GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard

Welcome to GTA Wiki's Community Noticeboard.

Talk page rules apply here. This noticeboard is for discussion and voting on changes to the wiki, reporting vandalism and wiki rule breaking, and reporting bad or unfair behaviour from GTA Wiki staff. Votes for the expiration of a Patroller's probation will also be held here.

For requests for promotion, please go to GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion.

Voting Rules

Since voting about a change can cause arguments, here are the rules.
 * Anyone can start a topic for a community vote.
 * Please be civil when voting, and never condemn another user's vote.
 * Voting usually lasts 3 to 5 days.

Please input your new discussions at the top by editing the "New Topic" section and adding a new heading, leaving the "New Topic" heading at the top. That way, we can easily spot it rather than looking for it and you don't have to edit the whole page each time.

New Topic
Blank for next new topic.

Vote: NalexandruN - Probation End

 * 'Closed as Successful by Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate

After what has been a very fast three months, Alex's probation period has come to an end.

Senior staff will now vote on whether they feel Alex has proved himself enough to continue as a full-time Patroller.

'''Bureaucrats and Admins can vote. Patrollers cannot vote, but may leave comments stating their thoughts.'''

LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 17:05, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Votes

 * Yes - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 17:05, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes - Office-HUDIcon-GTAO.gif BolbiiS Office-HUDIcon-GTAO.gif (Talk ~ Edits) 17:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes - Matrexpingvin (talk) 17:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes - Sam Talk 18:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes - Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 22:35, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * I don't think much needs to be said. You've definitely shown yourself to be up to the task. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 17:05, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Like I said in his RfP, he's absolutely proven himself in my eyes to be a helpful and responsible editor. Cheers Alex! Office-HUDIcon-GTAO.gif BolbiiS Office-HUDIcon-GTAO.gif (Talk ~ Edits) 17:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This guy's pretty good. Matrexpingvin (talk) 17:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Given current staff numbers, the prior 4 Yes votes already constitute a successful vote, so Cam's opinion doesn't count ;). Nothing has occurred during the probationary period to suggest a negative vote is required. Closed as successful. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 22:35, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Announcement: Ease of Use/Compliance Changes
Got a few announcements for things that need to be changed rather than suggestions subject to voting.

If you need help with carrying out any of the following changes, please post in the comments or ask a staff member or use the #wiki-editing-help channel in the Wiki Discord.

Date Order in tables/tabbers etc
A "new" problem brought about by the longevity of GTA Online. In order to make pages more easily viewable for our readers and accessible to our editors, we should have the latest information on top wherever possible if it make sense to do so. Feel free to make such changes wherever it looks necessary. Short lists and tables such as GTA Timelines, and in-article lists of game titles are not proposed to be changed.
 * Examples
 * Events. (already done 20/01/2022)
 * Lucky Wheel podium prize vehicle list.
 * Prize Ride Challenge prize list. (already done 20/01/2022)
 * Every past DLC Page: Event weeks tabber. Latest week should be first/default tab.
 * Title Update Notes table. (WIP)

On vehicle articles we regularly see new editors changing 3D Universe design information because they haven't read far enough to see the latest model in the HD Universe game section(s), so it may be better to have the latest appearance at the top of each section in that type of article. That sort of change may also be proposed in the future but is not part of this change.

If you have a page that you think needs re-ordering but are having trouble doing so, please ask a staff member for assistance or use your personal sandbox page to try it.

Invalid use of Wikitext ; markup
The  ;  has been used repeatedly by just about everyone here (I'm very guilty of doing it often) as a shortcut to a "subheading-like" formatted piece of text that does not appear in a TOC.

This is invalid and an accessibility issue.

The  ;  wikitext is intended (and creates background HTML code) as a Description List. See: "Do not use a semicolon simply to bold a line without defining a value using a colon . This usage renders invalid HTML5 and creates issues with screen readers. Also, use of a colon to indent (other than for talk page responses) may also render invalid HTML5 and cause accessibility issues per MOS:INDENTGAP."

It's not really possible to fix these with a bot (although we can identify the pages), since each individual case may require a different sub-menu level or no sub-menu at all. Wherever this is found in a page, please replace it with the appropriate level subheading using === === markup or if a heading is not desired, the appropriate bold or css in-line styling (e.g. in-line styling just used).

Deprecated HTML Tags
Read More

The use of and tags in particular has been common but is highly discouraged and they should be replaced wherever found with compliant in-line CSS styling (depending on the element -    ) tags.

Thanks for reading. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 10:38, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Vote: Use of Definitive Edition characters in infoboxes VS Original Titles
Closed as Compromise see final comment by Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 09:26, 18 November 2021 (UTC) Alright, It has been only a few days since the release of the... very controversial and divisive release of Grand Theft Auto: The Trilogy - The Definitive Edition. Specifically, the updated look of the various characters across all three titles have been both ridiculed and defended across the internet. This look has thus sparked a debate within the Wiki community on whether we should, on these characters' infobox pages, give priority to their updated looks or keep the look of the original characters prevalent as they are.

Putting both in the infobox as a gallery with tabs or other methods is off the table, as certain character infoboxes are cluttered as they are, i.e Donald Love. Obviously it is our job to show and record these looks and details, so we cannot just pretend it doesn't exist (as much as parts of our community and the GTA community overall want to), so we are putting it to the community:

Should infoboxes for 3D Universe characters prioritize the Definitive Edition look, or the original?

Leave your vote and any additional comments/justifications below, and remember to sign your vote and comment using  ~ .

BolbiiS (Talk ~ Edits) 08:45, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Votes

 * Original - kamikatsu_ (Talk) 07:49, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitive Edition - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 08:54, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitive Edition - Jackyforever (Talk) 7:54 PM, 12 November 2021 (AEDT)
 * Original - Matrexpingvin (talk) 08:56, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitive Edition - SRG (Talk • Edits) 09:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitive Edition - Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 09:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - Jibvander (talk) 09:11, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Undecided - Alex (stalk)/(mock) /(Check out my mediocrity) 10:09, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitive Edition -  The  S-424   10:45, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - 20:34, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - User:Randall-B (Talk) 20:58, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - Slash M ,C 21:48, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - TheSecretPower (talk) 00:18, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - Oligordon (talk) 10:44, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - Radstyke 13:02, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - Universetwisters (talk) 19:39, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original - Matthew Cenance (talk) 22:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Comments

 * As I said in the Discord server, I wouldn't use anything from the Definitive Edition on infoboxes, and that include characters, locations, weapons etc.
 * The quality of some non-cutscene character models in DE (particularly in GTA San Andreas) are either horrible or inaccurate, so I wouldn't use Definitive Edition characters images on infobox (anymore).
 * We also have a problem with the location pics, many business signs in GTA Vice City were likely upscaled using AI and has too many typos. Not only businesses but also billboards ("Welcom to Vice City" billboard near the Escobar International Airport) and the Fort Baxter Air Base sign being replaced by the NOOSE logo from the HD Universe games. kamikatsu_ (Talk) 07:49, 12 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment placeholder until I can recharge my phone. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 09:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC) see below.
 * I don't know what GSG were smoking when they were working on those remasters, but prioritizing the DE is a big no from me, for obvious reasons. Heck, if you want some more examples in addition to the ones mentioned above (aside from the blatantly messed up character models), you have this tagline now saying "heat" instead of "meat" (completely killing the joke), and a Hotring poster replacing an old-school car by what seems to be an anachronistic Nissan GT-R R33. 20:34, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The new character models look absolutely hideous. Please guys, don't use them on the infoboxes. Either that or just let us switch between them (ala the age differences). User:Randall-B 21:04, 12 November 2021 (GMT)
 * Hello, I've come out of retirement to vote here.
 * I'm begging you - do not replace the originals with the "remastered" version on infoboxes at any cost.
 * The infoboxes (unless displaying several iterations of a subject via the tabber function) must display the definitive version of the subject. As Kamikatsu pointed out previously in this comment section, this "definitive edition" is not even close to being a definitive version of anything except maybe poor remasters. "Top Bun" instead of "Top Fun", 40 year old "Old" Reece... Even still, I don't suggest these rereleases be ignored, only that they can't replace the originals when they're the way they are now. Slash M ,C 21:48, 13 November 2021 (UTC)


 * The Definitive Edition is not representative of what the games are supposed to look like. There are several lore-breaking inconsistencies for the content to be taken serious. For example, mags with OG Loc appear in Vice City with reused assets from GTA V, dispite OG Loc not properly existing until GTA San Andreas. There are also traced drawings of the Elegy Retro Custom from GTA Online appearing in Vice City, this vehicle based from a 90s car. The ammount of assets used from GTA V makes you wonder if the developers even considered the Universes. There's also several missspellings and grammatical errors which are so obvious and complexing how they thought what they wrote made any sense. TheSecretPower (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Right, back from a long weekend away, here are some arguments for and against that should give some idea why I consider it in the wiki's best interests to use DE content this prominently. In the weeks leading up to the release I had been considering many options for how to treat the variable content without coming to any conclusions beforehand.


 * While I accept that much of the DE content is frankly unacceptably bad, especially character models, we are not here to judge the quality of the game in our article space. While we can draw some conclusions as to the validity of the content in respect of Universe continuity and canon, one of the core tenets of the wiki is to present a Neutral Point of View. It is not our place to decide that an "enhanced" version is less valid than a prior version, we just report and document what the developer and publisher provides. Rockstar/TakeTwo have decided to use a developer that clearly doesn't care as much about the content as their fans, and have then chosen to release the inferior result. We can probably assume the deadline of the 20th anniversary had an impact on the quality, but it would be wishful thinking to suggest that it would have been much better with more time. We can also hope some of the more blatant issues will be patched over time, but it should not be an expectation.


 * But we have to accept that the DE versions will be bringing a brand new audience to these games, with little or no opportunity for this new generation of players to get their hands on the original versions now that they are no longer available for new purchase for the foreseeable future. Those new players will be coming to the wiki for the same reason players have been coming for the original versions.


 * They will expect to see content relevant to their experience with the DE games. The first image a reader sees when they arrive on a page, be it desktop or mobile skin, is the infobox. If they see old content that does not match what they see in their game, their impression will be that the wiki is not up to date and the chances of them continuing to use it will reduce.


 * If you want a very clear example of what happens to a wiki that does not cater to the consumers of new content, you need look no further than the GrandTheftWiki. In 2013, when GTAV was released, it was easily as busy as the GTA Wiki and each wiki thoroughly documented the original GTAV content. Since GTW has basically ignored any enhanced version Grand Theft Auto V/Online content since 2014, it has effectively withered and died because it is no longer relevant to the current player, even though their pre-GTAV content was more or less identical to ours.


 * As fans of the original Trilogy games, we pretty much already know what everything in those versions look like. Catering to new players will not adversely affect our memories of the original content which will still be documented, just not with the same prominence.


 * We have had a couple of near-precedents for this situation. The 10th Anniversary and mobile ports of the 3D universe games didn't update models but had increased graphical resolution, but not enough of a change to be significantly distinguishable from the originals, which were also still available, so were not used as replacements. The Enhanced version of GTA V provided some improved character models (but not all characters by any means). We decided to replace the character infobox images but did not do so for vehicles and many locations have also been replaced over time. Whether the upcoming Expanded and Enhanced console version provides any necessity to revisit that is doubtful, since it would appear the PC Enhanced version will not be updated and still be available.


 * It is probably wishful thinking, but there is also a chance that our prominent display of this terrible content will contribute to the negative spotlight being universally focussed upon these DE versions at the moment and actually prompt some fixes. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 15:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Dude, these versions of the game have almost been universally shat on all over the internet. Look at the Metacritic score ffs. So some people who sadly play these over the originals will see these models aren't the ones of the versions they played, does it really matter? Sure the GTA V enhanced edition updated the models but those stayed 100% true to the original vision. On the other hand, look at how DOGSHIT Tommy's model is in the DE, it doesn't even look like the same guy. And besides, more people here have voted for the originals than the DE, and I think it's only fair you do things in their interest. I browse this wiki very often, I don't want to be looking at these abominations whenever I visit character pages, and I'm positive countless other fans don't either. This thing should be remembered exactly as what it is, a mistake that Rockshit/Take-Turd conceived just to make a quick buck off people's nostalgia. NONE of this is going to be fixed or patched by the way. Keep in mind that the 360 port of San Andreas (also from the same developer) is broken to this day. User:Randall-B 18:55, 14 November 2021 (GMT)
 * I'm all for keeping the original pictures on the infoboxes, or at least having a tab to where you can switch to the character's DE equivalent. But the original should be the first option because status quo - Universetwisters (talk) 18:59, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * There are serious issues with the texture work in the games, like for example The Burger Shot location in GTA: Vice City in the Definitive Edition showing only pictures of tacos and nachos where in the original it showed pictures of various burgers and sandwiches, and The Cheesy Crust Pizza Co. next to it only showing pictures of hot dogs, which is so contrived it breaks believability in the setting. I think there should be a page on various errors introduced in the Definitive Edition. I would definitely NOT use pictures of the Definitive Edition actors.
 * I haven't cast a vote yet because I'm torn as to what to say for definite. As Sean (and others have) pointed out, the new remastered images look very poor and are not what most people will recognise as the games of past, but our role on the Wiki is to display the most up to date information/images for the games, which these ones represent. One thing I have been thinking over (and I believe Universetwisters suggested) is to have separate tabs for the "original" images and the DE images. The Mafia Wiki has separate sections for the original 2002 Mafia game and its 2020 remake/remaster (Mafia: DE) which highlights the differences between both games. I believe that would not be necessary for this Wiki since the 2020 Mafia version is considered a remake of the 2002 version (plus there are only four Mafia games, compared to approximately fifteen in the GTA series, so there is more space for Mafia) whereas the GTA DE trilogy is a "remaster" of the original games, but maybe a tab highlighting the differences between the versions, as has been done with vehicle pages when there are different designs across the universes (i.e. a "History" tab, but with a better term) to recognise the differences. Sam Talk 16:48, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed - The Mafia example does not apply. We're not going to split them up completely they way they have.
 * As far as tabbed versions go, I've been giving it some thought and come up with the following idea:


 * Light theme, Mobile view (two windows to show scrolled down) and Dark (current desktop default) theme.
 * Styling is not finalized by any means, this was just a proof of concept test. This puts a tabber over top of two near-duplicate versions of the infobox and allows the reader to select which version to see. On mobile, which does not support tabber, both infoboxes will be shown, hence the additional headings between them. I don't think it is good practice to integrate this tabber option into the infobox template itself (because: mobile), but I may reconsider that. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 00:43, 16 November 2021 (UTC)


 * The separate tabs thing seems like a fair compromise. I think implementing it would be a good idea. User:Randall-B 05:14, 16 November 2021 (GMT)
 * This has been tested and implemented on Lance Vance/Sandbox and Donald Love for readers to view the compromised solution with FandomDesktop skin styling to integrate it into the existing Infobox style and the Mobile view can also be observed. Note, the odd positioning of the infobox captions below each rendered infobox on mobile is not fixable afaik. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 03:26, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Closure Statement

 * Based on positive feedback in the Discord (and the one additional comment made here), the top-mounted tabber over the infobox compromise solution has now been widely implemented on character pages using in-game and cutscene captures from DE. As stated, we are performing our role to report the content with a NPoV. It is up to the reader to decide their own opinion on the quality of the games.
 * Some notes:
 * DE is set to the default on the tabbers. This will not be changing for the relevancy reasons spelled out in my initial comments and endorsed by the other bureaucrats.
 * While this may seem like it ignores the will of the majority, a compromise is better than an outright unanimous Bureaucratic veto.
 * Current DE images are taken from XBox version without the aid of a replay feature or freecam modification, unlike probably half of the Original Version infobox portraits. Some of these still show some deformities caused by the new engine models/textures so can probably be improved upon over time with better angles, lighting etc from PC version.
 * Thanks for your (mostly) civil input on what is proving to be a contentious issue for everyone. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 09:26, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Announcement: Definitive Edition Trilogy remakes
As the trailer and official screens have been released today, we have been presented with a number of decisions to make around how this content should be handled and presented on the wiki.

Firstly it is important to note that these are not new games, they are remasters of existing games. There will be some content differences, but generally speaking, they will be treated no differently to the way we treated the second version of Grand Theft Auto V (enhanced version for PS4/XbOne/PC).

Screenshot "replacement"
In general, replacement of screenshots from previous PC or console versions of the game should not be required, however if done the following rules should apply:
 * No trailer screengrabs or official pre-release screenshots (cropped or full) are to be used in infoboxes.
 * Infobox images should be taken in-game by the wiki editor after the games are released. It remains to be seen whether cutscene images will still be the preference for character models, but we should assume this will be the case.
 * The image needs to be of equal or better quality - not "just" better graphical fidelity.
 * This is somewhat subjective, but photographic criteria around lighting, composition etc need to be taken into account.
 * Do not delete prior generation images or remove them from articles. If it is an infobox image, move the old image to a gallery, with a caption indicating the version it was taken in.
 * The new version images should be notated in the filename to indicate they are from the Definitive Edition. The Media Policy will be updated with instructions.
 * e.g. GTASAde, GTAIIIde, GTAVCde as the game title abbreviations.
 * This is something I should have followed through to ensure was done with GTAVe/GTAOe but it never caught on in 2014/15. We will be insisting on it for GTAVee/GTAOee in 2022.
 * Existing game screenshot licence templates are valid and still apply to the new versions.
 * Existing walkthrough image galleries do not need to be replaced.

Video walkthroughs
New version walkthroughs should be added to a walkthrough gallery, and should not replace old version walkthroughs under any circumstances. This allows comparison of the changes. As per the media policy, GTASV walkthroughs are preferred. As recently announced, YouTube walkthroughs must not be uploaded to the wiki, just embedded into the article gallery using the Embed Video extension.

Content differences
Just like with the enhanced version of GTA V (and GTA Online in particular), there will be differences in the versions that need to be described. In some cases, content will be removed in the new version (censored with today's sensibilities rather than attitudes of 20 years ago) and some content may be added. A Versions template is still being worked on to be used wiki-wide for all games with version variety (even going back to the ports of GTA 2). The old content is still valid and must remain documented. The old versions of these games didn't all suddenly become invalid or unplayable.

Canonicity of differences caused by Grove Street Games errors
It is now (<24 hours from release) apparent that these Definitive Editions contain numerous obvious errors that will only multiply as we delve into the content. When Grove Street Games did things like using FIB instead of FBI textures in their 10th anniversary ports, we explained it away as a probable copyright correction, but it is becoming more obvious that this studio gives little importance to the Universes continuity, or even basic attention to detail or accuracy.

Using HD Universe LCPD logos on LCPD police cars, Fam3's Rimmers singlet now saying something unintelligible (RinimO's anyone?). Various HD Brand textures have also been seen on props in the backgrounds of the official screenshots and gifs.

Whilst it has always been my position that we cannot decide what is canon and what is not, that it is dictated to us by the developers, we need to give serious consideration to how much weight/importance we place on these obvious mistakes and oversights.

Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 00:06, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Updated by Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 04:10, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Comments

 * A few observations/trains of thought/suggestions:
 * As stated above, wholesale image replacement is not required, See: this discussion. We didn't replace GTAV enhanced version wholesale, nor did we replace original Trilogy with 10th Anniversary versions, just because "better gfx". Document the change, sure. Replace? No.
 * A catalogue of continuity/Universe-breakages/mistakes/quality errors and omissions could be maintained in a subpage, e.g. GSG Errors . Most of these seem to be textures, but like any mistake, once you see them, you can't un-see them and every time you see them, they grate on your consciousness. But there are also things like weapon names and icons using other game or even HD Universe names.
 * Probably more to come as I think of it. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 23:40, 10 November 2021 (UTC)


 * A new vote page: GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/DefinitiveEditionChanges has been set up to get consensus on the validity of individual changes. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 04:08, 11 November 2021 (UTC)