Forum:SH Archive/Droid layout guide additions

Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH Archive/Droid layout guide additions

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. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:35, October 27, 2010 (UTC)

As I've been working with couple droid articles lately, I have noticed that there's no clear rules what sections should individual droid and droid series articles contain. I want to raise a discussion that leads to a clear written rules placed to Layout Guide. So, here's what I'm thinking that might be good to be there:

  • Individual Droid (loosely along the character articles)
    1. Biography ... or should this be History? Self-explaining either way.
    2. Characteristics should contain shortly what is related to droid series and concentrate on what this particular droid is.
  • Droid series or model (loosely along the starship and vehicle class articles)
    1. Characteristics all that tech-talk and details.
    2. Role for what it made and used ... although this might be redundant.
    3. History

I haven't made up my mind should it be Characteristics or Functionalities, or something totally else. Also I'm pretty sure there's something I have forgotten that should be taken to account. Any sense? --Tm_T (Talk) 17:01, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

  • My only comment is that role seems more appropriate as an infobox field for series/models. - Esjs(Talk) 18:11, August 20, 2010 (UTC)
  • Be sure to include a cost category for models. Dangerdan97 07:20, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

I can't speak for the articles on individual droid characters, but I've been working on a revision of R3-series astromech droid offline for a while now, and what I've come to believe is that droid series articles are a hybrid between vehicle-type (or other object-type) articles and alien species articles. In other words, the article needs to cover the droid as both an object and as a "species" of intelligent life. Thus, the article needs a section on the droid's physical makeup (it's hardware, appearance, weapons if it has them, tools, etc.), a section on its programming (which would include what it can do, it's typical personality, and presumably the "role" stuff mentioned above), a section on its history (design, development, etc., which would include the cost at various times if known), and a section on notable models of that series (functioning as the equivalent to the "In the galaxy" section of alien species articles). I can't remember the exact labels I have going in the R3 rewrite, so I'll check sometime tomorrow and post them up. But it seems my categories are roughly analogous to the ones mentioned above, with the addition of the notable models part. ~ SavageBob 02:24, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Here's a rough draft:

Article Design

There are some guidelines for the organization of droid-series articles within Wookieepedia. Ideally, they are organized into four main sections:

  1. Physical description deals with the physical characteristics of the droid model. This includes information on its physical appearance, stock hardware, and attachments and weaponry (if any), with particular emphasis on unique factors.
  2. Programming and functionality deals with the model's software and functions, including such features as skills, intended role, temperament and behavior, and interactions with organics and other droids.
  3. History deals with the major events in the history of the droid model. This includes such events as concept and design, manufacture, sales data, role in various conflicts, and the extent of the unit's availability and popularity in different eras.
  4. [Model] units provides an overview of notable examples of the droid model and their involvement in the galactic community. Depending on the available information, this section in particular may be incorporated into the earlier sections.

Each of these four sections may be further subdivided as appropriate.

Any ideas? ~ SavageBob 13:32, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

  • Eh. I'm a fan of keeping things as simple as possible. Just stick with the site standard and name the first section "Description." Subsection from there as necessary. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:58, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
    • The difference is that we're dealing with things with a personality, so it seems to make sense to me to sort out the physical from the "mental" stuff as we do for alien species and for characters (who have a P&T section, as well as "powers" where appropriate). In other words, I think droid models need to be treated as a hybrid of equipment/vehicles/starships and aliens/characters to be done justice. ~ SavageBob 19:06, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
      • That's why you have section number 2. The first section doesn't deal with personality, and "Hardware and appearance" is just kind of silly, IMO. That can be condensed into the standard "Description." Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:09, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
        • Per Tope on this one. Description sounds way better in my opinion. -- 1358 (Talk) 19:22, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
          • So are you two just arguing that the first section be renamed "Description" but the other sections stay the same? If so, I think I just misunderstood Tope's original comment. ~ SavageBob 19:23, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
            • Yes, that was my intention. Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:27, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
              • Ah, gotcha. I could live with that, although I'd prefer "Physical description", since personality and such could conceivably be included in the more broad term of "description". ~ SavageBob 19:45, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
              • FYI, I've modified the blurb above to reflect this discussion. We could still axe "physical" if most others favor doing so. ~ SavageBob 19:47, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • My ideas: I rather would see "Characteristics" to describe the droids, both individuals and series, I'm backing up this by long list of GA's and FA's.
    GA: 3C-FD, 3C-series utility droid, Bettie-Bot VJ, FEG-series pilot droid, GT-9R, KRONOS-327, OLR-4, PLNK-series power droid, R-3PO, R3-T6, R5-J2, R5-M2, Tactical droid (unidentified planet), TJ-55.
    FA: 4-LOM, 8t88, A-3DO, BL-17, Doctor (tactical droid), EV-A4-D, HK-47, IG-72, IG-88A, K-3PO, Lone battle droid, MK-09, N-K Necrosis, OOM-9.
  • Also Characteristics can be subsectioned to have physical and other separated that way. I also noticed that many individual droid articles has P&t section, perhaps it could be included? In overall there are several styles used currently and it ain't pretty. --Tm_T (Talk) 13:16, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
    • What do you reckon is the advantage of lumping physical and mental/functional information all together under the "Characteristics" header? I realize precedent is this way in the articles you listed (though I'd caution that the bulk of those are individuals and not models), but the fact that this hasn't been discussed before (to my knowledge) leads me to believe that precedent here is not all that compelling. I still think that it'd be better to treat droid series articles (at least) as hybrids of equipment/vehicle articles and alien/character articles—which, at the very least, necessitates separating out mental/functional traits from purely hardware/physical ones. So, rambling aside, what is the advantage of a single, catch-all "characteristics" section? ~ SavageBob 21:47, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
      • Sorry for my slowness on this, haven't got much time to concentrate this kind of things lately. I base the idea of needing a single section for such to my own experience. I aknowledge I'm not any kind of an expert on this, and I possibly think this a bit wrong way, but adding required section to droid LG would force to write such propably unneeded section. Possibly this interpration is avoidable by saying that if an article doesn't warrant a section for the programming side, it can be omitted? --Tm_T (Talk) 20:18, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
  • I like the layout proposed above. Article layout standardization = good. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:12, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
  • As far as individual droid articles go, I think that they should follow the same guidelines as characters. I'll hopefully have some sort of working personality & traits sections for Threepio and Artoo done in the not too distant future, and my plan was to include several subsections, including "Programming" and "Personality". They do have personalities, after all (outright confirmed in a multitude of canon sources), and I'd hate to see them denied p & t sections. Menkooroo 14:25, October 6, 2010 (UTC)
    • I agree. I've always found it odd that articles on droid individuals aren't treated just like regular character articles. I mean, we don't treat articles on Wookiees differently from articles on Mon Calamari. The only thing that might be different from a regular character article is sort sort of "Equipment and hardware" section, but this could be broken out on its own (as per Mara Jade Skywalker's "Mara's ships" section) or folded into P&T. Honestly, I think droid models need their own layout, but droid individuals don't. ~ SavageBob 15:06, October 6, 2010 (UTC)
      • I agree that such sections are needed for some cases, but I don't see it as mandatory. So we agree that such sections are needed as an optional for individual droid articles? --Tm_T (Talk) 15:30, October 6, 2010 (UTC)