Hey there :) Great work on the Apocalypse pages, it's nice to see editors giving love to my first XCOM game. Hobbes (talk) 02:59, 29 April 2022 (CEST)

cheers! EsTeR (talk)

Toes stepped on

Since you asked: yes, I've been quite irritated at your rewrites of several of the pages I'd previously rewritten (I noticed UFO Incursions and Tactical Combat Missions; I don't know if there were others). I appreciate your enthusiasm, but your excited, rambling tone makes the pages much less readable than my more clinical format. I originally thought this might be just bias on my part, so I had a friend compare the versions blind (i.e. without telling him that I wrote one of them or what to look for); he said "1A [your Tactical Combat Missions] reads like a poorly compiled strategy guide, whereas 1B [my Tactical Combat Missions] reads like a wiki".

I've been strongly considering mass reverts, but I haven't been on much recently and didn't particularly want to start a giant fight (was also concerned that reverting some of your edits without tracking down all of them might leave information out, if you'd moved it from one article to another). But since you asked - this is where I sit.

(I have no issue with adding information or moving it around, to be clear; it's the prose issue that's driving me nuts.) Magic9mushroom (talk) 06:32, 5 July 2022 (CEST)

Criticism

I've had a look at the Organizations page and noticed you have given it a comprehensive re-write. While you were right to remove the Relations section because it has it's own page, I'm not cool with some of the other edits. Especially the section about guards - your edits have made it *less* accurate.

1. Most glaringly, the "guards" don't just defend the organizations' buildings, but are also used to raid others, including X-COM.

2. There is no unit that's actually called "Guard" in the game. "Building Security" is a specific type of unit used by most organizations (all except Megapol, the Cult, and the Gangs) to defend their buildings. You seem to have confused this. Look at the Population page, it clearly states which unit appears in which mission.

3. More generally, some of the section titles aren't good - for example, "mercantile services" - "mercantile" means something that pertains to merchants or trading. Government funding or taxi services, for example, don't fit.

4. Avoid writing like this:

"Note:

Note:

Special note:"

If there are so many things you have to "note", either re-write the section and incorporate the notes into the text, or use a separate section for the notes.

I'll re-write the page when I find the time. But, in the future, please don't do this sort of major surgery if you're not absolutely certain that the information you are removing/changing is actually wrong.

The only other pages I've looked at are a few of the weapons. These edits seem better, at least at first glance, so here's just a few observations:

1. "Explode-on-impact when thrown. RMB on grenade image in agent's hand." I assume the first full stop was supposed to be a colon? In any case, this information is placed in an awkward place, and writing it as a full sentence would make it easier to understand. It may also be better to place it on the Controls page rather than listing it under every single explosive weapon.

2. "Flame Time Effective = burning well, will damage units, set fire to torso, spreads if possible.

Flame Time Extingushed = flames are dying down until no more.

On Fire Time = flames on torso."

I have no idea what most of this means, and the way its stuck at the end of the article makes it even less understandable. Again, it would certainly help if you used full sentences.

3. Descriptions that are directly quoted from the in-game UFOpaedia and other official sources should be clearly marked as such (Source: X-COM Apocalypse Ufopedia). Darkpast (talk) 09:57, 5 July 2022 (CEST)

YES... I agree with you Darkpast. Those weapon equip articles are a bit repeatative text, which was going to be changed. Looking at my quick jotted down list, there was on there.

I have seem to have gotten two at once: Darkpast and Magic9Mushroom.

Replies will be forthcoming.

General Reply

Most of the pages written are formatted in such a way to have a:
1. relevant but humerous bolded one-liner at the start.
2. a basic definition/description of what it is, using (mostly) the article title as the first heading (or "In General", which i'm avoiding).
3. a step further in description 'working our way' through to get to the proper 'meat and bones'.
4. detailed description in a ~~template~~ format style which will look similar to other pages.
5. if needed, highly detailed information relevant (facts) to the specific article.
6. cautions, warnings and notes to get the readers attention as something important.
7. and any other wip version since no page is ever finished 100%.

The Hive

logical format for each page, uniform layout, removing fluff, pub-talk, weasle-words, incorrect stuff.

I generally agree that these should be removed. I don't think Trivia sections are bad, however - I mean things like "this alien is likely inspired by the Creature from the Black Lagoon". However, I do think they could be moved to a separate, combined page. Something like this: https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_pop_culture_references_in_Warcraft

Darkpast (talk) 12:59, 5 July 2022 (CEST)

Thanks for the swift reply. Trivia not connected to apocalypse (chuck morris) but the other one in Valkyrie is good. The cultural references or "other fandoms" link probably should be at the bottom of pages with such info. EsTeR (talk)

The thing about copywrite.

If every 'official text' needs the disclaimer: "Source: in-game Ufopedia", then every single picture, word-for-word text, no matter how acquired, must have the disclaimer immediately after (something like this): "Source: in-game asset illegally de-compiled from insert filename using editing programs, displayed/copied here without exclusive permission".
Is that silly? of course it is!

I agree that it's not necessary for every single bit of "official" material. But I do think it should be done for those quotes at the beginning of many articles. Not because of copyright reasons, but to clearly mark it as in-game text. This is important because the in-game text is sometimes vague or misleading. Darkpast (talk) 12:54, 5 July 2022 (CEST)

REPLY: quite a few (all the weapon links if i remember) did not have the official text prominent, but was buried into the article, and NOT attributed as being official, but there it was!:
some random old weapons pages to explain:

...essentailly all weapon equipment pages had the official text but was it was not attributed to ufopedia!
It is a bit harsh to complain about removing "source: official text" from some articles but many many more (the majority format. ie: a wall of text, then pic, wall of text) had the exact same thing as above examples (ie: no source blurb as noted in the three examples above).
Most, if not all, of the weapons pages I changed to a 'middle ground' format which I knew the official text should be prominent. Removing the large boxed+picture plus "source: official text" from the few pages reduced the visual page size. Large pictures when added increased that boxed 'source: official text' box and pushed the text down. Removing those 'boxed source official text' boxes allow a format of having two pics either side... that's why all (probably missed some) were changed to have uniform format. example (which needs more work):
Metro_Roadhog_(Apocalypse)
instead of this example which the bigger the pic, the bigger the boxed section becomes:
Talk:Metro_Roadhog_(Apocalypse)

EsTeR (talk)

Disinginuous Criticism

Entry within "Populations"
https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Population_(Apocalypse)&oldid=106830#Building_Security

Security guards' armament and numbers depend on which organization employs them (starting Tech Level can be as low as 1 or as high as 4, and there can be anywhere between 5 and 17 of them). In particular, the Government, Marsec, Solmine, Cyberweb, S.E.L.F. and the Mutant Alliance use better-equipped and larger groups of guards.

and

Security guards' Accuracy is a little poorer than average.

"Security guards" which can be shortened to "Guards". Yey, I get blasted because I called them guards elsewhere ...yet, here in that example old-edit above, security Guards word is used instead of the specific "Building Security".

...example in old-edit:

Megapol will use Police. The gangs will use Gangsters. The Cult of Sirius will use Cultists. Everyone else uses Building Security."

and

Guards will also pick up loose and valuable goods such as..."

Darkpast: "You seem to have confused this. Look at the Population page, it clearly states which unit appears in which mission."

No no no... YOU seem to be confused. You fly off the handle about building security this, building security that, and thats what they are called (guards), yet the edit exactly before mine when I started, used the words Security Guard, which you blast me for, for continued use and trying to keep the same wording?

...and
Wherever I've made the choice to use the word "guards", I've tried to make the distinction that they are seperate entities, ie:

Tactical_Combat_Missions_(Apocalypse)#Battlescape_Mission_And_Tactics "...on the population of: aliens, civilians, security guards (cultists, gangsters, police and guards), and X-Com units.

Tactical_Combat_Missions_(Apocalypse)#Search_And_Investigation "...are detected, [[Organizations#Corporate_Security_Forces|security guards]] will only appear if..."

and bulleted explaination for those readers that missed the first two:
Tactical_Combat_Missions_(Apocalypse)#Raid

A raid will contain security guards to defend the structure:

   Company buildings and the government will contain Guards.
   Gang buildings will contain Gangsters.
   Temple buildings will have Cultists.
   Any buiiding owned by Megapol will have uniformed Police.

TO say that I seem to have confused this. when it is written within the building security old-edit which i kept using as "security guards"...

yes... damn right I'm angry.

There are five types of "guard": Police, Building Security, Corporate Hood, Cultists, and Gangsters. You completely left out Corporate Hoods, and you even omitted them from the quote you use to supposedly prove you're right. Pathetic!

Here's the whole quote:

"Megapol will use Police. The gangs will use Gangsters. The Cult of Sirius will use Cultists. Everyone else uses Building Security in their own buildings and Corporate Hoods when attacking yours."

Your edits completely ignore the fact that most organizations use Building Security to defend from your raids, but Corporate Hoods when attacking X-COM bases. So using "Guards" to refer to both of them is incorrect. THAT is the problem.

I'm sorry to hear you're angry, but that's not my problem. Darkpast (talk) 14:20, 6 July 2022 (CEST)

Mercantile word use

Darkpast: "... "mercantile services" - "mercantile" means something that pertains to merchants or trading..."

Merchants: the thing/person/company et al. that sell/barter/trade to others. eg: marsec sells a prox mine for cash. Trading: buying something with money/credit/IOUs/"other" services. ie: the swapping of something valuable to someone for something else in mutual agreement. eg: X-Com buys a prox mine for cash.

so... "...means something that pertains to merchants or trading..."

Thanks for clarification that I'm correct with vocabulary. I won't bother trying to explain "services" as in "Mercantile Services".

Once again, government funding isn't a mercantile service. Neither is having Androids or Hybrids available for hire. Darkpast (talk) 14:22, 6 July 2022 (CEST)

I have no idea what most of this means

Flame Time Effective = burning well, will damage units, set fire to torso, spreads if possible.
Flame Time Extingushed = flames are dying down until no more. 
On Fire Time = flames on torso.

What happen when a IN (round or grenade) is has impacted and started burning? What does fire do?

IF you don't understand it then it is obvious you haven't played the game enough to be suitable in editing ufopedia apocalypse section.

yes... damn right I'm angry.

You know what, you can fuck right off with that attitude. I'm certainly not the best editor in the world, but I am a veteran player (completed the game at least 5 times) who's spent ages testing game mechanics and editing these pages, and most importantly *keeping the information on them accurate and understandable*. And you know what? Sometimes I was wrong (especially when I was just starting out), but I didn't cry like a bitch every time somebody corrected me. Darkpast (talk) 14:36, 6 July 2022 (CEST)

The thing about "reads like a strategy guide"

(Which I think is pertaining to "Tactics" section in some pages).
Well, if a subjective description for, (eg:) tactical battle, is prohitited because it is not 'facts', then it will only ever read like this:
eg:
1. Land at crashed UFO.
2. Find aliens.
3. Netralise aliens.
4. End Turn(TB) or Wait(RT).
Thats it! That is the absolute maximum that can be on the page according to you because it is only fact.
I know its ridiculous, you know its ridiculous.

Thinking about it later: I don't understand your myopia. You complained about one page specifically and complain that other pages I've edited to (roughly my) same format aren't your "clinical format". Well... why didn't you back up your 'clinical format' ideals by fixing up every page that needed fixing over the years? (need examples? look at my profile: "Pages Changed" for many more to the same format). I've made a large effort to making this apoc section of ufopedia have -all- the information possible. Read all pages that have "tactics" within them - which the bulk of which does not say how to play the game but what to expect when playing the game. However, riculous things like blocking dimension gates will need step by step explaination, which will be ~~how to play~~ how to do it. EsTeR (talk)

User talk:EsTeR

Contents