Difference between revisions of "Talk:TCA Atlantis"

Revision as of 23:34, 18 April 2008

This page needs to be moved to TCA Atlantis (Ship) or something, as this page is reserved for the Unreal 2 level TCA Atlantis. --Sir Brizz 10:05, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

I thought about it for a while, but I still disagree. First of all, I see the current list of maps does currently link to the planet articles (and this ship one), but simply changing the links in that list would take about 5 seconds per mission, so "reserved" doesn't really mean much. Other articles do already link to the planet articles (in my head they were reserved for the planets). I argue that that changing the list would be a better course of action.

It would keep the planet articles neatly named, without the bracketed "planet" or "moon" suffixes. (Those should be lower case instead of upper, right?)

Personally if I was looking for the planet, I'd definitely enter the word "Sanctuary". If I was looking for the mission, I'd go through the Unreal 2 article and look for a list there. Especially if I wasn't a hardcore fan who is only looking for "that level where you land in the jungle to rescue some dude". :) Also, once reading an article, I'd like to have a template a the bottom to view the other missions, just like it is with Unreal and RTNP already. That makes the names for the missions somewhat less important.

The missions in-game are also chapters, so wouldn't it be a decent solution to name them like in the game, with the chapter number in front? In my opinion that wouldn't lower the quality of the articles, the wiki a as a whole, or anything.

Taken straight from the game, the list goes:

1. Avalon
2. Atlantis Interlude
3. Sanctuary
4. Swamp
5. Atlantis Interlude
6. Hell
7. Atlantis Interlude
8. Acheron

(I restarted on my new computer, don't play everyday, so I didn't get the rest unlocked just yet.) I say the Atlantis Interlude stuff is very important to the story, so it should also get some articles. Like with the game, players looking for a walkthrough can easily skip them. Of course maybe a single article is better (depending on the size(s)), with numbered sections for the different chapters, and bookmarks to those chapters in the template at the bottom.

OK, pretty long response, but that's my view on how this could/should be done. Feel free to (dis)agree! :) Retodon8 14:04, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Quite a long one ;) I support disambiguations. Like, there should be an article on Foundry - the actual building, and an article Foundry Tarydium Plant that is a level walkthrough, both with disambiguations (if more than one, then it would be good to make a disambiguation page).

That way, it wouldn't matter how they are named, as when you get to the page, you can follow a link to the one you need. But in my opinion, planets should have higher priority, like Retodon stated, if I entered Sanctuary I would be looking for the planet. But I would look there for a link to the level as well.

Yes, template. I'm thinking of creating one, that's not hard. I have a good walkthrough resource as well.

With Interludes, I'd say we should do the same as it's with Intermissions of RTNP - after each level, a section describing the Atlantis Interlude should be added. --GreatEmerald 15:05, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

Why would anyone ever come to the wiki looking for information on a planet in the series? It is MUCH more likely that someone typing in Sanctuary would be looking for information on either the UT3 map DM-Sanctuary or the Unreal 2 level than the planet name. That's why it should have the main title. I realize most of the names are not explicit in the game, but "Sanctuary" as a keyword in Unreal 2 is a lot more forefront than a cursory mention on a character description page somewhere in UT.

A lot of this other stuff is nice to have, but it is superfluous information. Having a disambiguation page and linking from the other article should be common practice, if you go to Wikipedia and search for something, it will usually bring up the most common result on the strict name and link to the disambiguation page for other uses. I believe it is simply good practice to keep pages that will be commonly searched for at the top of the chain. --Sir Brizz 02:34, 19 April 2008 (EDT)