|
This page is documenting a discussion about a policy or project proposal that was PASSED by the community with a final vote of 5-1-0. Details about implementation may or may not be listed at the bottom of the page. THIS DISCUSSION IS NOW CLOSED, so please do not edit here. Thanks. |
The form below serves as a tool to describe the project. The form is intended to be as specific as possible to what the project is to accomplish.
- Please place all comments under the Comments heading.
- If there is a discussion page linked, then be sure to check it out as well.
- Also please do not create any articles unless all the details have been worked out, or at least the majority of them.
- Once the article/project has been created/finished, please put a mention that the article/project is completed and provide a redirect to the relevant article/s and talk page/s.
If any new things come up after the project proposal's passing, then please shift the discussion to the relevant article talk page/s.
If you have any questions on how to fill out the form, or any other question, please refer to the Project Forum talk page.
Project: Cut Content in Articles
- Developer(s) notes:
- Status last updated:
Page location:
Page should contain:
Supporting links or images:
Discussion on:
Other Notes
Project Specifics
This project's aim is to create a central page to document cut content for the first Mass Effect game, as well as the pages and edits relating to such which would be linked on it.
New Pages
- Mass Effect Cut Content and all its affiliated sandbox pages, which include several new character pages, assignments, locations, dialogue/voiceline pages to be used as references for convenience's sake, and Mass Effect Cut Music, User:Loadingue/Sandbox/Mass Effect Cut Content/Altered Names and User:Loadingue/Sandbox/Mass Effect Cut Content/Miscellaneous Texts.
- Topics for which the cut content section would be too prominent are to be have a separate page created: "Lystheni (Cut Content)" and "Caleston (Cut Content)".
Edits to Existing Pages
- An indeterminate number of pages which relate to cut content in a notable way is to be edited with the appendage of a "Cut Content" section, or "Trivia" if the information is short enough. The model for these edits is the page User:Loadingue/Sandbox/ME1 Cut Content Merges, which include a number as examples. See "Guidelines" below for information how the Cut Content sections are to be presented.
- Mass Effect Wiki:Information Sourcing remains in effect with regard to sourcing requirements, speculation, etc but files and databases supplied by BioWare may now be used to source the existence of cut content in the wiki.
Templates
- Template:Cut Content is to be edited and renamed to apply only to cancelled BioWare projects.
“This page refers to a project BioWare once worked on which was eventually scrapped. It is preserved here for archival and reference reasons.
- The new Template:Cut Content would state the following:
“The following information is drawn from cut content and is not to be considered canon in any way.
New Guidelines
- Cut content is to be generally presented in an impersonal, concise and relevant manner, and sourced extensively.
- Edits to existing pages are to be made according to the amount of cut content related, in three different ways: within the "Trivia" section if the information is short (example: if a character's name was different during development); a dedicated "Cut Content" section if the information consists of one or two paragraphs; a separate page, linked under "Cut Content" if the information requires a long explanation (only in exceptional cases). The nature and relevance of a page's cut content may be discussed and decided on a case-by-case basis on the page's talk page.
- Articles describing cut content must abide the wiki's Information Sourcing policy to avoid speculation regarding development timeline which is unconfirmed by BioWare devs. Data sources such as the plot database are now considered sufficient to establish the existence of cut content and are valid sources to document the existence and nature of that content, per the sourcing guidelines below.
- Sourcing:
- The cut dialogue/voiceline pages are to be used wherever relevant. They are meant to be used as references, and contain detailed data sources and explanations. As such, a page's cut content section should link to the exact dialogue relevant to it, or to the page in general if more than a few dialogues are relevant.
- For data sources that do not relate to voicelines/dialogues shown on those pages, the path(s) to the relevant file(s) for the PC versions of Mass Effect should be used as reference. Both the original release and the Legendary Edition are valid as each contains cut content data that the other does not.
- BioWare's Plot Database, accessible through the modding suite Legendary Explorer, is a separate and valid source for establishing the existence of cut content, which should be noted as "Plot Database: [Plot Database path to the relevant data]". If several plot checks in the Database are relevant to the topic at hand, referencing their section instead of each check separately is valid if they are contained within the same folder.
- TLK references which do not fall within the voiceline/dialogue pages are to be used as reference as "Mass Effect/BioGame/CookedPC/Packages/Dialog/GlobalTLK.upk: (TLK number or numbers if in succession)" or "Mass Effect Legendary Edition/Game/ME1/CookedPCConsole/Startup_INT.pcc: (TLK number or numbers if in succession)".
- Dialogues, voicelines or sounds in general that do not fall within the voiceline/dialogue pages are to be used as reference as the relevant soundbanks and their paths within either version of the game.
- Relevant screenshots should be added to the page itself, or linked, with a brief description of their origin: art book, trailer, official website, press kit, etc.
- Concept art (such as sketches or production paintings) alone is not a valid source for cut or altered content, unless dev-confirmation exists to show it was being implemented in a 3D environment.
Future Projects
Applying the same project and guidelines to Mass Effect 2 (which already has its own incomplete page), Mass Effect 3 and Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Comments
Note: Considerable earlier discussion has been archived in preparation for voting. Cattlesquat (talk) 18:00, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
New Template and Understanding Development
In the last few months since our last discussion, I've thought hard about ways to resolve this situation, and I have come up with an idea to better present cut content while sticking to objective facts. This idea is a new template with different messages depending on the sourcing of the content. However, before I present it, there is a very important thing that I need to make clear to ensure that everyone reading this understands. In previous discussions, I have often realized that some people did not seem to understand the implications of some cut content; that is why I will, step by step, explain the process of development within BioWare games, or in games in general.
The Process of Development
The following are steps that a game like Mass Effect goes through, from throwing out ideas to a released product. The number attributed to these steps will be referenced further in the discussion. This information comes from developer commentary; I suggest you check out the Bonus Content Disc documentaries and galleries (which I've transcribed earlier this year) if you have any reason to doubt the veracity of this, and I'd recommend doing it anyway to make sure you have a good grasp of everything at stake.
- The development team has a meeting to come up with ideas and define what the game is going to be. These meetings treat more and more precise aspects of the game as development goes on; you start with the scope of the project and what genre it belongs in, and later down the line, you define who the characters are and what each level consists of. Writers are in charge in tying it all together and coming up with the details.
- Based on the ideas thrown during the meeting, the artists will work on finding ways to illustrate the universe the game wants to depict; sometimes separately, sometimes together. This is where initial concept art is made -- environments or characters and creatures. This helps define the game's identity, and give a clearer vision of it to guide the whole development process.
- The resulting concept art is presented to the main directors and designers. They will either respond to it with "no, this is not what we want", "it's kinda what we're looking for, keep digging in that direction" or "this is exactly what we envision." In the first two cases, the artist literally goes back to the drawing board. In the third case, the concept art is then transmitted to the 3D artists.
- As the story and setting become more detailed, this is usually where the game enters full development production. The writers write scripts of detailed story scenes; the 3D artists make characters, models and textures based on the validated concept art; the level designers plan levels to accomodate the writers' story, and programmers make the story function within them; the sound department starts experimenting, the composers come up with music, voice actors are cast. This is where rough playable levels start existing. Some amount of content may be cut here, if the designers realize it is critically flawed as they begin implementing it.
- The levels are further refined or altered depending on feedback or technical issues, as are other departments. The game becomes presentable and partially functional; it is ready to be showcased. This is the part where some content is cut usually because, basically, "it just doesn't work out as hoped" or "it just isn't that good."
- As the release date comes close, the game developers must balance between polishing existing content and adding content that still needs integrating. Because of this, this is where a lot of content can be cut due to time restraints; some may be accidently "cut" due to not being integrated properly into the game.
- The game releases. Do note that DLC's and sequels are usually planned to some extent before the initial game even releases, for practical and financial reasons.
As for cut content in all this, you'll remark it usually originates in steps 4, 5 and 6, from the moment the game enters technical development (which is where data-mining becomes possible). The distinction between those 3 steps will help categorize cut content down the line. An important thing to remark is that we will assume that unrealized concept art is NOT cut content. As far as we know, they're just ideas that were not cleared for implementation; that's why cut content doesn't concern steps 1 to 3. Unrealized concepts were never intended to be in the released game, except maybe in its artist's hopes. Anecdotes regarding unrealized concept art may still belong on this Wiki, but only as general trivia and are beyond the scope of this project.
New Cut Content Categorization Template
Determining the development steps will help define the different types of cut content I propose implementing into a completely revamped "cut content" template. The purpose of this template, aside from warning the reader about the non-canonicity of the information, is the fact that it helps understand the context and relevance of it. While based on it, the cut content's sourcing itself would be unaffected by this template (the template doesn't replace source references).
Cut content would be divided into 4 categories:
- Preliminary Development Cut Content
- This is content of which we have only traces of basic development; data that could have been added quickly to the game before the idea was scrapped before entering advanced development; this is likely to be content cut during step 4. There are two main sources of this: BioWare's Plot Database, and the text string database. Normally, I would consider them reliable enough to infer that anything within them was considered for serious development; but for the sake of this project, I've reconsidered that view. Therefore, any cut content based solely on text strings and/or plot data is to use the following template message:
“The following information is cut content based on preliminary development data. It may not have been developed past basic implementation, or may have been scrapped early. This information is not to be considered canon in any way.
- Examples: Misery, Global Plot 2, the initial batch of Citadel assignments, the scrapped DLC's such as Cerberus Brainchild, gear and equipment of which there are only text strings.
Note: while concept art alone may not be described as cut content, it can sometimes be used in this category to illustrate preliminary development cut content (as is the case with Misery, for instance).
- Advanced Development Cut Content
- This is content of which we have stronger traces of serious development, likely during step 5. This can come in basically any form, as long as it doesn't fall into the third category: script/dialogue files, soundbanks, models and textures, even screenshots (including cubemaps) and video footage, as long as it's not obviously testing or placeholder material. This category would use the following template:
“The following information is cut content which has gone through partial implementation during development before being abandoned for any reason. This information is not to be considered canon in any way.
- Examples: Caleston, Global Plot 1 and Global Plot 3, the original Bring Down the Sky assignment, Mako modifications.
- Functional Cut Content
- This is content that has been mostly or fully developed to the point of completion, but cannot be accessed in the game, thus usually related to step 6. The difference between this category and the previous one is how difficult it is to make the content work in the game; if editing saves or using the console is enough, then it belongs here. If an actual modification of the game itself is necessary to restore the content, then it is a matter of how extensive the mod needs to be; if a majority of data needs to be remade from scratch, then it should fall into the previous category. How bugged or unbalanced the content is doesn't matter; only that it can be accessed in-game. This category would use the following template:
“The following information is cut content which appears mostly or fully functional but nonetheless cannot be normally accessed in-game. This information is not to be considered canon in any way.
- Examples: the option to save both Kaidan and Ashley on Virmire (restored by tweaking script files to make it available again), the Normandy workbench (restored by simply re-inserting the entity onto the Normandy), the option to persuade Jeong on Feros to pay off the colonists (restored by unblocking the option on the dialogue wheel), all the armors that cannot normally be accessed in-game (obtainable via console, usually unbalanced), the Harvester enemy (restored by re-inserting it, though reportedly quite bugged but still deadly and defeatable).
Note: content which has been made accidently inaccessible falls easily into this category, but unless there is dev-confirmation, no mention of that possibility should be made.
Note: since the original releases and the Legendary Edition can have different traces of cut content, the more advanced category always prevails for the same information. For instance, the Normandy Workbench would fall under "Advanced Development" in the Legendary Edition alone, but the original release has the files needed to make it fully functional. Therefore it should belong to the "Functional" category. In the exceptional case where only a combination of data files from both releases allows it to be functional, it should fall into that category. The point is to establish how much a piece of cut content was worked on at the minimum.
- Altered Content
- While not "cut" content per se, I believe it should be grouped with it as a matter of proximity. Altered content is anything that points to a piece of content which clearly exists in the final, accessible game having been different before release. All the "old" names or visual designs of places and characters fall into this category. If a certain piece of cut content pertains to both this category and one of the actual "cut" categories, then the "cut" categories should prevail (for example: Eden Prime having been shortened from its original design). While this category mostly consists of names and visual representations, it may rarely involve alternate versions of existing dialogues or cutscenes. This category would use the following template:
“The following information represents content which appears to have been altered during development. Unless confirmed otherwise, previous iterations are not to be considered canon.
Note: "unless confirmed otherwise" comes from the example that Chora's Den's previous name in data appears to be Archos, which is canon since a salarian mentions Chora's Den used to be called Archos in-universe. There may be other examples of this throughout the series.
I also considered a fifth category, "Testing and Promotional Content" (such as the X06 trailer dialogues), but I figure it can be left in general trivia if it relates to any topic in particular.
This categorization of cut content can be applied to all games, and probably could for most AAA games. As for language -- I believed in the necessity of using certain language to help contextualize the information presented, but this template helps doing just that. With this, I feel more comfortable foregoing "problematic" language like "originally" and the like.
I believe I should also re-arrange the main page to reflect this; it would make it easier to see what may have gone far in development and what may not have. Of course, it's not because we only have preliminary data that a certain piece of content didn't reach advanced development, or even full functionality, but we have to work with whatever information we have.
If you agree with this template and its use, then I think we are nearing the completion of this project. Implementing this information will take time, and it would have to be done gradually; whether this template is approved is critical to how it's implemented. I hope you will give it due consideration.--Loadingue (talk) 04:10, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
- I agree that it would be useful (even necessary) to classify cut content into distinct categories – in particular, on the main pages that are all about exhibiting the range of discovered cut content. I'm not sure I can see the need or value in individual cut content inserts, however. The description of the cut content should in itself make the nature and sourcing clear, without needing to use a separate, splashy banner that makes vague assertions about implementation maturity. Or am I misunderstanding how the templates are to be applied? You mention the four different variants, but also
- a "Cut Content Section ME1" template, to be used for trivia entries and sections
- a "Cut Content Page ME1" template, to be used for separate cut content pages
- but it's not clear to me what these templates would constitute and what their relation is to the four variants. Could you please demonstrate? Elseweyr (talk) 17:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- The proposed templates could be rewritten to make more clear their point isn't to point how far along development the pieces of content are, but rather how extensive their sourcing and documentation goes. I understand that a lack of different sources doesn't necessarily mean it got scrapped early; however, I would like to press that the opposite is true. Beyond the simple textual implementations of the Plot Database and text strings, other data files, increasingly difficult to produce, do mean that a certain piece of content went quite some distance before it was cut (not to mention the technically functional content, which is game-ready). Thus, I think only the wording of the first template declination, Preliminarily-Developed Cut Content, may need some adjustments. If you have better names for all the declinations, I'm also open to ideas because they're all a mouthful.
For instance, the Benezia page would have this cut content section:
Cut Content
“The following information is cut content which has gone through partial implementation during development before being abandoned for any reason. This information is not to be considered canon in any way.
- Instead of being by the rachni queen, Benezia was at some point located elsewhere in the hot labs. As revealed by a cut dialogue with the rachni queen, Benezia had biotically erased a part of the queen's memory so she would forget the coordinates of the Mu Relay. Shepard's squadmates would react to that revelation, noting that it's a trick that only powerful biotics are capable of, while a shocked Liara would remark that such practice is "forbidden."
I hope that illustrates the use.--Loadingue (talk) 17:44, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- It seems to me that a message "The following information is drawn from cut content and is not to be considered canon in any way." would be completely sufficient in all cases. Optionally the words "cut content" in the banner could link to some page which discusses the issues of cut content in more detail (eg describing the various sources for cut contnet). Meanwhile wiki users will be able to easily draw their own conclusions based on the actual descriptions of the content itself. Cattlesquat (talk) 19:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Then you have to be more clear, do you want me to describe the context of the cut content or not? These templates' purpose was specifically to avoid having to do that by giving a quick and generic introduction, since it seemed like a less controversial thing to do.--Loadingue (talk) 19:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- I have not decided myself how I stand on the specifics here, but I'm a firm believer in the KISS principle. Never underestimate how easy it is to confuse people, even if you THINK you're being helpful by providing more info and context. Hell, I've even confused myself when I've been over-explaining something here, and that's usually a good sign you may be breaking KISS. Neo89515 (talk) 19:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- The trimmed template I described above would work just fine with the following:
- In a cut version of Noveria, Benezia was located in the hot labs instead of being near the rachni queen. As revealed by a cut dialogue with the rachni queen, Benezia had biotically erased a part of the queen's memory so she would forget the coordinates of the Mu Relay. Shepard's squadmates would react to that revelation, noting that it's a trick that only powerful biotics are capable of, while a shocked Liara would remark that such practice is "forbidden."
- There could then be sourcing provided to the data files in question along with (optionally) metrics about how many messages existed, whether or not there were any art assets, and how much (if any) of the lines were actually recorded by voice actors. Those sorts of metrics allow users to draw their own conclusions about how far along development got, when/why the material was cut, etc. Also in cases where the devs are actually on record saying something about the development details (eg the bonus disk interviews) then those could be mentioned. Other than that, no assertions about timing, order, intent, etc, in main space. You could of course maintain pages in your own user space or on your own blog that discussed your theories about the development and cut content, and could link to the main wiki pages from those placed (but could not link back from main space). Cattlesquat (talk) 20:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- These metrics you're asking for are unreasonable to ask for, even after everything I've already done for this project. They would clutter the page with a bunch of technical data that few users would care about and even fewer understand. And please don't bring up "theories" about "timing, order, intent, etc" because this has nothing to do with all that, I know perfectly well you don't want this kind of stuff.
How about changing the first template variant (preliminary data cut content) to this instead?
“The following information is cut content based only on textual data. It is not known how far in development this content may have gone. This information is not to be considered canon in any way.
Instead of being vague and confusing about its source, it sticks to the fact that both the TLK file (text strings) and the Plot Database are text-based. I think it conveys the point better.--Loadingue (talk) 20:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'll be interested to hear what Elseweyr thinks on it, but I personally don't think we need any extra templates and definitely don't need any comments on how far development might or might not have gone. Cattlesquat (talk) 20:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm hold on, I think it's still not clear enough that there's no other trace than textual data, not that we're limiting ourselves to textual data for documenting it. How about this?
“The following information is cut content of which only textual data remains. Whether any additional development has occurred is uncertain. This information is not to be considered canon in any way.
Better?--Loadingue (talk) 21:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Again I don't think we need four templates, just one template that we're in cut content territory. The template doesn't need to make any comment on development. If there are text sources presumably they will be listed/summarized. If there are other valid sources eg art assets, dev commentary, then they will presumably be listed/summarized/quoted too but without any additional embellishment. The metrics I mentioned are strictly optional - they are facts that could be presented if you want to help users draw their own conclusions about something you think is important. Presumably if cut content is being added to articles there will be some provision for others to confirm the sourcing. Cattlesquat (talk) 21:15, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
“The following information is drawn from cut content and is not to be considered canon in any way.
- That still seems a bit short and unexplanatory considering the wide range of sources in terms of quantity, variety and reliability. For instance, for quests like the ones on Misery, we only have some vague words in the Plot Database to rely on, but for Global Plot 1, we have pretty much the entire assignment's dialogues, voiced by the professional actors. That's a massive difference, and while the implications would be apparent in the reference section, I think it's better if the reader can understand it early. It doesn't feel right to put every piece of cut content under the same template when their interpretation can vary so much, but I'd like to hear Elseweyr's opinion.--Loadingue (talk) 21:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
By the way, to make it clear, these wouldn't be 4 different templates, it would be a single template whose text can vary, written for instance like {{cutcontent|textual}}, {{cutcontent|advanced}}, {{cutcontent|functional}} and {{cutcontent|altered}}.--Loadingue (talk) 09:02, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- To make it clear what we're talking about, let's use template only for the content that is transcluded from the Templates namespace and a different term for the surface form, e.g. callout.
- I agree that the most important function of the callout is to highlight that we're, as Cattlesquat said, in cut content territory. The way the content is described should in itself not come across like a superposed narrative, but inherently express the nature of the source material and reliability of conclusions drawn thereof. So, in the friendliest possible way: We do need the context, but we should not need a callout to understand it. Personally I don't think we need to complicate the proposal with these banners; it's just as good (or better) without them.
- Addendum, just in case: Not sure if there was any discussion about the styling, but I think the callout chould "pop out" considerably more than the quotation and probably link back to the main cut content page. Elseweyr (talk) 06:54, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- The callout just means more or less what you were calling a template -- the visual graphic-plus-text that appears as a result of invoking the proposed "cutcontent" template. I believe Else requests that the styling be more attention-catching for the reader. That will help prevent the kind of mistake where a reader misses the callout and mistakes cut content for canon, or descriptions of cut content for descriptions of canon. Recall that the previous cut content template resulted in super-ugly callouts but definitely stood out vividly on the page. I wouldn't insist on the super-ugly part haha, but maybe you can come up with something that fits our aesthetic but grabs the attention more? Also, in the text of the callout, she's asking that perhaps the words "cut content" should link to the main cut content section. Cattlesquat (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's just more accurate terminology at a technical level. Cattlesquat (talk) 15:26, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Alright, well I had another idea for this "callout" that would make it a bit more explanatory without over-complicating things. The idea is that depending the sources, you could for instance write {{cutcontent|text strings, soundbanks, script files}} and the callout would appear like:
“The following information is drawn from cut content, based on the following sources: text strings, soundbanks, script files.
It is not to be considered canon in any way.
Unnecessary, or helpful in showing how extensive the information is?--Loadingue (talk) 15:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'd rather any generic synopsis of cut content sources be either on the main cut content page (reached through the link we're adding to the callout) or in the MoS, or both. And of course there are further possible sources including dev diaries. Cattlesquat (talk) 17:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Of course, the details would be present elsewhere. I just think it would be helpful to the reader to quickly differentiate between, say, a piece of information with only the broadest details available (which would only read "plot data" for instance), and one which is heavily documented (which would read like the above and more). And yes, things like "developer comments" or "concept art" can be used too. Since you mentioned elaborating on those sources, maybe also a link to the relevant part of the MoS in the callout? I've updated the callout to illustrate.--Loadingue (talk) 17:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with Elseweyr that we should leave that out of the callout. Can you try your hand at a more visible styling of the callout? Cattlesquat (talk) 18:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'd like to make sure Elseweyr doesn't like this last idea before scrapping it. But let me try to see what I can do:
| The following information is drawn from cut content and is not to be considered canon in any way. |
Since that'd be linking to the first game's cut content, then the callout/template should be able to link to each game's respective cut content page; so again, I assume we'd be looking at making something that can be written {{cutcontent|me1}}, {{cutcontent|me2}}, etc.--Loadingue (talk) 19:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- That is certainly an improvement -- an image (eg of scissors or maybe big red Omni Blade or something) at the left would be good. Sounds like it would be preferable to make a new page simply called Cut Content which briefly discusses what cut content is (and what the potential sources are) and then has links to the cut content pages for the individual games. Going in a direction that requires specific game name sounds like (a) more drudgery for editors, (b) more opportunities for mistakes, (c) not actually very helpful/necessary. IMHO. Cattlesquat (talk) 19:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think that image will look very pretty in the frame, I'll find something. But as for your idea of some sort of disambiguition page for cut content, I'm personally really not too convinced. I'd like to also have Elseweyr's opinion before I start going in that direction this late in the project.--Loadingue (talk) 19:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- This is just an idea, but a Category could be created for cut content (if it doesn't already exist {EDIT: it does exist}) and the main Category page could function as a landing page as well; however, I was given the impression at some point that Category pages aren't generally supposed to be either linked or considered part of the standard Wiki main space because they don't show up in standard Searches. Neo89515 (talk) 21:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm not married to the idea but it certainly helps grab attention. Cattlesquat (talk) 20:28, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
I still think that particular image is a bit too elaborate and distracting for a callout. Something simpler in shape is best. I'll look at Mass Effect's internal icons, I might find something suitable. Cherry on top would be an unused icon.--Loadingue (talk) 20:31, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
What about this? It's an unused HUD icon for a squadmate. Quite appropriate, and aesthetic.--Loadingue (talk) 10:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Pardon the vaguenuess of my previous reply; luckily Cattlesquat's elucidation of it was spot-on. I disagree with creating a cut content "hub" page in the main namespace. Game-specific ones will do just fine. The category page for cut content could be spruced up independently of this project, but certainly it can at least be fleshed it out with some links once we have more substance in this category.
- I like the way the callout development is going. If you want to design the template so that more detailed information about the source material can be passed as a parameter, I suppose that's alright, but it should be optional. (Meaning that it should not be crucial for understanding the context, and there should be a default text that works in any case.) As for the image, I think we're on the right track. While the HUD icon is cut content and I see the appeal, it doesn't really work as a symbol of cut content. My first thought was "What's this statue head?" and I would never understand its significance if it wasn't for your explanation. The broken omni-blade would perhaps work if it was a bit smaller? Something that signals scrapping or trashing may be easier to convey than some "unfinished" aspect. Elseweyr (talk) 11:23, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I forgot: Regarding the template design, if there's a need for variants per-game, we tend to just have separate pages per medium.
Template:This_and_that_(MEX),Template:This_and_that_(MEY), and so on. I don't recall a template that would take the game as a parameter value. Elseweyr (talk) 11:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Then we'd need to have 4 different cut content templates for all the main games, since if there was only one, it would have to link to a general cut content "hub", and you don't like the idea. But then, 4 different templates would probably need 4 different color schemes and maybe a different icon each, so that'll take some time to design. For ME1, I could also use the "trash" icon from the inventory screen, but that might be a bit too irreverent. As for citing the types of sources in the callout, I guess we'll drop that idea then.--Loadingue (talk) 11:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Upon reflection, it would be much more convenient for a single cut content template that works for all games. Visually, the callout would remain the exact same for all games, but the link accessed through the words "cut content" could change according to how it's written, for instance {{cutcontent|Mass Effect Cut Content}}, {{cutcontent|Mass Effect 2 Cut Content}}. Can everyone agree on this?--Loadingue (talk) 14:38, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Here's a bunch of icons (9 of them) I've found through the files of ME1 which might be suitable for cut content. My favorites are 2, 5 and 8.--Loadingue (talk) 21:24, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- The red one at the bottom is at least attention grabbing (and warningish). That would satisfy me for now although I like the red omni blade better for including the "cutting" concept. Cattlesquat (talk) 15:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- I think the red one is the most attention grabbing, it looks like a biohazard symbol to me. I prefer all of the rest of them to that one. DaBarkspawn (talk)
- (And maybe change the border color to something that doesn't make the red clash so much?) Cattlesquat (talk) 15:09, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
I've adjusted the project proposal, it should be in its final form now. I will leave another week for any last minute comments or suggestions here. I also assume that should this project pass, it would also allow for ME2, ME3 and MEA cut content to be documented on this Wiki, following the exact same guidelines, without needing another project proposal.--Loadingue (talk) 13:24, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
A few last notes before the vote begins:
- All of the sandbox pages will be adjusted or rewritten before being made public. Elseweyr's specific requests for change will be respected, and a number of less "objective" wording issues will be corrected.
- All references will be rewritten as per the guidelines in this proposal.
- While I believe they're valuable illustrations, the audio reconstructions of some cut dialogues (consisting of unused sound files) will be left out until I've re-recorded them in a more accurate way.
- Several images of cut content will be added wherever I can; I've put off uploading those because I'm not sure whether uploading images solely for sandbox pages is frowned upon.
- When I feel comfortable with the state of documentation of ME1 cut content on the Wiki, I'll get started on ME2.--Loadingue (talk) 14:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for heeding Elseweyr's direction (which was basically speaking for all of us old hands) to get this project in as close to compliant form as possible before implementation. Ideally, you would have made the actual adjustments/rewrites you allude to above before voting, but this is a case where I think we can dispense with that in the interests of expediency in view of how much time has already passed from when this project began. One final reminder that once this content enters the main space, any editing disputes that arise will be handled like any other. Anything that, on closer or further review, is deemed too speculative or weakly sourced can, and likely will, face challenge sooner or later. The general approval of this project as a whole is no guarantee against that. With that out of the way, it looks like you've finally reached the finish line after a lot of work. Congrats. Neo89515 (talk) 04:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Voting
Support
- Loadingue (talk) 12:22, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- DaBarkspawn (talk) 16:10, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Looks like we're good to go. Cattlesquat (talk) 03:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Neo89515 (talk) 04:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Elseweyr (talk) 19:16, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Neutral
- T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 11:26, 24 November 2023 (UTC)