Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From UFOpaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (→‎NPOV-ing of TFTD Equipment: Removed an orphaned sentence.)
(337 intermediate revisions by 48 users not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:
 
That's it. Happy editing!
 
That's it. Happy editing!
 
----
 
----
 +
 +
Old articles have been moved to [[Talk:Main Page/Archive]] for later perusal.
  
 
__TOC__
 
__TOC__
 +
==Featured Projects on Sidebar==
 +
I was requested on Discord by user [[Ucross]] to add to the Featured Projects section of the sidebar the mod that he is working on called Long War Rebalance, which is a mod of Long War, and thus a mod of XCOM: Enemy Unknown, and I refused the request for the same reasons I already presented below regarding the Piratez mod for OpenXCom.
 +
It's arguable for the same reason that Long War shouldn't on that list for the same reason, it being a mod, but since Firaxis gave the official recognition to both Long Wars, and even gave support to Long War 2, that's the difference I see between Long War and all the other mods made for all XCom games, and thus worthy of recognition as significant contributions by and for the community. The same reason behind UFO2000, OpenXCom, OpenApoc and UFO:AI, they are all entire new XCom games built by teams of fans, and the first three are playable, and you can create mods for them. OpenXCom and OpenApoc are in active development.
 +
As for personal projects to be present on that section, I can think of a ton of projects related to XCom that would deserve to be there, and that would make that list endless an unpractical. And at the end, the objective of this wiki is to inform about the games. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 20:28, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  
−
== Translation? ==
+
: It still would be nice for players to be able to find all of the mods/projects that this wiki hosts.  What about something like: "Other Projects" where it's a page that lists all other projects occurring for other games? Just a suggestion.  Feel free to ignore me. =D [[User:Ucross|Ucross]] ([[User talk:Ucross|talk]]) 16:33, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
−
Hi everybody
 
−
 
 
−
I just found this ufopaedia and now I'm spending most of my time at work here :-)
 
−
 
 
−
In Uruguay there is a very small X-Com community, and AFAIK, I'm the first one to find this site.
 
−
I was thinking about translating the articles to spanish (very slowly), since most players around here are not familiar with the advanced "tips and tricks".
 
−
I could also post about the rather poor game translation.
 
−
Do you think it could be worth it?
 
−
 
 
−
[[User:Diegoba|Diegoba]] 06:38, 15 August 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: Hi Diegoba. I think those are great ideas. You could even work on an improved [[SPANISH.DAT]]. Hobbes posts here frequently and I believe he did the Spanish translation for [[XcomUtil]]. If you were translating Wiki pages, I wonder which pages should be translated first? We would need to think about how to structure it. Maybe an /en and an /es path, like Wikipedia does it?
 
−
 
 
−
:[[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:10, 15 August 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
Having the /en /es path sounds good. I was thinking about leaving the pages with the most basic info (IE, Geoscape / Base screen description) for the last. I believe that anyone already knows this basics, and are not that hard to understand.
 
−
 
 
−
But I really don't know how to get it started. Do I just create an article called "pagina principal" (main page) and then link from there? I guess that page can then be mapped to es.ufopaedia.org
 
−
 
 
−
[[User:Diegoba|Diegoba]] 07:04, 16 August 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: I see you already started on a home page, cool. It makes sense to start with "Top Tricks & Tips".We probably need that in English too!
 
−
:Thinking about the structure, this is a wiki, so maybe name your pages e.g. "Home Page (Espanol)". Then  link each Spanish name "{Spanish Name}" as a wiki redirect to each  "{English Name} (Espanol)" Spanish page. Or vice-versa.While you only have a small number of Spanish pages, link them from See Also of the English page, as well as from the Spanish Home Page.Just some suggestions. Hopefully Zombie and those other sysop-type guys will express a view.
 
−
 
 
−
:[[User:Spike|Spike]] 09:47, 16 August 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
I have no idea how this would work out to be honest. An /es path would probably be the best idea, but I think we'd need to be running a second copy of the wiki software to make that possible. (Something I always wanted anyway as UFO2000 isn't really a game in the series but a project - we are just hosting their pages). If anyone knows how the Wikipedia handles the languages internally, please let me know. Doing all those redirects just doesn't make much sense to me because it is a huge amount of work and could tax the system if there are too many queries. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 22:30, 18 August 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:What about just creating a link for both languages in the left side menu, and a link to the other language in the main page?. That is simple enough, and most people will be visiting one language or the other, not switching around.
 
−
 
 
−
:[[User:Diegoba|Diegoba]] 20:18, 24 August 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: That would work for now and it has the benefit of being simple. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:31, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:Ok, I added a link to the Spanish main page in the sidebar. Is that good? --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 23:53, 28 August 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
----
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== Site TODOS ==
 
−
A general dump of to-dos or maybe not-do's. Add any where appropriate:
 
−
 
 
−
* Template navigation toolbars for subsections. (Some tests have started)
 
−
* Strategy by terrain notes?
 
−
* Mention of bug where unit gets stuck in the corner of the map
 
−
* Mention of bug where you reload a battlescape mission only to be on an invalid level and how to recover from it (use OHMap, go back down to legal level, click until you find the map again, save the game). Often happens after editting the game, strangely enough. Is it possible the game stores map camera coordinates as a file checksum or somesuch?
 
−
* Categorizing all pages related to the games. I've finished it already with Apocalypse and TFTD shouldn't be too hard because it has the less pages, but it UFO is going to be a long work. I've already started a few categories for UFO and TFTD (<nowiki>Category: Enemy Unknown/UFO Defense</nowiki> and nowiki>Category: TFTD</nowiki>, along with a few specific ones (<nowiki>Research (TFTD</nowiki> and so on). It could also be possible to have some general categories that emcompass the whole of the series (UFOs/USOs, X-COM craft). [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 16:32, 4 November 2009 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Discussion/talk page proposed format ==
 
−
Ok folks, we all seem to have our own ways of adding comments to a discussion page. The way it stands now, it becomes really difficult to follow a discussion when it is broken apart with different formats. What I suggest is this: when you leave a comment use a horizontal line to separate your post from the one(s) above it. In this manner, everything is left justified and the comments are separated. The reason why I do not support the colon as comment separation is that as the discussion progresses you are going to be adding more and more just to get the indenting correct. It also makes it confusing. Another side effect is that once you have a lot of colons present it pushes the text off the page itself and forces a scroll to the right to view. That isn't good.
 
−
 
 
−
I suppose if we really want to use colons as separators, we could alternate the use. If a comment is indented above yours, do nothing. If a comment is not indented, use a colon for your submission. Still, the constant zig-zagging isn't really the best idea either.
 
−
 
 
−
My vote is therefore to stick with the horizontal line (four dashes). If the discussion veers way off course, or if you have a couple questions/comments, break it apart into different headings. And always sign your post too as that makes it easier to follow.
 
−
 
 
−
Discuss.--[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:46, 9 March 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
Works for me, Zombie. Another problem with indentation is that one isn't necessarily addressing only the previous comment, but it could be about the previous one, and tying together things that are 4, 6, ''and'' 12 entries back. Colons are fine for quick rejoinders, but not as a requirement. A potential alternative is to leave two blank lines, as I just did after your sig. This is a fairly clear delineator for folks scanning quickly. However, the horizontal separator is more clear, in general. So I guess I'd vote for the hor-sep for all except quick comments thrown in, which can use colons. And anything that's a new topic or big break should get a new topic, using = signs. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:10, 9 March 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
----
 
−
 
 
−
I've reformatted [[Talk:Exploits#Extra_Ammo_Exploit]] to demonstrate how the indentation style ''can'' work, if done consistently.  I think it's somewhat better than the line-separator style for very long discussions, making the structure a little clearer.  However, if it's sometimes-used and sometimes-not things get messy, as you've noticed.
 
−
 
 
−
I'll codify the rules right here (surprisingly, they're not well-codified on Wikipedia itself, despite the fact that it's used quite consistently throughout the site):
 
−
 
 
−
*Add an indent for each reply
 
−
*Reuse your prior level of indentation if it's a back and forth:
 
−
 
 
−
First person's comment
 
−
 
−
:Second person's comment
 
−
 
−
::Third person's comment
 
−
 
−
:Second person again
 
−
 
−
::Third person again
 
−
 
−
::Third person's afterthought
 
−
 
−
:Second person again
 
−
 
−
::First person jumping back in
 
−
 
−
:::Third person once more
 
−
 
−
::First person again
 
−
 
 
−
*If you get to 5 or 6 indents, just "reset" (start without indents for the next reply).
 
−
*If you have an addendum to your own comments, use the same indent level and re-sign.
 
−
*If somebody doesn't know/doesn't use the right indent level, fix it when adding your next reply so the rules become clear during the course of conversation.
 
−
*Likewise, if someone adds a new comment to the top or fails to add a heading when starting a new subject, fix it when replying.
 
−
 
 
−
The problem we've had lately is the mixing of styles, neither being used correctly.  So far it seems that myself, Sf, and NKF have been using indents, you (Zombie) and Mike favoring dashes, and most newcomers failing to use either.  No clear winner just yet. ;-)
 
−
--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 23:56, 9 March 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
:What if you're addressing several and various issues raised before, not just a comment on the previous statement? (And it runs on for four or six paragraphs?) - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:14, 10 March 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
::If you're consolidating a bunch of replies to several earlier points, that's a good time to reset the indent.--[[User:Ethereal Cereal|Ethereal Cereal]] 01:07, 10 March 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
::: Works for me, Eth - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:47, 9 November 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
== British vs. American spelling ==
 
−
 
 
−
Summary: Use which ever convention you want. It does not matter as long as you do not get into petty spelling convention battles.
 
−
 
 
−
== XCOM Box Art ==
 
−
 
 
−
Someone (NKF? Danial?) once asked if anybody could scan XCOM's box art, so that they might e.g. put a better graphic on the main page. I just uploaded a 300 dpi scan of all four sides as [[Media:XCOM_UFO_Defense_DOS_US_Box_Art.zip]] (3.2 MB). The box is not in mint condition (see the ReadMe), but a little tweaking by somebody with skillz (Danial) could easily spruce it up. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 18:05, 19 October 2007 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: Was it me? Hmm. Can't remember. I did think to just grab the cover for the PDF version of the X-Com Player's Handbook (US version - with the Mars/Super Avenger cover), but it's black and white. Could've sworn I've seen a copy in colour somewhere. Not that sepia version wouldn't look great though!
 
−
: Oh hang on, I don't think it was for the front page graphic in particular, but we did want to get various versions of the box art for the various games. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]
 
−
 
 
−
----
 
−
NKF - or anybody - can we consider replacing the current main page art, with the XCOM box art? Or a portion of it. I loved the game's intro and in-game "cartoon art", but why not use the game's best image, for our primary Main Page image? (Is there somebody with skills that can clean it up quickly? I'm happy to, but I'm no pics wizard.)
 
−
 
 
−
[[image:XcomScExample.png|thumb|100px|One of many possible screencaps]]Related to this, I think it would be a nice touch if anyone put a bunch of selected and/or random screen captures (screencaps) onto a page, with a link just "under" (i.e., indented under the Main Page entry for) [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]]...
 
−
 
 
−
:I have a sneaking suspicion that we get a ton of lurkers (someone who is there but never speaks) who once played X-COM and came across our page by chance, and would like to relive it, if even for a few screencaps... yet as it is now, our site is becoming more of an in-depth encyclopedia, instead of a "you were once here" kind of place. All us hard core players gravitate toward the encyclopedia - but even if folks who once played it don't stay, if they say, "wow, I remember doing all that" based on a stack of screenshots, that would be good. I'm thinking of easy sections that are light on text (and no Ufopaedia info), but heavy on thumbnails and click-on screencaps (see the image to the right - I love that financier in the background) like:
 
−
:*My first base - Decisions
 
−
:*The Globe - Radar alert!
 
−
:*First contact! Small farm in Iowa, USA
 
−
:*Managing Research
 
−
:*Terror in Sydney! ''(include zombies - squad wiped out - see next)''
 
−
:*Headline: World Council generally supports X-COM efforts - subheadline - Australia may now be under the control of aliens ''(funding results for a month)''
 
−
:*Headline: X-COM squad impacted by "Blaster bomb" - the world cries (before and after pix)
 
−
:*The tricky depths of a Battleship
 
−
:*Elite squad Mind Controls all aliens
 
−
:*Final showdown: Cydonia
 
−
:Each of the sections above might have 1-5 images. Something like that.
 
−
 
 
−
:If no one objects, can I ask that anyone who is willing to do it, make a bunch of screencaps, using .pngs and thumbnails as shown above. Then lurkers can "remember the days" right up front. And a few more lurkers than currently breeze through, might stay.
 
−
 
 
−
:To put this in context, CNN recently had a number of articles admiring Commodore 64s (one of them [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/ptech/12/07/c64/index.html?iref=newssearch here]). X-COM is like that, to me... it lives past its "life expectancy" to gamers, because of how well put together it was, especially including how much it hit you in the gut.
 
−
 
 
−
In summary, then. I have one question for us XCOM hardcore (can we change the Main Page image) and one for everybody (want to post a lot of screencaps?). I have made a stub page for the screencaps page. I'll retract it if the hardcore object or there's no response in a couple of months' time. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 21:44, 14 December 2007 (PST)
 
−
----
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
I'm perfectly fine with getting the main title changed. Get a few more ayes and we'll make it so.
 
−
 
 
−
A screencap section would be nice. I'm quite partial to creating screencap mini-comics (no, not real comics. Just sequential before/during/after images), although I never use them and they just get deleted in the end.
 
−
 
 
−
One benefit is that some of the shots can also be recycled throughout the rest of the site to illustrate certain things. Or for an article that's no more than a solid block of text, something to break up the monotony. I'm also always for a few well placed humorous shots.
 
−
 
 
−
-[[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:02, 15 December 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Sounds good, NKF. There could easily be a "comics" page link several ways:
 
−
::1) The new Main Page entry indented under [[Info|About X-COM: UFO Defense]] could also have a link to a comics page, but on the screenshot page itself,
 
−
::2) That same new entry on the Main Page could read something like "[[Screenshots]] - and [[Comics]]!" The concept of the screenshots page is to help folks relive the past. And something just as good as screenshots - or better - is screenshots with humor.
 
−
::3) Or, make a link for it, all by itself, somewhere obvious on the Main Page.
 
−
:I think it's a great idea!
 
−
:As for the other idea - you said you're fine re: changing the main title. But it's the graphic at the top of the Main Page that I'm talking about. Just to make sure we're clear on that. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 17:21, 21 December 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Request ==
 
−
 
 
−
I have noticed that there is no pictures of TFTD, Apoc, or Int on the main welcome page. Any ordinary joe browsing to here from the four wiki (which I just added the links to point to here in "External links" on each page) is going to leave if they see just the first game picture (and not scroll down to see the other games covered).
 
−
 
 
−
SO, my request: have a collage of all four (five incl. email? ) on the front page which easily shows each game box-front. If copywrite issue, then someone could get creative with their own personal artiste skills.
 
−
 
 
−
: Further up this page there actually has been discussion of using the box art for the various games. Real life, as is often the case, intervenes. But it's not a bad idea mind you. A change is as good as a vacation. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 18:20, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
I was just thinking about this the other day in fact. Anyway, there is a nice collage of all the game boxes on the side of the X-COM Collection box. I could probably scan that and stick it up here for you guys to check out if you want. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 23:30, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: Zombie, have you had a chance to scan the collage? Just spotted this as I was responding to a different matter. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 22:05, 28 February 2010 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Favicon ==
 
−
 
 
−
Does the UFOpaedia have a favicon? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 17:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
:We did have it at one time but I think it disappeared after an upgrade to the wiki software. If you have an idea for a favicon, submit it here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 18:21, 6 November 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
Okay, I don't know where that logo in the upper left came from, but after a quick GIMP edit, I came up with this: [[Media:favicon.zip]]. I'm not quite sure how The GIMP works with icons, so I also included the .png's. What do you think? -- [[User:NinthRank|NinthRank]] 18:51, 6 November 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Not too shabby. Next time I talk to GazChap, I'll run it past him. Any more ideas for a favicon? I'd like to get a few (at least 3) and run it through a vote here. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:28, 6 November 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
::[[image:FavIcon-Crude1.png|thumb|16px]][[image:FavIcon-Crude2.png|thumb|16px]]NinthRank and Z, my two cents are something like this. My pics are incredibly crude - I'm a total graphics n00b - and would need somebody like you, Ninth, to turn it into the "burnished gold and navy" (or is that black?), like you did with yours. I couldn't even get my damn background to change for me using simple MS Word art ... what do you use? (See how n00b I am?)
 
−
 
 
−
::I think you have some great ideas there, but my favicons show as 16x16 pixels. (Is this because I use small icons? I had never heard the the word until you said it, Ninth, at which point I read the wiki entry, and it made immediate sense.) At 16<sup>2</sup>, you have to keep it incredibly simply... having the COM on a big X does that, because it doesn't "waste a repetitive 'X-' across the center", if that makes sense. Another idea is be careful with the X ... I didn't like the X in your 16x16 and 32x32 because it was "narrow" (more vertical than horizontal). I definitely like your 48x48. (I can't tell what's going on with your animated 16x16 .ico, my friend - a 16x16 pic on a 1280x1024 screen (or higher) needs to be real simple. It looks like a tiny pulsing thing, with an X sort of there, overall.) I think the X should be, if not symmetric, then, more wide than high - to me, this implies something "ominous". A true X would have to be "cut off" at the corners to be "wide and fat" at 16x16. This shows more in my second try than the first.
 
−
 
 
−
::You can make things bigger than 16<sup>2</sup>, a real plus and you get much more flexibility, but for me, only 16x16 exists.
 
−
 
 
−
::My two cents. I love your overall idea, and using navy (or black?) with gold trim. Thanks for signing in and helping out, NinthRank! -[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:40, 14 December 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
==Technical Commentaries==
 
−
 
 
−
I just thought of adding a specific section concerning commentaries regarding the game, i.e., trying to explain how the weapons/diplomacy/funding/etc. would work in real life. The idea here is not to expand on the canon X-COM material but to describe/explain in a rational way.
 
−
I've come with this idea after reading Spike's section (on his [[User talk:Spike]] page) explaining the economics of X-COM and starting my own section regarding the Council of Funding Nations.
 
−
I think there is plenty of material available on the Data canisters that could be used/adapted to this. Also, the discussion regarding Elerium (with all those formulas) on the Talk Page is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of.
 
−
 
 
−
- [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 22:59, 10 March 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: I don't see any problem with it. Go for it. We've started with a magnificent wealth of knowledge about the game itself (and a bit beyond, with the binary file diving). Theories and explanations of the X-Com world wouldn't be out of place. They'd certainly add a bit of literary colour and interest for those that wish to look beyond the game. There are lots of interesting bits and pieces scattered throughout the articles (like real world equivalents of weapon or tanks, just to name one example) that would probably fit better in a section like that than in the articles. Perhaps a an expanded data-canister like section would be in order. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 01:13, 11 March 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Game Editors ==
 
−
 
 
−
I was going to add a link off the Main Page to the [[Game editors]] section that I wrote, under Misc. I still have a nagging feeling there is another list of them somewhere, but I can't find it. Any comments?
 
−
 
 
−
Also, any additions to the Game editors section are welcome.
 
−
 
 
−
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 03:40, 15 March 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: I don't think we've ever had a particular listing of editors.
 
−
 
 
−
: Tell you what, I'll throw these changes in, and we'll see how this works out.
 
−
 
 
−
:# I'll put the new game editor section onto the UFO main table (I've also renamed the page to stick to the first capital letter naming convention the other articles use).
 
−
:# I removed XComutil off the main table, since it'll be under the game file section.
 
−
:# Removed the UBK - it's just a tool for wiki editors and not something that would interest players of the game.
 
−
 
 
−
: I might also add the [[Command Prompt]] to the game editor section for its notes on using MS-Edit as a binary file editor.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
:- [[User:NKF|NKF]] 04:46, 15 March 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: While I see the validity of adding XComUtil to a page regarding editors won't it make sense to keep a sublink to the page which deals on how to use it, together with MSEdit? I mean, the other editors only have links to them on that page and I think that at least XComUtil deserves main page status because of its notoriosity and complexity. What do you guys think? - [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 14:08, 15 March 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
----
 
−
a good idea to include the Command Prompt help. How about broadly dividing it into 2 sections: X-COM-specific tools and general purpose tools?
 
−
[[User:Spike|Spike]] 07:08, 17 March 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Newb questions ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello good sirs. Sorry for my bad non-native english. While in total noob in wiki, im relatively for long playd this great games. Great thanks for you for this great site, it really helped me with some ideas, especially with Funding Nation, even dont know how i played it before without it. Now more close to point, i realized what TFTD section here are, say, unperfect, if not somewhat wrong. As i readed somewhere not all play TFTD much, UFO1 instead, so it maybe be the point. Id edit something on it, but im totally dunno how to do it, and my language will have too many mistakes to be proudly presented to people. So id be glade to hear what you may propose for me to do. Again big thanks. Ill wait for answer.
 
−
 
 
−
PS Or im searched too badly, or its differ in TFTD (i play only it now) from UFO1, but i cant find here about stunned persons behaviour. Cant find what they awake only if theyr stun is lower then HP's and if only they have awaken person in theyr tile during end of turn. IMHO its important thing to know off, at least for me.
 
−
 
 
−
PPS. My friend made great tiny changes to one tiny file, what make FundingNations game way more easy and elegant then described in issue. I can upload it if you need this, tho its for TFTD im sure he can do UFO1 also if its needed. Anyway this game too easy even on FN to play it without it :).
 
−
 
 
−
Eh PPPS. Dunno how to properly log on :(.
 
−
 
 
−
: Do not worry about the language barrier - sometimes it's harder to understand people who speak English natively! ;) In any case, There'll be other editors who will be able to help fix the article for you if you can get the idea across.
 
−
 
 
−
: To get started editing pages, check the Community Portal on the left sidebar. That has links to articles that can help you get started - more or less. One good way to find out how some text is formatted (or anything else you'd like to duplicate) is to edit the page and see how it's done in the source.
 
−
 
 
−
: If in doubt, or if you're unsure about editing the article, feel free put your ideas or suggestions in the article's Discussion page.
 
−
 
 
−
: Because TFTD and UFO share a lot of the same mechanics, there would be a lot of unnecessary duplication if we were to write up articles for it that are already available in the UFO articles. Therefore we mainly include articles that cover topics that are unique to TFTD, like the weapons, door opening, aliens, etc. General mechanics like how damage works or how experience is earned is identical to UFO's, so there's no need to duplicate them. What sections do you think need improving or what sections do we need to add? The more input the better.
 
−
 
 
−
: Regarding consciousness, have you checked the [[Unconscious]] article? I think we might need to redo that article bit and perhaps add a few illustrations. One note about the difference between UFO and TFTD with the visual appearance of a unit recovered with a medikit needs to go in there too if it hasn't already. Oh well. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 22:54, 22 May 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: PS, to sign your messages in the discussion pages, put four tilde's <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> anywhere you want to insert your name and the timestamp.
 
−
 
 
−
== same questions ==
 
−
 
 
−
Thank you for answer. I been somwhat incorrect in my english. I didnt mean what TFTD pages are bad or what they lose reduntand UFO1 information. All they lack are only slightly wrongly described alien's dangers levels (one of most dangerous creatures cant be low treat, and least dangerous one medium) and lack of mission types what only TFTD have. Also i readed "Unconscious@ article few times, stiil cant find only how to use medkit and no word about what generally need for stunned person to rise. From that follow advices to grenade stunned chryssalids and so on.
 
−
 
 
−
PS. Oh, yes, and whats wrong with door openings?
 
−
[[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 08:59, 23 May 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
: A unit falls unconscious when the stun bar is equal or greater than the unit's remaining health points. If it's under that, the unit will be awake.
 
−
 
 
−
: To wake a soldier up, you have to reduce the stun level by either waiting for the stun to wear off, 1 point per turn, or use stimulants on a medikit. Looks like the TFTD section doesn't have its own medikit page, but UFO's [[Medi-Kit]] section explains how to use it, as they are identical. Basically, if the unit is unconscious, the medic must stand on top of the unconscious unit and use stimulants (the second choice) until the unconscious soldier wakes up. When the unconscious unit wakes up, they'll appear to the north of the medic.   
 
−
 
 
−
: TFTD's stun weapons are much more powerful than in TFTD, so you often have to use a lot of stimulants to wake a person up.
 
−
 
 
−
: TFTD's unique because it allows you to open doors by right clicking them - and it's a free action so you won't spend any TUs to do it. UFO cannot do this (except the Playstation version).
 
−
 
 
−
: As for the threat levels of the aliens - I agree, some should be reclassified. Personally I'd move the Gill-Men and Calcinite up to medium threat - all the current medium level threats look just about right though. What are your suggestions? 
 
−
 
 
−
: Hang on, why are there so many references to vibroblades in the overview article? That can't be right. I'll have to update that later on. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 15:05, 23 May 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
Nonono. I mean what if unit's stun damage falled below it's HP, and no one stand in tile it lying, it will never rise. Medkits not the point. No stunned aliens or soldiers will rise if no one will end turn on it, or take it to inventory/hand. I tried to say this. Maybe it been different in UFO1 (as with doors, i thought what doors always open by right click, and in UFO1 too (btw cant find about door opening anywere in wiki)), but in TFTD it means what you dont have to bother with stunned tentaculats etc to rise after stun if you do not stand on it, or try to move it in backpack/hand. Same with soldiers, you can click zillion turns, but they will never rise until someone stand on it. Without this game must be horrible with all this undying lobsters awake afer you pass them.
 
−
With danger level id suggest this:  Harmless: hallucinoid; deep one; Low: gillmen; aquatoid; Meduim: zombie; calcinite; bio-drone; lobsterman; xarquid; high: tasoth; triscene; What really matters: tentaculat. In line of growing dangerness. [[User:Derrida|Derrida]] 16:30, 23 May 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Regarding image file formats ==
 
−
 
 
−
I'd really like to add a note somewhere obvious about using GIFs for screenshots in the wiki, rather than JPGs. For 256-color images like X-COM uses, GIFs are no larger than JPGs and generally look much better. For example, see the nasty compression artifacts on the terrain maps in the [[Terror ship|Terror Ship]] article. PNGs might work just as well, I'm not sure, but we should really avoid JPGs.
 
−
 
 
−
Where would be the best place to mention this? I'm thinking near the top of the main page for visibility, but that might be more clutter than people want. [[User:Phasma Felis|Phasma Felis]] 23:59, 11 June 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:It's been dealt with [[User_talk:Zombie#Image_Types|here]] that PNG is the preferred file format of the wiki; however, where to note this...I honestly don't know. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 00:37, 12 June 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: PNG's reduced to 256 or less colours can be quite the space saver for X-Com screenshots. You can go the extra step and run them through PNG compression programs and somesuch - but they're pretty good as-is. Jpgs should be reserved for images with a broader range of colours. One place the note could go is in [[Guidelines to writing articles]]. In fact, that section could do with a few extra additions in any case to expand is to that it's not just covering the composition of the language of the articles, but to cover the creation of the articles. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:04, 12 June 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Hosting move. ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hi guys. It appears I'm still hosting the UFOpaedia - I did discuss moving it to StrategyCore with both Zombie and Pete a while ago and I think I gave them copies of what would be required.
 
−
 
 
−
Anyway, I'm moving hosting servers so the UFOpaedia is going to move too. I'm aiming to carry out the transfer on Sunday September 28th at about 8pm GMT+1. Any changes made between this time and the time that the transfer completes may be lost, but hopefully not. Just thought I'd give you guys a bit of notice.
 
−
 
 
−
I should point out that I still have no objection to hosting the UFOpaedia on my servers, it's a great project and you guys have done a bang-up job with it, it's far surpassed my original intentions :) However, if StrategyCore want to take over hosting to remove the potential "failure point" (i.e. me) then that's fine and we can give it another shot?
 
−
 
 
−
GazChap, 25th September 2008 12:50 GMT+1
 
−
 
 
−
:Thanks for the heads-up Gaz-Chap! Sure, StrategyCore is still willing to host the UFOpaedia. Sorry things didn't quite work out the last time we talked. Pete needs to be constantly reminded to do things as he's easily distracted. I'll try and start a fire under his bum to get the ball rolling again. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 07:14, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::Hosting has now been moved to StrategyCore. Cheers to Pete and Zombie for sorting it out. GazChap, 11:28, 1 October 2008 (GMT+1)
 
−
 
 
−
::: There may be a slight problem with caching of the temporary holding page ("coming back soon". On some browsers I'm using (not all), the temporary page is still up and you can't see the UFOPaedia site. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:48, 1 October 2008 (CDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::The new website address is quite likely still propagating out through DNS, since we moved hosts.  So that's just the nature of the internet and should be gone in a day or two.  [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:06, 1 October 2008 (CDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:Most browsers seem to allow a full page refresh via Ctrl + F5. There's also an option re caching under the Misc section of your Preferances - I had to disable it ages ago 'cause it was always failing to show me page changes... - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:54, 1 October 2008 (CDT)
 
−
 
 
−
Sorry about the downtime everyone. The bandwidth limit wasn't set high enough after the recent change in hosting and basically didn't allow access. I contacted Pete and he fixed the issue. Good to catch these issues earlier rather than later. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 15:11, 15 October 2008 (CDT)
 
−
 
 
−
=== 14 March 2009 ===
 
−
 
 
−
Zombie mentioned that Pete may be moving the server this weekend. I'm getting lots of errors and more or less unable to make updates to the site. Probably this is to do with the server move. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:14, 14 March 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:Apparently the move has been complete most of the day. So if you guys continue to have problems, please contact me and I'll relay it over to Pete. I'm not experiencing any problems though. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 21:34, 14 March 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== 500 Internal error ==
 
−
 
 
−
This seems to occur whenever I edit a subsection on a page, and I click the edit button on the TOP of the page instead of the edit button next to the subsection title. So, if you wanna avoid this error, try using the button which only edits that subsection... [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 05:40, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:Already been tried.  Doesn't work any better.  UFOpaedia admin is on it, I've been told. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 12:05, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: Pete's finished his latest round of changes. Give it another go. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 22:12, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Proposed top level links ==
 
−
 
 
−
I've written some pages which I'd like to be proposed be linked to the main page, unless anyone can suggest where to put them (careful now!).
 
−
 
 
−
I'd like to link [[Fictional Equivalents]] to the main page.
 
−
 
 
−
I'd like to link [[Wish List (TFTD)]] to the TFTD page. It would also be good to start a [[Known Bugs (TFTD)]] page, for TFTD-specific bugs.
 
−
 
 
−
However as some tricky template work is involved, I'd rather not make these links myself for fear of screwing up the main page(s). Thoughts? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 11:20, 14 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
 
 
−
: Feel free to edit the templates - as long as the tables look okay when you preview them, they shouldn't break the page. The templates are standard pages but with a fancy prefix to their file name to categorize them as templates. This was needed so that any updates to them would show up on the main page right away without forcing the viewers to force-refresh the page. - [[User:NKF|NKF]] 12:46, 14 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
::It should be noted that the [[TRTBAG]] more or less covers the "Known Bugs for TFTD" segment. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 16:08, 14 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Well it covers the Research Tree bugs but not any of the other TFTD-specific bugs as far as I can see. Still that's a good starting point, thanks AQ! And thanks Zombie for adding the links. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:34, 14 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
 
 
−
::Maybe TRTBAG should just BECOME the "Known Bugs(TFTD)" page. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 17:36, 14 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Because TRTBAG is such an excellent self contained guide, and well written, and quite long, I think it should be separate. I will link to it under the Known Bugs (TFTD) page. I suggest the main page link to TRTBAG be remained "''Research'' Bug Avoidance Guide". Probably the TFTD Alien Glitches page can be gotten rid of. It only mentions one bug, which is not a bug at all. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:16, 15 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Terminology==
 
−
 
 
−
===X-COM/XCOM/XCom/Etc.===
 
−
 
 
−
I remember reading about this discussion before and if something concrete comes out I think it should be added to the [[Guidelines to writing articles]].
 
−
Do we have set a proper spelling to refer to the organization? IIRC the game uses X-COM/XCOM/X-Com/etc. Should we set a standard for the Wiki? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 07:52, 21 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
:It's a good idea to agree on a single standard spelling for the Wiki, if only to keep links consistent and prdictable. But it's a shame if there is no clear canonical spelling though. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 12:28, 21 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
::From what I recall there isn't a standard followed on UFO Defense, where you have X-COM/XCOM/XCom/etc. Apocalypse might be more consistent and I have no idea for the other games. I try to use X-COM and I've done some edits to follow this standard spelling but I'd like to read more opinions [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 17:43, 22 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
:I've had a check through the in-game strings and most if not all of them say "Xcom", which is my least favourite spelling. :( I think X-COM has the best flavour. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 19:41, 22 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
If any of you folks here have been following what I've been up to lately at the StrategyCore forums, you'll see I have been amassing a collection of most of the game versions in the series. Checking my [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/xcom/pg/ufogameversions UFO Game Versions] site page, you'll see that the original European release used XCom while the budget releases used X-Com. Other than that, those spellings quickly fell by the wayside as MicroProse decided on X-COM which quickly gained approval and remained the standard spelling throughout the series. (You can't really go by in-game text as those were not checked for consistency). Anyhow, I'd opt for the same route MicroProse took: <b>X-COM</b>. --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:33, 22 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
 
 
−
===Capitalization guidelines/rules for the wiki===
 
−
 
 
−
Another thing that crossed my mind are guidelines/rules tossed in to prevent overcapitalization.
 
−
 
 
−
Specific ingame terms/names should be always capitalized:
 
−
*Weapons (Boomeroid, Elerium, Entropy Launcher
 
−
*Alien Races (Sectoid, Lobsterman, Skeletoid, etc.)
 
−
*Organizations (MarSec, General Dynamics, Council of Funding Nations)
 
−
*X-COM Crafts (Skyranger, Manta, Dimension Probe)
 
−
 
 
−
Generic ingame terms/names (that already exist in English) should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry.  Some examples:
 
−
*Weapons (Plasma Rifle, Torpedo Launcher, Vortex Mine, etc.)
 
−
*UFO types (Large Scout, Dreadnaught, Alien Mothership, etc.)
 
−
*Soldier Attributes/Agent Stats (Stamina, Psi-defense, etc.)
 
−
*Base Facilities
 
−
 
 
−
Wiki terms should be capitalized the first time they are mentioned on a wiki entry:
 
−
*Tactics
 
−
*Economics
 
−
*Game Mechanics
 
−
*Etc.
 
−
 
 
−
A few other rules to prevent overcapitalization and make a smooth reading:
 
−
*After the 1st mention, generic ingame terms are not required to be capitalized. As an example, after the first mention of a Laser Pistol, any additional mention(s) to them can simply use the term pistol(s).
 
−
*When refering to similar names/terms, it is advisable to capitalize both when they are mentioned. Eg. "Auto Cannon, unlike Heavy Cannon, allows for automatic fire" "Large Scouts are more dangerous than Medium Scouts".
 
−
*The same applies to wiki terms.
 
−
 
 
−
[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 16:54, 23 November 2008 (CST)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== Humor and Flavour Text ==
 
−
 
 
−
GEH!!! This whole issue is taking on a life of it's own. On one hand, yes, I can see the allure of ufopedia being a serious informative site. On the other hand, there's the "fun" factor... When you get right down to it, Xcom is actually a rather simplistic game in terms of storyline, and storyline interactivity, so we REALLY have to make up our own, otherwise the game degenerates into "capture this technology, research research, shoot shoot. MC = win game". The ingame UFOpedia is great, but it's limited to several paragraphs to describe an entire race of creatures, and 2-3 lines to describe the horror of Blaster Bombs and such. ... I vote that this online UFOpedia becomes everything that the ufopedia in-game was missing... let's have something that ENTERTAINS as well as giving good accurate information!
 
−
 
 
−
I'll wait for the votes to come in before touching anything else. I agree with you guys, the Lobstermen and other aquatic aliens getting eaten is something that is VERY much a part of the X-com community's culture... it should go into the UFOpedia. [[User:Jasonred|Jasonred]] 04:00, 13 March 2009 (CDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: I've nothing against humour. All for it. In fact I'd very much like to see more of that so that definitely gets my vote. A few light hearted moments in between all the seriousness does wonders. Perhaps not when you're getting into the particulars, but the descriptions or opening paragraphs that don't get into deep detail could be livened up a little. In moderation, of course!
 
−
 
 
−
: However, the hard part is deciding on the line between being humorous within the confines of what's available (yes, funny discussions amongst the troops about eating lobstermen after battle instead of selling it could count towards that), and then there's making stuff up.  Apologies to Morken for borrowing an example from his on-going graphic novel: explaining the alien's general idiocy/sportsmanship through their strong belief in the tenets of Amgoth. Highly amusing, but not part of the story. Granted, I don't think we've got anything like that on the wiki, but you never know.
 
−
 
 
−
: In any case, a good mental exercise for the writers. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 05:14, 13 March 2009 (CDT)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
My two cents then: I like the humour, anecdotes, flavour and fan fiction but I think the main purpose of UFOPaedia is informational and that should not be compromised. I like the little touches of humour, and I've been known to attempt them myself. But humour and anecdotes should be kept brief and supplementary - e.g. one-liners and wry observations at the end of a section. Non-canonical flavour text and fan fiction (especially) should be kept clearly separate and distinguishable. Someone reading the site with no prior knowledge of XCOM should be able to tell right away what is factual vs what is humour or speculation/imagination. Not quite sure how to do that - maybe by using sidebars, the Humour category... ok ran out of ideas there already. Maybe we need an "official" font for reproducing canonical, in-game flavour text, so it stands out. Not sure.
 
−
 
 
−
Also, humour, anecdote and flavour are much more subjective than fact. What one person thinks is funny, others may not. So non-factual content may just get edited out unless a lot of people agree that it's funny/cool/interesting etc - in fact that's probably already happening. Maybe a good idea is to make the jokes on the Talk pages, and if they are found to be universally funny, move them on to the main articles later - pretty much the same as factual content in fact? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 05:19, 13 March 2009 (CDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: I'm certain that we would all agree that the wiki is first and foremost an informative site. We needn't go so far as to point out to the readers what is or isn't. That would be overdoing it. A dash of humour anywhere we can get away with it without compromising the message, facts or turn it into fan fiction is really all that's required and can be more effective. Like spices, the right amount can add to the flavour of a dish. Too much and it just ruins it.
 
−
 
 
−
:Now a little creative writing to make the articles (with or without the humour) more captivating to the reader and less like text-books will certainly go a long way. But then again, I believe that we've always attempted to do this. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:04, 13 March 2009 (CDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: I agree with NKF's point here regarding humor. But, concerning fanfic, to make up and add things that aren't on the original UFOPaedias or the History distributed with Interceptor is to take too much liberty with the original material (in regards with fan fiction). Just because it gets discussed in the forums at strategycore or xcomufo or that it is mentioned in someone's fanfic doesn't mean that it should be taken as a fact, regardless of the argument that the game story belongs to its fans/players. The game belongs to all of them and quite frankly we are quite a minority (although a very loyal one) regarding that. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 21:58, 2 April 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
I personally hate the in-game perspective of some articles. I come to this page mainly to get information, not cheesy stories somebody made up. How about splitting it into two wikis? A serious one in the style of a guide book and a fan-fic one full of funny stories and made up background information? [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 07:55, 10 May 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: That's why we've got the Field Manual, which is all fiction. The rest should be as fan-fiction free as possible, and any light hearted bits in the non-essential text  shouldn't affect the game mechanics explanations (which I feel is the wiki's star aspect). Much of what fiction there (all the non-canon stuff) is a throwback to when we first started and were populating the wiki before we started developing article standards. If you think there's anything that can be done better, we can easily sort that out.  -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 08:53, 10 May 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
==XML dumps available?==
 
−
Hello guys! Kudos for creating this amazing wiki!
 
−
 
 
−
I have some ideas and I'd like to test them on an XML dump of ufopaedia, since it's a small but interesting wiki. Do you offer the dumps for download somewhere (like wikipedia does)? That would be absolutely fantastic. :) [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 10:23, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:Do you mean [[Special:Export]]? --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:31, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::I'm not sure if that export page does the job. It seems that it only allows downloading a list of articles I have to type in. What I want is ALL articles of Ufopaedia in XML, be it one file per article or one file for all articles(which I would prefer, since that is what Wikipedia provides and I'd like my software to work with all wikis). You can see what Wikipedia offers here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/]] and here [[http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20090501/]]. Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 23:19, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
 
−
::Never mind, I just entered all the relevant categories into the export page and got the XML file I was looking for (Downloading only the files relevant to playing X-COM 1 results in 1.5MB of XML). Thanks! [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 11:21, 4 May 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
More problems! Since "Special:Export" seems to only allow categories it is impossible to download articles that have no category (e.g. "civilian"). I see two ways how you could fix this: Add an option "Include all uncategorized articles to export" to the export page or put every article in categories. Or run a script that puts every article without category in a "Other" category. [[User:RedNifre|RedNifre]] 07:26, 10 May 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Stats & Purchasing Options ==
 
−
 
 
−
Two wildly different subjects here, but worth mentioning:
 
−
 
 
−
1) Are any of the Wiki overlords interested in gathering Wiki usage statistics using something like Google Analytics? I just fished about in the server logs and it may interest you to know that the Wiki gets 6,000-8,000 unique visitors a month with anywhere from 13,000-25,000 visits a month from those visitors. With Analytics plugged in (which would take about five minutes from me) then interested parties could keep an eye on what's getting the most attention and, possibly, what people are searching for most (as in things that they're looking for that may not be covered). I'm new to MediaWiki though so I have no idea whether it's got some level of reporting built in?
 
−
 
 
−
2) Is it worth putting a link in the menu to the left to a page with more details on buying options and what's in the "complete" collections (as they're not totally complete technically, and people may not be aware that they can buy just one of the games if they want)? I would imagine it's something that quite a few people would be looking for, though admittedly without the detailed stats it's hard to say. Just pretend I don't have an interest in affiliate linking with this question too - I'd thought about it before putting my business hat on, honest!
 
−
--[[User:Pete|Pete]] 17:58, 23 June 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:1 - MediaWiki doesn't have much in terms of stats so it would be great if you could install that for us. Would be a handy tool for all sorts of things.
 
−
 
 
−
:2 - Good idea. If someone creates such a page I'll add it to the left menu. :) --[[User:Zombie|Zombie]] 20:11, 23 June 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::I like both ideas as well [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 20:30, 23 June 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: That is a decent number of UVs and well worth monetising just to defray the costs a bit, which is all it would do. I guess you are talking about some Adwords and affiliate links to Steam? Fair enough. I don't pay for the site and it has to be paid for somehow.
 
−
 
 
−
Interesting stats though. So there are 6 to 8,000 people viewing and what, at most 10-20 people posting regularly? That's a pretty high "lurker ratio". :) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 21:18, 23 June 2009 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== Copyrighted Materials from Official Sources ==
 
−
 
 
−
I've read a post concerning this and I suddenly couldn't remember if there's any guidelines regarding this, so I decided to ask your opinion about it. I've been transcribing quite a few descriptions from game manuals and game UFOPaedia's for the articles about Apocalypse that I've been adding because I worked under the assumption that this site is basically an online resource for players and it already uses a lot of copyrighted materials, especially images (and also to save some work in creating articles for the pages I've been adding).
 
−
Another thing that I've been putting into practice is some special editing to differenciate canon material from official sources, I can't remember how to describe but just check any the page of any organization from Apocalypse. Likely there's a better way to it but the most important would be to add something regarding this matter to the UFOPaedia's guidelines [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]]
 
−
 
 
−
: I've been thinking that official quotes of in-game text should be clearly defined as such and left unmodified. Perhaps a formatted table with a note at the end stating its source (or title/author/publisher/ISBN if it's from official printed material). Perhaps even have the quotation in italics.
 
−
 
 
−
:(Example removed)
 
−
 
 
−
: Would something like the above, or along similar lines work? Could be done by way of two templates (open and close), and you just sandwich the text in between them. The open/close templates could take one parameter each, the title/source. Leaving it out will obviously leave a blank. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 21:56, 28 February 2010 (EST)
 
−
:: Something like this would do rather nicely. I think the important part is for the source of the copyrighted material to be clear. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 12:36, 6 March 2010 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::These could use some adjustments if anyone has any feedback to offer, but I've converted the previous example into a pair of templates. We now have <nowiki>{{Ref Open}} and {Ref Close | }}</nowiki> to wrap around quotations. 
 
−
 
 
−
{{Ref Open}}
 
−
 
 
−
'''Celatid Autopsy Official Entry'''
 
−
<p style ="text-indent:1em;">''"The core contains a small bio-mechanical device which appears to be a naturally evolved anti-gravity propulsion system. The sac of venom is the largest organ and there does not appear to be a separate brain structure. There is no discernible digestive or reproductive system. A small organ contains embryos which can grow rapidly into a new being."''</p>
 
−
 
 
−
{{Ref Close| Source: Enemy Unknown/UFO Defense Ufopaedia}}
 
−
 
 
−
::: The pipe symbol is very important for Ref Close - you put the list of references right after it. Check the source for the above example. The text is set to display one size smaller than the current font and is right aligned, but you can also use links and simple text formatting in the reference list.  -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 22:15, 6 March 2010 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::: Awesome stuff - thanks for the great work NKF. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 4:57, 7 March 2010 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==UFO Classes==
 
−
 
 
−
Hi all!
 
−
 
 
−
I recently finished a mod for X-COM UFO: Enemy Unknown that automatically assigns class and level to soldiers based solely on their stats, called "UFO Classes". It would have been nearly impossible if not for all the reseach into game mechanics i gleaned off this site.
 
−
 
 
−
In hope that my work improves the best game of all time, for all the people who made this possible, I proudly present: [[User:Necuno|UFO Classes]]
 
−
 
 
−
--[[User:Necuno|Necuno]] 15:20, 9 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Deleting trash files==
 
−
 
 
−
I haven't been able to find an option for deleting trash files, these files are not in use:
 
−
 
 
−
If anyone could instruct me or perform the deletions I’d appreciate it.
 
  
−
: Deleted as requested. You need to be an admin to delete files, so just ask like you did :) [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 21:42, 19 December 2009 (EST)
+
:: I am rather partial to this solution myself. The wiki does need to keep its main focus tight as far as its main content is concerned. But nothing says we cannot have a page that acknowledges and point to other projects of interest. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 04:10, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
  
−
Note that you can overwrite old files. Might be better off sticking to a more generic filename, then mentioning stuff like version numbers in the file comment section. One file name constantly being overwritten would be better then many files and many delete requests. - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 21:45, 19 December 2009 (EST)
+
==Server Move==
 +
In the near future we're going to move to a new server (hosted by NineX) because of the constant site outages and other technical/security issues that have been affecting the wiki since the last year. NineX currently hosts the OpenXCom forums and site, so I feel that it will be a good move since the OpenXCom community has been the most active in keeping the old XCom games alive.  
  
−
== "Spin-Off in progress" edit ==
+
However we're still not sure if we're gonna be able to keep the old domain (www.ufopaedia.org) or if it will be necessary to move to a new one, and ask everybody to update their links. We're trying to keep the old domain, but right now the choice is to be between keeping things as they currently are, or get the technical/security issues fixed and get back the wiki properly working, even if that means losing the domain and the traffic.
−
I don't think the last edit to Main Page (adding a "Spin-Off in progress" section) is appropriate. It implies official sanction (by Microprose, Mythos or whomever has the X-COM licence now) where there isn't any AFAIK. I would have reverted, but I guess it's best to discuss this first. [[User:Cesium|Cesium]] 19:57, 26 February 2010 (EST)
 
−
: I share the concern. This is effectively an ad for an in-development product. It is not a sanctioned product like the others in this section. It's of interest to XCom fans, but should be grouped with UFO2000, Pocket UFO, etc. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 22:04, 26 February 2010 (EST)
 
−
:: I also agree that calling it a spin-off is incorrect since it implies continuing some element of the original series and developing it, which would require permission from the owner of the trademark/copyright (on this case Take-Two). There are precedents for having projects related to X-COM on the Main Page (UFO2000 and Project Xenocide) but those are/were open-source and intended to recreate the original game, replicating or drawing heavily from it. It might be debatable if UFO2000 should have a place on this wiki, though.
 
−
:: For time being I will keep the change on the page until more opinions are heard, from the other administrators and hopefully from the author. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 19:45, 28 February 2010 (EST)
 
−
::: Almost a week has passed without any more comments on this issue. Unless there is further discussion I shall remove the section next Monday. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 12:35, 6 March 2010 (EST)
 
  
−
::::I've often wondered if UFO2000 should be a part of the wiki as well. I'm not saying that it (and all the other projects) don't deserve a place, but just having it here sets a precedent. If one fan made game can be on the wiki, why not all all the others as well? Removing any one could be seen as favouritism. But letting them all in has the danger of muddying the purpose of the wiki.  
+
I personally prefer the 2nd option since we need a wiki that is 100% available for both consulting and editing information, like it did in the past. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 14:17, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 +
==Temporary Domain==
 +
We completed the server move thanks to NineX, who also upgraded the wiki's software. The process required that we moved temporarily to a new domain, ufopaedia.info, but we'll return to our old domain, ufopaedia.org, as soon as the process is complete. Thanks for your patience :) [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 21:40, 28 January 2018 (CET)
  
−
::::I don't know what should be done with UFO2000 now that is has been established, but for the others: how about setting up a page that links to and advertise the various active fan X-COM-influenced projects? -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:31, 8 March 2010 (EST)
+
Migration finished. ufopaedia.info is redirecting to ufopaedia.org.
 +
Mediawiki software have been upgraded to latest version , and whole site audited. [[User:NineX|NineX]] ([[User talk:NineX|talk]]), 13:27, 31 January 2018 (CET)
  
−
::::: Isn't the case that UFO2000 has some special relationship, e.g. this is the "official" Wiki site for UFO2000 or something like that? So it's a special case. In the general case, fan made games and remakes should have less prominence, IMO. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:55, 8 March 2010 (EST)
+
==Piratez in featured projects?==
 +
It seems out of place that piratez has it's own table on the UFOpedia, and uses (Piratez) to distinguish its own pages, but is not listed on the featured projects.  Going to add it if nobody objects.  The rationale for adding Long War in this talk pages history (Huge makeover of the original version) pretty much goes doubly so for piratez.  [[User:Greep|Greep]] ([[User talk:Greep|talk]]) 21:57, 5 May 2019 (CEST)
 +
:Only admins can edit Featured Projects. And I object to it.
 +
:I proposed to add Long War because it was the only major mod available to EU/EW, and even got recognition and compliments made by Firaxis (with Jake Solomon joking that he was the guy that designed LW's beta), which was then extended to hiring the LW team to make official XCOM 2 mods for the game's release. So LW is really something special that deserved to get its own recognition.
 +
:Piratez is just one of several total conversions available for OpenXCom, and the intent is not to list all mod projects on Featured Projects, Because then X-Files, Hardmode or Area 51 would also qualify, being also expansions on their own right, although without Piratez's popularity.
 +
:Not to mention that there are other current XCom games like XCOM 2 that have also their own mods. So, if Piratez is added, what happens if someone else from another XCOM game, or current projects being developed like OpenApoc, decides to ask for his major mod to be added?
 +
:The primary intent of this wiki is the XCOM games, and Featured Projects is a way to recognize the hard work and dedication of a few fan projects, OpenXCom being one of them - and if you add Piratez then you're basically saying that Piratez is at the same level as OpenXCom, when Piratez wouldn't exist if there wasn't OpenXCom to begin with.
 +
:Finally, pages with their own suffix (Whatever) don't necessarily translate into Featured Projects, check the existing Interceptor and the Enforcer pages, it's more of a matter of internal page categorization. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 23:23, 5 May 2019 (CEST)
 +
::: Ah okay, but I'm not really convinced, this feels like a matter of scale.  I'm not trying to get it added as a featured project because I'm a fan, it just doesn't seem right to not have it there regardless of those reasons.  If you look at something like UFO:AI or OpenApoc, on the main featured bar, they're almost completed unupdated and tiny.  If the idea is that Piratez should have it's place on this wiki, and not on it's own wiki, then it really should have a place on the main page.  If it's not, why is it even on here with hundreds and hundreds of pages?  I type in just about any search for x-com related things and see a bunch of piratez pages in the autocomplete.  If X-Files, Hardmode, Area 51 had hundreds of pages on the wiki, I'd recommend adding them as well, though they don't.  Anyways, just my thoughts, I won't push this anymore.  [[User:Greep|Greep]] ([[User talk:Greep|talk]]) 01:53, 6 May 2019 (CEST)
 +
:::Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Orphan explains the argument more.  It The piratez main page is a huge presence on the wiki, and is essentially unaccessable on the wiki.  Which is just not what wikis are about. [[User:Greep|Greep]] ([[User talk:Greep|talk]]) 01:59, 6 May 2019 (CEST)
 +
:::: There are a lot of interesting points in your reply, that I'll try to answer separately to those, since some I have already considered myself.
 +
:::: UFO2000 and UFO:AI are dead projects, UFO2000 had its glory days more than 10 years ago (I was heavily involved with it) and it is playable (although hardly anyone plays it) and UFO:AI was never finished, so there's really an argument there whether both should still be on Featured Projects. OpenApoc on the other hand is actively being developed right now, they have their own Discord channel and it might take a while, but the general feeling is that one day it will reach 1.0 status, like OpenXCom did.
 +
:::: Piratez section on its wiki grew up by itself out of the OpenXCom until now, Dioxine or anyone ever asked permission, that I recall, but since we got the space and it is XCom related, no one objected, and the community is pretty supportive of each other's projects.  
 +
:::: If by Auto-Complete you mean Google's search bar then the reason why you get so much Piratez results associated with XCom is because it uses your past search history and page views. I don't get any Piratez results when I search for XCom things because I don't play Piratez (and I don't play LW or LW2 also, but I suggested that they should be added because of their importance).
 +
:::: And this brings me to another important point, which is that Piratez includes content that some people don't really think belongs in an XCom game, namely it being about space pirates, slaves and mutants against aliens, and with the nudity involved. I know it takes place in an alternate universe where XCom lost the war, but if Firaxis announced that XCOM 3 followed Piratez setting, there would be a huge fan backlash because XCom has almost always been about an international, semi-clandestine organization of humans fighting aliens, and never required nudity to be atractive. Piratez setting and aesthetics appeal to a lot of people but to a lot of others it doesn't, even inside the OpenXCom community.
 +
:::: And for instance, I'm the lead developer of Area 51 that was mentioned before, and while it expands the base UFO: Defense game like EW or LW did, if not more, I do not think it should be on Featured Projects because of all the reasons I mentioned before. As a developer I'd love it to be more publicized, but here I need to think first as a wiki administrator, and like I said before, this is an XCOM wiki since it was created 15 years ago, not an OpenXCom one. If this was a wiki dedicated to OXC, then Piratez, Area 51, Tech-Comm (another total conversion I'm working based on the Terminator universe), Warhammer 40k, Dune, and all other major projects, XCom based or not, would belong here, but it isn't.
 +
:::: Finally, we're not talking here about a single orphan article. Orphan articles mean that they can only be accessed by searching the wiki since there aren't any links to them anywhere. Piratez can be accessed through here https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Mods_(OpenXcom). The issue really is that you think Piratez should be more advertised on the wiki by adding it to Featured Projects, but as I said before, it is questionable whether it deserves to get that sort of attention on an XCOM wiki. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 05:37, 6 May 2019 (CEST)
 +
::::: Heh, well in any case, looks like someone else added it to featured projects about a year ago: it's just on the featured projects at the very bottom of the page, along with all the other featured projects but with piratez squeezed in haha.  Somewhat tangential but a bit on topic:  Maybe the front page should just have a section at the top listing all the relevant games on the wiki? I remember like a decade ago when it was just the 1994 version/TFT and Apoc and the main page was very organized and clear, but it's really not now what with the tables of nearly every game on the wiki on the main page and some random lists in random places.  Case in point: Piratez is already considered a featured mod by someone and neither of us noticed until this point, nor did I know even enforcer or these other spinoffs existed that you mentioned earlier existed or were on the wiki at all. In any case, glad to have talked this out. [[User:Greep|Greep]] ([[User talk:Greep|talk]]) 11:21, 6 May 2019 (CEST)
 +
::::: Bluh, one last point, I promise.  I think maybe your having made/worked on a huge mod might be influencing your decision: you make it sound like it'd be a bad thing if all OpenXcom mods were featured and I don't think this would even be bad at all.  E.g. a lot of games wikis list basically all the relevant large mods for the game in a very visible place.  Example: https://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page has a link to a list of pretty much every major mod visible up front without needing to scroll down.  To me it just seemed odd specifically for piratez here since it also had a huge space on the wiki, but I don't see an issue with Area 51, Warhammer 40k, etc having a visible place.
  
−
:::::: I'm biased towards UFO2000 since I was a member of the developer team, but I'll state what I think about it. UFO2000 is a playable game, but still in progress, which aimed to be a remake of the original game, although only the tactical game is implemented and the remake aim had to be dropped to prevent copyright issues. I can't remember who asked for it to be included in the wiki list of games but it clearly has content of its own (new weaponsets, tactics, etc., all expanding upon the original game). I agree with having a page to list all active projects. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 15:16, 8 March 2010 (EST)
+
== XCOM 2 section problems ==
  
−
: Since there's a consensus the previous edit was inappropriate, and the Monday deadline came and passed, I've reverted the edit. [[User:Cesium|Cesium]] 08:34, 15 March 2010 (EDT)
+
Hi guys,
−
:: The deadline applied if there was no further discussion after it was set. Since people contributed to the discussion afterwards, the deadline became void. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 12:05, 15 March 2010 (EDT)
 
  
−
: Is there a consent in moving the section on the Main Page moved to a new Spin-Offs and Projects page? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 21:40, 13 March 2010 (EST)
+
I've noticed that there's loads of problems in the XCOM 2 sections - misspellings, orphan pages, a lack of organisation, and so on. Even the term "MEC" was spelt wrong in a page title. I've been tackling a few of these issues, but I'm just thinking that this isn't worth having because Fandom have their own wiki at [https://xcom.fandom.com/wiki/XCOM_Wiki] and they've got nearly everything down already.
−
:: I would agree to create a fan/tribute/etc projects page. The term Spin Offs should be reserved for "official" sequels and spin offs, if only because that's how it has been used. UFO 2000 could move to the tribute projects page, or keep its current special position. I don't mind which. It's more logical to have it all on one page, unless there are objections. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 14:47, 15 March 2010 (EDT)
 
−
:: I don't mind moving, as long as the current distinction re: spin-offs is kept, and the current wiki pages regarding these spin offs are also kept (e.g. timeline info). UFO 2000 can keep its special position, as this is also the official UFO2000 wiki and there's a lot of wiki pages for it. However, I wouldn't mind if it were moved. [[User:Cesium|Cesium]] 15:48, 15 March 2010 (EDT)
 
  
−
== NPOV-ing of TFTD Equipment ==
+
What are we trying to do here - dedicate this wiki to the old X-COM and a few mods (ahem, Long War), or adding in Firaxis's new XCOM grouping?
  
−
After Spike used the new reference templates on the Dart Gun section, I got to reading most of general descriptions for the equipment articles. I feel they are due for rewrite to set them in line with the NPOV stance we've adopted. That and some reorganization of the content, such as the UFO/TFTD weapon comparisons need to be shifted to the analysis page.  
+
Just a question in editorial direction.
  
−
If everyone doesn't mind, I'll try my hand at a few pages this week. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 08:03, 15 March 2010 (EDT)
+
--[[User:SpeedofDeath118|SpeedofDeath118]] ([[User talk:SpeedofDeath118|talk]]) 17:08, 16 December 2019 (CET)
 +
:I think the question is more, what are you interested in doing? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 23:11, 16 December 2019 (CET)
  
−
: I very much agree that the TFTD pages are generally weaker than the UFO pages, in their less neutral POV, more chatty style, and also in overall completeness. I think any effort to improve them would be most welcome. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 14:49, 15 March 2010 (EDT)
+
::The Wiki was set up long before the reboot series, so you could say the classics were its original focus. However it would have been remiss to not accommodate the new games as they appeared. However the wiki thrives or declines entirely on the input of the people that make use of it. If the interest and willingness is there, the sections will grow. If not (looks at the early spinoff titles), then perhaps not so much. [[User:NKF|NKF]] ([[User talk:NKF|talk]]) 07:31, 17 December 2019 (CET)
  
−
:: Started on the [[Dart Gun]]. Not sure if there's too much else to elaborate on, but at least now it's not openly saying it's the worst weapon in the game.
+
== Enable dark mode theme? ==
  
−
:: Need to fiddle with the layout a bit as I'm not too keen on just one big block of text. I thought it would be a good idea to move the official entry to the top of the section for a start. Still needs a bit more zing to it. Maybe a screenshot of an in-action picture of aquanaut armed with a dart-gun would break up the monotony a bit?
+
Would it be possible to add a dark mode option to this wiki? Something like these:
 +
https://help.fandom.com/wiki/Converting_to_hydradark
 +
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Skin:Timeless/DarkCSS
  
−
::One other idea I've been toying with is an executive summary of sorts. A split pro/con table that highlights the key features and flaws of the weapon for readers to quickly glance over. Would that work, or would that just add more clutter to the page? -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:07, 16 March 2010 (EDT)
+
I see a "Skin" option when I navigate to Preferences > Appearance (https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering ), but no options other than the default appear.
 +
-[[User:JimmAYY2|JimmAYY2]] ([[User talk:JimmAYY2|talk]]) 19:38, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:38, 23 October 2021

Welcome To All Rookies

This is the place to talk/ask about general issues concerning the wiki and hopefully someone will answer/reply to them.

Specific game questions should be asked on the game's individual talk pages.

For new users, in order to reduce spam you'll need to register to be able to edit pages.

To start a new topic simply press the edit button above. Then place your ==Topic Name== like it is written here.

  • To add a line you can either type ---- or use the buttons that appear on the edit screen.
  • If replying to an existing topic use colons : before your answer
  • Don't forget to sign your posts in the talk pages by typing ~~~~ at the end.
  • Finally when creating/editing wiki articles have a look at the guidelines page.

That's it. Happy editing!

Old articles have been moved to Talk:Main Page/Archive for later perusal.

Featured Projects on Sidebar

I was requested on Discord by user Ucross to add to the Featured Projects section of the sidebar the mod that he is working on called Long War Rebalance, which is a mod of Long War, and thus a mod of XCOM: Enemy Unknown, and I refused the request for the same reasons I already presented below regarding the Piratez mod for OpenXCom. It's arguable for the same reason that Long War shouldn't on that list for the same reason, it being a mod, but since Firaxis gave the official recognition to both Long Wars, and even gave support to Long War 2, that's the difference I see between Long War and all the other mods made for all XCom games, and thus worthy of recognition as significant contributions by and for the community. The same reason behind UFO2000, OpenXCom, OpenApoc and UFO:AI, they are all entire new XCom games built by teams of fans, and the first three are playable, and you can create mods for them. OpenXCom and OpenApoc are in active development. As for personal projects to be present on that section, I can think of a ton of projects related to XCom that would deserve to be there, and that would make that list endless an unpractical. And at the end, the objective of this wiki is to inform about the games. Hobbes (talk) 20:28, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

It still would be nice for players to be able to find all of the mods/projects that this wiki hosts. What about something like: "Other Projects" where it's a page that lists all other projects occurring for other games? Just a suggestion. Feel free to ignore me. =D Ucross (talk) 16:33, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
I am rather partial to this solution myself. The wiki does need to keep its main focus tight as far as its main content is concerned. But nothing says we cannot have a page that acknowledges and point to other projects of interest. NKF (talk) 04:10, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Server Move

In the near future we're going to move to a new server (hosted by NineX) because of the constant site outages and other technical/security issues that have been affecting the wiki since the last year. NineX currently hosts the OpenXCom forums and site, so I feel that it will be a good move since the OpenXCom community has been the most active in keeping the old XCom games alive.

However we're still not sure if we're gonna be able to keep the old domain (www.ufopaedia.org) or if it will be necessary to move to a new one, and ask everybody to update their links. We're trying to keep the old domain, but right now the choice is to be between keeping things as they currently are, or get the technical/security issues fixed and get back the wiki properly working, even if that means losing the domain and the traffic.

I personally prefer the 2nd option since we need a wiki that is 100% available for both consulting and editing information, like it did in the past. Hobbes (talk) 14:17, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Temporary Domain

We completed the server move thanks to NineX, who also upgraded the wiki's software. The process required that we moved temporarily to a new domain, ufopaedia.info, but we'll return to our old domain, ufopaedia.org, as soon as the process is complete. Thanks for your patience :) Hobbes (talk) 21:40, 28 January 2018 (CET)

Migration finished. ufopaedia.info is redirecting to ufopaedia.org. Mediawiki software have been upgraded to latest version , and whole site audited. NineX (talk), 13:27, 31 January 2018 (CET)

Piratez in featured projects?

It seems out of place that piratez has it's own table on the UFOpedia, and uses (Piratez) to distinguish its own pages, but is not listed on the featured projects. Going to add it if nobody objects. The rationale for adding Long War in this talk pages history (Huge makeover of the original version) pretty much goes doubly so for piratez. Greep (talk) 21:57, 5 May 2019 (CEST)

Only admins can edit Featured Projects. And I object to it.
I proposed to add Long War because it was the only major mod available to EU/EW, and even got recognition and compliments made by Firaxis (with Jake Solomon joking that he was the guy that designed LW's beta), which was then extended to hiring the LW team to make official XCOM 2 mods for the game's release. So LW is really something special that deserved to get its own recognition.
Piratez is just one of several total conversions available for OpenXCom, and the intent is not to list all mod projects on Featured Projects, Because then X-Files, Hardmode or Area 51 would also qualify, being also expansions on their own right, although without Piratez's popularity.
Not to mention that there are other current XCom games like XCOM 2 that have also their own mods. So, if Piratez is added, what happens if someone else from another XCOM game, or current projects being developed like OpenApoc, decides to ask for his major mod to be added?
The primary intent of this wiki is the XCOM games, and Featured Projects is a way to recognize the hard work and dedication of a few fan projects, OpenXCom being one of them - and if you add Piratez then you're basically saying that Piratez is at the same level as OpenXCom, when Piratez wouldn't exist if there wasn't OpenXCom to begin with.
Finally, pages with their own suffix (Whatever) don't necessarily translate into Featured Projects, check the existing Interceptor and the Enforcer pages, it's more of a matter of internal page categorization. Hobbes (talk) 23:23, 5 May 2019 (CEST)
Ah okay, but I'm not really convinced, this feels like a matter of scale. I'm not trying to get it added as a featured project because I'm a fan, it just doesn't seem right to not have it there regardless of those reasons. If you look at something like UFO:AI or OpenApoc, on the main featured bar, they're almost completed unupdated and tiny. If the idea is that Piratez should have it's place on this wiki, and not on it's own wiki, then it really should have a place on the main page. If it's not, why is it even on here with hundreds and hundreds of pages? I type in just about any search for x-com related things and see a bunch of piratez pages in the autocomplete. If X-Files, Hardmode, Area 51 had hundreds of pages on the wiki, I'd recommend adding them as well, though they don't. Anyways, just my thoughts, I won't push this anymore. Greep (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2019 (CEST)
Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Orphan explains the argument more. It The piratez main page is a huge presence on the wiki, and is essentially unaccessable on the wiki. Which is just not what wikis are about. Greep (talk) 01:59, 6 May 2019 (CEST)
There are a lot of interesting points in your reply, that I'll try to answer separately to those, since some I have already considered myself.
UFO2000 and UFO:AI are dead projects, UFO2000 had its glory days more than 10 years ago (I was heavily involved with it) and it is playable (although hardly anyone plays it) and UFO:AI was never finished, so there's really an argument there whether both should still be on Featured Projects. OpenApoc on the other hand is actively being developed right now, they have their own Discord channel and it might take a while, but the general feeling is that one day it will reach 1.0 status, like OpenXCom did.
Piratez section on its wiki grew up by itself out of the OpenXCom until now, Dioxine or anyone ever asked permission, that I recall, but since we got the space and it is XCom related, no one objected, and the community is pretty supportive of each other's projects.
If by Auto-Complete you mean Google's search bar then the reason why you get so much Piratez results associated with XCom is because it uses your past search history and page views. I don't get any Piratez results when I search for XCom things because I don't play Piratez (and I don't play LW or LW2 also, but I suggested that they should be added because of their importance).
And this brings me to another important point, which is that Piratez includes content that some people don't really think belongs in an XCom game, namely it being about space pirates, slaves and mutants against aliens, and with the nudity involved. I know it takes place in an alternate universe where XCom lost the war, but if Firaxis announced that XCOM 3 followed Piratez setting, there would be a huge fan backlash because XCom has almost always been about an international, semi-clandestine organization of humans fighting aliens, and never required nudity to be atractive. Piratez setting and aesthetics appeal to a lot of people but to a lot of others it doesn't, even inside the OpenXCom community.
And for instance, I'm the lead developer of Area 51 that was mentioned before, and while it expands the base UFO: Defense game like EW or LW did, if not more, I do not think it should be on Featured Projects because of all the reasons I mentioned before. As a developer I'd love it to be more publicized, but here I need to think first as a wiki administrator, and like I said before, this is an XCOM wiki since it was created 15 years ago, not an OpenXCom one. If this was a wiki dedicated to OXC, then Piratez, Area 51, Tech-Comm (another total conversion I'm working based on the Terminator universe), Warhammer 40k, Dune, and all other major projects, XCom based or not, would belong here, but it isn't.
Finally, we're not talking here about a single orphan article. Orphan articles mean that they can only be accessed by searching the wiki since there aren't any links to them anywhere. Piratez can be accessed through here https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Mods_(OpenXcom). The issue really is that you think Piratez should be more advertised on the wiki by adding it to Featured Projects, but as I said before, it is questionable whether it deserves to get that sort of attention on an XCOM wiki. Hobbes (talk) 05:37, 6 May 2019 (CEST)
Heh, well in any case, looks like someone else added it to featured projects about a year ago: it's just on the featured projects at the very bottom of the page, along with all the other featured projects but with piratez squeezed in haha. Somewhat tangential but a bit on topic: Maybe the front page should just have a section at the top listing all the relevant games on the wiki? I remember like a decade ago when it was just the 1994 version/TFT and Apoc and the main page was very organized and clear, but it's really not now what with the tables of nearly every game on the wiki on the main page and some random lists in random places. Case in point: Piratez is already considered a featured mod by someone and neither of us noticed until this point, nor did I know even enforcer or these other spinoffs existed that you mentioned earlier existed or were on the wiki at all. In any case, glad to have talked this out. Greep (talk) 11:21, 6 May 2019 (CEST)
Bluh, one last point, I promise. I think maybe your having made/worked on a huge mod might be influencing your decision: you make it sound like it'd be a bad thing if all OpenXcom mods were featured and I don't think this would even be bad at all. E.g. a lot of games wikis list basically all the relevant large mods for the game in a very visible place. Example: https://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page has a link to a list of pretty much every major mod visible up front without needing to scroll down. To me it just seemed odd specifically for piratez here since it also had a huge space on the wiki, but I don't see an issue with Area 51, Warhammer 40k, etc having a visible place.

XCOM 2 section problems

Hi guys,

I've noticed that there's loads of problems in the XCOM 2 sections - misspellings, orphan pages, a lack of organisation, and so on. Even the term "MEC" was spelt wrong in a page title. I've been tackling a few of these issues, but I'm just thinking that this isn't worth having because Fandom have their own wiki at [1] and they've got nearly everything down already.

What are we trying to do here - dedicate this wiki to the old X-COM and a few mods (ahem, Long War), or adding in Firaxis's new XCOM grouping?

Just a question in editorial direction.

--SpeedofDeath118 (talk) 17:08, 16 December 2019 (CET)

I think the question is more, what are you interested in doing? Hobbes (talk) 23:11, 16 December 2019 (CET)
The Wiki was set up long before the reboot series, so you could say the classics were its original focus. However it would have been remiss to not accommodate the new games as they appeared. However the wiki thrives or declines entirely on the input of the people that make use of it. If the interest and willingness is there, the sections will grow. If not (looks at the early spinoff titles), then perhaps not so much. NKF (talk) 07:31, 17 December 2019 (CET)

Enable dark mode theme?

Would it be possible to add a dark mode option to this wiki? Something like these: https://help.fandom.com/wiki/Converting_to_hydradark https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Skin:Timeless/DarkCSS

I see a "Skin" option when I navigate to Preferences > Appearance (https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering ), but no options other than the default appear. -JimmAYY2 (talk) 19:38, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&oldid=103953"