Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Locriani]

The raw data will probably be moved soon, it's far too cramped as it is there imo.

There are several issues with the raw bar though that make it very difficult to work with: namely, it HAS to be a fixed width (because of limitations with html) or it will expand to fill a ridiculous horizontal space.  So, I'm not exactly sure what to do with it at the moment.

The idea behind cramping the In the Real World box is so it becomes visually unappealing to add a treatise on the formation of magnetite under conditions similar to the sun where the llamas have yet to encounter the genetic soulstone of livingswort growing for the manhattan complex of lunar flares whilst chewing the green pork.

Also, I tried moving everything over to the side because a lot of our templates on our larger pages are cramped and fighting for space on the z-levels (blocking access to information).

[SirHoneyBadger]

There seems to be some debate here, so are we going with Wikipedia being good enough, as far as real world information is concerned? I'm sure it's not 100% accurate, but is it enough to satisfy the curiosity of any amateur geologists who are also OK with dwarfs and dragons in the game?

If so, then there doesn't seem to be too much point in adding more than just a short description of real world items (a few lines to give you the basics), and a link to the "other Wiki".

If somebody wants to take it further than what Wikipedia provides, it's probably better at that point to start hitting a real library or book store, or taking a college course, rather than relying on a game to give you better info than Wikipedia.

Anything that's grossly inaccurate either won't affect gameplay, or can be corrected by editing the Wikipedia itself.

[Graebeard]

Discussions about the format and content of the wiki should be informed by its purpose and the way people actually use it.

Who uses the wiki?  My educated guess is that new players represent a disproportionate percentage of people going to the wiki.  When going directly to individual pages they likely go there to (1) figure out what the hell a specific game concept/item/action is, (2) figure out how to accomplish an objective they've already formed, or (3) expand their general understanding of broad game ideas and themes.

What is the purpose of the wiki?  (1) To promote the game, and (2) to consolidate and verify information about the game from the forums and other places.  The wiki does this by making it easier to begin playing, allowing for deeper understanding of the game, and explaining the culture of the dwarf fortress community.

What practical implications does this have for the wiki?

• The perspective of a new player is more relevant to design and content considerations than the perspective of a veteran player.  Put simply, if you understand the game well, your stylistic preferences should not take precedent over the concerns and interests of a new player.  If you're tired of having heard the same joke for 3 years the wiki is not for you, it is for the three years ago you.
• Information should be easy to find, even for those who know little or nothing about the game.  As someone who understands the game, I'm capable of scanning a page for the string of obscure numbers at the very bottom that links to the complete wiki for older version.  A newbie is not.  For this reason, there should be a prominent link in the center of the main page that directs people to the wiki for the most stable version of the game, which is still 40d.  The number of people who've had problems with this is staggering.  After a while, we need to reconsider our design decisions.
• Article content should not be limited solely to information relevant to game mechanics.  Content that promotes a more immersive game experience (pictures, other interesting information) and references and explanations of the culture around DF (including tropes and references to prior game versions) leads to a richer game experience, particularly for new players.  Of course, it is a good idea to properly label information not directly relating to game mechanics.

The wiki is an amazing resource, one I believe is largely responsible for popularizing DF.  It is also necessary for a large portion of new DF players.  If we keep that in mind when we work to continue improving it we'll be able to create and design a better community resource.

[Tarran]

• Information should be easy to find, even for those who know little or nothing about the game.  As someone who understands the game, I'm capable of scanning a page for the string of obscure numbers at the very bottom that links to the complete wiki for older version.  A newbie is not.  For this reason, there should be a prominent link in the center of the main page that directs people to the wiki for the most stable version of the game, which is still 40d.  The number of people who've had problems with this is staggering.  After a while, we need to reconsider our design decisions.

There is the 40d pages you know, if someone wants to search for 40d they can just add '40d:' to the start of their search. And there's that version box at the top of the page. It's not that hard to search for 40d.

[Graebeard]

• Information should be easy to find, even for those who know little or nothing about the game.  As someone who understands the game, I'm capable of scanning a page for the string of obscure numbers at the very bottom that links to the complete wiki for older version.  A newbie is not.  For this reason, there should be a prominent link in the center of the main page that directs people to the wiki for the most stable version of the game, which is still 40d.  The number of people who've had problems with this is staggering.  After a while, we need to reconsider our design decisions.

There is the 40d pages you know, if someone wants to search for 40d they can just add '40d:' to the start of their search. And there's that version box at the top of the page. It's not that hard to search for 40d.

Yes, there are the 40d pages.  After you search for something and arrive at a blank page you can click on a number in a green box with no explanation of what's linked to arrive at the thing you were looking for.

Alternately, you can preface your search terms with an obscure version number that you are likely unfamiliar with, and which is explained nowhere on the wiki that a new user is likely to notice.

You are correct to point out that experienced users will be able to locate the information they're looking for after casting about for a while.  But the wiki should not be designed with you and me in mind.  It should be designed with new players unfamiliar with game concepts and version numbers in mind.  The sheer amount of confusion that's manifested on the forum indicates that the current design fails in this regard.

[Tarran]

So, you think the wiki should forget the 0.31 players and set everything to link to 40d?

I think that the wiki is fine how it is already, after all, new players have to search for '40d' in the old versions before they can get anywhere. They likely would have heard '40d, 40d, 40d' over and over again on the forum. And they should be able to see and click v0.28.181.40d.

[Graebeard]

So, you think the wiki should forget the 0.31 players and set everything to link to 40d?

No, as stated above, I think the main page should have a prominent link to the 40d material.  Perhaps also a sentence explaining that "search defaults to the newest release, and that those looking for the previous version of the wiki should click here."

They likely would have heard '40d, 40d, 40d' over and over again on the forum. And they should be able to see and click v0.28.181.40d.

Why are we assuming new users are intimately familiar with the forums?  If we want people to know something, then we should tell them.  To that effect, a brief explanation of the ArticleVersion Template in the center of the main page would help alleviate confusion and allow people to utilize the current features of the wiki.

I am not saying the functionality of the wiki is flawed.  I'm saying that the design could be improved if we keep the intended audience of the wiki in mind.

[Tarran]

Think, we have to tell users to use 40d specifically, on the forums (unless you are telling them in person, then you should be pointing out that they want 40d information anyway). We also have to tell them why.

But I also think a version change on the main page would be a good idea. And a brief explanation of the ArticleVersion Template.

[Squirrelloid]

Any new player is going to download the latest version unless told otherwise - he needs to know what .40d is to even dl it at this point.

This problem will be self-solving in not very long, because eventually the current version will become 'stable', or at least 'stable enough'.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

Personally, I have found the new version to be stable enough and the improvements to the interface make it actually the version I would recommend to new players.

As for the old jokes, much more than having heard the elf hate and magma dumping a zillion times, the thing about suggesting that this is all there is to the game is what really bothers me. There are many different approaches to the game and you can play it much more freely in directions of evil and good (however you define those) than any other game, and yet, the those jokes give the impression that this game is only good for psychopathic people out to engage in slaughter and physical abuse. As such, I feel that it discourages full exploration of the potential of the game.

Deathworks

[Squirrelloid]

Hi!

Personally, I have found the new version to be stable enough and the improvements to the interface make it actually the version I would recommend to new players.

As for the old jokes, much more than having heard the elf hate and magma dumping a zillion times, the thing about suggesting that this is all there is to the game is what really bothers me. There are many different approaches to the game and you can play it much more freely in directions of evil and good (however you define those) than any other game, and yet, the those jokes give the impression that this game is only good for psychopathic people out to engage in slaughter and physical abuse. As such, I feel that it discourages full exploration of the potential of the game.

Deathworks

The 'old jokes' are much broader than that - like references to old skool rampaging elephants, dwarves fishing with their beards, and so on.  None of it is necessarily canon, but it is pretty funny, and the wiki would be a poorer place without it.

[Graebeard]

The 'old jokes' are much broader than that - like references to old skool rampaging elephants, dwarves fishing with their beards, and so on.  None of it is necessarily canon, but it is pretty funny, and the wiki would be a poorer place without it.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Furthermore, there is an enormous barrier to entry in the form of the learning curve, interface, and graphics.  Let's face it, none of us started playing DF for the graphics.  For many it was the community or the stories it generated that motivated us to continue through hours of confusion and frustration to learn enough to kill our first fort.  The more accessible the DF community and the more available the culture it generates is, the more interest there will be in playing DF.

There are many different approaches to the game and you can play it much more freely in directions of evil and good (however you define those) than any other game, and yet, the those jokes give the impression that this game is only good for psychopathic people out to engage in slaughter and physical abuse. As such, I feel that it discourages full exploration of the potential of the game.

There may be material that's unsuitable for the wiki, but it won't be unsuitable because it's related to DF culture, it'll be unsuitable because it's inappropriate.  At the same time, mass death, severed limbs, blood, decay, puss, etc... are a part of the game for a reason: because it strives towards being a detailed simulation.  There are, however, many more aspects of the game and many other established tropes.

If you think the wiki presents a one-sided view of DF culture, then the answer is to include the missing perspectives, not to sterilize it.

[Locriani]

My educated guess is that new players represent a disproportionate percentage of people going to the wiki.  When going directly to individual pages they likely go there to (1) figure out what the hell a specific game concept/item/action is, (2) figure out how to accomplish an objective they've already formed, or (3) expand their general understanding of broad game ideas and themes.

Correct.  Approximately 50% of page views are from new (ie, never visited the wiki before) users. 83% do not have a user account.  Of this final 17% with a user account, only 5% (so, a total of less than 0.85 of 1% of all wiki users) have been active in the last week.

For this reason, there should be a prominent link in the center of the main page that directs people to the wiki for the most stable version of the game, which is still 40d.

Feel free to add one.  I haven't gotten to it because of time restraints, and because I'm working on possible redesigns for the front page as well.

As for the old jokes, much more than having heard the elf hate and magma dumping a zillion times, the thing about suggesting that this is all there is to the game is what really bothers me. There are many different approaches to the game and you can play it much more freely in directions of evil and good (however you define those) than any other game, and yet, the those jokes give the impression that this game is only good for psychopathic people out to engage in slaughter and physical abuse. As such, I feel that it discourages full exploration of the potential of the game.

The wiki is a community resource, feel free to add your other viewpoints on how to play the game.


Regarding Elven / Human / Dwarven, anyone is free to change the reading on those templates.  Once again, it's just something I have not had time to do, and am not likely to have time to do so for a while.

[SirHoneyBadger]

It be painfully obvious to everyone, by this point, that the way information is presented in the DF Wiki could be more ergonomic for some.

The DF Wiki should be as easy to use as possible, for everyone. Ease of use is even more important than the amount or accuracy of the information contained within, because it's harder to organize and edit the basic structure than it is the data.
This isn't the game, afterall. The Wiki doesn't need a high learning-curve, or an "iron man" sensibility. 

The Wiki should endeavor to point us towards whatever information is currently the most useful to players, with a special emphasis on brand new players, since they need the most help, anyway.

Does that make sense?
Considering that whatever the Wiki is meant to be, it's certainly meant to be a helpful reference and a useful tool. Tools and references are only as valuable as they are useful, and a great deal of that usefulness will be determined by how quickly and easily information can be located.

Another facet to consider is that the DF Wiki could still go a great deal towards easing the transition between the 40d version and the current version (and future versions), if steps are taken promptly to ensure that this is the case.

This really should be the moment when the DF Wiki shines the brightest for old players and new players alike, as a central reference for everyone to use.

I hope atleast the opportunity will be taken to learn from these events.

This is an evolving game. There will be more versions in the future. It's important that the best methods be put into place so that past, present, and future versions of DF, along with all the other information in the Wiki, be represented in the most useful form possible, at any given time.

[Mason11987]

Could we try to organize this discussion about the wiki, on the wiki?

http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Real_World_Information

I've also set up an area for all sorts of different wiki related discussions so everyone can have their voice heard.

http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Centralized_Discussion

If you never have, take this time to make an account:

http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin&type=signup

Thanks!

It be painfully obvious to everyone, by this point, that the way information is presented in the DF Wiki could be more ergonomic for some.

The DF Wiki should be as easy to use as possible, for everyone. Ease of use is even more important than the amount or accuracy of the information contained within, because it's harder to organize and edit the basic structure than it is the data.
This isn't the game, afterall. The Wiki doesn't need a high learning-curve, or an "iron man" sensibility. 

The Wiki should endeavor to point us towards whatever information is currently the most useful to players, with a special emphasis on brand new players, since they need the most help, anyway.

Does that make sense?
Considering that whatever the Wiki is meant to be, it's certainly meant to be a helpful reference and a useful tool. Tools and references are only as valuable as they are useful, and a great deal of that usefulness will be determined by how quickly and easily information can be located.

Another facet to consider is that the DF Wiki could still go a great deal towards easing the transition between the 40d version and the current version (and future versions), if steps are taken promptly to ensure that this is the case.

This really should be the moment when the DF Wiki shines the brightest for old players and new players alike, as a central reference for everyone to use.

I hope atleast the opportunity will be taken to learn from these events.

This is an evolving game. There will be more versions in the future. It's important that the best methods be put into place so that past, present, and future versions of DF, along with all the other information in the Wiki, be represented in the most useful form possible, at any given time.

I get what you're saying but I don't see a lot of practical suggestions.

You're saying "make it more useful" and "make it more organized".  But I will speak for everyone when I say that we do, all the time we try to do that.  But it's not easy.  If you have suggestions on actual steps that can be taken that'd be awesome.  Also, if you'd like to get in there and do some work to improve it, go for it.