Spring talk:CategoryStructure

K, hope pretty much everything is back in - I left out the Strategy guides on purpose, because I don't think they have a place in the "public face" of the Spring site (don't care if they're hidden somewhere). The reason is, the site is about the engine - I think it makes sense to also showcase which games are using it, but explaining those games is better left to the games one homepages, that's my opinion. Seanheron 12:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC) Maybe we should have a more general discussion of what should displayed by the site/sitemap ? Related to this is what should go in which of our "top-bar" pages. I would suggest:

• Present Spring as an Engine (currently About)
• Present Games that use Spring (Games)
• Enable people to install and use spring (Download for installation, FAQaka Help for usage, ??)
• Support improvement and work on the Engine (is in Source Development)
• Support work on content and games (This is also in Source Development, but I think it should have an seperate page)

That would cover everything I think the Spring site should be about / display visibly. I've split Engine Devving and Game creation, cause I just think it's two very seperate things (just look in the forums!). A different possible split might be: Coding <-> Artwork

Well I see no reason why it shouldn't be there - it's an optional thing anyway. Including it won't make the Wiki's primary purpose change and that's being about Spring. But why not allowing some guides for the games? I mean the games may actually present themselves (which often also include brief guides). Considering your argumentation those pages also should be removed. That's because they imo aren't just "showcased" but quite extensively described (game dynamics, tactics and so on)...

You also shouldn't forget that not all of the mods have a website of their own and with the new Project Subforums there's no need for them to do so (those sites have quite a danger of disappearing anyway and so they have a "safe" place for their guides). Games that have external guides (like Gundam RTS) are going to just put in an external link anyway...

You also shouldn't forget that the guides are a HUGE topic with very long explanations - would be a bit lame to simply trash all that work. I mean by putting it e.g. in the "Playing Spring" category it also won't be in the "public face" as you describe it but just one subcategory of many the mods/games can link to in their description... - Athmos, copied here by Sean

I'm not saying they should be deleted - so it's not "trashed". But honestly, these games/mods could make their own websites to present that kind of stuff, I don't see the problem for them to be honest. So I basiclly still disagree with you on including them (the most I would think makes sense is for the Mods page to link to strategy guides - but then I wouldn't include that in the SiteMap. Seanheron 15:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Well apart suggesting to do discussions in the forum (like HERE when it's about the structure) as that's more comfortable imo there's not much use in arguing about every mod creating their own website. That either won't happen or they once had one nobody ever visited. That's also an argument that didn't make it when deciding about the Project Subforums which even might have worked with some easy & free stuff like the NOTA forum does it (although also here e.g. the BA forum that once existed was visited rarely at best and the main discussion happened here). So outsourcing this is no solution and so it should remain in the Wiki. With it being in the Wiki and not really fitting like in the CA-mod description or any other one it should have a category of its own (especially as it's a huge topic with lots of articles) and thus has to appear on the sitemap which is why I put it at the end of the "Help" section. - Master-Athmos

I don't much care whether Games have their own site or not - that's their own problem. I don't think we should be bending the structure to accomodate some Games that wouldn't have a place otherwise, we should be thinking about what we want to present here, and in my mind, as stated above, that's the following:

• Present Spring as an Engine (currently About)
• Showcase Games that use Spring (Games)
• Enable people to install and use spring (Though to be quite honest, on the installation side I would suggest giving more room to/highlighting individual games installers)
• Support improvement and work on the Engine
• Support work on content and games

If you think there should be anything added (or removed) to/from that, I'm definitely listening.

Plus, I disagree that everything that has a category needs to be in the sitemap - I'd be happy with having pages that are not in the sitemap, and think that can be useful (why not have something like the "King of..." pages, if they're used, I'm fine with that, they just definitely do not go in the Sitemap). Seanheron 14:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC) P.S.: Discussing fine points like this in the Forum seems to be spamming it up to me - if we want to keep people following the threads / interested in the Wiki-cleanup action, we can't fill them with discussions on minutae like this. (and it's just as comfertable to me).