Author Topic: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles  (Read 59404 times)

GuyPerfect

  • Mary Poppins
  • Titan Staff
  • Elite Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,740
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #80 on: June 29, 2012, 02:01:07 AM »
However, I think it's more useful to list the methods of acquiring an item rather than simply the methods of earning it.

That's precisely what I object to. (-:

There's a massive distinction between transferring inventory between players and coaxing the game into generating one for you. How to produce one is a concept in and of itself, and then once you have one, what you can do with it is a different concept.

Sekoia

  • Titan Network Admin
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,848
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #81 on: June 29, 2012, 03:18:30 AM »
There's a massive distinction between transferring inventory between players and coaxing the game into generating one for you. How to produce one is a concept in and of itself, and then once you have one, what you can do with it is a different concept.

If I'm interested in acquiring a given enhancement, I'm not interested in differentiating between "Can I make the game generate one?" and "Can I acquire one in a way other than having the game generate on?". I'm simply interested in "How can I get it?". I'm certainly not interested in only seeing a list of "How can I make the game generate this?" to the exclusion of non-generation methods.

And you keep phrasing it as if it's a binary situation: "how to produce" and "what you can do with it". It's not binary. There's also "how to obtain without producing". It'd be absurd to exclude methods of obtaining something simply because they aren't methods of producing.

I'm not saying we have to detail each and every method by which a player can trade. Simply saying that it can be bought and sold on the Auction House and can be transferred to other players is sufficient. "Transferred to other players" encompasses anything from trading through the trade interface to plucking it out of base storage.

Really it boils down to a mere sentence or two.

Aggelakis

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,001
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #82 on: June 29, 2012, 04:55:48 AM »
== Acquisition and Sales ==

omg I managed to put it all under one header. :)
Bob Dole!! Bob Dole. Bob Dole! Bob Dole. Bob Dole. Bob Dole... Bob Dole... Bob... Dole...... Bob...


ParagonWiki
OuroPortal

Sekoia

  • Titan Network Admin
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,848
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #83 on: June 29, 2012, 05:24:02 AM »
== Acquisition and Sales ==

omg I managed to put it all under one header. :)

Hurray! Let's use that. :)

GuyPerfect

  • Mary Poppins
  • Titan Staff
  • Elite Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,740
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #84 on: June 29, 2012, 06:48:16 AM »
If I'm interested in acquiring a given enhancement, I'm not interested in differentiating between "Can I make the game generate one?" and "Can I acquire one in a way other than having the game generate on?". I'm simply interested in "How can I get it?".

This right here is where the article diverts from objectivity and brevity; both things that we want to maintain on the wiki. On the technical level, answering the question "how can I put one in my hands?" will, at best, produce hypothetical fluff that is not focused on just the simple facts like it should be. This is what I'm trying to avoid.

Let's try an analogy.

Long ago I was watching an episode of Bill Nye The Science Guy, but I don't remember what it was about... But! There was this old footage that looked to be from the 1950s of a city boy in a supermarket being asked some questions by a reporter. "Where does food come from?" the reporter would ask. "Well, from the supermarket," the boy replies. "And where does the supermarket get its food?" "Um... from... a bigger supermarket!" "Have you ever seen a cow?" "Well sure!.. On television."

In this Enhancement context, the conversation would look something like this: "Where do Enhancements come from?" "Well, from other players." "And where do other players get them?" "Um... from... yet more players!" "Have you ever seen a Recipe?" "Well sure!.. At Wentworth's."

It's begging the question. It's prolonging the issue. It's beating around the bush. Trading with other players is simply not an appropriate "how to get" method.

What we're looking at are attributes, not tasks. If it can be traded, that's a property. If it's account bound, that's a property. If it can be converted, that's a property. If you have to complete the trial assigned by Woodsman to get one, that's not a property.

Sekoia

  • Titan Network Admin
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,848
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #85 on: June 29, 2012, 07:20:26 AM »
This right here is where the article diverts from objectivity and brevity; both things that we want to maintain on the wiki.

A lot of what your posted amounts to semantic fluff. If you want to call "it can be traded" a property, good for you.

The fact remains that when someone wants to know "How do I get this?", one of the things they'll want to know is "Can I get it via the AH?". When someone comes to PW looking to find out whether or not they can get it that way, they are likely to expect to find the answer in the section named "How to Get" (or "Acquisition and Sales"). For that information not to be there is poor design.

As for objective... what's not objective about stating that an item can be traded? An item is either tradable or not. Either you can get it from other players, or you can't. That's objective. None of the beating around the bush you did in your example needs to go into the article. Believe it or not, most people don't find their minds spiraling into a hypothetical maelstrom of confusion when they see "This item can be traded". :P

As for brevity... as I said, the information can be conveyed in one or, at most, two sentences. I fail to see how that diverts the article from brevity.

Thirty-Seven

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
  • Keeper of the Sacred Number
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #86 on: June 29, 2012, 08:41:39 PM »
Hurray! Let's use that. :)
Agreed... I think that sums it up nicely.

We might also want templates that can create a little "This item is tradeable/account-bound/not tradeable."  Yes, I know we want to focus on what can happen... but the fact that something isn't tradeable goes against the vast majority of items in the game...

*prepares for a long list of untradeable things... to refute my claim*

Cannonfodder

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #87 on: June 29, 2012, 08:56:00 PM »
I woke up with a thought about a new structure for the enhancement-type articles.  I thought of structuring the article in "chronological order".

Here's an example applied to a page:  http://wiki.cohtitan.com/wiki/User:Storyteller@fuse.net/Hecatomb:_Chance_for_Negative_Energy_Damage

I haven't laid it out yet, but an alternate structure for the page could go in reverse chronlogical order with the same headers.  This would bring the Effects section closer to the top (which is what I think is the information most often desired).

--Jason
@Cannonfodder
Victory:  Cannonfodder 50 Inv/SS
Virtue:  Pravda 50 Bots/FF
The Hall of Justice/The Hall of Doom /chanjoin "Victory Badges" /chanjoin "Virtue Badges"

Aggelakis

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,001
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #88 on: June 29, 2012, 09:30:34 PM »
There is way too much junk in your version. I'm sorry, I just don't like it at all. Additionally, you are not separating out the recipe data vs the enhancement data vs the set data, which was agreed upon earlier in the thread.

Quote
Modify a template so that it does not automatically include categories such as "Sets that improve"
I want to call this a terrible idea, but that seems rude. How else do we aggregate this data for use? An article seems silly when it's so much simpler to categorize it.

I updated my pages listed before:
Set page: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/User:Aggelakis/Performance_Shifter
Recipe page: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/User:Aggelakis/Recipe:Performance_Shifter:_Chance_for_%2BEndurance
Enhancement page:
-- Special enhancement: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/User:Aggelakis/Enhancement:Performance_Shifter:_Chance_for_%2BEndurance
-- Standard enhancement: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/User:Aggelakis/Enhancement:Performance_Shifter:_Endurance_Modification/Accuracy




(NOTE: my pages have deliberately removed all auto-categorizing templates so that they don't show up in main categories. All appropriate auto-categories and manual categorization would exist. I just don't want my user content in the main categories.)
Bob Dole!! Bob Dole. Bob Dole! Bob Dole. Bob Dole. Bob Dole... Bob Dole... Bob... Dole...... Bob...


ParagonWiki
OuroPortal

Sekoia

  • Titan Network Admin
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,848
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #89 on: June 29, 2012, 11:03:35 PM »
How else do we aggregate this data for use? An article seems silly when it's so much simpler to categorize it.

Semantic Mediawiki introduces something called "Properties". It's something to evaluate on a case-by-case basis, but Properties may be better for some things (such as this, likely) than the massive system of categories we currently use.

But we shouldn't get rid of the categories unless and until something else is in place that makes them redundant.

Thirty-Seven

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
  • Keeper of the Sacred Number
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #90 on: June 30, 2012, 11:48:55 PM »
To further de-couple Enhancements in general from the Invention system, I am working on a new set of "Drop Symbols" that use generic enhancement rings and re-colored Hami-O rings... that way they look like something merely associated with Enhancements in general and may be made applicable to other things.  Thoughts?

(I will post an image of my initial pass shortly... it will be quite WIP and I may just use the rings kinda willy-nilly in order to present some options.)

Update:
« Last Edit: July 01, 2012, 12:36:25 AM by Thirty7 »

GuyPerfect

  • Mary Poppins
  • Titan Staff
  • Elite Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,740
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #91 on: July 01, 2012, 03:52:31 PM »
Aha! We'll call the section "Item Details" to describe A) where the Enhancement comes from and B) what you can do with it, which are two separate and otherwise not-lump-together-able things!

Also, in regards to that Reward Merit icon, it looks kinda funky with two borders...

GuyPerfect

  • Mary Poppins
  • Titan Staff
  • Elite Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,740
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #92 on: July 01, 2012, 04:17:48 PM »
So I was looking at the Enhancement Sets page and saw that all of the Archetype Enhancements were being labeled as Obtained by Special Means. That label is generally reserved for time-limited things like the summer and winter events. We probably need a new icon for Obtained from Super Packs, since that can be done at any time of the year.

CmdrAdeon

  • Minion
  • **
  • Posts: 33
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #93 on: July 01, 2012, 06:33:29 PM »
Yeah I did that as a temporary means until we had a better solution. My suggestion would be a "Super Packs" symbol for the standard ones and a "Enhancement Catalyst" symbol for the Superior ones.

Cannonfodder

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #94 on: July 01, 2012, 08:52:14 PM »
We've been talking about this issue for 3 months off and on.

I mean I like many of the things proposed in this thread, but we don't seem to be coming up with any overall consensus quickly.

Can we set a time limit to propose all the options and then have a poll or something for each part (article structure, article divisions, categorization, symbols, banners, terminology, preferred templates, etc.)?

Give some people (founders vs. admins vs. editors vs. contributors) weighted votes and maybe assign someone with ultimate veto power, forcing a re-poll.
--Jason
@Cannonfodder
Victory:  Cannonfodder 50 Inv/SS
Virtue:  Pravda 50 Bots/FF
The Hall of Justice/The Hall of Doom /chanjoin "Victory Badges" /chanjoin "Virtue Badges"

GuyPerfect

  • Mary Poppins
  • Titan Staff
  • Elite Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,740
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #95 on: July 01, 2012, 10:18:14 PM »
[...] we don't seem to be coming up with any overall consensus quickly.

With the exception of what to call the "how you can get it and what you can do with it" section, we've all pretty much settled on a new organizational schema and article layout. Take a look.

Sleepykitty

  • The Napping Cat
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 266
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #96 on: July 02, 2012, 02:21:57 PM »
z.z I'm a cat, and I would nap on top of that article.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I am Sleepy! Hear me Yawn!

o.o reachable at: My Paragonwiki Page

Cannonfodder

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #97 on: August 01, 2012, 08:41:35 PM »
It's been 31 days with no further discussion.  I think everyone has given whatever input they have into what structure we want.  Now we just have to go ahead and convert articles to the new format and categorization. 
--Jason
@Cannonfodder
Victory:  Cannonfodder 50 Inv/SS
Virtue:  Pravda 50 Bots/FF
The Hall of Justice/The Hall of Doom /chanjoin "Victory Badges" /chanjoin "Virtue Badges"

GuyPerfect

  • Mary Poppins
  • Titan Staff
  • Elite Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,740
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #98 on: August 07, 2012, 05:28:46 PM »
We gots work ta do

Quote
  • Improved Enhancement Set Bonuses: Invention Origin Enhancement set bonuses, such as XP debt reduction and specific mesmerization/mental control resistances, have been replaced with more useful set bonuses. These new set bonuses provide more powerful resistance against a broader variety of damage.
  • New Invention Origin Sets: Four new Invention Origin Enhancement sets debut with Issue 24. Annihilation (targeted AoE), Unbreakable Guard (damage resistance), Reactive Defenses (defense), and Preventive Medicine (healing). These new sets all offer different and specific bonuses, such as decreasing an opponent's resistance, increasing a character's maximum hit points, improve resistances, and even granting an absorption shield.

Thirty-Seven

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
  • Keeper of the Sacred Number
Re: Re-evaluating Recipe/Enhancement articles
« Reply #99 on: August 08, 2012, 12:16:33 PM »
Is the issue that there are so many folks who have had input that we don't know where to begin or if we should be waiting on something?

Maybe the best way to go forward is to create an article like the one for Mission documentations guidelines outlining our plan so that work can begin on Categories, Templates, SMW stuff (instead of DPL) and get this ball rolling!  I think putting an article together on the Wiki might just provide momentum (and an easier way to reference our finalized plan) to start putting this into action.