User talk:Fitzroy doll/archive1

From Valve Developer Community
< User talk:Fitzroy doll
Revision as of 19:53, 9 October 2009 by Fitzroy doll (talk | contribs) (archiving talk page)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

USER TALK ARCHIVE 1




Hi.. Just suggesting that you use the preview button to prevent cluttering the recent changes list. Jupix 13:17, 18 Apr 2006 (PDT)

Entity category organisation

Hi, I was the one that removed the Npc manhack from the entity category. The reason I removed it was all NPC's are entities and thus NPC could therefore be a subcategory of Category:Entities. What was the specific reason you wanted it added back? --brandished 19:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Please do not do this. The Category:Entities page is among the most useful in this wiki, as it provides a fast index to all Source entities. It's fine to create subgroups such as NPCs (that's what the Categories are for), but the categories are not mutually exclusive and should not be treated as such. --Fitzroy doll 19:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
To be more specific, how is the Category:Entities page useful to you? In what situation or for what use do you need to see all entities for all Source based game in one giant list? This is what I'm not understanding, I can't think of any use I, myself, would have for a list of that type type, nor could I see it being helpful to anyone else. --brandished 01:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
It's useful to me on a regular basis as an index of Source entities, so that I can go straight to the page I need, but that is beside the point. Categories are not folders - a page can and should exist in several at the same time. Furthermore, it's bad form to make unilateral changes like this without discussing it on the relevant page first. If you don't want to revert your Category edits I will do it.--Fitzroy doll 09:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
There is a search function you know. --TomEdwards 09:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes I'm aware of that. It's faster, however, to just go to the 3 page index and find the entity you need. In what way is this controversial?--Fitzroy doll 10:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
There is a seperate list of entities that lists them by type and name, it's much easier to use if the page is kept up to date. While having entities in both a general category and a specific category should be done, i personally prefer using the page that lists them by type and name. Solokiller 12:51, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes, but the problem with that list, as has been pointed out in the discussion is that the list of entities is incomplete and is arranged according to arbitrary categories. Furthermore, it requires someone to keep it up to date, which isn't always being done. The "Entities" Category tag is a simpler and more effective solution, as it only requires a small edit on each entity page to keep the list of entities up to date.
The rule has always been this: if the article refers to an "Entity" (as opposed to a tutorial or other information), then the article gets the "Entity" Category tag. It can then be sub-categorised according to the game in which it is available, whether it is an npc, a brush entity, a node and so on, but everything is an entity first. This was working fine up until the recent edits.--Fitzroy doll 13:32, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
It's useful to me on a regular basis as an index of Source entities, so that I can go straight to the page I need, but that is beside the point. You still not answering my original question though. What are you doing were you need to see every Source based entity ever made at the same time, creating some all inclusive mod similar to GMod? Honestly, I'm not trying to get on your nerves or argue with you, I'm just trying to see how you were using the page so I could see if we could compromise or if there was some use for the category I was overlooking. My problem is the way the categories are set up now there is no clear delimiters as to which game / mod certain entities are available for. I mainly use the entity categories in relation to level design for specific games. When I'm trying to recreate certain features from other maps, I like to know what entities are available and if there are other options. I was using the guidelines on WiKipedia (as the VDC mostly has from the start) as a basis for categorization. Recategorizing articles is a pain, it can be very time consuming as many pages have to be manually edited one at a time with the categories tags not always being obvious (and you are at the mercy of transfer timeouts and network outages, unless you have direct access to the server). On the other hand, creating an entity list is fairly trivial (for me anyways), I can easily generate a list of all available entities for any Source game that I can access through Hammer in a matter of 2 or 3 minutes using scripts. --brandished 16:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
That's just how I work, and have done so for some time. If I need to quickly know about an output or keyvalue then I like to be able to go straight to the entry without having to type the article name into the search box and without having to remember in which arbitrary category someone hid the entity. It's just faster and simpler, and, as you say, I like to see the options and then choose a solution. I can't do this as effectively if someone has decided to start hiding things. The reason I use the Entity category and not the specific HL2 category is that there is some vagueness about what goes into the HL2 category, and I would rather look at a complete list with some things I can't use in it, than a partial list and miss something.
I do agree that the current category system is vague and only partially implemented, but this is no reason to start re-arranging things into dozens of small single categories, as you seem to want to do. Instead, it would be more useful if you could ensure that the current hierarchical conventions are implemented correctly. For example: at the top level we have Category:Entities. At the level below this, we have entities only available for specific games, each of which is in its own sub-category. A logic_auto is only tagged in "Entities" because it is available for all Source games. A func_liquidportal is, however, only available in Portal, and should therefore be tagged in both as an Entity and as a Portal Entity. For consistency, this division would have to be maintained for more familiar entities such as the npc_manhack, which should appear as an Entity, as well as an entity for HL2, Ep1 and Ep2. In general, you can get this information from the FGD for each game, but additional research may be required. I believe this is a better solution, than, for example, having an exclusive category called Category:Half-Life_2_NPCs, but I welcome the input of others.--Fitzroy doll 18:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
According to the Wikipedia page for categories, an NPC entity should be in both the Entity category along with the NPC Entity subcategory. Anything in a subcategory should also be in it's parent category. --Remmiz 00:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I had the exact opposite impression reading that article. Anyways, my apologies for any frustration I may have caused, I honestly did not think anyone would care if I changed the category tags on pages, they seemed (to me) to have been placed sporadically without any strong guidelines, which is why I didn't discuss it first, but I have stopped making further changes for now. I never imagined I would to run into this much opposition changing the categories on a few pages, but as Fitzroy has already discussed, this should be discussed on a more appropriate page were other are others are more likely to find the conversation. I'm stating my points here (Talk:SDK_Docs), as there is no page related to all categories in general, along with a few others suggestions that I'd like addressed as well. --brandished 04:58, 27 March 2009 (UTC)