General talk:Tamriel Rebuilt

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search

To whomever might feel responsible for answering: I'd like to start a page for the Tamriel Rebuilt project. It was suggested in their forum that I use this namespace - is that correct? And is it ok? I don't want to clutter up your website with stuff you don't want on it. Other than correcting the occasional spelling mistake or fixing a graphic I've never done this before, so if any mentors feel the urge to take on a new magician's apprentice. I'd appreciate the help! Aelina 08:38, 7 January 2009 (EST)

We already have this page, but it would probably be more suitable in this namespace, yes. In general we don't host information about 3rd party mods, but TR is big and well-established enough that it probably warrants a mention. –RpehTCE 08:43, 7 January 2009 (EST)
Wow! That was quick - thanks! I'm thinking of something along the lines of the Bloodmoon and Tribunal pages - quest walkthroughs, new items, places, NPCs, etc. So it would be more than a "mention" ... Aelina 08:54, 7 January 2009 (EST)
If it's going to be big it should be set up like Midas Magic - subpages off one central page. Don't begin anything just yet: wait a day or so to see if anybody else has a problem with the idea. –RpehTCE 09:01, 7 January 2009 (EST)
The Tamriel Rebuilt staff have already specifically requested that we do not do any detailed discussion of their project on our site (or any other site except theirs). The one page is enough, and it links to their official site, which has all of the information that they choose to make public on it. I'd say we should respect their wishes and not post any more information about the project, unless you are a member of the TR staff and/or have received their express permission. --TheRealLurlock Talk 09:57, 7 January 2009 (EST)
I didn't know that. Can you point me to the page where that request was made? The only thing I can find is a comment that was added to this article and removed again almost immediately. –RpehTCE 10:24, 7 January 2009 (EST)
I posed the suggestion in the forum on 30 December - the discussion, or what there was of it, is here[[1]]. (Still figuring out how to link stuff, sorry). Gez suggested using the Tes3mod namespace, and nobody offered any objections. I'm perfectly willing to respect their wishes, whatever they might be. Aelina 12:08, 7 January 2009 (EST)
Oh sure. If they'd rather keep material under their own control that's fair enough and even understandable. I just don't know where that request was made or whether it's still in effect. –RpehTCE 12:34, 7 January 2009 (EST)
Personally, I don't think any of us are opposed to creating a more complete summary of the project. In fact, I'd love to see it here, and it appears to me from that forum thread that there is at least some backing from the project itself. I don't remember any comments from TR about limiting the information we give out about the mod, but if the head people from TR don't want us to do so, we're not going to do it. Anyways, if you can get a couple of the leaders over here to tell us it is a go, we'll definitely look into expanding in that direction.--Ratwar 12:37, 7 January 2009 (EST)
I'm not sure where the comment got made - it was over 2 years ago, might have been the Admin Noticeboard or Community Portal or something - may have to peruse the archives. (Ask Nephele, maybe. I think she was in contact with them back then - that's why she put that notice up back then.) But I remember that a couple of the higher-ups at TR definitely asked us not to discuss the specifics of the project. Now it's possible that in those two years, they've changed their minds on the issue - the Morrowind section of TR at least is much closer to "complete" than it was then, so it's less likely that any information we posted would be in a state of flux or become outdated. I agree that it'd be cool to have some coverage of the project on the site, but unless the project leaders give it the okay, it would be wrong to do so. (I don't know if Gez in the forums is somebody with any authority on the project, or what their policies are for how many people need to agree on something for it to be allowed, but that's up to them to decide, not us.) --TheRealLurlock Talk 01:15, 8 January 2009 (EST)

The original request was made on this talk page, but the talk page was then deleted. Since only admins can see the deleted history, I'll copy the request here. It stated:

Please do not create pages or edit pages about Tamriel Rebuilt unless you are part of TR's Core, or have TR's consent.

The edit was made by Haplo. --NepheleTalk 00:17, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Hmmm, after digging around I can't find any other concrete records, so I suppose there's just my memory of events.... I remember that at the time (i.e., in October 2006) there was definitely additional discussion about the issue in IRC, which I think may have also involved people from Tamriel Rebuilt. My memory is that Otarrec was not a TR member (oh, and since it's probably not clear to everyone, Haplo is a TR admin) and that Otarrec's original version of the Tamriel Rebuilt page was not appreciated by TR; this revamp of the page was necessary to make the page acceptable. We discussed whether the page should be protected (not really a workable solution given the limited overlap between the communities), or what types of measures would be acceptable to everyone involved in order to prevent unwanted information from getting posted on the wiki. In the end, the agreement (again, as far as I remember) was basically that we'd keep an eye on the article to make sure that it didn't get expanded to include excessive details, especially about work in progress.

However, based on the discussion thread that Aelina posted, it seems like TR's stance may have changed. Gez is clearly in favour of expanding the wiki's coverage, so I'd say that means that expansion has "TR's consent".

In terms of technicalities.... This page on Tamriel Rebuilt was put into the General namespace because TR doesn't fit neatly into just Tes3Mod or Tes4Mod. But I'd agree with Gez that expanded coverage (articles getting into how to actually play the game) belong in the Tes3Mod and Tes4Mod namespaces; the General could remain as a project overview, and have links to the game-specific content.

--NepheleTalk 13:21, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Though keep in mind that TR is HUGE, so much so that it might not make sense to try and shoehorn it into the Tes3/4Mod spaces. The MW section alone could easily be double the size of our current Morrowind namespace if given an equivalent degree of coverage, even more if you only counted things like places, quests, and NPCs, and not things like attributes, skills, magic effects, etc. which aren't generally seen in expansion namespaces. It could easily fill its own namespace, or even two if you kept the MW stuff separate from the OB stuff. This would, of course, be somewhat exceptional as we haven't honored any other 3rd party expansion in this way, but the sheer scale of the thing almost warrants it. Otherwise, we'd end up having to make a lot of annoying links like [[TES3Mod:Tamriel Rebuilt/Port Telvannis|Port Telvannis]]. Of course, before we do anything we should wait until we get some sort of official go-ahead from somebody who counts over there, so the ball's in their court either way. --TheRealLurlock Talk 14:52, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Well, it seems I've opened a can of worms over at the TR website - I've got a "yea" from one admin (Lady Nerevar) and from the head of concept art (Gez), Haplo said no, I suggested they discuss it among themselves and come to a consensus. The link to the forum discussion is in one of my earlier posts, if you want to follow it. We'll see if they get anywhere... Aelina 04:47, 13 January 2009 (EST)

After reading that updated thread, I feel obligated to say that if we do get the go ahead to cover TR more completely, we're not going to have specialized rules for who can add to that content. Anonymous users will have to be allowed, which may discourage some of the TR people. Simply put we don't have the staff here to enforce that, and I'd rather not get in a situation where we start having special rules on editing for a single area of the site. Of course, I would be happy to get a few TR people as Patrollers to help manage the addition of new content, which would help them make sure everything is fine. --Ratwar 11:31, 13 January 2009 (EST)
I posted a few thoughts to the forum thread - not to preempt any discussion here but to try to calm some of the fears expressed. Ratwar is absolutely right - we're not going to stop people who want to contribute adding content. If there is internal content the project wants to keep off (progress reports and upcoming additions for instance) then that's obviously fine - it's their info and they should be able to request it be deleted should it be added.
I'm not so sure about appointing people to patrol specific areas of the site. There's no way to enforce it, and it would seem to give those people seniority over other patrollers in that area. Of course, if anybody from the project were to meet the requirements and be voted in, they'd be more than welcome. –RpehTCE 15:08, 13 January 2009 (EST)