Liquipedia talk:Style Guide
Currency formatting convention[edit]
I think there should be a currency formatting standard for prize pool tables. For example, the currency symbol, then the number, with a comma for the digit grouping (no space).
RippingFlesh 10:06, 4 May 2011 (KST)
Contradictory[edit]
The style guide as-is contradicts itself. I made changes, but they were undone without supplying a reason.
Some notes:
In the very first point it says "Unit and building names are abbreviated" and reads "3 Hatch Muta"
It is unclear whether one should always abbreviate names or if the writer is mentioning that it is merely permissable. They then go on to not abbreviate, so I can only assume the second.
Later on there is an entire header devoted to numbering which demands the writer spell out any numbers less than twenty, yet the first line uses "3"
"If you see the Terran put up three Starports, get a Spire as soon as possible."
"If one sees" would be a more editorial second person.
Simonsarris 06:45, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments. Regarding the numbers: The first paragraph is entirely concerned with Build Order nomenclature, it is named "Titles and Links" after all. It does not concern how you write numbers in prose. So as a BO name, you might use "3 Hatch Muta", but in text you will write "build Mutalisks from all three Hatcheries". --Aesop 09:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
We need guidelines for talking about tiers[edit]
There are various ways of writing tiers written throughout the pages. For instance Tier-2, Tier 2, Tier two, and Tier II.
Mods, please specify in the style guide the most appropriate way to write tiers so that we may make pages concerning them and keep the guide consistent. I would recommend Tier-2 or Tier 2.
Simonsarris 21:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Plurality[edit]
Should add a small part to the "Spelling" section to deal with plural unit naming.
Example: Templar is both a singular and plural name for the unit. (eg. he killed all of his opponent's High Templar with his single Dark Templar)
Needs to be moved[edit]
Page should be moved to Liquipedia:Style Guide, as it is a project page. --Zamiel 20:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Liquipedia Icons[edit]
I would like to see uniformity in the site's icons, as well as just some general icon changes around the site. I will do the requisite work in the various site templates in order to make this happen, but of course there first needs to be a consensus on the topic.
See Forge. Template:Upgrade uses what I consider to be the "correct" mineral icon: File:Minerals.jpg, which I uploaded back in June. This is the actual in-game minerals from the top-right-hand corner of the screen; I created the JPG myself directly from a screenshot that I took using the max in-game resolution (1600x1200), then resized down to 16x16.
Just as a quick example, Template:Infobox_Building does not use this same mineral icon, and all icons throughout the site should probably be uniform.
Even the Template:Upgrade does not use the "correct" vespene icon, since no-one has bothered to create it. All of this also applies to the supply icons used throughout the site.
Besides minerals, vespene, and supply, I'm not quite certain why each race needs to have its own build-time icon that is a different color (a.k.a. ). I think it should all be , which is what the Template:Upgrade uses for zerg already (something I uploaded back in June) or . (Side note: should have transparency, which is something I will do a little later tonight.)
Finally, there is the topic of size uniformity. Should 16x16 be the correct size? Or larger?
That's all for now. Thoughts? --Zamiel 05:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- I agree as far as uniformity goes. Let's get some more opinions to find out which way we should go. --Pholon 09:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- I agree that uniformity is the way to go. Let's look into replacing it. Imperator 09:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- All the templates does not have consistent use of the same icons, there are multiple files in multiple formats uploaded. I uploaded the updated icons for SC2 some time ago (borrowed from Blizzards site ^^ ), not as updates though since I did not know anything about templates at the time. I have also considered a {{minerals}}, {{gas|zerg}}, {{supply|protoss}} set of templates but im still unsure if it would be a good or bad idea.
|
- The Buildtime.jpg image is bad since it does not have any transparency and hence leaves a white box on pages with different background. The are fine by me and there is no exception to the 3, since we don't have any race-neutral element (unless we are having problem controlling the race condition in the template).
- I would recommend we use the SC2 standard icons on all templates, remove all other and redirect any "variation,jpg" "variations.gif" to the correct image for future use.
- The armor, hit points and sheilds icons could use a update but I know of no good replacement.
- What templates needs to be updated?
- --Kokkan 21:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Regardless of what Blizzard uses on their site, I think the in-game icons look a lot better.
As for Buildtime.jpg, see File:Buildtime.png. (It has transparency.)
As for a "vespene" template, it is a nice thought but kind of a waste of time since the templates will (eventually) all use the same icons and the code has to make a distinction based on race anyway. --Zamiel 22:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- The in-game icons are not designed for web use. The ones from the web site are a lot clearer and easy to see. You can't even make out what is on the supply.jpg unless you look really hard. If we are going for unity, then all icons should be boxed, and none of our old ones are. --Kokkan 08:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
- That's true, the supply one is pretty awful, haha. --Zamiel 13:16, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
You Versus One[edit]
Should we refer to the reader with you or should we say one? From Macro: "Micro is the ability to control your units individually..." Should this be written "Micro is the ability to control one's units individually...?" Xapoc 03:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- It is the proper way to say it, yes, but down the line it just gets in the way when you also have to use "his or her X" or "he or she". Write the path of least resistance. It's much easier to use "you" when writing a how to or making a suggestion. It's better to use "one" when making an objective stand. --Fiel 10:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Language and Date Format[edit]
I assume that the language to use is US English and not UK English. If this is the case would be a good idea to add to the language section for clarification. Also for date should we use the (more germanic) ISO, which is awesomely logical for sorting etc, standard yyyy-mm-dd or the weird US dd of month, yyyy? This might also find it's way into some header because I see a very wide variety of date formats on a lot of pages. (Also I thought media-wiki could deal with different date formats if they are linked they will be set to the standard set by the user) --Salle 16:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
- Though I particularly hate the ISO formatting which makes me want to destroy various object, I think it is the standard we have to adopt. It prevents any kind of problem and is perfectly understandable for anyone using a Gregorian calendar which is our public. If you don't answer here, I'll drop you a word in IRC.--Otolia 07:36, 30 September 2011 (KST)
Less background colors for Ro64-Ro2 cells[edit]
If I look at the team rosters like on oGs or The_SCV_Life it looks like some kind of rainbow, showing all colors of red without any purpose (why is one more orange and the other more dark?). Specially the reds should be just one red for being dropped out at the specific round. --Progman 19:29, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- The purpose, I assume, is to give a quick graphical representation of someones result without having to actually read the Ro information. I do think that the gradient could need some tweaking, Ro64 is hard to read and there's almost no discernible difference between Ro16 and Ro32. --Salle 19:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
"player" vs. "playersp"[edit]
For writing player names with their flag/race we got the Template:player and Template:playersp templates, but the usage in the wiki is not really consistent. At some points "player" is used, than at other places "playersp" is used. It gets more confused if the player page exists or not, sometimes I see usage like {{playersp|[[username]]}}
with wikilinks inside a template which is meant for not having links. So what is the correct template to use and how (and when)?
As a side note: maybe we should remove the #ifexists stuff so there is always a link shown with {{player}}
, even if the page doesn't exists (which encourage users to create that missing page). --Progman 13:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- This has been solved as playersp has been completely knocked after player was fixed by.... I don't remember who, I feel really bad, sorry. —DivinO— talk.to.me 14:57, 29 April 2011 (KST)
Cast/casted/commentated[edit]
All three seem to be used interchangeably throughout the wiki. Can haz policy? —Wulf 16:22, 20 October 2011 (KST)
- "Cast" is short for "broadcast," so it should be used as the full version is.
- Commentated v cast? Don't think there's a real difference. ~Wren (Talk) 10:37, 2 February 2012 (KST)
Strategy Articles - "Variation" pages[edit]
What format should a page describing a build variation take? E.g. 111_Build/Fast_Pre-igniter_variation variation of 1Rax 1Fact 1Port. Specifically;
- 111_Build page is just a redirect; should the sub-page be moved?
- Should all variations be linked to from the parent?
- What determines if a build is a variant and should be formatted in this way?
--BlueNovember (talk • contribs) 22:08, 20 October 2011 (KST)
- Similarly, many builds are thematically similar, even if they open differently. For example all these builds feature openning with reactor healions in some way:
- Marine,_Hellion_Elevator
- Reactor_Hellion_Expand_(vs._Zerg)
- Banshee into Reactor Hellion harass (vs Zerg)
- Should these be linked in some fashion? --BlueNovember (talk • contribs) 22:14, 20 October 2011 (KST)
Number of bases[edit]
When referring to a play that happens before an expansion, should it be called: "one base," "one-base," "1 base," or "1base"? ~Wren (Talk) 10:40, 2 February 2012 (KST)
- I think one-base is the best option. --ChapatiyaqPTSM (talk) 05:06, 6 February 2012 (KST)
- I think 1-base, 2-base, 3-base, n-base is the best option here. While one-base and two-base look fine, three-base does not, from a purely visual standpoint. Keep in mind the hyphen, which is not included in the original examples listed. --itsjustatank 11:16, 12 April 2012 (KST)
Linking[edit]
Should it be noted that breaking up links within words is preferred over writing the word twice within a link (e.g. [[Roach]]es, not [[Roach|Roaches]])? Currently both are used to some extent, but the latter is only needed for possessive cases (e.g. the [[Roach|Roach's]] speed, not the [[Roach]]'s speed) for MediaWiki to automatically linkify the whole word. --Attribute 17:13, 24 May 2012 (KST)
I've just been reading some player pages, and I've noticed they all have major parts that read like a news article and not like an encyclopedia article. There is nothing in the style guidelines that I could find about the general tone that an article should take, with the exception of some guidelines on strategy articles. I am far from an expert on the issue, but I found wikipedia's "Words to Watch" page to be insanely helpful and clear. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Words_to_watch. Also on neutrality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view.
Overall Tone/Neutrality[edit]
Looking through several player pages, I've found that most of them contain a significant amount of non-neutral words and/or parts that are just generally not written like an encyclopedia entry. I am not an expert on this or anything, but I found Wikipedia's Words to Watch article to be very helpful. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Words_to_watch. Also, here's wikipedia's article on neutrality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutrality. Perhaps there could be a link to these resources somewhere on this wiki so we could nip some of these tone issues in the bud?