User talk:Qwer Stoneghost

Greetings and Core Page Edits

o/.

Drebin 679 here, one of the curators. You've been putting a lot of work into the wiki as of late, which is greatly appreciated. The Game Settings page in particular was one that I hadn't been aware that this wiki was missing and also ought to have.

You have been working on a lot of core game mechanics pages, and there I am a bit more iffy on the changes that have been made.

• While I appreciate the spirit of the addition of sample fits in the Tanking page to explain what a tanked ship would look like, I'm unsure if mixing them in the way they are is the best way for people to get tanking info. As is, the page is already fairly long, and the fits are listed before the respective tank modules are. Perhaps putting all of them in their own section in the bottom?
  • Also unsure if you're aware, since wikifits got dunked back in July, but the UniWiki has its own template for listing fits, Template:ShipFitting. It can be used in lieu of linking EWB fits (the linked Maller is active tanked, while the listed one is passive), and tailored exactly to what you actually want the fit to be. A bit of a pain to work with without Hirmuolio's template creator tool, admittedly.
• In the Weapons overview page, I'm unsure of the choice to include EWar, cap warfare, and tackle, which while offensive, do no damage whatsoever. I guess it makes sense, but I'm getting twirled by tradition at the moment. By the same nature, Entropic Disintegrators, Vorton Projectors, Smartbombs, and Bombs all lack representation in the current page. I'd like to first like to get a feel for what should and shouldn't be in the page before making any edits on top of yours, though.
• While I can get moving Scanning to be a generic scanning page, it does create a lot of baggage due to all of the pages that have linked to it, expecting it to be the "probe scanning page". As of the time of writing, dozens of pages link there, and unless you want to change each and every one of those redirects, I am reticent on keeping this setup. It also misses ship and cargo scanning, which admittedly is fine, considering the wiki has no page on them at all.
• The prose used does gloss over some intricacies or specifics in places:
  • The weapons page simply notes that energy and hybrid turrets deal two types of damage, but outside of dev ammo both are also damage locked.
  • The drone page suggests that drones of each faction only deal one type of damage. While true for regular drones, 'Integrated' and 'Augmented' drones deal two.
  • The weapons page summarizes missiles, in part, as "soooo slow". While torpedos certainly are, frigate-sized missile launchers, and any Mordu's Legion ship lob missiles at a speed I would consider quite fast. Also, whether a turret "misses a lot" really depends on the situation, and I'm not comfortable giving a blanket statement like that.
• While not harmful by any means, making a lot of small edits does make page history harder to read compared to fewer, larger edits. The drone page changes took 55 edits.

Oh, and User:Noemie belacqua hasn't made an edit to the wiki for over three years. We stand on shoulders of giants, metaphorically speaking, with much of the heavy lifting done by those who are no longer active either in the wiki or in this game. As a consequence, many of the problems that existed back, say, in 2017, still exist today.

Now, I complained a lot, but I know your heart's in the right place, and that you clearly have the acumen to make good pages. I'd recommend getting hooked up with other wiki editors when you want to make major structural changes to pages, to give peer review before they go live. The Wiki subforum, #wiki channel on Discord, and talk pages are all ways to request feedback. We haven't had the largest wiki team for quite a while, but the pace has stepped up this year, and with your help, we can get through them.

Best regards. Drebin 679 (talk) 07:27, 22 November 2020 (UTC)