This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Godwiki Guidebook/sandbox article.
Feel free to add new topics that you feel are necessary for the guidebook.
✅ = completed ❌ = take a stab at it!
- Replying on a talk page ✅
- How to indent and outdent a comment✅
- Using the tqb and tqi and talkback templates✅
- red links❌
- How to get help
- Links to Help:Requests and wiki forum thread
- How to add pictures to an article Pictures❌
Some codes / templates
- New message notification:
Thought this might be useful for the page content. Copied from https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/New_messages_notification It should automatically change its appearance based on what skin the user is using. Try viewing this page using different skins to see the difference.
I am creating this page so that a dynamic list can be created for all the things that should be included in the new guidebook. There are two lists. The first list is for topics that are not yet covered in the godwiki guidebook or creators manual. The second list is for topics that already exist, but need to be rewritten (read: dumbed down). The idea is to rewrite the guidebook as a clear tour and guide to the first time users of the wiki. If you are adding to the list of existing articles, please include a link to the original. If it is a topic on a page, you can link to the specific topic on the page by appending a "#" followed by the name of the topic to the end of the page name. For example, to link to Lists in the Creators Manual you would type [[Creators Manual#Lists]]. Please note, it is important to write the name of the page and topic exactly as it appears on the page you wish to link, even the capitalization is important. Thanks all! --His portliness (talk) 19:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- So far looks good. I wonder if in the end we'll need pictures to dumb it down even more but that's a later discussion. -- WardPhoenix (talk) 23:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- I suggest adding pictures to illustrate the instructions. Granted, the written instructions here are already short and easy to understand but some people are visual learners who learn better with pictures. There's also the case that someone who may be looking for something specific or someone who doesn't have much time to read will tend to skim past most text. Having pictures would give these people the instructions they need without them having to read anything. While I pretty much read anything and everything I come across, I am also all of the people I mentioned so this might be more a personal preference. My problem with reading MediaWiki or Wikipedia editing help pages is that there's too much text to read through, few examples in the page and no picture to illustrate how it looks like. Most times, I have to take the plunge and just do the thing while praying I'm doing it right. This is uncomfortable and people don't like uncomfortable stuff. I also have the privilege of having had studied a bit of programming and front-end stuff so I can mostly get the gist of some of the more technical stuff. This is not the case for some people. --Zoombie (talk) 07:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
I did an
interrogation impromptu interview with a couple of people I've interacted with in my friends list. I'll present what I've found below if it will help with this page. (If it doesn't just remove this.) The people I've interviewed are all relatively new. One has been in the game about a month longer than me. Another is someone who is newer than me by about a week. For reference, I have been in the game for a month and a day as of time of writing. I'll just combine their answers into one to save space.
- Q: Why do you go to GW? A: To find answers about game mechanics and things like monsters, equipment, artifacts, guilds, and what else to do. Also, to read more about the lore to either entertain me or to help in writing my chronicle. (Zoombie says: My main reason for visiting GW is crosswords.)
- Q: What was your first impression of GW? A: It was confusing and intimidating because there was just too much info on the Main Page. It was just a bunch of small blue link texts. The new redesign really helped it look more friendly. It also made things look more organized and easier to read. The icons were cute too. (Zoombie says: I think the fact that the categories/buttons on the Main Page are now farther apart and the larger text contributes to this friendlier and more organized feeling so kudos to you guys who developed the new design.)
- Q: Do you contribute or want to contribute to the wiki? Why? A: I'd love to contribute but I really don't know how and I don't have the time to think up things or the confidence in my ideas.
- Q: Do you know how to seek help about the wiki? A: One answered that they don't know how to ask for help on wiki stuff. One answered that they know they can ask for help in the forums or in their guild chat. --Zoombie (talk) 07:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
One answered that they don't know how to ask for help on wiki stuff. One answered that they know they can ask for help in the forums or in their guild chat
- Damn, you are saying that the big "? Ask for Help" is still not enough ? *sad noises*. UX is so hard (especially when user don't give feedback) so thanks for giving us feedback. Looks like we'll need to add the how to get help on this page. -- WardPhoenix (talk) 09:19, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah. They never mentioned anything about getting help in the wiki itself. Maybe put the "? Ask for Help" as the first item in the list. Right now, it's the last item in that part so it's not that noticeable. My eyes rarely go to that part of the Main Page when I look at it on the desktop. Usually, I just look at the left-most items because that's mostly where the things I need are for crossword. -- Zoombie (talk) 12:36, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
I think indents are pretty important. We use it all the time. Along with outdenting and talk quotes.
Should I explain how to indent a comment, or is that too much info for a beginners guide?
I don't really use this so I can't comment much on this. I use Recent changes more because the traffic here is really low and I check everyday anyway.
- Another suggestion: Can we do something about going overboard with bolding names in a page? This is painful to read. And it's not the only page I've seen with so many bold words. To be fair, those seem to be old articles. I've been slowly going over pages to populate a list which I will explain below.
- This is slightly related but not really and I feel like an idiot for doing this but I am putting up a list of pages that need some minor editing fixes here. My hope is that this can be used as a jumping off point for new editors to try their hands on wiki stuff and learning how to format and use templates in a very hands-on manner. (Obviously, this will not happen now because there's really no one here right now. But maybe in the future this can happen alongside a mentorship program thing to help along newbies. If we're all still here. If that future actually comes. Of course, if we end up going through everything on the list and fix them, there will be nothing for future newbies to try their hands on. Which is really not a bad thing.) Most fixes are minor so the list could be useful for teaching newbies how to format and edit things in the wiki and give them some real hands-on experience on those things. At the very least, this would help current editors to know which pages still need some tidying up. A lot of articles fall through the cracks, especially old ones. Having a list of pages that need fixes would alleviate having to crawl through the whole wiki to fix things and we'd only have to chase after newly made and recently changed pages. -- Zoombie (talk) 14:05, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
I suggest breaking up the 'Editing a talk page' section into 'Creating a new topic' and 'Replying to a topic' so we don't end up with a wall of text. Then indenting, outdenting, and using the tqb, tqi and talkback templates can be subsections under 'Replying to a topic'. I'll try to come up with sentences when my brain starts cooperating with me again. -- Zoombie (talk) 15:02, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Separate pages instead of one page
I was thinking if breaking down the whole Guidebook into separate short pages and having a single hub to house those articles similar to how Guidelines currently is structured with either a navbox or a "previous page" "next page" navigation links at the bottom would be better. This would avoid having a wall of text, help people find only what they are specifically looking for without them having to scroll through texts (I suppose the TOC is made for this purpose but it doesn't show up on mobile iirc), and organize content into specific topics so we can be more comprehensive in those topics. Like, we can put stuff for advanced users like how to edit a template for a single page using subst in the templates page, how to put up a gallery of images in the images page, etc. So formatting is a separate page, templates is a separate page, images is a separate page (I can help a bit with image compliance if we're gonna add a section about that. I know a bit about avoiding license issues with images.), talk pages/discussions is a separate page. -- Zoombie (talk) 07:12, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- I am pretty sure there was a similar question on another topic once on GodWiki, but I can't find where it was or what it was about
(or maybe it was just me talking with myself in my mind, I wouldn't put that out of question). Anyway, the answer is to search on UX side (again) and mobile-internet performance.
- UX-wise, having an index is probably the best, with a link in each articles to come back to the index. Though some people don't like having to jumps on many links to reach an information so we have to be careful not going full Inception there.
- There could be an index referring to either sections or full pages of actual Godwiki Guidelines whatever we choose one-pages or as-many-pages-we-can. (Maybe the same kind of index that main page or Category:Gameplay).
- Performance-wise, most of the Godwiki traffic is mobile, and there was already some notice about the Omnibus List being difficult to charge, so technically having lighter page help charging faster.
- BUT, having more pages to consult also means you'll have to load more page, which can be difficult as well for some connections.
- I don't know which one is worse for slow connections
- TL:DR, well I don't know exactly which solution is the best, though a proper index could probably be nice and this could actually be the Guidebook's job (considering that one is on the sidebar that would be a smart move I think), with current Sandbox content end-up as a "Begginer Creators Manual" or whatever many pages we want it to be. --WardPhoenix (talk) 17:25, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- That looks nice! 😃 It has every guideline/manual topic in it.
- UX-wise, I think that's the purpose of having a navbox at the bottom of the page. It directly points to the other pages related to the current page without having to go back to a central nexus/hub so that things don't go full Inception. It's sort of the counterpart of the TOC except for multiple pages instead of multiple sections. If, say, I am browsing through strong monster articles, I would probably get fed up if I have to return to an index everytime to find the next article. The navbox at the bottom ensures that I don't have to go through that while still getting what I want. Bonus points for also letting me choose the next article since they are all listed.
- The central nexus/hub still has its place though. It's a good starting point/jumping off point when coming from the Main Page, just like what you did with the Gameplay category. It's easier to see now what kind of topics are in there. Plus the central nexus/hub can still be used even if we go one-page-contains-all instead of multiple pages. It can serve as a sort of replacement for TOC on mobile except it's contained in a different page.
- I agree with the loading time issue. I think I may know a way to check the loading time for a page. I'll come back with data if I manage to do it. -- Zoombie (talk) 13:12, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
I got some data on page loading speed. I posted some data here about how the Omnibus List loads on various speed settings. I'll concentrate on Slow 3G speeds here instead of going through other speed settings for the sake of brevity and because the lowest speed setting is the one that really matters.
On average at Slow 3G speed, the current Creators_Manual takes around 4-5s as shown here. Though it can go up to 7s as per Google PageSpeed Insights here. I found a bare monster page called Orangutank and looked at the page loading speed. It takes about the same time as shown here. And Google PageSpeed Insights says it can take as long as around 6s as indicated here. The index for the guidebook also loads at about the same speed as shown here and here. As does this current sandbox as shown here and here.
The difference really is how much data is being transferred. The current Creator's Manual currently weighs at 14.8kb. Orangutank is at 7.3kb. The index is at 6.5kb. And this sandbox currently is at 6.5kb. For reference, the Omnibus is at 66.5kb. And that's only the text part of the html. The images add a lot more kb depending on image sizes though it looks like images and some elements are cached.-- Zoombie (talk) 11:30, 6 March 2021 (UTC)