GuildWiki talk:Use lower case

importance?
No offense, but is this really soooo important that it must be added to the "Six key ideas for editing the GuildWiki"? To me, this is just one among many other formating rules that can be covered in Style and formatting. It seems out of place between the other 5 key ideas, which are more of an ethical guideline. --Fisherman's Friend 07:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed. --Karlos 07:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * You've caught my personal bias. Yes, it's that important&mdash;especially since nobody does it!  But you're right, it doesn't fit.  *sigh* &mdash;Tanaric 15:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * This would rather belong under Style and formatting, IMHO. -SolaPan 09:35, 22 March 2006 (CST)
 * For the sake of Fighting Against The Man (where the man happens to be Tanaric today), I'd have to agree. I'd also have to agree because I agree, but that's less of an exciting reason.  --JoDiamonds 01:47, 23 March 2006 (CST)
 * If you're going to fight the man, make sure there's something to fight first! I moved this to style and formatting (and out of the guiding principles) back when the objection was first raised! &mdash;Tanaric 08:34, 23 March 2006 (CST)

challenging decision
Can somebody point me towards the talk page where this rule has been decided? Because ... I want to challenge that decision! --Fisherman's Friend 08:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * This is just, at the moment, a tradition we've written down. Unfortunately, these articles are getting swamped in the Chapter 2 crud. Michael's recollection of it is:
 * Tanaric: Hnnrgh! There is improper article capitalisation everywhere! I want to change it all!
 * Nu/Grave/Biro: Sounds fine, knock yourself out.
 * ..and so was born the Case Crusade. ;p --Nunix 14:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * If you wish to change this tradition, this is the appropriate place to present your argument. &mdash;Tanaric 14:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm hugely in favor of lower case for page names as much as possible, and most of the rest of this article. I *know* I've complained about that here before, long ago.  (Or was the UrbanDead?)  Anyway, there's my vote. --JoDiamonds 05:59, 8 March 2006 (CST)


 * Ooh, UrbanWiki. Brings back memories.  69.124.143.230 06:03, 8 March 2006 (CST)


 * I have to agree. At first I was against it, but it just makes sense.  And clears up ambiguity.  Of course, if it's a proper noun, teh whole thing should be capitalized.  Teh!  69.124.143.230 06:03, 8 March 2006 (CST)

Questioning Lower case rule & Vote Results
==> As the vote was closed April 3rd, I've removed the 'Vote' category from this article, and have archived the results to Old votes. --Barek 00:15, 18 April 2006 (CDT)

Discussion
Yaaaay! Let's rediscuss, rewrite and redo this whole wiki some more. There is a difference, a clear difference, between a rule that is inadequate and in need of being changed (like the monster box templates being consolidated into one simple template) and between consistently visiting a rule because we may not like it. Zzzzzz.

Ok, with regards to this debate. There is very little that can be done. Names of Places, Skills and characters need to follow in game spelling. Or are we going to question that rule to? In terms of other articles in the wiki, unless the article title contains the name of an in-game "label" (not noun). Then is hould NOT be capitalized. To answer your example above:


 * Ccategory:Enchantment spells by skill trainer location
 * Category:Pet resurrection spells by quest giver location

The rule states this very clearly. --Karlos 04:26, 16 March 2006 (CST)

Non-nouns
Um, so what do we do with verbs, adjetives, and adverbs then? I don't see it come up in the vote. All lowercase unless game use upper? -PanSola 07:39, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * Yes. The policy is simple, use proper English capitalization UNLESS the game does not, and the game only breaks the rules in object labels. --Karlos 11:15, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * I agree with Karlos then. Making Nouns a special case just make things MORE complicated. -PanSola 13:22, 16 March 2006 (CST)

Redirects
Maybe I should not open a can of worms that does not belong here, but given the problems with different article capitalisations, I see our policy of not creating redirects (and even deleting some) for other spelling as very problematic. From the forum and several talk pages here I get it that this is the most common problem of users, so why not have an array of redirects that directly bring you to the correct page if you misscapitalized. At least we should stop deleting those "unnecessary redirects". --Xeeron 01:25, 16 March 2006 (CST)
 * This is what I see is the biggest problem with this idea (from the Main Page):
 * We are currently maintaining 4,874 articles...
 * Even taking into account that say half of those articles have only 1 word in their name, that would still leave almost 2500 redirects which I see as pointless. Especially now that the search function has been re-enabled, more redirects seems like a waste to me.  --Rainith 01:48, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * Well.... on the one side, do redirects really create such a big problem? But on the other, yeah, search is working so at the very least the article title will pop up at the top... but I don't really see it as much of a problem either way.  If anything though, aren't redirects meant for things like misspellings and miscapitalizations?  I mean, it's always been bad practice to interwiki link to a redirect.  Evan The Cursed (Talk) 14:13, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * Well if there is any server side problem, ok. But as long as the server can handle it, I dont see a problem with the redirects. We dont need to start a crusade, but I definitly remember capitalization redirects being deleted. --Xeeron 01:32, 17 March 2006 (CST)


 * With the search function re-enabled, I kinda think this is a moot point. Everything I've tried searching on with all lower case (jade armor, jade bow, mursaat token, mursaat garments, horn bow, galen trask, etc...) has taken me straight to the correct page w/o the use of redirects.  Just type it in the search box and hit enter.  --Rainith 06:09, 17 March 2006 (CST)


 * Actually the search function is weird and stays weird. Try "Mursaat token" vs "guild versus guild", the first leads directly to the correct article, the second to search results. --Xeeron 21:00, 17 March 2006 (CST)


 * It's okay with two words but goes picky with three. -- Dashface [[Image:User_Dashface_Sig.png]] 07:26, 2 June 2006 (CDT)

Old discussion on Case

 * GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Archive 1

There were multiple sections on it too.

Article title disambiguation case
Most pages that have text in parentheses to disambiguate them (as in (location), (mission), etc.) have the text capitalized. This seems to be contrary to GW:ULC. There's a lot of such pages. --68.142.14.80 07:23, 24 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Mission is an in-game term &mdash; Skuld 07:29, 24 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Where is it used in a sentence in game? I don't recall, but it's been more than a year since I've been in pre-Searing and I didn't pay attention to tutorial stuff in Factions.  --68.142.14.80 08:15, 24 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Ping. --Fyren 02:33, 18 September 2006 (CDT)
 * What comes to immediately to mind is the "Enter Mission" button, but I guess you could say that that isn't a full sentance. --Rainith 16:03, 18 September 2006 (CDT)
 * No, not a sentence. (There's also "Enter Battle," but we're not going to start capitalizing battle because of it.)  --Fyren 18:44, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

Cleanup tag
No comments in the talk page related to the cleanup tag, and no reason given on the edit that added it. Unless someone sees a reason to keep it, I'll go ahead and remove the tag early next week. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:51, 12 January 2007 (CST)

ULC worded contrary to current practice
GW:ULC mandates using "normal English captitalization rules", and that means article titles are to be capitalized in their important words - unless the game doesn't. Unfortunately, the example given in GW:ULC (and, as it seems, current Guildwiki practice) is to not use proper English capitalization in article titles, in flagrant contradiction to what GW:ULC actually states. Sigh. The proper English thing to do (and what is actually covered by the letter of GW:ULC) is to name the article uppercase Split Skill and use the words split skill in lowercase in any article texts, unless of course you want to refer to the article by name (and not to the skill). Example: I believe split skills are documented in the Split Skill article.

This implies that redirects need to be established for any article titles longer than 2 words - it is done automatically for two-word articles, or so I believe. I have reviewed the vote that was taken in April 2006, and unfortunately the vote was to "keep the current rule, because it's abundantly clear". So no luck there.

The alternative is to expand the summary of GW:ULC to document current usage, which is as follows:
 * The only other exception is: Contrary to normal English, words in article titles are never capitalized unless they're capitalized in-game. Example: Ranger skills quick reference

Do we want that? mendel 07:15, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I see what you're saying, but in practice, the title of a wiki "article" is not the same as the title of a magazine or newspaper article. Thus "normal English capitalization rules" for an article wouldn't apply to wiki "articles"; indeed, even Wikipedia uses all-lowercase titles, for example, Sound recording and reproduction.  All other capitalization rules should still be followed, of course, which mostly apply to proper nouns.
 * The rules should probably be rewritten to better reflect actual usage. Here's my proposal:
 * If an article title is an in-game term or name, use the same capitalization as is used in-game.
 * Example: The Fissure of Woe
 * If the article title is a proper noun, use standard English capitalization rules for proper nouns.
 * Example: Gaile Gray
 * Otherwise, only the first word of the article title should be capitalized.
 * Examples: Ranger skills quick reference
 * The "Exceptions to standard English" section should probably be thrown out. The first point there contradicts the "Capitalization of in-game terms" section, and I believe the latter is correct; the second point is covered by the first of my proposed rules above.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 16:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia uses the same brain-dead software that automatically capitalizes first words; a real encyclopedia doesn't capitalize entries at all, see e.g. |Britannica, or uses title caps, see e.g. |Encarta. But it's nice to know we're not alone.
 * Your rules 1 and 2 apply to all text, not just article headings.
 * The rules, as I see them:
 * Use proper English capitalization.
 * Treat in-game terms as proper names, that is capitalize them the way the game does. This applies especially to profession, item and skill names.
 * Example from my dictionary's grammar section: General Post Office, but Let's go to the post office..
 * Example sentence: There were meteor showers hitting all around us; obviously, the other team had Meteor Shower equipped on more than one character. The second MS is the proper name for the skill bar skill, there can only be one Meteor Shower on anyone's skill bar, it is in effect unique; but the meteor shower as an in-game event is not unique, and thus not a proper name in that sentence. (Feel free to prove me wrong on this.)
 * Use a salvage kit to salvage dropped armor; use an Expert Salvage Kit to salvage Tormentor's Armor.
 * Article titles should be capitalized like normal text (i.e. lowercase by default, unless they contain names), but the mediawiki software will automatically capitalize the first word. It is not necessary to capitalize the first word when referring to the article, e.g. Have a look at the [effective ranger guide]. (Only that's another badly chosen example because by the talk there is consensus that professions are to be capitalized as Anet capitalises them (mostly), the ranger guide capitalizes them everywhere, just not in the title. Sigh.)
 * For technical reasons, any article with mixed case and more than 2 words needs a redirect with the title all in lower case so the search engine will always find it, no matter what the capitalisation is.
 * mendel 20:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Other than your last bullet point, which has always irritated me, I really am not sure if this is important or not. Does correct capitalization within an article make any meaningful difference if there are no links involved? Or for that matter, does it actually matter if we don't use the most up-to-date and standard English? (By the way, even though we are like an encyclopedia, that is no reason to use standard encyclopedic formatting if we don't like it.) I don't believe so...it can impact the style and readability, sure, but that is not an issue most people care about unless they are blatant errors. The example of always capitalizing professions is an example. (T/C) 23:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The ULC, as it is now, says "exception this, exception that", and contradicts itself. I've rephrased what the first 2 paragraphs say without (hopefully) changing the meaning (or adding any), but at the same time stressing that most of these rules are actually standard English applied in specific ways.
 * That you perceive my first few points to say no more than "use standard English" is testament to my success in phrasing them non-controversially, but they do illustrate GW specifics that I wouldn't have known about with just a general knowledge of Standard English, so they're in fact a bit "non-standard". ;-)
 * Since we have Content over presentation anyhow, ULC is probably one of the least important policies we have, but I think it makes sense to collect the oddities that someone who is used to standard english (including title caps) encounters on this wiki in one place (and express them in a non-selfcontradictory fashion ;-). Otherwise people who don't know are just going to want to discuss them (who? me? impossible!).
 * Some final points, in case you still need specific replies to some points you raised: Correct capitalization in text makes no difference (GW:CONTENT), but arguing about it does. Looking like an encyclopedia in many ways forms editor expectations, and GW runs more smoothly when it conforms to them where it can and clearly states where it breaks them (and why) because that helps editors adjust. mendel 23:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that we have gotten somewhat lazy with this policy and made tons of exceptions where it would be more efficient to just rewrite the policy and uncorporate them. I appreciate your help in fixing that...
 * I think the main problem with this policy in general has always been the "What is standard?" question. We have our own mix and match of various general English conventions; sometimes we use the typical, sometimes we ignore certain inconvenient rules (example is capitalizing article headings - even if we had the power to, I would not change the MediaWiki software governing that). It really depends on what works best to present the content in an organized and readable manner.
 * Oh, I wasn't trying to imply that I dismiss you and your arguments as unimportant (AGF/YAV). Rather, I was a bit surprised by how much gravity you (seemed to) give to the issue, since it has never bothered me or other users before. Not to the point of actually commenting here, anyways. While a passionate and factually correct argument is welcome anywhere, it seemed bit out of place on such an unimportant page. That's all.
 * By the way, the Editing guide and Style and formatting are helpful in relation to interpreting this policy. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 00:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)