Hey, to cite something, go into source mode and (ignoring the spaces) put the source between < r e f > < / r e f >. If there's no references section, put a header that says "References" at the end of the page (below the gallery and above the navbox), and underneath that type either <r eferences /> once again, ignoring the spaces.
You can just use that for future reference, though. I'll add it right now if you let me know where you got the info.
I don't know if it helps or not... but when I put the article into Source mode, I have spellcheck that finds all sorts of mistakes for me. I know some people don't have the spellcheck set up, but it's worth a shot as a final review mechanism before posting an article. Obviously, words specific to the game like Dunwall, Morleyan, and such may show up as wrong, but that is to be expected.
To your other point: I un-italicized it for the time being, as it looked odd otherwise. If someone else, such as Essie, 8-Bit, or Piko says different then we can put it back the way you originally had it.
...but I think you misunderstood something I said during our previous conversation.
When you asked about un-italicizing the name of the Dreadful Wale, I simply meant in within the note. Keeping the ship's name italicized within the contents of a note, then italicizing the entirety of the note, results in a kind of "double negative" which makes the ship's name appear un-italicized.
That was what I meant about it looking weird, and that it wasn't needed. It looked weird within the note.
The other articles where the name appears should be italicized when the name of the ship appears in normal text. This includes appearances of other named ships like The Delilah. I am very sorry that my reply misled you; that was not my intention. :(
No, don't worry. I understood that. I un-italicised those names due to the linked edit by Epic Mustache. I too thought that ships names were meant to be italicised, but him being him and me being me, I thought that he knew something I didn't and I was wrong, and the conversation that you are referring too was outdated due to a more recent conversation that he had been involved in that I wasn't privy too. Perhaps it's best to check with him, ask him why he thinks that?
Re: "Unless it's necessary, we generally don't use < b r > on the wiki." I think adhering to in-game accuracy where possible necessitates the use of line breaks. I think written notes and journals are a rare example of where breaks are occasionally used, successfully. :)
I get that it makes very little difference with the Sokolov note, in question. But I have come accross several lists in Dishonored 2, (or lists within a transcript) and it just seems it'd be easier on the eye with breaks instead of spaces. Thoughts?
(I'm also a sucker for trying to get things as close as possible to the original format) >.>
The Overseer Outposts are commonly referred to as such throughout the game. Furthermore, Karnaca Enclave would suggest there is only this one Overseer base in Karnaca, which is not true as there are outposts found in at least three missions, in different areas. Please keep the outposts as such.
The reason I changed it last time was that the in-game map was called as such, implying it's the Karnacan equivalent of the Office of the High Overseer. That time, I simply removed the letter 's' from the end of the word Overseer, as that is grammatically incorrect. It is now called, as you said, Overseer Outpost.
That was part of my thinking, yes. But also, achievements are related to various things, and I think it adds more to the wiki, as the achievements section seems to go largely ignored, so putting it on the pages makes navigation easier and draws attention to parts of the wiki and the game that people may not otherwise have realised exist. Wikis are intended to disseminate information about their topic, but the achievements are largely hidden, existing but not being disseminated. Some pages already have the achievements in the Trivia section, but not many, so it's very inconsistent and not very informative, as one could go from a page with the achievements listed there to a page without and assume that the latter has no achievements related to it, whereas it could be something like Possession, which actually has five. Having a section for it everywhere that's relevant does inform. However, you will have noticed that I've put it near the bottom of the page, above only the Gallery and Audio sections, so those that do view it as unnecessary need not read it.
I can see your reasoning to some degree. I still have some criticism on how this was carried out, though:
I find it generally superfluous to point out achievements in this fashion (or at all) which will inevitably get unlocked while playing because the relevant action is mandatory. This applies to the achievements you added for Emily Kaldwin, for example. You can't miss those, so drawing attention to them is unnecessary.
I can see pointing out achievements that are unlocked for actions you would not necessarily think about, like climbing on top of Kaldwin's Bridge, staying in a rat tunnel, or removing whale oil tanks form security systems, since those can easily be missed otherwise. As you pointed out, we have some of those mentioned in the trivia section of their respective pages. I am not generally opposed to add related achievements to pages, but I would prefer to keep the method that has been utilized so far. Giving them a mention in the trivia section also gives them a little bit of context. I think "Collecting all 11 paintings will unlock the Art Dealer achievement" in Trivia flows better with the overall page than some "Related Achievements" tossed at the end.
If you are planning to add more of the achievements to pages, please put some more thought into what you put where. You might have noticed that I removed some yesterday that made no sense, like the two drop assassination ones on Supernatural Abilities. Okay, on second thought, Corvo will probably have to use Blink to get up there, but wouldn't the more obvious spot to add them as related be the places from which Corvo and Daud drop?
I can see what you're saying about the unavoidable achievements, but given that some are up there, I thought they may as well all be.
The reason I didn't put them all in trivia in the first place was because I started this idea on the Possession page, which has five achievements, and I thought that that looked bad when all crammed into the trivia section. However, I can see that it doesn't look so good for the pages with less achievements, so I'll go through and move them all to the trivia section.
I wasn't sure about those achievements from the beginning because, while they rely on supernatural abilities to achieve, they're not directly related to the abilities. I decided I may as well add them and see if anyone removed them, rather than not add them and find that everyone agreed they should be there. The reason they're not yet on the pages you suggested is that I haven't got that far through the achievements lists yet, and stopped adding them while this discussion was taking place.
Please add related achievements only to pages that they are obviously related to. I think people should be able to make the connection right away, not through thinking laterally. That means, the two drop assasination achievements on the locations, NOT supernatural abilities. Kill someone with their own bullet on the bullets page, not sword. I think you get the idea.
Edit: I fixed the pages you did already to give some examples on how this could look. I removed some, and implented others. Note that I did put some of them not in Trivia but in other sections. You could argue about that being inconsistent, but I went by finding a spot to add them where they would flow well, not by consistency at any cost.