Forum:Sector main page layout

Forums: Index > Watercooler > Sector main page layout

Notes (2016)

Thomas, I think what you are doing looks great and makes imminent sense. Thank you for doing it.

• My only comment is that I think we need to match up some of the headers to match everything else:
• i.e. Description vs. Description (Specifications)
• i.e. References vs. References & Contributors (Sources)
• The re-arranged categories look good and make sense. I'm glad of your corrections to my and other's materials.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 14:38, 14 August 2016 (EDT)

---

I think the parenthetical additions to the headers are redundant. I feel they don't add anything, indeed they detract from the purpose of the header. The headers are supposed to be as simple as possible. This would include omitting, if at all possible, any special characters (like parenthesis and ampersands). So I defaulted to the simpler style for the headers because they look and work better.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 17:35, 14 August 2016 (EDT)

---

I think they add a lot and they help to guide the desired volunteers and contributors of materials that are so highly desired. Those parentheticals give direction and guidance. Respectfully disagree. Too much information density is undesirable, but so is the other end, when we get a lot of questions that a little clarification could resolve. Better to err by giving too much than too little.

• Plus, they are the exact things that younger Mongoose players and younger RPG's players ask me for at intro games. They don't start with the same base knowledge that we, earlier Traveller fan generations, start with.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 20:46, 14 August 2016 (EDT)

---

The Last time we discussed this you never offered a convincing explanation as to why the extra words and formatting were required. As a contributor I find them to be counterproductive. As a user I find them to be distracting and redundant. Part of the problem is the formatting. "Description (Specification)" means what? Description and Specification? and/or?

• Why does Specification need to be in parenthesis?

- Tjoneslo (talk) 22:22, 14 August 2016 (EDT)

How are we (the current contributors) to interpret parentheticals? "Description (Specification)", means what? Description and Specifications? and/or? I have no idea how you intend these to be interpreted.

---

I said my piece. No worries.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 23:44, 14 August 2016 (EDT)

---

This is from a discussion on my Talk page, and I thought I would bring it over here for a broader discussion. I am suggesting a change/update to the current outline used for the sector and subsector pages.

The major driver for this change is the Spinward Marches Sector page. As I complete the updates for the worlds from the Regency Sourcebook, we now have two major era's information to include on the sector page and no obvious way to include it.

This outline has been re-ordered slightly from my talk page. The biggest change (other than the simple moving of subsections) is the Political Astrography is duplicated by era. For the Spinward Marches there would be a Political Astrography: Milieu 1116 and a Political Astrography: New Era. The Solomani Rim Sector may have a Interstellar Wars, Milieu 990, Milieu 1116 sections and so on.

Description

Astrography

Native Sophonts

Mains, Traces, and Clusters

Other Astrographic Features

History

All major historical events with links to longer articles and year pages

Political Astrography -> by era

Generated sector summary paragraph for the era

World Listing

Demographics

Territorial Overview

Subsector listing

Polity Descriptions

Major Powers plus sub divisions (e.g. Imperial Duchies and districts)

Minor Powers

References

Feedback and updates are appreciated. Tjoneslo (talk) 19:59, 12 July 2016 (EDT)

I would appreciate if you would discuss more of the changes you are making with the rest of us before you re-write several hundred articles. In one day. Tjoneslo (talk) 01:10, 16 July 2016 (EDT)

---

I saw the Rhylanor updates on my talk page.

As you note, the wiki's main purpose is to be the Imperial Encyclopedia. To that end the original goal was to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style. For this discussion the Layout description should be followed. In this case references like the meta-history should be placed at the end of the article.

As previously discussed the long time style for the Traveller Wiki is to separate the Metadata/story/history from the main article. Either by putting on to a sub-page (like is done with the Talk and Meta pages) or by putting it into a differently colored box (like is done with the Sources box).

In theory, the Sources box at the bottom of the page, if correctly filled out for an article, should supply the complete information about the sources and history of the article in both canon and non-canon. I feel that adding a second copy of this information is redundant.

Tjoneslo (talk) 23:35, 15 July 2016 (EDT)

---

The reason the T5SS is not included in the Sources template was for two reasons. First, it was included in the categories at the bottom of the page. I had assumed, and no one voiced a contradictory opinion, that it was sufficient. Second, when the T5SS work started it was not published anywhere. It was kept on Don's computer and sent to a select group of people.

So neither of these is true any longer, and every sector page should have the Sources box updated with the Spinward Marches (for example) and the explicit notation about being part of the T5SS (or not) should be sufficient.

Please be more specific about the "dead ends" you see in my suggested format. This is the point of having a discussion before changing 200, 2000, or 20,000 articles.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 12:09, 16 July 2016 (EDT)

Categories & Sub-categories (2016)

Here are the current pieces in the organizational layout (template) as of 19-July-2016:

Infobox

• • Synopsis --- [removed]
  • Description (Specifications)
    • Toponyms
    • Native Sophonts
  • Physical Astrography
    • Mains and Branches
    • Traces and Clusters
    • Rifts, Voids & Jump Bridges
    • Other Astrographic Features
  • History & Background (Dossier)
    • Historical Eras
    • Major Historical Events Timeline
  • Politics & Diplomacy (Interstellar Relations): Milieu 1116
    • Demographics
    • World Listing
    • Polity Listing
      • Capital/s
      • Polity Descriptions
    • Territorial Overview
      • Territorial Chart Key
    • Imperial Territory
      • Imperial Duchies & Districts
  • Politics & Diplomacy (Interstellar Relations): New Era
    • Demographics
    • World Listing
    • Polity Listing
      • Capital/s
      • Polity Descriptions
    • Territorial Overview
      • Territorial Chart Key
  • References & Contributors (Sources)
    • Incomplete / Detail / Stub / Language notes
    • Meta-History & Background
    • Source
    • Categories
    • Canonicity Supra-tags (LE, LEN, MET, etc.)

---

Here are the current pieces in the organizational layout (template) as of 16-July-2016:

• Infobox
  • Synopsis --- [removed]
    • Meta-History & Background
  • Description (Specifications)
    • Toponyms: 1116
  • History & Background (Dossier) ==
    • Native Sophonts (NILs): 1116
    • Demographics: 1116
    • Historical Eras
      • History: General Overview
      • History-Era: Mileu 1100
    • Major Historical Events Timeline: 1116
  • Politics & Diplomacy (Interstellar Relations)
    • Polity Listing: 1116
    • Polity Descriptions: 1116
    • Imperial Territory: 1116
      • Imperial Duchies & Districts:
  • Trade Routes (Economic Astrography)
    • Greater Mains (Blue & Cyan Lines: 51+ destinations)
    • Lesser Mains (Green & Yellow Lines: 11-50 destinations)
    • Micro Mains (Red & Pink Lines: 0-10 destinations)
    • Rifts, Voids & Jump Bridges
    • Traces & Clusters
    • Other Astrographic Features
  • Worlds, Systems & Sectors (Political Astrography)
    • Capital/s: 1116
    • Sector Summary: 1116
    • World Listing: 1116
    • Subsector Listing: 1116
    • Territorial Overview: 1116
      • Territorial Chart Key
  • References & Contributors (Sources)
    • Incomplete
    • Detail
    • Source
    • Categories
    • Canonicity Supra-tags (LE, LEN, MET, etc.)

Provisional Template to Edit/Modify/Experiment with/Etc.

Here is the base template:

Can I also suggest we use a similar layout and ordering for the Subsector pages. The only changes that would be removing the "Toponyms" table and the "Subsector Listing" section. The "Territorial Overview" will be just for the subsector. Everything else looks correct and useful for information'

---

{{InfoboxSector |x = |y = |name = |alg = |capital = |domain = | |c1 = |c1p = |c2 = |c2p = |c3 = |c3p = |c4 = |c4p = |c5 = |c5p = |c6 = |c6p = | |gsp = |number = |population = |trade = |

|coreward = 
|spinward = 
|rimward  = 
|trailing = 

| |ss1 = [[|]] |ss2 = |ss3 = |ss4 = | |ss5 = |ss6 = |ss7 = |ss8 = | |ss9 = |ss10= |ss11= |ss12= | |ss13= |ss14= |ss15= |ss16= | |sectordata = true |worlds = | |credits = |other_names = |source =

Synopsis - No information or synopsis yet available.

Description (Specifications)

No information yet available.

Toponyms

This sector has been known by different names to different groups over its existence including the following:

Sector main page layout Names
Culture	Toponym	Polity
Third Imperium	Core	Third Imperium
Aslan		Aslan Hierate
Droyne		Droyne Oytrip Yatroy
Hiver		Hive Federation
K'kree		Two Thousand Worlds
Solomani	Core	Solomani Confederation
Vargr		Vargr Extents
Vilani		Third Imperium
Zhodani		Zhodani Consulate

Native Sophonts

I separated this from the demographics section and put it here as part of the background of the sector. In theory the listing of NILs should not change with eras. No links in the headers.

That seems very logical. 100% agreed upon here. the only exception I can see would be from native NIL's that are discovered at a later date. TNE had a ton of them. Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

The following races (sophont species) are believed to have originated within this area:

• Humaniti (Human races)
  • None

• Non-Human Races
  • None

• Terragens (Non-human Terran races)
  • None

Physical Astrography

These really are not trade routes, the name is misleading. This really is simply Astrography, that is a listing of astrographic features, some of which can be use for (or inhibit trade). No links in the headers.

What are they really? Constellations then? Certainly linked star routes. And their primary story function is as trade or travel routes.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

This is Physical Astrography. It is a listing of groupings of stars (mains, branches, clusters, traces), absences of stars, and other interesting astrography features. A listing of stellar features within the sector. Since this is not in the era specific sections, it should omit things (like specific trade routes) which may change over time.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 12:23, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Something still seems off. A Main is a trade designation from history (pirates anyone?) and that was the Classic Traveller intention with the Spinward Main. In nautical terms, an ocean trade route possesses both physical and mercantile properties. The two overlap. While trade routes vary in usage, they never really change, maybe fall mostly out of use, but people do not forget. The Portuguese sure didn't.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 12:55, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

I would suggest you are thinking of the relationship backwards. The physical arrangement of systems exists long before anyone with a jump drive shows up. As a consequence of their arrangement, when people do come they use the connections as a trade route. The term "Main" encompass both aspects (physical arrangement, trade). The reasons for using the term "main" are historical (both in and out of game). This is why I want to call this section "Physical Astrography", to emphasize we are discussion the arrangement and relationships of the systems, rather than economic connections. Tjoneslo (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Sounds good. I originally thought of astrophysics when I made this category up and starting cataloguing the trade routes and whatnot. How do we encompass the non-permanent aspects, human sociological terms like "Other Astrographic Features" such as the Bridled Steed or Riverland Wall? I imagine you've noticed the cool stellar studies that Wayne is doing?

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 16:17, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

---

I've removed the color and destination list from these header because it conflates two things, mains as a collection of stars and trade routes as links between them, in a way that is confusing and misleading.'

Let's define these things, whatever they are. I based my definitions on the GURPS economic calculations that you were a primary creator of. It's a hat tip to you. I hope that we can eventually match up the existing ones to the trade maps (...they are called trade maps hence the trade route designation, right?) and map out charted space.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

In the original formulation of Main, there are two definitions: the "main" (50+ systems linked by Jump-1) and "Cluster" (or "Trace") (5 to 50 systems). Since all of the groupings are either Mains or Cluster, I think the addition of "lesser" and "micro" mains just confuses things. They are not canon an not used anywhere else.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 22:53, 18 July 2016 (EDT)

Good point. I think canon definition is perfect. But where does that come from? GURPs? T5? I don't believe my Classic Traveller books ever define those astrographic features in that way.

What do you call 2 to 4 systems together?

I think to 2 to 50 should be traces and clusters...

And is it canon that clusters are parts of Mains?

And for that matter, many of the mains are not all J-1 routes... The J-1 sections are sometimes pretty limited.

I've read easily 200+ of the books and I don't recall any kind of definition standing out in my head. But, I don't have your specific minds with its many talents. Please help.

I think we need to standardize on some kind of definition of these astrographic features for the wiki.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:43, 19 July 2016 (EDT)

Talk: Main#Origin of the terms is my explanation of the original terms and why the sizes are selected. I'll need to do more research. And don't change the name of the header in the talk page or you'll break the link. Tjoneslo (talk) 18:47, 19 July 2016 (EDT)

OK. 10-4. Sounds good. I responded there.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:49, 19 July 2016 (EDT)

---

Mains (51+ destinations)

• No information yet available.

Traces & Clusters (5-50 destinations)

• No information yet available.

Rifts, Voids & Jump Bridges

• No information yet available.

Other Astrographic Features

• No information yet available.

History & Background (Dossier)

Moved the Native Sophonts and Physical Astrography up (or the history header down) as the as the sophonts and astrograpy are part of the description of the area, and the history should be separate.

That sounds very reasonable.

one of my concerns is that the native sophont discovered. I like your reasoning though.

Its just that that thought tugs on my curiosity and sense of order. there must be a way to reconcile all of these ideas.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:49, 19 July 2016 (EDT)

---

Historical Eras

No information yet available.

History: General Overview

This overview should go under the "History & Background" header (without a header) as an introduction to this section.

No information yet available.

History-Era: Mileu 1100

This section and the next section should be named consistently. That is we should have a "Historical Events : <Era>" header, and repeated for each era in which there are significant events.

Do we standardize on the eras from Agent?

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 16:18, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Category:Milieus -> This is the list the wiki should be using. Do you have the list from Agent posted somewhere, perhaps we can integrate the two.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 16:25, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

[1] Third Imperium Historical_Eras

I am pretty sure that this one matches Agent.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 18:15, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Major Historical Events Timeline: Milieu 1116

These are some of the more important historical events that have affected this sector:

• No information yet available.

Politics & Diplomacy: Milieu 1116

Politics (or political astrography as I've labeled it above) is inherently tied to the era being written about. Hence a suggestion of having one copy of this whole section for each era. Then remove the the era tag (e.g. 1116) for each of the sub-sections, as it should be apparent the sections apply to this era

Excellent point. 100% agreed. Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

No information yet available.

This summary paragraph was designed to serve as the introduction to a large section. I think it ought to go under the "Politics & Diplomacy:" header without a section header.

Sounds good. Excellent point. 100% agreed.

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 12:56, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Sector main page layout/summary

Demographics

I moved this from above, because demographics is both political and era specific.

Excellent point. 100% agreed. Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Significant populations of the following races (sophont species) reside within this area:

• Humaniti (Human races)
  • Solomani (Major Race)
  • Vilani (Major Race)

• Non-Human Races
  • None

• Terragens (Non-human Terran races)
  • None

Polity Listing

I dislike separating the polity listing from the polity descriptions (next section). Having two copies of similar information means they will get out of sync, meaning both with be wrong in ways that are difficult to reconcile.

Excellent point. 100% agreed. The only reason the Polity Descriptions existed was because it was a way to distinguish an already existing text block from Trojan Reaches and a few others. I like the high level overview with bullets and would also like some kind of text synopsis. Not sure how to organize or place that. Appreciate your point and think it needs to be accounted for in the design. Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

The following polities can be found within this sector:

• Independent Powers (Pocket Empires)
  • None

• Non-Aligned Powers (World-States)
  • None

• Other Powers
  • None

• Third Imperium (Imperial powers)
  • None

Polity Descriptions

Here are several synopses of the polities found in this sector:

• No information yet available.

Imperial Territory

This sector is not an Imperial possession.

• 0.00% is controlled by the Third Imperium.
• 100.00% is controlled by non-Imperial powers.

Capital

The capital or capitals of this area is/are located at:

• No information yet available.

World Listing

The following systems and worlds can be found within this area:

No world articles for this Zowie Sector

23 Worlds in the Zowie Subsector

Dripatqoo  •  Haxavant  •  Iyuok  •  Kanyadarn  •  Komla  •  Lee  •  Lyoliuqet  •  Miuir  •  Nacockgen  •  Nalratan  •  Neh  •  Nunuxut  •  Pawoox  •  Phlesige  •  Phliino  •  Plaia  •  Ros  •  Shiqatafatu  •  Sovolyit  •  Taanoonoo  •  Trookiloxspesgucknuf  •  Uxiteck  •  Uygulaan  •  

Subsector Listing

I still think this is redundant with the listing in the infobox, and the overview below

Excellent point. 100% agreed. Is there any way we can get this data at the bottom of one of the other linked-in data pages? I cannot access Trav Map during much of the day and access to the subsectors is important. But, I agree with you, it should be removed. Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

The following subsectors can be found within this sector:

• No information yet available.

Territorial Overview

The following table details the subsectors within this area:

• No information yet available.

Territorial Chart Key

This should be a template, as the territorial overview should be standarized'

Excellent point. 100% agreed. I created this as an experiment and liked it. I am just not as experienced or used to wiki templates as you are. Hadn't had the chance to wikify the template yet. Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

No information yet available.

References & Contributors (Sources)

• Incomplete
• Detail
• Meta-History & Background - > Moved from the top of the article.

Ok. Point conceded. Can we make it into a nice infobox instead of the Template:* template? Please. I want it to scream out at the wiki detractors and angry fans (...and herded cats). LOL

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

---

I will need to play with some options to make it look ok. I'll use Spinward Marches Sector/history as the working example.

- Tjoneslo (talk) 12:43, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

---

Ok. Appreciate your hard work. Sounds great. Can I offer any help?

- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 12:56, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

• Sources
• Categories