Fallout Wiki
Don't have an account?
Register
Advertisement
Register
Fallout Wiki
Nukapedia: The Fallout Wiki
45,279
pages
in: Wiki discussion (archived)

Forum:New standardisations

Sign in to edit
Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > New standardisations

Note: In my stupidity I created a poll before the preliminary discussion could take place, so let's do that discussion now.

I regularly stumble upon irregularities while editing Nukapedia, even though there are quite some policies and guidelines preventing this. However, there are quite some things that have not been covered by these, and I find that quite annoying. Therefore I'd like to create a new set of guidelines that do cover a few (minor) points of the pages. Most of these points will only make the source code of the page look better, but being a programmer/web designer I know it is very important for a page to be readable both from the front as from the back. (Also, I'm a perfectionist)

I have a list of a few points I'd like to have answered in these proposed guidelines:

  • What is should be the length of the base id and ref id, and should they be in capital letters?
  • Should the descriptions of images be ended with a period?
  • Should the names of files directly taken from the game (like this this sound file sound file) retain their original name, or should they be given a new one?
  • Should the quest stages be numbered from 1 through the end, or should they be given the amounts as found in the G.E.C.K.?
    • And do they have to be ended with a period too?
  • Should texts taken from the G.E.C.K. (like quotes) retain their original capitalisation and errors (even if they have been made by accident)?

Please excuse me of some of these points have already been covered by other guidelines.

I know some of these points don't make any difference for how the page looks, but take a look at this page. Even if you don't understand anything of it at all, you will most certainly notice that not all bits of code are the same. They do, however, have the same result. That is exactly the same as with the pages here, and different conventions used at the same time is very annoying.

~ Scribe Aurora talk 14:24, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Comments[]

From the poll page.

  • Has a space
  • Doesn't have a space

Has a space[]

Doesnt have a space[]

Ultimately making a rule on either of those is counter-productive. It makes it "harder" for people to get used to our rules, and has no effect on the article at all. If I'm having to warn people/potentially ban because they did or didn't include a space where having a space has no net effect, then all we're succeeding in doing is scaring people out of editing - we've spent a good part of the last year doing the opposite.

Things like Capitalisation and full stops I have no issues with standardising - they should be standardised.

Quest stages, as I understand it are supposed to be standardised to the GECK (F3/NV).

Agent c (talk) 14:03, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Then how about making it that the capitalisation and full stops are standardised, and the pieces only improving the back of the page are recommended? With recommended meaning that it is encouraged to do so, but you will not be punished if you don't, and if you find such a mistake, there is no shame in correcting it.
~ Scribe Aurora talk 14:36, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Because I think ultimately even at a recommendation its making a rule for nothing... I don't see the value in it... I think the pages are equally readable either way. It then also creates a new category of "busywork" edits - people removing/adding these spaces without actually improving the page. Agent c (talk) 14:43, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Some of those are already covered by our policies, albeit indirectly, since, unless specified otherwise, we employ Wikipedia's manual of style. I'll give a rundown on each point specifically:

  • What is should be the length of the base id and ref id, and should they be in capital letters?
The length of the codes is given, so there's really not much way to variate on that. The letters should be decapitalized.
  • Should the descriptions of images be ended with a period?
They should, always.
  • Should the names of files directly taken from the game (like this sound file]) retain their original name, or should they be given a new one?
This is a good point to raise. Our policies say the file should have a descriptive name, which the internal GECK names aren't. But we should still make note of the internal name for reference, preferably on the file's summary.
  • Should the quest stages be numbered from 1 through the end, or should they be given the amounts as found in the G.E.C.K.?
Nothing specific on this AFAIK, but good sense would have it that it be numbered so as to make them easy to follow by the reader. But like above, I believe a mention of the internal numbering should be made as well.
    • And do they have to be ended with a period too?
W:MoS suggests that fullstops should only be omitted in lists where each item does not constitute a full sentence, such as each item a single object. Also, when the sentence is supposed to continue in the following item.
  • Should texts taken from the G.E.C.K. (like quotes) retain their original capitalization and errors (even if they have been made by accident)?
They should, with the {{sic}} indication on the offending words. Exceptions are in the notable quotes, which should be corrected since the intention is to convey the quote, not the text.


Limmiegirl Lildeneb Talk! ♪ 14:55, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Limmie, the Wikipedia MoS says explicitly, "Most captions are not complete sentences, but merely sentence fragments that should not end with a period. If any complete sentence occurs in a caption, all sentences and any sentence fragments in that caption should end with a period.", contrary to what you said above. --Skire (talk) 23:24, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
  • IDs: One leading zero is necessary and sufficient. Lowercase - just for the sake of consistency. Uppercasing them all will be a worthless work even for a bot.
  • Filenames: New descriptive names. No IDs required.
  • Quest stages and quotes/transcripts: As seen in the GECK, to the last character. Permaban for violators.

--Theodorico (talk) 15:48, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Even with these answers, I still have a few questions:

  • Limmiegirl, what do you mean with "The length of the codes is given" in your first solution? As far as I do understand what you mean, it is in conflict with Theodorico's solution.
  • About the numbering of quest stages, which one should I choose? Limmiegirl suggests easy numbering, while Theodorico says the GECK should be followed. Who do I have to believe?
  • And the file names: I expect at least a few conflicts, especially when there come more games. How do we solve these conflicts? I actually think we should even prevent the conflicts from happening by using the name as in the GECK, and quoting what is said in the summary of the file.

~ Scribe Aurora talk 10:10, February 17, 2013 (UTC)

For now we are just stating our points of view, aren't we? Ok, I see that I was too brief, so here goes the explanation:
  • One leading zero: I just can't see no purpose in having "00000abc" in the source code - we have {{ID}} or {{DLC ID}} to display it.
  • Quest stages: GECK's way as it may be used for setstage.
  • File names: GECK naming will just tangle everything.
    • Which one is more informative: "nvdlc01int_nvdlc01introsli_00010aed_1.ogg" or "FNVDM Intro Slide03.ogg" ? Now imagine a page with 40+ files...
    • This one File:DMending VA Finale.ogg was mixed form a dozen of source files. Do you really want me to name it after all of them?

--Theodorico (talk) 18:21, February 17, 2013 (UTC)


"Limmiegirl, what do you mean with "The length of the codes is given" in your first solution? As far as I do understand what you mean, it is in conflict with Theodorico's solution."

Theodorico and I are saying the same thing really; since the ID template will return the same code regardless of how many leading zeroes you input internally, there's actually no meaningful way to variate. EG: Inputting "1ab" will yield: 000001AB ; "000001ab" will yield: 000001AB ; "00000000000000000000000001ab" will yield: 000001AB. The number of leading zeroes is completely immaterial, the code will always be the same. The template will add missing ones, and crop excessive ones. And for that matter, so is the capitalization of the letters: "1AB" will also yield 000001AB just the same.

"About the numbering of quest stages, which one should I choose? Limmiegirl suggests easy numbering, while Theodorico says the GECK should be followed. Who do I have to believe?"

Neither of us are enacting rules here, we're just voicing our personal views. Hopefully the community will reach a consensus at the end regarding this, but so far there isn't.
“
  • File names: GECK naming will just tangle everything.
    • Which one is more informative: "nvdlc01int_nvdlc01introsli_00010aed_1.ogg" or "FNVDM Intro Slide03.ogg" ? Now imagine a page with 40+ files...
    • This one File:DMending VA Finale.ogg was mixed form a dozen of source files. Do you really want me to name it after all of them?”
This is why I feel the file summary would be a good place to note the original sourcefile(s) name(s). It would keep the name descriptive while still informing the GECK's internal name for reference.

Limmiegirl Lildeneb Talk! ♪ 01:48, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

To prevent conflicting and unpractical naming of files, I think it is necessary to specify how a file should be named. What is a 'descriptive' name? "I find 'Capital Wasteland.ogg' pretty clear!" is no good. We should, for example, say that a sound file for a notable quote should be named as "[short name] - [speaker] - [most important few words of quote]": "FO3 - Moira Brown - Keep up research(.ogg)".
~ Scribe Aurora talk 17:53, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, something like this, but we should try to cover screenshots also. --Theodorico (talk) 08:05, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Other guideline changes[]

Here I'd like to make room for other guideline change suggestions.

  • On quest pages, should the quest stage box be headed with Quest stages or Journal entries?
  • ...

Jspoel Speech Jspoel 16:31, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

How about "Quest flow"? And we really need to list both Quest stages and Quest objectives. --Theodorico (talk) 17:42, February 17, 2013 (UTC)

Capitalization[]

I'll leave the other points to others to address.

  • "Should texts taken from the G.E.C.K. (like quotes) retain their original capitalization and errors (even if they have been made by accident)?"
    • Absolutely not. This is something that has always bothered me when concerning other wikis like TES wiki, and I would personally recommend not to adopt such a spartan conformity. No one cares how the developers spelled or mis-spelled words in-game or throughout the G.E.C.K. In the situation that someone really does find themselves caring, they can go into the G.E.C.K. or game itself to find out instead of a professional wiki that should embrace proper English conventions instead of developer perceptions and/or mistakes. It already bothers me enough that we rely on the exact-wordings in the design documents for the Fallout title ' Van Buren ', as asinine as some of them are, (See Ginger Flowers for a perfect example.) and I'd rather not to see our article pages degraded in such a way any further than they already are, instead of fixing them like we should be doing. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 18:06, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
I fail to see the issue here, that's why we use the sic notation. It's not up to us to decide how someone else's words should be written.

Limmiegirl Lildeneb Talk! ♪ 20:08, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
Because using the sic gives the impression that we allow for a margin of error in our expectations and quality. Using a sic in something such as a critique or transcript is fine. But as a central port of knowledge and professionalism over the subject that we cover, we should pride ourselves on actually spelling words out right instead of acting like poor writings are okay simply because a developer or whatever did so. And yes, it is up to us. If they miss-spelled something, we have every right to correct them. If their wording is shoddy, we have every right as a wiki, of all places, to re-write their wording as long as the original intent from the developers is still clearly shown. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 20:19, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
Totally disagree. Your proposition goes against the spirit and the letter of VA:C. You are proposing to dismiss the main principle that keeps us from censoring/embellishing/distorting canonical content. By the way, here's an example: History for the Recipe: Super-Heated Knife! - the transcript was censored (Aug 12 and Feb 3), while keeping general meaning. Do you want to encourage this, on a site-wide basis? --Theodorico (talk) 13:55, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
My proposition doesn't violate the VA:C even in the slightest. I'm also not entirely sure in which context you are using the word 'censor'. Re-writing a page because one feels as if they can improve upon it is not censorship. Refusing editors the right to re-write a page simply because the original content came from a developer or such is indeed censorship. Now, if you meant censorship as in the removal of expletives and crude phrases, then I absolutely agree with you. This is a mature wiki, and as long as the expletives and the like contribute to the professionalism of the article-page, then we should continue to revert trivial edits such as this one. However, with the Ginger Flowers page I linked, I did not single it out because it was colourful. I singled it out because the writing is shoddy, and not even in the slightest is it professional. So I'm sorry if I gave the wrong idea of me attempting to start a holy crusade against harsh language and such. All I meant is that we should have the right to correct spellings, and we should have the right to re-write a page, and not be forced to look at eyesores simply because a few developers were feeling witty or bored one day while writing out the design documents and dialogue. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 15:04, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
Let's draw a line between wiki page and in-game content (like: quotes, transcripts, design documents). I have no objections, if you make changes to this page Ginger Flowers, but this one Hoover Dam design document/2 should be kept as is. What's the point in naming something a "transcript" or "quote" if we make changes to it's content? --Theodorico (talk) 16:37, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
I can agree with keeping the original transcripts untouched. I made a similar comment earlier: "Using a sic in something such as a critique or transcript is fine." But quotes shouldn't have amnesty when it comes to spelling, at least. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 16:44, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
"All content needs to relate to the games as delivered by the developers; user modifications are not covered by this wiki." – VA:C. I take it, that "all content" means "yes, quotes too!", while "user modifications" means "no, we can't fix quotes". --Theodorico (talk) 17:56, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
I also can take hidden meanings from vague quotes. But I won't, no disrespect intended. I do feel obligated to mention, however, that if that were the true meaning for that quote, and not merely a loose interpretation, we are already contradicting it in varied ways. Perfect examples:
  • In-game, it is spelled Pre-War. On Nukapedia, we spell it as pre-War.
  • In-game, all creatures are considered proper nouns. So, in-game it would be Brahmin, not brahmin. On Nukapedia, we do not consider them proper nouns and we leave them de-capitalized.
    • This goes the same for locations, weapons, armour, etc. etc. etc. We make sure to capitalize the proper nouns, but nothing else, unlike Bethesda-related games.

ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 18:45, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

(←) Capitalization is covered by VA:EDIT, which clearly states that it must be applied "regardless of in-game spelling". While correcting errors, falls under jurisdiction of VA:C, which clearly prohibits such activity. I don't see any conflicts. --Theodorico (talk) 20:13, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

"All content needs to relate to the games as delivered by the developers; user modifications are not covered by this wiki." – VA:C The way I am reading this, it is coming across as we can only make mention of content that has been provided to us by the developers that we cover and their affiliates/ parent company, while disallowing the additions of fan-made material and perceptions. Because I'm looking in there, and I am seeing absolutely nothing that specifically mentions that developer spellings and wordings are infallible. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 20:43, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
How a rewritten quote differs from a mod at Nexus? A mod correcting a typo is an unacceptable content and should not be covered here. But if we fix the same typo silently, then everything is all right??? --Theodorico (talk) 08:20, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
A mod changes the actual game. We are not changing the actual game by doing such a thing, but are making a few spelling and wording corrections for the benefit of the wiki, instead. (And you're right. If there was indeed a mod that changed the spelling around in the actual game, we would not cover it here. But at the same time, this example has nothing to do with my proposal.) All I am proposing is that we follow proper English conventions and sentence structure. Just because a developer didn't feel like doing so is no excuse for us to follow-suit blindly. We can keep the transcripts the same, but our user-base created article-pages should have the same liberties to improve upon them as they see fit. That is the point of a wiki, after all, as a collaborative effort to provide the best content possible over the subject covered. We're defeating the purpose of the wiki by disallowing our user-base to correct obvious mistakes or poor writing. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 17:38, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Quotes (just like, transcripts) are in-game content (read: canon), it doesn't matter how poorly they are written. If you want to rewrite a quote, then go ahead and do it, but don't call it a quote anymore. Put the rewritten text in the suitable section (background, notes, or whatever) and provide the original quote in <ref>...</ref> so other editors will be able to verify yours interpretation. That's how a wiki supposed to work, IMHO. --Theodorico (talk) 22:51, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
You make a good case there. The only real argument that I can think of in this case is that there are such things as partial quotes. Even in research papers it is okay to use partial quotes, and sometimes, it's even expected so to make sure the one covering the quote in question is truly understanding the stance being made. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 22:55, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Guilty! I'm using them from time to time. Any objections, except of requirements to preserve the original meaning? --Theodorico (talk) 09:28, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

If its a typo or something, in most cases I think we're fine to correct. When it results in an unintended word or can make a meaning unclear, I think thats when sic comes into play. Actually "censoring" something never should be permitted. Agent c (talk) 15:15, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

For all the character articles with transcipts of the written guide, would it be possible to have the page number written into the source too so it isn't so much of a hassle to try and find later. As it is I can't locate the entry on Pek on page 435-436 of the guide (the pages concerning Falls Church). Great Mara (talk) 09:40, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Actually, there's no entry on initiate Pek whatsoever in the guide. I've checked both my physical copy as well as an e-book (Ctrl + F is very helpful), but nothing is said about him, except for "Initiate Pek can be found here." and "Execute all Muties inside, and look for Initiate Pek, in the back room.", both on page 435.
~ Scribe Aurora talk 17:11, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Comments from KingClyde[]

Just a general question, what in God's name brought this mess up? Did business get that slow? Truly article content was always my priority. The items in infoboxes etc. that contains files lists, item ID's etc that are from the G.E.C.K. we decided long ago the use them EXACTLY have they appeared in the G.E.C.K. to prevent any confusion. Long ago is when Fallout 3 came out when this engine was used and the same stuff was moved to FO:NV. I know I'm going to hear from certain people "I don't see it as a rule or a guideline anywhere" so what are you gibba-gabbaing about. Alot of the stuff that was implemented here in the past isn't written down it was just common knowledge. Now if I could remember it I would tell you but the G.E.C.K. is a tool, keeping the info that comes out if it exactly the same is important in my opinion to avoid confusion. Same with in-game file names. Lets say I wanted to make a mix tape for my girlfriend from Fallout 3. If you guys change the file name, how in the heck am I going to find it in the game files. So here are the points made below and my responses with them.

  • What is should be the length of the base id and ref id, and should they be in capital letters?
They should remain the exact length as they are in the G.E.C.K. with the non capitalized letters.
  • Should the descriptions of images be ended with a period?

No, it would cause confusion.

  • Should the names of files directly taken from the game (like this this sound file sound file) retain their original name, or should they be given a new one?

Again, no it would cause confusion. See my mix tape example above.

  • Should the quest stages be numbered from 1 through the end, or should they be given the amounts as found in the G.E.C.K.?

Not sure about this one. Ideally I would go with the G.E.C.K. but in this case either or.

  • And do they have to be ended with a period too?

If they already do then yes. If not then no.

  • Should texts taken from the G.E.C.K. (like quotes) retain their original capitalisation and errors (even if they have been made by accident)?

Yes, because they do appear in-game (quotes) like that).

Anyways, that's my 25 cents. Have a chipper day.--Kingclyde (talk) 21:52, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

Fully agree with Clyde. Most of the possible changes would be frivolous and unnecessary, as current practice has been relatively straightforward with all this. Common sense in conjunction with written policy seems sufficient enough at this point. --Skire (talk) 01:03, February 26, 2013 (UTC)
I am in agreement as well. I took the time to read the entire discussion and Clyde seems to have summed everything up perfectly. No need to fix what isn't broken. I will say though on the topic of numbering quest stages, we may need to consider a new policy. The numbering is based off of an archaic coding system and can be confusing to users unfamiliar with code. On another note, good to hear from ya Clyde. Hope everything's going well and I look forward to seeing you around more in the future. FollowersApocalypseLogonihil novi sub sole 08:05, February 28, 2013 (UTC)
From my observations, we have:
  • all possible variants of IDs, even within one single page.
  • all kinds of file names, depending on contributor's will.
  • all kinds of opinions about fixing/censoring/improving the quotes and transcripts.

So, that "common knowledge" thingy ain't working. That's why this topic is here. --Theodorico (talk) 17:16, February 28, 2013 (UTC)

I have to agree with Theo. Most of the proposals are simply - questions, and we're here to address them as they come up. But a couple of these topics have sparked a bit of interest, (From me on one of them, as seen above.) and discussions are proper in these cases. I do not like to see these sorts of forums being casually dismissed simply because someone doesn't see the point in them personally, as it makes us seem like we have a superiority complex over the standard user. No offense to anyone. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 17:30, February 28, 2013 (UTC)
Well, good to see you haven't changed Leon. So I have a superiority complex now? Pot, kettle? Anyways, I never "dismissed" anything. I never said "I don't see the point" in these forums. If you can't see them sarcasm in the first two sentences in my statements, then I'm sorry. I pointed out why things were done the way they were and why it makes sense to keep them the way they are. I even gave common sense examples. I never said they were bad questions, I answered them with points that I felt were valid and even said we could go either way with the quests. I'm sorry if the way I answer my questions with bullet points and clear and concise answers makes me appear to have a superiority complex but I do not. Just for the record. My time is running out on the library computer so I have to go, talk to you guys and gals tomorrow.--Kingclyde (talk) 23:57, March 1, 2013 (UTC)
Well, no. But then again, I never made such an accusation. I was merely making the observation that it is frustrating for anyone asking questions or making proposals to have responses begin with comments such as this one: "Just a general question, what in God's name brought this mess up?" It's especially de-motivating to have a veteran user saying this and sparking other users to stating how frivolous and pointless this forum is. (At this point, I would like to make the statement that my response was not entirely aimed at you. I'm not sure why you think that myself and others are always personally attacking you with our critique.) Anyways, enough of that. I'm certainly not looking for a fight, I was just attempting to keep this forum from degrading into insinuations over how this forum is 'pointless'. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 20:27, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
Well, again I will point out that 80-90% of the average users will see that opening sentence as a sarcastic statement. I would add more to make my viewpoint clear but I will take the high road here. If you truly wanted to keep this forum from degrading into insinuations. (As for the "I'm not sure why you think that myself and others are always personally attacking you with our critique", you and a few others always point out specific parts of whatever argument or point of discussion I am making and use vague but obvious references and then add things like "no offense" like that fixes things. Take the following. "I do not like to see these sorts of forums being casually dismissed simply because someone doesn't see the point in them personally, as it makes us seem like we have a superiority complex over the standard user. No offense to anyone." The likelihood that that was aimed at anyone but myself in that section is doubtful as it uses the same MO as other cases. Just food for thought. Now I'm done discussing this minutia.) So that's how I feel on the standardizations. I still think the quest think could be reworked to be more user friendly.--Kingclyde (talk) 20:44, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry if my rebuttal seemed to be solely aimed at you, but it was intended towards Sigma and Follower, as well, as it seemed like a trend was starting over this forum not having any real purpose. Didn't want that trend to escalate since it's shown that quite a decent amount of people are interested in discussing the points here. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 21:40, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
I'm not saying that this forum doesn't have a purpose, just that our current policy was summed up by Clyde and for the most part, changes aren't necessary. However, as you said Leon, most of these policy questions are just that - questions - and if they are not common knowledge, they should be readily accessible for both new and veteran users. That being said, I'm sure that all the answers are available, but they may need to be moved to a more convenient location. FollowersApocalypseLogonihil novi sub sole 23:40, March 4, 2013 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
More Fandoms
Advertisement