Talk:People (style guide)
It is becoming more obvious that we're going to need a more explicit way of dealing with crediting people who have ported other people's games. I get the impression that contributors want to keep porting credits separate from normal author credits; perhaps we want a 'Porting Credits' section? Also, I would really prefer to see ported game references to be in the style of:
- Ported Game Name (porter: Porter's Name; date; ported-platform). Ported from Previous Game Name (authors; date; previous-platform).
-- David Welbourn 20:04, 16 May 2005 (Central Daylight Time)
There's something I don't understand here:
Games that were ported, translated, illustrated, or remade should be listed in the Porting Credits section.
I don't think games that were illustrated by the person should be listed in Porting Credits, if they were never released without graphics! Which section should they be listed in instead? Author Credits, Other credits, or another one?
Also: I think this page should be more precise about which categories the people should be added to (Illustrators, Interviewed, Translators, French, etc.), like in the Games (style guide) page. --Eriorg 11:30, 13 July 2006 (EST)
- Good catch. I think my reasoning went something like 'author credits are one thing I can moreorless clearly understand and can be put in one section, and all the quasi-authorship stuff (which is complicated to think about) goes into another'. So, um, I belatedly propose the creation of a new section called Multimedia Credits which can be used to credit people who have done illustrations, music, sound effects, and animation in IF works that they didn't author in the usually-understood sense. And, I'll try to add something more about categories. It's been a while since I last looked at these style guide pages; I guess they could use a bit of updating. -- David Welbourn 22:12, 13 July 2006 (EST)
- (TODO: Decide how we want to handle graphical adventures. Should we omit them? Have them in a separate section? Merely mark them as Graphical?)
- Short answer: it is not decided yet. What I need to do is first write up a proposed IFWiki:Scope article that sets down where the line in the sand should be drawn with respect to which games are included in IFWiki, and which are not. Graphical games are something of a grey area. Certainly the mere presence of graphics in a game should not bar a game from inclusion, but it doesn't make sense to allow every point-n-click adventure-like game ever written to be included either. Assuming we want to list a game with graphics, however, I think we should merely put "Graphics." after the game ref, just like we used to add "Italian." after an Italian game. I wouldn't separate them from the main list unless we were claiming these were the non-IF games which the author wrote, and in which case, we don't wikilink those particular game titles as well. -- David Welbourn 05:42, 18 September 2006 (EST)
Editing own entries
What is the policy here about editing pages related to things you've worked on? Ralphmerridew 11:40, 21 November 2006 (EST)
- There's not really a formal policy about that. My personal feeling is that you should be able to edit pretty much any page you like as long as you're sane and sensible about it, and at least try to follow the formats we've used previously. In fact, I would encourage authors of games and programs to create or edit those pages about the games and programs they've worked on, if only to get the pages created a bit faster. IFWiki is still a rather young wiki with very few active editors; we can't afford to turn away anyone who wants to help out.
- I'm slightly less enthusiastic about someone editing the People pages about themself; self-promoting a game is one thing. Self-promoting oneself is a bit icky. However, I dislike inaccuracies and misinfomation more, and if you see that a page about yourself is wrong, you should be allowed to fix it. -- David Welbourn 19:16, 21 November 2006 (EST)
Should we then mention in the IFWiki, as far as possible, all the beta-testers of all the games?
If we do want to add these credits:
- Of course, it would only affect the pages about the beta-testers or about the beta-tested games. (It would be very excessive, and almost unreadable, if we listed all the beta-testers of every game in an Author Credits section or in the Games Released in Year pages!). Therefore, People (style guide) and Games (style guide) should be updated, but not Game reference (style guide).
- What would the name of the section be? Tester Credits? Beta-tester Credits? Beta-Testing Credits? Testing Credits?
- Should we create a Beta-testers category, or would it be useless? --Eriorg 10:17, 14 July 2007 (EST)
I think I've been balking at the amount of work that would be involved in listing the testers for every game, and listing the games for every tester... but only because it's a lot of damn work, not for any other reason. I think, if anyone wants to go to the trouble to add tester credits to the appropriate pages, we should let them, with the understanding that it's low priority and completeness is not required or expected.
Um. Because testing can be alpha-testing, beta-testing, and even gamma-testing, I'd opt for an optional Testing Credits section (on people and games pages) and a Testers subcategory for people. Testing credits can be assumed to be beta-testing credits unless explicitly said to be otherwise. Does that work? -- David Welbourn 14:08, 21 July 2007 (EST)
- OK, that seems very good to me. --Eriorg 08:40, 22 July 2007 (EST)
Baf's Guide listings: what now?
The style guide for the "links" section says "The next link listed should be, if available, the Baf's Guide listing for that person." Since Baf's Guide is no longer maintained as far as I can tell, what should we do about the existing Baf's guide links: delete? Point to saved captures at the Internet Archive? And going forward, should the style guide be changed to request a link to the person's IFDB profile instead, or an IFDB search for games they'd authored, or...? bg (talk)