Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From UFOpaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(646 intermediate revisions by 70 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
New issue: I wish there was a more obvious place for the pages "Damage", "Explosions", and a new one I'm about to make, "Experience Training". To me, Damage and Explosions in particular seem a bit too good to be buried down under layers. But they don't really fit anywhere near the top of menus neatly. It's not just Weapons, it's not just Soldiers. Anyone else have ideas? ---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 19:07, 2 Dec 2005 (PST)
+
'''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.
  
(Snipped for brevity - basically "We're working on it!" )
+
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.
 
 
NKF, I'm not sure the the whole Main Page needs an overhaul. But that too is fine, as long as it works. Like you, I'm not sure just what might be best... but I too wish things were different, somehow. Perhaps in the meantime, I'll put a link for Damage, Explosions and Experience Training under the Main Page topic "[[Missions (UFO Defense)|Missions]]".
 
 
 
Also, NKF: Right, this Talk page could be cleaned up. Anybody is welcome to take a whack. I've been busy lately, but might find some time, soon.
 
 
 
Transclusion looks cool... thanks for experimenting; maybe it'll payoff big.
 
 
 
: ---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 15:02, 8 Dec 2005 (PST)
 
 
 
----
 
 
 
Hi all. Just to let you all know that I'm gonna have a crack at sorting out the issues with filetype uploads, spammers, restrictions for unregistered users, and adding new administrators. I'll start tomorrow night, now that I have my broadband back and I've just about settled in to my new place, I should be able to find more time for this stuff :)
 
 
 
Keep up the good work guys, the wiki has expanded far further than I imagined it would :)
 
 
 
I've now upgraded MediaWiki to the latest stable version. This seems to include more features for restricting editing, which I will enable ASAP.
 
 
 
In the mean time, users should now be able to upload files with the following extensions: PNG, JPG, JPEG, GIF, ZIP, DOC, XLS, RAR, DAT and PDF.
 
 
 
: ---[[User:GazChap|GazChap]]
 
 
 
----
 
 
 
Ah - '''much''' better. Thanks, GazChap!!!
 
 
 
Ops, why not we make a page to discuss issues. For example, I am seeing that links to the new document types are not quite [[Manufacturing_Profitability#Tables|working]] right and wonder if anyone can help. And/or the new page could be a place to propose redesigns, etc. Or maybe we should just do it here?
 
 
 
: ---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:24, 10 December 2005 (PST)
 
 
 
-----
 
 
 
I'm still eager to drop the suffix (UFO Defense) from most of the UFO pages, or at the very least shorten it to (UFO). Mainly for the sake of expediency. Hah.
 
 
 
- [[User:NKF|NKF]]
 
 
 
----
 
 
 
FWIW, I just found that saying something like <nowiki>[[Soldiers (UFO Defense)|]]</nowiki> causes the link to be [[Soldiers (UFO Defense)|Soldiers]] (look closely on Edit). Still, there's every reason to take all the (UFO Defense) away from the core articles, and let the rest add their difference. My two cents ---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]]
 
 
 
== Main Page Table Proposal ==
 
 
 
''ABRIDGED by --[[User:Papa Legba|Papa Legba]] 00:51, 19 December 2005 (PST)
 
I've cut out the parts of the matter that seem settled.  Here are some outstanding issues:''
 
 
 
I suppose we'll stick with the monochrome scheme for now. It's adequate. But should we make it site-wide, or split it into three main categories. UFO using the site-wide templates, and TFTD and Apocalypse using slight variants of the scheme?
 
 
 
For example, TFTD and Apocalypse could look like:
 
 
 
{| cellpadding = "2" style = "border: 2px rgb(0, 128, 122) solid; border-collapse: collapse;"
 
|- style = "background: rgb(0, 83, 72); color: white; font-weight: bold;"
 
| Terror from the Deep
 
|- style = "background: rgb(215,255,255)"
 
| The Sink
 
|-
 
| Rubber Ducky
 
|}
 
 
 
 
 
{| cellpadding = "2" style = "border: 2px rgb(255, 75, 43) solid; border-collapse: collapse;"
 
|- style = "background: rgb(70, 16, 0); color: white; font-weight: bold;"
 
| Apocalypse
 
|- style = "background: rgb(255, 185, 185);"
 
| Doom
 
|-
 
| Gloom
 
|}
 
 
 
 
 
Apocalypse's table doesn't look right to me, but TFTD's might just work. But let's concentrate on the site-wide template.
 
 
 
The template will actually consist of three templates, the main one being the overall table style, and the other two for the look of the table heading and the subheading (basically lighter variant of heading). The last two can be implemented by way adding "heading" and "subheading" to the name of the template.
 
- [[User:NKF|NKF]]
 
 
 
-----
 
The different colors for the three game layouts: It might not be a bad idea, except for two things:
 
*Having three different-colored tables on the main page might look very [http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/A/angry-fruit-salad.html angry fruit salad.]
 
*What do we color pages that are shared between two games?  (UFO and TFTD share several.)
 
 
 
Moderating the colors some:
 
{| cellpadding = "2" style = "border: 2px rgb(220, 75, 43) solid; border-collapse: collapse;"
 
|- style = "background: rgb(70, 16, 0); color: white; font-weight: bold;"
 
| Apocalypse
 
|- style = "background: rgb(220, 185, 185);"
 
| Doom
 
|-
 
| Gloom
 
|}
 
 
 
 
 
{| cellpadding = "2" style = "border: 2px rgb(0, 128, 122) solid; border-collapse: collapse;"
 
|- style = "background: rgb(0, 83, 72); color: white; font-weight: bold;"
 
| Terror from the Deep
 
|- style = "background: rgb(200,220,220)"
 
| The Sink
 
|-
 
| Rubber Ducky
 
|}
 
--[[User:Papa Legba|Papa Legba]] 06:37, 16 December 2005 (PST)
 
 
 
-----
 
 
 
By the way, we'll keep the table specs templates as well. In the future, we may want to change them a bit. Maybe even give them construction paper or graph paper backgrounds! Gasp, shock. Just a thought. For now, we can use the specs templates as another site-wide template for all spec tables.
 
 
 
So now we've got <nowiki>{{StdTable}}</nowiki>, which contains:
 
 
{{StdTable}}
 
 
 
And <nowiki>{{StdTable Heading}}</nowiki>, containing:
 
 
 
{{StdTable Heading}}
 
 
 
 
 
I haven't created a sub-heading template for the moment, as I can't see any place in the main menu to stick one for the moment.
 
 
 
But when it's created, it'll look exactly like heading only the background colour will be set to #EEE.  
 
 
 
- [[User:NKF|NKF]]
 
 
 
P. S: You can see what templates are used on a page when you enter the edit screen just under the save and preview buttons. This will be templates that were in the page in the previous save. Not in the current edit in progress. I think. Still, handy to know.
 
 
 
----
 
Just ported the TFTD menu over to the new format.  I'd say the Xcom menu is decent for now, it seems like what's needed is someone to prune the Apoc menu.
 
 
 
Anyway, it looks great in Firefox.  However...
 
 
 
I just loaded the main page up in IE 6, Windows XP.  The horizontal lines represented by
 
<nowiki>|- style = "border-top: 1px dotted;"  </nowiki>
 
aren't showing up at all.  I might look into it later, but it's getting early here.
 
--[[User:Papa Legba|Papa Legba]] 00:51, 19 December 2005 (PST)
 
 
 
----
 
 
 
Don't worry about them. They're not essential, but are handy when they show up. Actually, if we can get away from using them at all, that'd be great. As for Apocalypse - ah, most of that section can be condensed. I originally put a number of the subsections in a little brainstorming session just to get some ideas out on the table. Then I think someone turned them all into links, then it just snowballed from there. I never intended them to actually become articles, but there you go. Ah, heh.
 
 
 
Speaking of splitting the table into Geoscape and Tactical sections, have a gander at the following:
 
 
 
{| {{stdTable}} title = "X-Com UFO Main Directory"
 
|- {{stdTable Heading}}
 
| '''UFO Defense/Enemy Unknown'''
 
|- style = "background: #ddd;"
 
 
 
| '''General'''
 
|-
 
| [[Info|General Information]]
 
 
 
|- style = "background: #eee;" title = "Global Geoscape Affairs"
 
| '''Geoscape'''
 
|-
 
| [[Base Facilities (UFO Defense) | Base Facilities]]
 
* [[Base Defense Measures (UFO Defense)|Base Defense Measures]]
 
* [[UFO Detection (UFO Defense)|UFO Detection]]
 
|- style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" 
 
| [[Craft (UFO Defense)|X-COM Craft]]
 
* [[Craft Armaments (UFO Defense)|Craft Armaments]]
 
|- style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" 
 
| [[Research (UFO Defense)|Research]]
 
* [[Alien Research]]
 
* [[Alien Artefacts (UFO Defense)|Alien Artefacts]]
 
|- style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" 
 
| [[UFO (UFO Defense)|Unidentified Flying Objects]]
 
* [[UFO Components (UFO Defense)|UFO Components]]
 
|- style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" 
 
| Global Issues
 
*[[Missions (UFO Defense) | Missions]]
 
*[[Scoring (UFO Defense)|Scoring]]
 
*[[Geography (UFO) | Geography]]
 
 
 
|-
 
| [[Economics (UFO Defense)|Economics]]
 
 
 
|- style = "background: #eee;" title = "Tactical Close Range Skirmishes"
 
| '''Battlescape'''
 
|-
 
| Ground Combat Units
 
* [[Soldiers (UFO Defense) | X-Com Soldiers]]
 
* [[Heavy Weapons Platforms (UFO Defense)|Heavy Weapons Platforms]]
 
* [[Alien Life Forms (UFO Defense)|Aliens]]
 
:[[Overviews of Aliens (UFO Defense)|Overviews of Aliens]]
 
:[[Terror Units (UFO Defense)|Terror Units]]
 
|- style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" 
 
| [[Equipment (UFO Defense)|Equipment]]
 
* [[Weapons (UFO Defense)|Weapons]]
 
 
 
|}
 
 
 
I think I might be able to get away with taking the dividers out completely. The sub-heading's manual at the moment. 
 
 
 
It's not perfect, but while I was bashing this together, a few things started to stick out. There's definite room for a bit more expansion in a number of new areas we've not really covered on.
 
 
 
Like geographic information about countries (really general stuff, like the type of terrain found in the countries, or actually, describing the terrain types, etc). Funding, market information and all that go under economics, I guess. Public relations is covered by scoring. Or maybe undocumented interface commands (like the instant Zoom in the Geoscape or for the Playstation door-opening trick in particular), stuff like that.
 
 
 
- [[User:NKF|NKF]]
 
 
 
----
 
Hi Everyone, I'm still here (lurking in the shadows). This site is changing so fast that I can't keep up with it all, so I'm just sitting back waiting for the dust to settle. Once it has, I'm sure I'll get back into the swing of things --[[User:Danial|Danial]] 05:02, 19 December 2005 (PST)
 
 
 
----
 
I fixed the dividers for IE, NKF.  The trick is that the border styling must be attached to the table cell instead of the table row.  In a world where strict W3 HTML conventions were followed, this wouldn't matter.  Styling the cells seems to work for both IE and Mozilla, though, so I switched them all over.
 
 
 
So, instead of
 
<nowiki>
 
|- style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" 
 
| [[Equipment (UFO Defense)|Equipment]]</nowiki>
 
 
 
You do
 
 
 
<nowiki>
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" | [[Equipment (UFO Defense)|Equipment]]</nowiki>
 
 
 
 
 
I like the new layout, but "Economics" looks a little orphaned under "Global Issues."  How about we give it some better billing:
 
 
 
{| {{stdTable}} title = "X-Com UFO Main Directory"
 
|- {{stdTable Heading}}
 
| '''UFO Defense/Enemy Unknown'''
 
|- style = "background: #ddd;"
 
 
 
| '''General'''
 
|-
 
| [[Info|General Information]]
 
 
 
|- style = "background: #eee;" title = "Global Geoscape Affairs"
 
| '''Geoscape'''
 
|-
 
| [[Base Facilities (UFO Defense) | Base Facilities]]
 
* [[Base Defense Measures (UFO Defense)|Base Defense Measures]]
 
* [[UFO Detection (UFO Defense)|UFO Detection]]
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" | [[Craft (UFO Defense)|X-COM Craft]]
 
* [[Craft Armaments (UFO Defense)|Craft Armaments]]
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" | [[Research (UFO Defense)|Research]]
 
* [[Alien Research]]
 
* [[Alien Artefacts (UFO Defense)|Alien Artefacts]]
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" | [[Economics (UFO Defense)|Economics]]
 
* [[Manufacturing Profitability]]
 
|- 
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" | [[UFO (UFO Defense)|Unidentified Flying Objects]]
 
* [[UFO Components (UFO Defense)|UFO Components]]
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" | Global Issues
 
*[[Missions (UFO Defense) | Missions]]
 
*[[Scoring (UFO Defense)|Scoring]]
 
*[[Geography (UFO) | Geography]]
 
|- style = "background: #eee;" title = "Tactical Close Range Skirmishes"
 
| '''Battlescape'''
 
|-
 
| [[Terrain (UFO Defense)|Terrain]]
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" |Ground Combat Units
 
* [[Soldiers (UFO Defense) | X-Com Soldiers]]
 
* [[Heavy Weapons Platforms (UFO Defense)|Heavy Weapons Platforms]]
 
* [[Alien Life Forms (UFO Defense)|Aliens]]
 
:[[Overviews of Aliens (UFO Defense)|Overviews of Aliens]]
 
:[[Terror Units (UFO Defense)|Terror Units]]
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" | [[Equipment (UFO Defense)|Equipment]]
 
* [[Weapons (UFO Defense)|Weapons]]
 
 
 
|}
 
 
 
In the Geography section, I think there's one issue we should address: terrain sets.  Notes on why fighting in deserts or snow is a good/bad thing (no cover for the aliens), tips for managing farmhouses on the farm set, etc.  Come to think of it, the terrain set stuff will often come down to tactical advice-- maybe it belongs in the Battlescape section somewhere.
 
--[[User:Papa Legba|Papa Legba]] 10:19, 19 December 2005 (PST)
 
 
 
----
 
I think it should be in the Battlescape section.
 
 
 
--[[User:Danial|Danial]] 16:08, 19 December 2005 (PST)
 
----
 
 
 
I think you're right.  So, we would have two sections: geography (the big picture) and terrain (the ground-level stuff).  To save space, I've  put it in the version above.  Feel free to switch it around if you have a better idea for organization. --[[User:Papa Legba|Papa Legba]] 21:21, 19 December 2005 (PST)
 
 
 
 
 
==Valuable Real Estate==
 
The most viewed part of the wiki-- the top part of the main page-- is pretty cluttered.  If there are no objections, I'd like to put the Resources for Authors on the Community Portal page as NKF suggested, or at the very least below the UFOPeadia entries. 
 
 
 
Also, I've used the <nowiki>__NOTOC__</nowiki> tag to suppress the Table Of Contents on the main page.  --[[User:Papa Legba|Papa Legba]] 21:21, 19 December 2005 (PST)
 
 
 
----
 
 
 
Hi folks,
 
 
 
Wow, tons of great work! Unfortunately I just stumbled into Civ4 so I'm giving it some quality time. But I will stick to this site and XCOM, and eventually move to Project Xenocide some day. Great idea to separate Geo and Battle, NKF. Here are my two cents:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
{| {{stdTable}} title = "X-Com UFO Main Directory"
 
|- {{stdTable Heading}}
 
| '''UFO Defense/Enemy Unknown'''
 
|- style = "background: #ddd;"
 
  
| '''General'''
+
To start a new topic simply press the '''edit''' button above. Then place your <nowiki>==Topic Name==</nowiki> like it is written here.
|-
+
* To add a line you can either type <nowiki>----</nowiki> or use the buttons that appear on the edit screen.  
| [[Info|General Information]]
+
* If replying to an existing topic use colons '''<nowiki>:</nowiki>''' before your answer
 
+
* Don't forget to sign your posts in the talk pages by typing '''<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>''' at the end.  
|- style = "background: #eee;" title = "Global Geoscape Affairs"
+
* Finally when creating/editing wiki articles have a look at the [[Guidelines to writing articles|guidelines]] page.
| '''Geoscape'''
 
|-
 
| [[Base Facilities (UFO Defense) | X-COM Base Facilities]]
 
* [[Base Defense Measures (UFO Defense)|Base Defense Measures]]
 
|-
 
| [[Craft (UFO Defense)|X-COM Craft]]
 
|- 
 
| [[UFO (UFO Defense)|Unidentified Flying Objects]]
 
|-
 
| [[Research (UFO Defense)|Research]]
 
|-
 
| [[Economics (UFO Defense)|Economics]]
 
|- style = "background: #eee;" title = "Tactical Close Range Skirmishes"
 
| '''Battlescape'''
 
|-
 
| [[Overviews]]
 
|-
 
| [[Missions (UFO Defense) | Mission Types]]
 
|-
 
| [[Soldiers (UFO Defense) | X-Com Soldiers]]
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" |
 
*[[Equipment (UFO Defense)|General Equipment]]
 
* [[Weapons (UFO Defense)|Weapons]]
 
* [[Heavy Weapons Platforms (UFO Defense)|Heavy Weapons Platforms]]
 
|-
 
| style = "border-top: 1px dotted;" | [[Alien Life Forms (UFO Defense)|Aliens]]
 
|-
 
| [[Terrain (UFO Defense)|Terrain]] ''(maybe - maybe not)
 
|-
 
| [[Scoring (UFO Defense)|Scoring]]
 
|-  
 
 
 
|}
 
 
 
 
 
I have taken PL's latest proposal and run with it. Why do I choose this particular layout?
 
 
 
I prime decider is, "how often are folks going to use one particular area as a reference, over others". Anything on the main page should be important, and on a recurrent basis. This is not the place to make a "logical equal breakout". This is the place to make a "most used lookup" table, for two audiences: newbies, and diehards.
 
 
 
For this reason, I collapsed Base Facilities, XCOM Craft, UFOs, and Research into having one entry alone (each)... I feel that there really won't be ''that'' many times that folks want to look up ''only'' XCOM Craft armaments as opposed to XCOM Craft, or UFO Detection as opposed to Bases, or ... etc., etc. I also still don't see a need to break out Terror Units seperate from other aliens... do we ever face a combat field composed only of Terror Units? I don't see why they're so special. I propose either 2nd level headings of "Overviews" and "Alien Races" (the current [[Alien_Life_Forms_%28UFO_Defense%29|Aliens]]), or just simply have one entry for "Aliens". Again the salient question is, how often are particular people going to be trying to access particular pages.
 
 
 
Some notes while I wordsmith my table:
 
*There is almost nothing under the short [[UFO_Detection_%28UFO_Defense%29|UFO Detection]] that isn't already under [[Base_Facilities_%28UFO_Defense%29|Base Facilities]] - doesn't warrant Main Page. It could get highlighted in a section of [[Base_Facilities_%28UFO_Defense%29|Base Facilities]]. There is a recent summary section on Detection that clears up the issue - but I don't not see it linked to on [[UFO_Detection_%28UFO_Defense%29|UFO Detection]]. Anyway, really, these short pages are not Main Page stuff IMO. This is not your grandpa's wiki any more.
 
*Give XCOM Craft Armaments a section on the XCOM Craft page. Not important enough for Main Page entry.
 
*Economics, more specifically, Manufacturing Profitability, is not important enough to take up two lines on Main. Why? People will consult it once (or a few times), see/print out the most profitable things, then never visit it again. Profitability should be second level, or there should simply an Economics entry with no 2daries. There are other important sources of income, such as country funding and loot.
 
*UFO Components is not that different from UFOs. It should be a section on UFOs.
 
*Alien Artefacts is a small page that's already covered under Weapons. Alien Research is likewise very small. Both of these should just be additional sections under the current Research.
 
*Missions, Scoring, and Geography/Terrain should be under Battle. That's what they really apply to. This changes the Battlescape portion a lot.
 
*Otherwise, under the Battlescape, I've re-organized stuff. First, Overviews. This is where most everything currently under Missions / General Tips should go. Then Mission Types. Then the real meat - soldiers and their gear. Finally, ancillary stuff like Terrain/Geography and Scoring. I'm not sure what everybody wants for terrain and/or geography, but to me it can only be of tertiary significance past all the other stuff. So it comes next to last. Scoring comes last because it happens last.
 
*"General Equipment" links to the current "Equipment", but "General Equipment" should be those things that are not weapons. Let's separate things out.
 
*Unless what you folks have proposed as Geography or Terrain is really crucial, I propose that it just becomes a Section or Link under Battlescape Overviews. It can't really be that important as to warrant Main Page, can it?
 
 
 
Yes, my menu is much shorter than previously. But don't make things long unnecessarily - the first rule of making a good site, is to key in on what's needed most. Just that - albeit for two audiences, newbie and diehard. Anyway, it is not to list out everything categorically and/or everything that has existed before. We're going for a major revamp. Let's majorly revamp!
 
 
 
My opinions are ONLY my own. What happens to this wiki is basically a majority vote. I myself do not have the time to restyle it. Which begs the next question - what happens to this wiki, is also a function of who has the time to do it, laugh. My proposal would take somebody a half a day to rewire. But it works for me, at first glance.
 
 
 
PL, that sounds like a good idea to suppress the TOC, it reduces the visual clutter.
 
 
 
I think it is very important to make it clear even to newbies, that their input is wanted and desired - we all were once somebody who knew nobody, wondering if anybody else shared our intense love for XCOM. I like the current way the Main Page is, with a '''bolded''' link at the bottom of the page asking for input. Any way you slice it, input from newbies must be not only on, but also blasting, from the Main Page.
 
 
 
My two cents! ---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 23:50, 21 December 2005 (PST)
 
  
 +
That's it. Happy editing!
 
----
 
----
  
Mike, you appear to have read my mind on the subject of collapsing the less important links under their own sections. I'm all for it.
+
Old articles have been moved to [[Talk:Main Page/Archive]] for later perusal.  
 
 
About Geography, in addition to describing the more important battlescape features (Tip: Caution! Stepping on daisies make you walk slower), we could include a rough estimate for the content of terrain in each country - which can be useful for part of deciding where to place your base. But this would be such a small section it could slip in anywhere relating to the land and its features.
 
 
 
Speaking of base matters, I was going to suggest collecting them all into [[Base Management (UFO)]]. Anything and everything you want to know about managing your base goes in here, from base placement, modules, construction tips/suggestions to populating it with people and goodies.
 
 
 
- [[User:NKF|NKF]]
 
  
----
+
__TOC__
For what it's worth, it looks good to me.
+
==Removing All Featured Projects from Sidebar==
 +
:We had another request to add an entry to the Featured Projects sidebar (LWOTC) and since we now have a Featured Projects page I've been wondering if it wouldn't be better to remove all the current Featured Projects from the sidebar and put them in that page, for several reasons:
 +
#The wiki has always been focused on the games and not on fan projects.
 +
#There are wiki-relevant sidebar links that keep getting pushed downwards everytime a project is added, like languages or tools.
 +
#With the reboot of the franchise and OpenXCom, a lot of fan projects are in the works.
 +
#While we provide a space for their subwikis if they need, the wiki was never a hub for fan projects and to publicize/monetize them.
 +
#Those projects typically came and use our space but I can't remember any who contributed to the wiki's main pages about the original XCom games, other than placing links to their projects on the original game pages for publicity.
 +
#A couple projects have also left and set up their own wikis, without ever bothering to at least delete their content once they stopped updating it, since they decided they didn't want to be here anymore when they didn't get the publicity they wanted.
 +
#UFO2000 & UFO:AI have zero or limited development for years - they're dead or almost.
 +
#OpenXCom and OpenApoc already have links for their subwikis on the UFO and Apocalypse tables.
 +
#Having Long War and Long War 2 then leads to other large projects like Long War Reworked and Long War of the Chosen also wanting the same attention/publicity. All of those could have also links for them on the Enemy Unknown and XCOM2 tables.
 +
#And the Featured Projects page could be reworked so that they are properly grouped together according to their specific game that they originate from and it could also include a short description about their scope and objectives.
 +
Ideas/Comments? [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 06:07, 4 January 2022 (CET)
  
I could start on the terrain write-ups.  Are there hard stats on terrain around anywhere?  I know it's 4 TU for a standard square of movement, think it's 5? over meadows (cursed daisies), and 6? through wheat or craters. Fun with incendiaries and hay bales, the wisdom of blasting orchards open... etc.
+
==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)
  
My only reservation is about the 'Overviews' sectionI don't know what other overview pages there are, and I'm dubious about the value of collecting them together onto one entryThis is especially the case when we're going for brevity on the main pagePerhaps we should just roll the overviews into their respective entries, and give them good billing on whatever page that the TOC entries land on.
+
: It still would be nice for players to be able to find all of the mods/projects that this wiki hostsWhat about something like: "Other Projects" where it's a page that lists all other projects occurring for other games? Just a suggestionFeel free to ignore me. =D [[User:Ucross|Ucross]] ([[User talk:Ucross|talk]]) 16:33, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
--[[User:Papa Legba|Papa Legba]] 22:14, 25 December 2005 (PST)
 
  
----
+
:: 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)
  
Isn't this discussion page getting a little too big? ;)
+
==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.
  
One thing I just noticed: the only existing references to the X-COM timeline is on the UFO Defense section. Since the rest of the timeline is missing (something I am going to correct tonight) I've been thinking about the way the UFOPedia is organized. Right now there's plenty of technical information and playing tips regarding the first game, reflecting a gaming/modding orientation. This is quite natural to happen, considering how UFO is considered by many the best game of the series but at the same time it excludes the rest of the series.  
+
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.
  
For instance, if one looks at the page concerning Sectoids there's all you need to know for the first game but there are no references to their appearance on Interceptor/Enforcer/Apocalypse. I think that we can have a more 'global' look upon the entire X-COM universe that should be reflected on the Main Page. I will try to explain this idea in more detail later.  
+
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)
  
[[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] 12:54, 27 December 2005 (PST)
+
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)
  
----
+
==Piratez in featured projects?==
  I could start on the terrain write-ups. Are there hard stats on terrain around anywhere?
+
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)
I know it's 4 TU for a standard square of movement, think it's 5? over meadows (cursed daisies),
+
:Only admins can edit Featured Projects. And I object to it.
and 6? through wheat or craters. Fun with incendiaries and hay bales, the wisdom of blasting
+
: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.
  orchards open... etc.
+
: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 posted a list of TU usage. It's [[TU#Time Unit Walking Usage Tables|here]] on the TU page.
+
== XCOM 2 section problems ==
  
--[[User:Danial|Danial]] 19:25, 27 December 2005 (PST)
+
Hi guys,
----
 
  
Isn't this discussion page getting a little too big? ;)
+
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.
  
My thoughts exactly :)
+
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?
  
It sounds like we've reached a fair amount of consensus. But I guess we'll leave the exact details up to whoever does it :P ... it will take a few hours to do all the re-organization of small pages (and links to them) that I proposed.
+
Just a question in editorial direction.
  
NKF, [[X-COM Base Management]] works for me. One more menu entry simplified!
+
--[[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)
  
PL, the reason I proposed a Battlescape Overviews section is that there are a number of important "over arching" concepts that don't quite fit anywhere else. Things like Damage, Explosions, and a number of other things currently stashed under [[Missions_%28UFO_Defense%29#General Tips|Missions - General Tips]]. Individually, none of them seem important enough to warrant a Main Page entry. But collectively, they are important concepts that might otherwise be lost in the noise if e.g. Explosions were only linked to on the Grenades page, etc. If you can think of a better way to have these entries fairly readily reachable from the Main Page, let us know your thoughts. FWIW I for one think that Terrain and/or Geography should probably be under Battlescape Overviews, instead of in its own Main Page link. ---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]]
+
::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)
  
'''Addendum:''' We should make a special page for questions/comments/issues to the admins. Not all special issues relate to the Main Page, after all. As for "where to put it", it needn't be obvious from the Main Page, but should quickly become clear to folks who are new to our wiki per se, but are old and wise hands to the net at large (via search or Main Page links).
+
== Enable dark mode theme? ==
  
Oi, can one of you admins make .TXT be an acceptable upload file extension. I want to upload the code to my program that did the [[Experience_Training#Kill_Modelling]]. I see no reason to subject the general readership to such droll reading by making it take up 250 lines of a wiki; only 1 in 200 that make it to my highly obscure page will care for the code, too. So, TXT should be cool. Should I become an admin too? ---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:18, 29 December 2005 (PST)
+
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
 +
: Hi and thanks for asking but after consultation with NineX, we don't have the resources (someone experienced with Mediawiki) to keep the UFOpaedia.org updated to the latest Mediawiki releases. Otherwise, the odds are that things will start breaking with UFOpaedia.org if we change the custom skin, which has happened to other wikis. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 23:32, 25 October 2021 (CEST)
  
----
+
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)
  
You've got a point about the overview page, Mike.  I was just looking for the TU page off the main page, and it requires quite a bit of navigation to get to. --[[User:Papa Legba|Papa Legba]] 10:33, 29 December 2005 (PST)
+
== New and old images not showing? ==
  
----
+
When adding images to new pages that I've been editing I've noticed some images will never be displayed properly, this includes new images I've uploaded and old images from years ago that I've simply linked in a new page
  
Right, I've converted the UFO table into the revised table, and have finally made the general sub heading template. ( <nowiki>{{stdTable Sub Heading}}</nowiki>  )
+
On this page:https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Lab_Ship
 +
You can see that while the 'side view' image loads in correctly, however the terrain map images fail to load properly, spouting errors. These are all new images.
  
It certainly looks much more compact.  
+
Conversely on this page: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Battlescape_Strategy_(Hardmode)#Disembarkation_Strategy
 +
While most of those images are also new, the third image is the very old 'motion scanner' image from the vanilla wiki that has been around for a decade, it is also failing to load.
  
I've taken the liberty to reduce the heading font by one point just as a trial. I don't know if it works or not.
+
I've no idea why some images will work and other's won't. I have also tried to do the edits and upload new images from entirly different devices and computers but to no avail.
  
Also, I've removed a few of my old comments. That's removed the complaint about the file being over 32k, at least. For now.  
+
Just reporting the issue. Cheers [[User:Steelpoint|Steelpoint]] ([[User talk:Steelpoint|talk]]) 17:52, 3 June 2022 (CEST)
 +
:I just tried to see the image being hosted of the LabShip that wasn't displaying on the gallery and it didn't also load, with the similar error message. Since all the majority of the .pngs you upload seem to be correctly appearing, I'd advise to recheck those .png files. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 03:38, 5 June 2022 (CEST)
  
- [[User:NKF|NKF]]
+
:I've tried taking a new image on a different machine and have re-uploaded it to no avail, I've even taken a new image and converted it to a different file format but it still produces an error output. I've even uploaded the images to different websites to see if there's a problem with the files but the other websites display the image with no issues.
 +
:If we check some of the older pages I made, using the same program to get the UFO images, the images uploaded just fine as evidenced here: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Sentry_Ship
 +
:I'm just not sure of the issue or if its even one on my end due to how random the issue is. If it was just affecting images I am screenshoting from 'MapViewer' then I'd say that's it but its also cropping errors for a wide range of images from different sources. [[User:Steelpoint|Steelpoint]] ([[User talk:Steelpoint|talk]]) 12:11, 5 June 2022 (CEST)
 +
::I think I might have encountered this bug years ago but I think it got eventually for the images to appear. Try using .jpg instead? Otherwise, I'm afraid I don't have a clue of how to solve it. [[User:Hobbes|Hobbes]] ([[User talk:Hobbes|talk]]) 17:33, 9 June 2022 (CEST)
 +
:Have you guys found any solution to this ? [[User:Horace vr|Horace vr]] ([[User talk:Horace vr|talk]]) 11:57, 5 February 2023 (CET)
  
----
+
== Thumbnails issue ==
  
Folks, I've been away playing Civ 4. But it'll be a passing fad. I've come to like this community, and XCOM is 10 years old. I will be back, smile.
+
[[User:Horace vr|Horace vr]] ([[User talk:Horace vr|talk]]) 12:41, 4 February 2023 (CET)
  
NKF, the main page looks '''great''' IMHO. Clearly you took many things into consideration, including the "oomph" factor. The only thing I can suggest is that, in that very first full sentence in the top of the Main Page, have e.g. an underline link (no reason to change a single word!) to the main wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcom XCOM] link. Some folks will drop in totally out of the blue - that's their release valve to see, "ah, they're talking about a game".
+
I am seeing issues with thumbnail creation, for both old and new pictures
  
Bravo and I hope you reworked all those little links I fretted over, to make the site more cohesive. I will spend a little time now reviewing Recent Changes but mainly only have time to look for big things.
+
For example here:
 +
https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Template:Research_required_(LWR)
 +
If you try to thumb the picture (by adding a pic size), you will get an error;
  
Anybody's welcome to email me. I am around. Just conquering the Civ 4 world a few hundred times over, before I get back to any Alien Menaces, laugh. Anybody can clip out all I said above. This Discussion page needs a major cleanup. I'm sure Gaz would say the same. As for the major re-write of main page, and lack of discussion here past my last post - whatever happened was always up to, the person that chose to sink the time into it. We all had time to say our peace. NKF, you did a great job as far as I'm concerned. So a lot of this Discuss can be cleaned up.
+
This happens with existing pictures (I tried to restore the original pic) and to new pics (Event research2.jpg is a pic I uploaded a few days ago)
  
---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 00:27, 14 January 2006 (PST)
+
This could be related to the issue reported earlier by Steelpoint: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Talk:Main_Page#New_and_old_images_not_showing.3F

Latest revision as of 10:57, 5 February 2023

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.

Removing All Featured Projects from Sidebar

We had another request to add an entry to the Featured Projects sidebar (LWOTC) and since we now have a Featured Projects page I've been wondering if it wouldn't be better to remove all the current Featured Projects from the sidebar and put them in that page, for several reasons:
  1. The wiki has always been focused on the games and not on fan projects.
  2. There are wiki-relevant sidebar links that keep getting pushed downwards everytime a project is added, like languages or tools.
  3. With the reboot of the franchise and OpenXCom, a lot of fan projects are in the works.
  4. While we provide a space for their subwikis if they need, the wiki was never a hub for fan projects and to publicize/monetize them.
  5. Those projects typically came and use our space but I can't remember any who contributed to the wiki's main pages about the original XCom games, other than placing links to their projects on the original game pages for publicity.
  6. A couple projects have also left and set up their own wikis, without ever bothering to at least delete their content once they stopped updating it, since they decided they didn't want to be here anymore when they didn't get the publicity they wanted.
  7. UFO2000 & UFO:AI have zero or limited development for years - they're dead or almost.
  8. OpenXCom and OpenApoc already have links for their subwikis on the UFO and Apocalypse tables.
  9. Having Long War and Long War 2 then leads to other large projects like Long War Reworked and Long War of the Chosen also wanting the same attention/publicity. All of those could have also links for them on the Enemy Unknown and XCOM2 tables.
  10. And the Featured Projects page could be reworked so that they are properly grouped together according to their specific game that they originate from and it could also include a short description about their scope and objectives.

Ideas/Comments? Hobbes (talk) 06:07, 4 January 2022 (CET)

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

Hi and thanks for asking but after consultation with NineX, we don't have the resources (someone experienced with Mediawiki) to keep the UFOpaedia.org updated to the latest Mediawiki releases. Otherwise, the odds are that things will start breaking with UFOpaedia.org if we change the custom skin, which has happened to other wikis. Hobbes (talk) 23:32, 25 October 2021 (CEST)

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)

New and old images not showing?

When adding images to new pages that I've been editing I've noticed some images will never be displayed properly, this includes new images I've uploaded and old images from years ago that I've simply linked in a new page

On this page:https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Lab_Ship You can see that while the 'side view' image loads in correctly, however the terrain map images fail to load properly, spouting errors. These are all new images.

Conversely on this page: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Battlescape_Strategy_(Hardmode)#Disembarkation_Strategy While most of those images are also new, the third image is the very old 'motion scanner' image from the vanilla wiki that has been around for a decade, it is also failing to load.

I've no idea why some images will work and other's won't. I have also tried to do the edits and upload new images from entirly different devices and computers but to no avail.

Just reporting the issue. Cheers Steelpoint (talk) 17:52, 3 June 2022 (CEST)

I just tried to see the image being hosted of the LabShip that wasn't displaying on the gallery and it didn't also load, with the similar error message. Since all the majority of the .pngs you upload seem to be correctly appearing, I'd advise to recheck those .png files. Hobbes (talk) 03:38, 5 June 2022 (CEST)
I've tried taking a new image on a different machine and have re-uploaded it to no avail, I've even taken a new image and converted it to a different file format but it still produces an error output. I've even uploaded the images to different websites to see if there's a problem with the files but the other websites display the image with no issues.
If we check some of the older pages I made, using the same program to get the UFO images, the images uploaded just fine as evidenced here: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Sentry_Ship
I'm just not sure of the issue or if its even one on my end due to how random the issue is. If it was just affecting images I am screenshoting from 'MapViewer' then I'd say that's it but its also cropping errors for a wide range of images from different sources. Steelpoint (talk) 12:11, 5 June 2022 (CEST)
I think I might have encountered this bug years ago but I think it got eventually for the images to appear. Try using .jpg instead? Otherwise, I'm afraid I don't have a clue of how to solve it. Hobbes (talk) 17:33, 9 June 2022 (CEST)
Have you guys found any solution to this ? Horace vr (talk) 11:57, 5 February 2023 (CET)

Thumbnails issue

Horace vr (talk) 12:41, 4 February 2023 (CET)

I am seeing issues with thumbnail creation, for both old and new pictures

For example here: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Template:Research_required_(LWR) If you try to thumb the picture (by adding a pic size), you will get an error;

This happens with existing pictures (I tried to restore the original pic) and to new pics (Event research2.jpg is a pic I uploaded a few days ago)

This could be related to the issue reported earlier by Steelpoint: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Talk:Main_Page#New_and_old_images_not_showing.3F