Skyrim Mod talk:Skywind

Question

Should we be hosting this? Bethesda didn't approve of Morroblivion and the porting of assets, and as far as I know these mods are usually incomplete. Additionally, almost all information here will be duplicates of Morrowind, meaning covering this mod in-depth seems a bit pointless. —Legoless (talk) 20:30, 10 July 2014 (GMT)

Apparently Bethesda clarified their position as not being against the project itself, just how it was taking things in one game and using them in another. I'll leave the redundancy and notability arguments for someone who has had a look at the mod itself. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 20:48, 10 July 2014 (GMT)

I don't think we should be hosting it. Otherwise we will get another TR3 situation where the people making it aren't updating here and it's just a group of stubs and empty pages for eternity. Unless they can provide a 100% complete set of pages upfront, there isn't really a reason to host it. There is also the notability and usefulness aspect. As far as I know, the only two major mods we've ever hosted are TR3 and Stirk. They need to provide a good reason why we should host their info, rather than a lack of a reason not to. Jeancey (talk) 05:18, 11 July 2014 (GMT)

1. They are creating all new assets for Skywind so it is completely legal.

2. You can't just say it could have stubs and because it "could" just be stubs we should not.

3. your statment "Additionally, almost all information here will be duplicates of Morrowind, meaning covering this mod in-depth seems a bit pointless" is not entirely true. They are making many changes so it will have new information that may be needed.

4. I have a reason, this is not just some random quest mod that breaks the lore, its a recreation o Morrowind into Skyrim.

we should wait until it's done though.— Unsigned comment by Wubonater (talk • contribs) at 08:08 on 11 July 2014

Who is "they"? Why wouldn't they be stubs? Unless you plan to probably single-handedly do every single page? "I have a reason" isn't a good enough reason. And why wait until you are done? That would just mean more work to delete every single page by the direction of this conversation, sorry. •WoahBro^►talk 13:41, 11 July 2014 (GMT)

I and others were going to add stuff to the page, i just started the page but then we were told not to until the mod was done. i apologize.

that's what i meant when i said wait till its done, i was saying the page should exist but not right now, and i did it too soon.

"they" are the mod makers.

And i gave a reason, but i guess you didn't read it. — Unsigned comment by Wubonater (talk • contribs) at 14:02 on 11 July 2014 (GMT)

If no one plans on finishing this, I'll go ahead and propose the page for deletion. —Legoless (talk) 14:07, 11 July 2014 (GMT)

(←) I'm contesting deletion and have therefore removed the Prod. To address some of the points raised here, yes, this could be an unfinished project. That's a risk we take in allowing someone to document a project. But to kill it before it has even a chance to establish itself seems self-defeating. Our purpose is to document the games, and Dave has said before (and I agree with him) that we should also document mods if the mod-makers want to document them here. That and the technical documentation are pretty much why we have the TesXMod spaces. I really feel like we should be welcoming and encouraging mod-makers and/or those who want to document mods rather than dismissing them out of hand before they even have a chance to get started. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 14:31, 11 July 2014 (GMT)

No, we should delete it until the Mod is done, to stop confusion, and other problems — Unsigned comment by Wubonater (talk • contribs) at 14:42 on 11 July 2014 (GMT)

(edit conflict) According to Wubonater above, the mod makers don't want the project hosted here until it's complete, and I would tend to agree with them. If someone wants to see us continue to host the mod, I propose that they undertake the burden of documentation themselves and get in contact with the mod makers. —Legoless (talk) 14:43, 11 July 2014 (GMT)

I agree that it should be deleted until the mod is completed. I don't have a problem with the mod makers documenting it here when its done if they wish to, but they need to be ready and willing to take the lion's share of documenting it. --AN|L (talk) 15:28, 11 July 2014 (GMT)

Okay, I wasn't clear on that. I'll re-instate the Prod then. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 17:00, 11 July 2014 (GMT)

Just a follow-up note: I've deleted the article, but have deliberately left this talk page here as both a record of why it was deleted and so that it's clear to any future creators that it should only be created once the mod is reasonably complete and there is significant content to be added to the wiki. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 04:13, 18 July 2014 (GMT)

Page Recreation

Skywind Community Manager here. I note the above discussion. Since that discussion, the project became a ground-up remake with no ported assets, and I have no reason to believe it is in any way in violation of ZeniMax policies on modding. Although providing specifics about the mod has no purpose before release, it's informative for UESP users to have the information I've put up in the new page. I've written this in what I believe to be an encylopedic way, but any edits will be graciously accepted. --egrets (talk) 08:19, 18 February 2020 (GMT)

As Modspace documentation lead, I fully support the inclusion of Skywind (and the rest of TESRenewal) here. As a major fan project, I would also support the creation of a project overview page about TESRenewal itself, in the same way we already have pages for Beyond Skyrim, Uutak Mythos, and others. Although for that we'd need confirmation on whether TESRenewal, TES Renewal or The Elder Scrolls Renewal is the correct name of the project. --Enodoc (talk) 21:39, 19 February 2020 (GMT)

Thanks for the welcome, Enodoc. You'll see that I've already included links to pages for the other two TESR projects, although they don't exist yet. I agree that the naming is ambiguous. The overarching name is properly The Elder Scrolls Renewal Project - this is often shortened to TESRenewal for brevity (and I accept this is inconsistently displayed across our web presence) or TESR as an initialism. The fully qualified project names are The Elder Scrolls Renewal: [ProjectName], and in that context the initialism TESR is again common as shorthand. TESRP is never used, and should not be. Hope that clears things up a little! --egrets (talk) 15:09, 20 February 2020 (GMT)

Great! I've made a project overview page – feel free to fix it up with additional information or change anything if I've got something wrong! --Enodoc (talk) 22:44, 20 February 2020 (GMT)