Forum:New Discussion - Should we separate The Sims 4 information from the Original pages?

From The Sims Wiki, a collaborative database for The Sims series
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archived discussion
This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance. If you wish to revisit this topic, please bring it up again in a new thread.
Forums: Index → Community discussions → New Discussion - Should we separate The Sims 4 information from the Original pages? | Post

This is my Original post found HERE

Many, many, many times The Sims DEVS have stated that The Sims 4 universe is a completely different world from The Sims 1/2/3 plus spinoffs universe. So why are the characters who appear in the original universe and the new universe still on the same page? Like Bella Goth for example? I suggest that these pages should be separated! So we would have Bella Goth or Bella Goth (Original) which would focus on her life from the original universe, then Bella Goth (The Sims 4) or Bella Goth (Alternative) that will focus on her life from the new universe and any possible sequels in the future. I mean the characters from The Sims 4 are actually completely different characters from their original counterparts so I think the pages should be separate. As The Sims 4 is a completely different universe some information conflicts with information established in the original series.

I think this Wiki should follow the path that the Tomb Raider wikia has done to show the different Lara's like this:
Lara Croft (Original Timeline)
Lara Croft (Legend Timeline)
Lara Croft (Rise Timeline)

Basically, what I'm saying is we copy the information established about The Sims 4 from character/family pages and put the information on subsequent pages about said character/family. Give the information a bit of a clean up and what not. It may be a tedious process at first but it's the simplest solution seems that nothing has been done. 

Many Wiki's have adopted this sort of thing for separate timelines now, or even different forms of characters. Examples of this are the Tomb Raider one's shown above as well as:
Nightmare (Main Page)
Nightmare (Siegfried)
Nightmare (Inferno)
Nightmare (Graf Dumas) All of that is from the Soulcalibur Wiki, it was a very recent change that didn't take very long and it was lead by me (I'm an Admin over there).Also the Sonic Wiki which has seperated the Main timeline from the Boom timeline.

If we adopt something like the examples shown this Wiki could look a bit cleaner and it would be less confusing for people as well. Obviously if the change does happen I will be happy to help make it happen and get the pages set up and what not.

So what do you think we should do? Should we separate the pages? I mean, it would make more sense as the characters from The Sims 4 are completely different characters than the ones in the original timeline.

Here are the final Poll Results. However, this does not mean that a final decision has been made as the poll results are for guidance from the Community only. The Poll ended on June 30, 2015 (BST).

-- JaseyJasee (talk) 00:33, June 30, 2015 (UTC)

Discussion[edit source]

This was already discussed at Forum:Organization for TS4 timeline, but the discussion died off as a consensus was silently formed. Also, per our voting policy, polls cannot be used to conduct votes, and votes should generally be used as a last resort: consensus gained through discussion should be used first. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 11:26, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

I know there was a previous discussion, and like it states if you want to bring the subject up again make a new thread, so I did. That last discussion was inconclusive more than anything else...
Sorry I didn't know that, to me I think a poll is a better way to decide things like this, I think you get a better answer rather than discussing it. People are more likely to press a button that says "yes" or "no" rather than having a big disscussion. Also, to what extent in the discussion will results be decided? I dont want the discussion to die off again, i think polls give you more precise answers than a genreal discussion... From a discussion how do we know what the final "say" will be to make changes or not? In a poll the results are right there I think you would get a better result from that, but if the rules say you need to have a disscussion then a discussion it is, I personally think the poll results should stand though? Anyway, what is your thought on this then? If its a discussion we have to have what do you think on the situation?
JaseyJasee (talk) 13:16, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
You can use polls to a general mood, but they can't be used to establish a policy or practice. The poll feature is notoriously easy to mislead, so we can't be guaranteed of its accuracy. Not to mention, discussing solutions is important, as there are often details to be worked out; it's a kind of nuance that a simple yes/no poll just isn't able to achieve. All that being said, there's nothing wrong with using a poll informally.
Onto the subject at hand, I do think that splitting those pages might be a good idea. LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 14:11, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
Oh I see now, sorry I'm just used to Wikis that use polls instead. Every wiki that I use that use polls to decide things like this has went smoothly without any problem. Like I previously stated I lead the Nightmare Page split over at the Soulcalibur Wiki, that was decided with a poll and everything went very smoothly and a big discussion wasn't needed.. After the poll was over we just changed the pages like stated in the original post. I find the voting policy over hear a bit strange and more complicated but I will follow the rules nonetheless.
Yeah, I think if we split the pages it won't be too difficult, we can start basic by just copying The Sims 4 information onto said new pages.. That is saying we do the two splits and not the five splits ie Bella Goth (Original) and Bella Goth (The Sims 4) or Bella Goth (Alternative) JaseyJasee (talk) 14:24, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
The previous response I made was somewhat limited, as I hate typing out long responses on my phone. After the blog post was made yesterday, I reached out on the TSW Facebook and Twitter feeds for reader opinions on a proposed split. The responses received said they'd rather see the information kept on the same page and split into distinct sections, rather than divided onto completely separate pages. Now of course, four people responding on Twitter and Facebook isn't a mandate of anything, as there could easily be many others choosing not to respond or who simply haven't seen the post. But admittedly this sort of a decision could have wide-ranging effects. You do raise a valid issue, in that the average reader isn't going to participate in this discussion (just as the average reader is also not a wiki editor at all). The burden in many ways falls on the actual editors to perceive how the readers would react to a change. To a certain extent I would dismiss the comments on Twitter and Facebook as simply being resistant to change or unaware of how such a change would be implemented; that sort of reaction is to be expected. But before any sort of change is made going forward, we might want to come up with some way of polling our reader base to get their general opinions on a change. This is a circumstance in which a poll might be useful - to determine the overall intent of the readership, as a piece of "evidence" towards making a decision in a discussion.
I think some change to the way it's done would be good, but I'm not sold on a page split necessarily. We could achieve the same result with less headaches by making a more clear divide within a page itself. This could be achieved by using two instances of {{simbio-start}}, for the TS1-TS3 timeline, and then for the TS4 timeline, separated by a section break. That's just one idea, however. At this point, I don't think there are many ideas off the table, including the page split being proposed. - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 16:16, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
I was wondering if tabbers would work here. For example:
John Doe appears in The Sims, The Sims 2, The Sims 3, and The Sims 4.

Foo

Bar

Foo

Bar

--I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 17:08, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, tabbers sounds like an okay idea. I have quickly just made a page for Bella Goth, basically showing what her The Sims 4 page would be like.... This is the vision I have about the whole situation Bella Goth (The Sims 4). Then her original page would stay the same but minus all The Sims 4 information.. What do you think?
EDIT - Also, that didn't take me very long and it's as detailed as can be provided the information from The Sims 4, and it really didn't take me very long.
JaseyJasee (talk) 17:25, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
Tabbers don't display correctly on the mobile skin. LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 17:38, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
So, does anyone have any further thoughts on this? I don't want the forum to go dead before a decision is made.
JaseyJasee (talk) 14:55, June 2, 2015 (UTC)

I disagree and do not support this motion of creating separate articles for TS4 universe counterparts of prime universe Sims and other such things. If we were to create multiple articles for every single Sim that existed in both realities, then it would make for a pretty short read. It's not like Memory Alpha where they can have different articles for the same character. MA can do this because the prime reality and alternate reality from Star Trek 2009 are completely different. TS4 isn't much to go on by ways of differences between two realities. The border isn't well-defined anyway, so there isn't much point in creating separate articles. ―The Tim Man (Infinite Histories • Galactic Crucibles • The Sims Wiki • AltHistory • Contribs) 16:35, June 2, 2015 (UTC)

So, are we going to come to any sort of decision soon? Or is more discussion needed?
JaseyJasee (talk) 20:30, June 4, 2015 (UTC)
More discussion is needed - there isn't a clear consensus yet.
@LostInRiverview: Tabbers don't work on the mobile skin, but we still use it extensively on existing articles already. Sim articles already use tabbers. Many other wikis, like the FNaF Wiki, use it to divide articles as well. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 20:55, June 4, 2015 (UTC)
It might be worth considering moving away from tabbers in other locations where they're used as well, but that's a different discussion. - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 02:45, June 5, 2015 (UTC)
Well the Poll results are at 10 Yes and 10 No and not much discussion has been happening... Any thoughts? - JaseyJasee (talk) 00:35, June 16, 2015 (UTC)
A bit off topic, but with regards to the tabbers, <span style="display:none;"></span> tags can be used to hide text from desktop view but make it visible in mobile view. We can add the tab title in it and mobile users can see it, but desktop users can't. We can add it just under the tab title. Should throw a bone for mobile users. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 02:17, June 16, 2015 (UTC)
Like I said, though, polls can't be used to determine policy or consensus, so for now I'm discounting the poll results. I was actually tempted to just close it, since it isn't going to make a difference anyway. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 02:21, June 16, 2015 (UTC)
I know they can't be used but they can at least help towards a decision :). I was just wondering then, I know some people are against this decision... But, why in the world is Bella Goth (Lunar Lakes) separate from the original Bella Goth page? And people are fine with that? It was confirmed that Lunar Lakes Bella Goth is the EXACT same person as Bella from TS1/TS2/TS3 Sunset Valley, so why does she get a whole page for Lunar Lakes when it's the same character? Whereas TS4 Bella IS a different character but is a part of the original Bella Goth page? - JaseyJasee (talk) 02:28, June 16, 2015 (UTC)
My best guess is that it was done to avoid confusion, since it's basically the same Sim appearing in essentially the same game more than once. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 02:35, June 16, 2015 (UTC)
Ah I see, I don't think it's confusing. You could just add a section to Bella Goth called Life Leading Up To The Sims 3: Lunar Lake or something similar. That's a whole different discussion however. - JaseyJasee (talk) 02:39, June 16, 2015 (UTC)
I think the Bella Goth/Bella Goth Lunar Lakes problem is pretty representative of the issue as a whole, in that it demonstrates that the whole process of deciding how articles are sorted and arranged is pretty much decided on a whim. To my recollection there never has been any conversation about having a separate page for Bella Goth in Lunar Lakes, it was just decided by someone and everyone else followed suit. Regarding this discussion... there doesn't seem to be a clear consensus either for the status quo, or for the split as proposed. So it might just fall upon someone to act boldly and implement a change, and then let everyone else fight it out consider other options for a time. - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 03:39, June 16, 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm I see.... Well with that in mind we may as well start by changing Bella Goths page seems that I have already made a test version for her Sims 4 version here I can just change the title to make it an "official" page, and removing The Sims 4 information from her original page. Then moving on to Mortimer, Cassandra, Alexander... And possibly making a new "Goth Family (The Sims 4)" page seems that in The Sims 4 Bella and Mortimer don't have any family (i.e Bella doesn't have a brother etc) thus their family tree would be different from the original timeline. Start with that, see what the response is and if nothing is said or the response is good continue on with all The Sims 4 characters like Dina, Nina, Don etc... Agreed? - JaseyJasee (talk) 17:52, June 16, 2015 (UTC)
I disagree. Dev statements weren't usually taken into account in this wiki, and nor were inconsistencies (which was the main reason for the devs' aforementioned statement). In fact, the Sims series is strife with inconsistencies. Here are some:
There are also many inconsistencies with personality, starsign, genetics (ie: hair color of elders in The Sims 2 vs. other games). I'm not aware about how each timeline is consistent in and of itself in the Tomb Raider series, but a single inconsistency of the Caliente sisters' mother named Nighat or Katrina isn't enough of an excuse for splitting articles IMHO.M2Panthera (talk) 16:48, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
Some inconsistencies can be explained. Others not so much. Some don't really need any explantaion and don't bother people.
  • He was a test subject in the Science Career.
  • ?????
  • Console games shouldn't really be counted as canon as they are spin-offs of the main series. The Sims 2 (PSP) startes that Bella never loved Mortimer and only wanted his money. We know this isn't true.
  • ??????
  • ?????
  • Well consdiring that The Sims Social is a spinoff game I wouldn't count it as canon still though it easily explained. The Aliens dropped her off at Strangetown where she had no memories. She eventually packed up and moved to Littlehaven to find answers. She settled down there and found some answers. She eventually decided to move to Lunar Lakes for the remainder of her Elder life, where she eventually dies alone.
Personality and stuff can be explained with coding in the game. Obviously cause the coding is different that means the values would be different which could lead to different personality types. Which most of the time it's only slight differences. Literally every game in the world has inconsistencies like that. The Caliente sisters Mother isn't the "excuse" to split the articles. It's because it has been confirmed that The Sims 4 is an entirley different universe from the original Sims universe (The Sims 1,2,3). Also, the family ties are different. For example, in The Sims 4 universe we do not know who Bella's parents are.. Bella also doesn't have a brother anymore etc... This is why the change should happen. - JaseyJasee (talk) 17:06, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
So you'd rather answer with question marks than go to the links and be informed about those inconsistencies!?
Also, I'm fully aware that Mortimer was a test subject (Lv. 1) in The Sims 1. But his memories, canon information from The Sims 2 state that he was Lv. 8 in the science career at the time. Also, I did say those are some inconsistencies, not all of them. However, if you did read Bella Goth's article, we only know it isn't true because... it is inconsistent with information we already have, ie., the relationship between Bella and Mortimer in TS1 AND TS4.
Even then, maybe canon is that their love knew lots of ups and downs all that time, so that the love we know they have was only at that brief moment? I know that's only speculation, but simmers are so good at speculation, that they can take a simple game mechanic, and use it to contradict canon information to reducto ad absurdum. Which is, perhaps, the only reason why Strangetown Bella gets her own article.M2Panthera (talk) 17:31, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
EDIT: I'm not going to talk about family ties, because we only know about them due to family trees and relationships. TS1 had neither of them, so until The Sims 2 came out, no one knew, for example, that Bella and Michael were at all siblings. Do you want to know what this simple piece of info did to the community!?M2Panthera (talk) 17:58, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
The question marks meant that I didn't have an answer for it. Not that I'm not aware of the inconsistency -_-.
An inconsistency is just information that doesn't match up with previously stated information - I know you know that - but like I previously stated every single Video Game series in the world has inconsistencies no matter what. This whole thing is about the fact that The Sims 4 is a separate universe and should be separated from the original articles for that reason. This is not about inconsistencies in the series. So let's stop discussing them and if you want to continue make a new thread about them. - JaseyJasee (talk) 17:42, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
I was aware of the devs' statement and if you've read my original comment, you'd see that I stated those inconsistencies only because they were the main reason the devs made that statement (which I can't seem to find its source at the moment) in the first place. Bella's three articles are a reminder that canon information is sometimes regarded pretty much to have less value than community theories.M2Panthera (talk) 17:58, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
EDIT: Found it! SimGuruSarah changed her words on Twitter, but SimVIP preserved her original phrasing. Quote: "The timeline got pretty crowded with TS1, TS2, and TS3, trying to fit another game into the timeline would be tough." M2Panthera (talk) 18:21, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
What's that supposed to showcase? The Sims 4 is still a different universe.. - JaseyJasee (talk) 18:22, June 17, 2015 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Regardless of the reasons why TS4 is in a separate timeline, the fact remains that it is. Right now the differences don't really manifest themselves too badly, but if more Sims from past games are brought back, the differences between timelines could be even more pronounced. But, it would not be reasonable to say that splitting the pages is the only way to handle those sorts of discrepancies. We might just as easily be able to accommodate both timelines in the same page. - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 21:08, June 17, 2015 (UTC)

Don't you think it would be better - if we do separate the pages - to do it now. It would be much easier - less work - to start the process now rather than wait for more and more sims to be added as that would be a lot of work all at once rather than a nice slow process. I understand splitting the pages isn't the only way, I'm not suggesting that it is, it's just my suggestion that they should be. I see why you would suggest keeping the articles on the same page and just separating the information that way. However, the Tomb Raider Wikia originally did this and it looked very messy and the article was a hell of a lot to read. If more information/games/sims appear in the sims 4 from the original series this will lead to a big long messy page that doesn't look attractive.. That's why the Tomb Raider Wikia split their pages, and now it looks much better. That's why I suggest we do it here, slowly. - JaseyJasee (talk) 21:42, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
@K6ka, I thought that tabbers couldn't be viewed within the mobile skin, so I am a little confused how hiding text for the desktop user will solve the issue with tabbers for mobile users. Shouldn't the hiding be the other way around? If so, I guess using class=hidden would effectively hide things for the mobile users (like tabbers), but visible for desktop users. -- Icemandeaf (talk) 23:22, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
@Icemandeaf: No, the text isn't visible for desktop users, but it is for mobile users. For example, view the following in the mobile skin (you can do this by adding ?useskin=wikiamobile to the end of the page URL, or just view it on a mobile device):
You can't see this in desktop, but you can see this in the editing window and in the mobile skin


--I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 23:33, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
I understand that it is to make it so that the text is visible for mobile users, but I am just not seeing how that will work with the tabbers. -- Icemandeaf (talk) 04:13, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
Since tabbers do not appear at all in the mobile skin, this text will help mobile viewers by replacing the tabbers and serving as a heading in order to divide the content. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 05:16, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
Ok. That makes sense. (I don't know why I couldn't see something so simple before. *blushing*) -- Icemandeaf (talk) 13:39, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
Personally, I don't think that the information about the Sims as they appear in the Sims 4 should be separated from the information about the Sims as they appear in earlier games, because they are still basically the same Sims. It's necessary to keep separate articles for examples such as Bella Goth and Bella Goth (Strangetown), and Skip Broke and Skip Broke (hidden), and Nighat Caliente and Katrina Caliente, but other than that, the idea of separating information from the original pages, well. It just doesn't seem right to me. This is just my personal take on this, but it's my opinion! :) -- C.Syde (talk | contribs) 02:24, June 19, 2015 (UTC)
I get your opinion. However, despite The Sims 4 characters essentially being the same characters the fact is that they're not. They exist in an alternative universe to the one we played for years (The Sims - The Sims 3). Like I have stated, it's just like the Sonic Universe/Boom Universe. They are essentially the same characters, but they are not. This is similar to something that happened on the Tomb Raider Wikia. Lara, from the "Rise" series or "2013 series" was put down as a non canonical character on that Wikia until recently. People didn't want to accept that this Lara is canon in her own universe. Similar to this situation, as I'm guessing people don't want to accept that the Sims in The Sims 4 are canonically different characters. Also, in the original universe Bella Goth is now deceased. However, she is living in The Sims 4. That's another reason why the pages should be separated. - JaseyJasee (talk) 12:46, June 24, 2015 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I understand your reasoning. However, we are not Tomb Raider Wiki. Personally, I like things the way they are here in terms of main/alternate universe organisation. Despite them existing in different universes, they all share the same name (unless you count Nighat and Katrina Caliente. Then it just gets heck of a lot confusing.) So unless we want a loooooong list of disambiguation pages we don't really need, I do not recommend having separate articles for every single TS4 doppelgänger that pops into existence. —The Tim Man (IH • GC • TSW • AH • Contribs) 13:11, June 24, 2015 (UTC)

I have never stated that this is the Tomb Raider Wikia. I'm just using that Wikia and other's as examples as those Wikia's are a lot more organized when it comes to separate universes. I think people just need to accept that The Sims 4 is essentially a reboot of the series and that the characters are different. It doesn't really matter if they share the same name... Appearances, some family ties, personality, and other things are different. Also, like I previously stated, Sims like Bella Goth are deceased while being alive in The Sims 4... Thus, another reason to be separated. Don't get me wrong I respect your opinion. I just think they should be separated as it technically makes more sense. - JaseyJasee (talk) 13:28, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
@K6ka: Would it be possible to see a demonstration of the Tabber/mobile heading system in action on a Sim page? Whether or not that design is feasible would go a long way towards deciding my personal feelings on a page split. If using a tabber for these pages would be practical, then I would probably support it over a complete split. - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 16:00, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
I actually agree. I wouldn't mind a tabber/mobile heading but I want to see it in action. If it looks good an all then I will most probably want that, if not them I'm still for a page split. Also, @LostInRiverview a bit off-topic but if it is decided for a page split or tabber/mobile heading do you think we should merge Bella Goth (Lunar Lakes) with the original Bella Goth page? As we know, she is the same Bella as The Sims 1/2/3. - JaseyJasee (talk) 16:07, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
@ JaseyJasee - No, I still don't agree with the majority of your opinion, because the neighbourhood that Bella Goth appears in the Sims 4 takes place before Pleasantview does in the Sims 2. Also Bella Goth in the Sims 2 is not deceased because at the start of the game, her ghost flags are not ticked. She only dies if you add her to a playable household without removing the death token she has. She isn't already deceased. -- C.Syde (talk | contribs) 06:07, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
@C.Syde65 Sorry but no it doesn't. The Sims 4 takes place in an entirely different timeline to that of The Sims, The Sims 2 and The Sims 3. Everything in The Sims 4 is set in it's own universe, The Sims 4 is not a part of The Sims 1/2/3 universe it's the start of a whole new one. That's why I'm saying the pages should be seaparated as they are different universe's. So no, Willow Creek, the world Bella Goth lives in is not set before The Sims 2. It's the beginning of it's own new timeline. As for Bella being deceased, she is. Bella Goth (Lunar Lakes) is the same Bella from the main series (The Sims 1/2/3) so yes, Bella is canonically deceased in the main series. - JaseyJasee (talk) 11:54, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
The Sims 4 is really a series of mixed timelines. But somehow I still don't agree, for the reasons I posted above. I also don't think the Lunar Lakes Bella has enough resemblance to the Pleasantview Bella to warrant a merge between those two pages. -- C.Syde (talk | contribs) 02:31, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
The Sims 4 is not a series of a mixed timelines, it has been said more than once by the DEVs that's its an alternate universe completely separate from the one established in The Sims 1/2/3. It is its own brand new timeline! The fact that Lunar Lakes Bella doesn't resemble Pleasantview Bella is irrelevant. It's still her, that's been confirmed by the DEVs too. Also, you must remember that she is an elder. The DEVs might have made her look very different to make her look like she's been dead for a while. The fact still remains that it is Pleasantview Bella, despite her appearance. - JaseyJasee (talk) 02:59, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
Okay, that may be so. But I still stand by my reasons listed above. What I've said above does reflect my personal take on this after all, and I'm not trying to stand in the way of anyone who has a different opinion to myself. -- C.Syde (talk | contribs) 03:36, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ So, according to this discussion some people agree with the page split, some don't, I also do take notice that polls cannot be used to determine a result, however, as a guideline the poll shows that the Community are more in favor of the split than not. With that said, what are the final thoughts before a decision is made? @K6ka, @LostInRiverview. - JaseyJasee (talk) 00:43, June 29, 2015 (UTC)

@JaseyJasee - I think more people must have used the poll since you posted your comment, because from looking at the poll, I can actually see that more people that used the poll are not in favour of the split. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 05:53, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
Looks as if they have, however it also seems that the votes for "yes" are going up once again. I understand now why this Wiki doesn't use polls to settle things like this. However, it can still be used as guidance. For the poll, I know it's not relevant, but I will put an end to it tomorrow. So final poll results will be tomorrow (BST) - JaseyJasee (talk) 16:21, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
I'm still awaiting a possible demonstration from K6ka regarding tabbers. I won't be able to say definitely whether or not I support a split until then. - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 04:24, June 30, 2015 (UTC)
I understand, I am also waiting for a demonstration from him. However, @K6ka has been online, and has also most probably seen this thread, and thus our request, so how long should we exactly wait for him to give us a demonstration before we make a final decision? As he may never make a demonstration it would once again mean that no decision will be made... Unless you have made a decision yourself now? - JaseyJasee (talk) 17:16, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, kinda forgot about this thread. Anyways, by "tabber demonstration" I assume you mean "I show you how the idea works."
In my sandbox I took some tabbers and inserted <span style="display:none;"> tags into them. Just below the tabber title I put those tags there, and in between those tags I repeated the tabber title. (Raw wikitext)
Desktop users will see this. The tabbers are visible, but not the "display:none" tags.
In the mobile view, the tabbers do not load so their contents simply "spill out" onto the page. However, "display:none" tags are also not rendered and so their contents "spill out" too. Thus the same page would look like this on Mobile.
The idea is for these tags to serve as tabber titles on mobile devices while simultaneously not disrupting the view for desktop users. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 00:04, July 5, 2015 (UTC)


┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ So yesterday I made a test Template as a way of separating The Sims 4 information away from the information established in the original timeline. The Template is like Tabs but links to subpages instead, and also shows on the mobile skin. So essentially it's not a full page separation. You would have the main overview page that will contain the Template simbio-start with basic information about the Sim, that sims simology, easter eggs, trivia etc.. Then you would have one Tab that would be Original Universe that would contain the simbio1, simbio2, simbio3 and infomrmation from those respective games and other things. Then you would have another tab that would be Alternative Universe that would have sim4 and information from that game and other things. So what do you all thing about this idea then? Here is an example of what the tab will look like....

Overview

JaseyJasee (talk) 21:23, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

This idea of yours isn't too bad, I mean it does at least have a navigation bar where users can quickly move from page to page. If that's the case, I wouldn't be opposed to your idea, unlike I was before. But on the other hand I wouldn't mind, if your idea didn't make the cut. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 22:06, July 26, 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I was hoping you'd like this idea better. I personally like this much better than a full page split also, I think that in the future if any other Sims games come out that is the same universe as The Sims 4 then this will be a much better way to differentiate between the Original universe and the new one. Also, it means we won't have full page length simbios which looks nicer! The navigation bar is very seamless and fast and it links directly back to the main Sim page. So yeah, I think this would be a much better solution! - JaseyJasee (talk) 22:21, July 26, 2015 (UTC)
I think it would be best if the Alternative Universe tab had its own instance of Simbio-start as well, since Simbio-start lists out (among other things), siblings, romantic relationships, and parental links, all of which can and have been altered between the timelines. Also, I'm not a fan of calling it an 'alternative timeline', as that implies that the TS4 timeline is secondary to the TS1-TS2-TS3 timeline. - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 02:16, July 27, 2015 (UTC)
Yeah I think a new Simbio-start would be better too, as like you said, the family instances have been altered between the universes. What would you suggest calling The Sims 4 universe? So, do you agree with this change over the full page split?
Edit - I suppose we could call The Sims 4 Universe something like New Universe? Or Current Universe? I was just saying Alternative as that's how the DEVs and the majority of people refer to it. - JaseyJasee (talk) 17:15, July 29, 2015 (UTC)

Vote on how to proceed[edit source]

It seems this discussion has reached an impasse. There are several open questions about how we should proceed from here, but no clear consensus for any one solution, or for making a change to the current arrangement. I think a vote would be useful to help overcome this hurdle. The first question that needs to be answered is simply whether or not a change is even warranted in the way we present information about TS4 Sims and families; if no change is needed, then making additional discussions about the particular kinds of changes is pointless. To that end, I would like to start up a vote on how to proceed. - LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 03:44, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

Question

Should The Sims Wiki make a change to how it presents information about Sims and families in The Sims 4?

Yes - The Sims Wiki should adjust how it presents this information.
No - The Sims Wiki should not adjust how it presents this information.

Note that this vote does not determine a course of action if it's determined that a change is needed; it simply determines whether a change would be appropriate or not based on the desire of the community.

Voting on this matter will last until seven days from now; 03:44 August 22, 2015 (UTC). Countdown -

Please cast your vote below

Yes[edit source]

No[edit source]

Comments[edit source]

  • I'm not sure exactly what kind of system would be best, but I feel that there could be improvements to how we currently handle these cases. TS4-era information is sometimes directly contradictory to earlier information, so it's confusing and misleading to include both in the same place. Again, I'm not sure what change should be implemented, but I think a change of some sort is needed. LostInRiverview talk • blog • contribs 06:07, August 15, 2015 (UTC)
  • Personally I think the {{Tab Template Test}}  would be the best way to separate The Sims 4 era from the previous era, and not a full page split. As like you said, some information contradicts previous information that has been established, and if The Sims Team decide to make The Sims 5, continuing in TS4 Universe then more information will probably start to contradict. I think it's best to set up a change now. User's may get confused about the contradicting information if no change is done, I've seen many times User's asking on Fan Games if it is real or not even though it explicity states it's a Fan Game, so I'm pretty sure some Users must get confused about the differences in information on The Sims 4.
    Jasey Jasee talk • blog • contribs 12:08, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

Result[edit source]

The vote was generally in support of some changes to how we handle TS4 information, but there is no specific consensus as to how this will be done. As this thread is several months idle, it makes more sense to restart any discussion about the outcome of this vote and its implementation in a new thread or threads. -- LiR talk • blog • contribs 17:27, January 12, 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://www.thesimswiki.com/wiki/Forum:New_Discussion_-_Should_we_separate_The_Sims_4_information_from_the_Original_pages%3F?oldid=828786"