Forum:SH:Droid article layout guide

Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:Droid article layout guide

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. —MJ— War Room 18:11, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

The Droids Barn Burner has made it evident that we lack any consistent layout guide to handle articles on both droid characters and droid models. Checking the list of FAs and GAs shows that such articles are treated very differently from one case to the next; compare the characters 4-LOM to 4-8C, for instance, or the models chameleon droid to 3C-series utility droid. It's clear that a standardized layout guide for droids and droid models would be useful!

To that end, I propose two things. First off, for droid models, a modified version of the starship and vehicle class layout guide might be useful. I've put the proposed layout below; it's essentially the same as the starship/vehicle one, except that I renamed "Characteristics" to "Description," since "Characteristics" seems hopelessly vague to me. The layout below facilitates both droid models that are more akin to vehicles, like Separatist vulture droids, as well as droid models that are more akin to "alien species" in that they have distinct personalities, etc., like R3-series astromech droids. What do folks think?

Droid Model Articles

There are some guidelines for the organization of droid model articles within Wookieepedia. Ideally, they are organized into three main sections, with subsections and extra sections where appropriate:

  1. Description includes any descriptive information about the model's physical characteristics, as well as any statistical information provided.
  2. Role encompasses the duties the droid type was designed and/or used for, as well as typical personality traits, languages, programming, and skills. Strengths and weaknesses in application are laid out here, as well.
  3. History covers the known development and operational history of the model, arranged in chronological order. Ideally, all appearances of the model in canon are described here.

Each of these three sections may be further subdivided as appropriate. Note: if anything in particular is of overwhelming significance concerning the model, or a preponderance of information is available, a section of its own can be created.

As for droid characters, I wonder if we need any layout guide at all. I mean, why can't droids simply use the existing "character articles" layout guide? You'll notice that most droid character FAs and GAs rename "Personality and traits" to "characteristics," but I don't see that that is necessary. Why not make things simple and use the character layout guide? It seems perfectly fine to me to cover droids. "Biography" would cover the individual's personal history (despite the "bio" prefix, this is already used in the vast majority of our droid individual articles). "Personality and traits" would cover the droid's physical description and personality. "Skills and abilities" could cover the droid's programming, languages, and skills. Finally, "Equipment" could cover any non-mounted equipment. In other words, a droid with built-in blasters would have those listed under "Personality and traits" as part of the physical description, while one that carried a blaster like an organic would have that listed under "equipment." Simply using the existing "character article" layout guide would simplify things, although we'd likely need to amend the LG to clarify some of the above points.

What do you all think? ~SavageBOB sig 18:38, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

  • I think that it would definitely be best to use the same layout for droid characters and regular organic characters. The droid model layout guide looks good as well. I have thought for some time that we have needed a layout guide for droid models. Good job getting this out for everyone to look over.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 20:18, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
  • Both sound good to me. Regarding the proposal to simply use the character LG: "Biography" is perfectly fine for non-living stuff, as evidenced by definition 2 here. —MJ— Holocomm Sunday, May 13, 2012, 02:03 UTC
    • I like it. I'm happy with the change to "History"—"Biography" always struck me as strange. "Operational history" would work too. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 02:18, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
      • I think you're confused. Per Bob's last paragraph, "Biography" will remain for individual droids. "History" is for droid models. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers Sunday, May 13, 2012, 23:03 UTC
  • This looks good. Could "Description" and "role" be merged into one section simply called "Description" for droid models about which very little is known? If so, should it be spelled out? Menkooroo 05:34, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
    • I wouldn't have a problem with that. One could argue that if a droid's degree is known, a short, one-sentence "role" section could be added to explain that, but I've never been a fan of one-sentence sections. The word "ideally" may leave wiggle room for a merger, but I'm not sure. In other words, I think this is an issue for all layout guides (like a sentient species we have no physical or biological information for still needing a "Biology and appearance" section if we strictly follow the layout guide). ~SavageBOB sig 14:44, May 14, 2012 (UTC)
    • Makes sense to me to give droids themselves the character format, if droids have personalities and then can be considered like organics. Droid models are unique enough to warrant a new scheme, which I support here. -- Riffsyphon1024 08:08, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
    • Once it goes through for the droid character layout, I'll go format 4-LOM appropriately. A designated layout for droid model articles is also good, as I was thinking of doing the LOM series for the Barn Burner, but didn't really know at what angle to approach it. Trak Nar Ramble on 08:13, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
      • I'd love to see that, Trak; do it! Since there is no set format (yet), do whatever seems to work (whether it's the proposal above or something else). :) ~SavageBOB sig 17:18, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
  • I recall we have been discussing this several times before, time to dig those archives if there's anything relevant... – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:~$ 09:50, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
    • You're right. I'll see if I find anything when I get back home later tonight! ~SavageBOB sig 14:53, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
    • OK, I searched and could only find a discussion from about two years ago (to which TmT and I both contributed): Forum:SH Archive/Droid layout guide additions. I disagree with my past self in that I think it's best to keep things simpler: droid character articles use the standard character infobox, and droid model articles use the scheme above, which is modeled after the vehicle and starship model infobox. In the case of droid characters, this differs from your 2010 suggestion, Tm, since I'm not sure why droids can't be treated as normal characters. The character infobox sections support this as is, so its less fuss, less muss. But my suggestion above is identical to your original suggestion from 2010, Tm, except that I prefer "Description" to "Characteristics" for the model infobox, since "Characteristics" seems too broad to me, while "Description" fits better with the physical side of things. Comments? ~SavageBOB sig 16:20, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
      • Thanks for spending time digging the past, I still have limited possibility to do anything around here... indeed, the simple nature of your current proposal is rather pleasant, and with this quick thought I'd be ok with it. Let's see if I have time to think of it bit more later and be more verbose on what are my thoughts on this. (: – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:~$ 18:27, May 25, 2012 (UTC)