SC4 Devotion Forum Archives

This thread was previously known as: "(Urban) Planning reference - collected tutorials?"

I think we can agree that there are some truly amazing MD's floating around, both in terms of the results achived with both good cities and a good story (like Sepsi's Rodina (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=36&threadid=53428) (not mirrored on SC4D?)), and what can be learned from creative playing and key pressing, like David's Three Rivers Region (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=112.2320) -- congratulation with the anniversary, well celebrated on my part on a large airport covered in fog for six-seven hours! How time is found to family, job and SimCity is unbelivable, especially after the Swiss told me a few words about banking.

The same is true for the tutorials -- much time can be saved by 10 minutes of reading. What I do miss though, is a thorough reference sheet, similar to them you can use when you need to sharpen up your knowledge, wether it be physiology or economics. Something like a collection of several tutorials, divided into different topics but in a larger context, seen as solutions to common urban problems.

This could be how to solve inner-city traffic jams with a sunken highway in dense areas, or a "Big-Dig" project like one have in Boston; or how to create a realistic/believable airport with right markings, ample space; or how, where and when to plan a military base; how to zone for different areas; infrastructure choices; etc. This would also be of help if you want to build in different building styles -- compare America's Las Vegas with Germany's Berlin; just by looking at the map you can notice the huge difference in how these cities are built.

I wouldn't hesitate to make such a reference, if there is interest in it, but that would mean I need help from you, both in planning in what to include/exclude, help with technicalities (conversion tables etc.) and permission to use content (like pictures, tutorials and exercepts).

If anyone would be interested, there is plenty of time in the Yuletide to get som worke done :satisfied:

MOD EDIT:Changed title, discussion has moved onto the SC4 Encyclopaedia now. - Fred

Quote from: krbe on December 22, 2007, 06:10:35 PM
I wouldn't hesitate to make such a reference, if there is interest in it, but that would mean I need help from you, both in planning in what to include/exclude, help with technicalities (conversion tables etc.) and permission to use content (like pictures, tutorials and exercepts).

Yes, there is an interest in it  :D
Your proposition is very kind and interesting.
Do you have any more detailed idea how should look such reference? If yes, you could explain it, even if it is general and incomplete.
Some of us are thinking about an SC4 Encyclopaedia  :) , it's an idea of Dustin (thundercrack83). This idea is on the very early stage of development, but we think about it.
There are at least two problems with it:
1. The sc4 knowledge has a complicated structure, it would be very difficult to divide it into categories
2. This knowledge was never structured in any way. Because of it there is a lot of information redundance in all SC4 sites - people ask for the same things many times.
If you have any ideas/questions/propositions, please send them here  :). Maybe we will find a starting point?

A Wiki would be very useful, because it's easy to edit and provides a great repository of information.

ST has the Omnibus, which is the closest thing to what you're proposing, but it's not open, like a Wiki is.

Quote from: Ennedi on December 22, 2007, 07:30:53 PM
[...]
1. The sc4 knowledge has a complicated structure, it would be very difficult to divide it into categories
2. This knowledge was never structured in any way. Because of it there is a lot of information redundance in all SC4 sites - people ask for the same things many times.
If you have any ideas/questions/propositions, please send them here  :). Maybe we will find a starting point?

Exactly the problem. Since so many are doing so much, it's hard to get an overview, and the soultions may also be hard to incorporate into existing developments, as we're really dependent on were we live (it's always interesting to see how different answers may be depending on origination in Europe or the US). And because this game now is almost exclusively community supported, much information are withering away in old threads -- even though it may be just as important today.

The encyclopædic/wiki approach to the problem solves some of dating issues forums have, but if we're going for that, we must decide on wether we want many entries to deal with specific problems (example "train stations in local neighbourhoods") or fewer which covers systems in more detail (example "viable suburban train networks").

More on this later -- last Christmas shopping to do!

A wiki would work very well for something like this... As an example, in another forum I'm a member on, we're a region in the online game NationStates. We created a wiki to compile information about the various nations, since we can create pages for our fictional nations, corporations, characters, and whatnot. So far, it's worked very well, so a wiki for city planning and such in SC4 would work great.

The difference in terminology and other things between different countries could be solved by either having those as categories on the page (like they have on Wikipedia).

-- John

That's good such thread was sterted.

SA, good to know your opinion, it makes me more sure of myself in my thoughts.

krbe: Thank you, I will wait for your next ideas.

Quote from: krbe on December 23, 2007, 05:16:21 AM
The encyclopædic/wiki approach to the problem solves some of dating issues forums have, but if we're going for that, we must decide on wether we want many entries to deal with specific problems (example "train stations in local neighbourhoods") or fewer which covers systems in more detail (example "viable suburban train networks").

Fewer entries, better covering of the whole field. More detailed entries in some crucial points of interest.
An important feature of th Wiki is it doesn't need to consist a complete information from the beginning. It's open formula enables adding information as many times as we need.
As a company owner and managing director (it's a small company, so I must make most organization work myself, or at least give well prepared ideas to my workers ;)) I tried to collect my knowledge many times. No matter which tools you use (spreadsheet, database or others), your main problem is good start point. In past I often made  a mistake trying to make codes and categories for everything, and the system was more and more complicated, unfriendly and unuseful. The Wiki formula is a lot more flexible.

Please send here more opinions (if you are interested in it :)). If we will achieve only a partial success with it, a lot of people will save a lot of time.

When I will know more about your thoughts, I will ask other moderators what they think about it.

I think its a great idea.

While not the most knowledgeable of SC4D members, I'm pretty good at editing as I'm the proud holder of a B.A. in English Literature.

I have never looked up Wiki templates, however, since they exist all over the web now they must be pretty easy to start, right?

Basically, we need to find ALL of the tutorials that exist and figure out to classify them. From there, we need to get the pages built and functioning on a private basis for testing, then we need to figure out a way to host it.

I'm not sure who Jeroni uses to host SC4D, but if he went with an American host they typically scale disk space and bandwidth the longer you have a site active, therefore there could be the resources to host it here.

It seems that www.sc4wiki.org is available if push comes to shove and we have to find our own hosting.

I'm really excited by this prospect, it will allow the collected knowledge to be very easily shared and accessed.

What do you all think?

Cheers,
Kevin

Mmmm....  :-\ .... I always wanted SC4D to be the SC4 encyclopedia  ::)  ;)  :D :D :D

Seriously, I think this is a really good idea, and I totally support it, but there are two basic things that we must organize before we install a single bit of code.

a) As Ennedi mentioned, the structure of the information must be defined right from the beginning

b) The maintenance team must be set prior anything and without hierachy. I can take the technical role of setting up the software and maintain it but this would be all the difference between the team members

I dont mean I want to set any rules or take any sort of command. I just want to share with you my experience with teams in this life  ;)

---

The site is hosted in Houston, and the host has proven to be very reliable and almost never failed. We have still some room to accommodate a SC4 wiki and it would be a honour to do that. I really hope to see this idea mature, and have a really useful source of information for our loved simulator  :thumbsup:

Command isn't a dirty word, jeronij -- crevice is, but not command. I believe the encyclopædia should be in form something like The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...

... DON'T PANIC!

... a "handbook" which helps transfering regional/urban/local planning from the real world down to the SC grid. Although it may seem contrary to our creative instinct, each region needs a Bureau of Bureaucracy (you) to do the dirty work  :-\ <- and to jumble the ball(ot)s.

Let's start with what most of us is most familiar with: City level. Since the sizes of the cities vary considrably, I believe there should be some form of separation of the content -- what works in a 300k city doesn't work that well in a 3k town. For the smaller cities, planning for the future might be important -- such as development of wide axis which can be used for avenues on a later stage; how to keep undesirable elements away from the city and the best location of the next residential area. Later on, a bus network might be needed, expansion/construction of a central business district could be necessary or a railway line might be wanted to transport sims from other parts of the region to the city.

THis way, the list can go on and on almost forever: local planning involves schools, health care, small shops and the preservation of nature; regional planning involves the constructions of motorways, important intersections, specialised districts and perhaps a nifty airport; and inbetween there are all sorts of challenges, like building on slopes, crime fighting and water grid issues.

If we start stockpiling our two cents the lot of us, we'll soon be millionaires  ()stsfd()

This is exactly the type of idea that I was envisioning with the SC4Devotion Encyclopædia.

As Adam (Ennedi) pointed out, the hardest part is finding where to start. There is a lot of information out there that we'd have to compile and organize before even starting the actual process of turning it into something useful.

I'm definitely on board with helping with this project wherever I can, as Adam and I had been tossing ideas around for this for a little while now. If there's anything I can do, please don't hesitate to ask!

I will have a little bit more time after Christmas, I will think about what tutorials already exist and how they should be divided up, and what should be added.

And the site is hosted in Houston, eh? No wonder SC4D is always so bloody fast for me...I'm only 400 miles from there, which is virtually my backyard compared to Spain or South Africa...

Cheers,
Kevin

Always happy to throw in my 2c.  This sounds like a great project!


David

I'm pretty sure you have way more than 2 cents to throw in David... :D

I fully support the idea of a SC4 encyclopaedia/wiki/repository, and I would kindly support and develop ideas and things

Joe

Uhm, but isn't SC4D some sort of Encyclopaedia or/and ST?
The thing I like most about SC4 is that you can be creative by trying out things, explore options and create your own style.
Tutorials are shared to give idea's so other can refine or simply use it.
It is not my intention to put this idea down but by not knowing everything the game is so much more an adventure just simple trying and picking up some hints
down the tutorial and/or MD section of this forum.
If I think I build great railroads I start a new topic in the tutorial section and it's free for others to give their input.

Peronaly I think this board has a "wrong" layout. [imho]
First prio should be tutorials and after that game help, md's, teams, oftopic.
Tutorials should have more sub-forums and clearer ones like "economics", "terraforming", "ordinance", "infra-structure" etc.

I don't dislike the idea of a Encyclopaedia but I think we're allready siting on one with a little modification.

Tutorials are for learning, MD's are for inspiration, team-section for admiring and off-topic for relaxation.
But maybe I missed the point.  :D

@krbe, thank you for giving an impulse to start this discussion  :thumbsup:

Quote from: krbe on December 22, 2007, 06:10:35 PM
The same is true for the tutorials -- much time can be saved by 10 minutes of reading.

Yes, and this is a main reason that such many people are interested in this idea.

Quote from: krbe on December 22, 2007, 06:10:35 PM
What I do miss though, is a thorough reference sheet, similar to them you can use when you need to sharpen up your knowledge, wether it be physiology or economics. Something like a collection of several tutorials, divided into different topics but in a larger context, seen as solutions to common urban problems.

This could be how to solve inner-city traffic jams with a sunken highway in dense areas, or a "Big-Dig" project like one have in Boston; or how to create a realistic/believable airport with right markings, ample space; or how, where and when to plan a military base; how to zone for different areas; infrastructure choices; etc. This would also be of help if you want to build in different building styles -- compare America's Las Vegas with Germany's Berlin; just by looking at the map you can notice the huge difference in how these cities are built.

Yes, it would be very good to have a list of tutorials diversified in many sites. If such list would be well thought and easy to use, it would save a lot of time for everybody looking for his/her problem solution.
But reading your examples I'd like to say we should think about a larger field:
1. The game has a lot of features and we can modify many of them.
    - The environment: maps and configs, the terrain, water, trees and everything connected with the visual aspect of the game. Also - terraforming and arranging the terrain before we start to build cities and later, during building works.
    - Game objects: BATs and LOTs, how to create them and use them in the game.
    - The simulation (transit, budget, utilities, regional development etc.)
2. What I said in point 1 is a basis. These are our puzzles and our tools. What you said in your examples is a later stage - how to solve specific urban problems, create a city in a specific style and so on.
I would like to add that there is no simple answer how to build a "realistic" airport, busy industrial city or a tourist village. It is a question of the creativity. This is what LoneRanger said - you can look at various MDs and find an inspiration.
But we can formulate many general tips about making an efficient transit networks, industrial districts, proper development of residential areas (growable or ploppable? use CAM or not?) and about avoiding typical mistakes. Such tips also should have a place in our Encyclopaedia, but they leave enough space for creativity.

So, we aren't speaking only about tutorials here. We are speaking about all SC4 knowledge which can be used by player. It would be also good to know about these outstanding MDs, which are especially good source of an inspiration (no matter they are active or not, and where we can find them).
Also, many problems were only discussed in various forums and nobody made any tutorial about them. Links for these forums would be highly useful.

Quote from: krbe on December 23, 2007, 02:48:07 PM
Command isn't a dirty word, jeronij -- crevice is, but not command. I believe the encyclopædia should be in form something like The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...

... DON'T PANIC!

Great idea!  :D But if you are Douglas Adams' fan, you probably know what information was in the Hitchhikers Guide about the Earth: only two words - "Mostly Harmless"  ;)
Maybe it wouldn't be good if we would end with such SC4 description... :)

Quote from: BigSlark on December 23, 2007, 08:23:10 AM
I think its a great idea.

While not the most knowledgeable of SC4D members, I'm pretty good at editing as I'm the proud holder of a B.A. in English Literature.

If this is an offer, thanks a lot! It is a task for more than one people, it will be a pleasure to work together  :thumbsup:

Quote from: LoneRanger on December 25, 2007, 01:21:33 PM
Uhm, but isn't SC4D some sort of Encyclopaedia or/and ST?
The thing I like most about SC4 is that you can be creative by trying out things, explore options and create your own style.
Tutorials are shared to give idea's so other can refine or simply use it.
It is not my intention to put this idea down but by not knowing everything the game is so much more an adventure just simple trying and picking up some hints
down the tutorial and/or MD section of this forum.
If I think I build great railroads I start a new topic in the tutorial section and it's free for others to give their input.

Peronaly I think this board has a "wrong" layout. [imho]
First prio should be tutorials and after that game help, md's, teams, oftopic.
Tutorials should have more sub-forums and clearer ones like "economics", "terraforming", "ordinance", "infra-structure" etc.

I don't dislike the idea of a Encyclopaedia but I think we're allready siting on one with a little modification.

Tutorials are for learning, MD's are for inspiration, team-section for admiring and off-topic for relaxation.
But maybe I missed the point.  :D

LoneRanger, your thoughts are very important!
You are right in most your opinions. But I'd like to give you an example:

Let's say you are a novice painter. You have many paints and brushes, but you haven't a big practice with them. You can spend years looking at other painter's pictures and trying to find their techniques. You can also meet some masters and ask them for something, but you often don't know what is the right question ;)
And it would be very good if somebody would tell you:
"- Do you like this effect? Look, you can use this brush in this way to do it! But don't try this one, it is not good in this case!"
If you would have such source of knowledge, you would save a lot of time. You would use this saved time for making your creations  ;)
And after some time, you would be able to start your own experiments. But you would have a basis yet and you wouldn't waste your time for discovering America second time  :D
And you would save even more time, if all such knowledge would be well ordered and easy to access. And it is diversified and difficult to find now.
This is what are we saying about here. As you see nobody wants to limit our creativity in any way.
But with your independent thinking you would be more than welcome with our work  :)

Dustin, maybe we will make a greater step with your idea now?

Jeronij and David, I am sure with your support the work will start soon. Thank you!

Now I will start to make my proposition how sc4 knowledge should be organized. Please do the same, we will compare our visions after a few days.

Adam :thumbsup:

Quote from: LoneRanger on December 25, 2007, 01:21:33 PM
[...]

I don't dislike the idea of a Encyclopaedia but I think we're allready siting on one with a little modification.

Tutorials are for learning, MD's are for inspiration, team-section for admiring and off-topic for relaxation.
But maybe I missed the point.  :D

(Adam has already gone through this first part while I was looking at somebridges while writing this :'()

The problem is vast amounts of information spread out over severeal sites in a format that is unsuitable. MD's, support threads, announcements etc. are all well and good, until a point, but unless you follow updates regularly, you will at times run into trouble. In addition to this, a forum is constructed to encourage (the most recent) discussion(s), which is a bad way to compile knowledge (likewise, discussing with encyclopædias are generally considered cumbersome). Some information are impossible to comment on (like the fact that the speed limit of different networks are so and so); some are really worth commenting on (like solving a hard and persisting problem for the community), which causes updates to be lost among otherwise useless non-information; and some information tend to be lost among other information, such as support threads (no-one wants to be that idiot which asks a question for the tenth time, but no-one wants to read 35 pages of fruitless answers), especially if it's for several "products".

An encyclopædia or reference on the other hand, doesn't encourage discussion, although you may do it at the appropriate place (like a subboard on this site for example). And since it keeps discussion, questions, comments etc. apart from the information itself, it's easier to pack more information together, and to "bundle" it with other knowledge, like how to incorporate the information given into different styles of playing and planning. It's also easier to relate different pages and portions of pages to one another than with traditional forum tutorials. Few keep an updated TOC in their threads, even fewer relate (and link) their pages to another's.

Like if you build a great railway somewhere, or discover some clever solutions that are worthy a tutorial, there are probably many more railway questions that others want answers to to get it "right": Like construction of large railway yards close to city centres, construction of high-speed railway (not HSRP) tracks, how to construct in high mountains etc.

(And yes, I'd like the MD's further up too :thumbsup:)

---

On your suggestions Adam: not a bad starting point -- I would like to read the terraforming section, I think my own terraformed regions are incredibly round for some reason. And this game is of course up to your own creativity, but if that your air passengers have to wait for take-off until all planes further out on your pier have left, you have to consider some other way to save valuable farmland :satisfied:

On the preposition: We should be starting on throwing out categories soon, and decide on how to collaborate/contribute. I got to read a book about my hometown's history and development from ca. 1850 to about 1940-50, and I noticed that the developement of the city (Kristiansand, Norway) can be slightly compared to a city with about 20.000 inhabitants in SimCity (about the size of the city itself at the time). The book dealt with the developement of main street and commercial area, a gas plant, electricity plant, additional bridges, hospitals, religious life (something I've never thought was quite important in my cities), and I suddenly found myself scribbeling down ideas on how to diversify my own cities more...

@krbe,
I agree with your answer to LoneRanger. In fact, I agree with you in more points than you expect  ;)

Quote from: krbe on December 25, 2007, 03:49:33 PM
On your suggestions Adam: not a bad starting point -- I would like to read the terraforming section, I think my own terraformed regions are incredibly round for some reason. And this game is of course up to your own creativity, but if that your air passengers have to wait for take-off until all planes further out on your pier have left, you have to consider some other way to save valuable farmland :satisfied:

You gave some examples concerning the simulation aspect. I has a feeling you would like to limit your vision to this aspect, so I added terraforming, LOTs, BATs etc. But it was not my intention to say any of these aspects is more important than others, but to say our "Encyclopedia" or "Hitchhikers Guide"  :D should be as complete as possible.
It is very good you emphasize the simulation aspect. Many people make eye-candy regions, but others want to build the properly functioning city and observe it's development. This aspect is very important for us in SC4D too, the CAM is the best example of it.

Because of it I asked all of you to show your own vision of the SC4 knowledge structure. Every of us has specific points of interest, so he/she will emphasize these points. When we will compare different propositions, it will be easier to find the starting point.

Our problem for now is not only the structure (categories). Easy access = good search tool, and as I know it is connected with key words (and maybe other things).
It would be good to have some help from somebody who knows more about the Wiki software functionality, I know about it only as much as an average user should know  ;)

I only have my own experince to compare with, and since I'm not able to run any tools created for SC4 (with maybe the honest exception of the reader) I have to admit that I haven't thought so much about BAT's, and since I'm usually playing on premade maps I didn't think about terraforming (that's what background do to you kids!);D

If we're looking for premade templates for a portal / document repository, there are example of free ones (PHP & MySQL) available at OpenSourceCMS (http://opensourcecms.com/). If necessary, I have free server space available at my own domain.

About software to be chosen: Of the Wikis available, I find the MediaWiki (as used by Wikipedia) to be far the prettiest, and the easiest for users to navigate / use. It's however harder to maintain (or at least I think so), but I believe we should be able to find someone with the experience here(?). The others might be easier to maintain, but are much less "interesting" for users (and perhaps lacks important features, I'm not sure).

Sorry for my lack of attention here, I was off for a while for the holidays, but now I'm back.

As krbe stated above, the first step is going to be coming up with "categories" of some sort in order to start classifying all the information that we want to make available. In another post, Adam (Ennedi) gave us a pretty good starting point with environment, game objects, and the simulation, but these will need to be expended thoroughly, and more categories will almost certainly be necessary.

On the Wiki front, I have no experience with any of that, so I can't stipulate as to which set-up is better for making a Wiki. I'm sure that I can play around that try and figure some basic stuff out, though, if need be. If there's anything that I can do, please don't hesitate to let me know!

So far, I see two components that will be on every page of our Wiki/Encyclopedia:

A link to a discussion topic for that particular topic and lots of photos, to illustrate the point.

There's nothing worse than attempting to figure something about SC4 out without anything to visually reference.

Beyond that, well, give me some more time to think about it...

Cheers,
Kevin

This sounds like a great idea. As a relatively new owner of SC4/RH (4 months) I have spent more time looking up threads and info than I have playing. I have a ton of hints, tutorials that I have printed out including readme's such as those for Voltaires RMIP and the NAM as well as terraforming and other tutorials. I also have noticed that some tutorials referenced in some threads have disappeared from ST or whatever site they were hosted on so this would preserve what is left, and might inspire others to write new tutorials. I found though that I did spend hours on fruitless searches for info at times so a central repository of hints would be most welcome especially as new players are still popping up here and there. I think this is a result of SCS as many people found that too easy and may turn to SC4 as a better game as I did. Well I never played SCS but bought SC4/RH as I felt SCS would be exactly what it turnesd out to be. I'm not a fan of plopped buildings. Anyway I can help I will. I have a degree in research so am used to research on the net.

A Wiki doesn't take up much space in terms of physical space on a hard drive. So, it'd be possible for SC4D to host it.

A good name for the Wiki would be 'A Hitchhiker's Guide to SimCity 4'. :P

If this takes off, I'll be very happy to contribute my ideas and whatnot about city development and the like. I know a fair bit about Wiki code [it's quite easy to learn, actually -- it's a modified version of BBCode with some extra features], so, again, I'm willing to help.

I'd, however, suggest that the Tutorials section be moved to this Wiki, if it does take off, thereby removing it from the forums. It'd unclutter the forum index somewhat and make it easier to navigate.

I believe there is a package for SMF (this forum software) that relates the user management for a mediawiki wiki to the user management for this. I found this a while ago and it may have changed/got better.. I will research it some more now...

Here you go: Choice 1 (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SMF_Authentication)  Choice 2 (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SMF/Users_Integration)
Choice one works well, but all it does is creates and logs users in to both pieces of software

EDIT: Choice 2 allows you to create an SMF user group (either post count based or other) that alows the user in that group to edit pages on the wiki, it also closes the wiki from unregisterd guests and removes the ability to register.

I will try both at the same time, but i dont know how well it will work

Joe

Joe (star.torturer): thank you very much! It can be really useful.
Shadow Asassin - thank you too! We will not be able to organize our knowledge without looking at it from the software point of view  ;)

To all: I didn't expect such amount of good propositions and - first of all - good will and readiness to help  :thumbsup:

To make a step ahead I'm going to prepare my proposition of categorization and a few examples of various terms desriptions (as I imagine how they would look in our Encyclopaedia, or Hitchhikers Guide  :D)
I will do it tomorrow, maybe we will be a bit closer to the start point  ;)
The next step would be probably to organize a team...

Quote from: krbe on December 25, 2007, 03:49:33 PM
such as support threads (no-one wants to be that idiot which asks a question for the tenth time, but no-one wants to read 35 pages of fruitless answers), especially if it's for several "products".

An encyclopædia or reference on the other hand, doesn't encourage discussion, although you may do it at the appropriate place (like a subboard on this site for example). And since it keeps discussion, questions, comments etc. apart from the information itself, it's easier to pack more information together, and to "bundle" it with other knowledge, like how to incorporate the information given into different styles of playing and planning. It's also easier to relate different pages and portions of pages to one another than with traditional forum tutorials. Few keep an updated TOC in their threads, even fewer relate (and link) their pages to another's.

Well, you are right obviously but the key is to update your "tutorial" when someonefinds a better way.
Lets say I wrote a tutorial about the quickest route from A to B but you say [with proof] that traveling trough D instead of C works better I should adjust it in my tutorial.
That way you as a interested searcher on quickest routes, have only the first post of a tutorial to read.
I think that the responsibility of writing a tutorial comes with updating.
That way the interested party knows that only reading the staring post is enough to be up to date.

But ok, if you want to start somekind of wiki I fully support but wonder if there's still need of a tutorial section wich covers your wiki idea if.. well update is the key-word.   ;)
The stong point of a forum is the discussion.
Some things are obvious in right or wrong, some things ain't.
That's my point kinda.  :)

Adam I get back to your post, to many thoughts to order.  :D

You do realise that the wikimedia software that I am experimenting with allows for a special page for the discussion of individual articles? much like Wikipedia (which incidentally uses wikimedia)

I am also going to test to see if i can compile a SMF package that will install the wiki, and add a button for it to the "main menu" that is located between the header and the "breadcrumbs" (sorry for using all this techincal mumbo jumbo LOL, breadcrumbs are these links:

QuoteSim City 4 Devotion Forums > Sim City 4 Devotion Related > Site Requests and Technical issues > (Urban) Planning reference -- collected tutorials?

) the integration methods I am experimenting with cause the wiki to be installed in the ./forums/wiki/ location, but i am sure with some php jigery pokery (me being a slight n00b doesnt know what kind of jigery pokery would be needed but i have seen it done) it could be masked so it appears in the ./wiki/ folder on the web... might be as easy as to change the stuff on install.. i will test it now.

on a completely unrelated note, someone would have to adequately skin the wiki to make it fit in with the SC4D theme('s)

Joe

EDIT: well i have successfully combined.... nope not conbined nothing LOL, well you now have to be a member of the forums to edit, and you have to register thought the forum, cant create/login through wiki (random quirk is that you cant log out via the wiki because instead of redirecting to [root]/forums/[the logout page] it redirects to [root]/[logout page] damn). but editing can be done by anyone still, yep anyone. I could continue to try and get it to run off a user group. and eventualy i could maybe get it to only allow some users to edit different parts/create new pages/do other things

If the guide were a wiki, would everyone be able to update it?  If not, wouldn't that exclude the the people who are not the bat gods or forum legends, yet might have stumbled onto a new idea, or might be good at creating just the perfect high-tech zone, or european country village.  If it is a wiki, do we trust everyone to as courtious on the wiki as on the forums?   Would this guide be on SC4D or would it just be affiated like the LEX? Just a little conversation starter.

Quote from: LoneRanger on December 28, 2007, 12:15:10 PM
Well, you are right obviously but the key is to update your "tutorial" when someonefinds a better way.
Lets say I wrote a tutorial about the quickest route from A to B but you say [with proof] that traveling trough D instead of C works better I should adjust it in my tutorial.
That way you as a interested searcher on quickest routes, have only the first post of a tutorial to read.
I think that the responsibility of writing a tutorial comes with updating.
That way the interested party knows that only reading the staring post is enough to be up to date.

But ok, if you want to start somekind of wiki I fully support but wonder if there's still need of a tutorial section wich covers your wiki idea if.. well update is the key-word.   ;)
The stong point of a forum is the discussion.
Some things are obvious in right or wrong, some things ain't.
That's my point kinda.  :)

[...]

I agree with you, however TOCs hasn't seem to be catching on right yet $%Grinno$% And I don't believe that forcing the community to adhere to even more rules is going to make it, and it's not everyone who'd be able to it (with a mixture of languages, a mixture of styles etc.). You might end up with some tutorials as shining lights in the history of literature, while others might look like something found under a hitchhiker's shoe.

And I'm not advocating the end of the discussion (it will still be a vital part of any coomunitygathered information repository), just the end of discussion and information clogged togheter in countless threads (in the words of the Founding Fathers: separation of discussion and information).

Quote from: GrizzlyBuilder on December 28, 2007, 12:32:00 PM
If the guide were a wiki, would everyone be able to update it?  If not, wouldn't that exclude the the people who are not the bat gods or forum legends, yet might have stumbled onto a new idea, or might be good at creating just the perfect high-tech zone, or european country village.  If it is a wiki, do we trust everyone to as courtious on the wiki as on the forums?   Would this guide be on SC4D or would it just be affiated like the LEX? Just a little conversation starter.

As far as I can see, the LEX is just another closed off part of SC4D... However, jeronij pays for the host, so he decides, but he seems positive :thumbsup:

As the nature of discussions usually are to reach common ground and not to preserve the information for future generations, a wiki presents the opportunity to include contents from many creators, yet keep the minimum of control needed for a consitency in style, language etc. The important thing is not to have entries such as Earth: Mostly harmless, as the Volapük edition of Wikipedia has (100 000+ articles in a language noone speaks!), so we need some sort of basic review of the content that'll go on the wiki.

And about your concern; if you're making great BATs you might still be missing out on some concepts on writing, so that's why we need guys with BAs (it's not science, right?) in literature to help you. It may also be that you want to focus on BATs, or helping out on the forum rather than be writing/editing such articles, so we'll need someone to oversee the wiki at times. Who knows?

And if you found the (or a) way to build that realistic European village, you should tell me right away, not wait for the wiki!

I now see your point.  Sorry, but I don't have a wonderful way of creating perfect villages, though it is like to holy grail to me ;D

As I promised I want to present my propositon of organizing our SC4 knowledge.

But earlier I would like to comment two posts:

Quote from: BigSlark on December 26, 2007, 11:53:56 PM
So far, I see two components that will be on every page of our Wiki/Encyclopedia:

A link to a discussion topic for that particular topic and lots of photos, to illustrate the point.

There's nothing worse than attempting to figure something about SC4 out without anything to visually reference.

Beyond that, well, give me some more time to think about it...

Cheers,
Kevin

Definitely yes! But in the same time an information (an article, in the terms of Wikipedia) should be as concise and clear as possible (both for experienced players/creators and for complete beginners!). It would be good to prepare some templates for more typical articles (such as information about a person, software description, mod description). We hould also have rules concerning picture sizes (both in pixels and in KB).
Links are essential, it's the only way to collect the diversified knowledge in one place.

Quote from: LoneRanger on December 28, 2007, 12:15:10 PM
Well, you are right obviously but the key is to update your "tutorial" when someonefinds a better way.
Lets say I wrote a tutorial about the quickest route from A to B but you say [with proof] that traveling trough D instead of C works better I should adjust it in my tutorial.
That way you as a interested searcher on quickest routes, have only the first post of a tutorial to read.
I think that the responsibility of writing a tutorial comes with updating.
That way the interested party knows that only reading the staring post is enough to be up to date.

It's very important point.
I would like to don't limit anybody's right to edit an article, but I think about some kind of confirmation. It should be a task for the Encyclopaedia management team. It's members should temporarily check edited articles (every added/changed text should be marked, for example by another font color or italics etc.), asked specialists for opinion if necessary and confirm (or not) changes. After some changes it could be necessary to edit all article to keep it clear and concise.
I know it's a slightly different mechanism like in Wikipedia, but maybe it will be better for us?
Of course added text would be available before confirmation, but the reader would know if something is checked and confirmed or not.

OK, now my proposition about categories.
I must strongly emphasize that the list below is not complete and probably not very good. My main goal is to start working with it and encourage you to share your propositions. We should make some real work from now.

SC4 Encyclopaedia categories and subcategories (my comments in square brackets)
Please note that every article can belong to more than one categories. One of the managing team tasks should be checking if new articles
are properly positioned in the categories system and making changes if necessary.

1. Game Mechanics
  1.1. Game installation [also crashes and other problems]
  1.2. Game structure and features [everybody should know a game instruction, but maybe some information should be more detailed, for
example simcity1-5.dat files structure]
  1.3. Plugins: installation, organizing, possible conflicts, safety conditions
  1.4. Game management software (Reader, SC4Tool, SUM etc.)
  1.5. Mods and modding
  1.6. ...

2. The Environment
  2.1. Maps
  2.2. Terraforming
  2.3. Map making and terraforming software
  2.4. Creating regions
  2.5. Terrain, rock and water mods
  2.6. Tree mods
  2.7. ...

3. Game objects (Lots, BATs, ploppable stuff like trees, rocks etc., effects)
  3.1. Lot structure and other basic information about Lots
  3.2. Lot editing
  3.3. Creating BATs
  3.4. Lot and BAT resources
    3.4.1. Buildings
    3.4.2. Props
    3.4.3. Textures
    3.4.4. Other resources
  3.5. Dependencies
  3.6. ...

4. The Simulation
  4.1. City planning
  4.2. Transit Networks
  4.3. Utilities
  4.4. Zoning [also - ploppable or growable, the influence of various objects, placing eye-candy objects such as airports, seaports etc.]
  4.5. City growth [stages, conditions, troubles, data analysing]
  4.6. Regional development
  4.7. CAM
  4.8. ...

There were my basic categories. After some thinking I added the following ones:

5. SC4 Glossary [shorts and terms definitions - this is what Dustin started some time ago, I think it doesn't need subcategories]

6. SC4 People [persons, teams and communities ie. SC4 sites]

7. SC4 Related [for example graphic programs - but only an information which can be useful for us - tips, tricks, techniques etc.; also such programs as clip2pic, texture sources etc.]

Please think about it, share with us your opinions and propositions!

One more comment:

Quote from: LoneRanger on December 28, 2007, 12:15:10 PM
But ok, if you want to start somekind of wiki I fully support but wonder if there's still need of a tutorial section wich covers your wiki idea if.. well update is the key-word.   ;)
The stong point of a forum is the discussion.
Some things are obvious in right or wrong, some things ain't.
That's my point kinda.  :)

- If our Encyclopaedia will be established, the tutorial section will not be necessary. Existing tutorials can be moved to the Encyclopaedia as articles in their own category (categories). But to do it the Encyclopaedia must earlier work very well and enable a really easy access to every information.
- The Help section: I think when Encyclopaedia will start, the Help section will still be necessary.
If somebody will ask about something which is described in Encyclopaedia, more experienced players, will be able to point him/her to the
apropriate place without a need of preparing a 397th answer for the same question and without time-consuming looking for a link to the proper place.
When more and more people will use the Encyclopaedia, I hope there will be less and less repeating questions (in my opinion many people ask not because they are lazy but because they really have troubles with finding an information they need).

At the end - two examples of Encyclopaedia articles (how I imagine they should look).

Example 1: Slope mod

A mod which changes transit networks placing parameters (maximum slope, smoothness, terrain conditions for tunnels and bridges, costs).
The main purpose of creating slope mods was to achieve more realistic looking transit networks. Making tunnels in an easier way was also a
point of interest.

There are no tutorials concerning using slope mods.
Discussions about slope mods:

1. Simtropolis thread Slope mods - which to use (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=42&threadid=84518) (consists a comparation of MaxSlope parameter for various slope mods made by RippleJet - reply 12/08/2006. )
2. Simtropolis thread My experiment in tunneling (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=41&threadid=44972&STARTPAGE=1) (here is the only place where BRF published the first slope mod - Vester_DK reply 04/26/2006 )

Existing slope mods:

[link 1]
[link 2]
[link 3]


Example 2: A person description [I was afraid about missing any achievements of an existing person, so I described a fictional one]

crashtodesktop: An MD author, BAT and MOD creator.

Home site: SC4 Devotion [link to profile]
Also active on ST, PEG and Simcity Plaza.
He released his works in LEX, STEX and PLEX (type CTD in the searching box).

Main works:
- An MD "Charming Vogonia" on SC4 Devotion (subcategories: "ghetto", "toxic sludge", "mines", "riots"). Interesting but unusual photo editing and storyline.
- A mod disabling building bridges across the water, but making placing them along rivers really easy [link]
- Ploppable diagonal kayaks [link]
- The Vulture Effect (ploppable lot on the transparent base creating vultures cruising in the air, sitting on streetlight etc.) [link]


Now I start reading Wikipedia - I'd like to know a bit about managing team tasks. It will be our next theme

Cheers
Adam

Joe (star.torturer): I am personally against the idea of integrating the Wiki into the forum software, as it can cause issues that are unexpected... each SMF installation may be different (in terms of mods installed), and they may interact with each other in unexpected ways. Also, some of the mods and admins here may have no interest in moderating the wiki. Don't forget that the Wiki can be set up so that you have to register before you edit, to ensure that vandalism is minimized.

I'd prefer the Wiki to be organised as an independent entity, part of SC4D, managed by a different group of people (maybe Jeronij would have admin privileges, after all, he'd be paying for hosting if it was part of SC4D's space). The Wiki could have other members as admins, moderators, but they wouldn't necessarily be the same mods and admins as what we've already got, right?


With managing a Wiki, it's generally best to keep the hierarchy transparent, while there is a moderator body keeping an eye on the Wiki, anybody is able to contribute, as long as it's acceptable. But if they vandalise a page, their editing privileges are revoked (ie. the account might be deleted, and the address blacklisted for editing). They still can view the Wiki, but they can't edit a page inside the Wiki.

Mods only can have global privileges on the Wiki (it's all or nothing, basically), but delegation is the key. If we work together, we can make this project a reality.


As for discussion pages on MediaWiki, the structure of the Wiki is such that the person wouldn't necessarily always get an answer to their question, because basically, no one can be everywhere at once. A support thread on the SC4D forums would be a much better option. However, some ground rules should be set in place with support. The person asking the question should at least say what article they're enquiring about/link to it to make it easier for people to answer those questions.

Now, the Wiki would also help with the situation of a dependency list - the BSC team, for example, would quickly be able to add to it as they upload their own dependencies/prop packs/miscellaneous stuff to the LEX. Also, manuals would be added to the Wiki, especially for mods such as the NAM. The entire process would make it entirely transparent, and new readmes would no longer need to be built for the release of an individual lot/BAT/mod when the central repository can simply be updated as new lots are released. It would make chasing down dependencies a non-issue, as well as shifting the readme from being offline (single readme copied multiple times, each viewed only once) to online (single readme, viewed many times). Each Wiki page is very light on bandwidth, especially if images can be hosted off site. But a little bit of bandwidth really adds up when lots of people visit, though...

The whole point of the Wikipedia would be to have a central repository of information for the SC4 community, much like Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy, as well as being a place where important information, especially pertaining to manuals, is stored.

This would definitely change the way content is viewed, as it's changed from the old closed system (download the thing, keep it on your computer) to the new open system (access the page, can access it any time and it's updated with a minimum of effort).

Granted, at first, a lot of time would need to be invested into building up the repository, but when it's done, it's a very simple matter to keep on updating the pages, and once the page has been established, it would only take five minutes to update everything.

Here is an example:
The SimForum BAT team have a number of lots on the LEX. Each one would link to the central SFBT page, which contains links to all the necessary dependencies, as well as links to other lots they may have uploaded. Basically, the SFBT page that was linked to is a central hub. Included would be readmes for individual lots/mods/packs. When that lot is updated, the readme is updated to reflect the changes.

Old style: including documentation with the install file. Pros: easy method of distribution. Cons: May be out of date, support for the lot may be incorrect (for instance, a mistake is made with the readme, where say, a dependency was not added... it would open a whole can of worms support wise).

New style: having the documentation at a central repository. Pros: Easily updated (with the situation above, the person who uploaded the lot would simply update the wiki page to reflect that the missing dependency was added to the list. People would then simply click on the page, see that the dependency was added, click on it and download it from the LEX). Cons: Bandwidth adds up.


The trick is, making change happen fast enough that people can't protest against it because they've used an inefficient method of distribution of documentation for five years.


--SA

SA, your vision is really wide and I must say I agree with you in every point
It seems we have a similar way of thinking  ;)

Now we have a lot of material to think about  ::)

I know most of you have holidays now and you prepare yourself to a New Year party, so I would like to ask you to send your ideas and propositions till 5th January. After that day  I will try to prepare a kind of summary (maybe I will need help with it  ;) ) to know where we are at that moment.
Please think about the structure (categories, subcategories, important themes which I missed). Think also what Shadow Asassin said, it adds important elements to my first proposition.

Cheers
Adam

Yes...

Quality control was a point that I forgot to bring up. Maybe I'll cover that later when I'm less tired (it's 2.30am here).

this sounds intresting as im getting ready for work will have to read into this much more later... so far so good imho... - pat


btw anywhere help is needed im willing to help out...  :thumbsup:

Hi there,

Long time, no see $%Grinno$%

As far as the listing, (Ennedi's), it doesn't look too bad; however, my time does allow for anything being done on my part (for the time being), but in the fullness of time (about the 15^th; I'm trying to move and get some exams done, and see Berlin soon [again...]), I'll be able to get something done if people here are still willing to help me. As it looks like I'm going to have to clean up in my own plugins, so we might have a chance to see how our articles can help without passing all the trouble onto innocent end users.

Till next time, good tie!

I am defiantly up for helping gather info up

Joe

SA, you make some great points, especially with the example of each team having their own "hub", where readmes and such could be linked to. These hubs could work similarly to the portals that are on Wikipedia. And many of the pages that shouldn't be edited by anyone can be protected so that only certain people would have access to them to edit them.

-- John

Please give me 1-2 days more  :)
I started to analyse some aspects of Wikipedia functionality (various ways of knowledge organizing - not only categories  ::), maintaining the system).
I must think more about it. We shouldn't make the system too complicated. I think I will send PMs to some of you before weekend - I have some more detailed questions.

Cheers
Adam

Hi Adam, this sounds like a great idea! I have used several wikis already and I have found that they have been very easy to use and easy to moderate too. I think it would be great if we could get a system like this up and running. I can see many many ways that it could be used to ease collaboration on large projects and to collect all of our knowledge into one massive repository. If you need any help with this, just give me a shout, I'm definitely interested. ;)

Fred

This thread was previously known as: "(Urban) Planning reference - collected tutorials?"

As important as having an outline for articles we need, are clear and precise guidelines on how the articles should be written, so as to avoid excessive information on a subject, or leaving out important notes (oh, everybody knows that!). Sort of the same as the templates, but covering more possibilites.

what?  ()what()

edit: nvm, i thought that^ was the first post in the thread.

Quote from: Pat Riot on January 11, 2008, 06:44:57 PM
what?  ()what()

edit: nvm, i thought that^ was the first post in the thread.

Might mean someones onto something :thumbsup:

If this is done in a wiki format, I would be happy to paste in some of my work (when I find the time ofc)

I would also strongly advise to keep the number of content links in such a wiki to other sites (especially discussion forums) as minimal as possible. Forums tend to go down and up and sometimes even down permanently, as such - in my opinion - it's generally better to sum up the most important points of a discussion instead of linking to it.

Exactly, and in the case of a lot of things found in the early days of SC4, they are very close to being lost forever, now that Simtropolis [why ST? Back in those days, it was the site to go to for the discovery of new things in SC4] is archiving old threads. So, it's probably worth it if we can rescue that stuff before it gets lost in the mists of time.

Especially the stuff pertaining to transit-modding. ;)

On the Wiki, we are going to transfer information over from various small repositories of information, such as RedLotus's Interchange Tutorial [which is hidden in some Yahoo! briefcase somewhere in the messy place that is the Internet]. An archives section will be created specifically for that purpose.

I'd just like to add that the Wiki should support [[Links that allow spaces (and brackets) as Wikipedia does]] and not [[LinksThatHaveToBeWrittenInOneLongWordWithoutFormatting]]

I've tried a few Wiki installs, and it seems like most of the rely on the latter method (but the former should be possible to get to work in MediaWiki, I didn't just find out of it back then &Thk/().

Quote from: Shadow Assassin on January 14, 2008, 05:56:25 AM
Exactly, and in the case of a lot of things found in the early days of SC4, they are very close to being lost forever, now that Simtropolis [why ST? Back in those days, it was the site to go to for the discovery of new things in SC4] is archiving old threads. So, it's probably worth it if we can rescue that stuff before it gets lost in the mists of time.

Especially the stuff pertaining to transit-modding. ;)

On the Wiki, we are going to transfer information over from various small repositories of information, such as RedLotus's Interchange Tutorial [which is hidden in some Yahoo! briefcase somewhere in the messy place that is the Internet]. An archives section will be created specifically for that purpose.

I agree entirely. However, there are techniques from the dark ages that are no longer used for a myriad of reasons. Granted, they should be preserved, but I feel they should be marked as "This is a historical article only and should not be used creating X."

Suggestions?

Cheers,
Kevin

I'd have to agree with Kevin.  A lot of the transit modding documentation dates back to 2004 (like redlotus' tutorial), and it is more than a bit outdated, not to mention cumbersome and dense, but I'd still say it's important stuff, even if for nothing more than "historical" purproses, so marking these things as such seems logical to me.  I'd also like to see Tropod's Network Specs document up there as well, as right now, it's only available behind closed doors (on the Private NAM Team Exchange).

Of course, that means we'll need new documentation . . .  ::)

I need to get around to writing that 0x10000000 tutorial one of these days (especially since redlotus' section on RUL files just says "send it to Tropod"). ;)

-Alex

Well, outdated information isn't worth hanging onto -- the trial by water isn't exactly mentioned in papers on modern penal systems either $%Grinno$% But if it's knowledge worth to know, I agree with you guys.

But really historical stuff might need an entry after all, just to warn people that these practices are deprecated.

QuoteWell, outdated information isn't worth hanging onto

How can we stop history from repeating itself if we don't know what caused it to happen in the first place?  ;)

By the way, with those links, MediaWiki does indeed support it. It's the same software that Wikipedia uses, after all.

About wiki soft, I'm using http://www.splitbrain.org/projects/dokuwiki
which is simple, small and support image ( direct hosting on imageshack ), namespaces

one page features list :
http://www.wikimatrix.org/show/DokuWiki

and the 'Compare them all' web site http://www.wikimatrix.org

Make your choice wisely :)

I do actually have some experience using PmWiki (http://www.pmwiki.org) as well.  I managed documentation for a computer lab I was running at my previous university with a PmWiki.  But I'm not entirely sure I'd recommend it, unless they've upgraded it quite a bit from a security standpoint in the past couple of years. 

-Alex (Tarkus)

I think MediaWiki is the best one to use, because it is the most popular one, and it's fairly easy to use once you get a hang of the codes and such (actually, many of the codes are easier to use than plain HTML). It can be a pain to set up though.

-- John

We are most likely to use mediawiki, purely because it's the most popular, and therefore has the most support and is easiest to pick up. Unless there are some major problems with mediawiki, it is likely to be the one we go with.

Fred

Plus, whatever works for Wikipedia should work for us.  ::)


:P

I'm glad SA gracefully accepted to take care of the hassle of installing such an application $%Grinno$% I wondr how Ennedi's doing with his list $%#Ninj2

Ennedi had a lot of RL work last few days  :angrymore:
And now he is slowly regaining consciousness  :D

I have something to tell you all, I will edit this post today (a bit later).
Thank you very much for supporting this idea! :thumbsup:

Edit: I would like to tell you that we started experimenting with the MediaWiki software. Fred (freedo50) installed a wiki 13th January and we started to play with it. We organized a small testing team: Fred, Shadow Assassin, Kevin (Big Slark - he is waiting for first articles to edit  ;)), and me.
We invited also Dustin thundercrack83 (he is an author of the SC4 Encyclopaedia idea - but now he has much work with the MD section reorganisation) and krbe (but we agreed we will have an occasion to cooperate at the later stage). Jeronij of course will look at our progress.

The MediaWiki software is really easy to use, but there is an incredible amount of options in it. I started to build the categories tree (based on my proposition presented in this thread earlier, there were no other propositions), but I must say I spent most time reading the MediaWiki Help  :D
Fred and Shadow Assassin (who seems to be the most experienced one) did the same. We've got to know much things, but we have a long way to go.
Unfortunately I was very busy in RL and wasn't be able to do as much as I planned last week.
I want to finish creating categories this weekend, then we will start to write some articles and general introductions to particular categories. This will be an occassion to to create article templates and learn editing. It is very important, because if we want to have our knowledge well organized and easy to read, we must show you examples. Of course we will ask for your opinions at that stage.

The next thing we must perfectly know before we will make our wiki public, will be all admin and moderating tasks. We will be able to practice with them when we will have some articles yet. In other words, we must run the wiki some time with some (but not too much) content and make it in a small team to be able to track all our operations and their effects. when we will achieve enough experience in managing te wiki, we will make it public, ask for opinions and invite to the common work  :)

We will inform you about the progress, we will also ask you for opinions if we will have specific problems.
In the meantime - please post here everything you think about it, all ideas and propositions. This is a "brainstorming" period.  ;)
After some days (maybe next weekend) we will try to analyze your thoughts and maybe come to any conclusions.

As for your last posts:

- I agree with Shadow Assassin, Fred and Dfire870: the MediaWiki is the most popular one, many people are familiar with it's codes and functionality. As Shadow Assassin said - whatever works for Wikipedia should work for us  ;)
I think the main reason of creating a lot of versions of the Wiki software is a need to simplify it and modify according to various users needs.
Many of these wikis can be easier to manage in some aspects, but in fact we don't know what will be useful for us. So it would be very difficult to decide which version would be the best for us. MediaWiki looks very flexible and it has very detailed help section - and it is very important for us now.

- As for the outdated stuff: this theme needs a discussion, but I think we can't give a simple rule here. Some information can be copied from other places (after an author's permission), some other can be leaved in the source place (but what daeley said is very important, it is more safe to have as much information as possible inside our system), and in many cases an article author should make some work to extract everything valuable information from all sources and organize it. This is the ultimate goal of making an encyclopadedia - we want not only to collect, but to organize our knowledge and make it easy to learn and use also for beginners!

That's all for now, thanks again for your support, we are waiting for your ideas and opinions!

Adam

I was just contemplating... we could go as far as making an information page for every lot created..... LOL... a bit OTT really

Cant wait to get going on this project... I'm itching to be of some use to the community LOL

Joe

Glad to see that we have someone to take care of the technicalities in a team. I found myself sweating over the help pages more than working with the software when I tried it last time ;D Since I've reinstalled Windows (I'm running it on a Mac in order to play SC, and Vista was far too bloated and big to have on a 20 GB partition), I have the opportunity to "test drive" the articles without having too much else to worry about :satisfied:

As key HTML tags don't work here (table, a, img tags, if anyone wants to enable them $%Grinno$%), I had to use a blog to post progress; see the Fairmont Report  (http://thefairmontreport.wordpress.com/) if you have anything to help me with :thumbsup:

Well, that was the advertising; if anybody really wants to, they may well provide information on every lot existing; but I believe some broader categories will work better (and will get the job done quicker). We may start with providing information on the lots on the LEX (how many do we have?) and expand with quality lots found elsewhere. We risk having to write about the same lot in more than one category, but that also makes it possible to find information on lots based on several themes (example: the SMP Police station is both good for your military and your police service). Anyways, if anything of this seems odd or unclear, it's because it's late %confuso

And people, don't forget to read Ennedi's thoughts two posts up!

Actually, looking at that Wordpress page gives me an idea. I wonder if there's a way to add meta tags/keywords [like in a blog] to a particular page to assist with searching...

I'll look around in the help files and see if it's built in or requires an extension. They probably have to do it with searches anyway...

help as writer offered.

Quote from: mightygoose on January 20, 2008, 03:53:35 AM
help as writer offered.

Thank you, I will contact you soon  ;D

Quote from: Shadow Assassin on January 20, 2008, 02:48:59 AM
Actually, looking at that Wordpress page gives me an idea. I wonder if there's a way to add meta tags/keywords [like in a blog] to a particular page to assist with searching...

I'll look around in the help files and see if it's built in or requires an extension. They probably have to do it with searches anyway...

The redirecting feature will be highly helpful! I hope the search will be as powerful of Wikipedia's--at least my searching returns som relevant results over there and not just 0%'s as here $%Grinno$%

I'm not sure how tags works in a wiki, but this also has somting to do with the way we're writing and how different things are named in the game and RL. Example highway: I always thought it was the American equivavlent to the autobahn, but it turns out to be any main road or any road at all. This is of course not going to work if we're writing about SimCity, where highway implies a highspeed, highcapacity road (or the very least the 2-lane RHW).

The equivalent to the tags in a wiki are the categories. Under a page you put in [[Category:Name]], replacing name with whatever category, and when you visit the category it gives you all pages listed in that category.

For example, if you went to the Avenue page, at the bottom there could be the "Road" and "Transportation" categories. If you clicked on the "Road" category, it would list various pages such as Street, Road, One-Way Road, Avenue, etc., as well as sub-categories.

This the default method MediaWiki uses and would work quite well with what we want (wow, can someone say alliteration? :P).

-- John

krbe and SA: If you would like to explain a bit more clear which way of searching are you talking about?

Why am I asking for it? Yes, DFire870 is right, we can use categories to searching, but I am sure we will need more searching methods. I have an idea about it, but I would rather like to wait for your explanation, I don't want to complicate the discussion.

Adam

Just pointing out that the writing style matters for search, AND that we're dealing with the SC4 concept spread througout the world. We need to find a common ground when it comes to writing, so that an American game with its own concept translated into severeal languages can be translated back to (American-SC) English :thumbsup:

Quote from: krbe on January 20, 2008, 03:47:11 PM
Just pointing out that the writing style matters for search, AND that we're dealing with the SC4 concept spread througout the world. We need to find a common ground when it comes to writing, so that an American game with its own concept translated into severeal languages can be translated back to (American-SC) English :thumbsup:

OK, so maybe it would be good to write SC4 terms definitions? You are right, we had troubles with such terms as street and road when we made translations of the query texts for cogeo's Road Top Mass Transit Set. In addition, we noticed that SC4 Locale files prepared by EA are misleading in some cases. We will have to consult it with players from various countries.

QuoteThe equivalent to the tags in a wiki are the categories. Under a page you put in [[Category:Name]], replacing name with whatever category, and when you visit the category it gives you all pages listed in that category.

Nope, not at all what I'm trying to get at. If you look at a blog, you'll notice keywords at the bottom of the post. They're not necessarily categories, but keywords that can be brought up in a general search.

Have you looked around for a Wiki modification or plugin that allows something like [[keyword:road]] for example... I haven't particularly looked around but if you cant find one, I might try and see if I can make one for you

Joe

The mediawiki search is pretty good anyway; it works exactly like the one on wikipedia, so it will give each result a percentage match and will search the whole of every article for that word/phrase. Keywords might be a good way to adjust these to take into account the fact that if you're searching for road, you're not going to want to see an MD where the author is placing lots of road :D, which atm would have a high percentage.

Fred

I'm thinking that the wiki search should only search within the wiki, not the forums as well. And since the MD's would stay put in the forums, that shouldn't be an issue.

Sorry yeah, that wasn't what I meant. There will probably be wiki pages about the most interesting/legendary MDs, like 3RR and SCR. The forums will definitely not be directly linked to the wiki, although they may be affiliated and/or on the same server.

Fred

QuoteHave you looked around for a Wiki modification or plugin that allows something like [[keyword:road]] for example... I haven't particularly looked around but if you cant find one, I might try and see if I can make one for you

I will look, but I think the keywords can be added by using meta-tags, which is what search engines [such as Google] use to find if a page is relevant to a particular search.

SA, you mean the stuff that goes in the <head>? Also, there's a nifty way to write a short summary to show up in search engines instead of parts of a lengthy introduction piece.

Hey guys, I have implemented an extension to allow the inclusion of meta tags to articles ;).

See, we do listen to you!  :)

Fred

Hows it going?

It seems I caused some delay - I was ill last week (and I'm not quite well yet). I promised writing some articles and now I have to do it quickly  ;)
It seems we have everything what we want, but now we must play a bit with some content (so a few articles are necessary).

What about now? I hope your feeling better Ennedi

Joe

indeed you have our best wishes....

Thank you Joe, I'm feeling quite good now (although I will be a convalescent next 4-6 weeks  $%Grinno$%)
In fact, I made some work yet, but these were another things. My absence caused a huge accumulation of work - both in RL and in SC4.
I had 3 important tasks:
- preparing the slope mod to release
- the Encyclopaedia, and
- my own MD.
It was impossible to do everything in the same time. All these things need too much time. I decided to finish the slope mod first and... I spent a lot of time with it  ;D. Fortunately, it seems I finished it today.
The second reason of the long break in the Encyclopaedia activities was collecting an information. Now the first thing to do is to write a few articles and check the Wiki software in action - and I didn't want to write nonsenses  ;)
I think I will start writing articles next few days - but I don't know how much time will I need - maybe 1 or 2 weeks? Then the rest of the testing team members will do their tasks - editing, quality control etc., and we will be ready to make the Wiki public.
It isn't too good me that others must wait for me  $%Grinno$% - but it seems I creared such situation myself  :D, so I must do what I promised.
Of course I'm going to work with the Encyclopaedia in future too, but this task is huge and it will need many people to become something useful.
Personally I will try to do my best  ;D

Edit: thank you mightygoose for wishes and also for your nice post in my MD - I will answer soon  :thumbsup:

Adam

WOOO, a slope mod by Ennedi, how exelent, and a update on your fantastic MD. If you want to test out TUT articles, feel free to use mine, and if you want some other people to test/write articles, I am free.

Joe

Quote from: star.torturer on February 14, 2008, 09:04:15 AM
WOOO, a slope mod by Ennedi, how exelent

I can ensure you it is excellent, and well worth the time it took! :thumbsup:

hmmm...going back to the MD thing, what could be done is have a D category where those who want to can write the backstory of their MD and put in a link to the MD on the forums.

What do you guys think?

Nice idea, maybe restrict it to well established MD's, also they could post a table of contents on the page?

cant wait for the update

Joe

Hi All, I tend to be a lurker not a poster, but think a SC4 Encyclopedia is a great idea not only for beginners, but so the information we already have doesn't get lost, so while I don't have much experience with wikis, I have had some experience in Web Site creation, technical writing and proof-reading, so if that any use to you, I am more than happy to help in anyway needed. Catty

Just need to check in every once in a while $%Grinno$% I'm having a few problems now, both RLS (maybe an exam, maybe not, but at least a lot of lectures...) and computerised (worked like a charm during three hours on the train, and when I come home, it's a dead as a dodo $%#Ninj2). But at least I have an old, crappy Compaq so I can visit you guys :satisfied:

I'm glad to hear Ennedi's slope mod has been/are going to be public; I've used some of them myself, and I really like the diagonals!

Now, I just hope I can be of some help soon ()testing()

I guess either RLS has hit again, or maybe ur keepin secrets ??? :D :P

hope to here from you soon

Joe

Quote from: star.torturer on February 27, 2008, 11:03:59 PM
I guess either RLS has hit again, or maybe ur keepin secrets ??? :D :P

hope to here from you soon

Joe

Both  :D
But don't worry, this is the first theme in my schedule now
Some secret work will be done this weekend, and then... we will see  ;)

ooooooooooooooo

/me jumps up and down

any progress?... sorry to bump this thread (again) but I really want to help with this project. and whats with the skunk may I ask? (me must just not be getting the reference.. lol)

Joe

Some patience please!  :D

As I said last time, last weekend I tried to prepare a few articles. But of course there were a lot of unexpected things to do during that time, so I wasn't be able to find links, prepare pictures and so on  $%Grinno$%
The wiki structure is ready. Our first idea two months ago was to write some articles and this way give others an example - how should look a properly written article. Our intention was to prepare a bigger amount of them, and then make some exercises with editing and managing the wiki. But it is very time-consuming, so I suppose we will prepare only a few articles, then make the wiki public and invite all of you to the cooperation. It would take too much time if a few people (having much more things to do) would fill all Encyclopaedia categories, even only partially.
I will try to finish my articles next few days, and then we will discuss the future tasks in our team. We will definitely need your help, and I feel a bit ashamed of the last break. But I'm still sure it is a good idea and I want to develop it (of course I can't be the only person to manage it).

Adam

(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Ff%2Ff1%2FSkunkworks-logo.jpg&hash=0e44fd88928e40442b1c1c1a50e1044fb4ee909a)
The building Ennedi and his mates are buried in when they're working in the Skunk Works (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunk_Works) producing our wiki

... when he's not hanging out in "Cafe Poland" of course. There's always the risk that the occasional coffee and croissant are too tempting.

oh, sorry.... ;)

cant wait, still

Joe

Quote from: krbe on March 09, 2008, 11:48:41 AM
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Ff%2Ff1%2FSkunkworks-logo.jpg&hash=0e44fd88928e40442b1c1c1a50e1044fb4ee909a)
The building Ennedi and his mates are buried in when they're working in the Skunk Works (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunk_Works) producing our wiki

... when he's not hanging out in "Cafe Poland" of course. There's always the risk that the occasional coffee and croissant are too tempting.

Skunk Works
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Skunk Works is used in engineering and technical fields to describe a group within an organization given a high degree of autonomy and unhampered by bureaucracy, tasked with working on advanced or secret projects. 

:D :D :D

Very good you described this term, Kristian, I didn't know it's source and spent some time with the dictionary  ;D
I must explain there were only two reasons of starting this project non-public:
1. We wanted to keep the general wiki structure well ordered, to avoid problems in future
2. We want to learn how to manage it before making it public, to know what to do in the cause of improperly created category, unclear article structure and other similar events.

We don't prepare a new SR-71 or Stealth (=invisible wiki  :D)

PS. I love this logo! Maybe we will use it? (No, it is probably protected by copyrights  :()

Indeed it is. But if we call the development of the project secret (not the project itself, which is highly public), you may probably use it as it's only for authorised eyes :satisfied:

Edit: Or use it as a categoriser, a "common" logo for those working on the NAM, the different teams, our French friend which name starts with a W (sorry W, I never remember how to spell/pronounce it), as we're all working with a high grade of autonomy or on secret projects :thumbsup: Or use it under the "idiot" clause. The logo is also mirrored on Wiipedia for some reason; perhaps to avoid Lockheed doing anything stupid?

sorry for being persistent, I guess you have just been busy with your other projects. hehe

any news?  :)

Joe

Quote from: star.torturer on April 16, 2008, 11:09:25 PM
sorry for being persistent, I guess you have just been busy with your other projects. hehe

any news?  :)

Joe

Sorry for late answer Joe!
Your supposition is partially true. Yes, I have a few other project started and I want to continue them. I have not enough time to do two serious things in the same moment, in addition my RL work needs spending at the computer a few evenings every week. It's a temporary situation, and some of my RL tasks are difficult to provide earlier. The most critical period on the building site I'm working now ends up about 20th May and I hope I will have more time after that date.

But it is only a part of true and I would like to explain something to you (and others) in a more detailed way:
As I promised some time ago, I started to prepare a few articles in March. But before putting them into the wiki I checked them and started to think again.
What is my problem for now?
It would be relatively easy (although time-consuming) to choose a theme, check SC4D and several other SC4 sites, collect links and write an article simply repeating most important information (in the author's opinion of course) from most informative sources. I have done it for several themes. But after reading these articles again I came to conclusion that in fact it is not a big progress - an information looked still chaotic and cluttered. The problem is that the value of various source texts is very varied and it is difficult to create a condensed yet clear information without any rules. My main goal is to create something easy to read and understand for people who don't have any knowledge in the particular area. I'm a beginner in many things and I know what I need, some advanced discussions between experts are above my head without more basic information. And there is a lack of such basic information very often.
If we would like to simply collect a source information in one place, we wouldn't need a wiki - an index with links would be enough. I saw some wikis of that type on several sites (not SC4) and I can't say they are a big help for readers.
I think SC4D is a good site. We need a professional encyclopaedia or nothing.
So what is the conclusion? I will not be able to prepare articles for many themes. But I want to make - as a minimum - a few articles showing the proper information structure to make learning as easy as possible, and to use them as a reference for creating next articles by other people. If I will not do it, the managing team will have a lot of unnecessary editing work, and we probably will not be able to check and edit every separate information. It needs a bit more time and some inspiration  ;) At that moment I will immediately ask Fred to make the wiki public and we will be able to work together, having a good start point.
Sorry Joe, I'm not a machine, I have good ideas from time to time, but I have also some periods of an incredible stupidity  :D
In addition, I know that some of my teammates (SA, Fred) are very busy lately, so I don't want to force them to do too many things in the same time.
I can honestly say I'm going to continue this theme, I'm sure it is very good idea and can be a great help for many people, even more that many old yet important threads are more and more difficult to find. But I must put some additional work to it. So please for some patience, I know very good there is a lot of positive energy around this theme and I don't want to lose it.

Thanks for the update, and what you say is true...

and as I have said, I am always here to help...

oh and about you not being a machine... :D

will digest it and add some tomorrow, its getting late

Joe

Adam if you want help here with this at all in getting any information lemme know and Im still willing to help!!!

In the meantime, the rest of us will be making your job that much harder, by adding more information among these pages.  $%Grinno$%

Quote from: Shadow Assassin on January 14, 2008, 05:56:25 AM
Exactly, and in the case of a lot of things found in the early days of SC4, they are very close to being lost forever, now that Simtropolis [why ST? Back in those days, it was the site to go to for the discovery of new things in SC4] is archiving old threads. So, it's probably worth it if we can rescue that stuff before it gets lost in the mists of time.

Especially the stuff pertaining to transit-modding. ;)

On the Wiki, we are going to transfer information over from various small repositories of information, such as RedLotus's Interchange Tutorial [which is hidden in some Yahoo! briefcase somewhere in the messy place that is the Internet]. An archives section will be created specifically for that purpose.

Yeah, but maybe archive.org can help. Type http://www.simtropolis.com/ into the Wayback Machine, pull the switch, and be warped back to a 2004 world where SimCity 4 was relatively new, Rush Hour was trendy, diagonal bridges were wishful thinking, and people thought there would be another expansion pack to SimCity.

I really like this idea, and even though I thought I saw some sort of glossary on this page, I hope that I can help in this task and perhaps help get it published. This would be helpful in keeping SimCity 4 on the shelves of your local retailer (the shelf life of SC4 is long and fruitful), hopefully pull in entirely new players, and make the Prima guide version of SC4D and the original manual look like dung.

Why a print version, you ask? Well, it's slightly more expensive, but it has advantages. You can have a copy while playing SimCity 4 or have a copy near your bedside (good reading). I think a section on UDI strategies would be cool, a full-color section showcasing BAT creations, and a real step-by-tutorial showing how to go from a basic plot of land to the megalopolis of your dreams. Is anyone a nice artist, to make a potential cover?

Anyone still want to help with this project???

if so PM me :)

Joe

I just looked at the first page of ST ever. I think the guide is the precerser of the Omnibus though. It's hard to tell since the links don't seem to work. ??? It's amazing to look and see har far we've come though. :o

im still willing to lend a pen...

sim-al2: the "wayback" links work for me...

Orange Julius:

It would be great to have a CD of all the tutorials, and then we could print it ourselves. We would also be donating to the site and helping jeronji maintain the site. I would definitely pay for any of the tutorials posted here.

MaryBeth

I really like this new SC4 Wiki...

anyway, I'm a member of the BLaM team and I'd like to see how I could claim myself as a member of the BLaM team on my user page here (http://www.wiki.sc4devotion.com/index.php/User:Nerdly_dood). The only tag things I could see that were relevant were... most of the SC4 custom content teams other than BLaM. I'd appreciate if a pre-made whatchamacallit thing was made for the BLaM team.