44

We've recently instigated a discussion about cleaning up tags, following on from last year's tag cleanup. You can see it here.

While there is more to Arqade than just the tags we have, let's stick on that topic for a while longer. One of the first comments on the above discussion was:

While going through the tags I saw that there's a fair few that need tag wikis, and others that have bad tag wiki excerpts. Can we incorporate a clean up of bad tag wikis into this maelstrom of hellfire somewhere?

~fredley

Let's get a few things clear:

What is a tag wiki?

Tag wikis are brief excerpts of information detailing what the tag is about, the kinds of questions that should be asked in a tag, and possibly providing you links to some external resources like the Wikipedia article or official website for the game or game developer.

What makes a good tag wiki?

Clear, concise and original information. Tag wikis are shown in multiple places as follows:

When you hover over a tag, either in the tag list, or on a question, a nice little pop up will appear detailing the Excerpt section from the tag wiki:

Excerpt Popup

This same excerpt is displayed at the top of the list of questions when you're browsing questions by tag, with a link to "learn more":

Excerpt at top of page

The full tag wiki is displayed when you click "learn more":

Full tag wiki

So, a good tag wiki will:

  • Concisely state what the tag is about when you hover over a tag
  • Give a full description of what the tag is when you click "learn more"
  • Detail where you can find more information when you click "learn more"
  • Be original - we don't like plagiarism at the best of times, but on tag wikis, don't do it. If you want to include a small section of text from a site like Wikipedia, clearly block quote it and attribute it and ensure it's not the only information available.
  • NO SPOILERS. Spoilers in a tag wiki is just not acceptable. You can't hide them and they've got high visibility

What format should tag wikis be in?

It would be nice if we could agree a format to use when creating tag wikis, for consistency. This will also help our newer users create their own tag wikis as they'll know exactly what is expected in a tag wiki.

Tag wikis should be started using the dictionary method; that is we make the assumption that the user knows what they've just clicked on, so don't reiterate it. This means instead of

"Minecraft is a game by Mojang where you break blocks and eat cake"

we use

"A game by Mojang where you break blocks and eat cake"

(I've never played Minecraft, I don't know if cake is involved!)

The point of this question

If you agree we should have a consistent community agreed format for tag wikis, upvote the question.

If you disagree we should have a consistent community agreed format for tag wikis, downvote the question.

Post answers below to propose a format for us to use site wide for all tag wikis, these can individually be upvoted and downvoted to form community consensus.

Once we reach a community consensus on a format, the editing can begin.

  • 17
    Cake is involved. – fredley Oct 22 '13 at 14:40
  • 1
    When a consensus is reached, is it expected that -every- wiki on the site will be edited? – Ash Oct 22 '13 at 14:40
  • @AshleyNunn I think that's what kalina wants to do... – fredley Oct 22 '13 at 14:42
  • 2
    -every- is a lot. Probably should stick with the wikis on the first x pages of gaming.stackexchange.com/tags. – au revoir Oct 22 '13 at 14:44
  • 3
    x = 5 would cover all tags with > 50 questions. – fredley Oct 22 '13 at 14:46
  • @JasonBerkan that was my concern as well. Going over every tag seems almost sisyphean in scope but that might just be me. – Ash Oct 22 '13 at 14:47
  • 2
    Every is a lot, but that's the point. You don't have to do them all, they don't have to be done in the same day or week or whatever. I don't mind doing the bulk of the editing but we need the community to agree on something consistent. Consistency is something we're lacking, especially in this particular instance. By having a consistent format, it wouldn't matter who did the editing because they'd all meet a minimum level of quality and fulfil their purpose. – kalina Oct 22 '13 at 14:47
  • 3
    Can we at least agree that most such unified formats will only work for game tags? The pc tag, for example, won't exactly fit any standard format that includes a game's genre and developer. – Billy Mailman Oct 22 '13 at 15:30
  • There will certainly be exceptions, but the overall layout will work regardless of the type of tag the wiki is for. While 'release date' might not be good for PC, it will certainly be relevant for all of the console tags, PC in fact is the exception, rather than platform tags in general – kalina Oct 22 '13 at 15:32
  • 1
    @kalina well, I wasn't referring to platforms, really. pc may have been a bad choice. There's stuff like achievements, technical-issues, multiplayer, mods, controllers, and that's just the first page. Any of those that survive won't fit most unified formats. I guess I was just trying to make sure I understood the scope here, make sure this was primarily just aimed at consistent wording of game tags. – Billy Mailman Oct 22 '13 at 15:39
  • @BillyMailman many of the tags you've mentioned are also being suggested as tags that we shouldn't even have anymore - there will of course be some exceptions but the point is to provide a consistent method of creating tag wikis that everybody can follow – kalina Oct 22 '13 at 15:54
  • 2
    The cake is a lie – SysDragon Oct 23 '13 at 11:22
  • For now, I think that the more tags with acceptable summaries the better. The summary is the one you see when tagging, so that should be our focus if we wish to avoid mis-tagging. I've been trawling meta and regular gaming a bit, trying to set up as many summaries I can, even if the body itself is lacking, and even if the format I use still leaves something to be desired. – The Ugly Oct 31 '13 at 20:13
  • @Vaishali look good to me! Look like they were all accepted too – kalina Feb 6 '14 at 15:07
24

Excerpt

A [Release Year] [Genre], developed by [Developer] for [Platforms]. [Short Description].

So, using the current wiki as a basis, the result would be something like

A 2011 Fantasy Action RPG, developed by Bethesda Softworks for the PC, PS3, and Xbox 360. It is the fifth game from the main line of the Elder Scrolls series, and the eleventh in total.

Body

A [Release Year] [Genre], developed by [Developer] for [Platforms]. [Fuller description].

General Information

  • Release Date: [Dates, by location/platform/whatever. May need multiple lines.]
  • Developer: [Developer]
  • Publisher: [Publisher]

Links

  • Official Site: [Site]
  • English Wikipedia Page: [Wikipedia Page]
  • Game Wiki: [Any popular game wiki, if appropriate. Multiple, if need be.]
  • [Whatever]: [Any other highly useful resources.]

Related Tags

So, using the current page as a basis again, it would be something like

A 2011 Fantasy Action RPG, developed by Bethesda Softworks for the PC, PS3, and Xbox 360. It is the fifth game from the main line of the Elder Scrolls series, and the eleventh in total. It is set in the northern, Viking-inspired country of Skyrim within the continent of Tamriel. Skyrim is home to the Nords and at the time of the game is embroiled in a civil war consisting of the Imperials and the Stormcloaks.

General Information

Links

  • 1
    I'd rather the release year further down in the excerpt. It's not an overly important piece of information for gamers (when compared to genre or gameplay). I'd prefer "A [genre of game] developed by [developer], [short description], Released [Release Year]" – Robotnik Oct 23 '13 at 0:04
  • 3
    @Robotnik I didn't put it where I did as an indicator of importance, so much as to remove the word "Released", shorten the boilerplate a bit, and thus get a bit more room for the description out of what little real estate there is on the excerpts. Putting it into the sentence like this also seemed to make things flow a little better as text, whereas separating it out made it sound a bit too bullet-point for the excerpt, IMO. – Billy Mailman Oct 23 '13 at 0:12
  • 2
    @Robotnik I tend to disagree with you on this one. That sentence flows pretty nicely, and, in my opinion, game genre and release date are about the same as importance goes. – Unionhawk Oct 23 '13 at 5:43
  • @Robotnik In many cases, release year provides as much context about the game as the genre does. (or more context, if the genre is "action-adventure"). And honestly, how is "2011 fantasy RPG" any more difficult to read than "fantasy RPG,...Released 2011"? – Unionhawk Oct 23 '13 at 6:45
  • @Unionhawk - I'm sorry I don't get your reasoning, how does a release year provide more context than a genre? And its not about ease of reading, its about how we read - humans will skim sentences, latching on to important words and generally skipping the rest. As I've stated I don't think a release year is that important, therefore I've moved it further back. It doesn't even really need to be on the excerpt at all IMHO, especially as we're including it in the full wiki. – Robotnik Oct 23 '13 at 8:21
  • 4
    I also do not find release year to be important enough to be the second word of the excerpt. I'd rather see this information be left out of the excerpt in most cases and in the second 'fuller description' sentence in the cases in which it does matter. – ken.ganong Oct 23 '13 at 14:20
  • The tag wiki body template you have here is excellent. – ken.ganong Oct 23 '13 at 14:22
  • I'm not going to continue to argue semantics to this extent. I am going to let the votes do the talking. – Unionhawk Oct 23 '13 at 15:18
  • Why are you putting related tags in? Aren't those in the right side-bar of the webpage? – Batophobia Oct 25 '13 at 21:42
  • 1
    I also do not think the release year is important enough to be part of the excerpt, let alone the second word. – Gwen Oct 31 '13 at 9:45
  • 1
    I mean, if we take wikipedia to be the standard for concise, standardised text you'll notice that the release year isn't in their first sentences either – Gwen Oct 31 '13 at 9:56
  • 1
    @Batophobia, the related-tags sidebar kinda sucks sometimes. It's based on things being tagged together, which makes popular tags sometimes more 'related' to other popular tags than to less-popular tags they're actually related to. For example, out of three non-synonym tags that start "steam-", only one shows up in the sidebar on the actual steam tag. skyrim doesn't show the-elder-scrolls, etc. – Billy Mailman Oct 31 '13 at 11:02
  • 1
    @Unionhawk - Note that the consensus for those situations is to make the release year part of the tag itself, and therefore, again, doesn't need to be in the excerpt – Robotnik Oct 31 '13 at 23:20
  • 3
    I think, depending on the game, the release year can be quite important; in tags like "SimCity", where the tag actually refers to the newest game, it's nice to make it obvious. – Adam V Nov 4 '13 at 17:21
  • 1
    What should the excerpt look like if the release year differs per system? We wouldn't write "Minecraft was released in 2011 for PC/iOS/Android, 2012 for Xbox 360, 2013 for PS3, 2014 for PS4/Xbox One/Vita/Windows Phone, 2015 for Wii U, 2016 for Apple TV, and 2017 for Nintendo Switch" – Stevoisiak May 16 '17 at 23:35
7

My suggestion, following up my comments on Billy's answer:

Tag Wiki Excerpt

A [genre of game] developed by [developer], [short description], Released [Release Year]

-OR-

A [genre of game] developed by [developer], [short description]

Note: As I explained on Billy's answer, Release date shoudn't be given priority over other, more important things in the excerpt description. It could even be removed entirely, and only be listed in the Tag Wiki itself.

Bear in mind for situations such as The Stanley Parable and Simcity (where two versions of the game have the same name), the consensus is to add the release year to the older version's tag, leaving the plain tag for the current release. (see , ). As such, in these situations it makes even less sense to inlcude the release year in the excerpt.

Tag Wiki Body

A [genre of game] developed by [developer]

[blurb/game synopsis]

General Information

  • Release date: [date of release]
  • Developer: [developer of game]
  • Publisher: [publisher of game]
  • Available on: All platforms
  • [or] Available on: ,
  • [or] Available on: exclusively

Links

Related Tags

Include these tags if your question is about these specific sections of the game.

Note:

  • The official website & wikipedia page should be the first two links. Any modding communities, forums, steam page etc could also be added where relevant
  • 3
    I disagree with Year being the least important item. I think year is arguably more important than developer. After all, if you have 2 games with the same name, year is the only thing that will tell them apart. – Batophobia Oct 25 '13 at 21:45
  • Also, I suggest changing your "Links" formatting to be in this order: Official Game/Mod page, Official game on store (Steam page, App Store page, etc.), Official Game/Mod Wikia, (if mod Official Game page), Forums, Community, etc. – Batophobia Oct 25 '13 at 21:49
  • 2
    @Batophobia - I've cleared up the links, and our policy for two games with the same name is to rename the older one with its year in the tag itself, meaning it doesn't even need to be in the excerpt at all – Robotnik Nov 1 '13 at 2:59
1

The Tag Wiki Excerpt

A [genre of game] developed by [developer of game], [short synopsis of game].

The Tag Wiki Body

A [genre of game] developed by [developer of game], [full synopsis of game].

### General Information

* Release date: <date of release>
* Developer: <developer of game>
* Publisher: <publisher of game>
* [Official Game Website](http://www.website.com)
* [English Wikipedia page](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/some_game)

Any other associated links, comprehensive game guides, etc can also go here. Wikia is a good example.

### Related Tags

List of related tags. (not applicable in all instances, for example would have and maybe in this section. would have all of the various subtags, / would have all of the associated class tags, etc)

  • "Related Tags" are included in the sidebar of the webpage. – Batophobia Oct 25 '13 at 21:43
-3

A Template for Meta.Gaming Tag Wiki

This format:

If your question involves:

  • [Situation 1]
  • [Situation 2]
  • [Situation 3]
then use this tag.

[Note: I need someone who knows how to make that part no-parse to do it, I haven't got a clue]

Produces this:

If your question involves:

  • [Situation 1]
  • [Situation 2]
  • [Situation 3]
then use this tag.


This is what I did for :

If your question involves:

  • proper use of a tag
  • creation of a tag
  • removal of a tag
then use this tag.

  • 3
    Meta tags and main tags serve very different audiences. I don't think this belongs here, because this discussion is not focused on the unique needs of meta regarding tagging. – SevenSidedDie Oct 31 '13 at 20:50
  • @Seven Alright, seems logical. Maybe a question organizing accepted formats can be made after this settles then. – The Ugly Oct 31 '13 at 21:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .