Welcome to Nukapedia!
Hello, Wisdawn, we are glad you have joined the Fallout Wiki!
Learn more
For assistance, please feel free to reach out to our admins or join the Nukapedia Discord server. We look forward to working with you!
Sincerely, GarouxBloodline (talk) 22:11, January 3, 2014 (UTC)
Irrelevant messages[]
...because I obviously have nothing better to do that ruin someones day by zealously reverting their messages. Look, I remove irrelevant posts as I see them; when it's not appropriate for what talk pages are intended, I take it off. I'm not about to sift through the thousands of talk pages that are years old to nitpick through finding irrelevant posts. But you know what I will do? Just for you, I'll remove the junk on That Gun's talk page, so we can be on our merry ol' ways. If you see any other talk pages with crap that's not suggesting how to improve the respective page, go ahead and take it down. --Kastera (talk) 23:16, January 3, 2014 (UTC)
- P.S. You probably should comment on the mod's download page and notify potential downloaders of the "false advertising".
- P.P.S. This wiki doesn't cover the use of mods, so any content related to the use of mods that don't fix game bugs will be taken down as well.
- I tried to do just that, but that mod strangely disappeared from the entire web. I cannot even find it an a cached Google page, strangely enough. I still posted on the forums of a well known modding site, but that won't help, because the relevant section is not frequented that much. People should be able to search for something on Google and find it. And it is irrelevant whether Wikia covers the use of mods or not, because Wikia was affected already by that mod. How? Well, the mod changed the damage of a few weapons, specifically, the mod reduced the damaged of That Gun significantly (and let's remember that the mod does [not] tell the user everything it does certainly not about that particular change); so when I checked the damage on Wikia and found out that it makes That Gun one of the best pistols in the game, I was like, "Oh, apparently this page needs to be updated; the actual damage is much less than the listed here." So I went on and changed the damage "accurately" according to what I see in-game. That change was quickly reverted, alerting me that the damage had been checked several times in GECK already (which is a modding application, by the way!), so I checked, too, and found out that the damage indeed is superior as listed on Wikia. And it was ONLY due to my knowledge and understanding in modding that I was eventually able to figure out why I was seeing and experiencing much reduced damage in-game; if it was not for what I know, I would've probably never understood what was going on, or resolved it, let alone pinpoint that specific mod to be the culprit. Long story short, like it or not, policy or not, mod DO affect Wikia, very much can, and probably will. So I was not letting off some steam on a Wikia talk page (barely anyone reads those anyway!), but I was including information that may be relevant and important to someone who might feel like "correcting" the information on Wikia in the future; and to someone wondering what the heck is going on with that particular gun in-game.--Wisdawn (talk) 13:27, January 4, 2014 (UTC)
- Howdy, Wisdawn. I've just noticed this discussion, and I'd like to add a bit to it. The point you bring up about users with mods coming here to investigate game info is pertinent, but in a different sense than you see. One of the reasons we don't cover mod content at all is so that folks who come here understand that the content on our pages is exactly what is in the vanilla game files. At this point in time, hundreds of editors have reviewed the data on weapon pages, our most visited pages. I personally checked every single geck entry on FO3 and FNV weapon pages for accuracy. So, users who come here for info can implicitly understand that if they see something different in their game, it must be a mod (or some other glitch) causing it. I hope you can also understand that with the bazillions of mods out there, we can't simply add content for all the problems associated with mods. That info would bloat our pages to the point where finding the real info is harder. The other point you bring up: That others may try to change the pages from the correct info by mistake; is also a good one. One I've considered what to do about in the past, since it is not infrequent that it happens. I will bring up with the community what we can do to place some kind of reference on weapon article pages to inform visitors that all the info on the pages has been verified with the game editor and is correct. I hope this info helps inform you of the reasons why we do what we do and also understand that we take your concerns into consideration. Thanks for understanding. The Gunny
18:04, January 4, 2014 (UTC)
- Hey Gunny. I understand where you're coming from, and I thank you for your courteous explanation of many points. Much appreciated. The reasons I got upset with taking off what I wrote were: 1. It was on a Talk page, not on the actual weapon's page; and 2. I did include details that I believe were useful, if not relevant, like the detail about a certain mod changing the damage of that weapon without informing the mod user of the change. So why did that have to be taken off from a [Talk] page, especially one about a specific single weapon in a game, not a Talk page of some huge page with zillions of things to discuss and dispute? Furthermore, I would like to draw your attention to some points that would hopefully be considered feedback from a user of your pages (before I was a contributor), and a user who plays games, uses mods, and also develops mods: you seem to assume that [most] Wikia users will feel that the information on it is 100% accurate, but as an example, that's not how I treat Wikipedia or Wikia; I understand that they are encyclopedias being built by normal users and people like me, and that almost anyone can change something or contribute; and at the same time, that some pages can become outdated after certain patches are applied and so. Due to all those things I know about Wikia and Wikipedia, I do not take information on them for granted, and if I have enough reason to believe that a number may be inaccurate, I go ahead and change it usually. So that's my attitude and understanding as a Wikia user, and I don't think I'm too special in this aspect; I reckon a lot more users out there feel or think the same way. Thus, I do not think it would be wise that we, as users or visitors, readily assume Wikia pages are 100% accurate. That's just my feedback and advice on what to assume about visitors, or how they think. Moreover, while a half-intelligent user or visitor will understand that the numbers shown are for the vanilla, un-modded version of the game, of course, if that same user believes that he is not using any mod that changes that aspect of the game, then as far as that user and that specific page or number is considered, he is using a "vanilla, un-modded" version of the game, or more accurately, using a vanilla, un-modded section or part of the game. If that section is vanilla and un-modded for the user, or that's what the user believes, then they will wonder why their game shows them different things. I do not think that the user will quickly believe it's a mod, because as far as the user is concerned, they are sure which mods they installed and they know what the mods do; and the game should not have been changed by any mods in this specific aspect. So that user will end up thinking their game is bugged...or the Wikia page needs to be updated. I hope that makes sense. You mentioned that you wondered what to do about an issue like this, and the proposed solution was to put a note that all numbers have been double-checked within the master file of the game as of patch x.xx and they are accurate and should not be changed...or something along those lines. That might be useful to some users, but I believe that what would be more useful is to perhaps add a section with a title or subject like "Are your numbers different in-game?", then explain in that section that it could be because they're using a different version of the game, or because of a mod. And if they're sure they're using an up-to-date version, and that none of their mods should change this aspect, then perhaps direct them to another page that explains how they can pinpoint the source of the change or problem; maybe even a page with a list of mods that change that aspect or number within the game, especially mods that do so without explicitly and clearly telling the user. Now, I understand what you explained about "getting into mods" and bloating the pages with largely irrelevant content to most users; so I'm not suggesting that Wikia starts to focus on mods, not the least bit, but to simply allow users to contribute to a section or page that simply lists the names of mods that change aspects or numbers listed on any Wikia page. And the formatting of the section would intuitively make it clear that the site does not want to go into any details about mods, but simply offer a reference to the community, by the community, as to what mods change the page's details, especially what mods do that without making it clear. If it's a simply list, with only names, and the community builds it slowly, then what's the harm? Wikia is supposed to be an encyclopedic reference, so why not be a reference for something simply like that? A list of the mods that affect the info on this page.--Wisdawn (talk) 18:40, January 4, 2014 (UTC)
- Howdy, Wisdawn. I've just noticed this discussion, and I'd like to add a bit to it. The point you bring up about users with mods coming here to investigate game info is pertinent, but in a different sense than you see. One of the reasons we don't cover mod content at all is so that folks who come here understand that the content on our pages is exactly what is in the vanilla game files. At this point in time, hundreds of editors have reviewed the data on weapon pages, our most visited pages. I personally checked every single geck entry on FO3 and FNV weapon pages for accuracy. So, users who come here for info can implicitly understand that if they see something different in their game, it must be a mod (or some other glitch) causing it. I hope you can also understand that with the bazillions of mods out there, we can't simply add content for all the problems associated with mods. That info would bloat our pages to the point where finding the real info is harder. The other point you bring up: That others may try to change the pages from the correct info by mistake; is also a good one. One I've considered what to do about in the past, since it is not infrequent that it happens. I will bring up with the community what we can do to place some kind of reference on weapon article pages to inform visitors that all the info on the pages has been verified with the game editor and is correct. I hope this info helps inform you of the reasons why we do what we do and also understand that we take your concerns into consideration. Thanks for understanding. The Gunny
- I tried to do just that, but that mod strangely disappeared from the entire web. I cannot even find it an a cached Google page, strangely enough. I still posted on the forums of a well known modding site, but that won't help, because the relevant section is not frequented that much. People should be able to search for something on Google and find it. And it is irrelevant whether Wikia covers the use of mods or not, because Wikia was affected already by that mod. How? Well, the mod changed the damage of a few weapons, specifically, the mod reduced the damaged of That Gun significantly (and let's remember that the mod does [not] tell the user everything it does certainly not about that particular change); so when I checked the damage on Wikia and found out that it makes That Gun one of the best pistols in the game, I was like, "Oh, apparently this page needs to be updated; the actual damage is much less than the listed here." So I went on and changed the damage "accurately" according to what I see in-game. That change was quickly reverted, alerting me that the damage had been checked several times in GECK already (which is a modding application, by the way!), so I checked, too, and found out that the damage indeed is superior as listed on Wikia. And it was ONLY due to my knowledge and understanding in modding that I was eventually able to figure out why I was seeing and experiencing much reduced damage in-game; if it was not for what I know, I would've probably never understood what was going on, or resolved it, let alone pinpoint that specific mod to be the culprit. Long story short, like it or not, policy or not, mod DO affect Wikia, very much can, and probably will. So I was not letting off some steam on a Wikia talk page (barely anyone reads those anyway!), but I was including information that may be relevant and important to someone who might feel like "correcting" the information on Wikia in the future; and to someone wondering what the heck is going on with that particular gun in-game.--Wisdawn (talk) 13:27, January 4, 2014 (UTC)
- P.P.S. This wiki doesn't cover the use of mods, so any content related to the use of mods that don't fix game bugs will be taken down as well.
Those are good points you've made. We are bound by two things here: Our no mods policy and our article talk page policy. The first is self-evident, the second is that talk pages are for discussing improvement to the article, not a repository or hints, strategy, speculation etc. Any change to these policies would need to be discussed in a forum and approved. More to the point, the other input you have on what we put on pages to inform visitors would be very welcome on the forum I just opened up specifically to discuss just that: Forum:References_to_GECK_data_on_articles. Your input is very welcome there, if you'd like to participate. You would bring to that forum the view of someone who uses the pages. The Gunny 19:06, January 4, 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for the invitation. At first glance, I felt like I have nothing to contribute beyond the suggestion of a section for mods that change the info any particular page; but thankfully at second thought, I had a lot to contribute. I hope the discussion leads to improvements to the site that would reflect on many other places.--Wisdawn (talk) 19:56, January 4, 2014 (UTC)