Difference between revisions of "The re-PSUPedia talk:Manual of style"

Revision as of 04:06, 18 August 2007

To help save space and make browsing this page easier, older discussions will be archived here.

Open polls

VOTE: Weapon template

Before we go any further with weapon template implementation, let's make if official with a vote like we did with the other standards. Please cast your vote below by posting your choice in bold followed by your signature (and reasoning, if you want). Also, if anyone has another template that they would like to propose, please do so. In such an event, if your vote is swayed by a new entry, please feel free to update your vote.

• Qwerty's template
• F Gattaca's template

Voting will be open from now until 12:00a.m. Tuesday, August 21. EspioKaos 00:22, 14 August 2007 (BST)

• Qwerty's template - I prefer this template. The seperated tables allow for users to easily find what details they need. Natasha Milarose 19:29, 14 August 2007 (GMT +10)
• Qwerty's template --Beatrixkiddo 00:46, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• Qwerty's template - I like the general idea of this one, but now that I've seen it filled in on a few occasions, there are a few things that I don't like about it. For one, when shop and pricing information is put into its respective table, it begins to squash together the other tables, making them look, well, bloated. (Heh, for a lack of a better term.) I've been trying to come up with an alternative based on this design that solves this, but so far, I've had no luck. I'll keep trying, though, and submit my version if I'm successful. So, for now, my vote goes with this one. EspioKaos 01:05, 14 August 2007 (BST)
  • I noticed the same thing on a few pages. It's due to "Unknown" taking up a lot more horizontal room than an actual price would, never fear. :P I was gonna change the unknown to "???" but didn't feel like messing with Q's pages. --Beatrixkiddo 01:48, 14 August 2007 (BST)
  • http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/beatrix_kiddo/Clip_10.jpg. In this example pic, sample prices are put in, making the boxes not get squished. --Beatrixkiddo 02:11, 14 August 2007 (BST)
  • It only looks squished if you use something less than 1280 x 1024, which I figured was more or less standard. >_> --Qwerty 06:12, 14 August 2007 (BST)
    • Here's a pic showing how the template is fine at a higher resolution. --Qwerty 07:03, 14 August 2007 (BST)
  • In other news, pricing can replace grinding in the second line, which in turn would move down to a third. Such a change could be easily implemented, but isn't necessary at 1280 x 1024 and above, and I'd imagine anyone playing PSU (at least on PC) can support that resolution (even if PSU has to run lower). Regardless, the change is easy to make if deemed necessary. --Qwerty 06:50, 14 August 2007 (BST)
    • I used to have my monitor set to 1280x1024, but for some reason, it kept squealing every once in a while. D: I finally just knocked it down by one spot and it stopped. I'm building a new computer very soon (well, as long as my new motherboard that should be arriving soon works this time), so once it's set up, I'll see if I can get away with a better resolution. I preferred 1280x1024, anyway.  :) EspioKaos 15:35, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• F Gattaca's template - I'm a lurker and often use the PSUpedia but never edited yet, so I guess throwing my say wouldn't hurt either. Qwerty's has some several advantages, namely being squashed to fit in half of a screen(in my resolution, at least) thus allowing on checking quickly the stats of a weapon, but I preffer F Gattaca's overall. It's breathier, spacier and feels more encyclopedic. Plenty of space and no risk of entries of squashing up into a mess. While it takes a screen, it's still pretty small and spacy. So, yeah, my vote's for F Gattaca's. Emryl Denjay 01:42, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• F Gattaca's template - I prefer the non-squished look. Firehawke 01:53, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• Qwerty's template. - Mewn 10:40, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• Qwerty's template. 12 10:45, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• Qwerty's template. Clover 12:15, 14 August (BST)
• I can't say I'm a fan of the redundancy displayed with the "Rank" field of Qwerty's template. "Rarity" already has that covered, so couldn't we find a better use for that field? - Miraglyth 18:37, 14 August 2007 (BST)
  • Well, the table looks really lopsided without it, so unless you can suggest something better to put there, then that's really a moot point. --Qwerty 18:53, 14 August 2007 (BST)
  •  :O I just realized a "version" (i.e. PAU/AoI) field would work well there. At any rate, stuff like that is easy to change in the template. --Qwerty 19:04, 14 August 2007 (BST)
    • A version field would be great. Of course, keep in mind that TECH weapons present a new problem. They only affect one stat (TP), thus leaving one stat box open (the one that was for ATA in striking and ranged weaponry). Any ideas? EspioKaos 19:07, 14 August 2007 (BST)
    • Wouldn't Rowspan 2 solve that particular problem? - Mewn 19:22, 14 August 2007 (BST)
      • Yeah, planning on just rowspan for the TP issue, but a version field would be nice once we get a vectored logo for regular PSU to match the AoI one. --Qwerty 19:25, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• Qwerty's template. - Demon 04:06, 18 August 2007 (BST)

VOTE: Item template

Let's make it official on this one, too. Right now, I think the only proposal out there is mine, but I'd like to open up the floor once again in case anyone else has any ideas. If so, please submit your ideas! As with before, please cast your vote in bold followed by your signature.

• EspioKaos' template
• Other; please elaborate.

Voting will be open from now until 12:00a.m. Tuesday, August 21. EspioKaos 15:51, 14 August 2007 (BST)

• EspioKaos' template EspioKaos 15:51, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• EspioKaos' template. - Mewn 17:02, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• EspioKaos' template --Qwerty 17:49, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• EspioKaos' template - Bit of a no-brainer. But as with shop buy/sell stats, I'm not sure about the presence of PM feed stats. The star value and item type (e.g. Ingredient in above example) is already given, no? - Miraglyth 18:26, 14 August 2007 (BST)
  • Yeah, I put that there as filler, but it's just kind of stuck. Other stuff could go in its place. EspioKaos 21:24, 14 August 2007 (BST)
    • Would definitely like to see discussion on that. We'd already determined for other tables that feed stats are best left to the Partner Machinery article. - Miraglyth 00:27, 16 August 2007 (BST)
      • Drop details (especially for rare materials) would be a good replacement for the feeding info. Do you think keeping synthesis uses is good? EspioKaos 00:32, 16 August 2007 (BST)

VOTE: Color-coding

Another one to get out there and finalize. At the moment, the only discrepancy I've come across with the color-coding system is in the shade of red used to identify an item that has not been officially released. In the current tables, it's of a lighter shade than what has been proposed. As before, if anyone has another suggestion, please post it. In the meantime, cast your vote in bold followed by your signature.

• Color proposal #1
• Color proposal #2 - The only change is in the shade of red.
• Other; please elaborate.

Voting will be open from now until 12:00a.m. Tuesday, August 21. EspioKaos 15:59, 14 August 2007 (BST)

• Color proposal #1 EspioKaos 15:59, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• Colour proposal #1. - Mewn 17:02, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• Color proposal #1 --Qwerty 17:49, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• Colour proposal #1: Edit - Ah, I see what's being voted on here. Actually I used the lighter red initially because I found reds that were much deeper stole too much attention from the text. It's arguably too pale now, but I didn't expect availability to be too important a detail. In any case, #aaccff and #ffaaaa can of course be shortened to #acf and #faa - Miraglyth 18:20, 14 August 2007 (BST)

VOTE: Main weapon listing table

And another one. (One of these days I'll take the time to use the actual poll tags, but in the meantime, this will work.) As with some of the previous polls, this one is more or less a yea or nay kind of thing. I haven't gotten any negative opinions on this layout after making a few discussed modifications, but I want to make its standardization official. As before, bold you choice and follow it up with your signature. If you vote other, please submit your own proposal. If a new proposal is made and it sways your vote, please feel free to update accordingly.

• Proposal #1
• Other; please elaborate.

Voting will be open from now until 12:00a.m. Wednesday, August 22. EspioKaos 00:21, 16 August 2007 (BST)

• Proposal #1 EspioKaos 00:21, 16 August 2007 (BST)
• Proposal #1. - Mewn 11:08, 16 August 2007 (BST)
• Proposal #1: - For once, no real objections. But perhaps the "JP/unavailable" colours could do with a slight bleaching. - Miraglyth 18:30, 16 August 2007 (BST)
  • Perhaps so. I've been changing these to color templates in the tables over the past few days, so if/when we do change anything, it will only require one simple edit as opposed to some ridiculously large number of them.  ;) EspioKaos 20:10, 16 August 2007 (BST)
    • True, but people will need to agree on it nontheless, which is proving a time-consuming process! - Miraglyth 17:25, 17 August 2007 (BST)

Unit tables

Rank	Name	Maker	Tech.	Ment.	Ver.	Comments
1★	Cara / Force		20	0		--
	Cara / Mind		0	10		--
Rank	Name	Maker	Tech.	Ment.	Ver.	Comments
6★	Te / Force S		100	-50		--
Rank	Name	Maker	Tech.	Ment.	Ver.	Comments
9★	Te / TECH PP Save		-30	0		Lowers PP usage and TP.

This is the general idea for unit tables. Of course, we'll swap out Tech and Ment with Att, Acc, Def, Eva and End where applicable. Anything else we should add? EspioKaos 03:07, 18 August 2007 (BST)

Just wanted to add that I've done the initial conversion of the tables for both online and offline. You can find it here, I'll keep it updated with any suggestions/changes until the format is finalized. Propagandist 04:56, 18 August 2007 (BST)

• Excellent work!  :D Two things. First, a few of the offline S-rank units are identified with the A-rank green. Minor, I know.  ;) Second, in a few of the comments sections, it might look better with commas or semicolons separating two descriptions (Hard / Power Charge, for example). Or maybe line breaks. EspioKaos 05:06, 18 August 2007 (BST)

Mission info articles

This is what I have in mind for individual mission articles. Of course, fill in the enemy and drop sections with actual information. Opinions? Suggestions? EspioKaos 00:08, 17 August 2007 (BST)

• I suggest an infobox (à la Wikipedia) to the side showing at least the following things:
  • Mission name (maybe JP name as well, since there is a large difference between the two in many cases)
  • Start Counter
  • Destination
  • Area(s) that the mission takes place in (e.g. Mad Creatures takes place in Raffon Meadow, Mad Beasts in Raffon Lakeshore etc.)
  • Type of mission (Free, Story, Co-Op, Party, Event)
  • Available ranks
  • Elements represented in the mission. - Mewn 12:03, 17 August 2007 (BST)

I'll see if I can take a shot at making a design like this when I have a chance. (Sometimes tables just don't come out like I want, though, so no promises. XD) EspioKaos 03:36, 18 August 2007 (BST)

Weapon listing table

And now we have a complete proposal for the tables used to list weapons. Really, the only thing that's changed is the addition of the column used to identify items exclusive to the expansion (thanks for the icons, F Gattaca and Qwerty!).

Rank	Name	Maker	PP	Att.	Acc.	Req.	Ver.	Comments
1★	Sample		230	72	42	27	Template:PSU-version	--
	Samplesou		260	64	38	29	Template:PSU-version	--
	Shigga Sample		200	76	45	30	Template:PSU-version	Drop: Sample Monster Lv01~09
Rank	Name	Maker	PP	Att.	Acc.	Req.	Ver.	Comments
4★	Sample Mk. 2		333	302	149	164	Template:AotI-version	--
6★	Sample Mk. 3		356	450	212	266	Template:PSU-version	--
	Samplesou Mk. 2		403	402	189	281	Template:AotI-version	--
Rank	Name	Maker	PP	Att.	Acc.	Req.	Ver.	Comments
7★	Shigga Sample Mk. 2		340	553	253	325	Template:PSU-version	Drop: Sample Monster Lv80~99
Rank	Name	Maker	PP	Att.	Acc.	Req.	Ver.	Comments
10★	Shigga Sample Mk. 3		380	732	373	488	Template:PSU-version	Drop: Sample Monster Lv100+
12★	Shigga Samplec		300	625	618	617	Template:PSU-version	Still unreleased in JP.

Opinions? EspioKaos 20:43, 14 August 2007 (BST)

• • Quick adjustment. Changed the Att. and Acc. columns to ATP and ATA. EspioKaos 20:54, 14 August 2007 (BST)
    • I'm so damn indecisive. Changed it back since the in-game windows list weapon stats by Att., Acc., Tech., etc. EspioKaos 19:31, 15 August 2007 (BST)
      • Good thing, too. - Miraglyth 18:27, 16 August 2007 (BST)
        • Implying something? EspioKaos 20:11, 16 August 2007 (BST)
          • That's what they are in the game, is all. - Miraglyth 05:04, 18 August 2007 (BST)
      • Something possessed me today to work on updating these tables throughout the site. It's actually been really fun, too. Anyway, just wanted to say that if the final outcome of the vote on this design changes anything, I will personally go through and make any necessary adjustments since I've begun implementation ahead of schedule. EspioKaos 00:47, 16 August 2007 (BST)

Weapon template standard proposal

• Qwerty, Beatrix and myself have come to a consensus on which weapon template we prefer: this one. Any objections? The whole decision process on this matter is taking a lot longer than we'd hoped, so we're just trying to speed things along. EspioKaos 19:25, 12 August 2007 (BST)
• Yes, this particular issue has taken too long. I have no particular objections. If there is enough objection a vote will have to be set up, but I don't forsee that. - Mewn 19:32, 12 August 2007 (BST)
• Just one tiny thing. 'Base rate' is mostly useless information; I'd rather see the chance it has on a pure PM. Perhaps both but people don't usually synth guns on armor PMs so... Au+ 21:43, 14 August 2007 (BST)
  • Maybe we could detail increased rates later in each article? Or, an expansion of the synthesis article could include pure and hybrid rates. EspioKaos 03:38, 18 August 2007 (BST)

Weapon table revision

• Since our S-rank listing is using a darker red to point out items that have not been released in any version of the game, shouldn't our new weapon table do the same? Or is there a reason that it uses a lighter shade of red? EspioKaos 03:49, 4 August 2007 (BST)
  • I believe the notion was that it was too dark/bold for general use in other temples but let me mess around with it, and see how it looks. --Qwerty 05:40, 4 August 2007 (BST)
    • Any updates on this end?  ;) EspioKaos 19:14, 7 August 2007 (BST)
    • Yeah, I was wondering this myself. The sooner finalized templates can be shown by the both of you, the sooner we can vote on them and institute a standard. Oh, by the way, something neither of you seem to have considered at the moment is AoI - if you are working on your templates at all you might want to add a place to put which versions of the game an item is available on, for future use. - Mewn 21:23, 7 August 2007 (BST)
      • Perhaps we can make the text for the item name yellow...while still retaining it as a link to its own article. Not sure if this is possible, or if it'd even look good though. But a seperate coloumn would probably be a lot easier anyways. - Saiffy 21:36, 7 August 2007 (BST)
      • I'll see if I can mess around with the tables some to add a column for AotI-exclusive items. Same for the individual item templates. On that, I'm trying to come up with some ideas for templates on other non-weapon stuff like traps, materials and consumables. I'll try to get some things done on that as soon as possible. EspioKaos 21:59, 7 August 2007 (BST)
      • OK, here we go. I quickly added in a column before the comments section to display which version of the game an item is from. As I state in my notes there, I think the italics look a little silly, but I don't want to make a double-standard since game titles are supposed to be italicized anyway. Perhaps we could use a small icon similar to the manufacturer icons? EspioKaos 00:41, 8 August 2007 (BST)
      • For tables, I suggest we do use something like a very pale yellow as Saiffy suggested, or put in the extra column as Espio did. Alternatively, we could use a very small icon to denote AotI-only things in tables and lists. For articles addressing a bunch of AotI-only content, I suggest we just use something like below. --Qwerty 06:16, 8 August 2007 (BST)
      • Me again. Here is an example of two possible ways to denote an AotI item/quest/whatever in tabular/list form. As noted there, I'm more so fond of the little icon (), as it can be more widely applied. Also, too many varying colors in a table is both hard to remember and confusing to the lay reader. Anyway, comments plx. --Qwerty 06:50, 8 August 2007 (BST)
      • I prefer the column directly stating PSU or AoI, it'd be good for any future expansions, and the colour has the flaw of not telling us if the item is released or not. - Mewn 11:14, 8 August 2007 (BST)
• Check this out. I opted for a scaled down version of the Illuminus logo as opposed to the exclamation point from the beta. I just like it better.  ;) Now we'll need a logo for just the base game. EspioKaos 20:07, 8 August 2007 (BST)
  • Hey, I can do pixel art; if I make a knockoff logo based on the PSU icon and the AoI icon, would those work? F Gattaca 08:13, 10 August 2007 (BST)
    • No real point; we might as well just shrink the official logo, no one seems to care. --Qwerty 18:54, 10 August 2007 (BST)
      • Yeah, the official logo shrunk down will work just fine. Quicker, too.  ;) EspioKaos 19:18, 10 August 2007 (BST)
        • I suppose. I figured transparent pixel art icons would have looked better alongside the manufacturer icons, which have transparent backgrounds themselves. F Gattaca 03:50, 11 August 2007 (BST)
          • What about vector art like the manufacturer icons? (I think it's called vector art.) If someone could do that with the Illuminus logo, we could scale it up and down without distortion so it could be used for multiple purposes. EspioKaos 15:38, 11 August 2007 (BST)
            • That'd be better, since the manufacturer logos are also made from vector graphics, although they're .png files. Following the same pattern, I could do that with Flash and make a big vector .png of the logos--but if you're thinking about that .svg stuff, I've no clue how those vector graphics work. I've only seen them used on Wikipedia ... F Gattaca 19:37, 11 August 2007 (BST)
              • PNG would be great. Give it a shot, if you don't mind.  :) EspioKaos 19:50, 11 August 2007 (BST)
• I just finished a rough design of the Kazarod page. Of course, we still need a picture to add to the upper right, but this is what I think individual weapon pages should look like. (I still need to add drop info in, however. Not sure if I want to do it as text or a table...) EspioKaos 16:58, 12 August 2007 (BST)
  • I guess we'll need to do a referendum on the weapon pages. That's three style propositions now, heh!
    
    Anyway, I finally found the time to work on the vector graphics version of the AoI logo. Tell me what you think:
    
    
    
    You can view the full size (250x250) here. F Gattaca 21:09, 13 August 2007 (BST)
    • Perfect!  :D What program do you use for this? I'd kind of like to try my hand at creating some logos like this for other in-game icons such as status effects and materials. EspioKaos 21:22, 13 August 2007 (BST)
      • I personally used Flash for this, using its Export Image feature to turn my working movie into a still image .png file. There's some dedicated vector graphics programs out there, but I've found Flash can handle many of the same things. F Gattaca 21:30, 13 August 2007 (BST)

Individual item pages

This format seems to be going over very well considering that Beatrix, myself and a few others have been faithfully using it over the past few days as we add new articles to the wiki. Considering that, I assume it could more or less be a set standard, but I'd still like to see if anyone has any opinions on the style that maybe they've just kept to themselves. A few things on it, though:

• I've opted for a more bold set of colors for the star rating as the ones selected for the table cell backgrounds seemed a little too light against the normal white background. The green star was especially difficult to see.
• I'd ultimately like to set up a number of more organized categories, such as what we're doing now with these small articles, as opposed to the 500+ categories we have now that split everything up into smaller and smaller pieces. I mentioned this at Raffon Field Base, but I'd like to say it here, too. I really think we need to clear out a ton of the unnecessary categories.

Anyway, I think that's it. Comments, suggestions? EspioKaos 18:31, 11 August 2007 (BST)

• • Well, for the star rating, I guess you could try a wikitable thing to get a darker background. Something like:

{| class=wikitable
| style="background:#A7A7A7" | <font color=blue>★★★<font color=cyan>★★★<font color=lightgreen>★★★<font color=gold>★★★
|}


Which gives:

As for the categories, they were originally intended to be there because we can't really get the advanced search functions a more conventional database can have and this was a work-around. They've never been used really and are archaic, they're also intrinsically tied with the old, broken template system. They should be deleted so we can have cleaner categories. Special List pages can be set up if necessary. - Mewn 20:21, 11 August 2007 (BST)

• I am pro special list page.  ;) We could use that to sort out which categories to keep and which to axe. EspioKaos 04:40, 12 August 2007 (BST)
  • • I personally think the way Espio is doing them looks fine, and the grayish background table for the stars would just look out of place. I'm also curious if the board table I used on my sample weapon page might look better for the individual item pages as well, rather than the textual board and ingredient description. The colored star rarity would also fit in well with my weapon page, if we choose to do that one. --Qwerty 01:03, 12 August 2007 (BST)
      • Create an example of what you have in mind and we can judge from there.  :) EspioKaos 04:40, 12 August 2007 (BST)
        • Nothing too fancy, just a simple little table, easy to read and standardized. Here be the example. My pricing table could be thrown in too, but I think that might be a bit much. Also, for my sample weapon page, I could just put the color-coded stars below the item description as on the item pages, or possibly in the weapon name title line (with reduced text-size, obviously). --Qwerty 07:03, 12 August 2007 (BST)
          • Yeah, the pricing table would probably be too much, but the synthesis table looks great there. EspioKaos 15:01, 12 August 2007 (BST)

• As an aside, it's worth standardizing exactly what types of items are to use this style - obviously synthesis materials and traps use it, but I also assume that consumables, buff items, room goods, redecoration tickets, boards which don't particularly belong to another page (e.g. conversion boards), PA Disks and Clothes/Parts will also use this standard? - Mewn 20:40, 12 August 2007 (BST)
  • Yeah, that sounds about right. I plan on doing some more item pages later today, possibly finishing off the synthesis materials section. In the meantime, however, I'm going to head off to the gym for a bit while I've got a chance. (There are weights to be lifted there, and it just so happens that I'm the only one who can lift them.  :D) While I'm there, I'll be going over these things in my head. EspioKaos 20:58, 12 August 2007 (BST)

Synthesis board suggestion

(Copied from the scape doll talk page.) I really hate questioning something that we're trying to set as a standard, but I think this might be a valid point. While working on the scape doll's board info, I realized that the rarity of the board and the rarity of the item are different. While I don't think this is a common occurrence, I think we should address it before we begin a mass implementation of synth board tables, especially since the board rarity is never mentioned anywhere. I suggest changing the title of the table to the board name and then changing the current board name cell to indicate rarity. Like so:

I think we should do this, unless we're going to make individual pages for each board. Actually, that's something else. Should we do that, or just make a synth board redirect to the page of the item it creates? EspioKaos 18:40, 13 August 2007 (BST)

I'd be all for individual pages for boards, but the simplicity of putting board and item on one page is clear to me as well. --Beatrixkiddo 23:17, 13 August 2007 (BST)

• I have to admit, I'm not much a fan of this style. Why?

Seems a very strange way of arranging it to me, and not particularly conductive to finding out the desired information on a synthesis quickly. Additionally, there's a lot of "style="background:sixcharacters"" expressions in there which - while easily eliminated by a template - would surely be better off made header cells (start with ! instead of | ) and then just make the "title" cell darker manually.

If I may pitch in a couple of ideas:

Actually, the code for the second one isn't edit-friendly at all. But some might prefer the look so I'll leave it there. - Miraglyth 00:07, 14 August 2007 (BST)

• • I like how the vertical version looks. One problem, though: what to do with the empty cells for boards that have less than four materials? Also, I still favor the idea of keeping the title of the table the name of the board it's about. EspioKaos 16:24, 14 August 2007 (BST)
• I do too, come to think of it.

The "number of materials" thing could do with exploration. By nature, all weapons require four (Photons, Ores, Metals, Wood) and some line shields require four (Photons, Ores, Materials, sometimes event drops). Then there are Food and Item boards which take two (Natural Materials, Chemicals), Decoration boards which take two (Special Materials, Wood) and finally Grinder / Material Upgrade boards which use just one (Grinder bases and the materials, respectively).

It's the last two that bother me, since those won't fit into the "vertical with oddly-grouped" setup either. - Miraglyth 18:35, 14 August 2007 (BST)

• • We could always take the route of unique tables for each type of synthesis board, but do what we can to make them all have the same general feel. Maybe? I'll give some more thought to it to see if I can come up with another design. EspioKaos 19:10, 14 August 2007 (BST)