Editing Forum:Questions pertaining to the Walkthrough space

{{Forumheader|The Realm of Sleep|The World that Never was}}

<!-- Please put your content under this line.  Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ -->

{{TNE|time=18:41, 7 May 2011 (EDT)|attntext=In the recent Round Table on #KHWiki-noticeboard with practically all the regulars on it, we decided on an ''official'' walkthrough space. Thus we'll need Porplemontage's help in setting up the space. I believe all of us agree on this one.

We have all agreed on taking the best of all the existing user walkthroughs and melding them together, effectively removing the ones on the userspace, but not removing their efforts.

However, I have a few questions to address, and if there are any new ones that arise, I'll be bringing them up here.

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be structured?''' Is it going to be '''Page 1: INSERT WORLD HERE''' or '''Page 1: INSERT GAME HERE'''?
**If we go with Option 2, '''how are we going to make the walkthroughs presentable so that they do not look cluttered''', and how are we going to get all pages to the users' attention?

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be written — in the first person, or the third person?'''
**All user walkthroughs, including mine, have been written in the first person (kindly correct me if I'm wrong). If we choose the first person, then we will have to state a number of users in charge of the respective walkthroughs, as well as the people who originally wrote them. A separate set of rules for walkthrough writing styles shall be mentioned in the MOS.
**If we choose the third person, we may not have to worry about this. Writing styles will follow the rest of the articles in the Mainspace as per the MOS.

*If there are more than one solution to a boss fight or a sidequest, for instance, '''how many must be shown?'''
**My suggestion is three — either the most popular, or the most feasible.
**If we go with it (I'm not obliging anyone to go with it, really), then how is it meant to be displayed? As collapsible sections, or as tabs? I recommend the latter, but again, it's up to all of you.

Please, share your thoughts and suggestions.}}

{{Asif|potados=Okay...

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be structured?''' Is it going to be '''Page 1: INSERT WORLD HERE''' or '''Page 1: INSERT GAME HERE'''?
**I say we do both. First have a page with all the games in them, and within each game there should be a page with all the worlds in them. That'll make it more organized.

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be written — in the first person, or the third person?'''
**Personally I prefer the second person- "Go here, then do this." It sounds more like we're talking to the reader, which keeps them more interested. And yes, the MOS should be expanded to include walkthroughs.

*If there are more than one solution to a boss fight or a sidequest, for instance, '''how many must be shown?'''
**I think in order to include the old walkthroughs, we should group the similar strategies together ("A & B's strategy", then "C's strategy", and so on). Any other strategies can then be added to this. Any of the strategies can also be deleted if it is too complex/unreasonable.
**I think it should be organized like so:
==Strategies==
===A & B's Strategy===
Don't forget, Take Your Daughter To Work Day is the perfect time to have her tested.

===C's Strategy===
Alright, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back! GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR DAMN LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE? Demand to see life's manager! Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons! Do you know who I am? I'm the man who's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! With the lemons! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that BURNS YOUR HOUSE DOWN!

That's my two cents.}}


{{DDark|time=[[User:D.Dark.|D.Dark.]] 19:30, 7 May 2011 (EDT)|text=I suggest we go the route that the FF Wiki went with their walktroughs. In my journey of playing the FF games I always look there and the "structure" they use is good and informative. But every writer has his style and way of writing so its possible to recognize their work so they aren't identical. This is an easy and truthfully lazy way out but its tried and true.  }}

{{Chitalian8|time=20:14, 7 May 2011 (EDT)|talk= Here we go.
*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be structured?''' Is it going to be '''Page 1: INSERT WORLD HERE''' or '''Page 1: INSERT GAME HERE'''?
**I'd say go with it being organized by world. The page wouldn't be some huge text wall that takes 10 minutes to load, and we could have a neat little nav template at the bottom.

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be written — in the first person, or the third person?'''
**All user walkthroughs, including mine, have been written in the first person (kindly correct me if I'm wrong). If we choose the first person, then we will have to state a number of users in charge of the respective walkthroughs, as well as the people who originally wrote them. A separate set of rules for walkthrough writing styles shall be mentioned in the MOS.
**I'd say use third person in everything except for parts with separate strategies, like what As if showed. So basically, use "the player" for everything except strategies.

*If there are more than one solution to a boss fight or a sidequest, for instance, '''how many must be shown?'''
**Yeah, I'd go with something like what As if showed, grouping similar strategies. Maybe, at the top of the strategy section, we could have a general strategy, with basic tactics that would apply to everyone's, then have subsections with user's strategies that have variations on the general strategy or extra, unlisted strategies.

I'm now lacking 2 cents.}}
{{LapisScarab|time=20:21, 7 May 2011 (EDT)|text=I also think we should use the second person in the walkthroughs. It's easier and less awkward than writing in the third person, and we are literally telling the readers how they should be doing something. It just sort of makes sense to say "you" in the walkthroughs.

For organization, I really liked Kryten's idea on the forum that was sort of based on the Pokemon walkthroughs. Organize it by world, and have subsections for various events that you need to return to that world for (for example, in KHII, have a section for the Pride Lands, then subsections for the first visit, second visit, etc.). 

I'm liking As If!'s  idea on the way to organize strategies, but I just thought of something. Should we use actual users' names? A Wiki shouldn't have certain pages "signed" by the users that contributed to them (That's why we raised hell over the way Oasis displays the user that added a particular image, no?). If we organize it that way, perhaps we should say "Strategy A" and "Strategy B" instead of "Erry's Strategy" and "Af If!'s Strategy". Just a thought.}}

{{ErryTalk|time=21:13, 7 May 2011 (EDT)|cj=Here's my 2¢

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be structured?''' Is it going to be '''Page 1: INSERT WORLD HERE''' or '''Page 1: INSERT GAME HERE'''?

Well, I suggest each game has it's own page, while in the actual walkthrough, it would be structured in how the story would allow it, such as when in KH2, you would have to visit worlds twice. So it would be, for KH2, Twilight Town (Roxas) -> Twilight Town 1st Visit -> Hollow Bastion 1st Visit, etc. That way it would be organized. and the chapters (essentially the worlds) would be collapsible.

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be written — in the first person, or the third person?'''

Second person, such as 'you' and not 'the player'. Because that way it is better explained to the reader, rather than reading it to yourself.

*If there are more than one solution to a boss fight or a sidequest, for instance, '''how many must be shown?'''

With the numerous ways we can showcase different strategies, we could use 3, and again, like Asif where they are letters than names, but I do still think recognition is due to the ones who gave the strategy so if the person is having a problem, they can contact the person who submitted the method. We could have a signature at the bottom left or bottom right of a method to give recognition.

I have no personal preference, I am okay with either tabs or collapsibles... but tabs for the better layout of the walkthrough article.}}

{{LapisScarab|time=21:25, 7 May 2011 (EDT)|text=Grammar Nazi time. 
*First person = I
*Second person = You
*Third person = He, She, It.}}

{{ErryTalk|time=22:23, 7 May 2011 (EDT)|kk=I AM ESL, THANK YOU. Anyways, second person.}}
{{KrytenKoro|Walkthroughs should be filed under world, per game. This allows all the side-quests for a world to be in one area, and avoids the problem of which order you play worlds in. There are too many optional worlds in this series to just go with "what order do guides use".

The basic format should be something like with the Pokemon guides, I think: Have a main section for the "episodes", the first time you get to the world and do the story there, and then have some kind of "When you return" section, that lists what else you can do in the world, and what you have to do to unlock it.

For strategies: we should have some basic rules for what makes a good strategy. For example:

*Fastest
*Cheapest (item-wise, magic-wise in KH Days)
*Simplest
*Safest (HP-wise)
*No power-leveling required
*No inordinate preperation required
*Works on highest difficulty

Then, if there are different strategies that are TRULY different, and are in one way or another superior to another strategy (like A is faster than B, B is simpler than C), and not just a worse version of another, they should all be listed. Tabs would probably be best, in that case.

I also like how the FF wiki guides have a little popup infobox for new weapons or bosses, though obviously we don't want the full all-series infobox for a KH2 boss.}}

{{17m|text= Aight...

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be structured?''' Is it going to be '''Page 1: INSERT WORLD HERE''' or '''Page 1: INSERT GAME HERE'''?
:I agree with Erry, each walkthrough need their own articles. As for the worlds, we can make a sub page for it, like ''Kingdom Hearts II Walkthrough/Twilight Town'' and then merge all visits (Roxas, First, and second) in that subpage, while in the end of the of a section, we can put a link to the next destination .
like:
After Sora and co. received the Gummi Ship, a new world will be available.

Go to the next world [[Kingdom Hearts II Walkthrough/Hollow Bastion#First Visit|>>>]]

*'''How are the walkthroughs supposed to be written — in the first person, or the third person?'''
:Second person will be easier I guess. Comparison: 
**1st-person: "Before heading towards the next world, I visit Atlantica to further progress my story"
**2nd-person: "Before heading towards the next world, you can visit Atlantica to further progress the story"
**3rd-person: "Before heading towards the next world, Sora can visit Atlantica to further progress the story". 

First-person style kind of forced the readers to do what the author did, while the third one is a bit confusing. I say second person would be the best option.

*If there are more than one solution to a boss fight or a sidequest, for instance, '''how many must be shown?'''
:Three will do. Something like:
**Safe-way strategy (including cheap tricks)
**Normal strategy (block, attack, heal, magic, forms)
**Expert strategy (with limitations, like the boss can be beaten without magic, forms or powerful commands)

Although the third one is optional and is almost completely unnecessary.}}
{{TNE|time=05:53, 8 May 2011 (EDT)|text=Okay, the reason why I asked ''first or third person'' was for things which would go along the lines of "We recommend you to ___________________". My bad; it's only right that much of the walkthrough be in the second person anyway.}}

{{LapisScarab|time=13:25, 8 May 2011 (EDT)|text=Well, in that case, third person would be the logical choice, since not only one person would be writing the article. Though it could probably be worded to avoid pronouns at all, like "It is recommended that you..." instead of "We recommend that you...".}}

{{AlVan|time15:56, 9 May 2011 (EDT)|text=I agree with D.D., the FF wiki's walkthroughs are not official but have the same basic structure. They can be good examples.

One more thing, "We recommend you to______..." is 2nd person, not 1st. However, the point of view will probably be extremely mixed.}}

{{Asif|lemons=GRAMMAR HAMMER!

Seeing has how in the sentence, "We recommend you to _______..." the subject is "we", that sentence is indeed in the 1st person. The sentence would be 2nd person if it read, "You are recommended to _______..."}}
{{LapisScarab|time=00:16, 11 May 2011 (EDT)|text=...Touche, my friend, touche.}}

Hi, I'm from http://strategywiki.org and missed the meeting, but might I suggest writing the guides there instead, as we already have [http://strategywiki.org/wiki/Category:Kingdom_Hearts a number of guides] at various levels of completion?  -- [[User:Prod|Prod]] 01:41, 11 May 2011 (EDT)

{{Asif|sho=When I said A, B, C in my post, I wrote it in lieu of people's names, not because I think they should be actually labeled that way.  I agree with Erry and 17master about organization, with there first being a page with all the games, then clicking on one will link to a page with all the worlds in that game, with all subquests/stuff for that respective world in a page. Under each chapter (1st Visit, 2nd visit), there should be a link to the "next world" (Twilight Town 1st Visit -> Hollow Bastion 1st Visit for example). I also agree with Kryten for strategies.

And Prod, thank you for offering that, but I don't think it would be the right choice for this wiki. It would be more user-intuitive to host all the walkthroughs here, rather than just presenting a link saying, "For the walkthrough, go here." It just doesn't make sense.}}

{{AlVan|time12:10, 17 June 2011 (EDT)|text=I'm kinda confused, when are we actually gonna start on this. (If we have started this, I will admit to Kryton that I am somewhat of an imbecile.)}}
{{KrytenKoro|I don't think anyone started up the discussion page yet.}}
{{TNE|time=08:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)|shocktext=Shouldn't we begin one already? It's been months since this thing was started.}}