User talk:Dwarfmp/Sandbox4

Initial Thoughts

Immediately I prefer your opening for this page, it looks much neater and more formal then the current version. However, the bit in the second paragraph about his unique animations seems unnecessary. Also, the two sentences immediately after the opening should be moved to a new "See Also" section in my opinion. For the quest related events, some of the bits seem better than mine, but I prefer my version in some bits. But I prefer the use of tables for the alternative dialogue paths, this helps illustrate the fact that you go through either one or the other throughout the course of the quest line. I'll give this a more thorough look through later. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 00:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

The most important change of the intro is the fact I leave out the "he's actually Jyggalag" part to prevent this likely spoiler, I prefer putting those things at the bottom. The unique animations part was an idea, but is indeed very messy and I didn't know what to do with that, maybe just mentioning he has unique animations is sufficient. Not sure what you mean by the two sentences, but in any case, this is just a rough basis of what is to be. About the tables, I wasn't a fan because of the whitish look, but I see that has been tweaked as a hidden table, which looks a lot better, though it still looks a bit... hmm unclear or chaotic, but I suppose that can easily be fixed. I think the main difference between our version is you kept a lot of dialogue lines apart, with more paragraphs, while I tend to put things in (what I expect to be) fluent texts. ~ Dwarfmp 17:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I believe the images should be enough proof of his unique animations no? I don't think they need to be mentioned, and I can't think of an elegant way to do it. The most notable difference between our dialogue transcriptions is that I quoted the topic as what they player would say, and as such it became a back and forth dialogue between two characters. I think it looks nicer like that, but I prefer how you explain the more generic topics (As in topics like "Shivering Isles", I doubt that you are supposed to assume that the player is simply saying "Shivering Isles", but it is a fair assumption to say that when someone says something like "What happens now?" that is supposed to be your exact words.). I can't figure out a way to improve the tables that I use, and they could be removed all together if there isn't an easy way to make it clear enough, but I currently don't have any notable complaints about the tables. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 18:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, well I think the back and forth sort of conversation isn't very readable, and the way I put things seems to put more emphasis on the npc, and less on the player, which is good I think. I also think that, in your way, the page looks longer, while my version is compact, while still being able to mention as many details as possible. Anyway, I just thought of this: it's very likely that the books added by the SI expansion mention Sheogorath, so there could be some important information in there. I'm not much of a reader in the game, so maybe someone knows of any books in particular that have some information on him? ~ Dwarfmp 22:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

There is plenty of literature on Sheo, but almost all of it would only be of use on the lore page. Nothing directly relevant to the game article. Legoless 22:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

For what it’s worth, I just looked through the current Sheo page and there’s definitely room for improvement in the layout department. Hidden tables are incredibly hard to control, depends a bit too much on browser size (and settings, I guess). They (almost) worked on the Lucien Lachance page because the text was limited to a single sentence. I remember asking Rpeh about it and we ended up tweaking Lucien’s page for the longest time until we found a size that seemed okay. I’d recommend going for a different solution here – the hidden tables simply cannot be controlled with such a huge amount of text. --Krusty 22:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

In light of what Krusty has said, I guess the hidden tables can go. Plus, if we remove them then we can include the images of Sheogorath talking to Thadon and Syl after you become the Duke/Duchess of Dementia/Mania (I couldn't add them to the page without messing up the entire page). I'll alter it when I get around to it

I still prefer the back and forth conversations, mainly to emphasize that the way the dialogue path is supposed to go, but I'm not entirely committed to them, on one hand they allow for more line breaks, making walls of text less likely, on the other hand as you said it focuses more on the player than the NPC we are documenting (Then again, if we really wanted to focus on the NPC we should change the text style to third person to make the page less connected to the reader instead of the subject). Personally, I don't have a problem reading the back and forth conversations and I don't see a way that they are hard to follow; but I am unaware of any guideline on how conversational dialogues are supposed to be written so it appears that this comes down to simply a difference in editorial styles. To break away from that, one of the minor things about your sandbox that I greatly prefer to my version is your emphasis on topics, makes the different subjects easier to pick out, especially in longer sections with fewer breaks or link opportunities. However to get the absolute best version one of us is going to have to go through both versions line by line to find which version is better with X then the other version. Tell me when you are completely done with your sandbox so I know when I should start nit picking to find the best of everything. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 23:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes I will let you know. The page still needs post-transformation stuff, like Haskill mentioning him afterwards, and Jyggalag's speech (parts of it mentioning him, or maybe even the whole thing). "I'll alter it when I get around to it" - If you're implying on removing the tables from the existing page, there's no need to cause we'll just copy the good stuff from there into this sandbox, best thing to leave things as they are now, so we don't fill up the page history (initially asked trying not to do so, I feel now as if I should avoid AT ALL COST). As for the topic boldness, that's something I came up with which I thought would indeed help to identify topics you can select ingame, but this is something Krusty doesn't like (I believe he said once), so as you assumed, there isn't really a guideline with precise methods, it's mostly personal preference. What I forgot to mention (which should support my version :P) is that I based the style on a featured NPC article, Janus Hassildor to be exact. Though of course, that doesn't mean other methods are not to be tried ~ Dwarfmp 00:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Haha, just for the record, I never really had any use for topic boldness (I’d prefer a redundant link every day of the week), but when I ran into Lucien Lachance, I ended up using the technique anyway. Dwarfmp is absolutely correct, though; we have no guidelines on these majestic pages, only a slight obligation to make them as good and attractive as possible, both text and layout-wise. I have tested over 20 different “ways” of writing in-game conversations and, as was the case with the hidden tables, it merely depends on the amount of spoken dialoge for them to look good. No worries, though – we’ll always have the Final Preview stage of the OBNPCRP and then we’ll make sure that all these VIP pages meets the same standards. --Krusty 08:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

(←) I know it's been a while since I worked on this page. I should pick it up now, and I'm already writing as we speak. But I've thought about it and realized that, there's much more to add to this page if it is to be complete. I know I may have mentioned it is near completion, but that's incorrect. There are MANY mentions on Sheogorath, and they should be noted. It needs a seperate section on Saints and Seducers, but I don't know how big that would be. It's actually good, the introduction doesn't do him justice as it is now, and especially when I remove the animation narrating, it's going to look shorter. Anyway, I'll be working on it, though I won't know when it's finished. ~ Dwarfmp 00:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I've got a couple of questions. What of Sheogorath mentions in Cyrodiil, from before the SI expansion? Like from Whom Gods Annoy. There are also a lot of mentions from citizens of the Isles, you know I'll just add what I think may be worth mentioning or even more, and it can be discussed what should remain. But what about the rumors specific for NPCs, those are a lot I'm sure ~ Dwarfmp 11:46, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Just a few cents and suggestions. I'm not sure you should include Cyrodiil-related Sheogorath-rumors on this page, at least not for starters. Maybe as a note a long way down the page, but focussing on the Isles is the best idea, because it is SI-namespace. Also, I'd probably refer from using any wilderness-rumors about him (like the ones we discussed back and forth yesterday), as you will quickly run into trouble due to the NPCs mental state. And if you start doing that, then both Syl and Thadon should have similar sections, and these pages are perfect as is. In short, focus on his ton of dialogue and what the NPCs say about him during the quests; then maybe make a short section at the end with a bit of info on the Fork, the Vitharn-stuff. Otherwise, you will probably drown because Sheogorath IS the Shivering Isles. :) --Krusty 08:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd say that the events outside of the main quests should be ignored, the rest of the details would be more relevant on his lore page. As Krusty said, it is virtually impossible to include every or even the majority of the details and about him on this page. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 15:14, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey :D

I read the banner, and since you’re not in IRC I can't discuss it with you. I created the following table for Krusty's dialogue! It just shows the difference... but saves a bit of space on the page!

Speaker	Dialogue
Balgruuf		Proventus, what do you make of all this? If Ulfric were to attack Whiterun...
Proventus		As in all things, Lord, caution... I urge us to wait and see.
Irileth		Prey waits.
Balgruuf		I'm of a mind with Irileth. It's time to act.
Proventus		You plan to march on Windhelm?
Balgruuf		Imperial	Stormcloak
		I'm not a fool, Proventus. I mean it's time to challenge Ulfric to face me as a man, or to declare his intentions..	"I'm not a fool, Proventus. I mean it's time to challenge Ulfric to face me as a man, or march his Stormcloaks up to the gates."
Proventus		He'll do no such thing!	He'll do no such thing! A dagger in the back is all you could expect!
Irileth		He was rather straight forward with Torygg.
Proventus		Torygg? He simply walked up to the boy and murdered him!
Irileth		That "boy" was High King of Skyrim.
Balgruuf		I'm not the High King, but neither am I a boy. If Ulfric wants to challenge my rule in the old way, let him. Though I suspect he'll prefer to send his "Stormcloaks" to do it for him.
Irileth		True. He's already proven his personal strength. Now he seeks to prove his army's.
Proventus		Then might I urge you to consider General Tullius's request? I mean, if you are bent on offending Jarl Ulfric...
Irileth		Ulfric is the one who has offended. But, Proventus has a point. Ulfric has made it clear. In his mind, to refuse his claim is to side with the Empire.
Proventus		And what harm is there in letting a few legionnaires die in place of your own men?
Balgruuf		It seems cowardly.
Irileth		Was it cowardly then to accept the White-Gold Concordat?
Balgruuf		This again?! That was different. Was I given a chance to object to the terms of the treaty? No. The Jarls weren't asked. We were told. And we had to like it.
Proventus		The chests of gold didn't hurt.
Balgruuf		Damnit! This isn't about gold!
Irileth		It's time to decide.
Aventus		Lord, wait. Let us see if Ulfric is serious.
Balgruuf		Oh, he's serious. But so am I.
Irileth		Finally.

Just like to point out Krusty assured me there was two differences... but I only found the one! I might just be blind though ;) Turns out I am blind! Thanks Eshe! --kiz ^talk_email 16:10, 28 April 2012 (UTC)