page is a good example of what I would like to avoid. It is a huge conglomeration of different sets of information. New users, the people most likely to come to the wiki, must weed through a long page to find the information specific to the item of their interested. It would be far more helpful (and less intimidating) if they were greeted with a shorter page concentrated with the information on one specific kit or item. I don't see a problem with kits and items being on the same level and having their own pages. Both are entities in the game. A kit can be manipulated in the game just as much as any item. Any distinction seems meaningless. Webpages are free and there is no shortage of them. Why must "conserving" pages be a goal? It is my opinion that the Atmospherics page would be better served as four separate pages: Kit (Atmospherics) | Air Conditioner | Electrolyzer | Filtration. While I will advocate my point of view, I realize I am in no position to make dictates. I am eager to hear your points and counterpoints. I will listen.

As an example of my vision, please examine what I've done with Guide (Airlock) and all its associated pages, including Guide (Airlock) Atmosphere to Atmosphere, Guide (Airlock) Atmosphere to Vacuum, Kit (Airlock), Kit (Airlock) Airlock, Circuitboard (Airlock) and Circuitboard (Advanced Airlock). I tried to breakdown a complicated system into discrete parts of different functions and link them all together with contextual links and a comprehensive "See Also" section. You can examine the histories of the pages to see how the work progressed.

I have some time on my hands. Give me the day to try my hand on that monolithic Atmospherics page. You can then judge if the resulting collection of pages is or is not a better experience, especially for newer players.

--Ipottinger (talk) 05:56, 17 October 2019 (CDT) Okay, The original Atmospherics page remains, but I have created new pages for Kit (Atmospherics) | Air Conditioner | Electrolyzer | Filtration, all linked from the main page. I will finish the Guide (Air Conditioner), Guide (Electrolyzer), and Guide (Filtration) later.

--Bloby: Okay, I see better what you're wanting to do with the atmospherics. At this point I think they're probably both fine, so we may as well go with your preference for splitting the page. I see a couple of related issues that we might want to consider as well. The biggest two issues are:

1. Single construct kits. Are we going to split up pages like Autolathe as well then? It seems like this would be most consistent, but less obviously necessary.
2. Minor variants:
   • Stairs actually have three constructs: no railing, right side railing, and left side railing. Aside from their collision meshes, there are no mechanical differences. I don't really think these deserve four total pages, even assuming that kits like Atmospherics are split up.
   • Cladding has 13 constructs of varying shapes. Some of them have a 2x1x1 shape, and therefore take two Kit(Cladding) to construct. Again, I think they should be on one page.
   • Floor grating is basically the same story as stairs, with four variants.
   • Lights use different shapes, but their power consumption varies. I'm not really sure about this one.

Anyway, let me know what you think. I appreciate and share your desire to talk it through.

--Ipottinger (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2019 (CDT) I agree with you on all points above.

1. Single construct kits:
   • We should split up pages like Kit (Autolathe) as well. It will be most consistent, It will be what anyone who has browsed the wiki for a length of time will come to expect and it will set a clear president for future kits and items added to the game. Plus, there is no guarantee that future updates (or mods) won't add addition variants to these kits.
2. Minor variants:
   • Kits that produce multiple variants that are only trivially different from one another do not require individual pages for those varients. A simple table of characteristics should be enough to guide a player to the appropriate variant.
   • I agree that Kit (Lights) is a difficult one. Though Wall Light, Wall Light (Long), Wall Light (Long Angled) and Wall Light (Long Wide) are all essentially the same, albeit in size and shape, they are substantially distinct in form and function from Diode Slide and Wall Light (Battery). Even LED colorization is different enough from other Lights variant to cause confusion for a new player. Therefore, I think it would be wise to give Lights variants three separate pages. One for the common lights, another for the battery variant, and a third for LED.

--Bloby: Okay excellent, then that's taken care of.

I strongly disagree with these excessively long names! In every case where an individual item or structure is warranted it's own article, the article name should be identical to the English translation of the name. In the case of multiple things with the same name, any clarification should be following the name, not in some obscure naming scheme. I don't care so much about names of guides. We don't need atomic articles for every single item or structure in the game. Note that there are two major types of "things" in the game - items and structures (also reagents, gasses, dynamic objects, etc). An item that is a kit is generally used to place a structure. I don't like the idea of having an article for the kit item alone, and forcing the user to jump through hoops to find the actual information about the structure.

p.s. please follow general wiki convention of signing the end of your message --Sunspots (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2019 (CDT)

IC Scripts

(The following comment was removed from the Main_Page HTML and placed here for greater visibility)
Due to all the IC Scripts on the workshop have there own guides on how to use them, I will not link them here for now due to how many there is, could do a top 10 of them and place them here.

Discord Link

Hey guys, can you create a permanent discord link? The current one expired. PostRobcore (talk) 19:51, 21 December 2017 (CST)

Ideas/ suggestions for a standardized Logic Setup.

Hello guys!

I have made a system for distribute Logic Setups. This way we can have a "Standard" system for each and every Logic Setup added to the Wiki. It is nothing fancy or sensational. It just takes every Logic Unit in to a format it is uniform.

I made this in Evernote, as I use this a lot for many things.

My way might not be what everyone want. But might be a way to get every new guide or tutorial in sync with what is needed for every level the players are at in their experience with the game.

Another thing, is there a forum we talk about this Wiki for Stationeers? Or is it just this talk thing we share ideas for the site?

Here is an example: (Tried to edit to Wiki setup, but I'm on phone. And new to using the Wiki. So this look much better in my notes than in here. At least for now.)

Material List

Logic Memory

• 3x Logic Memory Unit

Logic I/O

• 1x Logic Reader Unit

Logic Processor

• 2x Logic Math Unit

Logic Processor

• 1x Logic Min/Max Unit

Logic I/O

• Batch Writer Unit

Sensor

• 1x Solar Sensor

Power Control/Storage

• 1x Area Power Control (APC)

Solar Panels

• 3x Solar Panels

Miscellaneous

• "x" Amount of Standard Cable
• "x" Amount of Heavy Cable

Settings

Logic Memory 1 of 3 (Settings):

• Label Name: Memory 15
• Memory Set: 15

Logic Memory 2 of 3 (Settings):

• Label Name: Memory 1.5
• Memory Set: 1.5

Logic Memory 3 of 3 (Settings):

• Label Name: Memory 100
• Memory Set: 100

Logic Reader 1 of 1 (Settings):

• Label Name: Logic Reader 1
• In: Daylight Sensor
• Var: Solar Angle

Math Unit 1 of 2 (Settings):

• Label Name: Math Unit 1
• Input 1: Result > Logic Reader 1
• Input 2: Memory 15
• Out (Operation Selector): Subtract

Math Unit 2 of 2 (Settings):

• Label Name: Math Unit 2
• Input 1: Result > Math Unit 1
• Input 2: Memory 1.5
• Out (Operation Selector): Divide

Min/Max Unit 1 of 1 (Settings):

• Label Name: Min-Max 1
• Input 1: Result > Math Unit 2
• Input 2: Memory 100
• OPR (Less/Greater Selector): Less

Batch Writer 1 of 1 (Settings):

• Label Name: Batch Writer 1
• Input 1: Result > Min-Max 1
• Out Var: Vertical
• Out Type: Solar Panels

How to layout stationpedia excerpts

Currently, most articles with stationpedia quotes put the quote after the description section. An alternative to this is to put it in the top section. I personally think we should migrate all articles to this variant because I think it makes the structure look better.

An example is Corn Soup compared to Autolathe.

Emilgardis (talk) 07:58, 10 July 2024 (CDT)