Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From UFOpaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(280 intermediate revisions by 41 users not shown)
Line 16: Line 16:
 
----
 
----
  
Some articles have been moved to [[Talk:Main Page/Archive]] for later perusal.  
+
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)
  
 +
: 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)
  
== Translation? ==
+
:: 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)
Hi everybody
 
  
I just found this ufopaedia and now I'm spending most of my time at work here :-)
+
==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.
  
In Uruguay there is a very small X-Com community, and AFAIK, I'm the first one to find this site.
+
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 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)
+
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)
  
: 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?
+
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)
  
:[[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:10, 15 August 2009 (EDT)
+
==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.
  
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.
+
== XCOM 2 section problems ==
  
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
+
Hi guys,
  
[[User:Diegoba|Diegoba]] 07:04, 16 August 2009 (EDT)
+
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 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!
+
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?
: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)
+
Just a question in editorial direction.
  
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)
+
--[[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)
  
: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.
+
::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)
  
:[[User:Diegoba|Diegoba]] 20:18, 24 August 2009 (EDT)
+
== Enable dark mode theme? ==
  
:: That would work for now and it has the benefit of being simple. [[User:Spike|Spike]] 06:31, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
+
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
  
: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)
+
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)
::[[User:Juju Dredd|Juju Dredd]] 12:00, 30 September 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
::Hi, I'd like translate at least part of this great wiki to French, could somebody tell me how to add Français(french) in the list, or do it if I'm not autorised to do it by myself?
 
 
 
:::It has to be Gazchap (administrator) to add it to the list on the left methinks. But it is possible to add the link to the main page when the french main page is ready. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 15:55, 30 September 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
::::Ok, so I should start with translating this one. [[User:Juju Dredd|Juju Dredd]] 17:16, 30 September 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
::::Oh, I've just seen how to modify the languages section. [[User:Juju Dredd|Juju Dredd]] 17:27, 30 September 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
: I can edit the side panel if you want me to add a French section to the wiki. Shall I call it Francais and link it to [[Page Principale]]? -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 19:02, 30 September 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
:: Yes, I was mistaking with the "other languages" sentence at the begining of the main page, I cannot add the link by myself. You guess right, I've begun to write [[Page Principale]] as the main page for French. But I think you should call it Français (French) with the cedilla to be consistant with the two others languages links. [[User:Juju Dredd|Juju Dredd]] 3:16, 1 October 2010 [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 ==
 
 
 
See [[Talk:Main Page/Archive#Discussion/talk page proposed format]]
 
 
 
== 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)
 
 
 
 
 
== Regarding image file formats ==
 
See [[Talk:Main Page/Archive#Regarding image file formats]]
 
 
 
== 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 ==
 
See [[Talk:Main Page/Archive#Humor and Flavour Text]]
 
 
 
== 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 ==
 
See [[Talk:Main Page/Archive#Copyrighted Materials from Official Sources]]
 
 
 
==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)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
== NPOV-ing of TFTD Equipment ==
 
 
 
Deleted old discussion for brevity. NPOV-ing of articles in general still in progress.
 
 
 
== OpenXcom ==
 
Hello,
 
 
 
I thought you may be interested in this new project - it's open source reimplementation of original X-com engine (it uses data from original game). Besides fixing bugs, adding new features and support for new platforms, aim of this project is to create clean open source cross-platform code, which will be useful for future tweaking/modding etc. It's in early development phase. You can find more information about that project on official site [http://openxcom.ninex.info/ http://openxcom.ninex.info/]
 
--[[User:Michal|Michal]] 11:43, 29 June 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
 
 
== Duplicate watch ==
 
 
 
Just as an attempt to streamline the wiki, if anyone spots an article that appears to contain duplicate information that is clearly covered in detail in another article, can we have them mentioned here. It occurs to me that since the wiki is quite large, there is bound to be some duplicated information floating out there, or even stand-alone pages that are probably not necessary. The problem is that there could be some disparity in information when one or either article is updated independently of the other. Again, if you spot any, please feel free to bring up the issue here. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 03:00, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
== Main Page reorganisation  ==
 
 
 
Just throwing up an idea for everyone to consider. The wiki's a great resource, but I've often found the main page to be a bit cluttered since it has the main menus for all three major games that are being covered and they're restricted to tight columned tables. Also sometimes finding specific information isn't always that easy as some of the relevant documents are buried several articles deep.
 
 
 
I'm no organisational expert, but one thing I thought that might help reduce the clutter is to simplify the main page and have it mainly link to the various submenus for each different game. The submenus can be broken out of their tables and rearranged in a format that would make it easier to access all the relevant articles.
 
 
 
The earlier suggestion of using actual game box art would be a great idea for the main page as well.
 
 
 
Thoughts, suggestions, etc? -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:45, 14 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
:?. More book like. A simple, from a information point of view, and short, to make it in fit(in general) into a singe browser window, main page. And link it up to a general main index page. Could be a full index page. But having a special short-type of index page seems better to me. --[[User:Mvgulik|MvGulik]] 09:20, 16 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
I agree with NKF. The main page is cluttered. I agree the solution is to reduce the main page to pretty much a menu option for each game and some other links that are not game-specific. Then fill up unused space with some nice box art. :) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 14:41, 17 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
: I resurrected and cleared most of the [[Mock main page]] to make a space to be able to draft a concept new main page. Haven't really got a handle of how it should look at the moment, but got to start somewhere.
 
 
 
: The excellent work Zombie's done scanning the various game boxes from his collection will be a good resource for the box art images. How big should they be though? More specifically, what dimensions?
 
:: I've got an idea how we could re-organize main page, but also I've got a lack of time to draw a sketch of it. And some questions: does wiki allow to use an image as a background for template and how to do this? And where can I get these Zombie's scans?
 
::: I am not entirely sure about the backgrounds, but as the wiki does allow some CSS code in the HTML and wiki markup code, I imagine you could put some background images into some page elements like the tables and some blocks of text.
 
 
 
::: As for Zombie's scans, they can be found on [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/databank/series/x-com/ Strategycore's game data bank]. Look under the individual games in the series and check the 'game versions' to see scans of various releases of the game. For example: UFO's [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/databank/games/ufo-enemy-unknown/game-versions/ game versions]. What i was thinking was perhaps an image that contains bot the European and American styled box art in one image for UFO. And the same for TFTD and Apocalypse. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 08:53, 22 October 2010 (BST)
 
 
 
 
: Also regarding the news box. There's not a lot of news, but I was thinking that it could be template-ized and we simply include it on the main page. We don't get enough news, but the template markup that includes/excludes part of the template could be useful to keep only the new items visible on the main page while the old news is hidden except when you view the actual news page. We could even go without it too. Any thoughts on that? -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 07:44, 22 October 2010 (BST)
 
 
 
:: I would be happy to assist with a new layout in terms of box art as I've got all the files to hand (as pointed out in the databank link above). I think maybe the way MediaWiki does news on their site is possibly the way to do it: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/News - if you look on their homepage it pulls in that latest news block (though I don't know how) so we could have latest and older news similar to that. Alternatively there does appear to be a few extensions for handling news but people seem to be having some difficulty with them. --[[User:Pete|Pete]] 10:32, 23 October 2010 (BST)
 
 
 
:::Looking at the source, there is a bit of code there, but otherwise looks like it mostly manually updated. Or only the items under the recent news heading may be included. Still, I think I think we could bash together something similar by hand easily enough to not need an extension for it.  
 
 
 
::: Any suggestions on how the box art should be displayed? -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:16, 24 October 2010 (BST)
 
 
 
::::It's a tricky one to be sure. If the box art is given too much prominence then you might not realise they're clickable (assuming you want to use them to click through to the relevant game, which would make sense). It maybe needs to be box art, with an obvious link to go to that game and perhaps a short sentence about each game. Not sure whether that's wasted space though as most people will know what each game is, but maybe that's just an assumption on my part as there's a new generation who are starting from scratch so a short sentence overview could be really useful.
 
 
 
::::I would say maybe just do it with two or three games per row perhaps and lay them out like that with a link to each section and an intro. The issue with this site is how silly it would look on wider screen resolutions as it stretches, but I can pull off some stats for the most commonly used resolution and work it out so it looks good on that. What I'll probably do is take a screenshot of the current homepage and whip something up later on quickly in Photoshop as a rough example for discussion. It is best to keep it basic though obviously so the layout easily survives future software upgrades (the exact opposite of what happens on StrategyCore ;)). --[[User:Pete|Pete]] 13:48, 25 October 2010 (BST)
 
 
 
: Check the [[Mock main page]] - is something like that what you had in mind? Just imagine the icons filled with pretty box art. The box art would be links to the pages as well. The end size of the boxart will have to be something that would work well both for wide screens as well as tiny devices like cellphones. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:57, 26 October 2010 (BST)
 
 
 
== Wiki software upgrade - 15/10/10 ==
 
 
 
Hi all. After discussion with NKF regarding adding some new extensions to the wiki in an attempt to help out with the spamming issue, I've been working on an upgrade routine to update the software from the current version (1.11) to the latest (1.16) as well as installing these helpful extentions.
 
 
 
Using a development version of the site, I've worked out any kinks in the upgrade path and as such will be going ahead with the upgrade betwen 3-4pm GMT today (see note on the homepage - I figured a nice, obvious message was called for on this occasion).
 
 
 
The upgrade itself should only take 15-20 minutes - it's a case of uploading the new files and running the upgrade script, so it hopefully shouldn't take even that long. Extensions can be added once it's back up and running as they don't cause any interference, however I'll be looking to do all of this within that window. Please see the link in the message at the top of the homepage for an idewa of the time difference between where you are and where I am.
 
 
 
Fingers crossed this should close several security holes in the system (according to the software developers), maybe reduce the amount of spam and certainly give sysops more tools to combat it. --[[User:Pete|Pete]] 04:00, 15 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
: This has now been completed as of 4.05pm (slightly later than scheduled due to going for a walk this mornig that turned into a long one!). All upgraded and new extensions installed which can be seen on the Special Pages:Version page, and I took the upgrade message down off the homepage. I've had a good look around and everyhting seems in order, however you can contact me easily via PM at [http://www.strategycore.co.uk/forums www.strategycore.co.uk/forums] if you do spot any issues. Thanks! --[[User:Pete|Pete]] 11:09, 15 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
== Hosting Move - 20th October 2010 ==
 
 
 
We're having and issue with the current hosting is that all sites on our server (including UFOPaedia and StrategyCore) are going down at random intervals several times a week for anywhere between 15-30 minutes. Unfortunately the hosting company are unable to track down the issue, and their best suggestion is for us to upgrade to a package with more resources, ie. try a different server as they're baffled. Now, if we're facing a server move one way or the other I'd rather be in control of it than leaving it to web hosts to do it when I'm not around to monitor it.
 
 
 
Firstly, before anyone gets flashbacks of the less-than-perfect way this was handled last time, I'll re-assure you all that this ''is'' a necessary evil and that I've done my best to test an exact copy of this site on the new server with the help of NKF and Bomb Bloke in order to work out any potential issues and minimise any downtime.
 
 
 
Whilst I've been researching the best way to do this as seamlessly as possible over the last few weeks, I found another host that was able to provide us with more resources for a cheaper price whilst providing a higher level of up-time - this sounds like the new server is cheap, but in reality I was paying over the odds for the current hosting - we're talking a few hundred dollars more than necessary here. I use this host for UK sites and they also do US hosting for the same prices, which is good as both sites in question are on US hosting currently but I then also get the benefit of the pricing being in Pounds Sterling for my accounting purposes (I live in the UK in case you were wondering).
 
 
 
Theoretically I can migrate the site with no downtime and minimum interruption to service. The process involves putting up a message on the homepage with the date and time of the move (which I'll do in a few minutes) followed by another message 15 minutes before the move reminding people not to add to or edit the WIKI until they see a message saying they're viewing the new site. Then I copy the site across, which takes 10-15 minutes and point the domain to the new server, which takes a further 5 minutes or so. I've reduced the amount of time that the domain name should be cached by DNS servers to 15 minutes - in laymans terms this is the amount of time browsers and DNS servers cache the IP address that relates to a domain name - and this will take effect in 23 hours (I changed it about an hour ago). At that point, your browsers should be checking the IP address associated with the domain every 15 minutes, so once you see the message saying the site is being moves, wait 15-30 minutes and refresh your page - you should then see the new site.
 
 
 
An additional failsafe will be in place in that I can tell the current server to forward all HTTP (web) traffic directly to the new server at the same time, so even if your browser is caching the old IP for longer for some reason, the current server should forward you on to the new server instantaneously.
 
 
 
All that said, this is the first time I will have attempted all of these "tricks of the transfer" at the same time, as last time I was unaware of the reduced DNS refresh trick and the domain IP forwarding. There is a lot going on and I'll be going through it very carefully to ensure it's done right this time, so please be patient with me.
 
 
 
Assuming all goes to plan, you will know you're on the new server and can begin adding to/editing the site once again as I will replace the red "server move on 20/10/10 at 9AM" message on the homepage with a green "server move complete" message (but with a more descriptive message) so there will be a clear indicator as to which server you are viewing.
 
 
 
Just a final note that I will only be moving UFOPaedia.org on the 20th, not StrategyCore as well. Last time I moved both at once and it was a nightmare to track down issues across two sites, especially since StrategyCore has 3 pieces of software to troubleshoot and UFOPedia has just the one. My aim is to focus on one site at a time this time around to keep potential disruption to an absolute minimum.
 
 
 
== New Sysop appointments ==
 
 
 
Just letting everyone know that Pete has let me appoint a few new Sysops to the administration team to assist with dealing any spambots, spammers, vandals and general troublemakers. Spike, Bomb Bloke and ufo.mesh have been appointed to the roles. Thanks everyone. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 00:55, 19 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
: Be afraid, be very afraid... >:] - [[User:Bomb Bloke|Bomb Bloke]] 03:00, 19 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
: I appreciate your confidence and will serve loyally for the growth and prosperity of the unique '''Ufopaedia'''! --[[User:Ufo.mesh|ufo.mesh]] 07:06, 19 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
: Carry on the good work guys! --[[User:Pete|Pete]] 07:44, 19 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
::Сongratulations to all! :) --[[User:-=Troll=-|-=Troll=-]] 07:50, 19 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
 
 
== New registrations temporarily disabled ==
 
 
 
Just a heads up to everyone and potential wiki contributors: Due in part to the recent vandalism, new user registration has been temporarily disabled. Apologies for any inconveniences caused, but don't worry as this situation is only temporary. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:34, 14 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
: Something must be done to prevent vandalism in the future. Temporarily disabling registration you'll only delay future attacks. Open it and new attacks will follow. I noticed that every wave of vandals was after the moment when I published update news at Russian forums. After that in a day or two new trolls appeared here. I think they visit forums regularly and track down changes at wiki from there but I can still be mistaken with that.--[[User:Ufo.mesh|ufo.mesh]] 17:35, 14 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
:: Just a quick one to say that registrations were re-opened "the other day" (Friday 15th or Saturday 16th - can't remember exactly). I'm not sure whether the vandalism we've been seeing was potentially automated or due to real-life people signing in and wrecking stuff, but if it ''was'' partially automated then the updated software should hopefuly curb the level of vandalism. either way, just to let you all know that registrations are re-open to test this out. I'm also keeping my eye out for other software extensions that may help with this ongoing battle. --[[User:Pete|Pete]] 15:46, 18 October 2010 (EDT)
 
 
 
== Dubious Accounts ==
 
 
 
There have been some pretty dubious user registrations over the last 2 days. Names that look to be generated by an algorithm. Views on what to do about these accounts? At what point do new accounts become eligible to post? [[User:Spike|Spike]] 22:00, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
: I think the new accounts are allowed to post right away, but these ones look very suspicious indeed. Having a bunch of them sign up at the same time and with the  same format with random numbers and letter after the name - and not one of them's posted (yet). Might be sleeper bots waiting for a certain time/date before they become active. I'd like to take action, but don't want to be jumping the gun either.  -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 23:41, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 
:: Could be that the new Wiki software blocked whatever the presumed Bots tried to do. I think we should block these accounts, and any like them that appear in future. But, what's the recourse if one of these accounts is a genuine user? How would they be able to let us know the mistake?  [[User:Spike|Spike]] 18:51, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
I had a very brief look at the past block logs and it seems that similar accounts have been blocked since late August or early September. Either I've been blocking them or the wiki's been auto blocking based on the IP's of some past accounts I'd put blocks on. All feature the same generated name format.
 
 
 
Unless the bots are designed to use the e-mail feature as well, I think one option is to block the account but allow them to send e-mails. That way they can contact the admins to sort the problem out. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 06:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 
:Can't you just add some kind of Turing test feature to the registration procedure? That should block most bots but should not be to much of a hassle for real new users. And add a autoremove after 30-60 days without a posting after registration(no checking for inactivity for established users)?
 
--[[User:Tauon|Tauon]] 14:16, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Hosting Move - 7 December 2010 ==
 
 
 
Unfortunately the current host isn't as good as I'd initially hoped and there have been unacceptable preiods of downtime for both UFOPaedia.org and StrategyCore as a result.
 
 
 
I've since found what looks like very good hosting with support technicians that will proactively work to get the sites running again as soon as they do go down (fingers crossed they won't), rather than the current hosts who pretty much leave it until you notice it yourself. To my mind that's worth a bit of extra hassle to move the sites again and worth the slight added expense for that kind of service. There are also far more resources available to us in terms of processor power and RAM which should hopefully see the end of the recent periods of instability.
 
 
 
So, the plan is to move UFOPaedia.org on Tuesday the 7th of December at 7pm GMT (again, refer here to see the differences to your local timezone: http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/info/current-time.htm ) with as minimal impact as possible. As per last time, a red notice will appear on the homepage just before the move begins, and when you see the green notice to say the move has completed successfully you will then be viewing the site on the new server. I'll put up a notice shortly directing people to this message to give some advanced warning.
 
 
 
Thanks again for your patience.
 
 
 
:Due to being stuck on the other side of the country for most of the day because of adverse weather (in England that is) I've had to reschedule this to tomorrow night instead - sorry for the short notice! --[[User:Pete|Pete]] 21:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
::The server move has now been completed and everything seems to be working okay. If something isn't working however, please let me know! --[[User:Pete|Pete]] 17:10, 8 December 2010 (EST)
 
 
 
:::Thanks a bunch Pete. Hopefully it'll be smooth sailing from here on. Or at least better than it was before this. -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 00:39, 10 December 2010 (EST)
 

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)