Grand Theft Wiki talk:Titles: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 126: | Line 126: | ||
==Chinatown Wars== | ==Chinatown Wars== | ||
Similar to one of the problems above, I have been seeing edits like [ | Similar to one of the problems above, I have been seeing edits like [{{SERVER}}/index.php?title=Statue_of_Happiness&diff=next&oldid=93888 this one] to add mention of GTA CW (The Statue of Happiness is a tourist attraction in GTA IV and GTA CW). Seems GTA IV and GTA CW take place in the same city, we are going to get alot of pages about locations saying this. So should it be enough to say ''...in [[Liberty City in GTA IV|Liberty City]] in [[Grand Theft Auto IV|GTA IV]]...'' which automatically means it's in CW (just click the link to LC in IV to find that out), using GTA IV as the game mentioned because like we said above (saying <tt>Bridges in GTA III</tt> even though they are in LCS as well) because GTA IV was the first released (and more prominent game)? As for the fact that Alderney doesn't exist in CW, those pages don't say ''in Liberty City in GTA IV'' because Alderney isn't in Liberty City, the pages simply say ''in Alderney in GTA IV'', so there is no problem with what is/isn't in both. For something that is ''only'' in CW (because CW ''does'' have some of it's own "locations"), it would say ''in Liberty City in GTA CW''. Thoughts? '''[[User:Biggest gta fan ever|Biggest GTA Fan Ever]]<sup>''[[User talk:Biggest gta fan ever|Talk]]''</sup>''' 02:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I think [[Grand Theft Auto: Chiantown Wars|GTA Chinatown Wars]] is part of the [[GTA IV Era]]. So just like we have [[Liberty City in GTA III Era]], we need [[Liberty City in GTA IV Era]]. That includes GTA IV, the DLC, and CW. So the Statue of Happiness is in LC in the IV era, rather than in LC in IV. We have separate pages for [[Liberty City in GTA III]] and [[Liberty City in GTA Liberty City Stories]] only to describe the ''differences''. We mention things are "in GTA III and GTA LCS" quite a lot, and it's never been a problem, but the above is even simpler. That make sense? [[w:c:gta:User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] <sup>[[:w:c:gta:User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]</sup> 13:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC) | :I think [[Grand Theft Auto: Chiantown Wars|GTA Chinatown Wars]] is part of the [[GTA IV Era]]. So just like we have [[Liberty City in GTA III Era]], we need [[Liberty City in GTA IV Era]]. That includes GTA IV, the DLC, and CW. So the Statue of Happiness is in LC in the IV era, rather than in LC in IV. We have separate pages for [[Liberty City in GTA III]] and [[Liberty City in GTA Liberty City Stories]] only to describe the ''differences''. We mention things are "in GTA III and GTA LCS" quite a lot, and it's never been a problem, but the above is even simpler. That make sense? [[w:c:gta:User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] <sup>[[:w:c:gta:User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]</sup> 13:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 135: | Line 135: | ||
== Image names == | == Image names == | ||
I'm in disagreement with the current idea of jumbling all wordings in an image name into one big mess (i.e. [ | I'm in disagreement with the current idea of jumbling all wordings in an image name into one big mess (i.e. [{{SERVER}}/index.php?title=File%3AJonGravelliGTAIV.jpg&diff=151771&oldid=77963] and [{{SERVER}}/index.php?title=File%3AIntroductionGTAIII4.jpg&diff=166824&oldid=133283]). It's less readable, even with capitalisation, and is even difficult to manage when used in large numbers in galleries. Isn't it a point for an image name to provide clarity? What happened to using parenthesis? - [[User:ZS|ZS]] 17:51, January 21, 2010 (UTC) | ||
:In my own opinion there is nothing wrong with the current re-naming of image files and there is no problem in reading the file names. This is also consistant with the names of character files, which was carried out over half a year due to my abscence from Grand Theft Wiki, and there was no criticism of the naming for those file names so I continued to rename files in this fashion. The renaming of images provides greater clarity from a name standpoint and there is no real problem with reading them, again, from my own experience of reading the file names. As for parenthesis, as explained above, there has been a large period of time to criticise this naming style and, as it wasn't taken, I continued to rename images in this fashion. [[User:A-Dust|A-Dust]] 18:09, January 21, 2010 (UTC) | :In my own opinion there is nothing wrong with the current re-naming of image files and there is no problem in reading the file names. This is also consistant with the names of character files, which was carried out over half a year due to my abscence from Grand Theft Wiki, and there was no criticism of the naming for those file names so I continued to rename files in this fashion. The renaming of images provides greater clarity from a name standpoint and there is no real problem with reading them, again, from my own experience of reading the file names. As for parenthesis, as explained above, there has been a large period of time to criticise this naming style and, as it wasn't taken, I continued to rename images in this fashion. [[User:A-Dust|A-Dust]] 18:09, January 21, 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Line 145: | Line 145: | ||
::::Just a note to say that vehicle images could keep the ''rear quarter'' section by adding RQV to the name. As for the images, I can start to change the images and add a hyphen if that is best for everyone. As I said above, I have no problem with it but others may well have. As for image names, as I argued when changing the character images, the policy of consistency should be enforced, otherwise what is the point in having it in the first place? I also have no problems with continuing this. I'd also like to raise the issue of using GTA3 and GTA4 in image names. Surely this should be GTAIII and GTAIV, as that is the name of the game. [[User:A-Dust|A-Dust]] 19:09, January 21, 2010 (UTC) | ::::Just a note to say that vehicle images could keep the ''rear quarter'' section by adding RQV to the name. As for the images, I can start to change the images and add a hyphen if that is best for everyone. As I said above, I have no problem with it but others may well have. As for image names, as I argued when changing the character images, the policy of consistency should be enforced, otherwise what is the point in having it in the first place? I also have no problems with continuing this. I'd also like to raise the issue of using GTA3 and GTA4 in image names. Surely this should be GTAIII and GTAIV, as that is the name of the game. [[User:A-Dust|A-Dust]] 19:09, January 21, 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::::Since when is Roman numerals simpler than Arabic ones? It might be understandable for template names, but given the need to balance simplicity with specification, this may seem more trivial. Anyway, The hyphen format works well (see [[Burrito]] [ | :::::Since when is Roman numerals simpler than Arabic ones? It might be understandable for template names, but given the need to balance simplicity with specification, this may seem more trivial. Anyway, The hyphen format works well (see [[Burrito]] [{{SERVER}}/index.php?title=Burrito&diff=167184&oldid=166587] article) so it should be fair enough. - [[User:ZS|ZS]] 19:22, January 21, 2010 (UTC) | ||
I'll start to change the character and mission file names. And you don't have to move the file names if you don't want to as I'm than willing to continue the project on my own. [[User:A-Dust|A-Dust]] 19:30, January 21, 2010 (UTC) | I'll start to change the character and mission file names. And you don't have to move the file names if you don't want to as I'm than willing to continue the project on my own. [[User:A-Dust|A-Dust]] 19:30, January 21, 2010 (UTC) | ||