Grand Theft Wiki talk:Titles: Difference between revisions

::In [[GTA Vice City]]...

[[Freeways in GTA IV]] was once called [[Freeways in the GTA IV rendition of Liberty City]], which moved to [[Freeways in Liberty City in GTA IV]], which a few days later I compressed to [[Freeways in GTA IV]]. I was thinking that Freeways in GTA IV would be much easier to find, and we all know that [[GTA IV]] takes place in [[Liberty City in GTA IV|Liberty City]] (anyone who wants to know about the freeways anyway). I noticed however that your the one that made [[Bridges in Liberty City in GTA IV]], meaning that you have a reason for mentioning Liberty City? I think that one of them needs to be moved for consistency, but which one? Oh, and sorry for having one huge post and taking up all the space on your talk page again. '''[[user:Biggest gta fan ever|Biggest GTA Fan Ever]]^{''[[user talk:Biggest gta fan ever|Talk]]''}''' 05:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

:The reason for all that is because [[Liberty City]] is a place, and [[GTA III]] is a game - things to do with the place should be part of the place as much as possible. However, if Rockstar keep re-using cities, they're ''all'' going to have to be moved to the game's name. And I also don't like having different styles for different games (not that anyone would notice). So should we move to use "in GTA IV" for everything, instead of the city names? Or should we stick with using the best option, and using the 2nd best if that one is impossible, and using 3rd best if that one is impossible? [[w:c:gta:User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] ^{[[:w:c:gta:User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]} 05:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

::Firstly, your example, there is a subway in every Liberty City. Secondly, going by the current policy, we can't have [[Bridges in Liberty City]]  because there are bridges in EVERY GTA game. As for the policy change, it's something that might have to be discussed, because although mentioning the place would be the absolute correct way (there are bridges in Liberty City which is in GTA IV/It would be best to place them in the city rather than the game in the name), but as the cities get re-used, we're going to find large amounts of inconsistency with the current '''best, or second best, or third best, etc.'''. For example, [[GTA San Andreas]] can have (almost) everything under the place name, games that take place in [[Vice City]] are half way there (same city in [[GTA Vice City]] and [[GTA Vice City Stories]]/and apart from [[GTA 1]] that's the only rendition) but Liberty City? With two completeley different (3D) renditions, and one of them being used twice, it's almost always [[Bridges in Liberty City in GTA III Era]] or [[Bridges in Liberty City in GTA IV]]. That's one thing you mentioned is that you don't like different formatting accross games, which is being done, and thinking about the future, what if there is another Vice City and San Andreas?

::A move to game name would ensure that it was kept consistent, however, what about the Liberty City in the GTA III Era. We couldn't have [[Bridges in GTA III]] because the same bridges are featured in [[GTA Liberty City Stories]]. This is why discussion is needed on the topic, does anyone have any ideas? '''[[user:Biggest gta fan ever|Biggest GTA Fan Ever]]^{''[[user talk:Biggest gta fan ever|Talk]]''}''' 06:35, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

::Almost entirely agreed. The only problem is, relying on game name, what happens to the bridges in Vice City? We can't use [[Bridges in GTA Vice City]] because the same city (and same bridges) appears in [[GTA Vice City Stories]]. I think that this is another reason why (in the past) #1 would have been best, but with a move to #2 being an almost important change for consistency while keeping page names short, what would we do in this case? '''[[user:Biggest gta fan ever|Biggest GTA Fan Ever]]^{''[[user talk:Biggest gta fan ever|Talk]]''}''' 04:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

:::Wait, in that case, it would become [[Bridges in Liberty City]] (because of [[GTA III]] and [[GTA Liberty City Stories]] having the same affect of the Vice City games), defeating the purpose of the policy change because of Liberty City in GTA IV. So I think use [[Bridges in GTA III]] or [[Bridges in GTA Vice City]] and have [[Bridges in GTA Liberty City Stories]] and [[Bridges in GTA Vice City Stories]] (respectively) link back there. GTA III and GTA VC being the prominent games. Thoughts? '''[[user:Biggest gta fan ever|Biggest GTA Fan Ever]]^{''[[user talk:Biggest gta fan ever|Talk]]''}''' 05:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Similar to one of the problems above, I have been seeing edits like [http://gta.wikia.com/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 [[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]]^{''[[User talk:Biggest gta fan ever|Talk]]''}''' 02:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

:I think [[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]] ^{[[:w:c:gta:User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]} 13:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

::I think having really long names can be very awkward, particularly when looking at the code. For example, names like [[:File:Pony (GTASA) (Life's a Beach) (rear quarter).jpg]] or [[:File:Yakuza Stinger (GTALCS) (rear).jpg]] are long and confusing, when looking at code. The names themselves provide clarity, but it's not hard to find out what an image shows (as generally it will be showing on the page). I think it would be hardest for inexperienced people who see <code><nowiki>[[File:Pony (GTASA) (Life's a Beach) (rear quarter).jpg|thumb|250|A [[pony]] in [[GTA SA]]]]</nowiki></code> and have NO idea which bits to copy, which bits to change. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone tries to ''guess'' image names, so they don't need to be THAT consistent? I think keeping image names simpler (without loads of spaces and brackets) would help make things easier for everyone. How about a format like [[:File:Pony-GTASA.jpg]], which uses no confusing spaces or brackets. Extra images (such as rear) could be simply added on like [[:File:Pony-GTASA-rear.jpg]]. I think that makes everything more obvious? [[User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] ^{[[User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]} 18:42, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I just thought it was a little silly insisting on IV on the wiki and 4 on images. But if you genuinely think that <code><nowiki>[[File:Pony-GTA4-rear.jpg|thumb|250|A [[pony]] in [[GTA IV]]]]</nowiki></code> is significantly easier to read than <code><nowiki>[[File:Pony-GTAIV-rear.jpg|thumb|250|A [[pony]] in [[GTA IV]]]]</nowiki></code>, then I'll trust your judgement. Anyone else got any comments before we proceed? [[User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] ^{[[User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]} 12:24, January 22, 2010 (UTC)