Talk:Impids

Please see the following from the style guide:

Acquisition: Details how the page subject may be acquired. This may include details on construction or crafting, the places it may be found or traded for, its presence as a quest reward, or the raiders it can be looted from Summary: Details information about the item that isn't readily conveyed by the standardized templates on the page and don't fit in the other sections - for example the effects of the Psychic shock lance are not Analysis or Acquisition, nor are they conveyed by the infobox or other information. Analysis: The place for comparison, value judgements, tactics, etc. Comparing the armor of Flak vests to other armor alternatives goes here, strategies for using psychic insanity lances for maximum effect goes here etc. This section can have some overlap with others - a farming strategy for the acquisition of Insect Jelly is a valid subject for example. Discussion about the stats or effects of an item might involve listing them just like Summary does, but is still valid. Subsections should be added as needed for clarity. Gallery/Styles: Gallery of images if necessary, such as for showing display variants. If affected by ideology styles, then it should be called Styles and follow this pattern Trivia: References and trivia, minor lore info, etc. Version history: Lists a changelog of the pages subject. Changes should be listed as changes i.e. "1.2.2900 - now provides ability to fly" instead of retroactive consideration e.g. "1.2.2900 - prior to this, it didn't allow you to fly". Similarly, if possible and know the exact changes should be listed e.g. "1.2.2900 - Sharp armor increased from 100% -> 150%". Ideally the version number would be specific but this is not always known or possible - do not link to a specific version unless that version is the one that implemented the specific change i.e. don't link 1.1.2258 specifically if all you know is that it was somewhere in 1.1. Ideally the following format should be used, placed in bullet points "*[[Version/<Version Number>|<Version Number>]] - <Change desc> . A gallery of relevant changes may be included at the end - for example showing old textures. See also: Relevant pages. Usually unnecessary through page links

Is it an idea to apply this to xenotypes as well?

Genes -> Summary; Add analysis; Origins -> Acquisition

Thanks, I hadn't looked at the style guide too closely as I just started editing to add biotech stuff.

I like those ideas, I think the only thing I'd add is in the new Summary section, I'd put the bullet-pointed list of genes in a Genes subsection to make it very clear that we're diving into the details of their genes. Then the Summary section can easily contain other things too.

Hmm the more I look at Acquisition though, the more weird it feels to be applying it to a type of people, since you acquire objects, not people. Thoughts on maybe using a synonym for that section? I tried to look at other character-focused pages like nobles, pirates, and prisoners, but those pages either don't have a section devoted to finding that type of person, or don't have standardized section names.

Thanks for your response!

Maybe something like recruitment would work? Or a small part talking about this within the summary.

I liked your 'genes' subsection, and used it myself for the other pages too. I saw that Harakoni also changed the layout once again, so it might be good to discuss it with him too. See the differences on these pages for example:

https://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/Pigskins https://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/Yttakin https://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/Impids

user:Harakoni

Re: Acquisition. Ultimately the page standard is a guideline only - it can't and won't be fully applicable in every case, and in some cases won't apply at all. Generally we try to keep broad categories consistent instead. So every weapon will roughly have the same sections as the other weapons, and every faction will roughly have the same sections as the other factions, they're a different standard to each other.

I don't disagree that acquisition feels a little weird, but imo more importantly its limited in scope - you likely want to discuss incidence not just acquisition, so how often they show up in factions, as raiders etc. instead of just how you, the player, acquire them. That in mind, you're more than welcome to work out a standard and apply it the the pages. Hell, that goes generally. If you want to make a change that you think will improve the wiki, do it.

EDIT: to be clear you also want to talk about how you get them, but just not ONLY that.

---

Re Genes. You can link directly to the relevant genes like this [[Genes#Fire_spew|Fire spew]] which results in Fire spew and should take you direct to the relevant row of the relevant table. Personally I wouldn't replicate the table itself on the other pages just because long term it means having to ensure both are updated concurrently, but if you think it'll improve the pages, do so. Thats my opinion as an editor only.

Also which layout did I change? I didn't add inheritance - idek if it makes sense as a table column. Did I step on someones toes without realizing it?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I think incidence would work well.

Regarding the layout change, I think that was my mistake. I saw two edits and your name, and jumped to conclusions a bit too early as I talked to the other person about the general layout yesterday already. Sorry for that.

@Boomalooper if you agree as well, I can make an example layout on one of the genotype pages that we can then apply on all of them.

Sounds good, thanks @Erik111erik for coming up with a layout, and incidence works for me too.