In the Submachine Universe section, the location coordinates are part of the link (e.g. [690-Looping traps]). In Sub10, the (binary) coordinates are not part of the link (e.g. OIO-[Resin mine]). And in the Sub4 section, the coordinates aren't anywhere at all.
Being a bit more consistent here would be nice..
Liam (talk) 23:07, January 24, 2017 (UTC)
- Will look into this as soon as possible.
- When compiling this page, I pulled the galleries for each game directly from the game pages, which I also reworked in Sept. 2016. You're completely correct that the Sub4 coordinates should be added; I don't know how I forgot that. Good catch.
- However, when creating OIO-[[Resin mine]], I left out the binary coordinates from the link on purpose. As in the example above, the Resin Mine does not represent the entire layer with the code OIO (which isn't paired to a number 1-7 yet). There can be other representations of locations that exist in OIO; likewise, there is only one location at 690-[[Looping traps]]. That's why I was unwilling to include the binary portals in the link.
- In the event that a future Submachine game does help delineate which binary coordinates correspond to which layers, then I will link the coordinates themselves to the appropriate layer page.
- Otherwise, thanks for pointing the rest out. I'll make this an official project, which is displayed on my profile :D
- Sounds good! I didn't even realize the idea that binary coordinates could be representing layers, even though that totally makes sense. The layer differences are on the level (no pun intended) of Sub8 layers, of course, not Sub9, though.
- Liam (talk) 16:09, January 25, 2017 (UTC)
Renaming and redirecting location pages to coordinate numbers
I was thinking about this last night. It hit me how the location pages on this wiki are named mostly by names decided on by the community instead of their canon numbers. While the community names are easily memorable and better than thinking of the right 3-digit number to type in, they are not canon and are subject to change. I wonder if the names of these location pages should be changed to their coordinate number. The current page names would become redirects to the relevant coordinate numbers to make the transition easier.
There are some pros and cons to this but I want to know what you all think. Apocryphactor (talk) 15:35, August 12, 2019 (UTC)
- To an extent I only know the rooms by their coordinates. However, some rooms do have canon names, so the mix would look unseemly. Plus, there's dozens of location without a portal/coordinate AND without an official name. I am not in favour. Anteroinen1 (talk)
- As I'm growing more and more attached to this idea, I'm going to address what you brought up, because I thought the same thing. I'm not concerned about an unseemly mix of name types, because I don't think the difference between coordinate numbers and place names is as relevant as canon vs. non-canon names. Uniform canonicity is more important, and if that sometimes means coordinates and other times actual names, then I don't see a problem.
- As for locations without official names and official coordinates, I believe a decent chunk of them have had names derived from the music played in those areas. I think, though, that there may still be some with only a community name attached to them. It reminds me that there used to be an unfinished conversation on here somewhere, maybe between Montinevra and others, who argued that some places should be renamed to be closer-fitting to the correspoding track titles. I'll hunt that down for reference and post it here later, because it could be the case we resolve that conversation around the same time as this one. Apocryphactor (talk) 14:51, August 13, 2019 (UTC)
- I was thinking of names like Ancient section, Ship, Root or to an extent the Edge areas 4 and 5 which are based on canon material. Then you have something like Murtaugh's communication room in a different category from that comes from Mateusz. Track names are whatever. Anteroinen1 (talk) 15:13, August 13, 2019 (UTC)