Talk:Age of Empires II

From GenieWiki

Scenario design team section

Ah... I just don't like this section. Honestly, I don't think we should have a section about scenario design teams in this article at all - perhaps on the AoKH and Scenario design articles, but this is far too specific at this stage - we don't even have a mention of the scenario design aspect of AoK yet on here, let alone its teams.

I realize I'm starting sound bossy and pedantic, but please bear with me and I'll try to point out some of the things that should be done differently:

The Teams of Empires

Sections should be name intuitively rather than stylistically, so it makes it easier to navigate within an article because you know what the section is about.

As with all games that include editors there are teams that design for them. Some teams you may have heard of are Tsunami Studios, Dgdn (Dragon Gaming Design Network) and of course the former Woad Creations. teams come and go, but in the wiki they will live on forever.

You: We never refer directly to the reader in a wiki - this is 'second person' writing. If you ever find yourself directly addressing a reader like that just change it to third person (e.g. Some scenario design teams that may be well known).

Regarding the internal links - please consider that when you link you need to do so to the article or future article as it will be named. We wouldn't use 'Teams', we would use 'Scenario design teams'. This can be piped ('|') like this (see the code) Teams. Naming conventions are hard to grasp at first, but they're very important to follow, otherwise there may be multiple articles on the same thing, red links that should go to existing articles etc. We also use lower case letters like I did in Scenario design teams there so that people can link to stuff without needing to capitalize. There are exceptions though, for example DGDN would all be in capitals.

Finally, we shouldn't say things like 'they will live forever' - the wiki won't be around forever either. Generally just try to avoid making 'boastful' sort of statements about things and try to keep it to known facts.

Since this is one of the most linked to and important articles on the wiki, it's especially important to follow the guidelines. It sets a good example for editors to learn from if we do it right here. If we're doing a more 'traditional' sort of article on a trick, or about a campaign by BJ etc, I think we can afford to be quite a bit more informal than this.

Phew, that was horrible to do. As a newcomer you're not going to have any idea about all the conventions on style etc, so please don't get angry at me. We also don't yet have a help section up, so the best we can do to explain things is use the help material at wikipedia.

Also, as I said before, it's much better to add this stuff than do nothing, and others can always tidy it up. But it's also important to learn from our mistakes as we go, otherwise we'll just keep making them forever.

Hopefully this explanation will be useful to other editors too so they can too learn of some of the conventions a wiki follows.

In the future I will be concentrating more on getting some editing help material up for people so they have a better idea on how to use the site and what the best proceedure to follow is when adding to the wiki.

Please don't be put off by my advise or the way I put it. Have a chat with me about it on my talk page or by email (I also use Skype, MSN etc - see my user page) if you'd like to - I'd be more than willing. Richard 23:36, 4 June 2006 (CDT)

Why?

Why is this page much shorter than its corresponding page on Wikipedia? This site is supposed to be about Age of Empires II!

The article is short because people haven't added much to it yet - perhaps you could add some material to the article yourself? The wiki isn't just for AoK though, it's for AoE, AoK and SWGB. Richard 00:58, 4 August 2006 (CDT)

Please stop advertising

Would be nice if you guys stopped writing about Heaven on every article here. Heaven is not an AoK site. Perfect 13:11, 5 November 2007 (CST)

Also, if AoK Heaven is not an AoK site I honestly don't know what is an AoK site. Last time I checked it had over 1000 downloads for almost any type - campaign, SP and MP scenarios. That's pretty good, I think. Peter 09:44, 5 November 2007 (CST)

That's AoC not AoK Perfect 13:11, 5 November 2007 (CST)

I think it's about both; and AoC is the expansion pack of AoK. AoE Heaven also has a lot of articles about and downloads for RoR, even though a set of RoR players thought it had nothing about RoR. I did notice that you can't tel AoK downloads apart from AoC ones, but that doesn't surprise me a lot - The AoE Heaven forum got flamed by people who had downloaded stuff at AoEH thinking it was for AoK/TC. Peter 14:15, 5 November 2007 (CST)

I still get a feeling you guys are advertising Heaven in every topic. Saw someone say that he was making these topics so the people of Heaven could be remember forever. Maybe GenieWiki should be divided into AoE, RoR, AoK, AoC and possibly that other galactic game. But irritates me when people forget to say if it's AoK or Aoc or when they assume everything is AoC. I did check a few scenarios that they upload on Heaven and I couldn't see none that I've ever played or seen being played. The pictures are also AoC. Perfect 16:27, 5 November 2007 (CST)

You can add links to what you think or know are real AoK sites. I'm not a great AoK player and don't know the game well - I only got the game a few months ago. The reason that HeavenGames sites are mentioned a lot here is probably that many contributors are active forum members there. If you want this wiki to be more balanced, I can only advice you to draw in more people from other places. :) Peter 17:37, 5 November 2007 (CST)

I understand what you mean but this is Wikipedia (or part of it) and shouldn't be filled with biased people. I don't see the point of having these articles if all are written by Heaven Fans. Perfect 15:27, 6 November 2007 (CST)

Actually it isn't Wikipedia, it's GenieWiki. If the staff of GenieWiki doesn't care about bias then why should you? But who's biased here? What's your grudge against HeavenGames? Peter 18:00, 6 November 2007 (CST)

I said "or part of it". GenieWiki aint part of Wikipedia? and doesn't the staff care about people being biased? For some reason I doubt that, unless you're the staff. "Why should I care what is written here or if it's biased", well why is this written by people for free. Because they care? I got no grudges against Heaven and I bet they are great for AoC, I just question their part in AoK. Perfect 15:52, 7 November 2007 (CST)

GenieWiki uses the wiki software, but that's where the relation ends. It's intended for people who enjoy the games, and I think that there's absolutely no point in being as strict about "advertising" as in Wikipedia itself. If you have a link to a good fan site with real stuff in it that makes it worth the visit, don't hesitate to add it. Don't add links to dead sites sitting there to make money by getting hits (you may know the kind: a glossy front page with dead links to sections where visitors are supposed to add the content.) :(

I'm not staff here, but I know that AoK Heaven was started as an AoK site - because TC wasn't about then, and the staff never updated the title. I suppose that TC has more or less outcompeted AoK, just like RoR has outcompeted AoE, at least I'm nearly always playing RoR because it has those few extras that make it a better game. And as a result I dare say that AoKH has a lot more about AoC than about AoK. Even so, I think that AoKH has still a lot to offer for AoK players. Or am I wrong?

Also don't forget that AoC = AoK + a lot of extras. I would completely agree with you if the link was in the AoE article - and I have seen links in AoE forums to downloads for AoK and TC campaigns and scenarios, inserted by people who were too stupid to see the difference. Peter 16:36, 7 November 2007 (CST)

This is not Wikipedia. It's just a place where that article would be more "at home", as opposed to Wiki where it didn't meet inclusion policy. Giggy ^Talk 01:14, 8 November 2007 (CST)

You're back. ;) An article about HG isn't much to the point here because people who come here probably know it already. Peter 05:18, 8 November 2007 (CST)