Talk:Unofficial quest solutions

From Discworld MUD Wiki
Revision as of 01:00, 13 August 2009 by Taepha (Talk | contribs) (Separate quest pages: Hidden text/spoiler warning)

Jump to: navigation, search

I've finished transferring over the old content, so now is a good time for anyone that gets the urge to add more solutions or fix existing ones as needed.

Spoilerised quest solutions

Anyone think it would be worthwhile to spoilerize the solutions (but not the quest titles) on these pages? I'm thinking of a template... I guess it would specify white font and white background, so that you'd highlight the text to view it. --Ilde 23:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. I tried to create a hidden template from the Wiki was first started, but it lacked some base code, should be possible now with the additions Drakkos implemented. Rehevkor 23:41, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Awesome, I got it to work. Highlight to see the spoiler. --Ilde 06:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Separate quest pages

Would it be a good idea to start making seperate pages for individual quests? That way they can simply be searched up rather than having to click through the categories and scroll around, and more detailed information can be added without clogging up the list style pages. -- Menouthis 21:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Hm. Maybe... there are an awful lot of them, though. Seems like a big job. --Ilde 23:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
I doubt Wikipedia ever adopted that attitude! :-P -- Menouthis 00:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 :P Wikipedia has a lot more users! Still... we could make a nice header template for them, a spoiler warning thing. (I think we should do that and keep the "hidden text" feature. Otherwise people could stumble onto the page and accidentally get spoiled; that wouldn't be nice. I mean, just looking at the "random page" feature--we've only got 648 articles, and with a few hundred quest articles you'd have a largish chance of landing on one from that.) And they could be categorized in a much nicer way, too, instead of all this redundancy there is currently.
For a header... something like this, maybe:
This is a quest solution page. It contains spoilers.
Easy enough to put that in a template. I mention it because if we do separate them all out, it'd be easier to put it in at the start than to go back and add it to all of them. --Ilde 02:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I would very much like to start separating all quests onto their own pages. Perhaps we should start a work crew and divvy up the task. -Taepha 07:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
In regards to the spoiler warning, I actually don't think it's necessary to do that at all. Anyone reading a quest article here rather than on the official website will be looking for the full solution anyway, and even if not, it's fairly easy to see a section titled 'Solution' and stop reading there. - Menouthis 10:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
I'd just like to have something that makes it obvious--even if someone got to the page through the "random page" thing and hasn't seen a quest page before--what it is.
"'s fairly easy to see a section titled 'Solution' and stop reading there." Not if you tend to glance over the whole page before reading it (unless specifically trying to do otherwise), and there's not so much non-solution information about quests that the section would be under the fold. That's why I like the hidden text--it means you have to intend to see it, to see it. --Ilde 18:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm quite happy with a little spoiler warning up the top: I find it unobtrusive, and potentially helpful (even as a skimmer). However, I am not a fan of 'highlight to read' white text. It's meaningless to anyone with a screenreader and it can be very difficult to read for everyone else. For instance, in Safari on my Mac, it's a very pale blue highlight around white text, and white on medium blue, as it is most other places, isn't exactly easy on the eyes either.
Frankly, there do not appear to be any good solutions for hiding spoilers in a wiki. I think people can probably figure out that it's a spoiler before they read the whole solution, myself. Otherwise, some sort of javascript/css hide script (which has its own browser support drawbacks, and again isn't necessarily terribly useful to screenreaders) would be preferable. -Taepha 06:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)