Talk:Fallout 4 downloadable content

Release dates

It may not be the right time now, but I think the multiple release dates in the infobox looks a little clunky. It might look a little better if we move them to each DLCs section, once they're filled out. Just something to think about for now. Also, if anyone has any thoughts on using the 'cover' images as non-free, fair use to sort of anchor each section with a small infobox. That might be a good place for the release dates, as well. However, I'm not sure what else would go in them. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 03:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@MjolnirPants: I copied the infobox from Fallout 3 downloadable content and changed or removed what was different (the engine and the release dates). I'm not familiar with these types of expansion pack articles (list-type articles) so I don't know what the infobox should contain or how the release dates should be laid out. I'm probably going to merge Automatron into this article, so the cover art for that is already uploaded. Far Harbor and Nuka-World have enough coverage to warrant standalone articles and the covert art for those two is already uploaded too. Anarchyte (work | talk) 04:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

I just merged the remaining contents of Automatron into this article, including the infobox with the cover art. Anarchyte (work | talk) 05:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Good stuff. I think there might be a question about whether the covers of Wasteland Workshop, Vault-Tec Workshop and Contraptions Workshop should be uploaded. I agree on the three story-driven DLCs. I'm not sure it's such a good idea for just me and you to discuss it, however. If no-one else wants to come edit this page, we might put up an RfC.

In other news, I'm working up a plot summary of Far Harbor now. If no-one else has one to add sooner, I'll try to wrap it up and publish it tonight. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 12:35, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Oops... I just realized we have a page for Far Harbor. I'm just going to summarize that plot summary (whoa, meta), rather than completely writing a new one and add a main article link. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 12:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

I know that Jo-Jo Eumerus is very familiar with file copyright, so maybe this pinging them would be a good idea. A couple of screenshots would probably be fine, but the cover art might be restricted to the main article only. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Personal opinion: I might be feeling a little inclusionist these days, but I was sad to see Automation merged. I understand it, just felt it was well done for what it was. -- ferret (talk) 11:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I always hate merging articles I've created, but there just wasn't enough reliable coverage :(. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

• Commenting solely on file questions: From what I know any cover here would likely be copyrighted. As for the current article, I am concerned that using one cover for each section may not meet WP:NFCC#8 - typically the non-free content reviewers want non-free files to work for the article topic in general, not just individual sections. As for screenshots, you'll have to make sure each of them increases the understanding of the article topic (emphasis on "article") significantly or else they will probably be deleted under NFCC#8 (again). Cover art of the main game is going to be difficult to justify on articles that aren't the main game - not impossible, but more likely to be wrong than right. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:29, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus and MjolnirPants: Do you think this article should be similar to Saints Row: The Third downloadable content and completely remove individual infoboxes? IMO they seem a bit too clunky. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:34, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

No opinion on whether to use infoboxes there. As noted before, using non-free images in such infoboxes is questionable. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Images

I've removed the infoboxes from the articles so that it doesn't infringe on WP:NFCC#8, and so there's more space for {{video game reviews}}. Here are a few ideas for alternative imagery:

• Vault-Tec Workshop, ant-farm view. Source: PC Gamer, Steam. Would be used to show how the different expansions add different content.
• Far Harbor gameplay. Already uploaded. Same reasoning as before.
• A screenshot of the Nuka-World gameplay to, again, show the differences between the expansions. This won't be available until the expansion is actually released.

Anarchyte (work | talk) 03:28, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Request:

Can someone who "works here" (I know how it goes here, just tryin to make a bad joke) add the actual filenames to each DLC's infobox? There's a "naming convention on various websites/platforms" issue involved here, most mod authors (or while researching stuff for a new mod the DLC's that get mentioned) refer to "DLC01", "DLC02", ect, they get simplified by release order, but the files I have don't say that. As a mod author I frequently need to add content from a particular DLC, but the naming conventions Bethesda used don't really correlate to anything useful and idk whats what all the time, no where does any website bluntly say "the third DLC's file is named "DLCFarHarbor.esm"" (or whatever it is, still don't have an answer). It has literally taken me over an hour today trying to find out what dlc03 is since the file isn't called anything like that and I'm a dumb-ass pothead who relies on Google a bit too much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.244.23.43 (talk) 23:53, 5 November 2018 (UTC)