General talk:Main Page

About the minor edit to 'future games'Edit

The page itself says it does not allow speculation: "Please keep all speculation, wishlists, etc. restricted to the forums." Either the link or the warning message on the page should be changed. --Admos 14:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Nevertheless the content of the page contains the words "Speculation" and "Rumor". There is no real evidence that there even will be an elder scrolls MMO. I think it is misleading to label the link as "Future TES games", as the page it links to doesn't contain any real information about future games. --Alfwyn 14:48, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Then maybe the warning should be removed or reworded? I think it's misleading to link to speculation and then warn against speculating. --Admos 15:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Real-world referencesEdit

It seems that edits of this nature are bound to happen. Perhaps, it would be a good idea to create General:Real-World References page and refer editors to it along with reverts in Lore and game spaces. It could look like this:

ES universe concept	Real-world reference
Oghma Infinium	The symbols on the second page of the Oghma Infinium are visually similar to the Vegvísir.

I am aware of challenges associated with such pages, judging by the "Easter Eggs" articles or by the recent discussion on the Imperial City... However, it could serve as an outlet for reference-making energies, while being separate from the ES universe documentation articles. Thoughts?  ~Shuryard (talk) 23:54, 21 April 2015 (GMT)

It seems clear that there's a demand for something like this, so I guess it makes sense to have it. I see threads about real-world comparisons all the time. I've also seen talk about making a comprehensive list. I personally don't think that's possible, we could still make a very, very long list... also, it might help avoid frustration with newcomers if we can direct them to an appropriate page when they try to add real-world trivia, instead of just shutting them down. Anyway, it's my understanding the rules are a bit loose in General, so ... really, why not? Insignificant Revisions^{Threats•Evidence} 03:16, 22 April 2015 (GMT)

If it's created, I'd like to see less restriction on what can be included compared to the Easter egg pages, to allow it to properly function as an off-valve. I'm also a little concerned by the vagueness of the topic and the possible lack of content, but there's no reason not to give it a go. —Legoless (talk) 08:35, 22 April 2015 (GMT)

My position on this has flip-flopped a couple of times over the years, but the underlying opinion is pretty much the same either way: I think it has potential to be interesting and informative, but it also has potential to become a total mish-mash of anything anyone thinks might have been a real-world reference...ever...maybe...even a little bit. :) I think we'll want to set up at least some minimal guidelines to ensure that that doesn't happen, but at least today, I'm inclined to agree on creating the page. One example I remember being discussed, but couldn't find anywhere the last time I searched, was the X-box logo appearing in Oblivion in gold coins on a hidden ledge on some tower or other. That's a perfect example of a real-world reference that could go on the page. Although being Oblivion-specific, maybe that should go on the Easter Eggs page? Something else to think about. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 18:49, 22 April 2015 (GMT)

I agree that it needs to be less restricted than the Easter egg pages, since it is in the General namespace. Concerning guidelines, I would prefer the descriptions, instead of being definitive (e.g., "was derived from", "was inspired by"), contain something along the lines of "visually resembles" or "has parallels with". X-box logo is probably better on the Easter egg page, since it sounds as something being planted in the world rather than belonging to it. Perhaps, one (or all) of these three examples could be something that belongs on the page in question. Also, the third table column could be a mandatory link to a corresponding Wikipedia page, as a kind of limitation.  ~Shuryard (talk) 02:54, 23 April 2015 (GMT)

I drafted the page here. Please, feel free to edit it.  ~Shuryard (talk) 18:43, 5 May 2015 (GMT)

It is launched.  ~Shuryard (talk) 15:35, 6 May 2015 (GMT)

Quest Gaming Network pageEdit

I made a draft for a page for the Quest Gaming Network here. I feel they've pretty much become a fixture in the community (hopefully the page will illustrate why). While there aren't many General pages like this, there aren't a lot of General pages period, because the namespace in relatively undeveloped. This is precisely the sort of thing I think the General namespace should cover. Insignificant Revisions^{Threats•Evidence} 00:18, 27 April 2015 (GMT)

Has it actually? I've never really heard of it, bar tuning in once. —Legoless (talk) 01:17, 27 April 2015 (GMT)

I've never heard of it either, actually. I'm not sure how pervasive this is. Jeancey (talk) 01:27, 27 April 2015 (GMT)

I love QGN, and I watch ESOTR and CES as often as I can, but I still don't find this entirely newsworthy, personally. I just can't find it to be beneficial to start documenting every fan-run thing that comes up. Of course, I don't find it to be not beneficial either, so I'm rather neutral on this matter. I'd think a CP discussion could be opened up, however, to test the water on having pages related to fan sites, although we'd have to clarify some kind of criteria that is a little more solid than " I feel they've pretty much become a fixture" so that we don't open a floodgate that creates a page for everybody and their mother about how great they think the series is. -damon  ^{talk ♥ contribs} 02:28, 27 April 2015 (GMT)

I actually hadn't heard of it until late last year, I admit. But if UESP readers haven't heard of a news source with over a dozen developer interviews under their belt over the course of a four-year project, then that's all the more reason to have a page for it, because some would be bound to find it relevant. Anyway, I don't see it as a question of whether it's "news" but whether it's relevant to documenting TES, and I think a lot of what they offers qualifies as "general information that is related to the Elder Scrolls Games, but not directly about the games". Besides developers interviews, they've also had numerous guests who are prominent in the community. While there's certainly a risk of proliferation, achieving a consensus should dampen that. And the fact is, the General namespace is nascent, and it's because it hasn't been utilized properly. I think this is an example of how to utilize it properly. We have "Other Sites" and "Interviews" as sections on this page for a reason, it just hasn't been pursued. Anyway, if adding this page means projects of similar caliber should logically get pages, then good. That's what we want. Insignificant Revisions^{Threats•Evidence} 03:17, 27 April 2015 (GMT)

Yeah, "newsworthy" was a mis-phrasing on my part. Oops. Well, I suppose we can make a page about this, and I'll side with it, since you are right about all the dev interviews and so forth. The one criticism I have of the draft you have is that right now it's really just a listing of episodes. If we could make it less list-y, or at least a bit prettier looking of a list, I'd be willing to go with it once it was fleshed out a small bit more. -damon  ^{talk ♥ contribs} 05:51, 27 April 2015 (GMT)

I dunno. It just seems to me that you went into it looking to fill out the General namespace, and were reaching to try and come up with something that fit. I just don't see how this is any more helpful to the average reader of the site than the Quest Gaming Network website? Is there really a reason to host a list of their episodes other than "General namespace needs more stuff in it"? Cause the articles on Bethesda in general in the General namespace are quite lacking and may be a better focus of resources, rather than a constantly expanding list of episodes from a single, albeit related, podcast. Jeancey (talk) 06:11, 27 April 2015 (GMT)

It's probably vice versa, if anything. It's QGN which likely increased my interest in filling out this ignored portion of the UESP, as it demonstrated that substantially relevant information is falling through the cracks on this site. I don't believe this is stretching the scope of the General namespace. And while there are other page's deserving of attention, that's always going to be the case, and setting priorities on what is most deserving of attention first has always been a matter of editor prerogative. Anyway, I'll see about making it less list-y. Insignificant Revisions^{Threats•Evidence} 14:39, 27 April 2015 (GMT)

I'm not opposed if it's actually something noteworthy. Although if we're making pages for community projects, Nexus really deserves a page here. —Legoless (talk) 10:04, 28 April 2015 (GMT)

(←) I've fleshed out the page a bit more. It still could use some work (images and what-not), but I'd like to know if anyone objects to it being published in roughly this form. And I agree, Lego, that Nexus deserves a page, but I'm not too familiar with it myself. Insignificant Revisions^{Threats•Evidence} 00:43, 13 May 2015 (GMT)