Talk:Vice City in GTA III Era

From Grand Theft Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Yes, Eganio is right. The texts are almost everywhere identical. Zaibatsu 19:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, now I'm not so looks like we're doing the same for every location. See Liberty City in GTA III and Liberty City in GTA Liberty City Stories. However, there is no Vice City in GTA Vice City Stories article. To me, the names get a little cumbersome, but I suppose it's a good idea to separate things if there's enough disparate information between game versions of a particular location to justify separate articles. I remain a little unconvinced, because, as Zaibatsu mentioned, the information looks identical, but I am loathe to challenge consensus. EganioTalk 21:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
You're half-right, we should be as specific as we can be. However, articles about Vice City in GTA VC and GTA VCS are going to be pretty much the same, except with a few specific differences. It isn't like its a totally separate city, it is 1 city which changes over time. Liberty City changes totally from GTA III to GTA IV, which is why we need to keep the articles always separate. The other thing you've forgotten is that Vice City in the GTA III era (VC and VCS combined) is much more prominent than in GTA 1. So we can have the main article Vice City being just about the GTA III era, explaining what the city is like, with a section explaining the differences between VC and VCS, but also with a link to Vice City in GTA 1. In short, you can put this page on Vice City, and move the less-used GTA 1 version to a different (specific) page. Gboyers talk 22:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I see your point. So, how was this decided, and what sort of guidelines should be followed when considering this sort of thing? It seems to me that having articles such as Liberty City in GTA Liberty City Stories is a bit unnecessary, since between GTA III and GTA Liberty City Stories, Liberty City hasn't changed at all, except for a few minor differences. EganioTalk 22:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
This article really requires images in order to make more sense. Otherwise, without images, it would'nt make any sense at all. MetaCracken 23:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
MetaCracken, please indent your text when replying thanks :) Uhmm, why is this article named as such? I wasn't aware of a Vice City in the GTAIV era? Ess-Tee 09:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Ahh, excuse that post, forgot about the GTA Vice City. Ess-Tee 09:57, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

smaller island sercuity are pigs

you forgot to mention that the sercuity forces in the smaller islands section are a gang called pig. If you don't believe me they is evidence for example have you ever seen a cop give chase to a pig. They fight with other gang. user--Stephendwan 21:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

you mean the Mall cops? which for some reason the Police see as criminals xD Zachariah Zuan 10:06, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Too many pictures

In the About the City section there is way too many pictures. For people with smaller computer screens it would look like their pics are on top of each other... Making the page look quite cluttered. Steahl (talk) 22:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I personally do not think the number of images should decrease, it is more about the layout of images. For the majority of thumbnail images, a gallery is an easy, suitable solution to arrange them as the images appear as much smaller, organised thumbnail rather than large, 'lost' thumbnails scattered all over the article. The gallery images can still be easily referenced to their particular section of the article as they still provide a caption. A gallery can easily be done- Montario (talk) 23:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Sorry that I made it sound like we should delete the pics. I think we should look for a solution, either we reduce the size of the pics or we place them in a Gallery as you suggested. But I think with the wiki's policy we should discuss it more? Steahl (talk) 23:22, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
You are right, however I don't think reducing the size of images will help that much. It is the actual amount and layout of the images which is making the article seem cluttered. How about moving all the thumbnails of districts (i.e. Prawn Island, Little Haiti) to a gallery near the bottom of the page as they are the largest group of images, occupying a lot of space. We could then take your idea of re-sizing images and slightly reduce the sizes of the rest of the pictures to see if it makes any additional positive impact as well. What is your thought on this?--Montario (talk) 16:41, 6 February 2012 (UTC)