Toggle menu
Toggle preferences menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Stationeers Wiki talk:Style guide: Difference between revisions

Discussion page of Stationeers Wiki:Style guide
No edit summary
Two new topics: Article joining/splitting, Article names
Line 4: Line 4:


I'll have to correct myself here actually. Wikipedia will always put infoboxes first, but as they serve a different version of the page to mobile, they will hoist the first paragraph above the infobox. This isn't something we can implement, so we might just have to live with infoboxes being the first element. --[[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:25, 1 July 2018 (CDT)
I'll have to correct myself here actually. Wikipedia will always put infoboxes first, but as they serve a different version of the page to mobile, they will hoist the first paragraph above the infobox. This isn't something we can implement, so we might just have to live with infoboxes being the first element. --[[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:25, 1 July 2018 (CDT)
==Article joining/splitting==
To which extent should we merge closely related item articles ([[Filter]] and [[Cartridge]] are good current examples imo), and/or should we split up other items/structures ([[Atmospherics]] is a good candidate, where one kit makes multiple structures)? -- [[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:38, 4 July 2018 (CDT)
==Article names==
Hopefull an easier decision to make than the one above: When we have 1:1 in-game item to article representation, we need to be more consistent in naming. Should we always use the name from the English translation in the game? One notable instance is ingots (in-game, the naming scheme is [[Ingot (Iron)]], we actually have them as [[Iron Ingot]]). I also believe we have a mix of "Kit(Thing)" and "Thing" articles which don't necessarily represent the current in-game names. The important part is to aim for consistency.
Would it be worth it to comb through and rename them all over the wiki? -- [[User:Sunspots|Sunspots]] ([[User talk:Sunspots|talk]]) 16:38, 4 July 2018 (CDT)

Revision as of 21:38, 4 July 2018

Proposal for section organization

I put up an initial proposal for organization of sections and order of content, the main thing that contradicts to the current state is: Summary/introduction before infoboxes. This is the default on Wikipedia and other wikis, it makes sense. On desktop, the order of infoboxes/summary won't matter, but on mobile devices it does. A short summary says much more about a topic to a new user than an infobox. -- Sunspots (talk) 16:02, 1 July 2018 (CDT)

I'll have to correct myself here actually. Wikipedia will always put infoboxes first, but as they serve a different version of the page to mobile, they will hoist the first paragraph above the infobox. This isn't something we can implement, so we might just have to live with infoboxes being the first element. --Sunspots (talk) 16:25, 1 July 2018 (CDT)

Article joining/splitting

To which extent should we merge closely related item articles (Filter and Cartridge are good current examples imo), and/or should we split up other items/structures (Atmospherics is a good candidate, where one kit makes multiple structures)? -- Sunspots (talk) 16:38, 4 July 2018 (CDT)

Article names

Hopefull an easier decision to make than the one above: When we have 1:1 in-game item to article representation, we need to be more consistent in naming. Should we always use the name from the English translation in the game? One notable instance is ingots (in-game, the naming scheme is Ingot (Iron), we actually have them as Iron Ingot). I also believe we have a mix of "Kit(Thing)" and "Thing" articles which don't necessarily represent the current in-game names. The important part is to aim for consistency.

Would it be worth it to comb through and rename them all over the wiki? -- Sunspots (talk) 16:38, 4 July 2018 (CDT)