Item Card Project (expired links/idea generally unliked) Conclusion: carefully template pages that need it, otherwise don't
Sat, 12/06/2014 - 19:53
In the midst of all this gunner stuff, we have the opportunity to come up with new, more flexible, more consistent templates. With the alchemy path template needing an overhaul, I decided to invest my time making this "dream" a reality, because the extent to which I can help with the alch path is limited...I can fuse rows like a boss, but plug-n-chug of that complexity is best left to editors who have a broader scope of available coding commands. Like raven! and icytea! Yay those two people!
Waiting for the userbase to generate existing recipes via gameplay to get more pics up too, since these seem to come from Basil. There's quite a few out there already.
The mediawiki version we have does not have a tabber extension, sadly. Funny enough, the wiki interface itself sort of has a tabber. Sort of. (The page/edit/discussion stuff, but these are not exactly "it" - they go to different URLs. But it's funny to me). So, I'm making something that is LIKE a tabber, but not quite - with the same ease of information, page consistency, and compression.
Go to the Plated Grizzly Sentinel Armor Page to see an example of the Card in action. I'm still working on it of course! Be sure you're looking at the most recent version of the page before giving feedback. Feel free to compare revisions though.
Goals:
Make the wiki look a little more like the in-game interface, but maintain wiki familiarity.
Force page consistency. Shields/Armors/Helms have different info locations than weapons, which I noticed when going through implementing changes talked about in forum node 106056.
Be adorable. I call it "Item Card Project" because the template sort of looks like a cute ID card for the item it's got all that information about.
It will also let us move sections around more easily, if the information is contained in {{{content}}} type things. This is something I implemented in various tablelist templates in case we wanted to move the {{{description}}} somewhere else and so on. Example - simply move the {{{description}}} to another place in the mother template, and bam, the content is in a column instead of a tooltip. Tahdah! Back to the main point:
I would very much enjoy feedback on this "Item Card" project. But please focus on the gunner stuff, of course. Just putting this in the forums for timestamp purposes.
EDIT:
Feedback from Chesh: prioritized show/hide sections to be on the bottom, so important stats information isn't pushed all the way through the bottom of the page to Pluto, which isn't even a planet.
Feedback from Bopp: this seems like making a page within a page. But organizing pages consistently is nice.
Sat, 12/06/2014 - 21:28
#2
@Bopp
"Show/hide" facilitates skimming to the section you want without guesswork, and very quickly if you don't want to use the CTRL+F keyboard function - trying to make it like the in-game interface. I managed to match the tab colors! This format forces editors to put the same types of information in the same places for all pages AND in the same format ( a lot of pages don't have descriptions italicized) - which makes finding things a lot easier visually too.
It would be easy but very tedious and not something I'd want to do to make a "page template" for items with {{{content}}} action, regarding all this ToC stuff. But I'd want help with that and call it the "Wiki Cleaning and Consistency Project." Again, tedious, boring, and doesn't have "pop" like in-game interfaces do.
Some browsers/websites have an option to force show/hides to always be opened or closed by default, no matter the settings on the page code...this would be for each individual user in that user's settings and not something we can edit, just suggest.. I think...hmmm...
I can add hiddenheaders for ToC navigation if this is desired...HMMMMMMMMM.
Yeah, on that chaos cloak talk page -pop all of the show/hides open at once and scroll up and down and decide how that feels. Tell me when you come to a decision. I can force the navs to all just be uncollapsed by default if it's desired.
In general, I'm pleased with the large amount of space we have for item names with this, the Volcanic Salamander Suit line breakage and template fattening always drove me nuts. And the new gunner armor/helmet names are HORRIBLY, HORRIBLY LONG.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 01:20
#3
@N
Though it is a large-scale undertaking requiring a lot of work, I think this would help to beautify the wiki quite a bit. As it is, the layout is inconsistent in terms of design and it can be a hassle to navigate depending on what you're searching for.
Personally, I think this new layout addresses most if not all of the navigational issues. The information you want to locate is very straightforward and easy to find. This negates the need to search through the breadth of the entire page as long as you have an idea of what you're searching for. The wiki should be convenient and easy to navigate, and I feel that in it's current state it is not.
The only concern I have is how resource-intensive it will be to render. I know that I don't have a strong computer and this always causes me problems.
Otherwise, you have my vote!
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 06:34
#4
response
"Show/hide" facilitates skimming to the section you want without guesswork, and very quickly if you don't want to use the CTRL+F keyboard function - trying to make it like the in-game interface.
I strongly disagree. Hitting a "Show" requires me to position my mouse over a pretty small target. Fitt's law tells us that this takes some time.
In contrast, I can scroll through the page, looking for the Section heading that interests me, with a simple swipe on my trackpad, scroll on my mouse scroll wheel, etc. This is super-fast. Having a table of contents makes it even easier.
Keep in mind that this is what Wikipedia does, and that Wikipedia has thought a lot more about this than you have. That doesn't make Wikipedia right and you wrong. But it should make you think a little harder.
Yeah, on that chaos cloak talk page -pop all of the show/hides open at once
How do I "pop all of the show/hides open at once"? That would help a lot. But the average wiki user may not know how to do it, keep in mind.
Also, much of my objections would be removed if you simply made everything "show" by default. You're able to do that, right?
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 09:25
#5
↓
Youre going to dislike me for this, Dracora.
I like the uniform color scheme.
I dont like how there is now additional scrolling for me to find the information.
When I visit the wiki for an item, it is normally to check a variety of things: Stats, Crafting Materials, or Alchemy tree.
The new card that you made shows the stats and description without scrolling.
The old method fit stats, description, and crafting materials without scrolling.
I'm lazy and dont like scrolling.
[Of course people with different screen resolutions will have different results.]
To change it to my liking...
Arrange it with the image/def/abils on the right side and expandable items on the left side like in your dream picture.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 10:47
#6
@Feedback
@Bopp
Can you see the most recent version?
@Raven
Hmm...I've got feedback on the scrolling from a few places.
Solutions:
1) buy a huge screen
2) don't be lazy
3) okay in all seriousness:
-I tried having the pic on the right, it didn't look quite right or flow with the format with show/hide.
-I can't seem to get hiddenheaders to work properly. Some help with this would be nice :). I think that adding hiddenheaders and having the ToC on the topright will be a nice addition - fine, if you don't want to scroll, click. If you don't want to click, scroll. If your info is close, just hide what you don't want to see to bring it to the top. If we could make the font size of the ToC a little bigger and maybe add some icons....that would take some anchors and a template instead...*muses*
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 14:56
#7
okay, good, less good
I don't know whether I'm seeing the most recent version of Plated Grizzly Sentinel Armor, but everything seems to be showing by default. If I never have to interact with the show/hides, then I'm okay with them.
And as always I'm happy to have consistent formatting of wiki pages. So that aspect of your work is still good.
That just leaves one problem for me: The idea that all of the contents of the wiki page are inside a container inside the wiki page. For example, at the top of the Plated Grizzly Sentinel Armor page there is the title "Plated Grizzly Sentinel Armor", followed by the title "Plated Grizzly Sentinel Armor" again, inside the info-box-like thing. There are boxes within boxes within boxes for no strong reason. The design should be simpler and less cluttered.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 15:24
#8
@Bopp
I can just take out the header maybe? (I never saw anyone complain about this repeat before ;P so I didn't think about it much, but I did notice it from time to time). Like all the pages with infoboxes have had this repeat for...forever. Just over to the right, so not as obvious.
EDIT: okay Bopp, took out the header. The icon is now by the arsenal linking. Check the Overcharged Mixmaster page - this change is only on the Handgun Card template atm. How's that?
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 17:40
#9
fixed a small part of the problem
I'm glad that you've fixed the double title problem. But for me that was just an example of the larger problem.
Let me try a different tack: Why aren't See Also and Categories in the infobox? They look weird coming after a box which until that point contains all of the page's content.
Here's another tack: Are all wiki pages going to be contained in this huge infobox thing? Or just wiki pages for equippable items?
If I can get a spare hour, maybe I will try to make my own version of your template. It would have exactly the same fields, with information plugged in exactly the same. But it would not wrap that information in a dark blue rounded rectangle. It would just let the information fill out the sections of the wiki page in a regular way.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 18:09
#10
@Bopp
Categories are wiki-formatted to be at the bottom of pages by default. This is the format almost every wiki on the internet uses. I've not seen one that doesn't do this. We could easily link to them in the groups section if this is desired.
See Also wouldn't be inside the infobox because it's specifically about things that are not about the item, but are still relevant. That's why it's a See Also.
People really like the colors. Like really a lot a lot, it's the most positive type of feedback we've gotten on this. This feedback is the first I've seen that doesn't like the colors, and that makes me feel like something's up with your browser or monitor. Dark blue? they shouldn't be. It's more like a slightly off-white, which is what the rest of the wiki uses in infoboxes. Would you mind uploading a screenshot of what you're seeing?
Unless you mean in general. Well, I'm trying to match the in-game interface - which isn't hard, cause most templates around the wiki use these colors anyway!
I plan on doing something like this for any pages about entities yes - so the same types of information are on the same places in a page.
I know what you're going to do regarding your version of my template, and it's something I've tried before a few different ways - but you run into a ton of issues with the range of computers people use. Wasn't it you who mentioned the 800px limit in another thread? This limit is really the only reason it looks like a page of a page.
I've enjoyed shrinking the window on my screen to fit the "card" exactly - lets me peruse things easily while in-game. I'm always in windowed mode with everything - but the only negative about being full screen is a lot of white space to the right of the template for larger monitors. But this doesn't show up for small ones. And horizontal scrolling stinks - hence 800px.
One thing I'd like to change in the template is the image location. Most wikis have the visual somewhere in the top right. While the template is cute with the image where it is cause it looks like an ID card, it's not ideal regarding general wiki format.
Suggestions:
I'll try to make it fit to window, so that it's not so...recursiony. Though I mean, is that really a problem? Like, yes, it's sort of a page of a page (less so with the header out of it), but beyond personal preference, I don't see it being a problem.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 19:00
#11
Great Idea
I really like the new layouts. I feel like it better organizes and promotes the important aspects of the gear. I think the strategy section will be pretty labor intensive on whoever is going to be filling that in, and possibly different people may have various opinions, so that might be a discussion point. Overall though, i think it is a nice fresh start to how to have things listed :)
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 20:42
#12
right
Because you requested it, here is a screenshot: File:BoppNovasterItemCard.png.
I'm not upset about the particular colors being used to envelope the content of the page. The colors are quite nice really. What I'm upset about is that the content of the page is enveloped in anything at all.
In your plan, are you eventually going to ask Clotho to change the "Energy" wiki page to follow this format?
When I asked about Categories, I knew the answer. They are auto-formatted at the bottom because the designers of the wiki expect pages to be constructed in a certain way, which the project described in this thread massively violates. That is my point.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 21:32
#13
@Bopp
How does it "massively violate" wiki format?
Cause you know, I try very hard to stay in wiki format. :/
I mean besides the pic not being in standard top-right, which I've already mentioned, I can't find anything that "massively violates" wiki format.
To see style guides (which, by the way...the page the sk wiki links to on wikipedia has a tag mentioning how outdated it is...this one I mean) just use the left-hand box and click style guide right under the search bar.
Yeah, I'm gonna fix that link to go here.
Bear in mind, we have an ancient mediawiki version. Things have changed. This is an effort to force what we have to work with to look more...updated.
Compare to other wikis (especially those for games - pokemon, warframe, guild wars, starcraft, homeworld - these are well established.). Again, I can't find anything that...massively violates...format. If anything, it's updating the wiki to be more like other wikis. Which have tabbers -,..,-
I haaaaaaate the HW wiki's blue background and yellow text. It's sorta to match their in-game stuff but NO. JUST NO. Anyway... Most wikis I see are Wikia supported, not Mediawiki. But the expectations are the same, despite having different codings available. I just love how most "Wikia" supported wikis have that "gaming" section at the bottom of the page with SO MANY OTHER GAME WIKIS.
In the future, don't ask questions you know the answer to. It's kind of weird to do that. I mean it feels like you're trying to trap people and that's not very nice at all, and it doesn't really help the feedback process. I don't like to guess what you mean by what you say, just say it directly. I'm a data-lover, and don't like assuming things. Additionally, suggestions would be good...instead of just saying what you think is wrong. And yes I will crit right back at suggestions I don't like ;P
But that brings me to a point...what we like and don't like is the point we're at right now. Lost of people like this, a few don't like some small things about it. And it's easy to work with too, the way I've got it set up. Nice, huge in-page sections that tell editors what sections they're in. I love doing that - we need more editors. Sometimes I feel like all the 1= and 2= stuff confuses people and pushes them away when they otherwise could have helped. I try hard to have intuitive words, like "field data ="...so in case I neglect to do documentation, just looking at the template is..easier than 2+2 = 4.
Energy fits into the format, it's just got a ton of more "notes" info than anything else. There's not a tooltip for it, which is basically what inspired this - if there's a big tooltip info thing in-game, then card it to make it look like in-game. But with lots more infos. This applies to materials, which don't have big nice images, but they still have tooltips. But that doesn't mean the card is limited to things with tooltips, not at all!
Basically...I'd like to see just 4 user-generated page formats, that will be locked-in to any format, able to have defined sections moved around anywhere we please with just a tweak of a {{{content}}} location in a mother template...
-Lists
-Cards
-Guilds/Userpages (hardly any consistent format, lol - "freestyle" pages if you will)
-Guides
We could ask Clotho to do this I suppose, but he says he does things only if there's lots of user consensus (see his archived pages) - and there is consensus! :)
Regarding your image, it looks normal, minus some borderfluff.
Sorry if this post seems stiff, I don't like what you did with that category question, I just don't.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 21:48
#14
my version
Well, I don't want to offend you or "trap" you. It is a common rhetorical device to ask questions, not because you want the answer, but because you want the listener to enter into a frame of mind where she can understand your view. In fact, this tactic is called "rhetorical question". It is very common and not at all unethical. :)
I have created my own version of Plated Grizzly Sentinel Armor to illustrate my argument. Keep in mind that I made this in under an hour, without being expert in wiki formatting. So it doesn't look great. It's only supposed to be a "proof of concept", where the concept is: You can have all of this templating to enforce a standard layout of item pages, without massively changing the look-and-feel of pages on this wiki. In particular, wiki pages can still be made of sections with subsections, that all show up in a table of contents (if you want).
http://wiki.spiralknights.com/User:Jdavis/Plated_Grizzly_Sentinel_Armor
Let me emphasize that the text of this page is almost identical to the text of your Plated Grizzly Sentinel Armor page. All I've done is change the "subsection headings" in the Acquisition section into actual subsection headings, instead of just bold text with a line under it. All other differences lie in the Card/Armor template.
Edit: Edited a couple of times.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 21:52
#15
↓
@Dracora-Speaking
I had a reason for attacking the scrolling problem and bringing you back to the original idea.
Taken directly from your dream idea text: "A way to [compress] the wiki, actually making the wiki more accessible in the long run - players know exactly where to click for what information, instead of scrolling through/relying on ToC (which isn't consistent) looking through sections.
I've gone through many pages organizing ToC order trying to make this sort of thing better, but, it just isn't consistent through time. With this tabber format, there will be little opportunity for randomness to rear its head."
I fully support that - less scrolling [more information compression] and more uniform arrangement of information.
That is the big thing that I hope to see out of this project.
I pointed out that it expanded the space of information presentation. You are definitely using templates to achieve a more uniform arrangement of information.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 21:55
#16
@Bopp
I know what a rhetorical question is, and the way you worded the reply to my answer was unpleasant, and the stated question didn't feel rhetorical. At all. You should know that.
That bolded bit - yes, I stated that already ;P and I've tried it before, see comment #10 in this thread. No need to bold it - feels like you think I deny this is possible. But I don't like assuming things...yeeeeeeeeah. Proof? Why do you need proof when I've already said yeah...that's totally possible, I just don't like it with old wiki format. Hence new format (which doesn't violate when compared to more updated wikis). *shrug*
I mean I've mentioned the dynamics of {{{content}}} several times. I guess I just don't get why we're so focused on this aspect.
We're working on hiddenheaders/anchors. Bolded sections fit into the Card format, and look almost exactly like ToC subsections - we're just having trouble making a ToC register within the template. Which I've already mentioned and have a solution in mind thanks to Raven. See comment #6 and Raven's talk page.
You got rid of internal code guides, which I don't like at all. Why did you do that? Those are map markers for editors and are designed to have no bearing on published page appearance. I'm not nitpicking the page format, since your point was...well, something we've already said is possible and very doable if we get consensus and you specifically said you threw it together in an hour so...yeah. Just wondering why is all.
Basically, this looks like "old internet." Users want "new internet." More pop, easier plug-n-chug, but with some nostalgia forced in because our wiki version is so darn ancient.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 22:10
#17
@Skepticraven
We need a show/hide all command. *thrashes at our mediawiki version*
At least...I'm pretty sure we don't have it?
Also, look at all those icons. Ridiculous. Hats off to Icytea for that work.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 22:08
#18
response
We do not agree about my rhetorical question or my reply, but it is unlikely that we will make progress on that issue, so let's not dwell on it. Please know that my goal is not to insult you. And I appreciate how much work you put into the wiki.
You got rid of internal code guides, which I don't like at all. Why did you do that?
Do you mean the comments? I like your comments. I removed them just because I was trying to figure out your code, and I needed to see more of the code all at once, without so much white space. If a final version of my code were ever produced, it would have those comments again.
Is the following text the part of post #10 where you explain that you've already figured out my version?
I know what you're going to do regarding your version of my template, and it's something I've tried before a few different ways - but you run into a ton of issues with the range of computers people use. Wasn't it you who mentioned the 800px limit in another thread? This limit is really the only reason it looks like a page of a page.
If so, I'm sorry that I didn't understand. What is the "ton of issues"?
I just don't like it with old wiki format. Hence new format (which doesn't violate when compared to more updated wikis). *shrug*
Is it fair to say that the primary goal of this project is to alter the appearance of the entire Spiral Knights wiki, to make it more "modern"?
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 22:11
#19
↓
Show/hide isnt the solution. With my monitor, there is a great deal of wasted space on the right because of the forced 800px width.
This is a large reformatting project. I feel like setting that 800px is necessary for the images to look like they fit without having too much extra space around them. That's why the previous armorinfo template used a 300px wide aspect.
On the other hand, text seems silly to conform to a 800px wide column. There ends up being a whole ton of wasted potential space. The current format optimizes the usage of the space by confining images to boxes and allowing text to expand as needed to fill as much space as possible.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 22:23
#20
@Bopp
Primary Goal: uniformity of information location on pages. And in a pretty way.
Secondary Goal: make the wiki updated, and easier to update.
Ah, I see - yes, we all like to modify our working conditions. I couldn't build furniture in any garage not my own.
Ton of issues: mostly consistencies.
- spacing inconsistencies (something that I ignored when learning how to code, and boy, Acies didn't like that when I let that habit spill over onto our wiki. But we all love learning!) Inconsistent vertical whitespace is the result of this sort of thing (which the card template STILL has regarding the set section, ugh...stupid bullet fluff), and it's difficult to control within a segmented template, especially when spaces can sometimes completely break a template. But that's usually resolved on the page itself with a good template - it wouldn't be an issue if it's coded well...and maintained.
-different dimensions of monitors. Even my card template looks different for different browsers/comps, despite its rigid skeleton - there's more space around the tooltip image for you than there should be and I have no idea why. There's probably some other differences that I didn't notice below, but I only got to see the top ;P
-the effort. Why put so much effort into making old internet consistent, when we can make it super pretty with just a tad more effort? (which is already done. so no more effort, hah. Just plug n chug). Also people want it...and as editors, we give people the information they want, how they want it. A wiki is a user-generated source of information...its greatest strength as well as its greatest weakness. Wikiness. Heh.
So an ounce of issues, not a ton. And I'd prefer to be metric. (joke about updating).
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 23:04
#21
@Skeptic
I don't know how much whitespace you've got. I have...*gets out a ruler* 8 inches of whitepsace on this comp, and 4 on my laptop. Point being, I'm sure you know, screens are different. I can give a pixel value if you want, I'm just being silly right now. 800px is just a number people agree on...
300px pic and text wrapping within the remainder is fine, it's just kinda...it like...encourages "old internet." And new editors follow old format blindly, that's why we have some tables that are just horizontally huge - generating internal "whitespace" instead of external. Which I think is worse. This way, stuff locks in. Tight.
But hey, you can horizontally shrink the wiki pages to compare across your monitor really easily with this - don't use tabs, individual windows! I just had some fun doing that. But that's how I work. How do most people work? *Thinks about windows 8 and cries*
How bout I do 100% instead? Then it will look hideous until you compress it by resizing your webwindow, unless you have a small comp screen ;P
Basically what I'm saying is - enjoy the luxury of your huge screen, don't let it influence how you format pages.
Horizontal space is solved in those ways - locked 800px, or locked smaller cells with text wrapping. I feel like locked 800px has more longevity.
Show/hide all command +ToC is the solution for vertical space user preference, is it not?
TL;DR: generating internal "whitespace" (inside of the template) instead of external (outside of the template) is worse, and pure empty whitespace is far easier to deal with with current OS flexibility.
Sun, 12/07/2014 - 23:02
#22
Fix: set spacing issue.
FINALLY fixed the set spacing issue. It was in both Card/Set and Card/Item templates. Should be consistent no matter if the item is in a set or not now.
Mon, 12/08/2014 - 00:05
#23
In General
In general, I'm going to be making the new gunner armor pages in this format.
Why?
1) people love this new format
2) if we suddenly don't like it, or decide not to do it, OR EVEN IN THE FUTURE WANT TO DO SOMETHING ELSE NEW: BAM - {{{content}}} flexibility.
It might draw in more feedback from the general population too: "Hey wiki editors!? What's this new stuff with gunner stuff? I hate it! I love it!"
The demand for gunner info is especially high, so hopefully a few people out of the thousands will come here and give feedback in some way or another. Without me asking friends/randoms in Haven.
Mon, 12/08/2014 - 07:53
#24
↓
Yes, I fully agree generating internal whitespace is worse than external whitespace.
The issue is similar to Bopps [but for a different reason].
I'm saying no whitespace is better than external-template whitespace. Why does all the information need to be bound by boxes? There is a good reason for images to be bound because their sizes are standardized. I just don't see the good reason for text.
Mon, 12/08/2014 - 08:04
#25
Skepticraven
But skeptic, every word is composed of tiny pictures of letters!
I have an idea in mind...
but first, I am at war with the ArmorList template.
Mon, 12/08/2014 - 08:49
#26
pros and cons
Dracora-Speaking, this thread could have gone more smoothly, if I'd understood that you meant to institute these visual changes throughout the wiki. I mean, these trading card pages for items will not be inconsistent with the rest of the wiki, if the rest of the wiki has also been turned into trading cards. :)
We have three courses of action: (A) continue the status quo, (B) templatize without significant visual changes (as prototyped at User:Jdavis/Plated_Grizzly_Sentinel_Armor), or (C) templatize with significant visual changes (as prototyped at Plated_Grizzly_Sentinel_Armor). Before instituting such a large change to our wiki, it's a useful exercise to list some pros and cons. Relative to the status quo, here are some pros and cons of Plan B.
- Pro1. Using templates allows us to enforce a consistent organization, which is also easy to change whenever we want.
- Con1. The template controls so much of the page's content, that its syntax comes to dominate the editing process. In a sense, users are no longer editing in MediaWiki syntax, but rather in our template syntax with a little bit of MediaWiki to fill in the details. New editors have a steeper learning curve, because the connection between markup and the resulting page is more abstract.
Relative to status quo, Plan C has the same Pro1 and Con1, with these additional pros and cons.
- Pro2. Plan C has a "glossier", more "modern" look, with show/hides to let users hide sections.
- Con2. We give up some MediaWiki infrastructure, such as tables of contents and links to sections within pages (like this).
- Con3. The formatting assumes a particular page width, rather than just letting the web browser lay out the page for any page width.
What other pros and cons should we list? I'm trying to keep them fair, so that we honestly arrive at the best solution, which may not be my solution.
I'm not sure whether to treat these as pros and cons: You have pointed out that several game wikis resemble Plan C. I have pointed out that Wikipedia resembles Plan B. You have found several players who agree with you, while I have not found (or tried to find) anyone who agrees with me.
Mon, 12/08/2014 - 09:21
#27
@Bopp
... meant to institute these visual changes throughout the wiki.
Only if people really like it :)
Which wooooooow they do!
Con 2 mediawiki ToC: we're still working on that. The goal is to not lose it.
Just put this thread down for a bit - I think I have a solution. But I want to fix that EquipmentList project we all worked on for a month first, so that players can sort through all these gunner bits. Like I said in the OP, this was more for timestamp reasons - but then I figured, I should press this, so new things get put into this format first, so we don't have to put more effort in with time you know?
Mon, 12/08/2014 - 17:27
#28
2-cents
Visually, I like it. Dracora-Speaking's card-page. It's like a blown up quick-reference box and looks like it was intended to be used like a quick reference, but it just doesn't feel that way.
Nitpicking things:
I miss the little white content box. Could you, would you add that in? On my phone, at least my browser squeezes paragraphs into narrower columns, but! It takes more scrolling and scanning with my eyes to find a section I want, and the show-hide option is so far to the right... so very far. I think I almost passed out with all the effort I took scrolling sideways and back again. Even on my laptop, using the show-hide function to kinda navigate the page contents is like operating a tv without the remote.
The Crafting Location column in the crating table looks unnecessary. 'Like the column is there to take up space. A sentence over the top of the table saying "This item can be crafted at a regular Alchemy Machine" is fine for clarity if needed.
It's nice that the sections and subsection you added seem to enforce specific details to be written for items. Can the Collection section be reduced to Set (which could include Group details) and Visual Aspects?
Where would Damage tables go... under Strategy or with its own show-hide section?
What do you mean, wiki-wide?
Personally, I wouldn't want to see this happen to every page on the wiki. Weapons and gear and maybe mats, yeah, okay, go for it; my eyes can handle, although I'd miss reading text against brighter backgrounds. Not all blocks-of-text pages deserve to be squished into giant boxes, too.
'Probably off topic question, but-- how do things get categorized? From what I've seen, things get categories from having certain links in them or having infoboxes on their page, or having certain words in their page name... er, or are there other ways? I couldn't find a place that clearly explains how everything gets a category. Would putting things into cards affect how things get categorized?
Mon, 12/08/2014 - 18:22
#29
your last question about categories
A wiki page is automatically entered into a category if its wiki source code contains that category's tag. In theory that's all there is to it.
In practice, things get more complicated, because wiki pages often use templates (little pieces of code from elsewhere on the wiki) that contain category tags. For example, if you make a guild wiki page, then you'll probably want to use the GuildInfo template on it. And that template contains the Guild category tag. So, as soon as you use that template, your guild gets listed in Category:Guild.
Mon, 12/08/2014 - 21:52
#30
Ohai
Acies seems to be sorta back. Hiiiii! Missed you! Let's argue about things!
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 10:59
#31
I don't understand what the
I don't understand what the item card project is improving on. To me it just seems like the font is bigger and things are switched around.
I know Novaster values aesthetics above all, but changing everything to just look prettier seems like a pointless endeavour.
When I remade the shade helm page I didn't like having to fish around to find where the health input went.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 12:34
#32
@Deliciousness
I know Novaster values aesthetics above all
Nononononono a thousand times no. I mean, I am a pretty blue dragon in-game, but for the wiki?
The point of this project is to make pages have the same types of content in the same places. Aesthetics is just a bonus effect.
To keep things as familiar as possible, I will move things like health pips to a slot where they used to be in the EDIT field of the page. That's an easy fix. We can move the appearance/location of this same data in the PUBLISHED page by modifying the template. Get what I mean? Editors will now have control of the various aspects of input and output, far more so than before.
Thanks for feedback!
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 13:45
#33
templatizing is the main question; aesthetics can come later
It's worth pointing out that Deliciousness' main complaint was Con1 of post #26, while Novaster's main argument of support was Pro1 of post #26. That is, they're both about templatizing the wiki, as opposed to the purely aesthetic trading card aspect of this project.
We can always tweak the aesthetics later. But first we really need to settle whether extensive templatizing is desirable at all. And we really could use some input from an administrator on that, because these templates promise/threaten to take over the wiki.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 14:07
#34
@Bopp
I've mentioned to Clotho that we're working on a thing, but I don't want to get an Admin to REALLY look at it until we have something we're willing to publish. In general, admins say that they let "the majority" of users decide what to do on the wiki. I've been told that...I think around...10 times now. Hehe.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 14:19
#35
↓
My opinion is that we should have neither a full template-based revamp of the wiki nor the "card" aesthetics.
Just adding the template to the current state seems... redundant. The majority of what it would be doing is auto-generating headers for section breaks for content. As Bopp mentioned, it changes the wiki syntax to a custom template syntax. I know Dracora-Speaking has been working hard on this template, but to be honest... I have no clue how to use it.
Just adding the card aesthetics [in its current state] shifts around the current content to make it less information dense. I have my comments earlier in this thread on that. The trickiness here in analyzing is that the examples Dracora-Speaking has made add a lot more content to each page. I'm not opposed to this new content [Collection, Strategy, and Gallery are all new sections within the "card" idea]. I just think it can fit into the current setup without using templates.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 15:17
#36
@Skeptic
The template you linked to is an entirely different project. That is for main item lists - see the sandbox. If you thought that was part of the card project, I understand how that would be completely confusing. But I try to name my templates clearly... and I don't put documentation in until the template is "ready to go" cause well, you know..changing documentation as a template changes would be silly.
Please withold feedback for a while, I'm implementing current feedback, a lot of comments are getting repetitive - I just have to put those changes in, be patient. There's really no rush on this at all.
I wouldn't do this if a lot of people didn't want it :)
Changes from "Card" to "Standard Page"
-ditching show/hide in favor of a nav bar at the top.
-doing text wrapping instead of a rigid cells and overall width restriction of 800px (less "page of a page" and "box of a box" stuff)
-removing rigidity of contents, instead, we will have "tips" in each page's code about what should go in which section. Like so: <--=============== hello editor, this goes here, and that goes over there!=================>.
-various other small things
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 15:28
#37
↓
@Dracora-Speaking
I'm well aware that that template was unrelated to this project. I used it as an example of how templates can be confusing. You understand the syntax of the template. I have no clue where to even start with it. The pages you made with them don't even make sense to me. [Don't bother explaining it to me now - when its done document it as well as possible on the wiki documentation page.]
"Please withold feedback for a while, I'm implementing current feedback, a lot of comments are getting repetitive - I just have to put those changes in, be patient. There's really no rush on this at all."
I worry about "putting this on hold" because it seems you have already decided this is going to happen and have already started telling wiki editors to use your new format without these discussions being complete.
"In general, admins say that they let "the majority" of users decide what to do on the wiki."
I understand you keep saying "quite a few people like the changes", but the comments in this thread is spread around 50% for and 50% against. I would prefer to see some unbias numbers with a poll to accept the premise. I guess that makes me skeptical.
This suggests that we should have some form of a poll outside of local friends/gilds before we make a change. Maybe make a forum poll in general discussion when the new design is fully presentable. But also make sure we are comparing apples to apples - Lets make the same page in the two or more different formats with all the content the same. As I said in my last post, "The trickiness here in analyzing is that the examples Dracora-Speaking has made add a lot more content to each page."
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 16:05
#38
@Skepticraven
I worry about "putting this on hold" because it seems you have already decided this is going to happen and have already started telling wiki editors to use your new format without these discussions being complete.
Please link to the most recent edit. If you link partway through a conversation, it doesn't make sense and kind of doesn't support your point as it is incomplete data - I really have to emphasize looking at the most recent edit of a thing too, cause feedback on old versions is not helpful and honestly kind of frustrating sometimes :).
Your concern doesn't make sense to me... I carefully worded that so it wouldn't be like "you have to do this, this is going to happen no matter what." I've used words like "try out" and "generally." I mean really. I did mention this huge project on Acie's talk page, but my concept of time is different then a lot of people. "about to" just means "the next big step" to me, not "the next moment" or "the next day." "Going to" refers to the Lists, not the pages. I see how that could be interpreted otherwise. Apologies.
I'm tracking the pages I've edited with the template in "what links here" - just a few different kinds of arsenal items with different factors so I know what variables I'm working with.
The point of talking to editors on their talk pages is to get them to try things, and then get them to give me personal feedback about gross tiny things/issues, and THEN get them to come to the forums to give big feedback - so instead of nitpicking details on the forums, we can discuss the general idea.
It is difficult to get people to take a few moments of their time to come here and give feedback. Even if they say "okay sure", they just forget. I've begun taking screenshots of in-game conversations - but this makes me uncomfortable because I respect that players need their privacy, preferring to have different player/forum/wiki editor accounts, and so on.
Just ask cheshireccat, I annoy him for feedback constantly. And lots of other people. Less frequently NJthug and Legobuild, since they're not on as often so I can't bug them as often :P. I mention their names here because they are the same in the forums as they are in-game...so it's probably okay. To be clear, I've not asked NJthug for feedback on this project or the list project, but feel free to ask him before I manage to.
It's fine to be skeptical, skepticraven.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 16:48
#39
↓
@Dracora-Speaking
Creating new pages for the new items? Sure that's fine.
Changing current pages to have a format inconsistent with the remainder of the wiki? I disagree with that.
Creating new pages inconsistent with the rest of the wiki's formatting? I disagree with that.
Telling others to "test out" creating new pages that are inconsistent with the rest of the wiki's formatting? I disagree with that.
Telling others to "test out" a new template you made but still use the current format? That is fine.
I would like an explanation for the following pages:
#1, #2, #3, #4, #5.
As of right now, 3 new gunner armor pages and the 2 older pages are a completely inconsistent format compared to the remainder of the wiki. I'm asking why this change in formatting when... (a) It's not done yet and (b) It's not at a proven consensus that the formatting change should occur.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 17:13
#40
@Raven
I'm in-game now if you want to talk - I understand not wanting to read through a ton of forum comments/threads...but it is a little annoying. Most of your requests/Qs are explained/answered already. Like even in the comment right before yours (#38). It's generally more polite to read things thoroughly - especially if you've asked the same questions already and they've been answered.
TBH it kinda feels like you're yelling at me with a megaphone demanding information that I've already told and am trying to tell ya, but you're covering your eyes and ears. Just saying.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 17:01
#41
Thanks for bring that up
Thanks for bring that up Skepticraven cause thats how I got here. I take things very literally so I took it as "Everyone has agreed to use this" and I get to this thread and I don't have a very good idea of whats going on. But I can see now people are still deciding.
Well the point I wanted to make is: which template to use on the new armor pages?
I don't want to use the old one then next week we are going to overwrite it or vice versa.
I know thats kinda the point of this thread but I guess there's no point until there's more of a consensus
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 17:04
#42
@Deliciousness
Oh goodness fill in the new armor/helm/gun pages like we have before (like pretend we never thought about the things in this thread), don't stop populating pages just cause we're thinking about changing things. Players need that info.
If you want, I can throw together a simple template actually...just a moment.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 17:31
#43
Okay
I've made a template (similar to Bopp's, but less like my template and more like wiki).
Having the page data in the {{{content}}} sections is proving to be amazingly functional and working out exactly like I thought it would :)
See the Shade Helm page.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 18:21
#44
@Delic
Actually, it seems a few editors can't agree on a few key points, even regarding the new template I made, so just fill in the page data like you would have if this thread never existed. We have hardworking editors that will go in and make changes, IF we decide to do them. But players need the info - so make the pages like you normally would, ignoring everything in this thread.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 19:36
#45
*sigh*
Talking in-game with another editor, a better idea would just be to update the Style Guide page with more informative stuff. Any time we see a new editor, go to their talk page and link to the style guide. So putting this entire project down for now, no feedback please.
Just a heads-up, the links in comment #39 and various other example pages are now out of date due to edits.
Wed, 12/10/2014 - 20:13
#46
that seems a good plan for now
That seems like a good plan for now. I mean, adding "status quo" wiki pages for the new items.
We should still consider the templating project. If we made the template really easy to understand, through well-named fields and comments like Dracora's, then it might be an improvement. But if the template discourages new editors, then it's not worth it. I'm conflicted.
Fri, 12/19/2014 - 06:55
#47
):<
Well, someone mentioned that the "Card" looks like an ID card, so I made one that's a "User" version. Feel free to use on your wiki User pages. I find it adorable and fun. And...not vain at all. Nope. Lol.
Eventually I'll make another thread called "Style Guide Page Renovation: Suggestions and Thoughts"
It's nice, but isn't this putting the entire wiki page into a templated box? There are two aspects:
First, using a template would help us make item wiki pages very consistent. It seems like a decent idea to me.
Second, having that template generate an info-box-like thing (but giant) seems like a bad idea. The page's content doesn't need to live in a container. The page itself is the container. So I would strongly advocate for a very different visual presentation, with very little show/hide action. Just give me a page with all of the information about the item, and let me skim to the section that I want.