Ah, I see. The titling thing is more to be consistant with other articles (though, that's a whole different matter), and the military ranks avoids confusion (Grand Admiral is a rank within the officially English-speaking SCRA and the German-speaking Kriegsmarine/Rheinland Navy).
There are, in my view, enough MCBs to warrant such a category. The Odin, Golgotha, Westfalen, Alzette, Krieg, Westphalia, Moselle, Regensburg and Strausberg are some that come to mind, and I don't really see where they could fit (particularily considering the split between stationary and active battleships).
On the subject of Kusari, I think transliteration is probably the best policy for things like titles and organisations, similar to my "Military Organisation of Sirius" lore.
About your "Terms and Conditions" Article,
What say we rename it to Natural Phenomena. Then we could add asteroid fields, gas, JHs, Dark matter, Radiation and some other space stuff.
T&D to me is too sterile, and doubles up on the Glossary page.
Sovereign Wrote:Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.
About your "Terms and Conditions" Article,
What say we rename it to Natural Phenomena. Then we could add asteroid fields, gas, JHs, Dark matter, Radiation and some other space stuff.
T&D to me is too sterile, and doubles up on the Glossary page.
Excellent idea. You go ahead and do what you had in mind. Another category I can't put into words are the man made objects like Jump Gates and Trade Lanes which would take care of the "other half" of game concepts.
On categorizing the the factions I think we can settle for only broadly and intuitively perceived categorization of factions. And not to delve too deeply into this. So forfeit Liberty Criminals or Liberty Lawfuls. So the categorization would look like
Ideologists <-- a better term needed perhaps? Since it sounds dorky.
The biggest problem are the neutrals like Bounty Hunters or Zoners and Junkers. There is no common denominator for them. But we can always left them uncategorized until we come up with a satisfactory term or terms (if split up) for them.
For corporations we can introduce the House categories if we want to. It might seem cumbersome but produces a decent list of house corporations.
On the IU and OOU. I prefer to have the factual OOU style in technical wiki pages. There always room to slip more RP articles in the text either in the the actual text or in "See also links" This is because the ship statistics data needs to be there and is common to all (thus interests all), but we could work out a mechanic to link to these more IU (more RP) from the data article. What I had in mind is like Famous Battleships.
Or we could combine pure data pages and these RP points to the single page. But that would be a huge amount of work.
Hmm...
On the System "template". I think it's not needed for example Cambridge System to have Commodities sold. It's confusing. I propose that we think of good and "final" template for Systems and Bases which we can copy-paste when filling out those. On systems we are lacking all the special features like Ice Fields, Radiation fields etc. I strongly feel that we should have them included. I further propose that we create a System_Template page and use New York System data to fill it out. We can improve on that template and when we have finished we take it into use. The same thing we should do for stations and bases. I can't do templates so someone has to get the ball rolling.
Oh, dear... One works somewhere else for one day and gets lost when he returns:)
I'll try to remember what was going on again...
I am all for redirects, like I already said. But I propose to check what links to the redirects once in a while and point the links to the right place. It allows authors unfamiliar with the convention to use their own, and still keep the system reasonably clean.
I got lost in the categories proposals:)I'll try to read it a few more times, maybe I'll get the hang of it. Just one thing. We don't need "Liberty Criminals", we can have "Liberty" and "Criminals" (I don't mean these actual Categories, just an example). It doesn't have to be just a tree.
I have noticed empty "Handling" sections being littered here and there among ship pages in the Wiki. I made use of one of them by adding a description of my experience to it to objectively reflect the usefulness of the ship in terms of actual fighting.
' Wrote:I have noticed empty "Handling" sections being littered here and there among ship pages in the Wiki. I made use of one of them by adding a description of my experience to it to objectively reflect the usefulness of the ship in terms of actual fighting.
I like it, but like Huyng pointed out all depends on achieving objectivity. First and foremost people should get a ship based on RP. But I like it since it gives me a fair picture what it would be like to fly one of those.
Well, I tried to put forward only irrefutable facts. If any of you find anything in that description opinionated or not true, by all means put it up for discussion or replace it altogether. I was thinking of doing this for at least the ships I flown, hopefully allowing people to gain an idea of what it would be like to fly a particular ship, rather than which ship is "the best".
That kind of "Handling is good and what I put those spaces up as intended for.
I put up all the visible handling sections because someone put one in there and it was
pretty nice and i thought it was a good idea to carry that on. I'll see if I can find it again.
Subjective opinions or information: (Does need work)
(Not really about handling but Id like to see this page: http://discoveryfl.com/wiki/index.php/Boun...r_Battlecruiser become more factual. No "favourite pilots" should be on these pages. I think that particular stuff might like to go on the ship discussion page rather than the main ship page.
Ships That Need Reformatting:
To be added
Just a note Blodo, you know you could combine the image and fullname on your template so that you can click on the fullname and it'll take you to the pic of it?
I personally dont like that Media heading, as its more clutter IHMO...But,
it works and may as well stay, until we decide otherwise.
If you wanted to combine the image and full name, then the template for external links would go something like :
[{{{image}}} {{{name}}}]
Edit: Just had another thought.We could have two pics...one for the small - medium size image to be displayed on the wiki page (when that becomes available) and one for the fullsize large render, usually stored on imageshack or something. This way the large renders wont take up any more server space.
Sovereign Wrote:Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.
' Wrote:Edit: Just had another thought.We could have two pics...one for the small - medium size image to be displayed on the wiki page (when that becomes available) and one for the fullsize large render, usually stored on imageshack or something. This way the large renders wont take up any more server space.
Makes sense. Although there is a problem. See, if I add it to the template in the format [{{{image}}} {{{name}}}], it will force all pages to have an external link to somewhere supplied for the name, otherwise the name link will not render. I would encase it in conditional statements, but like I mentioned earlier this wiki doesn't have advanced parsing installed so I can't. No way around it without installing advanced parsing, which only Igiss can do at the moment.
![[Image: Banner-Final.gif]](http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm70/Praetyre/Banner-Final.gif)
