Forum:ME1 and ME2

Has anyone noticed that ME1 and ME2 information is all on the same page? Does anyone agree with me that this is not the right way to do things? They are separate games, there for they should be separated to different pages. Polexian ♦♦Talk♦♦♠♠Leave Message♠♠ 11:20, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree. Something that many people may not know is that we've actually had multiple sources for quite a while now, seeing as how there were two books and another game released well before Mass Effect 2 came along. And we seem to be getting along pretty well merging the info from different sources (for an example, check out Storyline which merges details from Mass Effect: Revelation and Mass Effect) so I'm perfectly happy with the current system. If it's something that is substantially different between the two games I'd be inclined to support a "separate articles" plan, but for things like Characters it just doesn't make sense. You talk about separating Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2, but what about the other games and books? Where would their info go? Should we have separate pages containing the same information for Mass Effect, Mass Effect: Revelation, Mass Effect: Ascension, Mass Effect: Galaxy, Mass Effect 2, Mass Effect: Redemption and Mass Effect: Retribution? You have to remember, it's much more than just two games worth of info. It's 3 games, 3 books, and a comic book series, with at least one more game (and likely other print material) on the way. It's just not feasible to split it all up like that. SpartHawg948 12:10, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

You don't have to have separate pages for each, but we have to think for the future. You can have the same pages list the same information by using includes so that one page has the original information and the others just read it from there. Mass effect 1 and 2 galaxies are totally different, why wouldn't we have a different page for each, mass effect 1 and 2 planets are totally different.... ME1 and 2 Achievements are different. Would you rather look at one page that has the achievements for the game you are playing or do you want to look at a page with 100+ achievements on it. We need to start separating the content now with the games and then do the same for the books and other games. If it is done right, it will look very professional and make this wiki more popular. I started masseffect2.wikia.com and I had Joeplay forward it here because I hoped there would be inteligent people here that knew how to organize a wiki. Right now it is a bunch of article thrown into a room, and I want to help make this a well organized filing cabinet. Polexian ♦♦Talk♦♦♠♠Leave Message♠♠ 12:29, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

I would say that it is a question to be solved on a "case by case" basis. For instance, I think it might be beneficial to split some pages like Missions or Assignments, as there cannot exist such thing as a common mission or assignment for the two games and the common pages tend to become quite long and difficult to read. It is already the case for the Guide pages, which are separated. At the contrary, as SpartHawg948 pointed out, in many cases, when background information is involved, it makes perfect sense holding all the information on one subject, whatever the source can be, in one page. for instance, having all information on Medi-gel, or any persistent technology, allows to present evolution of its use, having all information on a character allows to have an historical perspective. --Celorilm 12:36, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the galaxy, you are wrong, it actually is the same galaxy, the Milky Way, with common elements: Citadel, Local Cluster (Earth, ...), ... Celorilm 12:40, February 4, 2010 (UTC)



What about the planets that you can visit in both games, like Earth and Pluto? Should the scanning info and picture from ME2 be on the same page, or should we split up the page in two? Spoo12 12:42, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

My answer would definitely be "on the same page", as these are the same planets, even real ones!! Screenshots of ME1 o ME2 are just two different pictures representing the same objects :). Celorilm 12:46, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * You know, flattery will get you nowhere! With comments like "I hoped there would be inteligent people here that knew how to organize a wiki." and "Right now it is a bunch of article thrown into a room", I can't see why we aren't just falling over ourselves to comply! :P I agree that some pages (including the Achievements page) should be split, but not all the pages you listed. The galaxy is the same between the two games. There is considerable overlap. Planets aren't really different either. Planetary exploration, maybe, but not planets. But again, you can't just say there need to be separate ME and ME2 pages (no such thing as ME1 or Mass Effect 1! :P) without also admitting that it must therefor be necessary to have differentiated pages for the other 5 works in the franchise. And many pages such as Characters, Races, and pages concerning the Galaxy, planets, systems, etc. have considerable overlap, making splitting them impractical. As for professional-looking, I think we do all right. We were featured in GameInformer magazine after all. Not too bad for "a bunch of article thrown into a room"! :) SpartHawg948 12:48, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Ok SpartHawg948 since you think we should split some pages then let's list them here and see what everyone else thinks.
 * Achievements
 * Characters

Anymore need to be added SpartHawg948? Thrown into a room, just saying this could be better organized. Polexian ♦♦Talk♦♦♠♠Leave Message♠♠ 15:13, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

I have split the achievements up to be listed on two different pages, but when people go there, they are all there because I included them which includes that page on the achievements page and at the top it will send them to that page if they want to see them alone. Polexian ♦♦Talk♦♦♠♠Leave Message♠♠ 15:23, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, as you asked for a direct response to splitting two pages, here's my take. Achievements- As I've already said, sure! Go ahead and divide it up by ME and ME2. Makes sense. Characters- Again, as I've already said, No Way! Too much overlap between ME and ME2 characters, plus, it's not just ME and ME2 characters on the Characters page! It's also characters from ME: Galaxy, ME: Revelation, ME: Ascension, ME: Retribution, and ME: Redemption. If we split the page purely along ME and ME2 lines, where would all those characters go? I've asked this before and have yet to see a good answer, or any answer, really. SpartHawg948 22:37, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Disagree.
I don't think separating the wiki by game is a good idea at all. We will end up with having dozens of pages essentially covering the same thing. Are you honestly thinking we'd have separate pages for the same character in different games i.e. Ashley (ME), Ashley (ME2), Ashley (ME Whatever)? That would swiftly make the wiki completely saturated with tiny pages when they could be simply (and common-sensically) integrated into one.

Having all information (within reason) on the same pages also makes it easier for casual users to find it. If they're looking for info on Liara T'Soni, it's obvious to have all the detail relating to her on that page. We are not going to end up having a Mass Effect Wiki and a Mass Effect 2 Wiki in the same Wikia space. You edit the DA Wiki: they don't effectively need several wikis to handle the books, Origins and whatever happens with Awakening.

That said, I agree with the statement above that it makes sense to have separate pages for ME2 assignments, and possibly for achievements, because those pages are pretty long and people may be inclined to look for ME2 assignments, not just assignments. But when it comes to characters, planets, plot--no. The wiki is more holistic than that.

As SpartHawg said, we've been handling several sources for a while now and not had any problem at all. While for organisational and search reasons ME2 achievement, mission and assignment pages may be more tenable, we also have categories for all this information and a search bar. While your idea does highlight that we could use a few dedicated ME2 pages, this seems to be a personal preference issue rather than an actual deep-seated problem with the wiki's organisation. --Tullis 15:51, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

While I'm sure many readers would prefer the wiki to be separated, I am compelled to say that I do not agree, for it would make things unnecessarily more complicated. --Fiery Phoenix 21:18, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Careful consideration
There are also practical issues to consider: overlapping content potentially maintained in two places; navigation correctness and consistency; category correctness and consistency; page nesting and click count; retaining compatibility with incoming anchor links &mdash; just to name a few. (Mediawiki anchor links are always problematic since they break silently rather than red-line. I certainly don't really want to be the one who has to hunt through all of the content fixing them.) At the mechanical level, the naming convention should also be considered: Mediawiki has some inherent support for parenthesized page suffixes which it would make sense to leverage; whether to split or parameterise templates; whether or not to use transclusion for common elements; whether or not to make use of DPL. These are just some of the sorts of real-world issues that intelligent maintainers need to consider before such a major project is undertaken. This is why we're maintaining sectioned pages until things stabilize a bit and there's time to analyze the situation as a coherent whole.

Additionally, while a Forum thread is perhaps a reasonable place to discuss cross-page issues, the pages involved should have their talk pages updated with a link to here. My experience is that very few contributors bother to watch the forum (myself included). In general, I've been asking that contributors discuss major changes on talk pages before starting work, not as policy but just as a matter of courtesy to the community. Note that, in this case, there are already at least three major contributors to ME1/ME2 overlap resolution so some sort of coordination would be wise. --DRY 15:54, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Split naming
In order to minimize the amount of needless labour, I strongly suggest that if a page is split for its ME2 content, that the original page remain with a for disambiguation at the top pointing to a page of the form (ME2). This has the dual advantages of ensuring that existing context-sensitve and anchor links to ME1 content remain reasonable while also splitting the ME2 content to a name which is consistent with the Mediawiki variant naming support. --DRY 18:33, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

I'm all for this one. DM Khalas 19:12, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

I support this as well. Matt 2108 19:52, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds very sensible. --Tullis 19:58, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I suggest that we let it soak for twenty-four hours or so to get feedback from other time zones and then anyone who wants to go ahead and split a particular page should feel free to go ahead along the lines mentioned above. Splitting the planets, systems, and clusters is a bit more complicated but by no means difficult. We should also decide if we want three nav bars, or one which takes a parameter &mdash; there are pros and cons both ways, but I suspect that either would do just fine. --DRY 20:38, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Looking at other wiki's?
I understand that things are in a transitory period right now, but this isn't the first time that a site has had to integrate new information before. Look at the Fallout wiki. It does a great job of organizing all the Fallout games together in a way that feels pretty natural.Elamdri 22:16, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * It might be worth elucidating further for those of us who are not familiar with the site. Based on a quick glance, they appear to use generic disambiguation pages linking to specific pages for each applicable game.  As mentioned above, that's potentially going to generate a fair amount of busy-work finding and fixing context-sensitive and anchor-specific links.  I'm certain that there are valuable lessons to learn, but it would be helpful if they were spelled out rather than needing to be ferreted out.  --DRY 22:41, February 4, 2010 (UTC)