Spiral Knights - Color Patterns and Other Things connected to them around wiki, And List Format

Color Patterns and Other Things connected to them around wiki, And List Format

24 replies [Last post]

Sun, 01/11/2015 - 22:41

Dracora-Speaking

I wish to show this example:

EDIT: link out of date. Changes implemented.

I foresee a very long list as the game goes on of more colors of these accessory things. (Why can't we just have a color palette like other games that works for most if not all items...? oh right, money.) The terminology used for these color styles is also a bit iffy. Style? Theme? Pattern? Cluster? Hue? Shade? And the groups...Special? Standard? Recolor? I say we can fiddle with that all we want...on one page, the Color Pattern page. In the meantime, we just smoosh all the ToC divisions on the accessory pages into one sortable list. That way, if like, surge or some other "recolor" becomes a "standard" color in some lockbox in the future, we don't have to care for every single accessory page. We can just adjust it or make a new on the Color Pattern page. Besides, people can sort alphabetically for what they want on the accessory pages. And they can see if something is "special" with our lovely tooltip images.

Regarding the show/hide in the example:

The Table of Contents (ToC) is a navigational tool and is very useful for getting around pages that have long lists like the accessories do. Example: I want to see more information...so I click on "notes" in the ToC and shazam, I've skipped the sections I don't care about and am reading notes. But why limit navigation to this?

I figure:

ToC remembers if you've collapsed it or not. There are different kinds of users:

1) not everyone likes to browse with the ToC uncollapsed. I don't. Pages get all chunky when some have some sections and some don't, so the ToC is longer and shorter and bleh. Collapsed, it's always the same size.

2) not everyone wants to scroll for 50 years, with or without the ToC collapsed. And like I said, SK could one day have over 9000 differently colored bolted vee accessories. Because the game doesn't do a palette. Ramble.

So, I've made a show/hide option - it's being used in this example. It is uncollapsed by default, and pretty much (EDIT:COULD) looks exactly like the regular bolted vee page, just with a fancy header for the list. Basically, it lets any ToC preference function without gettin in the way of desired browsing. Don't want to see the list? fine, hide it. The page instantly becomes compressed, because for accessories, there isn't much to see besides the list. Once implemented, this template will not affect editor workload.

This format works well for pages like crest, scarf, bandolier that have different forms. I've set it up so that it's not going to get all messed up for accessories like writhing tendrils, which don't come in every standard color like most other things do.

I'll also be fixing a few other things on accessory pages, like removing bullets. Spacing, and categories and internal format stuff will also be "cleaned up." I don't like saying "available" in the list sections, for example...cause...you know, SK just LOVES temporary promotions. So things might not be technically "available." Yep, lots of little OCD fixes. But I won't do these until I get feedback on the following:

Compare:

EDIT: links are out of date. Changes implemented.

-This one has all the info at the top, with the list expanding "forever" downwards, and the "see also" section is the only section after the list. Well that and categories of course. What is the merit of having show/hide here? For accessories that have multiple forms (bandolier, scarf, crest, etc.) users might want to just shrink lists of forms they don't care about + same logic as ToC. Try it out!

Ignore aesthetics, colors and cell size are easy to modify, just tell me how the pages feel to use.

Compress ToC sections into one list so that we don't have to care about "standard" and "special" and so on? Reread logic above before giving feedback. This compression does not have to include the show/hide format, but it is a major change, so, I'm getting feedback here.

I like the general idea of standardizing pages that are "lists" (vs. pages that are information about a single thing, like a boss or a mission etc.)

Gee Nova, you sure have a lot of projects going on!

Me: yes, yes I do. I must never reach the summit of the Mountain of Madness. Keeping busy is goooood. As long as I don't leave something half-finished and therefore confusing.

Wed, 01/14/2015 - 06:51

Dracora-Speaking

Well

There's been activity on the wiki editor forums, but no comments here, so I assume nobody cares about this -

I will not do the show/hide until I get feedback.

I will merge color pattern subsections on relevant pages and do general cleanup.

But not soon, much later. Other more important things are needing attention.

Wed, 01/14/2015 - 06:40

Bopp

I don't know

I don't know much about colors, costumes, accessories, planning outfits with unified color themes, etc.

Wed, 01/14/2015 - 21:41

Skepticraven

↓

I only have one costume with accessories. Past that, I'm lost at what all exists/matches.

You're better off getting input from players that actually visit those pages often. Unfortunately, they don't visit the forums/wiki discussions often.

Thu, 01/15/2015 - 00:13

Dracora-Speaking

Thanks

Well, thanks for posting replies guys.

This isn't going to be a huge major change - I'm basically cleaning and simplifying things. I imagine someone 3 years down the road will come along and redo the whole system as the internet evolves anyway.

main things:

1) cutting out my "middleman" pages like "X (Color Style)" and just going directly to a category page where appropriate
2) changing a few category pages to be "special" category pages in that they have some information about a thing (like a color pattern) in addition to functioning as a category page.
3) keeping things as simple as possible so different browsers are not all like "nope" and users are not all like "wut"
4) generating pages-that-are-redirects for items if said items exist so they show up in these categories.

If someone is bothered enough by these changes, I imagine they'll come to the forums somewhere, maybe not wiki editors but yeah, somewhere. I doubt someone will be bothered, but you never know. Lots of behind-the-scenes gruntwork with some small "interface" changes. Weeee. Cause I wont' do that show/hide thing. Which was mostly why I posted.

Sat, 01/17/2015 - 08:22

Dracora-Speaking

Phew

There's always more accessories than you think there are. That was...work. I need air, and not through a rebreather.

I'll flip a table if SK ever just does everything over with a player-controlled color palette that lets you choose the colors you want for everything. Overall I'd be happy with that sort of change, would just have been...lots of work for naught...but that's the nature of the universe, change... Anyway...

I want feedback on a sort of "Page Format" thing. What I've done to the Accessory page is put it into a "List Page Format" with a note at the top that links directly down to the Notes section. I figure people only need to read up on accessories once or twice, after that, they only care about looking through lists. So basically this format prioritizes what we think most people will want to get to...the most. I am using show/hides that are expanded by default (two show/hides contain the two not-special and special acc lists on the acc page) to further facilitate page navigation without an ugly ToC. The header that links to the top of the page also has a little show/hide that tells new users about how the list is organized and what to expect. This show/hide is collapsed by default because 1) I feel like the list is pretty intuitive and 2) users only need to read that stuff once or twice and 3) it doesn't fit anywhere else on the page.

Thoughts? To be clear, I wish to implement this "list page format" wherever relevant, if it is liked.

I've updated the individual accessory pages with new format as stated previously in this thread, as well as acquisition details to the best of my knowledge. I have this itchy feeling OOO is trying to phase out the iron lockbox...this feeling comes from just looking at all these patterns that I during edits...anyway, I'm certain that I've missed many acquisition details regarding the new lockboxes, but I refuse to update that sort of thing unless I have some sort of data from in-game. (I love spiral spy data but I don't trust it for the wiki).

I would flip the lists so that the newer acc are at the top for convenience, but I feel like forcing people to scroll for a millisecond or so just to see "the new stuff" is a sort of advertising (wow lookit all this stuff I forgot was here wow wooo), and they can see the new stuff in admin posts anyway. I think there are two kinds of users - old ones that wait for updates and just go straight to admin posts, and new ones curious about history. Reordering the list so that it's by DoR with the most recent at the top caters to neither. If there is a desire for this sort of organization, I'll just stick numbers into a sortable lefthand column like I did for the News page.

Regarding "unique" accessories, I still have to do those pages yes.

After that I will do template documentation.

*faceplants to the ground and sleeps.

Tue, 01/20/2015 - 10:12

Dracora-Speaking

@Unique Acc

Individual items should have their own pages really...Unique accessories are weird. But they shouldn't be.

I'll be trying a few format things, I'll post here when I'm done. It's more "cutting out the middleman pages" stuff.

EDIT: these things just don't behave consistently. Bleh. Reduced "unique" list to the #of acc slots we have. Might put each unique list for each slot onto the main accessory page to cut out the intermediate pages.

EDIT: yes, yes I am. Prepare for a huge mega list with a few columns to help clarify things. It's just unavoidable, in the past, I tried to separate things out so the list wouldn't be so huge, but they just...keep...making new accessories. Like rats and rabbits on Clomifene. Seriously, we already have extra verts, why not rat tails? Gremlins are kinda like rats...*mumbles off incoherently*

EDIT: done with main list, cleaning up and adding to individual pages. Now I really feel like they're phasing out that iron lockbox....

Feedback pls on how the main accessory page feels. It has a lot more data than it used to. Should really help new and returning players get an idea of what's out there. (An idea posted about a while ago here). My main concern right now is with the "list page format" - no TOC, direct links to "notes" section, collapse-able list content that is expanded by default...feedback on these properties please.

Tue, 01/20/2015 - 11:47

Bopp

http://wiki.spiralknights.com/Accessory

You're asking about http://wiki.spiralknights.com/Accessory?

The table there looks great. The huge show/hide before it is okay because it defaults to hidden.

The part of the page after the table has a number of issues. For starters, the definition of accessory comes in a "Notes" section. It should come at the extreme top of the page, before the show/hide and the table. Another thing is that the page seems to be using non-standard wiki formatting, such as bold instead of section headers.

Should I be editing this, or would that interfere with your ongoing work?

Tue, 01/20/2015 - 12:27

Dracora-Speaking

@Bopp

Please do not edit it. Yes it would disrupt work.

Part of the "list page format" is having the list at the top right away.

The "basic" information needs some cleaning, yes, that's low priority right now. Like the recovery stuff could go in a table like other priced/vendor list things, but yeah, please do not edit - and...Notes always goes near the bottom of a wiki page. That's wiki standard all over the internet.

But a basic intro/definition/some info is usually at the top of a page, yes, and I've merged that with the notes section at the bottom as part of the "list page format" proposal. Hence the emphasis in the note at the top of the page. The one with the pile of books that signifies an "editor thing is goin on." I want to know if users think that it is okay to organize a page this way, if a page qualifies, for convenience.

Would you suggest putting a brief explanation of the subject in this "list page format" note? Like so:

"An accessory is an aesthetic item that the player can attach to an armor, costume, or helmet slot. This has no effect on combat statistics."

And then the rest of the note?

Wed, 01/21/2015 - 15:13

Bopp

my opinion

I feel pretty strongly that every page should have an intro section. It doesn't need to be long, but it must define/describe the subject of the page, including all terms that redirect to the page. This is definitely Wikipedia policy, and I definitely think it's a good idea.

My ideal intro for Accessory would explain that they are decorations that can be attached to armor; they are purely cosmetic; they can be obtained from blah, blah, and blah; they are attached at Bechamel; and can they be unattached nowadays?

After that, I have no strong opinions about the order of sections.

Wed, 01/21/2015 - 16:12

#10

Dracora-Speaking

@Bopp

Okay how's that? (Top)

Will clean up bottom later.

Knights vs. player, still thinkin about it, will probably change to "player" when I get the whole page cleaned up. Was thinkin about NPCs at the time.

TBH I was startled to see that Warden wearing divine wings. Very fashionable NPC.

Wed, 01/21/2015 - 17:48

#11

Bopp

awesome

It is great. Thank you for accommodating my strongly felt preference.

Sat, 02/28/2015 - 17:04

#12

Dracora-Speaking

@Accessories

Okay, finally got back to it. I'll be adding a few more images, but the bulk text editing is "done." How does this section look now?

Sat, 02/28/2015 - 18:06

#13

Bopp

intro?

We're talking about the intro section of the page Accessories? It's good.

I still would like to see the giant honking list split off into List of Accessories or some such. But I feel less strongly about this issue.

Whether or not that split happens, but especially if it doesn't happen, I would like to see the table of contents restored. It would provide faster access to the sections near the bottom.

Sat, 02/28/2015 - 18:44

#14

Dracora-Speaking

@Bopp

Users generally prefer one long list instead of divided lists unless the list can be divided consistently as well as usefully. I prefer one long list because I'm a fan of knowing what was released after what, before, etc - chronological data. But if things were released at same time? Example: I've divided "list of sets" because the gunner family is so huge and released at the same time, but only temporarily until we get those pics.

You should be able to click notes at the top to get to notes. The idea of this list format is to get rid of a cluttery ToC at the top of pages that have the end purpose of being "lists" (vs 1 or 2 reads about the type of item itself, which later gets in the way of more veteran readers), while maintaining semi-standard page navigation, as described in comment #5 and 8. This is unconventional and I've been waiting on more feedback for this format than there is currently.

And no, I'm talking about the giant notes section at the bottom regarding concerns in comment #7.

Sun, 03/01/2015 - 06:13

#15

Bopp

response

I'm not opposed to having one long list. I'm opposed to having it dominate the page Accessory. This long list could be at List of Accessories, and Accessories could simply link to List of Accessories. This is pretty common on Wikipedia. And there is plenty of non-list content at Accessory for it to warrant its own page.

When I respond to a question on the forums, I often include a link to a specific section of a wiki page. I get that URL most easily by clicking on the section in the table of contents. Just this week I responded to a question about accessories, and I was unable to follow my usual procedure because of the formatting of the Accessory page.

Sun, 03/01/2015 - 12:51

#16

Dracora-Speaking

@Bopp

Okay, finally got back to it. I'll be adding a few more images, but the bulk text editing is "done." How does this section look now?- Novaster

Just this week I responded to a question about accessories, and I was unable to follow my usual procedure because of the formatting of the Accessory page. -Bopp

- Is that still a problem as of most recent edits? Feedback on this specific issue, please. You should be able to link to subtoc sections without problems now, if you are having trouble with this as of most recent edits, please elaborate.

Linking to a List of Accessories on the Accessory page is very inconvenient for the majority of users, since, as mentioned several times in this thread, veteran users don't need to read about what an accessory is more than once. They just want to go to the accessory page and look over available accessories. I suppose their solution would be to add the list link in their favorites/bookmark bar if they really want to get to it THAT quickly. But the format I am using is unconventional. So, awaiting more feedback from other users on that. I would MUCH rather just move the list to the bottom of the page than move it to an entirely new page. As a coder, I only move bulk information to its own page if some sort of hard limit of the wiki is reached (which has happened with parser functions on a few other projects - armor list) or the page begins to take forever and a day to load.

Please limit current feedback to just concerns regarding post #7 (and 12). I can multitask but only to an extent.

Sun, 03/01/2015 - 13:20

#17

Bopp

how do I do this common task?

Here is a link to the "Upgrading Gear" subsection. I got this URL by taking the URL for the wiki page and appending "#", then the name of the subsection, taking care to replace spaces with underscores. (Thankfully, this example is pretty easy. If the section title had URL-sensitive characters such as question marks, then I'd have to figure out their numeric codes.)

If the article had a table of contents, then I would simply click on the section and copy the URL, without any typing.

Is there a similarly easy way to get URLs when there is no table of contents?

Sun, 03/01/2015 - 13:29

#18

Dracora-Speaking

Bopp

I see, no, nothing that I know of comes close to the convenience of a ToC-style entity regarding easy URL copypasting. I'll modify a few things and get back to the list format later.

Anything else about the notes section?

Sun, 03/01/2015 - 13:44

#19

Bopp

thanks; now for Notes

Thanks for taking the time to understand how I use tables of contents.

The current top-level structure of the Accessory page is:
* short intro
* giant list
* giant Notes section, with numerous nested subsections
* See Also

This is highly unusual organization. Putting aside the issue of whether the giant list should be here at all, why not split Notes into multiple sections? (Basically, remove the Notes section header and promote each subsection header by one header level.) "Notes" suggests small details, peripheral to the main point of the page. But (for example) acquiring accessories is not a small detail. It's a crucial thing to know about accessories. For example, the Battle Sprite and Divine Avenger pages have sections about acquisition.

Sun, 03/01/2015 - 14:00

#20

Dracora-Speaking

@Bopp

How bout now? Compare to Costume page.

Current state of "Accessory": more standard/wiki/makes veteran users have to click twice. Oh no the labor. Oh dear.

Current state of "Costume": caters to veteran users

This is a clash between interface fluidity and wiki standards. I'd prefer to go with wiki standards. The "list format" was an idea I heard and liked but will not enforce.

Anything else about the Notes section? I have made it so all that stuff isn't nested under Notes.

Sun, 03/01/2015 - 14:08

#21

Bopp

wow

The page is now dramatically better: more friendly to newbies, more consistent with wiki practices, etc.

There are some small formatting things, such as a lot of extra spaces at the ends of sections (caused by clears?). And I would continue to flatten the section hierarchy under Using. But that can all be debated/tidied later.

In this episode your willingness to accommodate my opinions is impressive. Thank you.

Sun, 03/01/2015 - 14:56

#22

Dracora-Speaking

@Bopp

Internal spacing issues should be gone, did I miss any? I was actually fixing those before they were mentioned, haha. Like while the comment was being typed probably. Then I took a shower.

It's hard to make everyone happy. So I default to wiki standards when conflicts of opinion prevent progress. It's better to have potentially-infinitely-expanding lists on the bottom of pages anyway. Ultimately I defer to wikipedia. There are lots of wiki worlds...

Some interface on Wikia wikis inspired me (tabber), but overall, I really prefer the simplicity of Mediawiki and Wikipedia. Wikia tends to self-advertise with "must watch videos" and crunch everything between left/right background visual bars. No thanks.

Mon, 03/02/2015 - 06:50

#23

Bopp

looks good

The page looks good.

Isn't it unusual to have a guide/opinion section in the middle of a page? I don't feel strongly about this. But I remember past disputes in which you opposed such things. (For example, my tiny and entirely objective "guide" to how many boss materials are needed for boss furniture.) So I'm surprised that you support it in this case.

Mon, 03/02/2015 - 16:07

#24

Dracora-Speaking

Economics

I actually don't :P I'd much rather link to an "economics" guide (similar to shield bearer, gunslinger, etc.) and have sections for gear/acc/furniture and so on on said "economics" guide page. But I'm about to do battle with another formatting issue after I get a reply from support regarding another project, so "economics guide" is low low on the to do/debate list. I did spruce/update the "economics" section on the accessory page in the meantime, that was needed.

Search

Color Patterns and Other Things connected to them around wiki, And List Format