Semi Protection

UESPWiki talk:Namespaces/Namespace Reorganization

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search
This is an archive of past UESPWiki talk:Namespaces discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page, except for maintenance such as updating links.

This discussion was moved here from the Community Portal on June 20 by Nephele

Ratwar 1

Ever since 2005, it has been known that the Tamriel has problems, such as Tamriel:Tamriel not being an article about the continent itself and the fact that Tamriel really doesn’t cover what’s in the section. Therefore, I (and a few people who I have discussed this with on IRC) have come to the conclusion it might be a good idea to move the Tamriel namespace to a more accurately named namespace, such as ‘Lore’. While we were talking about this, several other problems with minor namespaces came up. I would like to propose that, in addition to moving the Tamriel namespace, we removed both the General and Review namespaces. The single-editor content (Fanfiction and Reviews) in both namespaces would be moved to Userspace. All the other content in General would be moved into mainspace. The move of single editor content to userspace will allow patrollers to easily identify who’s allowed to edit certain articles. The move of General’s content to mainspace would prevent inaccurate redirects (currently searching for ‘Bethesda’ takes you to Daggerfall:Bethesda not General:Bethesda) and won’t cause any problems because none of the articles are game specific. These moves will require a small amount of change to the sidebar. The new one, which will use a tweak to allow wikitext and look something like this. Now, obviously none of this is set in stone, so I/we would like to get some feedback on it. If you want a few more details on the ideas, take a look at my Sandbox. We’re especially wondering if anyone has any suggestions for the ‘new’ Tamriel besides Lore.--Ratwar 00:26, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

I think moving the Tamriel space will have good and bad results; probably more good than bad though, so as far as the moving goes, I'd agree. As for the FanFic, I think there should still be a page which has a list, with links to the userspaces. - Game LordTalk|Contribs 10:15, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Game Lord, that's definitely part on the plan. --Ratwar 11:24, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Benould 1

I agree with the main part of Ratwar's (and others) suggestion, renaming Tamriel NS to Lore will help define the section better and make it easier to keep focus. Naming it Lore will also future-proof it, in case of a non-Tamriel TES game. As it stands now, there is a lot of uncertainty what Tamriel is and how articles should be treated there, this move along with discussions can help bring clarity, as discussed in IRC. Further, I think moving single-editor content like lists, reviews and fan-fiction to User space is an elegant solution, preserving the wiki spirit, yet providing exceptions. --BenouldTC 12:43, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Rpeh 1

I broadly support all of that. To go through the points one by one:

  • Moving Tamriel to Lore would not only resolve the point Ratwar mentioned, it would also make it slightly clearer what the namespace is for. Dictionary.com defines "lore" as "the body of knowledge, esp. of a traditional, anecdotal, or popular nature, on a particular subject", which is exactly what we're trying to achieve. It might also help with the long-mooted perspective shift on those pages.
  • Most of the work in moving the pages will be done by NepheleBot and RoBoT for two reasons - speed and accuracy. Trying to do a move like this by hand would undoubtedly lead to dozens of mistakes, most of which will take ages to be found. Some cleanup will need to be done by hand though. For instance, if a page links to Tamriel:Tamriel at the moment, should it redirect to Lore:Tamriel or Lore:Lore? That kind of judgment call is beyond our bots.
  • Moving fanfics to user space. I was against this at first, but Lurlock and others have convinced me and I've already userfied my own stories. I agree with Game Lord that there should be a central page but that could be a part of...
  • Moving to Mainspace. This is the bit with which I disagree. The specific problem of the DF:Bethesda and Gen:Bethesda could be fixed with a mainspace redirect but I don't like the idea of putting, for example, the developer biogs in MS. I don't have a definite solution but perhaps a TES namespace would work here? It could contain the developer and company info as well as hub pages for fanfics and reviews, which brings me to
  • Reviews, if present, should be in user space because they are, ipso facto, personal opinion. The same goes for other material that authors don't want editing like lists of mods. Material on the wiki outside userspace is editable unless there's an administrative reason why it shouldn't be. If we start changing that rule it's just going to mean work for those of us who patrol the site.
  • I like the new sidebar.

I'm sure there'll be more to say on this, but those are my first thoughts on the matter. –RpehTCE 10:59, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

I'd rather keep Tamriel as it is. I can't really see any advantages to changing it, and unless the fanfiction problem gets worse, I think we should leave that alone too. --HMSVictoryTalk 15:06, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Why don't you agree with the advantages that have already been stated, HMSVictory?-Ratwar 16:45, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Nephele 1

I'm another supporter, and in general agree with the various points brought up by Ratwar, rpeh, and Benould. To throw in a few extra thoughts:

  • Renaming Tamriel
    • The current name confuses new readers (who have no idea what the "Tamriel" link in the sidebar does, and no idea what it means if an article says "Tamriel" at the top) and confuses editors. I think the name is fundamentally preventing Tamriel articles from being as useful as they could be.
    • There have been criticisms that articles such as Nirn don't belong "in Tamriel" since actually Tamriel is in Nirn, rather than vice versa.
    • Lore seems to satisfy the criteria needed for a new name: short (easy to type); makes sense even to newcomers to Elder Scrolls; describes the namespace's content. But if there are other suggestions, now's the time to consider them.
    • Moving the namespace is going to be a fairly major job: it is feasible, and it can be done with little or even no disruption to readers, but nevertheless it is not something to take lightly. However, if renaming the namespace will improve the site longterm (which I believe it will), then it's something we should do sooner rather than later. And right now seems like a particularly good time to consider it: many editors are starting to work in the Tamriel namespace, so it would be good to do any reorganization before a major expansion. Also, it would be best to have any reorganization completely finished (including all cleanup, checking, etc.) long before the next TES game is released and we have to cope with all of that chaos....
  • User-specific articles
    • The general philosophy of the wiki is that any article can be edited by anyone. The software isn't really designed to accomodate articles with limited authorship.
    • Experience with the fanfiction articles shows that trying to mix "owned" articles with other wiki articles leads to problems (e.g., A Few Questions, Fanfiction, to list just a couple of the incidents).
    • Although placing articles in the user space doesn't add any automatic protection to the articles, it does provide other wiki editors with a clear signal that the articles are not typical wiki articles, and that there may be limits to what edits are acceptable. It may not be a perfect solution, but there is no perfect way to include non-wiki content on a wiki. A perfect solution probably requires a website designed to host user-specific articles.
    • It may be useful to introduce some new templates for use on user subpages that clarify what level of editing is acceptable on a user-owned article, for example, the notice at the top of User:Wrye/Somewhat_Acerbic_Modders_Dictionary. In the absence of any tag on the page, it would be assumed that editing is limited to the article's owner.
    • Articles in the user namespace can still be linked to from other locations, included in categories such as Category:Fanfiction, and otherwise given just as much prominence as any other article on the site. Userspace articles don't have to be limited to sandboxes and test pages.
  • Cleaning up General and Review
    • These are both very poorly defined namespaces. I think each namespace should have a clear definition of its purpose and what type of article belongs in the namespace, so readers know where to look for certain information. General isn't even really a catchall for miscellaneous articles, since several such articles exist in the main namespace. In past namespace discussions it's been suggested that articles which don't belong in a gamespace should be left in the main namespace.
    • I'm open to opinions on whether or not the articles in General should be moved to the main namespace. But if we are going to put them somewhere other than the main namespace, I'd like to see some clear guidelines or definition for the new namespace.

--NepheleTalk 18:17, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Wrye 1

Essentially, I've argued (above and Authored Lists) that we need a category for articles that is somewhere between the fully restricted rules applied to user pages, and the "anyone can edit" rule of regular pages. I.e. there is material which: 1) fits quite appropriately at UESP, 2) naturally has subjective components (and thus should not be open to general editing), and 3) has other reasons for which it should not be permanently associated with one user.

No one here has answered those arguments in any way. The only objection has been that any (non-user page) that breaks the "anyone can edit" rule is counter to the wiki way. This is adminitis -- it's letting the rules overrule consideration of what is most useful/beneficial. (Keep in mind that I do not break the "anyone can edit" rule lightly -- I'm well aware of its importance and have criticized other wikis for unnecessarily breaking it.)

End mini-rant. It looks like I'm going to lose this one. So, reviewing options for treating Limited Editorship Articles (aka LE Articles, aka Authored articles, aka Authored Lists):

  • Put in regular spaces (Tes4Mod, General) etc., with a limited editing blurb at top.
    • I think this is the best solution, but it looks like everyone else is against this.
  • Put them in a special namespace ("Review", "Authored", "Semi-Public", "LE", etc.)
    • My second choice. Looks like this is out of favor as well.
  • Put them in user namespace, under individual authors.
    • Worst choice, IMO, but seems to be the one favored by others.
    • Can be problematic when there are multiple authors, authorship changes hands, or original author is not on wiki.
  • Put them in user namespace, under a common username.
    • E.g. [[User:Limited/A's List of Mods]], [[User:Limited/Somewhat Acerbic Modders Dictionary]].
    • This is in effect a pseudo-namespace, :shrug:. Articles are still under "User", but it also provides some distinction from regular user pages.

Given that it looks like I'm losing the argument, and that I don't want to spend a heck of a lot more time on a lost cause, then I'm ready to go with the last option.

On the other namespaces:

  • Tamriel >> Lore. Agree.
  • Moving fanfics to user space. I agree. (To be clear, I'm against hosting fanfics -- they're permanently single author items that don't require/benefit from the the in-between state of what I'm calling "Authored Articles".)
  • Discard Review: Agree. Reviews are user specific. IMO, they also should not be hosted, but :shug:. If they are hosted, they belong on userpages.
  • Merge General into Main: Agreed.

--Wrye 19:58, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Wrye, I am sorry that I haven’t been able to respond to your proposal before now. I have been quite busy with thinking and designing the main part of this namespace reorganization, and I have had limited time to deal with the UESPwiki. That being said, I am quite annoyed and insulted that you think my actions are the result of adminitis.
For the problems at hand, I see the best solution as a compromise. I agree that there are certainly downsides to the Userspace, but I am hesitant to allow anyone to post their opinions in the Tes4Mod space because I think it could turn out like Oblivion:Roleplaying#Character_Type_Roleplaying, substandard and in some ways a blot on the wiki. Therefore, I suggest we use a combined approach. Approved/Good Lists will be allowed within the Tes4Mod namespace, but new lists must begin their path in Userspace. The approval process would be very similar to our current featured article policy. All the lists would have a notice at the top, specifying who is allowed to edit them, thus solving the problem with multi-authored lists.--Ratwar 01:15, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Regards promotion from User space to regular space, wouldn't you say that A's List has already passed that test? I'd like to see a yes/no from people who support Ratwar's suggestion. All start a vote header below. --Wrye 21:38, 14 June 2008 (EDT)


GameLord 1

Ok, I think it's time for my response #2; the more detailed one.

  • Tamriel->Lore
    • I'm partly in favour of this. I think we should definately rename Tamriel to clarify what's actually meant to go there; and to make it easier for new users to understand, or even more experienced users who still haven't quite got the hang of it (me). Anyway, the reason I say partly is because although I think some articles (Lore:Dwemer, Lore:Sheogorath) should go into a Lore (Or something similar) space. I'm not so sure however about the articles like Lore:Velothi Mountains, Lore:Nirn or city pages like Lore:Mournhold qualifying as "Lore". To repeat Rpeh's dictionary's definition: the body of knowledge, esp. of a traditional, anecdotal, or popular nature, on a particular subject. The "traditional" part annoys me. Even when I first read the word it's sound suggests some kind of older, traditional nature. (I can't really put it better than that). For instance a book called A Guide to the Alps is a body of knowledge, which provides information in the Alps, but definately wouldn't be considered as lore. That's why I think we should move Tamriel not soley into Lore, but split it into two spaces, Lore and - Geography and Nirn are just a few random first ideas - .
    • That might be a bit hazy, but I think it gets the idea across.
  • Removing General and Review
    • Review: yes! It has two articles in it and they're both more or less by the same person (No offense there Wrye).
    • General: Probably. There isn't very much information in it, and it's hardly viewed very much by the readers. The FanFics to Userspace, another yes, but we do need to keep a list somewhere. I'm not to fussy about where, so long as it exists.
  • New Sidebar: I like it, but as I said before Tamriel->Lore + "Another one"

I think that's more or less all the points, I may have missed a few, but I don't think so. - Game LordTalk|Contribs 03:22, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

HMSVictory 1

I am strongly against most of what has been put forward here. Firstly, the word "Tamriel" is far more relevant and makes far more sense than "Lore." I think "Lore" would confuse new visitors even more than "Tamriel." Removing Review sems like a wise decision, as the information in it can easily go into Wrye's userspace, but surely General should stay? There is plently of valuable information in it that would not fit anywhere else. I see no resaon to remove General at all. The fanfiction shunt makes sense, but unless the problem gets much worse, I think we should leave it as it is.

Another idea of mine is to create Lore, but leave Tamriel as it is. Geographical, Race, and similar information can go in there and historical or otherwise "Lore-like" information can go into Lore. There is plenty of information under Tamriel: that would make no sense under Lore:. --HMSVictoryTalk 04:46, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Rpeh 2: Reply to Wrye, HMSVictory, and Game Lord

First to respond to Wrye: please can we not start flinging pejorative terms like "adminitis" around? It isn't incumbent on Ratwar or anyone else to explain why they want to follow the rules, it's up to you to make a strong case as to why they should be broken, and I haven't seen that so far. I disagree strongly with your assertion that the kind of subjective content suggested fits on UESP. A lot of the work done in patrolling the site consists of removing exactly that type of information and I believe that no (or almost no) pages outside User space have personal opinions on them. I'd much prefer to keep it that way because the alternative isn't appealing. Second, I don't really think it benefits the site either. Any list is going to be the personal opinion of the author, and is unlikely to be of much use to anybody other than that author. Linking to useful lists such as the TESNexus top 100 (as we already do) is more useful because it supplies a community consensus on the best mods - or at least, as close to one as will ever be achieved. I'd also ask that you don't frame the debate in terms of winning and losing. It's about achieving a consensus and doing what is best for the site. Ratwar has already suggested a possible compromise between the two viewpoints and I think it's likely some kind of middle way may be the best solution. To paint this as being about sides and opposition will not help achieve a valid consensus.

Next to Game Lord and HMSVictory. I think you are both overstating the need for a separation of the data. First, you're overemphasising the "traditional" part of the definition. That's often the meaning but it's just as possible to talk about lore in a modern sense. Two namespaces to replace Tamriel would make finding information a nightmare and lead to twice as much confusion. As far as I'm aware, nobody is wedded to the word "Lore" for the new space, however; it's just the best that anybody has suggested so far. There are problems with words like "Mundus" or "Nirn" for exactly the same reason that there are problems with "Tamriel". Victory, you say that "Lore" would be confusing but don't supply any reasons. If anybody really is confused, one click would take them to a page similar to the current Tamriel:Tamriel that will explain what it's about. As for the valuable information in General... there's not much there at all. I think there's a case for a "Real Life" namespace (but with a better name than that!) for information such as the developer biogs but I'd prefer a better name than "General" too.

Anyway. At least the debate is progressing! –RpehTCE 10:58, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Vesna 1

You mean heating up? Okay, kidding. Anyways... to start listing off what I think is necessary and what I don't like.

  • I totally agree with changing the Tamriel namespace to Lore (and I'm volunteering for clean-up work while I'm at it). As for splitting it into Geography and Lore, I don't think that solves any problems. There are many places that are mythological, so we can't say for sure that they even exist. Having one section will also keep it simple. Why make it complicated? The definition of lore is "all the facts and traditions about a particular subject". It is not simply folklore, which is just traditional beliefs. The subject here is the TES universe. So all facts include geographical locations, races, etc.
  • As for moving the General and Review namespaces... well, I don't really get it, so I'm not voting on it (heck, I barely knew those namespaces existed: the only page in General I accessed was fanfiction, and I've never even heard of Review).
  • Moving fanfiction to user spaces... I have no problem with putting my fanfiction under my namespace (sort of like a sandbox, I guess). There it would automatically fall under the "only the user can edit his/her user page" rule. But, for stories that have multiple authorship that could be a problem... As for those who may complain about "not getting enough audience" if they transfer to their rarely-viewed user page... well... the fanfiction page is so deeply lost in General that a casual visitor isn't likely to see it at all. And if we vote to completely remove fanfiction, I have absolutely no problem with transferring mine over to fanfiction.net.

This is basically my thoughts on the matter. And yes, I know it's confusing. :) Vesna 12:37, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Benould 2: Why Lore fits; General -> Meta

I agree with Rpeh's appeal to keep the discussion civil, name calling and "excessive" bolding is counter-productive. Further, I am not convinced that hosted list are part of the scope of the wiki, but if they can be integrated in a user space section, so be it. Second, "Lore" is a term that RPG players understand, whereas Tamriel is foreign, "what does it mean, is this another game?" term. In addition to the arguments already stated above, Lore is at least intriguing to explore for the casual visitor. I am against splitting the new NS into two sections, agreed with Rpeh that positions are somewhat overstated. The places in current Tamriel are the ones you've heard about in rumors, read about in books and so on, you can't actually go there unless they are featured in the particular game, thus being part of the Lore, written and oral history, important people, events and stories of the people of Nirn and other realms. If someone has a better term then Lore for this, I am all ears, just to not like it is not enough. As to renaming "General", it is not a namespace that i am much familiar with, if General is not precise enough, how about "Meta", meaning over-arching all games? All in all, good discussion. --BenouldTC 12:49, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

RobinHood 1

Okay, I was trying not to enter this debate because I didn't feel I knew enough about it...but having read the opinions, what I didn't already know, I've picked up. First off, I can think of several possible names for Tamriel/Lore, though I don't terribly like most of them, I'll admit: "Background", "World" or "WorldInfo", "Universe", "History", or just changing the printed Tamriel's to "Land of Tamriel" and leaving the namespace unchanged. Any kind of Authored Lists should be in the User Space of the author (just like my Mod List is...I wouldn't have it anywhere else!). Same goes for fanfic; multi-author fanfic can get a disclaimer at the top so editors know what the deal is. As for not finding fanfic, make a Category for it and put a fanfic link on the main page, game page or some other prominent page...problem solved. I won't bother with reasons for these opinions, as they pretty much agree with those of the others above who've stated the same things. I think that covers the more controversial issues, but if you want an opinion on anything else, let me know...I'm good at being opinionated giving opinions. :Þ --Robin Hood (TalkE-mailContribs) 13:30, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Lurlock 1

I'll add my voice of support for this - as a matter of fact I think I suggested something like this a while back, though I forget where. Tamriel -> Lore is definitely a good idea, for reasons stated above. Possibly other names such as "Elder Scrolls" or "Universe" might work, but "Lore" seems to be the simplest solution all around. I'm not so sure about General -> Main namespace though. Most of what's in the Main namespace is site-specific stuff, links to the other namespaces, etc. Things like articles about Bethesda and the developpers doesn't currently fit with that. And while I'm not exactly a big supporter of fan-content, I can see where there would be problems with moving all fanfiction and reviews to User space. (Multi-author works, works authored by people not involved with the wiki, etc.) I could see a call for creating a special namespace just for such things - call it "Fan Content" or something like that. This would include all fanfic, reviews, authored lists, and whatever else. Maybe fanart, maybe we could even shunt off the Roleplaying#Character Types section there as an alternative to summarily deleting it all (though if we're talking about deleting it, I'm still in favor). This would also serve to separate the "official" articles, such as those about the developers and such, from the fan-created stuff, without causing the fan-stuff to be hidden away in User space. (Again, I would also be in favor of moving fan-stuff to user space, but I'm offering this as a suggested compromise to those who would be against that idea.) --TheRealLurlock Talk 13:52, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Ratwar 2: Reply to HMSVictory, Gamelord, and Vesna

Tamriel >> Lore move: I am a bit befuddled by the people that disagree with this based on the name lore. In my original post I said, "We’re especially wondering if anyone has any suggestions for the ‘new’ Tamriel besides Lore." I was very aware that the name Lore may not totally fit for all the content (though I do feel it fits the content much better than 'Tamriel'). I think the terms "Elder Scrolls", "World", and "Background" are a bit too convoluted, and lends themselves to some of the same problems as Tamriel (not really identifying the information and conflicting with the article on the actual scrolls themselves), but I think "Universe" is an excellent suggestion, and in many ways fits better than lore. If that is agreeable to everyone, I'd use it instead. As for splitting the namespace into two sections, I am totally against that. It would require far more work.

Fanfic Concerns: I don't think they'll see any decrease in traffic, and in fact, I can see them getting more. Currently, they're three links of the main page (Main Page -> All Games -> General -> Fanfiction). In the new system they will only be two links (Main Page -> All Content -> Fanfiction).

General to mainspace move: On this site, the reason we resist having mainspace articles is simple, they screw up with the 'Go' search function. We don't want someone in Oblivion to type in Dremora and end up on Morrowind:Dremora. However, this reasoning doesn't actually apply to articles in the General Namespace. We don't have articles like Oblivion:Todd Howard, Morrowind:Todd Horward, or Redguard:Todd Howard. The seperate namespace hurts them (the 'Go' function takes people to a search page, rather than directly to the General Page). Not a huge issue, but it can still be resolved. Secondly, having a separate namespace hides the content further down in the sites pages. Sure, we could just link to the General Pages of the 'All Games' page, but this combined with the search functions is two handicapped descisions to avoid precieved problems that don't actually exist. The results of our current policy has been made clear by Vesna, "heck, I barely knew those namespaces existed". I want to fix it.

Fan Content Section: I'm not against this persay, but for the moment, I say we just move them into Userspace. This is already a HUGE task (3652 pages in Tamriel alone, plus redoing all the links). I think that any 'Fan Content' section will need to be considered very carefully, and what we allow in it will also have to be patrolled very well. Let's put that on the back burner, and use the compromise I already outlined.--Ratwar 16:07, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Wrye 2

This is getting a bit hard to follow. It would be nice if someone reorged it a bit. Anyway, proceeding... Regards promotion from User space to regular space, wouldn't you say that A's List has already passed that test? I'd like to see a yes/no from people who support Ratwar's suggestion. All start a vote header below. --Wrye 21:38, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Promote A's List to Tes4Mod?

  • Yes, Promote. --Wrye 21:38, 14 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Yes --Ratwar 00:32, 15 June 2008 (EDT)
Please can we wait until the overall debate is finished before voting on its consequences? The bigger issue takes priority and I'd rather not have it sidetracked into a discussion about one page. –RpehTCE 15:19, 15 June 2008 (EDT)
The very point of this discussion is whether various namespaces should be removed and/or deleted. Ratwar has proposed a solution which involves a vote test. And simply put, if A's List can't pass that vote test then nothing will. And if that's the case then Ratwars solution, doesn't work as advertises, and instead boils down to the solution of "put such articles in user namespaces and leave them there". I.e. the vote is germaine to the discussion.
See Wrye 3 for continuation. --Wrye 22:30, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

Guildknight 1

Okay, here goes:

Tamriel: -> Lore: - I think it makes perfect sense. "Lore" would encompass everything that we cover in that namespace, especially since all geography, history, etc. can be considered Elder Scrolls Lore since it's not real. I'm not against another name, I just haven't heard one that makes as much sense.

Removing General:/Review: - I completely agree. Single-author articles (fanfictions, reviews, mod lists) should be moved to Userspace. Multi-author fanfictions could be posted on a sub-page of the Fanfiction hub, and multi-author lists could be posted on a sub-page of the Tes4Mod page for Mod lists (which would be outside the User-space), and all would have a disclaimer at the top explaining that it's a special case. Mod lists could undergo a featured nomination process to be listed on the Tes4Mod page. I would think that existing lists could be grandfathered in. I can see no issue with articles that aren't about in-game experiences being in the main namespace.

Anyway, that pretty much explains my opinions on it all. By the way, if anyone's interested, I kind of organized the opinions in User:GuildKnight/Sandbox/6|one of my sandboxes. --GuildKnightTalk2me 23:31, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Looks good to me. --Ratwar 00:32, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

Nephele 2

Some thoughts on new names for Tamriel:

  • We could perhaps make up a word. For example, "TESpedia" to summarize that the section is an encyclopedia about The Elder Scrolls. But I don't think a made-up word would necessarily be any more obvious to new readers.
  • Lore is very commonly used in the Elder Scrolls community for exactly this kind of content. For example:
    • Wikipedia acknowledges that there is "a subculture amongst T.E.S. players of history and philosophy debaters affectionately called loremasters."
    • We already have a Loremaster user box.
    • The official forums have an Elder Scrolls Lore forum. That forum discusses geography as well as history and people (i.e., the geography questions in The Elder Scrolls Lore FAQ).
    • Do a search on lore on UESP and see how many times "lore" is brought up, especially on talk pages, to describe the type of content contained in Tamriel.
  • I think it's a bad sign that if you google "Elder Scrolls Lore" UESP doesn't even show up in the first few pages of google results. One reason for that is probably that "lore" hardly shows up in any URLs or page titles, but also even in text we have often used Tamriel in place of lore. I'd say it's far more likely that someone interested in the general background of the games will search for "lore" than for "Tamriel".

I'll chime in more on some of the other issues as I have a chance to think more about them and/or have new things to say, but right now I suppose I'm somewhat focussed on the Tamriel move question. The magnitude of the required reorganization for Tamriel leaves little room for uncertainty or error, so reaching a full consensus seems particularly important. --NepheleTalk 14:45, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

Wrye 3

I'm not going to be posting much more (if anything) regarding this (spending too much time on Wrye stuff again), but here some (possibly final) points:

  • "Adminitis" should not be taken as perjorative, but only as a mild criticism. If you spend most of your time being an administrator, then you're going to look at various situations from an administrators perspective, rather than from a users perspective. I.e. it's an occupational hazard that almost all admins will fall prey to to one degree or another. I.e. it's the equivalent of the telling a drive, "White line fever, dude."
  • It looks to me that most (all?) of the people are for moving mod lists to user spaces -- don't actually use mod lists. I.e. they're not familiar with the subject matter, not familiar with the problems that I was raising.
    • E.g. Benould, Nephele, GameLord and GuildKnight all play either exclusively or primarily on the xobx. (Based on their user pages and checks for Bethsoft forum activity.) I.e. none of them play extensively with user made mods.
    • In contrast, I'm very active with mods in multiple forums. Ratwar is a moderator on official forums. Lurlock is also present on official forums. We're all positive to one degree or another of having mod list be given higher recognition.
    • In short, the difference is this: Players who don't play with user made mods, are not familiar with the problems associated with them. As such they probably should not be voting for or against proposals designed to alleviate problems that players of user made mods face. Doing so goes against one of the primary virtues of wikipedia -- that content-makers administer the very sort of content that they typically write. (This can be overstated of course, one can apply general editorial knowledge outside of one's usual field, however when it comes to organizing material, the organization is usually best done by people who regularly use that material.)

Single-author mod lists vs. multiple author mod lists: Logically that seems right, but it fails to accomplish what I'm trying to do here. I made a very long argument above, but condensing it, the main point comes down to this:

  • Mod lists (and similar resources) are useful, living documents. I.e. a good part of their utility comes from their continued updating in response to a changing world (more mods released, more videos release, better definitions (Acerbic dictionary)).
  • "Living content" is of course one of the things that wikis are great at -- allowing document to continue to be updated and improved even after the original author has left. This argue for presence on a wiki.
  • However, these docs also have a strong subjective presence, which argues against the "anything can edit" wiki rule. These are docs that by their partially subjective nature need to have limited number of editors.
  • Hence there needs to be an in-between state, in which the article has limited editorship, but which can be passed like a baton in a relay race to the next editor.

My proposal from a year ago (implemented after no one objected), was designed to achieve that. It's important to note two things:

  • The solution needs to allow individual editors to create their list and maintain it.
  • The solution needs to subtly encourage the original editor to pass the ownership of the page on at some point. You almost always cannot do this at the point where the editor leaves -- since at that point they're likely completely burned out and fed up and generally negative. You want them to in essence agree early in the life of the list that it will be passed on.

The second point is why differentiating "single author" lists from "multiple author" lists won't work well. Every list is single author up to the point at which the author leaves. And if it's in the author's users page space at that poin, then it's still under his ownership -- and he's unlikely to turn it over at that point.

Again, I think that this is a point that mod-list users will get immediately, while other people basically won't care that much. People who don't use mod lists are likely to say "well it should be up to the author to determine whether to turn it over or not". Which is true, but mod list users want to see such resources maintained, and so they're going to understand that "if you're going to ask someone for a favor -- then you ask it when they're most willing to grant it".

My concern about Ratwar's compromise is that it doesn't provide the right incentives. E.g. once the author/editor has established the list on their own user page, then they won't care about getting it moved elsewhere -- in fact, they're more likely to be reluctant to do it. Second problem is that most of the editors on this site are not (user-made) mod users, and so would not be qualified to vote for wether the mod should be promoted from user space to tes4mod (or wherever) space. That was part of my point with the vote above. For anyone familiar with Oblivion mod lists, and supportive of your compromise, then approving A's List is a no-brainer. Yet it only got two votes.

And that's about all the time I'm going to spend on this. The proposals are out there. I'll see how the discussion turns out and then move pages as need be. --Wrye 22:25, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

Robin Hood 2

Since this is entirely a reply to Wrye's post, I'm putting it here under his.

Not all of the people proposing that mod lists be moved to user spaces are on consoles. :) Heck, I've even made my own mod, not to mention having a mod list in my User Space where I truly feel it belongs. In my view, if people want to know what I use, then they should look under my user page to find it. I doubt there's two people out there who are using mods to any great degree who use the same set of mods anyway, so I don't really see the issue of having mod lists in User Pages.

That said, there were a number of convenient mod lists readily available fairly high up in the hierarchy at one point, but all it really takes is a links page or a Category page that directs people to each person's mod User Page...then you know whose opinions you're getting. As for baton-style pages, I don't see the problem there either. If a user wants to pass on a list to someone else, they'll obviously do so; if another user wants to use someone else's list and then modify it to suit themselves, they can do that too. One of the joys of a wiki is that people can and will steal and modify your content fairly readily. (Just look at my User Page at creation and compare it to some of Rpeh's of around the same time. <g>) --Robin Hood (TalkE-mailContribs) 15:58, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Rpeh 3

I think everything bar lists is now resolved so I'm going to comment only on that. Since the debate has focused on A's List, I may as well say that as far as I'm concerned it represents everything that is wrong with such lists and acts as a perfect example of why I'd like to keep them in user space where they won't bother anybody.

First, it's far too long. The list contains nearly 250 mods, 62 of which are marked as "personal favourites", 22 as "popular" and 29 as "outstanding". Given that several have more than one marker, that means that about 150 are unpopular, average mods in which Aeolius had no interest. Why are they on the list?

Second, it's too unstructured. Most of the mods on the list fall under some kind of "Misc" category. That's no help to anybody.

Third, it's out of date. Pace Wrye's comments about other people picking up the ball, if it doesn't happen with this list, there's no chance of it happening anywhere.

Fourth, quality of writing. Leaving aside the mod misspellings such as "Encumbrance", which might be the real mod title, we still find gems like "percision" and in general, the article is littered with mistakes of spelling and grammar. I just know that the same thing is going to happen with any others.

I could give you fifth, sixth and more if really necessary but I can't see the point. I have still to hear one good argument for why mod lists should be on the site anywhere outside user space. –RpehTCE 16:42, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Ratwar 3

At this point, I think it is safe to say that the Community Agrees with moving Tamriel to Lore, Fanfic to Userspace, and moving the review namespace to somewhere else (though exactly where is still a matter of debate). I also think that we've agreed to either move General to mainspace or redefine the section and what it holds. Since there is currently nobody who seems to be willing to work out the details of what should go in the new section, I'm gonna go ahead and say that we'll move it to the mainspace. I am gonna go ahead and create a project page for the move to flush out the rest of the stuff that needs to be done to obtain these goals.

As for mod lists, I think the only thing that can be said about them is that there is currently no good consensus, and we will need to continue that discussion. Still, I think that's something that is not critical to making the major changes proposed here, so I don't want to delay progress on those major changes due to a minor issue. --Ratwar 12:50, 23 June 2008 (EDT)