Talk:WikiBound

Archive
WikiBound/Archive 1

This is the central talk page of WikiBound. Leave any questions or comments about the wiki in a new section below this message.

Proposal to do a major overhaul of items

For the longest time the way this wiki handles items is to do a "List of X items in (game)", where all the items in the category are on one page in a list. I assume because most items don't need large pages is why we did this, else they'd end up looking barron like EarthBound Wikia's. I personally don't think this was the best approach, because what it does from a readers' perspective is instead make it more convoluted if you're trying to look up a specific item, as you're instead forced to read through a large list of items just to find what the one you're looking for, and with huge lists like List of recovery items in EarthBound it makes it exceptionally annoying and difficult for people with slow computers (Why look through a list of 20+ recovery items just to find "Brain food lunch" instead of just being able to find it one click away?).

It also raises concerns for mobile users due to the horizontal scrolling required when viewing the tables. I have asked people outside the wiki just for curiosity, and they believe that having individual pages would be the better approach.

So I am officially proposing to split all items into individual pages. There will be case-by-case exceptions, however:

• Certain items are part of a "set" like baseball bats, similarly named items with similar effects will be covered on the same page, for example "Double burger" will be covered on a general "Hamburger" article, as it's simply a better version of the plain hamburger so no reason to cover it seperately.
• Some items have different names but identical effects, such as "Vial of serum" and "Antidote". Because both items cure poison they will be covered collectively on the same article.
• On cases where items have different effects but similar names, they will be covered seperately, for example "Magic herb" is an HP restoring item while "Refreshing herb" and "Secret herb" are status curing items. As they are different types of items it will be misleading to cover them on a general "Herb" page.

This is something I've been wanting to propose for a long time but haven't gotten around to due to my flucuating schedule. Since I'm going to be activly on here for at least the next couple months I'll be able to do some of the major work on this project. I am hoping to get some opinions on this matter so please share you're opinion if able to.

EDIT: I have also made an example page on what an individual item article will look like here, it is rather short but by comparison to recurring items throughout the series this can serve as an example of the minimum content in a page if this were to pass. And to clarify the lists qre staying, instead their purpose will be to serve as a disambiguation page. --OmegɑToɑd64 03:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Bump, would like to see some movement on this. --OmegɑToɑd64 12:37, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

It's been nearly a month without any movement (don't know what I expected from a dead wiki). After giving it some thought, considering the fact of how inactive it is here to where there likely won't be any movement let alone opposition, combined with Tacopill being mostly hands-off with my decisions, I will give this one final bump. And should there be no opposition by the one month mark I will begin this project unless there is a legitimate major oppose. Since most readers believed that individual pages is for the better then that should be a good enough reason to pass this. --OmegɑToɑd64 13:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

2024 Changes

In January 2024, I'm going to be starting a grifkuba-wide effort to revise many of the skins on wikis that we host. If you would like to be part of the conversation, please join us on the grifkuba discord server. Tacopill (talk) 23:34, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Indie Wiki Jam

I'm helping put together a edit jam for January.

Please see here for more info:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_nBN651Lh30Dd9e11YJUj0MahT-Q9PPSrdU26z_gwgk/edit?usp=sharing.

Tacopill (talk) 17:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Fan community namespace

Years ago we had the idea to expand our coverage to fan projects, I was in support of it back then and still am now, however it didn't get far. Furthermore I didn't push it as I realized we had a lot of stuff to catch up on for the official games. Now, our articles are in a much better state compared to before so I think it's worth going back to this.

The reasons the same as before: we can expand our coverage and bring in more editors. EarthBound is known for it's dedicated community to the point where even Wikipedia has an article on the fandom, and stuff like this would be a popular subject. And being an EarthBound wiki it feels off to not at least acknowledge dedicated community (outside of small mentions like how we say "EarthBound has a dedicated following" on several pages). It can also give us an edge over other wikis like EarthBound Wikia, as (to my knowledge) there aren't any other places that cover the fan community in wiki format, giving us more exposure. This will mean we're heading into unofficial territory, but this wiki isn't official and shouldn't be a problem, plus this can be similar to how SmashWiki has articles on competitive play, something that is not officially endorsed by Nintendo.

I will, however, express the concern that allowing coverage on fan projects can open the floodgates to covering all sorts of content regardless of quality and relevance. A few guidelines I propose, with more that should come, are the following:

• Relevance: An obvious one, but the content must be directly related to EarthBound; stuff like indie EarthBound-inspired games like Undertale or Oddity are out of the question for coverage.
• Notability: The project must have some recognition in the community. Something like Mother: 25th Anniversary Edition would be appropriate, a small niche ROM hack of an EarthBound game is not.

I would like to see what others think so please leave your thoughts, as well as suggest guidelines for making sure the content we cover is up to standards. --Ultimate Toad 02:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Huge Mistake

"Since it's launch in 2010". Seriously!? Two sentences to reach an error. It should be "Since its launch", not "it's". I can't edit the page though, so thanks to someone who can fix this. ButterCashier (talk) 12:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Fixed up, can do without the snark next time as it is a common mistake. --Ultimate Toad 23:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)