Talk:Haulers

Work in progress box

The work in progress box is now already there for over 3 months. The supposed discussion on discord nearly as long ago. Any results in that regard? Erwin Madelung (talk) 07:47, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Not really, Arin left it up to me. But I am still thinking about it. Did you read the Discord convo? And may I ask for your opinion> --Evon R'al (talk) 11:08, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

I can confirm that I left this up to Evon. Arin Mara (talk) 06:28, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

> Did you read the Discord convo?

I have not because I'm not on that discord server.

> And may I ask for your opinion>

In general, you don't want to go against CCP's definitions of ship groupings. But CCP's grouping isn't aimed to be the best grouping to be presented on a wiki. CCP gives the ships a group but also organizes them in market groups.

The groups are:

* Hauler

* Blockade Runner

* Deep Space Transport

* Freighter

* Jump Freighter

The hauler group also contains the Noctis and Primae which don't really fit in there for the wiki's purposes.

The market groups are:

* Standard Haulers (which is the same as the hauler group above except that it doesn't contain the Primae which is in special edition ships)

* Advanced Hauler, the advanced signals that it's T2 ships. This has the subgroup Transport Ships which signals that they all require the Transport ship skill. (This is CCP's general schema for market groups.)

Those two groups are together in a group named "Haulers and Industrial Ships" with Industrial Command Ships. This makes no sense for CCP and even less for a wiki page.

* Freighters are an independent market group under Capitals

* Jump Freighters, same as Freighters

So those are the ship groupings by CCP. Further you have to see the page(s) in the greater context of the wiki as there is also a page Hauling. I would change the current page into "Standard Haulers" being about those. I would mention both Noctis and Primae but not treat them any further. "Standard Haulers" because "Haulers" would always implicitly mean any ship when for hauling, even a Sunesis. Create a new page for Deep Space Transports and Freighters. Pages for Blockade Runners and Jump Freighters already exist. Tie all those pages together with Hauling. Hauling already duplicates a lot this page here (Industrials). Also obviously move the comparison table and graphic to Hauling. Erwin Madelung (talk) 18:23, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

It has been another month. If no edit happens, I'll remove the work in progress box. Erwin Madelung (talk) 06:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Section/article titles, singular or plural?

This topic is in reaction to Erwin Madelung edit summary for this edit.
I do not agree that article and section headers should be plural. The Manual of Style and these Wikipedia articles, Article titles and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals) indicate that titles should be singular, unless ...
There is a somewhat "technical" reason for this. Singular title make the link end trick possible. The link end trick makes it possible to make a link to an article or section, displaing a plural, without needing the use of a piped link it functions as follows:

Lets take the Vector article to demonstrate. For a link with the visible text singular we put the article name in double square brackets, [[Vexor]] which looks like this Vexor. For a plural displaying link we can simply add an s directly after the closing brackets, [[Vexor]]s giving this Vexors, a plural display that still goes to the singular article.

For more information about links and the link end trick (Word-ending links), see Wikipedia:Help:Links#Internal links

I agree that it was inconsistent at the page but I am always a bit hesitant to change existing titles afraid of breaking incoming links. --Evon R'al (talk) 11:30, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

The manual of style is clear in this regard. More important the whole practice on this wiki is accordingly. This talk page isn't the place to challenge this. Your reason regarding the linking is...

[[Vexor]]s turns into Vexors while [[Vexor|Vexors]] turns into Vexors. I suggest you right click and inspect those links. You'll observe that both are <a href="/Vexor" title="Vexor">Vexors</a> in html. The former only looks prettier when editing and for that it is indeed preferred when you can use it. But suggesting to rename pages to allow this is just... Erwin Madelung (talk) 11:57, 6 July 2022 (UTC)