FANDOM


  • This CT will focus on game categories. The Elder Scrolls Online is just around the corner, and will feature all of Tamriel, so we need to begin cleaning up categories and naming them correctly.

    For instance, cities that are present in The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind should use the category Category:Morrowind: Cities and not Category:Cities in Morrowind. It was my understanding that "Cities in Morrowind" was for Lore pages.

    More than likely we are going to have categories called "Online: Cities" to list categories like "Online: Morrowind Cities", "Online: Skyrim Cities" and so on.

    What are some other categories that may need to be cleaned up?

      Loading editor
    • One might need to change cities that are only featured in arena and mentioned in books. I can recall Cloudrest and Skywatch in the Summerset Isles from Arena have pages barely more than stubs.

        Loading editor
    • Many factions, including Imperial Cult and House Telvanni do not have Morrowind-specific categories. We need to create "Morrowind: House Telvanni Characters", "Morrowind: House Telvanni Quests", etc.

      There are also a lot of location categories missing, such as "Morrowind: Balmora Locations", "Morrowind: Vivec Locations", etc. (Some of these currently exist, but most do not.)

        Loading editor
    • Some I found:


      Looks like there's a lot of Oblivion and some Morrowind pages that have overarching categories that haven't been removed since the policy was updated.

        Loading editor
    • It's all going to come down to adding the game name as the prefix of the category. That seems to be the only way to organize these pages, separated by game.

      So, yes, we would need to have an "Arena: Skyrim Cities" instead of only "Cities in Skyrim". The same idea with the "Online: Morrowind Cities" example above.

      Since Solstheim is a location that appeared in two DLCs, making Solstheim Locations the list category, and then having a Bloodmoon: Solstheim Locations and a Dragonborn: Solstheim Locations, could work.

      The "Restoration" and "Mysticism" should only be in the categories "Magic", "Schools of Magicka" and their respective school "Restoration" and "Mysticism" category. As for mining as a skill, I also don't think it belongs there, because it's not a skill.

        Loading editor
    • Why do we have three different pages on Skywatch? There's 'Skywatch (Arena)', 'Skywatch (Lore)', and 'Skywatch (Online)', all of which have no more three sentences on them. Wouldn't it be wiser to condense them into one until more is known about it? I can sum it up pretty well:

      "Skywatch is a city in the Summerset Isles on the island of ------. It was sacked numerous times by the sload during the first era. In the second era it was ruled by Queen -------. It was featured in Arena and will be featured in TESO."

      It would of course have all the details I have forgotten, and more regarding it's sacking by the sload, but that's the jist of what it could become.

        Loading editor
    • We have different pages, because it's in different games. There might not be much to write about it in Arena, but when Online comes out more information will no doubt be added that is not similar to the experience in Arena.

        Loading editor
    • TombRaiser wrote:
      We have different pages, because it's in different games. There might not be much to write about it in Arena, but when Online comes out more information will no doubt be added that is not similar to the experience in Arena.

      But wouldn't it make more sense to have one page with subsections for how it appears in each game/lore? There would be less to navigate, and the information would be more centralized. 

        Loading editor
    • No, lore pages are always separate from game pages.

        Loading editor
    • I didn't notice that before. 

      However, wouldn't it be wise to include the lore in a subsection for the city labeled 'History'? 

      But I see your point. I personally have always wanted to data to be centralized, and easy to find. You could say it's a pet-peeve of mine to have to sift through disambiguation pages to find the correct article I'm looking for (Although Skywatch is a bad example of that, considering it's only three pages of less than a paragraph each).

        Loading editor
    • Next topic: How we categorize DLC characters, etc...

      We need to take a look at how we categorize characters in DLCs, and agree on which category should be used; the main game's category or the DLCs category.

      I'll use Dragonborn as an example. For Dragonborn characters we only use the Category:Dragonborn: Characters category and after that we use Category:Skyrim: Nords and Category:Skyrim: Males instead of Dragonborn: Nords and Dragonborn: Males. On the other hand, the DLCs Tribunal and Bloodmoon use only Bloodmoon or Tribunal categories including race and gender.

      So, question here is should Dragonborn characters also use Dragonborn: Males, Dragonborn: Nords or should Bloodmoon/Tribunal use the category system that Dragonborn currently uses (i.e., Morrowind: Nords, Morrowind: Males instead of Bloodmoon: Nords, Bloodmoon: Males)?

      I personally feel that organzation is better when the DLC category is used on DLC pages, and only use the main game's category if it is something that doesn't change when the DLC is installed, such as skills. (i.e., Morrowind: Marksman should be used on DLC pages instead of creating Bloodmoon: Marksman).

      In regards to characters in DLC that don't appear in the vanilla games, I think listing them by DLC category instead of main game category would be best here. Users would be able to filter out Nords that only appear in Skyrim and Nords that only appear in Dragonborn, only if they are in separate categories. Currently "characters" is the only way to filter Dragonborn characters from vanilla Skyrim characters.

        Loading editor
    • Hmm. Yeah, I would say that DLC characters and such should be divided into their own respective categories, instead of using the main game's categories. Although there's one other thing: should things like Dragonborn: Males go under Skyrim: Males, or just under Males in general?

        Loading editor
    • I would say have "Dragonborn: Males" under the list categories "Males" and "Dragonborn: Characters by Gender". As it is in current gender categories.

        Loading editor
    • I agree for the most part, although if someone is new to the game series, and is looking for a character that is in the Dragonborn DLC, but they only know the character is in Skyrim, it might be hard for them to find what they're looking for.

      (Example: Guy new to the series is trying to remember the name of his friend's favorite nord. He'll remember when he sees it. He looks under Skyrim: Nords, and doesn't find it, not realizing that Frea is actually in Dragonborn: Nords)

        Loading editor
    • TombRaiser wrote: Next topic: How we categorize DLC characters, etc...

      We need to take a look at how we categorize characters in DLCs, and agree on which category should be used; the main game's category or the DLCs category.

      I'll use Dragonborn as an example. For Dragonborn characters we only use the Category:Dragonborn: Characters category and after that we use Category:Skyrim: Nords and Category:Skyrim: Males instead of Dragonborn: Nords and Dragonborn: Males. On the other hand, the DLCs Tribunal and Bloodmoon use only Bloodmoon or Tribunal categories including race and gender.

      So, question here is should Dragonborn characters also use Dragonborn: Males, Dragonborn: Nords or should Bloodmoon/Tribunal use the category system that Dragonborn currently uses (i.e., Morrowind: Nords, Morrowind: Males instead of Bloodmoon: Nords, Bloodmoon: Males)?

      I personally feel that organzation is better when the DLC category is used on DLC pages, and only use the main game's category if it is something that doesn't change when the DLC is installed, such as skills. (i.e., Morrowind: Marksman should be used on DLC pages instead of creating Bloodmoon: Marksman).

      Personally I don't like the idea of mixing DLC/expansion content with the vanilla game. To me it feels like a step backwards in terms of organization. If it isn't included in the vanilla game it shouldn't be categorized as such. If Carnius Magius isn't in Morrowind, why categorize him as a Morrowind character?

      I prefer a structured tree system, with Bloodmoon: Characters and Tribunal: Characters as a subcategory of both Morrowind: Characters, and their respective games. That way anyone looking at either Morrowind: Characters or Bloodmoon is one click-away from finding specific content they want, without mixing everything together.

      Granted, it is debatable how people actually use categories, or if the average reader actually pays any attention to them at all. Either we believe that someone looking at a category page wants to see everything in the expansion packs as well as the main game in one list, or only wants to see what is in the game itself. Ultimately it is being user-friendly that should take priority, but we can only guess about how to do that.

        Loading editor
    • Th3Antioch wrote: I agree for the most part, although if someone is new to the game series, and is looking for a character that is in the Dragonborn DLC, but they only know the character is in Skyrim, it might be hard for them to find what they're looking for.

      (Example: Guy new to the series is trying to remember the name of his friend's favorite nord. He'll remember when he sees it. He looks under Skyrim: Nords, and doesn't find it, not realizing that Frea is actually in Dragonborn: Nords)

      That was a good example, and you have a valid point - but there's two ways to look at it. Say someone has Skyrim but doesn't have Dragonborn. Do they want to see content that does not exist in Skyrim listed in Skyrim categories?

        Loading editor
    • Eganogard wrote:

      Th3Antioch wrote: I agree for the most part, although if someone is new to the game series, and is looking for a character that is in the Dragonborn DLC, but they only know the character is in Skyrim, it might be hard for them to find what they're looking for.

      (Example: Guy new to the series is trying to remember the name of his friend's favorite nord. He'll remember when he sees it. He looks under Skyrim: Nords, and doesn't find it, not realizing that Frea is actually in Dragonborn: Nords)

      That was a good example, and you have a valid point - but there's two ways to look at it. Say someone has Skyrim but doesn't have Dragonborn. Do they want to see content that does not exist in Skyrim listed in Skyrim categories?

      That's a fair point. I assume in that case the tree/branch system you proposed is probably the best way, but I'm not sure if we can do that on the wiki. Perhaps TombRaiser can clarify for us.

        Loading editor
    • I'm for creating categories for each expansion and having them be sub-categories for the vanilla game and the general category. I.E. Dragonborn: Males would go under Skyrim and Characters by Gender. (If that makes sense.)

        Loading editor
    • Th3Antioch wrote:
      Eganogard wrote:

      Th3Antioch wrote: I agree for the most part, although if someone is new to the game series, and is looking for a character that is in the Dragonborn DLC, but they only know the character is in Skyrim, it might be hard for them to find what they're looking for.

      (Example: Guy new to the series is trying to remember the name of his friend's favorite nord. He'll remember when he sees it. He looks under Skyrim: Nords, and doesn't find it, not realizing that Frea is actually in Dragonborn: Nords)

      That was a good example, and you have a valid point - but there's two ways to look at it. Say someone has Skyrim but doesn't have Dragonborn. Do they want to see content that does not exist in Skyrim listed in Skyrim categories?
      That's a fair point. I assume in that case the tree/branch system you proposed is probably the best way, but I'm not sure if we can do that on the wiki. Perhaps TombRaiser can clarify for us.


      Currently all characters are categorized by game which includes expansions. What you are suggesting would either remove expansions from that list or without removing any of the list categories, add it to the main game's "characters" category.

      Eganogard gave the tree/branch example of, Category:Bloodmoon: Characters and Category:Tribunal: Characters should be listed in the Category:Morrowind: Characters category.

      So, it is a doable option.

        Loading editor
    • Can Category:Characters by Faction be removed from categories if they appear in the game-specific categories like Category:Skyrim: Characters by Faction? (You know, overarching categories and all that). I just added the game-specific ones to "Characters by Faction" so I wanted to check.

        Loading editor
    • Shockstorm wrote:
      Can Category:Characters by Faction be removed from categories if they appear in the game-specific categories like Category:Skyrim: Characters by Faction? (You know, overarching categories and all that). I just added the game-specific ones to "Characters by Faction" so I wanted to check.


      Yes, if it's already in a game-specific category, then there is no need to have it in the over-arching category, too.

      Like "Bards College Members" should be categorized under "Skyrim: Characters by Faction" instead of just "Characters by Faction""

        Loading editor
    • TombRaiser wrote:

      Th3Antioch wrote:
      Eganogard wrote:

      Th3Antioch wrote: I agree for the most part, although if someone is new to the game series, and is looking for a character that is in the Dragonborn DLC, but they only know the character is in Skyrim, it might be hard for them to find what they're looking for.

      (Example: Guy new to the series is trying to remember the name of his friend's favorite nord. He'll remember when he sees it. He looks under Skyrim: Nords, and doesn't find it, not realizing that Frea is actually in Dragonborn: Nords)

      That was a good example, and you have a valid point - but there's two ways to look at it. Say someone has Skyrim but doesn't have Dragonborn. Do they want to see content that does not exist in Skyrim listed in Skyrim categories?
      That's a fair point. I assume in that case the tree/branch system you proposed is probably the best way, but I'm not sure if we can do that on the wiki. Perhaps TombRaiser can clarify for us.


      Currently all characters are categorized by game which includes expansions. What you are suggesting would either remove expansions from that list or without removing any of the list categories, add it to the main game's "characters" category.

      Eganogard gave the tree/branch example of, Category:Bloodmoon: Characters and Category:Tribunal: Characters should be listed in the Category:Morrowind: Characters category.

      So, it is a doable option.

      I like the idea, but how would this apply to categories like Category:Skyrim: Vampires (maybe a bad example, considering Dawnguard) and Category:Skyrim: Merchants?

        Loading editor
    • Kroq-gar78 wrote: I like the idea, but how would this apply to categories like Category:Skyrim: Vampires (maybe a bad example, considering Dawnguard) and Category:Skyrim: Merchants?

      This may not be the best example, but I see that Morrowind: Spells already includes BM and TR spells as subcategories.

        Loading editor
    • Okay so this topic has been idle for 5 days now. After I post this I'll wait a few more days for more responses on the changes that would be made.

      1. So, seems that the preferred categorization method for DLCs would be to add them into the main game's list category. (i.e.; Morrowind: Spells containing Bloodmoon and Tribunal spell lists).
      2. Make all categories game-specific including DLCs (Skyrim: Nords to Dragonborn: Nords, Skyrim: Males to Dragonborn: Males, etc...)
      3. At this point, I'm not really sure what to do with the Solstheim Locations category. It currently houses only Bloodmoon pages. But, if we are aiming to categorize by game, then the only option I can think of would be to have a Bloodmoon: Solstheim Locations and a Dragonborn: Solstheim Locations. Or if those both seem redundant (because they have Bloodmoon: Locations and Dragonborn: Locations), we don't use a Solstheim Location category at all. Still need feedback on this.
        Loading editor
    • For Solstheim, perhaps we should just have a category Solsteheim: Locations, and then on the page it will specify which DLC it appeared in.

        Loading editor
    • How will we handle the minor DLCs of Oblivion and Morrowind, like The Vile Lair and Mehrunes' Razor? They're a bit too small, in my opinion, to have their own categories for some things, like locations.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, Solstheim Locations seems kinda redundant. I would say just delete it, unless it has some usefulness in regards to lore or something.

        Loading editor
    • Kroq-gar78 wrote:
      How will we handle the minor DLCs of Oblivion and Morrowind, like The Vile Lair and Mehrunes' Razor? They're a bit too small, in my opinion, to have their own categories for some things, like locations.


      I think because those smaller DLCs have their own base category Category:The Thieves Den, Category:Mehrunes' Razor, etc... that they can be categorized under Oblivion categories. Same for how Hearthfire stuff is categorized under Skyrim categories. I would say separate categories for the larger DLCs.

      For Solstheim


      The thing with a Solstheim category separated by DLC is that they are essentially the same place. For instance, Gyldenhul Barrow is the same barrow, except 200 years difference when it appears again in Dragonborn. I'm leaning towards not having a Solstheim category at all, because all events will take place on Solstheim under the Category:Bloodmoon: Locations and Category:Dragonborn: Locations category. I think Shockstorm's suggestion on using the Solstheim category would work better for lore pages.

        Loading editor
    • Good plan. I second that

        Loading editor
    • So basically a complete overhaul. This is going to take a while.

        Loading editor
    • Tomb, when are we starting, because I'll get started ASAP?

        Loading editor
    • AutoBlood wrote:
      Tomb, when are we starting, because I'll get started ASAP?


      Not quite yet. I want to make sure everything was covered. Some of the categories will be renamed using the bot, because it is a huge task. Others will need to be manually done.


      Just want to make sure we are on the same page about this:

      We will not create DLC categories for skills. For example, any skill that falls under "Destruction" in Dragonborn, Bloodmoon, Shivering Isles, etc... should be categorized under Skyrim: Destruction, Morrowind: Destruction, Oblivion: Destruction, and so on. The category stays that way because the "Destruction" skill is not new in DLCs. All skills come from the base game.

      On the other hand, not all spells (or weapons) come from the base game, so in this case we would use a DLC category. See Summon Replete Shambles for the correct way to categorize skill and spell on a DLC page.

      After this is acknowledged, we may be able to move forward with the changes.

        Loading editor
    • Shockstorm wrote:
      Some I found:


      Looks like there's a lot of Oblivion and some Morrowind pages that have overarching categories that haven't been removed since the policy was updated.

      Looking at these:

      • Category:Solstheim Locations - should really be part of Bloodmoon: Locations, following the convention for other game and not include Dragonborn.
      • Category:Cities in Skyrim - Should be renamed to Arena: Skyrim Locations or Arena: Skyrim Cities - and should not include other games beside Arena.

      Almost every cat like these should be prefixed by the game - that is the only way we can organize pages effectively over all games and not be confused to what a cat should be used for.

      I'm not too hot on the idea of creating new categories for things like Dragonborn: Nords or Dawnguard: Dunmer - mainly because:

      • Many cases the cat will contain 1 or 2 entries. Dragonborn has 1 new Orc character - Mogrul. Same for Ancarion - do we really want to create a new category for just him? - It's too specific to justify it.
      • What use is really for our readers (or editors) to list all Altmer NPCs in Dragonborn, for example.

      For spells, it makes sense to have Dragonborn: Spells or Shouts etc - there are enough for it to make sense.

      I think the setup we have for the Skyrim add-ons works well for now - we should focus on going back to the older game categories and bringing them in line with Skyrim cats.

        Loading editor
    • I agree that we should have prefixes to better organize things (ie not having Skyrim cities in a category with only Arena), but I'm thinking that some of the Lore Location pages might fit in "Cities in Skyrim", for example. I know there's some lore locations in Category:Summerset Isles Locations. (Speaking of that, "Category:Culture of Summerset Isle" should probably be moved to be plural).

      Semi-related: "Category:House Telvanni Members" was moved to here, but I think the former category should be recreated so we can include HT members from other games, like Lymdrenn Telvanni and Frathen Drothan, and the latter category can be a subcat of the former.

        Loading editor
    • Jimeee wrote:
      I'm not too hot on the idea of creating new categories for things like Dragonborn: Nords or Dawnguard: Dunmer - mainly because:

      • Many cases the cat will contain 1 or 2 entries. Dragonborn has 1 new Orc character - Mogrul. Same for Ancarion - do we really want to create a new category for just him? - It's too specific to justify it.
      • What use is really for our readers (or editors) to list

      I don't see why it matters if there will be 1 or 2 pages in a category. The purpose is to organize those that appear in Dragonborn to make it easier to filter by. A few posts up there was an example given on why having a category such as "Dragonborn: Nords" would be beneficial.

      Shockstorm wrote:

      Semi-related: "Category:House Telvanni Members" was moved to here, but I think the former category should be recreated so we can include HT members from other games, like Lymdrenn Telvanni and Frathen Drothan, and the latter category can be a subcat of the former.

      This would also create a category that only has 1 or 2 pages. One being from Skyrim, the other being from Oblivion.

        Loading editor
    • TombRaiser wrote: We will not create DLC categories for skills. For example, any skill that falls under "Destruction" in Dragonborn, Bloodmoon, Shivering Isles, etc... should be categorized under Skyrim: Destruction, Morrowind: Destruction, Oblivion: Destruction, and so on. The category stays that way because the "Destruction" skill is not new in DLCs. All skills come from the base game.

      So categories such as "Morrowind: Destruction" will include content that does not exist in Morrowind. If we're going to add DLC-only content in vanilla game categories, we might as well be consistent with that.

        Loading editor
    • Eganogard wrote:

      TombRaiser wrote: We will not create DLC categories for skills. For example, any skill that falls under "Destruction" in Dragonborn, Bloodmoon, Shivering Isles, etc... should be categorized under Skyrim: Destruction, Morrowind: Destruction, Oblivion: Destruction, and so on. The category stays that way because the "Destruction" skill is not new in DLCs. All skills come from the base game.

      So categories such as "Morrowind: Destruction" will include content that does not exist in Morrowind. If we're going to add DLC-only content in vanilla game categories, we might as well be consistent with that.

      I agree with Eganogard on this.

        Loading editor
    • You have me lost Eganogard.

        Loading editor
    • Murkywater2 wrote:
      You have me lost Eganogard.


      He means that if we are trying to be consistent then we might as well have the category called "Bloodmoon: Destruction" or "Dragonborn: Destruction" if it appeared in the DLC, instead of labeling it from the main game. That's how I understood it.

        Loading editor
    • TombRaiser wrote: He means that if we are trying to be consistent then we might as well have the category called "Bloodmoon: Destruction" or "Dragonborn: Destruction" if it appeared in the DLC, instead of labeling it from the main game. That's how I understood it.

      I'm focused on how we use categories, and what populates them. "Morrowind: Destruction" lists spells in Morrowind that require Destruction skill. If we don't have equivalent Bloodmoon and Tribunal categories, then we will include expansion-only content that is not found in Morrowind, in Morrowind categories. Since we are supposed to be categorizing by game, I see this as erroneous, and disregarding the very foundation of our categorization system. But that is not the point, and if that's the approach we want to take I'll be fine with that.

      My real point is that we should be consistent - either mix expansion-only content with parent game content, or keep it separate. Otherwise we're creating a subjective and irregular system that does both, based on opinion and judgment, rather than standards and consistency.

        Loading editor
    • Now it makes sense. Why dont we just list Destruction Spells for example as "Online: Destruction", ot "TESOnline: Destruction"?

        Loading editor
    • "Category:Strongholds" - probably move to "Category:Dunmer Strongholds". Maybe the former could then hold other Stronghold categories, like Category:Skyrim: Orc Strongholds.

        Loading editor
    • Shockstorm wrote: "Category:Strongholds" - probably move to "Category:Dunmer Strongholds". Maybe the former could then hold other Stronghold categories, like Category:Skyrim: Orc Strongholds.

      That's a great idea. I'm for it.

        Loading editor
    • Category:Dunmer Strongholds or Category:Morrowind: Dunmer Strongholds?

      Orc Strongholds is prefixed by Skyrim, even though it only exists in Skryim.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, I've seen several categories with prefixes even thought they don't really need them. Not sure what the standard is on that. Although I would say it's best to avoid prefixes if there's only one occurrence in the series (like Dunmer Strongholds).

        Loading editor
    • I disagree. By adding prefixes to (mostly) everything, we can avoid having to move and rearrange the articles when we see that the feature or entiti(y|ies) have been added to a new game.

        Loading editor
    • Alright, so after further discussion about this in IRC, we are going with the general consensus which is to use the DLC prefix to categorize. This will ensure that consistency is maintained across all games and the larger DLCs. We did say that the smaller expansions such as Mehrune's Razor, Orrey, Horse Armor, etc... could stay categorized under it's main game category, as long as the name of the expansion is used as a category to let people know it's not originally from Oblivion.

      I have already run DwemerBot on the Dragonborn and Dawnguard pages for characters, weapons, and armor. Those were the bigger tasks that required a bot to be run. There are still some other categories left that may need to be done manually.

      The listing of DLC categories will be under the Skyrim (or main game) list: Category:Dragonborn: Weapons added and categorized under Category:Skyrim: Weapons.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
*Disclosure: Some of the links above are affiliate links, meaning, at no additional cost to you, Fandom will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase. Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+