Forum:Linking and referencing

Forums: Index > The Keeper Compound > Linking and referencing

Abbreviations

Seems we've made a little headway already. I'm happy to see it. =) Remember that there's nothing wrong with copying stuff from Wikipedia to our hearts' content.

Now a couple of issues in need of adressing.

This far, the majority of content is a kind of repository for documents from T1 through T2. I believe the articles we already have should be linked up right away by putting double brackets around words likely to become entries. Even in directly quoted texts. Just as a reminder (and to get into the hyperlinking mindset). Like DromEd as of this writing still not having been created.

But even more importantly, and as I have come to realize (with a little help from my friends ;-), referencing sources properly is a must. That's why we're gonna need a simple, but good set of citation templates, and guidelines for their use.

(By the way, I think we should reach a consensus as to what kind of abbreviations should be used for the game titles throughout the wiki. Upon returning to TTLG, I discovered that TDP, TG, TMA, and TDS had become standard, and I wasn't unhappy about that, but we're free to choose.)

I can try and create some after the pattern of WoWWiki's citation guidelines, but I'd like some input on the particulars. For example, we have some text file assets which hasn't been used in-game. How would we mark it? And would we want to specify which game AND which mission a particular name comes from? How about the exo-game information we have, like preview articles, interviews, and TTLG posts?

I'm thinking we should make a WoWWiki style Citation index, but I'd need assistance collecting sources.

Larris 00:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Speaking for myself: Excellent ideas! I've been having trouble getting the linking to look right, and following the examples has led to unfavorable results that are different, for some reason. I hope to work that vexation out soon! :) I like the fact that we are all on the same page, and have many similar concerns, which means we can explain less, and produce more. Since dumping loads of information on people is my specialty, I've resorted to sending PMs, gmails, and links to those who can better divide the big cake into smaller, more palatable pieces. My last big dump was the TDS game texts. :p

I've grown quite comfortable with TDP, TG (though I usually write "Gold" instead when combining it with TDP), TMA, and TDS (although when pronounced in English, it sounds too much like "Tedious"). The best part about using T1, T2, & T3--or Thief 1, Thief 2, & Thief 3--is the emphasis on sequence. Others have adopted Thief 1: The Dark Project, Thief 2: The Metal Age, & Thief 3: Deadly Shadows. But yeah, we need consistency with the exception of headers on the index pages. They should always be spelled out.

Which audience should we cater to the most? The veterans who need no spoiler warnings and know what the acronyms mean? Those who are familiar with only one of the titles and will see spoiler information? Or newbies who may find it too spoilerific and find that the veterans talk too much jargon? Anything less than veteran level will require an adjustment of our format and attitude about what we want to present. Unfortunately, I want to show everything off. "See that dust mote? Pretty cool, eh?"

The headers for the Missions should give clues to the code of the filenames, and the Missions should be consolidated (even if only by links) under the game they come from. An explanation of the code could be given in small print, or linked to one, not just for the Wikia's sake, but so anyone may learn how to decode the files in their own copies of the games for themselves. Each game uses a different approach, and TDS is most different of all.

I'm currently of the opinion that adding "UNUSED" or some improved variant of "UIG (Unused In-Game)" to the beginning of an appropriate entry is the easiest way to get the point across, otherwise colour-coding and/or a legend explaining any marking becomes necessary. A better idea is welcome, as it will potentially improve the ETU as well.

Ehcmier 01:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Ehcmier

Oh, I can dive into some linking of the arrow articles right away. Just follow my lead, and if you disagree with me, change it. =D

I vote it's T1, TG, T2, and T3 for citation coding, then. (Editors who would vote differently should make a note of it in this thread.) Mission codes should follow whatever convention is given by the respective game files. We don't need to care about it appearing strange (TGM15 coming before TGM6), we're gonna have a citation index. We click on the reference abbreviation, and there it is explained. Wait and see. I'll show you.

We are naturally going to have to categorize quite heavily. You know, like "Category: Thief Gold missions" and "Category:Characters" with sub-categories as appropriate. Category:Weapons, Category:Equipment, etcetera. The trouble with that is normally that not all items, abstract or otherwise, are easily squeezed into artificial typologies.

When I started the topic, I was unaware of the Unused! article. I think we could even create a template for that... Including color-coding, too.

Our audience includes everyone. Actually, we potentially include everyone. Isn't that a nice thought? =)

I believe that with proper markup and/or layout it won't be too hard to skip reading too much about the game(s) in danger of getting spoiled. Explicit spoiler warnings might be appropriate in some cases, but this is not the NKL. Instead, I suspect people will hope to come here to be spoiled, and to learn something about the Thief Universe they were not previously aware of. And WRT jargon, the sensible thing would to explain each use of jargon in their respective articles, no? =)

So I'm not at all worried about the non-veterans, who quite certainly make up the most numerous reader type.

Amidst all my optimism, though, I find reason to admonish my fellow editors: We are preciously few as of yet, and need to focus on tasks in order of priority... but we decide the priorities ourselves around here! I guess when a little more content is up, there's reason to try and contact some TTLG members, for instance, in order to help editing.

Larris 02:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha! Excellent! I don't mind explaining and warning, as long as it doesn't take up too much space, or hamper navigation. :p A Legend page, then? I await to see what you've got up your sleeve. As for me, I'm in DromEd as we type....

Ehcmier 02:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Ehcmier

Larris, those ideas are major! When I started making the pages I didn’t do anything serious about referencing. My biggest contribution on that is that the TG text page looked like T2 page looks now, but that’s just it. I made the Unused page because my first concerns about referencing came along. But it needs serious revision and editing and off course thanks for the linking and sorry for the grammar :)

As for the citations I vote for T1, G, 2 and 3, because those sound the best in my opinion. But as Ehcmier pointed I’m concerned about the newbies. When you reach verdict you can post it as for Editors to change their pages as well.

Dan7 08:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

T1,TG,T2,T3 works well for file and image names as well as page names, most of which are in that format already. But we will still need to use the full names in certain places like headers on pages and the main page links.

This is what a Catagory page will look like Category:Weapon , it may work to just use it instead of the Items_Weapons_Tools page, but it look odd with other pages.

The WOW style citations look fine to use.

I wouldn't woory too much about spoilers, at this point in time,maybe if T4 come around though.

And the graphical site template can be changed, the current one is a gaming template. :There are others that you can change in your own Special:Preferences page and override the default, so try them out and see if any look better, we can also do a custom skin via CSS.

Sxerks 15:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

We are all in agreement, then. Nice work on the Category:Weapon BTW.

I'll see if I can whip up a few citation templates soon.

Larris 21:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I suppose it's time to ask again whether there should be a change in our previous consensus regarding SPOILERS. I'm noticing that articles are being written to not give away plot points. Ehcmier 07:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Ehcmier

A general warning on the main page would suffice, there is no need to hold back information in the articles.--Sxerks 21:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Search Engine

Can we embed a search engine into the Wikia? The Search Thief Wiki function looks for specific words in headers and certain types of pages only. I haven't been able to readily find terms and phrases in bodies of text, especially in our discussion pages. The more information is put in, the more this will become necessary to avoid clicking on multiple possible locations by headers alone.

Also, I won't be creating categories or pages too much. Not being able to repair terminology issues or typos as needed, nor being able to delete inaccurate, obsolete, or redundant categories, means every link to the wrong page will have to be corrected manually. Currently it's much easier to discuss what to do with information, settle on a decision, then create the page. That could be reduced by not linking to pages with rough headers, or headers that are inaccurate guesses as placeholders. Is Sxerks the only one who can correct bad headers? Or am I the only one who cannot?

Ehcmier 09:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC)Ehcmier

In the Special:Specialpages there is a search that has choices Special:Search

"headers"? as in page names? anyone can move/redirect to a different name, I'm pretty sure I'm the only one who can delete anything, which isn't that hard to do, just point it out on my talk page.

Sxerks 14:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look at those search options. Ah. See if an adjustment of Special:Preferences#prefsection-7 does the trick.

It's true that each link must be corrected manually (I think), but with automatic redirection from the old header of a moved page to the current location, it's not that much of a problem. Often it would not really be necessary to traverse the "What links here" result page from the old location. I've been correcting the headers of the old "Missionname: in game contents" articles to "Missionname: In-game contents", just because I thought it looked better. I've been meaning to do the same to the other articles of the same type.

In any case, I believe the value of categories outweighs the risk of having to correct them later.

Larris 18:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Abbreviations, round 2

I liberally formatted the threads here for readability, BTW. Discussion has arisen there, and I thought we ought to move it over here. Quote:

"Question - why TDS and not T3? Larris 11:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Because it is the abbreviation of the Original Title, whereas T3 doesn't really exist.--Sxerks 17:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)"

End quote.

Didn't we agree ten months ago, as evidenced above? Why the change of mind? Even if you were correct, which is debatable, isn't the precedence of material throughout the Thief Wikia overwhelmingly in favor of T3? At this point, alternative references are easy to redirect, but file naming practice is another matter.

And I think at any rate that "accuracy" here could and should be sacrificed in favor of consistency. What of TtDP and TIItMA? TDSMEe2?? =) IMO, T1/2/3 still work a lot better from a naming perspective in all ways imaginable. I can make an exception from consistency in the case of TG not being T1G (but insisting on T2G, if need should be. Insh'Allah.)

And Thief 3 was and is used by fans and professionals around the world. I understand and (to a degree) agree with Eidos' decision to remove the numeral to help ease in new players, but it IS the third part of the story. If anything, I'd think the Thief Wiki would be a great place to remind everyone of that, and bring the original consistency back. =) --Larris 09:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Not sure why I wrote that at the time (10 months ago), and don't recall even reading the conversation. I can only assume that at the time the only thing on the wiki(pages/images that had prefixes) was the Mapping Project and the Resources, which used T3, and that's why I thought it would be fine.

A month or so after that, I started the FM section, as well as the OM pages, which use TDS for accuracy's sake. For consistency's sake I should have gone back and changed the Mapping and Resources pages to TDS.

The names are interchangeable and we know that it is the third in the series, but file and article names are generally unseen(wikicode), so it can be called whatever in the articles, but the underpinnings should be accurate. Though either way it maybe relatively confusing to newcomers. --Sxerks 00:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

T1/T2/T3 works much better than TDP/TMA/TDS for many reasons:

• Easier to understand which game, the first groundbreaker, second continuation, or the latest third.
• Lets the visitor know which installation number (as opposed to name), to easily determine the sequence.
• Numbers are less confusing than the names (TDP similar to TDS, etc)
• Thief DP is not named Thief I because Eidos never planned multiple games at once
• Thief MA is prefixed with Thief II, MA is just the theme of the game
• Thief DS was to be named Thief III, but Eidos couldn't since new players would feel alienated to the series.

Drtomjenkins 10:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

The underlying articles and file names will be T1,TG,T2,TDS. In articles they can be anything in the Legend, though they should be spelled out as much as possible as the short abbreviations really only look good when used in a table format. --Sxerks 17:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

So be it then. I like the idea of Thief 3 getting abbreviated within a different convention from the others, because you know, it can be considered an independent game, which is not necessarily a sequel to Thief 2. -- Drtomjenkins 04:17, 27 April 2009 (UTC)