Forum:Relaxing a certain aspect of the transcript style guide

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Relaxing a certain aspect of the transcript style guide
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 3 May 2019 by Haidro.


I'm making this because of something I think is dumb to strictly enforce in the Transcript style guide. Namely this part (not verbatim, mish mashed a couple of parts from the same section together to be more concise):

"At certain times, a player may be presented with more than one option to select in the dialogue. These should be written in the following format:

  • NPC: Question?
    • Title of dialogue box (such as 'What would you like to say?')
      • Answer 1
        • Player: Response 1.
      • Answer 2
        • Player: Response 2.
      • Answer 3
        • Player: Response 3.


If you've looked at various transcripts, you might notice that a lot of them don't follow this format. An example of one that follows the format can be found here, and one that doesn't (i.e. the one I prefer) here.

I propose to relax the rules from this section of the style guide guide; only enforce it when the title of the dialogue box is somewhat unique (such as "Would you like to see the recording?" on Transcript:Bank guard), as the majority of titles are merely 'Select An Option' or 'What would you like to say?' - adding an unnecessary extra indentation, and making the page uglier and slightly more confusing tbh

thx for reading

Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 16:08, 15 April 2019 (UTC)


Support - by me Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 16:08, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - nothing more to add Srylius (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Oppose for now - "Transcription in the linguistic sense is the systematic representation of language in written form. "[1] Transcription is systematic and therefore the dialogue box option title should be included. Plus, there's no other way stylistically to make it clear that we're dealing with dialogue options and not something else. Until there is, I oppose. Sinister clown face chathead (male).png Tzar Talk 16:35, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment - I quite like the formatting I Am Me suggested and will support that. But I still don't support omitting any dialogue box option title. Sinister clown face chathead (male).png Tzar Talk 23:27, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - Transcript:The Chosen Commander reaches 15 levels of indentation in a section that doesn't include these titles anywhere. Parts of it are completely unreadable in portrait mode on the mobile view already. With dialogue titles, those sections would reach somewhere along the lines of 22 levels of indentation, which looks a bit like this in landscape mode (you can try for yourself here). When the titles add information, I'd say including them is reasonable, but when they don't? Let's not. -Hourglass (2011 Hallowe'en event) detail.png I Am Not You Talk III The Spark.png- 20:46, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Though I guess there are ways around the indentation issue. A decent compromise might be something like
  • Lau'Ra: We at the Prince's Trust wish you a Happy Easter!
  • Select An Option
    • Who are you?
      • (stuff)
    • Tell me more...
      • (stuff)
    • Where can I go for more information?
      • (stuff)
    • Goodbye.
      • (stuff)
Which includes the title in cases when it matters, but doesn't waste an entire indentation level on it. It also wouldn't look vastly different if the title was skipped in some places (because if nothing else it will still happen for historical content where we might not know what the title was). -Hourglass (2011 Hallowe'en event) detail.png I Am Not You Talk III The Spark.png- 11:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Oppose - There would be large inconsistency between transcripts which have it and those that don't because of the relevant text. Also, the goal of transcription is to transcribe everything, so the title should be included. The issue here is the formatting, not the content - perhaps there's a cleaner solution, but this is not it. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 23:47, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment - maybe a bit besides the point of this particular proposal but... I find the transcript style a bit frustrating and results in transcript pages (especially branching dialogue) getting very messy and becoming inconsistent with the style guide and each other and even within itself. Take Transcript:Death for eg. These have lots of tricky bits like dialogue that repeats, loops back, is identical except for certain words, only occur during the first time something happens etc. Also compare it to Transcript:Frank (The_Horsemen), which theoretically should be structured identically but isn't. I'm sure I'm just being overly pedantic but I think that addressing this issue (especially if seeking a formatting based solution per Haidro) will likely bring to light other issues with the transcript style. Superiosity the WikianQuick chat button.png : Yo 04:05, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

In retrospect I see that this is a whole lot of word vomit. In a nutshell: I have problems with the transcript style in that in seems to prioritise exact replication over being easy to write and readability. Superiosity the WikianQuick chat button.png : Yo 04:24, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
So my irrelevant rant aside, I will actually have to oppose - I'm noticing several of the supports are giving the reason that its "Select an option" or "What do you say" most of the time. Most of the time - I can recall a few instances (tho none come to mind immediately) where the the title is something unique, usually during quests and usually something that's humorous. So I'm opposing per 'dro, I agree that transcripting formatting is problematic but omitting content should not be a solution. Superiosity the WikianQuick chat button.png : Yo 03:21, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, hence my commenting on exceptions for unique box titles - I do however agree with all the comments saying about consistency; however I'd much rather forgo consistency for this small style point in favour of the points I outlined in my proposal. I *also* agree with the points brought up by you and Haidro mentioning that transcript styling as a whole is a bit messy and thus could have improved format instead; I'd wholeheartedly welcome a proposal to do so Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 20:24, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment - I support improving the style but I agree with Haidro's points and I think that changing the formatting to reduce the indentation, as per I Am Me, is the right way to go - Rawny (talk) 19:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - "What would you like to say" and "Select an Option" add nothing to the transcript (even though they are technically part of the transcript). I think that that title should be omitted unless it is something actually that adds to the dialogue/transcript (like in your example). It is very much implied that the options following some dialogue are something to select from, or that they are something you are going to say. Cache117 (talk) 22:48, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Support/Comment - There seems to be far more instances than not where the header of the option box is "Select an option" or something to the same effect. Most of the time when I see a relevant header is when you have a yes/no confirmation just in case you forget what you're agreeing to. To waste an indentation for the header is ridiculous. I'm in agreement with I Am Me about how to approach the situation when having it is absolutely necessary, especially since it's not an option or actual dialogue. I mean, we don't indent after every character name, do we? We just bold it and have the content of the dialogue box afterward. Badassiel (talk) 12:22, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment/Oppose - I confess that I didn't know that this was enforced and have omitted those on the Transcripts I've done, but I'd rather have it done always, for consistency, rather than only doing it when it's justifiable. An extra indentation doesn't bother me, however, F for going back and fixing everything. Meeeeerds msg 19:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - I’m all in for consistency, but since most transcripts don’t follow this and it’d be a huge task to fix everything, I’ll vote on leaving it up to the editor adding the titles when needed. Meeeeerds msg 20:01, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - jayden 21:14, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment/Soft Oppose - I guess I actually misread the style guide when I started helping with transcripts because I did not think that the "Select An Option" text had to be on a new indentation. That should go because that seems wholly unnecessary and would just make pages like Transcript:Garden of Tranquillity#Lyra, where there are many choices in a short amount of time, look ridiculous. At the same time though, I'm just not sure if I'm entirely on board with the idea of not including the title text at all. It definitely looks nicer without, but it's not the full and complete transcript then and at that point, it's no longer fully encyclopedic. I understand there needs to be balance though, which is why I actually like I Am Me's idea of just not indenting the title text the first time. That's what I've been doing (since logically it made the most sense) and I think it strikes a good balance between not looking terrible and still retaining the full text. ɳex undique 16:05, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Closed - There's clear consensus that indenting titles can grow the indentation size of a transcript to ugly proportions, and there seem to be three proposals to fix this: Never include the title, always include the title, or sometimes include the title.

The key concept that's getting thrown around is "what adds to the dialogue pages?". There's consensus that if a title "adds value" to the transcript then it should be added, but the inverse is not necessarily true. Part of this is because there's no clear definition on what titles don't add value. There are some cases like "What would you like to say" and "Select an option", yet there seems to be no definitive list, nor are people certain there is one. As agreed by practically everyone, inconsistency is not favourable - so titles should never be "sometimes" included.

Then there's the argument that every title is valuable because we are an encyclopedia for RuneScape, and that the whole point of transcripts are we transcribe everything from the game. The main reason why titles shouldn't be included is because of the formatting - there seem to be no arguments against the encyclopaedic nature of transcripts. Thus, titles must always be included in transcripts, to align with the intention of transcripts.

I Am Me's proposal seems to be well-received, so titles of dialogue boxes should be at the same indentation level as the NPC above. Any future formatting suggestions are welcome and another thread can be made to discuss them. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 03:31, 3 May 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ [1]