Archive talk:Mod

From SRB2 Wiki
(Redirected from Talk:Mod)
Jump to: navigation, search
This is an archive page for the discussion page of "Mod". The article has since been superseded by Modifications.

This was deleted for a reason, you know... ~Kaysakado  • Talk 09:36, 5 November 2007 (PST)

Well, I forget why, but the content in here works (and was written by Blue Warrior), not to mention Mod is a legitimate article here. ^_^ Yeah, it was probably originally deleted because its content was stupid. –SonicMaster 12:07, 5 November 2007 (PST)

The main conflict with this article is the fact that people cling onto it for advertising. It's also unfair to say what things are "mods" and aren't "mods" based off of opinion/quality. There are plenty of mods not listed here; doesn't mean that they aren't mods.

Yeah, I believe this article should be deleted. --Spazzo 12:28, 5 November 2007 (PST)

OK, but shouldn't the definition of mod be included somewhere in the Wiki? On another note, is this article redundant or something? –SonicMaster 13:46, 5 November 2007 (PST) EDIT: And shouldn't advertising be in like, that person's user page?

Before we go and delete this, we really really really have to decide which mods can go on the Wiki. As I see it, there are a few possible choices:

  • Free-for-all
  • Popular, big-name mods only (Mystic Realm, Acid Missile)
  • Any mod that's on the Addons section of srb2.org (not including the message board)
  • Any mod that has an MB topic or is on the Addons section.

I don't think "no mods at all" is an option, since Mystic Realm is pretty popular here. If Mystic Realm gets in, I think other people want their mods in, too. Personally, I'm all for the third option. (and, yes, that means "no message board", seriously.) We need a serious assessment over this, since we go through this over and over again. --Digiku talk 15:19, 5 November 2007 (PST)

Do you think you could get maybe Mystic/SSNTails/someone to upload Botanic Serenity to srb2.org, making it one of the OK ones to list (à la the third option)? Or is it not popular enough, or...something... –SonicMaster 15:49, 5 November 2007 (PST)

Thanks. :) It's already on the addons section. --Digiku talk 15:54, 5 November 2007 (PST)

What about Blue Heaven/Chaos Zone? It's now gone! XD –SonicMaster 19:51, 5 November 2007 (PST)

I'm more for having a sort of group determination for individual mod page proposals, for more significant mods. I would, obviously, say that there'd need to be a forum topic, significant release (Like, 6+ completed maps or something)...Anyways, I'll write up a proposal guideline soon. But I'd like to know what people think about that general idea there. Also, the Sonic image is back. ;_;~DarkWarrior Talk • Contribs 11:35, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Personally, I'm for the second option, with a part of the third option in having clear, written requirements for what designates a "major" mod. Honestly, there are plenty of decent mods not on the addons section (That requirement removes SRB2 Riders, for instance, which is plenty popular) -Mystic 12:56, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Save the mods!

Save the mods! Save the mods! Save the mods! Save the mods! Save the mods!

I'll never forgive you for this Mystic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Everybody vote fourth choice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!OR ELSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I did not foresee the consequences of copying Blue Warrior's sandbox Mod article into a regular one. >_< Sorry, guys. –SonicMaster 17:19, 6 November 2007 (PST)
I vote second option.SonicMaster 17:20, 6 November 2007 (PST)
WHOOPS! That would mean that I vote for keeping this article. DELETE DELETE DELETE. –SonicMaster 17:22, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Don't sweat it. :) This is something that we needed to deal with. We deal with it again and again and again and I just want to get it over with. It's helpful that this was brought up at all. --Digiku talk 17:35, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Qualification proposal

There's no doubt about it: Mod inclusion is going to be really political. I don't think this is something we can avoid. All of us seem to like popular mods with a mix of being on the addons page and/or possibly an MB topic. "All mods or No mods" is not an option, especially considering mods like Mystic Realm.

I'm thinking of a "grading system". Like, we'll grade by points. If your mod gets more than X points, then it'll most likely stay on the Wiki. If not, it goes. Simple. I based my grading system on Mystic Realm (especially), Acid Missile, Blue Heaven, SRB1 Remake, SRB2Riders, SRB2JTE, and Botanic Serenity. These are all pages that I think make the cut we've been tossing around right now.

See User:Digiku/Mod Grading.

We could publish it as a guideline, and we don't have to use it in practice, but at least there'll something concrete that unsure editors and even we can rely on. The political part, though, is arguing what is popular, what had effort put into it, etc. etc.

--Digiku talk 23:11, 7 November 2007 (PST)

You know my opinion, already, but I'd best state it here. I think that such a system could be useful, and yes, certainly a guideline to follow, but I think that we need to look at the gray areas around it. For example, PrettySRB2 should have a page, I think, because, from what I understand, people use it as an alternative to SRB2 proper for OpenGL, as it's 100% compatible with SRB2, and provides OpenGL fixes and features. Sure, it's not a proper mod, as far as those go, but it is notable. I'd follow this guideline, but I also think that there needs to be some level of what can be included on a case-by-case basis. ~DarkWarrior Talk • Contribs 10:52, 8 November 2007 (PST)

I'd like to point out to you guys working on Mod guidelines, that the addons section really shouldn't really be playing a role in these "guidelines". Why? Mystic rarely updates it anymore, if at all. What I'm trying to say here is that you really need to contact Mystic about the status of the addons page, and throw around some ideas.--Spazzo 13:01, 8 November 2007 (PST)

Spazz has a good point about the addons section. Good catch! I'll think about it.

And as for the gray areas DW brought up, I don't think it's something we can concretely describe without massive wars taking place, anyways. We can't put a strict guideline on what's "popular", what has had "effort" put into it, etc. But we can more easily put a guideline on how many levels there are, if there are SOCs, etc. Levels and SOCs, in turn, play a huge part in how popular a mod is, so it's still an alright indicator. Put a guideline on the stuff we can see and decide on a case-by-case basis the stuff that we can't. To decide whether a mod is "popular" or not, use evidence. I'm sounding really Phoenix Wright here, but for example: Mystic Realm. It's survived for three years; there are many netgames using Mystic Realm; the site statistics even list Mystic Realm on the top-viewed pages. There are multiple levels pages, and every topic started on Mystic Realm has sparked massive conversation. Therefore, we can safely say that it's popular without debate. That's what I meant by "political".

The grading system would be more of the own editor's use, so they have a better idea of whether the mod's right for the Wiki. We could still put points on "popularity", but the system in general shouldn't be strictly followed, or have strict rules anyways. It's a guideline, after all. :) --Digiku talk 23:49, 8 November 2007 (PST)


Shit, I missed one hell of a talk page.

Well, first, I'd like to get some information about the Sandbox article out of the way. I didn't think the article I plotted was fully perfected, which is why I didn't create the official article as of yet. Since SonicMaster created it for me, I just assumed that it was fine to be left alone, so I just let it be. If others don't see this article to be fit in its current state to stay, I'll be more than happy to finish my "unperfected" sandbox article. I believe the points system is an excellent idea for a grading system. We just need to establish which aspects of mods are higher than others. I believe I have some good ideas on a ranking system, which I'll get started on creating in just a moment. ~ Blue Warrior lulz 22:00, 9 November 2007 (PST)

I think, that maybe any Mods can be put up, but they can't be put up by the creator of the mod, and you'd have to be logged in to put it up, so we can make sure it wasn't the creator putting it up while logged out. ~Kaysakado  • Talk 15:59, 28 November 2007 (PST)

No. If just one person likes it and everyone else hates it, then it shouldn't go up. Moreover, people can make multiple accounts and sometimes use different computers. No, that could never work. –SonicMaster 15:59, 29 November 2007 (PST)

Action

Well, is it going to get deleted or not? It's just been sitting here. –SonicMaster 19:10, 23 November 2007 (PST)

And sitting here. –SonicMaster 00:27, 28 November 2007 (PST)

Just let it stay here. A lot of the time, we just let policy actions go in limbo and then pick up right where we left off later on. Mods is really shaky stuff. However, DW and I did talk some time ago in terms beyond what's in the several proposal pages here. --Digiku talk 14:51, 28 November 2007 (PST)

Second Thoughts

Alright, let's backtrack to the bare basics of the wiki. We know that it's a database for all editing needs and gameplay needs, but the question lies within the community section of the site. Notice that there's no section for it in the left-hand navigation bar. I think it's either an indication that we aren't exactly clear on what the community section should be about, or it's a section that is considered obsolete to the SRB2 and editing sections. Maybe it's both of those reasons.

Before we decide what to do with the Mod article, we need to figure out what the purpose of the community section is, as that's basically what we're dealing with in this article. What's noteworthy in a community article, especially in a mod article? I've been having some second thoughts recently, and I don't think a points system is how you judge whether a mod goes up or not. If you ask me, we should be thinking less on whether a mod sucks and more so on how it's affected the community, seeing as this is part of the community section.

If you need an explanation on why, then take Super Mystic Sonic for instance: by no means is it a decent character wad, but its constant usage in netgames has made it extremely infamous among higher-up part of the community. I think there needs to be an article on Super Mystic Sonic, what it does to the game, and how it became so infamous, if for no reason other than writing some history on what SMS is and how it's affected the community.

Other characters might not be worth their own articles. But characters on srb2.org are certainly used every once in a while by people, so, while they aren't worth mentioning on their own, a page known as Character Wads could be created, and short summaries of each wad on srb2.org could be mentioned on there without causing clutter anywhere else. Besides, pages such as SRB2JTE mention many of those characters, so instead of leaving some of the newbies hanging wondering what they are, Character Wads could explain all of them in two or three sentences each.

While I'm on the subject of wads that left their mark on the community, history of some wads should probably be mentioned as well. Mystic Realm is one of the first level packs (if not the very first) to grace the SRB2 community, and I think that's a fun fact that might be worth noting on the Mystic Realm article. History was an aspect that was in the SRBJTE article when it came to Universe mode, but that was removed for reasons that I don't recall.

As for what "system" we use for grading an article's quality, I think we should avoid getting technical and just use common sense on what belongs and what doesn't. I'm sure opinions will differ on how to handle this subject, but I would still like some feedback either way. ~ Blue Warrior talk 15:34, 8 December 2007 (PST)

I believe Universe Mode was removed cause it's defunct. You have a good reason to put it back up. *does so* –SonicMaster 02:02, 9 December 2007 (PST)

If we are going to encourage working on it from the perspective of the community, I think it would be wise to also try to encourage a neutral point of view. While in some cases its not so big a deal in this community, the n00bs vs srb2 thing is something this wiki can do without. See my comment at SMS Talk Page for more information... JEV3 04:06, 9 December 2007 (PST)


DW and I talked about this some time ago, and we also agreed that grading systems are the wrong way to go about it. In fact, we also agreed that the inclusion of mods should result in some really political atmosphere, where the inclusion of one mod is inevitably going to be contested. If a mod is contested, then both sides (the side that wants it out and the side that wants it to stay) should give reasons as to why the mod should either go or stay. And, yes, "how it affected the community" should be a big part of it.

As for a Community section, I personally noticed that all the mods and stuff are sort of mixed into the SRB2 section. It shouldn't be that way. In my opinion, vanilla SRB2 stuff should go in Category:Sonic Robo Blast 2. Mystic Realm stuff should go in Category:Community. Likewise, Vibrant Vendetta Zone should go in the Community section, as should basically everything in Category:Mods. Category:Community, on the other hand, shouldn't be under the SRB2 category; it should be a category of its own (aka a top-level category.)

Looking at the OpenTTD wiki, they actually have a good way of dealing with user-made content: Instructions and Resulting Page. The mod makers basically make the listing themselves and then add it to the list of mods that's there. However, (and surprise, surprise!) that won't work here. See, they're largely mature. We, on the other hand, aren't. I think it's because they're deeply involved into OpenTTD's development, whereas with SRB2, it's just SSNTails, Mystic, Arrow, etc. So depending on the content authors to add content like this probably shouldn't be taken with a lot of weight.

Concerning Super Mystic Sonic, I honestly don't think a single character WAD is worth their own page. Then again, I don't use character WADs all that often. In any event, if a character WAD is notable at all, they should go on a page describing Character WADs. Said page should also provide a link to where a collection of character WADs can be found. --Digiku talk 15:47, 9 December 2007 (PST)

But look at how much he could say. It deserves its own page. And I changed it to neutral per JEV3's request. –SonicMaster 15:55, 9 December 2007 (PST)

Do a page on Metal Sonic, please? Or any of these wads. I want a proof-of-concept. --Digiku talk 15:58, 9 December 2007 (PST)

Personally, I don't want every single character wad to have its own page, as it might encourage anons to create pages for their own wads as advertisement; meanwhile, not every frontpage character wad has much to note about other than its stats, abilities, and the fact that it's a character wad on the front page. Community wads, on the other hand, are up because they cause a ripple on the community, and there should be plenty of text to explain why. What I had in mind, was that the page Character WADs would contain a whole list of all of the srb2.org character wads. Anything else would be included in the subsection ==Other Characters== as external links (such as SMS and HMS 133221), since they are community WADs. I'm not going to get started on the article right at this moment, but after I collect some information on the main page's character wads (it's been a while since I played them XP), I'll get started on de-redirecting the Character WADs page and actually putting some content there. ~ Blue Warrior talk contrib 04:19, 11 December 2007 (PST)

Honestly, I don't see why this is such a major issue. Sepwich isn't running out of bandwidth anytime soon, so while this may be a shocking concept, why not just LET people make vanity pages for their WADs, and only take them down if the WAD is still "in development" or doesn't exist for any other reason. We aren't Wikipedia, we're a community-based video game Wiki, and honestly we don't need to clutter up our lives with the definition of "notable". Just because something ISN'T notable doesn't mean we can't have an article on it. Perhaps have a vanity page template for people to add to their non-notable WADs, and solve the whole problem right there.

Obviously, any articles would have to abide by the standards we have for the rest of the Wiki, so I honestly don't think all that many people will be creating articles for their crappy WAD anyhow, simply because of how high the standards are here for grammar and spelling, and with nobody but them caring about their work, their article would likely be deleted rather than revised.

Write "well-known mods" on the page for Mods, disallow editing of the page, and then just call it a day. -Mystic 06:43, 11 December 2007 (PST)

That's more or less what I was thinking of with the whole "Userpages are open for virtually anything" idea. There's no reason that they shouldn't be able to put their own vanity pages here. I just feel that they should be on the userpage, attributed to the owner. I'm all for that. I just don't feel that we should have "official" support for them here if they aren't particularly notable (Read: I'm not making templates & categories for every person's mini-mod! :() The only restriction I'd put on that is that the wads can't be uploaded up here... ~DarkWarrior Talk • Contribs 09:32, 11 December 2007 (PST)

Thus saith Dark Warrior. OBEY! ^_^ –SonicMaster 09:34, 11 December 2007 (PST)


Actually, Mystic, I believe it was you yourself who said the Wiki should consist of credible content, and not a bunch of WAD community garbage. No emphasis added, since quote is best interpreted in its entirety, but:

Honestly, I prefer to gravitate to results, not people. For instance, I'd rather have an article on Mystic Realm than an article about myself, with myself being a small footnote in the article about what I've made. Reasoning is that I don't want the entire community going "I want credit for that!" like they so often do in communities of this nature. The last thing we want is a system in place to give people an easy way to inflate their e-penis. If people want recognition on here, have them make something worthy of having an article on it. This community should be about collaboration, not personal accomplishments broadcast to the world.

I'm just exactly worried that Mods pages would be an opportunity for e-penises to be inflated. That point is the main reason why I've been doing all the side-stepping to regulate mods up to this point.

I'll give you something, though: One could argue that it doesn't really apply anymore, since that discussion was nine months ago and I think we're way more credible, now. The argument is that the "e-penis" dislike is more blatant when there's more credibility. Therefore, is there still a realistic risk for e-penises to be inflated as described, guys? Can we really be more relaxed about mods? --Digiku talk 15:22, 11 December 2007 (PST)

EDIT: Oh, and I agree with you, Digi. Only historical, whether good or bad, should go here.SonicMaster

Oh, jeez, we need to communicate better! Super Mystic Sonic should be legitimate because it's historical. So should Botanic Serenity because it's historical in two forms: its sheer popularity and the fact that it is the first NiGHTS mod. So should Blue Heaven because its popularity made it stand out so much and therefore it's historical. Exceptions are music WADs and SOCs, which should never get their own articles. Are we communicating now? –SonicMaster 15:56, 11 December 2007 (PST)

Ah, I understand what you're saying, now. I thought that was in answering of my most recent question, and I've gotta be honest: that doesn't answer my recent question at all. In fact, "is there any risk for e-penises to be inflated at this point?" supercedes the question that you seem to be answering, since my recent question would mean that the "historical" quality wouldn't matter. --Digiku talk 16:11, 11 December 2007 (PST)

Can we be more relaxed? Not really. Blue Warrior was right in his idea to allow the creation of WADs for infamous WADs. Here's this: Bad WADs can go on the Wiki. But they have to be seriously hated and undeniably infamous.

As for character WADs, they have to be just as liked and just as special as the EXE Mods and Level WAD Mods on the site. The level of strictness must be the same for Character WADs. Follow this, and there's not a risk for bragging rights and an advertisement forum here. –SonicMaster 19:39, 11 December 2007 (PST)

I think you sorta missed my point. The wad just has to have some sort of effect on the community. Botanic Serenity was the first NiGHTs addon to be created; Mystic Realm, Acid Missile, and Blue Heaven all have gotten a lot of attention both on the forums and in netgames, and have been around for quite a while; Super Mystic Sonic was one of the things that really worsened the divider in the SRB2 community. FORGET the quality and just focus on what it does to the community.

In regards to the whole "e-penis" thing, I think the easiest solution is to just let users post their wads on there user pages. I think we've agreed that user pages are pretty loosely restricted, so there really wouldn't be any argument on that. Community projects like Sonic Riders really can't fit onto one userpage, since there really isn't one single user that does most of the work, but that shouldn't be an issue, as they normally effect the community anyway. ~ Blue Warrior talk contrib 20:22, 11 December 2007 (PST)

Sure, we can work from there. And then let the userpages be linked from a main "Mods" listing -- possibly different from a "Notable Mods" listing, but one listing regardless. Would that work, though? Since I personally perceive userpages as being "less significant" and therefore "having no visitors". One might think the same. But we can divert the attention to user pages as I described in this paragraph, can't we? (The answer is "yes", btw.) --Digiku talk 01:22, 12 December 2007 (PST)


I got a solution. First and foremost, it's loosely based on this, specifically the rules here. But:

  • Fine, so we can forget about quality. We're also squabbling so much that it's really just better to let WADs of any sort have a page -- whether main or user page -- on the Wiki.
    • Lay out a simple procedure for adding any mods. Basically, it's "1. Put your mod on a subpage of your user page."
    • Then set up a page, List of Mods, which contains the list of said user page mods. It has to be organized, much like SRB2 Wiki:Requests. Then, the procedure goes "2. List your mod in List of Mods, and also add some [specific information]." (I kinda' want to do it like this.)
  • BW brought up that mods affecting the community deserve a main namespace page, no matter what the real quality.
    • If a mod is found to have affected the community as such, then let a Wiki staff move the mod over from the user page, over to the main namespace. "3. Maintain your user mod page. If a Wiki staff finds that your mod is 'notable enough' for the Wiki in the way of its impact on the community, then it'll be moved to the main space!"
  • Mods that really are notable won't be questioned upon movement. Likewise, mods that aren't notable won't be moved under our discretion. However, a mod may slip under our radar, and a mod author will likely question it. Fine; let the author question it, and we can work it out.
    • Likewise, even if discussions (or lack of) indicate that the mod isn't notable enough, then so sad, too bad. We have a Wiki to run, and we have to decide what goes on it. "4. If your mod isn't deemed notable enough, then sorry! Maybe you can work to make your mod really great so it will get another shot!"

The way I see it, it hits two birds with one stone. 1. We now know what the hell can go on our Wiki, and we also compromised with the WADs that wouldn't have made it by letting them on anyways. 2. This encourages better content. Mystic often says that the best way to make a good community is by making your own content. But nobody's motivated to do that around here. By this method, we encourage good mods by recognizing them, and that's motivation right there.

So fine; the second thing may be about as effective as crap pertaining to that, just like everything else has (I have to be the devil's advocate), but it is another reason to add on to the list of reasons why people should make good content. I mean, we got SonicMaster on board. :P Thoughts? --Digiku talk 02:18, 12 December 2007 (PST)

Don't have any questions on that; sounds good to me. ~ Blue Warrior talk contrib 04:50, 12 December 2007 (PST)

Well, the reason I suggested locking down the "Mods" page is that so vanity wouldn't be linked from anywhere. My implication was that someone could generate a page on some stupid mod of theirs, however, if it isn't notable, nobody would see it because nobody would bother searching for it. Since the main "Mods" page would be uneditable except by people who actually know what was notable or not, it would remove the entire issue. The only way somebody could find a vanity article would be the random article or the search dialog.

However, placing vanity mod articles on user pages seems to be a perfectly fine compromise. We're a community, not an encyclopedia, and personally I have a large number of problems with the way Wikipedia is run in general, and don't see why we have to emulate them. -Mystic 08:59, 12 December 2007 (PST)

Good sentiments. --Digiku talk 09:49, 12 December 2007 (PST)

People can post info on their mod on their own user page. That's where the vanity section belongs. Now as for people finding it? Make an article that shows a list of all the user pages. Explain that many mods can be found there. The Wiki, in my view, is meant to be a tutorial, SRB2 history, and information collection. The user pages can be used for advertisements. Elsewhere on the Wiki looks out of place and thus unacceptable. –SonicMaster 12:08, 12 December 2007 (PST)

EDIT: Wait, shouldn't all the user pages be looked through, in case some of them are in bad taste and weren't noticed?SonicMaster 13:18, 12 December 2007 (PST)

Sure, but remember that we already do that. We look through Recent Changes already, which includes user pages, so there'd be no difference. ;) --Digiku talk 13:59, 12 December 2007 (PST)

SonicMaster, regarding your idea on a userlist, the wiki already has that. ~ Blue Warrior talk contrib 17:36, 12 December 2007 (PST)

Sweet. But not everyone knows this...hmm...oh, well, I feel like I'm not going to have anything more useful to say regarding Wiki-mentioned mods. –SonicMaster 20:13, 12 December 2007 (PST)

Don't worry about it. The only thing we need to do now is execute it. I just have to find the time to do so. :P --Digiku talk 21:47, 12 December 2007 (PST)