PW:Staff Forum

We have a plan, right?

Welcome to the PHIGHTING! Wiki's staff forum! This page is intended to facilitate discussions regarding policy, procedures and styling concerns. Please keep discussion on topic!

To reply to a post in this page, edit the specific section and be sure to start your reply with a : - this will indent your reply and make it more readable. You can use ~~~~ or the signature button to add your signature.

In Discussion

Correct naming for boggio - 24 March 2024

Currently across the wiki, we use inconsistent naming for boggio dependent on where a particular citation or comment was made (as their usernames differ across platforms). For consistency, we should agree to either one of the following:

• 7GB0, Sodakettle, and pixonett - (Usernames)

or

• aidn, Soda and pix - (Personal names)

Notably, since we credit every single piece of artwork Soda draws in galleries, her name shows up the most out of all of boggio. We currently use 'Soda' in galleries and citations, and aidn in citations but 7GB0 on certain credits. I have no personal vote. ★ @NINJISY | WARDEN OF THE BANLANDS 20:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

for credits 7gb0, sodakettle and pixonett r all used in Boomball iirc cuz thats the credit used in game. whatever map credit is in game is used for the credit box so that is what is used there, as for like soda art tbh i dont rlly know but most people know soda = sodakettle aidn = 7gb0 pix = pixonett and idk if it was said anywhere that they were like ok use that cuz its been credited as just "soda" for example 4ever Beefore (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, honestly I'm kind of torn about it. I think the full name credits in infoboxes, maps, etc. is kosher, but then having to write Sodakettle in every single piece of art Soda has made feels like it might drive me a bit insane. But the inconsistency bothers me! We also have citations to concern ourselves with since aidn and Soda are both inconsistently referred to across citations. Should we make an exception here to just use whatever their screenname is on the citation? ★ @NINJISY | WARDEN OF THE BANLANDS 20:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

yes and also i think just soda in captions for art would just look better. also i think sodas username isnt sodakettle on everything so thats something. aidn also isnt 7gb0 username on twitter iirc. so like i think u just ... use the display name ez and its fine

would it be a wiki sin to use both? i.e. "aidn (7GB0)" for the first instance and then continue using the originally referenced name on the page --@CYBERUS || NIVEAN ❆ ROGUE 20:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm not really against it, honestly, but I think citations are probably our main problem in this. It wouldn't make much sense to apply this approach to citations so perhaps if we can agree on a standard for them specifically we can play the rest by ear. ★ @NINJISY | WARDEN OF THE BANLANDS 20:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

nods sagely. personally i feel we should use usernames for citations. makes it easier for users to look them up if they want to for whatever reason. plus using personal names feels a little informal and citations are .. kinda academic in tone. i think. maybe. @CYBERUS || NIVEAN ❆ ROGUE 20:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

can we asks the devs themselves about what name they would like? Kaffi | hi 02:11, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Header spacing convention - 24 March 2024

This is purely a nitpick sort of thing. Currently, we use no spacing on headers when editing, possibly due to FANDOM's visual editor implementing headers this way. Editors are a bit divided on which to use, so let's fight about it. /S

We should use one of the following:

• == Header ==

or

• ==Header==

My personal vote is for spacing between the equals signs and the header, but this is purely for aesthetic reasons. I think it looks cleaner when editing articles. ★ @NINJISY | WARDEN OF THE BANLANDS 20:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

biased towards ==Header== bcuz thats the one im used to, could care less, doesnt really matter to me Tbh Beefore (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

i am a == Header == supporter. personally makes it easy for me to parse through the text. clustered together it kinda blurs with the rest. but also i wont die on this hill. i am not the King of this Hill @CYBERUS || NIVEAN ❆ ROGUE 20:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

doesn't really matter to me though I am a user of ==Header== but I think making headings == Header == will help them stand out more specially if its a longer page @TarT 21:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

== Header == is more visually appealing and easier to identify, I vote for that one. ~ @basil 9:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Limited vs Removed for Maps - 21 May 2024

Following some discussion between myself and bee, we could not come to an agreement regarding how non-standard maps (those not in regular rotation) should be referred to, specifically in our new Location Navbox. Below are the two solutions we would like staff to vote on.

Solution 1

Only have the category/title 'Removed' which includes ALL maps under this moniker, i.e.:

• Removed: Boomball • Darkheart's Revenge • Fractured Space • Pizza Palace • SFOTH Revived • Teapots of Doom

This solution combines both limited time maps (Boomball, Pizza Palace, etc.) with overhauled maps who's original versions have been removed (Teapots of Doom, potentially the original versions of Banland, BOGIO Skatepark, etcetera)

Pros: Clearly shows that these maps have been removed, and does not presume they will return, which is something we cant predict

Cons: May confuse players who have played the event-only maps (Boomball, DH's Revenge, Pizza Palace) before, and implies these maps were once in regular rotation

Solution 2

Differentiate 'event' maps from maps which have been completely removed. I.e.:

• Limited: Boomball • Darkheart's Revenge • Fractured Space • Pizza Palace • SFOTH Revived
• Removed: Banland V1 • Teapots of Doom (etc...)

(Banland V1 is only here for demonstration, we may not make pages for V1 maps, and only make pages for maps that got complete overhauls such as Teapots of Doom)

Pros: Clearly differentiates maps that have been, or could be, playable in a Phestival/event rotation and gives a unique category to maps made only for events (Boomball, DH's Revenge, Pizza Palace)

Cons: May imply these maps will return, which we cant predict even if they have returned or appeared before

Please let us know below which solution you prefer and why if possible. ★ @NINJISY | WARDEN OF THE BANLANDS 15:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I think maybe calling limited maps "event maps" would better give the impression that 1) they have been in the game on a temporary basis before in events and 2) they may or may not return at an eventuality where the event comes back. I think it would be a more concise form of categorization, even though it's just a matter of semantics. Stating that these maps have showed up before in events and may or may not return is pretty clear; if the reader assumes that these maps are guaranteed a return, that's an error on their part. @CYBERUS || NIVEAN ❆ ROGUE 15:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with differentiating between the two types of maps. If we put them under "Removed" only, it'll give the impression that those maps are never accessible, which isn't the case for some. I agree with the suggestion above mine by Cyberus, calling them "event" maps is a good idea imo. ~ @basil 15:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

i think solution 2 would work the best, and i also agree with what Cyberus said. calling it "event maps" would work better because we cant really guarantee if these maps ever come back again, while still showing that it used to be in the game before. it's just quite weird to put maps that have came back to the game under the same category with ones that were completely removed, like space knights v1 for example. ~ @oofgod 16:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

works w me. would have sfoth revived be under removed. if a map hasnt returned for multiple phestivals/events where other maps have returned, and theyve only returned like once, id be inclined to just put it under removed and note in trivia or some stuff that it came back this one specific time. using the word phrase would workkkk ~~

Resolved

Naming convention for the deities - 24 March 2024

Currently across the wiki, we use inconsistent naming for the SFOTH deities, due to their inconsistent references in word of god. For consistency, we should agree to either one of the following:

• The deities
• The Swords
• The SFOTH

All of these have been used across various bits of PHIGHTING! media and word of god, but deities and Swords are notable in particular - Soda refers to them as both, but specifically regards 'the deities' as a subclass of the demon species, which we currently are not clear if is unique to the Swords. It is possible that there may be other deities that are not Swords, or even demons, specifically in regards to The Church of the TRUE EYE.

'The SFOTH' so far seems to only be used to refer to the SFOTH family - that is, the Swords, their children, their grandchildren, and Medkit. This is probably inaccurate to use in reference to the Sword deities only.

I personally vote for 'The Swords' to refer to the Sword deities as a collective, but to describe them as deities, or 'a deity' and not 'the deities'. ★ @NINJISY | WARDEN OF THE BANLANDS 20:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

"the swords"in regards to sfoth, if any other deities pop up then u can refer to the swords + other ones as "the deities" Beefore (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

i think they should be called "The Swords" collectively. individually "deity". @CYBERUS || NIVEAN ❆ ROGUE 20:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Naming Convention for the Deities - Resolution 21 May 2024

The Sword deities will be referred to as 'The Swords' and their extended family as 'the SFOTH family', in line with how Soda refers to them. ★ @NINJISY | WARDEN OF THE BANLANDS 15:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Ability type inconsistencies - 24 March 2024

Following the migration from the old wiki, there has been discussion regarding the classification of Phighter's abilities (e.g. AoE, Hitscan, Projectile). Currently, the ability types are as follows:

• AoE
• Buff
• Hitscan
• Melee
• Mobility
• Projectile
• Status
• Targeted
• Utility

The main point of contention is regarding the definition of "Utility" and if it is made redundant due to the existence of a "Buff" category. Furthermore, another point that has been brought up is if the existence of a "Targeted" is needed as a category or if its existence is too niche. Feel free to leave opinions down below!

Personally, I think we should utilize as little ability types as possible, considering how it could be confusing to keep track of so many ability types, but on the other hand having multiple ability classifications could give more depth into the moves themselves.
~ @basil 20:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I think we could get rid of the "Utility" category and move everything over to "Buff" since its the same thing and for "Targeted" it was created because of scythe passive (correct me if I'm wrong ;_;) but many other abilities such (e.g Vinestaff q, katanas passive) all apply a "Targeted" type of status to enemies/allies so I feel like added "Targeted" isn't redundant @TarT 21:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree with axing utility in place for buff. Targeted was originally made for Biograft Q considering it can be recast and hit a specific "marked" enemy. Now that scythe is here we have a similar effect although to a lesser extent, i still think its a bit silly to have a whole ability type for two characters (unless we count other abilities as targeted such as Vine Q / Med Q) but at the same time its difficult to define these moves considering how unique they are. ~ @basil 10:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Ability type inconsistencies - Resolution 2 April 2024

In the end, after discussion on Discord, we decided to completely remove ability types as they were confusing and staff could not agree on their actual purpose. Template:Abilitytable has been replaced by Template:AbilityNew which has removed this section entirely. Rejoice!! ★ @NINJISY | WARDEN OF THE BANLANDS 03:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)