Forum:Default faction article layout

I've noticed that faction pages generally have the same sections, but these sections don't have a uniform layout. I am attempting to remedy this by creating a guideline for factions. Below is what I propose to be placed in the new (soon to be created) faction article layout guideline page. If you have suggestions or comments, direct them to the section below.

This is the general layout for all factions.

Suggestions/comments
I'm fine with having a standard layout, but all faction articles should have Appearances places above References. Tagaziel (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I think this is perfect, pretty much everything I think we would need on a faction page is included. Shadowrunner(stuff) 20:59, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes Sounds fine to me.--Ant2242 (talk) 21:47, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I really like the idea and the overall look of the guideline. I agree with Tagz that "Appearances" should go before "References" (the latter should probably be mentioned as well). As for suggestions, I'm not sure if "Notable members" section is needed as we usually have them listed in the infobox. For larger factions, maybe. Also, I would mark "Outside relations" and "Technology" as not required. You may have trouble finding enough info for a whole section in case of really small factions like Tusk or Brimstone squad from Fallout Tactics. veryblackraven 21:58, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Good points; I will alter the "Outside relations" and "Technology" parameters. I too was mulling over including "Notable members", so I added the brief description caveat because, as you said, most notable figure are already in the infobox. I figured that with such large factions (like the BoS, Enclave and NCR) it would be good to include short descriptions of them to help readers find important people, but since this can easily be done in the infobox, we can nix that section. --Kastera (talk) 22:13, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I believe that we should keep the "Notable members" section for when there are larger amounts of notable characters. I don't believe that we should write a short description however.--Ant2242 (talk) 23:50, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Is there a reason you think this, Ant? If a character really is notable, they'll be in the infobox, which makes the section rather redundant. --Kastera (talk) 01:55, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay! If there are a good amount of notable characters for a faction there is no harm listing them. Especially if there are too many for the infobox, or are in a position not included in the infobox.

Ex: "Lyons' Brotherhood of Steel#Notable members" --03:34, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I think that section is fairly unnecessary considering that the pages Lyons' Brotherhood of Steel characters and Category:Lyons' Brotherhood of Steel characters already exist and cover what would be in the Notable members section. We shouldn't repeat the information that's already present elsewhere on an already large page. --Kastera (talk) 03:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That is not the entirety of those pages. That is the section about them, it's the reason we have a "Main" template.--Ant2242 (talk) 04:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * So what do you suggest? Keep the Notable members section, use a "Main" template inside that section and list the notable characters? And what would we define as notable? I think that everyone notable enough to list in the section is already in the infobox... --Kastera (talk) 04:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I suggest we keep it for sections that are to large for the infobox.--Ant2242 (talk) 10:49, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think we should have notable members as a separate section at all. We can use the infobox for that and importance should be established in context of the article. Tagaziel (talk) 12:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

For anyone still interested, I have the next couple of weeks off, so I will be uploading the faction guidelines with all the above considerations sometime today and begin making FNV faction articles line up with the guidelines. If you want to help you can take the factions of another game, go for it; I just don't want edit conflicts while I'm working on FNV. --Kastera (talk) 17:52, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

"Template:Infobox faction" has been updated, we should add this to the project as well.--Ant2242 (talk) 16:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, there's no formal project so we'll just do it as we can; it isn't imperative that we change them all immediately (at least not to me). The big four (NCR, Legion, Enclave and BoS) have been taken care of, so the other less important factions will get taken care of eventually. Side note: why do you always quote things instead of linking directly to them? Links aren't bad. --Kastera (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm saving the maintenance time, ie the linking. If it were to change or become obsolete, means that we will have to monitor the link.--Ant2242 (talk) 17:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't the example on the template page be updated?--Ant2242 (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2015 (UTC)