re-organizing content with an eye to the future

[jimmcq]

At some point in the not-too-distant future we need to start thinking about how to organize the Viva Piñata: Party Animals info on the wiki. I've started the List of Minigames in Party Animals, but we need to think about how to keep all this new (and upcoming) info structured.

At the same time, we also need to indicate content that is specific to the existing Xbox 360 game and doesn't necessarily apply to future games. An example of this is the Achievements article... we should probably move that to a new title, and change the general Achievements page to link to it (and achievement lists for other games) but that could wait until we first start to learn about the Party Animals achievements.

[An Insane Guy]

I think that the best thing to do would to make 2 different WIKI sections? Like when you click WIKI, it will re-direct you to a page asking whethre it's for VP:PA or VP, then everything is different.

If not that, then just split up the pages, like you said, and make VP:PA achievements, FAQ, etc and VP Achievements, FAQ, etc.

[FeralKitty]

I definitely agree with splitting up pages like Achievements. Most visitors would be looking for answers related to one game or the other, and this would help keep articles concise.

If VP2 came out, this would be an even larger undertaking, involving broader changes, such as with existing categories. It probably would be a good idea to factor that in to any rename/reorg changes within the various (e.g. category) namespaces.

As for page titles, I'm not a fan of excessively long titles, especially as they tend to regularly be directly linked from many forum articles. We can certainly setup "shorter" redirects (e.g. "Party Animals Achievements"), though, so that's an insignificant issue.

The nav bar would take a bit of thought. An important design issue would be for a consistent top/left menu, regardless of what page you're on. Underneath that, we could probably then add context-specific links, depending on the article.

Anyway, I've needed a new wiki project, so I'm happy to help with this one, and investigate options. I want to take a look at how larger wikis handle this, and what we could adopt or reuse, then try some ideas out and see how they might look.

Edit: Can we designate a Talk page where people who are interested in this can collaborate?

[Spartan]

Hey, FeralKitty you're not taking this project alone, FYI I've been working on it since this morning. :p :p

I've got a better understanding of the wiki now so I'll be more of a help and less of a headache. :)

[FeralKitty]

At some point I'll move this to a Talk page, but I just want to jot down some random thoughts while they're on my mind.

The reorg should support future new games on multiple platforms, so we don't have to redo a reorg down the road. So, although some of these may never come out, we should factor in future possibilities like VP2, VP2W, and PAW, as well as the current/announced VP, VPW, and PA.

We also have things like the TV show, Merchandise, and community portal, which aren't games, but need to fit in too, in the new reorg, navigation, and site map.

A single game on both Windows and Xbox 360 would have many common articles that apply to both platforms. There may be a few articles that are unique to either the Xbox 360 or Windows platform. Do we:

put the common articles in a VP supercategory and the unique articles in a VP (i.e. Xbox) or VPW category, or
put the common articles in both VP and VPW categories, and the unique articles in the either respective category.We'll have to think through button-press templates and such. Do we want to have 2 or more buttons listed (to cover the different platforms) every time we display a key sequence? Also, some sequences get a bit wordy (i.e. left mouse button). Do we want to keep these inline to the sentence, or move them out of the sentence into some sort of keystroke box (similar to what the FAQ does now)?

Since most visitors land at an arbitrary page, via a search engine, how do we supply them with helpful (topic/navigational -- i.e. this page relates to PA) context, and where should the context appear (i.e. at the top of the article content area, or above the content area?) Do we want topic/navigational context? Also, how much do we put in the page title? Tough to balance out search engine strategies vs. humans, readability, optimum length, etc. but something to think through since pages will get new, uniform titles. Do we even have access to meta tags on an article's page?

Do we want to use any other uniform cues, such as specific bg colors, bg images, or images in general, to help identify which page they've reached?

In other words, as a general example, if someone searches for "Fergy Fudgehog," they could end up on a different TV page, merchandise page, or on a VP, VPW, or PA article/species page. My point is if they're looking for PA answers and end up on a VP page, it should be obvious where they are, and how to get around.

And then there's the big question for me. How do we make it easier for visitors to find answers, with even more games and FAQs in our future? Just PA itself will add an entire series of new questions. The FAQ seems incredibly long, which is why I moved to the MiniFAQ to make questions more "visible" in a specific context. (If the answers are already there on the wiki, but people don't see/read them, it's not too helpful.)

Another "project" I had been thinking about possibly doing at some point was a Troubleshooter-ish applet kind of thing, where you click down through questions, to hopefully find specific answers to your problem. Not quite relevant to the reorg but something to factor in.

There are plenty of pros and cons that we can discuss for each of these. Right now, I just wanted to get these questions/topics down on paper.

[Spartan]

It sounds solid, but I can't think it all through right now. So basically we need to keep the PA content from tangling with the existing VP content and up with a system to keep it from happening in the future... I see no problem by putting some of this in the thread.

I think that VPW won't be much of a hassle as long as there isn't too much new content. If any.... we'd need to entail any signifgant changes to the game in it's page, but categories will stay the same. If there is a few pieces of new content, could we all collect it into one category of "VPW New Content"? Or is there need for intricate detail?

VP:PA and VP2 is were it gets tricky, not even considering other things that might get thrown our way. I take it that categorizing each aspect would be too cubersome and not adequate... Help me out here, where are you going here?

[FeralKitty]

With a fourth announced game (and third platform), one thing I want to avoid is multiple copies of articles that diverge from each other. (E.g. say we have several games that support Trading, but with their own platform nuances, UI, whatever.) My inclination right now is to lean towards common (single) articles. I'll have to see how we could differentiate platform information within a common article.

I'm not sure if we want some sort of dynamic "filtering" or not. I could see how someone on platform X might not need or want to see details that pertain to platform Y or Z.

Anyway, I'm just using this thread as a talk page. Comments, suggestions, criticisms welcome.

[Spartan]

So lets say that VP: X360 has a trading system and so does VP: DS. However they have different UI, etc. So we would have ONE page dedicated to trading that covers BOTH forms of trading? Is that what you are suggesting?

[LiveSlappNutz]

With a fourth announced game (and third platform), one thing I want to avoid is multiple copies of articles that diverge from each other. (E.g. say we have several games that support Trading, but with their own platform nuances, UI, whatever.) My inclination right now is to lean towards common (single) articles. I'll have to see how we could differentiate platform information within a common article.

I'm not sure if we want some sort of dynamic "filtering" or not. I could see how someone on platform X might not need or want to see details that pertain to platform Y or Z.

Anyway, I'm just using this thread as a talk page. Comments, suggestions, criticisms welcome.

Couldn't you just have one page labeled trading (like now) and then have the different platforms listed separately on that page? Then everyone would still go to the same page but then either click on the platform or scroll down to the platform. Maybe that wouldn't work but from my lowly standpoint :), I would think that would be the easiest on both the user and the person organizing the Wiki.

~LSN~

[Kawigi]

I hope we're not looking at lots of "disambiguation" pages now :-p

More seriously, maybe having platform specific information in different colored rectangles would work?

[Spartan]

The colored rectangles would be a good way to organize and keep seperate items but not to as much to identify without a label since not everyone spends alot of time studying the wiki...

[Dark_MEMENTO]

YOU'RE ALL HURTING MY HEAD!

Sorry about that.

Why don't you edit the pages for the 360 version like wikipedia.org.

So, the layout would be:



Costolot's Store
==Xbox 360==
Blah blah blah

==Nintendo DS==
Smee smee smee

==Windows==
Yada yada yada

==Party Animals==
(If Party Animals has Costolot's Store as, say, an unlockable shop)

So, you have the same info, on the same page. Much easier.

Hope that helps :)

EDIT: Oh, snap, it's basically LSN's idea...but drawn out...oh well.

[Spartan]

I with it were that simple Memento... but keep in mind guys that sometimes it does need to be taken simply.

[FeralKitty]

Continued food for thought:

One of the issues is page length. For example, the General Store article is quite "long." Repeating 11 or more different tables, with varying information for n different platforms, is a bit of a visual, maintenance, and navigational nightmare. There are pros and cons to collapsing (and printing out) information. Another length-related issue deals with platform-specific information being overlooked (e.g. keypress info), because it's "buried" further down the page.

Along similar lines, how do you identify at the top of an article which platforms the article applies to? It's frustrating to read a long article, then reach a platform-subheading (or category tag) and discovering that the topic isn't applicable (doesn't exist for) the platform you're playing on.

Making articles "longer" means far less information gets read or seen, leading to more questions that have already been answered.

How do we handle Strategies and Tips? Some strategies may only be supported on some platforms. Do we lead the strategy with a tag? If we use separate sections for platforms, how do you avoid "repeating" a strategy that applies to platform X and Y but not Z?

Whatever we do, I think a consistent approach is necessary, to minimize (eliminate) inconsistent visual presentations, depending on which page you're on.

These are just some of the topics and questions that deal with user-friendliness of the articles and site. With longer common articles, it's even more important to organize and display the information well, to make it easier to search, find, and navigate.

We've already seen examples of divergence, such as the Xbox 360 vs. Nintendo DS Ranks. Aside from the obvious fact that they're adding new species, the fact that the Experienced Gardener title happens at level 6 for 360 and 2 for DS (http://pinataisland.info/index.php?title=Image:Pinata_ds1.jpg) means we're facing a lot of presentation changes for many articles.

I imagine some form of color-coding might help identify/distinguish platform-specific information. We've already got some basic groundwork for this in the CSS, and have used color-coding in some of the message boxes. This means rethinking how existing (e.g. article bg) colors and such are used, especially when it comes to garden items and pinatas.

The "downside," say 6 years down the road, is if we're eventually talking about 11 different platforms. It's something to smile about, but also to factor in. Does color-coding or another approach hold up, with larger numbers? This is what I'm trying to factor in now, so we don't have to reorg again later on.

Keep the suggestions coming. Everything is being heard!

[DragonacheKing99]

Maybe a totally new wiki? :p Don't flame me but leave everything as it is, and add 3 wiki's into this one (if possible). Like make the main page link you to Viva Pinata on the 360 for the original wiki and add Viva Pinata Party Animals, Viva Pinata on the DS, and Viva Pinata on the PC. When you click the link it links you to the wiki where you can search and each page you find is for that game. Or you can always change around the site map. Idk much about wikis so I'm not sure, this might mean a lot of work and is probably a bad idea but eh...

domain names could be...

pinataisland.info
pinataisland.info/VivaPinataDS
pinataisland.info/VivaPinataPC
pinataisland.info/VivaPinataPartyAnimals

[Spartan]

But can Jimmy afford all those servers that? :p

[DragonacheKing99]

But can Jimmy afford all those servers that? :p

How much would that be :p

Maybe we can help out with Paypal or something...

[FeralKitty]

You don't need different servers, although I'm not sure Jim would want to deal with running n wikis, or editors having to maintain n similar sets of content across multiple wikis. It would also be "difficult" to search across multiple wikis. (I've got no problem with Google Search and like how it helps the site, but we shouldn't "break" existing wiki search functionality.)

We're still in the idea stage, and I'm tossing them all around. At some point, I'll start testing out some of the approaches and see how well they work. Probably in a month or so, we'll settle on an actual method to accomplish the reorg.

[jimmcq]

I agree that it probably wouldn't make much sense to have separate wikis, but I don't want to discourage the brain storming... keep those ideas flowing.

[Wanderer]

I don't think you are going to run into as many problems as you think you are here. I realize that there are specific things (like when you get certain titles) that will be different on the DS, but other then that, there shouldn't be much difference here. For those 'extra species', you throw some fat, red text on the top 'Pinata on DS only', or what not. For the DS specific differences, an additional column on the table listing 'standard' and 'DS specific' wouldn't do much damage.

I think part of the problem here is there are not many 'ToC' (Table of Contents) pages in the wiki, which means that the entire site relies on cross linking, or finding a specific item, then working backwards to see the items in the categories. The search button (for me at least) was missed for a long time because the ad over there pushes it down below my page line. I gave up looking for it, then tripped on it. Try to go from the main page to information on which Wild Cards aren't found yet. It's about impossible without a search. You get FAQ, Site Map, Pinata Species, and some random tips on the first page of the wiki. If I want to find out about Elm trees, I have to go Site map (okay so far), then click on Category:Garden Piece (Items you can place in your garden). Not intuitive.

If you review your overall structure, and work from a ToC perspective, I think you'll find that using an 'XYZ for dummies' idea of little notes in the middle will take care of a huge portion of your problems. Especially since different games altogether will have different 'trees' in your ToC. You could crosslink Fudgehog to Fergie in Party Animals, for example, and also link that to the 'character bio' for the TV show, which has little to do with either game. (It's not like you have to beat up your fudgehogs to shove 'em in crates...)

Once a couple of different versions come out of the same game on different systems though, you could take it on a topic by topic basis. IE: DS only pinatas could have a big ol' warning across the top. The differences between buying 'bottle's glasses' for Profitamole in one place and 'Big Ol' Coke Glasses' in another could simply be a small note, in something like FK offered, a standard colored box that means 'Version difference(s)', and then you can read through it looking for the header that means your system type.

In the end, I think you're approaching the idea of the differences between systems with to much emphasis, and not enough towards the idea of getting the wiki itself more organized from its first page, with a consistent style across all pages to get to the desired goal.

[jimmcq]

I agree that we need to re-organize a lot of the content in general.

My original thought when posting this topic was more about how to organize existing content so it is easier to find what you're looking for (now and in the future), rather than how to shoehorn new content into the existing structure.

[FeralKitty]

How about a Site Index, similar to a book index. It would be far more comprehensive than the site map, and function as a topical index, covering everything from the games, to the TV show, to the merchandise.

A (tree-structured) ToC could come as part of the reorg, but it would be simple to setup an Index as a separate project, independent of the reorg.

[Spartan]

Wait without a tree would this have a subcategories or not?

[FeralKitty]

Picture it exactly as an index would literally look in the back of a textbook. No tree. Linear alphabetized list of every topic, with break-downs for heavily-indexed subjects.

Unrelated to categories or trees.

[jimmcq]

The other organization/structure thing to consider is that we really should move away from using category pages as content pages. For example the Category:Species really shouldn't have that content at the top... It should simply have a link to a 'species' article with that same content and a list of all the species, and all links should point to the article rather than the category page.

It may seem a little redundant to have manually maintained list when the Category page automatically creates one for you, but the fact that it is automatically generated creates its own problems... It isn't cached like content on other pages, and changes to other pages can mess up on the content on the category page.

Maybe we could take some inspiration from Wikipedia's use of categories (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization)? (Yes, I know that is a really long article, but I think much of it applies here)

[WildChild]

i personally hope u find a perfect solution, we´re working on a german pinata wiki (just with 2 persons :eek:) and its sooooo much work, i began crying when i need to think about vp for pc, party animals and vp for ds,... :mrgreen: ;)

so i hope i can copy all ur great solutions and ideas.

[FeralKitty]

Can I ask a question about that? Since the wiki software easily supports multiple languages, what about adding German translations or contributions to this wiki's articles? It's possible for the entire navigation and UI to be in German, to make it easier to use and contribute to this wiki, and it would save you from having to deal with a lot of overhead in maintaining an entire wiki of your own.

[WildChild]

hehe, this would be so awesome FK. but i´m pretty sure it wont work, i did not found a translator that can translate something that make sense (okay, exclude hello) but we could give it a try, would be awesome. thanks for that. how would that work?

our wiki is also using diffrent codes than urs (yes, i need to upload every picture again hmpfz), so i need to make everything completly new. the frustrating part on that one is, that noone from us got experience with things like that and i´m pretty sure we will have to edit every page again and again before we have a result that we can show 2 others. :D

[Wanderer]

FK, I'm not sure if an index will make the site any better, really. It's like looking for the right category page. For example, the Oak Tree. Where does it land in the index? Tree? What's tree under? Is it under garden items still? How about plant, or flower? An index is a giant wall of text. It's perfect, if you know exactly what you're looking for...

... unless of course you have no idea what a Wild Card is. All you know is there's 'special' pinatas. Oh, Twins... must have been the twins after you go in and look at it. oh, rats, twins are buggy, only whirims. Guess I beat the game. If there is no obvious path from point to point, helping a newer player (or a more experienced one looking for some in depth piece of information, that wouldn't be found by 'accident') becomes arduous. You have to read every page on the site to know what some things fall under.

A tree like the following, though, would correct that.

Level 1: Which Game? (or TV series)
Level 2: Pinatas, Plantlife, Characters, Stores, etc.
Level 3: A definitions of terms (Wildcard, Nocturnal, Flying, etc.) followed by a Pinata list by level linking to their pages. A special notes link (A page that explains things like the sweets value is broken, 10% base value for each party, stuff like that)
(Flowers, Bushes, Trees),
(Leafos, etc.),
(Store list, with links to a page for each store),
etc...

You get the idea.

I want to know how to fertilize an oak tree. If I go to the index, I'm searching around for a good chunk of time trying to familiarize myself with it. A simple tree... Oh, Plantlife. Ah, is it a bush? No, back up, it's a tree. Ah, Oak tree. Done.

There is SO much good information in this wiki that it's the reason I stuck around. It's an impressive conglomeration of persistence and devotion to a favorite game. In my mind, the only thing it needs now is a nice organization to show it off in its glory.

[FeralKitty]

FK, I'm not sure if an index will make the site any better, really. It's like looking for the right category page. For example, the Oak Tree. Where does it land in the index? Tree?

If someone can't go to the T's and find Tree, then the Index couldn't help them. If they wanted to know about fertilizing trees, they could head to the F's to Fertilizer, ... and trees or back to the T's.

Since the Index would be written in plain English concepts just like a book index, you wouldn't have to know category names or whatever, and I'd expect it to take you directly to the subject you're looking for.

I would think that would be quicker and shorter than drilling down through a hierarchal tree.

[Wanderer]

If someone can't go to the T's and find Tree, then the Index couldn't help them. If they wanted to know about fertilizing trees, they could head to the F's to Fertilizer, ... and trees or back to the T's.

So all pages would be multi-listed under different headers? IE: Tree (or Oak Tree) would be under plant, tree, fertilizer, Garden Item... etc?

[FeralKitty]

To a limited degree, yes, just as a conventional Index would handle it. There's an balance, naturally, such as using See or See also, instead of listing every single reference in large numbers of entries.

Would you find that helpful in looking up information?

[Wanderer]

If you're willing to go that far, an intelligently organized index with crossreferencing, yes, it would *help*, and certainly be effective for someone familiar with the site, and the terms, that they knew they wanted. Perfect use of an index.

I still ask you how would I know about a Wild Card if I didn't know what was before I went looking, or that I'd even care to look at it? Index: Pinata: 37 pinatas, Wild Card, 18 more pinatas. If I wasn't looking at catching a Wild Card pinata (Wow, that must be like level 9 pinata, never heard of it!), I'd skip the entry, not understanding the term from the context.

You'd still want an intuitively navigated methodology for newer people.

[teker0]

Can I ask a question about that? Since the wiki software easily supports multiple languages, what about adding German translations or contributions to this wiki's articles?

Is there a way to use this method to support multiple information sources? Like a "VP:360" language vs. a "VP:Cartoon" language, vs "VP: DS" language, etc?

One of the ideas in the Wikipedia article Jim referenced was to have categories with the same name as an article. Maybe this would work with the pinata species. A "Horstachio" article that gives some basic info about Horstachios, and a Category:Horstachio that contains the basic article as well as a VP:360 article for Horstachios, a page for each Horstachio character in the cartoon, specifics for VP:Party Animals, etc.

Does the wiki allow you to arbitrarily create additional namespaces? I think that could be a useful method of separating articles based on platform / game.

[FeralKitty]

Is there a way to use this method to support multiple information sources? Like a "VP:360" language vs. a "VP:Cartoon" language, vs "VP: DS" language, etc?

Not really. The language markup deals solely with Internationalization.

Does the wiki allow you to arbitrarily create additional namespaces? I think that could be a useful method of separating articles based on platform / game.

It does, and I've looked into it already, but there are some cons that probably won't make that an option.

[Spartan]

You know, maybe and index like in the back of a textbook isn't user friendly enough. It could make a good edition but we probably don't want to rely on it alone because I know that some smaller kids, (SOME) wouldn't want to be reminded of their homework when looking for a pinata. That's only one brief drawback to an index, I could think of more.

You probably know that an index wouldn't be the only thing on the wiki but I'm just pointing it out.

[Spartan]

Sorry for the double post but I think that we should clear this up.

FK and Jim: Should we start adding info to the VP:PA pages when the demo is released and reorganize it later? Or is that premature and we should wait to finalize the systems before putting in the info?

[jimmcq]

Add the info ASAP... we can always re-organize it later.

[Dark_MEMENTO]

I know this is up there with Tomb Raider 6 (Angel Of darkness) in 'Late' stakes, but why not just make seperate pages, and link them together after the 360 pages? That would stop the pages being longer than Final Fantasy XI in slo-mo.

[teker0]

I'm thinking there's a good chance the requirements are going to expand/change for the existing pinata. It also sounds like the romance mazes are going to have extra items to improve chances of twins, etc. Any thoughts on a reorg?

[FeralKitty]

It's been talked about often, and some changes have already started to show up at the wiki.

For example, to support the differences between Classic, Pocket Paradise, and Trouble in Paradise, the species article will likely use tabs to display platform-specific details.

There's an old Reorg (http://www.pinataisland.info/viva/User:FeralKitty/Reorg) working document in my user name space.

[Spartan]

You say that we might use tabs to seperate the species between games? Because earlier I clicked the "Species" link on the table of contents on the left of the main page hoping to lead me to a list of VP2 species, but I just got classic species.

[BIGsheep]

I'll be honest, I'm not a wiki programmer but I have seen some stuff that Jim's been working on and so the framework is being put together. I'll wait for him to say more on it, though.

[jimmcq]

Each of the 'Species' pages will need to be reworked to use the tab system like the one here: http://pinataisland.info/index.php?title=PinataIsland.info:Sandbox&oldid=17140

At the top will be a general description and an image followed by the tabs with game-specific info. There will be a tab for Classic, Pocket Paradise, Trouble in Paradise, etc. Does that make sense?

As for the categories, the original species are in the Classic species category (http://pinataisland.info/viva/Category:Classic_species), but they will also be added to the Trouble in Paradise species category (http://pinataisland.info/viva/Category:Trouble_in_Paradise_species) as well.

[mattmarchant]

I like the tab idea, itll make it much easier to navigate through the pinatas.

[jimmcq]

There is a REALLY rough mock-up of the species page layout at http://pinataisland.info/viva/Mousezilla

Notes:


Trouble in Paradise actually can have two different sets of requirements... One for 'Just for Fun' mode, and one for 'Standard mode'
Trouble in Paradise adds Trick requirements, and also possibly Bait requirements for some species.
We should probably use a slightly different color background or maybe even a small logo for each tab's contents to make them stand apart a little more.

[Spartan]

I like the tab system alot, I think that it clears up a lot of issues.

I do agree that we need to redesign the tabs though, as they look pretty ugly by contrast to all the other color on the site. Maybe different colors would do, but maybe we could go a step higher and have a distinct design for each tab in addition to a small logo.

[FeralKitty]

I think that a leaf-green color scheme might be nice for the tabs, to match the site's background.

[trueinsanity]

The tab system is indeed very smexy. Keep up the good work.

I noticed that the right pane doesn't change. If possible, you might want to do that because I'm sure the WCs, Romance Dances and over-all graphics will look different in the different games.

[FeralKitty]

It actually does change, but it's not apparent to you. As we get more pics and details, you'll see different images, etc.

This is really a sandbox for us to try things out in, and it's only been up there for a day. It's going to take us longer than a day to collect details for a game that most of us haven't even played yet.

[trueinsanity]

It actually does change, but it's not apparent to you. As we get more pics and details, you'll see different images, etc.

This is really a sandbox for us to try things out in, and it's only been up there for a day. It's going to take us longer than a day to collect details for a game that most of us haven't even played yet.

Ok. Thanks for the clarification. I can't see many flaws with it if it changes besides making the tabs blend in more.

[FeralKitty]

Just a reminder asking people to please not copy the old Classic species layout into the new TiP species articles.

The new species articles will look quite different and use a new layout, which is still being worked on.

[Amaroq]

But when tip comes out will be combine Vp pinatas with newer TIP pinatas?