MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2009-06-18T16:08:24Z

64.206.123.1: /* ARE we going to relicence? */

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:

'''The move away from Wikia:'''
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki:Community Portal/Complaints]]

'''Our policy on having ads in the wiki:'''
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads]]

'''The Bookworm database-crash:'''
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Damage Control Central]]
* [[Project:Bookworm Crash]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving2]]

'''The server move:'''
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2]]

{{chapters
|title=Community Portal Archives
|content=*[[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive1|Archive 1]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive2|Archive 2]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive3|Archive 3]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive4|Archive 4]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive5|Archive 5]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive6|Archive 6]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive7|Archive 7]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive8|Archive 8]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive9|Archive 9]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive10|Archive 10]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive11|Archive 11]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive12|Archive 12]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive13|Archive 13]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive14|Archive 14]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive15|Archive 15]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive16|Archive 16]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive17|Archive 17]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive18|Archive 18]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive19|Archive 19]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive20|Archive 20]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive21|Archive 21]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive22|Archive 22]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive23|Archive 23]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive24|Archive 24]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive25|Archive 25]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive26|Archive 26]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive27|Archive 27]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive28|Archive 28]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive29|Archive 29]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive30|Archive 30]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive31|Archive 31]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive32|Archive 32]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive33|Archive 33]]
}}

== Quotes ==
{{note|This discussion was moved from [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Damage Control Central#Quotes]].}}

Quotes now seem to look like this:

{{quote|Freedom is the right of all sentient beings|Optimus Prime}}

when IIRC before the crash they look like this:

{{bigquote|Freedom is the right of all sentient beings|Optimus Prime}}

Now, it seems we can get the second result using the <nowiki>{{bigquote}}</nowiki> template instead of the basic <nowiki>{{quote}}</nowiki> template that is currently populating most of the pages.

I'm of the opinion that the bigquote look is much more pleasing to the eye and it also seemed to be the norm before the crash. Should we change the quotes to bigquotes on individual pages or just have someone with template knowledge make a change there? --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 23:29, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
:Discussion on [[Template_talk:Quote]] suggests that bigquote is the old style and quote is the new style. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:37, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
::Mind you I didn't ''ask'' anyone before swapping styles-- the intention was to give people a chance to evaluate the new look, but we only had it for a few days before the crash... so I don't think anyone noticed. :p
::It's my opinion that the old quote template took up too much space-- which is find for a single quote at the top of an article when you want to make a big thing of it, but I thought ''most'' uses of the template would look nicer with s smaller visual footprint. (Plus the html is more contextual.)
::Some people seem to dislike the chevron-style quoting... it's consistent with what, at the time, were our new reference templates-- also lost in the crash. The real appeal, to me, is that it lets you put quotes ''inside'' the quote template (such as an exchange between characters) without looking weird. The way we ''used'' to do that was multiple quote templates in a row, which (being oversize already) resulted in a massive on-screen footprint.
::If the consensus is to switch to the bigQuote format for all quotes instead of the smaller one, I guess that's the community's perogative... but I'm gonna argue against it until that decision is made.
::I ''like'' bitQuote-- it's great if you want a quote to be a big thing. Most of the time you don't. When you do-- why not just use <nowiki>{{bigquote}}</nowiki>? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:48, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
:::Ahhh, my mistake! I coulda sworn I'd seen quote in use longer! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:55, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

::Why I don't like "quote":
::#It's ugly.
::#It's '''bigger''' than bigQuote. That seems to defeat the whole point.
::#Single guillemots ''don't get used as quotation marks in English'' and so '''they don't parse as quotation marks'''.
::#It's '''incredibly''' ugly.
::#And finally-if-slightly-tangentially, there's a conscious effort, it seems, to change all "bigquotes" to "quotes", which defeats the whole point of having two templates.
::Definite vote to revert - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:35, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

I vote against the revert. I do not like the old quote style, as noted on the above-linked discussion page. All we need to do is change the guillemots to quote marks and it's fine by me. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 04:08, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
In accordance with the general wishes of the community, the quotes have been changed from guillemots to standard quotation... though I think it looks terribly ''silly'' that way. You can see just how silly over at [[Template_talk:Quote]]. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:57, 10 April 2009 (EDT)
:Well, one day after updating the quote template, I finally ran into ''exactly'' the scenario I was talking about in regards to quotes within quotes. I need to quote this passage (which includes but is not composed exclusively of dialog) for an article.
{{quote|"Farewell Optimus prime," [Starscream] whispered to himself. "Time for Endspark."|[[Starscream (Movie)|Starscream]]|[[Ghosts of Yesterday]] p280}}
:That looks absolutely retarded. The guillemots may have been ugly-- but they were at least ''clear''. And none of the user suggestions (including [[User:Abates]] idea of using multiple parameters for a series of quotes) applies here-- because the text is ''inline''.
:You all suck. Does anyone have any suggestions ''other'' than guillemots to make that look less retarded? Because <nowiki>{{bigquote}}</nowiki> looks even ''worse''. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 02:53, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
::[http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp Rule four] suggests it should look like this:
{{quote|'Farewell Optimus prime,' [Starscream] whispered to himself. 'Time for Endspark.'|[[Starscream (Movie)|Starscream]]|[[Ghosts of Yesterday]] p280}}
::although you could also use ‘ and ’ maybe? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:33, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
:::I have restore the guillemots as an ''optional flag.'' (style=2) The entire ''point'' of using a non-english quotation mark was to avoid conflicts with English quotation marks, so the guillemots seem like a good fallback position when there is a conflict.
{{quote|'Farewell Optimus prime,' [Starscream] whispered to himself. 'Time for Endspark.'|[[Starscream (Movie)|Starscream]]|[[Ghosts of Yesterday]] p280|style=2}}
:::This necessitated html and css changes, so some quotes may look funny for the next 24 hours or so until the pages de-cache. (They'll preview properly, and if you save them they'll look right... but left on their own they will re-cache with the updated <nowiki>{{quote}}</nowiki> HTML in short order, so don't bother.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:50, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

::Uh, why not take the easy route. '''Leave out the opening and closing quotation marks when you post''', and the template fills them in. i.e.,
{{quote|Farewell Optimus prime," [Starscream] whispered to himself. "Time for Endspark.|[[Starscream (Movie)|Starscream]]|[[Ghosts of Yesterday]] p280}}
::There you go, simple and doesn't involve guillemots that don't parse for anyone. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 05:01, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
:::What a lovely mix of smart and dumb quotes you have created. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 05:46, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
::::Given the use of a monospaced font, it doesn't make sense to use "smart" quotation marks anyway... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 07:24, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

:I prefer the old style quotes. Nobody can make me use the new ones. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 06:09, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
::I agree, for all the reasons that SanityOrMadness listed above (especially points 1, 2 and 4)[[Special:Contributions/81.108.237.26|81.108.237.26]] 13:44, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
::I completely don't care about this discussion, but I must take the time to point out that it's "guillemet". "Guillemot" is a bird, which is decidedly not relevant to this discussion. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 03:49, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I don't think the normal quotes show up properly in IE6 and a normal quote overlaps an image on http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Protoform so that needs to be fixed or bigquote restored.[[Special:Contributions/81.108.237.26|81.108.237.26]] 11:08, 22 May 2009 (EDT)
:That's a note, not a quote. The site unfortunately has plenty of problems in IE6, mostly caused by Microsoft's crappy rendering engine. A few of them linger in IE7 too... We really need to come up with a replacement for the messageboxes which doesn't lose the right-hand edge for one thing. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:48, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

== Redirects while editing ==

Go to [[User:Derik/Sandbox7]], hit edit, then ''preview''. (Hitting shift-refresh might be required to clear out your CSS cache if the effect isn't apparent.)

Links to redirects are highlighted ''in preview mode only''. If it's not highlighted, you know you're pointing to an actual page rather than a redirect. Should probably make it easier to just ''guess'' on a lot of links while still being assured you're picking valid ones.

(Pink is a terrible color to use for this. Any suggestions on how this should be styled? Sparkle-background?) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:46, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
:Would making them simply underlined be too subtle? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:15, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
::I worry it's too subtle. What about this?
::If that's too subtle I could break out the sparkling text and have the wiki chant "Septus, Dominus!" every time you mouse over it...-[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:30, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

Aw, what's wrong with the pink? I think that one's clear enough. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 00:39, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Not bad. At least this way it'll be easier to catch the redirects, applying changes when necessary. Although pink... I think it'd be better if the color was a different contrast if it's in the colored section of the templates (as in the episode/comic templates). --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 01:34, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:Abates suggested underlining... since the redirects ''only'' show up that way when in preview mode, I think it'd be a good idea to have multiple visual indications. (I don't think the previous/next links on the comicnav, for example, will change color... because they already ''have'' a color set. If you have multiple indicators (color underline, etc...) chances are at least one will remain noticable no matter what happens.
:Does anyone hate the blinking? (It's a firefox-only style.) Normally I HATE anything that blinks because its distracting, but the whole point here is to be able to easily spot the redirects. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:58, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::Eh, blinking's fine. Not that of a biggy for me. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 02:08, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

::It's only in the preview and not in the saved pages, so the blinking is ok so far as I'm concerned! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:15, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::I think the feature is great? But yes, I hate the blinking. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 10:03, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
This might be a good time to mention this, but just because a link is pink and flashy doesn't necessarily mean it is a mistake needing fixing, right? It is sometimes OK to use redirect links. If you are talking about Goldbug it is OK (and preferable in my opinion) to link to [[Goldbug (G1)]] and let the redirect do the work. I think having it stand out so much would tend to have editors feel the need to clean them all out. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 10:17, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:::There is potential for that. I agree that sometimes redirects are okay... <nowiki>*shrug*</nowiki> -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:44, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

How about "safety orange" or yellow? Those are universal "danger/warning" colors. (And less puke-inducing for me than pink). I don't mind the blinking either, considering that the idea is that the indicator is ''supposed'' to annoy the hell out of you until you change it. (FWIW, the whole thing works fine in Opera 9.63, too.)

As for Starfield's comment, eh, I just don't see it 99% of the time. If I wanted to link to something like Goldbug or Rodimus Prime, I would do <nowiki>[[Bumblebee (G1)|Goldbug]]</nowiki> or <nowiki>[[Hot Rod (G1)|Rodimus Prime]]</nowiki> instead. About the only time I could see it useful is if you were doing linking related to a spoiler (like Longarm Prime vs. Shockwave, for instance), but even then you'd still only need to do it for a month at most. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:15, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:I don't personally see the sense in manually redirecting to Hot Rod when you are talking Rodimus Prime when there is perfectly valid actual redirect to use. You aren't talking about "Hot Rod". It is like word-linking that way, like you are trying to fake out the reader. "Rodimus Prime" is that character's name in that point of the story. I always thought that was the primary purpose of having redirects, and search boxes were secondary.
:Plus there is the added benefit of when you use the "what links here" page, you see what pages link to "Rodimus Prime", which is interesting information that is lost if everything links to "Hot Rod". - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 17:53, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::Because it's the same character. We say "Spike" or "Daniel", but link to their full name. If someone refers to Bumblebee as a "giant yellow Volkswagon robot" in something, we might use that phrasing in the synopsis, but we'd still link to Bumblebee, not to "giant yellow Volkswagon robot" as a redirect. Etc. It's not a fakeout, it's just using the proper contextual name in the text, but cutting out the middleman for the actual link.
::Redirects can make linking easier for editors who don't know immediately what the proper link might be, so we don't end up with accidental duplicate pages (or as a shorter way to link to something like an oft-used section link), but on the whole I think it's mostly useful for searches.
::In short, while not all redirect linking is something to worry about, per se, I don't see anything wrong with encouraging editors to hunt down the correct linkage, even in those sorts of edge cases. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:19, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:::"Goldbug" was a character in the comic [[Used Autobots]], the character was ''not'' "Bumblebee". In that way, it is different than using Spike's full name, or even [[Peter Parker]] vs [[Spider-Man]]. I think a link on the [[Used Autobots]] article to <nowiki>[[Bumblebee (G1)|Goldbug]]</nowiki> is incorrect because there was no "Bumblebee" in the story. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 18:36, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::::And yet, Bumblebee and Goldbug don't have separate articles, because we treat them as being the same character. *shrugs a little* I don't ''care'' either way, really, and wouldn't consider it worth worrying about if someone linked to Goldbug, I just don't see that as more correct. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:47, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::Bumblebee/Goldbug is the same character. That is ''why'' I think it is OK to link to "Goldbug", even more correct to do so when you are talking about Goldbug. "Goldbug" is not a nickname for "Bumblebee", Goldbug is that character, at that point in the story. The article could be named "Goldbug (G1)" with Bumblebee redirecting to it or "Bumblebee/Goldbug", but for our, somewhat arbitrary, naming rules. I don't disagree with the naming rules, but just because the article is called "Bumblebee" doesn't mean that that always linking to "Bumblebee" is correct. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:00, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::And yet, even if you link to Goldbug, when you click on the link, you still end up at a page titled "Bumblebee (G1)". Is the little "redirected from" note really that crucial a difference? (Especially since the intro mentions the Goldbug change right at the top anyway.) It just seems like a difference that makes no difference to me. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:05, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Yes, when you link to Goldbug, you end up at the right spot, so why the big push to not link to Goldbug when you are talking about Goldbug? And yes, in some way I like seeing "redirected from", it lets me know that Goldbug is just as correct but the title is called "Bumblebee" out of convenience. And don't forget about the "What links here" feature. It is a little useful being able to sort out the Goldbug references. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:19, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::Someone requested I link-fix a bunch of minor variants of Hot Rod/Rodimus Prime ot all point to "Hot Rod (G1)". Instead I split them, pointing to "Hot Rod (G1)" and "Rodimus Prime (G1)" as appropriate-- in case we one day decide to split the articles like we do Megatron/Galvatron.
::::::The same principle applies. A split is ''unlikely'', but this way if we ''do'' split the articles, all the links are already pointing to the appropriate destination, instead of having to sort through 500+ incoming links ''by hand'' (that's abotu the number Hot Rod has...) to figure out which need to go where. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:57, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

::::::::''Is the little "redirected from" note really that crucial a difference?''
::::::::For me, yes, it kinda is. It lets me know that the powers-that-be have decided that "Goldbug" is heavily subordinate to the character of Bumblebee, that they are well and truly one and the same, that there's not some other Goldbug article out there that I'm missing. That in itself is a significant bit of information, even before I've started reading the text. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 20:09, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

I think that the "What Links Here" issue is a fair point. But IMHO if you need the little "redirected from" note to tell you're in the right place instead of just by reading the intro, you're either lazy or the intro needs rewriting. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:14, 22 April 2009 (EDT) 
Edit: Realized I should mention that I'm liking the blinky thingy so far... it used to be annoying having to click through every new link I was adding to make sure it was the proper direct link instead of a redirect. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:18, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
:We should have one standard for linking or not linking to redirect pages. I much prefer being able to link to redirect pages and not get reverted, but I would go along with the other way if that is the standard. I started a draft proposal for a standard to be added to the style guide at my [[User:Starfield/Redirect linking|sandbox]]. Please feel free to comment or edit it or add reasons for/against. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 10:51, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

==Franchise identifier consistency==
At the moment, we have 34 "G1" articles with an identifier of a specific Japanese sub-franchise to distinguish them from articles on usually Western/G1 material. We also have about 9 "G1" articles who use a different kind of identifier, on basis that the Japanese continuities are G1. 
This already led to a bit of moving around with the Grandus article between (G1) and (ROC) when the Animated guy was introduced. To prevent that happening with the Dai Atlas, Sky Garry and possibly Cancer articles, I'd like to have the community make a decision on how to deal with the (G1) identifier vs the (Headmasters), (Masterforce), (Victory), (Zone), (ROC) and (OC) identifiers vs whatever else can be/is used as identifier. 
My preference would be to use the Japanese sub-franchise identifiers. Simple and in line with the whole "from the (Japanese franchise) portion of the G1 continuity" on top of those pages. For convenience, here's a list of the moves it would mean:
*Sandstorm (Autobot) -> Sandstorm (G1) (Note: we have a SG Sandstorm now, so (Autobot) it can't stay anyway.)
*Sandstorm (Decepticon) -> Sandstorm (OC)
*Falcon (Predator) -> Falcon (G1)
*Falcon (Micromaster) -> Falcon (OC)
*Ricochet (G1 Autobot) -> Ricochet (Headmasters)
*Metrotitan (G1) -> Metrotitan (Zone)
*Grandus (G1) -> Grandus (ROC)
*Star Saber (G1) -> Star Saber (Victory)
*Joe (Micromaster) -> Joe (ROC)
*Circuit (Action Master) -> Circuit (G1)
*Circuit (Micromaster) -> Circuit (OC)
*Convertor (Micromaster) -> Convertor (OC)
*Convertor (Recyclon) -> Convertor (G1), but I'm in favour of leaving this one as (Recyclon) because all other Recyclons with an identifier use (Recyclon).
Thoughts? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 03:48, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

:Sky Garry etc... all fall under (G1.) Widest possible identifier when there's no conflict.
:This confuses people because we use specific franchises for UT characters... but the UT has SO MUCH name overlap it'd be pointless-- no one would have the (UT) identifier even if it was standard. G1 has little enough name overlap internal to itself we can make (G1) the default.
:So it's inconsistent--but it's at least ''consistently'' inconsistent. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 06:55, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
::Diver, Planet X, Hydra, maaaaybe Overlord... No, we're not consistently inconsistent either. And now I'm only looking at G1 West vs Japan. With BW, we do seem to be consistent in acknowledging its Japanese sub-franchises in identifiers. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 07:20, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

::What's this "widest possible identifier," Derik? Didn't we go through that huge "Swarm (G1)" debate (which seems to have been ''completely lost'' in the Bookworm crash, fantastic) to cement the franchise-of-origin rule forever and ever amen? The only question here is: What counts as a separate franchise? To my mind, ''Zone'' bears about the same relationship to G1 as G2 does. And, as the Swarm debate established, G2 is never ever G1 as far as parentheticals are concerned. The UT example has nothing to do with what you said and everything to do with our one simple rule. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 00:21, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::...I don't remember anymore. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:31, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::At least remember to curse the name of Bookworm for three to seven generations. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 00:59, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::Side note: Actually, the bit of the discussion that was on my User Page subpage isn't lost. I just didn't upload it anywhere because we never actually determined a good permanent place to move it to, so I didn't know ''where'' to upload it to. After a quickie Google search, it turns out there's still a good cache file for the Insecticon Swarm talk page, too. Anyhoo. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 02:19, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::Hey, whatever you can find and restore, please do. The biggest value of preserving a debate like that is never having to go through it again. I'd say you should re-make your Sandbox and its Talk page exactly as they were before. I don't think a more "permanent" place is necessary; it's an aborted experiment, so it can stay on an "experimental" page. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 03:11, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

:::::I'm for moving those pages. Except for "OC" since it's based on a bad translation of a Japanese title. 合体大作戦 (''Gattai Daisakusen'') means "Great Combination Operation". Everybody who knows this, including me, just has been too lazy to correct it. (And Derik, the punctuation for a sentence is out of the parentheses. I'm not sure why you consistently make that mistake.) [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:54, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::Then maybe this is a good moment to correct it? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 03:55, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Well, problem is that "Operation Combination", as incorrect as it is, is what the majority of English people know it as. And then what to have the disambiguation parentheses as? "(GCO)"? I would prefer to have it as "Gattai Daisakusen", but my opinion of forgoing unofficial translations is decidedly unpopular. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:13, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Then it depends on what this wiki cares more about: helping people find information or providing them with the correct information. By what you're saying, I'd say Operation Combination should become a redirect to the correctly named article. And from there, I don't think (OC) is going to be anymore clear on what continuity it represents than (GCO) or (GD). I don't think many will immediately guess "OC" stands for Operation Combination, and that's also not the point of identifiers. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 08:21, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I'm in favor of using the Japanese sub-franchise names. I checked Beast Wars and we are using the sub-franchise names for that, (BWII), (BWN) so this would be consistent. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 08:51, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Except as someone (Interrobang?) keeps pointing out-- that's problematic in itself. There was no BWII Toyline. There was a BWII cartoon... and a Beast Wars Toyline. Japan considers all 4 BW series paer of 1 toyline franchise, much like Generation 1. (This argument hasn't received a lot of traction, but I'm bringing it up because it seems relevant.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:19, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::FortMax brought it up at least twice. One could argue that since we focus on fiction, we should base our disambiguation system on it, but I dunno how to reconcile that with [[Cryotek (RID)]]. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:13, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::Or [[Sideways (RID)]]. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:34, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::Sideways at least got a RID bio. All Cryotek gets is a quote. (And what if they have RID fiction with Cryotek in it? RID and BM are in two different continuity families which means we have to split the articles and argharghargh) [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 19:19, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::Disambiguating by fiction has been argued. It doesn't work/help. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:52, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::::<nowiki>*bump*</nowiki> So, I like Geewunling's proposal. Objections? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:14, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::The Wiki calls Headmasters, Beast Wars II, etc. "franchises." I didn't know the weren't until just now. It seems useful enough to do so, even if it isn't 100% historically accurate. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:07, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

== Technical question: Firefox and history pages ==

Is anyone else running the latest version of Firefox and having trouble with the history pages? I'm running Firefox 3.0.10 and when I look at, say, the [http://tfwiki.net/w2/index.php?title=Optimus_Primal&limit=500&action=history Optimus Primal history page], Firefox locks up for half a minute while it runs the javasript to hide half of the radio buttons. It does it on two different computers running the same version of Firefox, but I don't have the same problem on Wikipedia or Wikia. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:56, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
:Oh wow, that ''was'' a pretty nasty stutter I got when I tried to reproduce your issue. Same version, same results.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 21:00, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::Ayep, same here. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:02, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
:::Issue also reproduced on my home PC, which has more get up and go than my workstation, with Firefox 3.5 beta 4.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 22:34, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::::Ditto on my notebook and tower unit. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 23:06, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::::...interesting. Why just firefox? (Clearly the 500+ items are an issue here-- but Safari has no problem with 500 items.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:26, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::I'd be curious to know as well. I specifically tried it again with the beta release because it uses a different (and supposedly more efficient) Javascript engine.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 23:30, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::And why only here and not on Wikipedia? Is there that much of a change in the Javascript between MediaWiki 1.12 and 1.14? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:32, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

Dropped down to Firefox 2...20 there to test, and clicking the radio buttons doesn't take very long, but the page DOES lock up for a while on initial load. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:28, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
:And FF 1.5.10 behaves as-FF2. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:38, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

== Bad images ==

My scanner is a piece o' crap. Is it better to upload dark and grainy pictures with a "badimage" tag or just put up a "picsneeded" tag? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 21:38, 3 May 2009 (EDT)
:Depends. With recent comic stuff, I think "pics needed" would be better, as there's a good chance that someone else will have the issue (or can find scans, *cough*). I replaced all the Defiance ones, for instance. If you have in mind specific scenes you would have scanned, you can always leave a suggestion in the picsneeded tag or on the talk page.
:On the other hand, for stuff that's old or rare, where it might be a choice between a bad image or never having an image, IMHO a bad image is better than nothing.
:(If you ever replace your scanner, I recommend the Canon MP210. I use it with Irfanview, and god I love the thing. Prints like a charm, too.) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:00, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

== New User Template ==

I remember... someone before the crash (FortMax maybe?) suggesting the idea of a template we can stick on the talk pages of new users to welcome them. I rather liked the idea, so I started a mockup idea here: [[User:Jeysie/NewUser]] Any ideas for a pic, info to add/change, etc?

Also, I noticed we don't have a New Users log enabled the way Wikia does... if we do create this sort of thing, having that sort of log would be helpful. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:21, 4 May 2009 (EDT)
:We'd need to either upgrade to MediaWiki 1.14 or install [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Newuserlog the extension] to get the new users log. It would be ''very'' useful, I'm thinking. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:35, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

== Screencap templates ==

Er... you know we can ''edit'' the text that appears on the file upload screen. Anyone got a list of screencap templates?

(I think you might even be able to set them up for one-click adding.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:37, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
:They are all listed at [[Transformers Wiki:Images]], to my knowledge. I added all the ones I knew of.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 20:42, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
::[[User:Derik/Sandbox7|This]] is what I'm looking at. It's kinda fugy. Anyone else want to take a whack at it? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:16, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

I'm also working at templating the comics images:
*{{tl|MarvelUScover}} (Marvel US G1), {{tl|HMcover}} (Marvel Headmasters mini) and {{tl|MarvelG2cover}} are maxed out.
*I ''think'' I've got all the extant & relevant images for {{tl|MarvelG2interior}} - although I can't absolutely swear to it
*I'm currently working as and when I have the chance on moving the Marvel US G1 interiors and HM interiors to {{tl|MarvelUSinterior}} and {{tl|HMinterior}} from a variety of copyright tags and the absence thereof (including the ones that lost their descriptions in the Bookworm Incident)
Like I say, the covers are maxed out, but there's always the chance that other interiors will be uploaded (Walky's done a few recently), and it would help if they were added too. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:58, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
:Propose a visually compact way of doing so. ;) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:10, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
{|border cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5" width="100%"
|-
!width=50%|General
!width=50%|Comic Cover
|-valign="top"
|width=50%|
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{hastak}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{comicinterior}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{comiccover}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{screencap}}</nowiki></charinsert>
|width=50%|
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelUScover|(description)|(issue number)|(issue title)|(artist list)|(last two digits of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{HMcover|(description)|(issue number)|(issue title)|(artist list)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelG2cover|(description) |(issue number) |(issue title) |(artist list) |(last digit of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
|-
!width=50%|Screencap
!width=50%|Comic Interior
|-valign="top"
|width=50%|
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{titlecard}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{G1cap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(last digit of premiere year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{RIDcap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(last digit of year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{BWcap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(last digit of year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{BMcap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{TFAcap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
|width=50%|
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelUSinterior|description=|issueno=|storytitle=|pageno=|panelno=|panelnos=|script=|line-art=|pencils=|inks=|colours=[[Nelson Yomtov]]|letters=|help=|year=(last two digits of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{HMinterior|description= |issueno= |storytitle= |pageno= |panelno= |panelnos= |letters= |help=}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelG2interior|description= |issueno= |storytitle= |pageno= |panelno= |panelnos= |script= |pencils= |inks= |colours= |letters= |help= |year=(last digit of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
|}
...I don't know about visually compact, exactly, but considering how many image templates we have, I'm not sure "visually compact" is possible... --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 23:06, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
:Well, it's something to work on. Unfortunately the '''charinsert''' plugin doesn't have any way to display s short piece of text while inserting a long one.
:There's a rabid wolverine scrabbling around the back of my brain licking carnival pennies... I feel like when he comes down off his ''filth high'' he might have some ideas about Stupid CSS Tricks to make that less loathesome. (Failing that we could do something with Javascript, but it'd be a bitch to update so that's a last choice.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:35, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::Yeah, it's pretty much the opposite... you can stick a description in the tooltip, but the actual text has to be visible. I honestly can't think of any way to do it in pure CSS without messing up the clickability of it.
::I guess we ''could'' just link to the plain vanilla templates with no parameters, but I kind of want to encourage people to be as thorough as possible with their info.
::I think we could also use a way to include a link to each template's page in case one needs to read the instructions. But I had trouble coming up with a way that's brief, clear, and won't get mistaken for the inserto-text link. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 01:53, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::Addendum: We could go for a fake form with OPTION or a CSS-based drop-down list, but I think those would both need JS. (Admittedly the CSS based drop-down would need less JS, and only for the style, not the functionality.) (Why do I always have extra thoughts right ''after'' hitting the "submit" button?) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 01:59, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
:::What about the Boilerplate plugin that was suggested a while back? Would that be more suitable for this sort of thing? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:04, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::::No, unfortunately... it only works for articles, not on file pages. (At least, if there is a way to get it to work on file pages, I couldn't figure it out.) Although I still think we should give that extension a whirl at some point, it won't help out with this specific thing. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 02:07, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::::My Wolverine stopped tripping long enough to say "<nowiki>{{MarvelG2}}</nowiki>:<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelG2interior|description=|issueno=|storytitle=|pageno=|panelno=|panelnos=|script=|pencils=|inks=|colours=|letters=|help=|year=(last digit of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>."
::::He is a filthy, FILTHY beast, and the hackiness of that CSS shames me. (And it's still not ideal code anyway.)
::::I think Javascript is a likely fate here. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:03, 12 May 2009 (EDT)

== Upload Preview ==

Over at [[Template_talk:Screencap#Since_we_got_derailed.|Template talk:Screencap]], Mr. Bates (or possibly Doug-- I can't keep them straight) suggested we look at the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/Scripts/Upload_Preview Upload Preview script]-- a pure javascript solution to the lack of previews during image upload (which the MW software doesn't naively support.)

The script is currently available for anyone who has the [[User:Derik/kired tools|kired tools]] plugins installed. Please report your thoughts, and if there are any problems or conflicts. If user response is positive, I'm going to recommend the relevant code be added to the Wiki's common.js file. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:59, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
:It works great - very handy (I was the one who suggested it, BTW) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 05:59, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
::I finally figured out why I have such trouble telling you and Doug apart.
::I'm actually trying to tell "apog," "apog" and "abates" apart under the impression they are ''two'' people. '''No wonder''' I'm confused. -[[User:Deceptitran|Deceptitran]] 12:37, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
:::With no reported problems from the ppl running Kired Tools, this plugin has been moved to the common file, and is now loaded for all Wiki users.
:::So if anything unexpected breaks tonight please report it here, since the preview script will be the likely suspect. (But we don't expect it to.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:53, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

== (comic issue) vs. (issue) ==

Is there any protest against eliminating (comic issue) as a disambiguation parenthetical? Near as I can tell, it's totally redundant with the shorter, simpler (issue) parenthetical. (again, unless there's a "Child's Play (socioeconomic issue)" article that I'm unaware of...) -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 10:52, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
:No protest here. I was planning on doing it someday. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 14:58, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

== ROTF spoilers from novelizations and other adaptations ==

So, is information from the novelizations off-limits until the movie is in theaters, or what? (If so, we need to protect the hell out of a bunch of pages) --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 22:58, 20 May 2009 (EDT)
:It was discussed [[Talk:Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)|here]] and decided that no, they are not off limits, but please date the spoiler tags on character pages to a week after the film comes out. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 23:04, 20 May 2009 (EDT)
::I've been stubbing in articles where I feel it's appropriate... but I've also been tailoring my content to avoid major spoilers-- more to have the infrastructure in place and ready to fill in then the movie drops.
::(And realistically speaking, there's going to be a flood of detailed spoilers, including lists of every fatality and major surprise on the 10th-- the film premieres in Japan 18 days before it does here.)
::Incidentally, I don't ''trust'' the tie-in novels. Characters vanish suddenly, details are glossed over or changed... I harbor a suspicion that certain plot details are being kept out of the books-- or at least obscured-- to prevent fans from being 100% certain about anything. The climax of the two movie adaptions I've read so far are ''different'', they have '''noticeably''' divergent outcomes. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:12, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:::I do not want '''''any''''' novelization and adaptation spoilers on character pages or other related articles. Stuff from adaptations should stay on their respective articles. Most of my work on the wiki at the moment is updating and maintaining movie articles, so it would be a personal inconvenience to me if I had to avert my eyes every time I come across the ''Revenge of the Fallen'' movie sections of character articles. Not only that, but there will be people who will wander onto this wiki with the intention of refreshing themselves on the movie or to read prequel stuff leading up to ROTF, but have no intention of reading up on plot points of the movie itself. And, as Derik says, novelizations and adaptations often differ wildly from the final movie script.
:::I think it's more than bloody fair to expect that we only post ROTF-related stuff on the day of the movie's release around the world, not before. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 00:59, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
::::That'd apply to the British Isles contingent? UK and Ireland are getting general release June 19. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 02:48, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::That's a good question. (I have no opinion, I'm spoiling myself by reading the novel.)
:::::IIRC, back during Animated season 2 we were observing a 1-week moratorium on character-page updates, which more-or-less covered the biggest broadcast markets.
* 10th - Japan premiere
* 24th - US Premiere
* 26th - UK Premiere
:::::Since the period we're talking about is just a 16 day span, I assume the same idea applies-- hold off until the 26th (possibly plus a few days) out of respect for other TF-fans. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:23, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::As Lonegamer ''just said'', it's out here in the UK on the 19th. And the rule for TFA S2 seemed to be that "as soon as it was first aired in English, be it in the UK, US or Canada (all three had 'world premieres in English' at different points), go for it". - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:02, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I think that the modifier in that situation, though, was the fact that as soon as said Animated episodes had aired in English ''anywhere'', high-quality encodes of them were promptly available to download for anybody anywhere who wanted them, making it all pretty much fair game. Information could be added, and editors would not be left unable to verify that information, as they could download and see the episode themselves. The movie won't have that - US editors simply wont know if what anon IPs add is true or not, because they won't be able to see the movie to verify it and will have to operate on good faith, which is laudible, but we saw how well that worked with the Dubai Animated debalce and "Animated Waspinator". While I'll be seeing it opening day here in the UK, I know that I, personally, wasn't planning to add anything about it to the wiki until it screened in the US. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 11:03, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::::What Chris said. "Airing in English" was a polite euphemism for "we can see it too." It doesn't apply for a 2-and-a-half hour theatrical movie. American fans will still be in the dark until the 26th, and as far as I'm concerned the wiki should honor that. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 11:04, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::''While I'll be seeing it opening day here in the UK, I know that I, personally, wasn't planning to add anything about it to the wiki until it screened in the US.''
:::::::::''American fans will still be in the dark until the 26th''
:::::::::Can I take it that the UK and US premiere dates above are switched?--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 14:02, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::It's now been said '''thrice''' in this thread that the UK/Eire date is the 19th. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]]
:::::::::::Beg your pardon, then. It was late, and I wasn't paying close enough attention.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 13:08, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

::::::::::::Damn Americans think they're the centre of the Universe. If I was President of the US, I'd invade the UK and Ireland to protect American Transfan interests. 14:56, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

I read the novel and have this to say: As much detail as is in it, there's no doubt its different. First of all: there's alot more detail so that means some of the slower parts are probably shorter in the movie (novels often do that anyways so no problems there) and also: in one chapter it leads up to fight and then on the very next chapter all of a sudden Devestator appears and is fighting already as if he's been there the whole time (meaning they skipped a chunk of that fight)So as is obvious, there will be differences.--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]] (or was it 9?)<<not that it matters

==Forgive my attitude but==
what the flying f***! What happened to my account. I made one, I even remember what it looked like. Where is it and why can't I login and my username no longer exsists! What..the..hell. I've not signed in for a long time but I still go here regularly and everything, don't tell me you autodeleted my account! I mean, I’ve been here when it was at Wikia, I moved with you guys here and even made a new account here! Hell, my old accounts on Wikia all got deleted, so please don’t tell me you guys stooped to their level and deleted my account as well! I’ve done nothing wrong, aside from giving the appearance of being inactive because I’ve not logged in within awhile, but so what? What right does that give you to delete my account? (and if by some means it does give you the right to do so, please provide a link proving that)--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]] (or was it 9?)<< not that it matters
:[[Transformers Wiki:Bookworm Crash]]. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 15:59, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
Thank you. I'll just make a new account then.-sighs- Forgive if I bothered any of you with what I just said.--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]]
::Don't worry, incoherent rage is the '''proper''' response to the Bookworm crash... you're just slowpoking. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 13:17, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

== Main page ==

[[Image:Mainpage_analytics-06-05-09.png|thumb]]
I'll just leave this here...

(I'll check in after work and see if anyone has thoughts, I sure do.)

Number are per-individual-link BTW-- so two separate links to the same location have their clickthroughs tallied separately. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 13:16, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
: In which we learn nobody clicks anything! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:21, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::The numbers on the page ''should'' add up to 100%. It's just that a few links get vastly more traffic than the others so they show up as 0%. That might represent a few hundred clicks-- the Main Page ''is'' our most frequented page. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 16:12, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::And people are obviously clicking on [[Kup (G1)]] as the page has gained a thousand hits and jumped 30 places in the Popular Pages list in the last week or so. Any idea what time frame the data covers? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:20, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::That was pretty much my thought, too. XD Although it is kind of interesting that some of the categories/continuities/series sections seem more popular than others... it's just hard to tell which ones, since the number pop-ups are in weird spots.
::I also notice that the "images" link in the Editing Tips is popular... and that apparently the fake disambiguation links get some clicks. XD Speaking of which, we really should write up some more of those to replace the rotating ones that got lost in the crash... --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 13:26, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::I may have sternly directed people to our Images policy page. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 13:49, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::It's the most common thing people get wrong, so it's also our most thorough policy document.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 14:05, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::About 8% of clicks on the main page are to our "anyone can edit" but up top-- which just takes people to anchors within the page. (The Editing tips section and the Holy Grails section, which do not themselves then collect a lot of clicks.)
:::::This leads me to think that people who click on these things do ''not'' get what they want/are expecting. We should look at changing those links somehow.
:::::Another 8 % of clicks on the main page are on the "home" logo in the upper left (which takes you... back to the main page) and the "main page" link in the nav toolbar.
:::::If there's agreement, I'd like to set it so that the "Main Page" link in the navigation on the left is grayed out when you're on the main page, so it's clearer that "you're here." (The link would still be usable, it'd just have this visual indicator.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 16:10, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::We could simply de-link the "anyone can edit" links... they just seemed like a good way to get people to actually read our policies and what we need. Or maybe we could link that text directly to [[Help:Contents]] and get rid of the "Editing Tips" box altogether?
::::::I agree with the "Main Page" link being disabled when you're actually on the Main Page. It's pretty easy to do via CSS, and you can also change the cursor to be a regular arrow in CSS to further de-emphasize the links and say, "Hey, dude, you're already ''at'' the Main Page."
::::::Although I had actually thought that 8% of clicks was to the Recent Changes page, which would have made more sense to me. The oddness of where the stat boxes are in relation to the actual page links does make it hard to analyze. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:45, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::AS FAR AS I CAN TELL (which in a few cases - the continuities box especially - is less than 100%), these are all the numbers >1.0%:
:::::::*Logo (goes to Main Page): 4.0%
:::::::*"Navigation" sidebar:
:::::::**Main Page link in sidebar: 4.0%
:::::::**Recent changes: 5.3%
:::::::*Fake disambig:
:::::::**"anyone can edit" (goes to "editing-tips" subpage): 4.0%
:::::::**"add to" (goes to "holy-grails" subpage): 4.0%
:::::::*Categories:
:::::::**Characters: 1.8%
:::::::*Continuities:
:::::::**Live-action film: 1.4%
:::::::**Full Series Info: 4.0%
:::::::*Also, the cumulative links to the ROTF page appear to be >1%, even if no individual link is.
:::::::Thoughts on that... firstly, the links TO the main page ON the main page need to be nerfed. Not greyed out, killed. The logo can be just a logo, and the main page link can be replaced or removed. Secondly, there is no way in hell we should delink the stuff in the fake disambig, but redirecting to other places may be a better idea - take the "editing tips" box and turn it into a full page, linked from there (And from the ET box). Not quite so sure on "add to" - a list of stubs that we want filled out, perhaps? The "Holy Grails" box is too specific for 99.9% of potential editors, I expect. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:32, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

== Useful Extensions ==

Now that we have a working server again and more control over the techie side of things, I wonder if we should start up a list of extensions to install that might be useful.

My own picks:

*[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Newuserlog Extension:Newuserlog] to keep track of new users so we can give them a [[User:Jeysie/NewUser|friendly greeting]]. As opposed to our current status of new people not usually getting much of a "greeting" unless they screw up. :>
*[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:MultiBoilerplate Extension:MultiBoilerplate] to provide a drop-down menu of skeleton codes for new pages. I find this ''incredibly'' useful on my own wiki for being able to easily keep different types of pages all laid out the same, by inserting full page structures into new pages so you can then just fill in the information. For example, [http://trinsic.alienharmony.com/Template:D20RulesPlayercharacterpage here's one structure page] I use to give an idea of the sort of code you can inset.

:Mine:
:*[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Title_Blacklist Extension:Title Blacklist] blocks creation of pages depending on a regular expression.

:I will note that Newuserlog is built into MediaWiki 1.14.0, but we haven't discussed upgrading the software yet... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:25, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

::Honestly, those "friendly greetings" drive me spare. I'd really rather not have them.
::Suggestions:
::*[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:KeepYourHandsToYourself Extension:KeepYourHandsToYourself] (prevents users or anons editing User:* pages other than their own.) [Beta] - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:47, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::I'd be fine with blocking anons-- but I ''have'' been known to reach out and tweak someone's user page from time to time.
:::(Not that we've really had a problem with either.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:02, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::Why do they drive you spare? Giving new users a heads-up regards our policies ''before'' we have to slap a nastygram user notice on their page seems like a good idea to me. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:54, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::They drive me spare getting them while doing IP-edits. And chances are you'll get them again, and again, and again... -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:02, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Oh! No, no, no. I didn't mean doing them automatically on all new users, I was thinking, like, putting the greeting ''manually'' only for new ''registered'' users. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 20:09, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

==Rise of the Chevy Autobots==
Allright, I finally got around to putting this up. This is everything I have saved from the "Rise of the Chevy Autobots" online game - flash files, HTML, etc. It comes to nearly 60mb.

[http://www.obscuretf.com/ChevyAutobotGame.zip Chevy Autobots]

Unfortunately, I am most likely missing the last week or two of the story, but I figure it's better than nothing. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] 14:18, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:Monzo- I luvers you...
:And AFIK the defeat of Mainframe himself never got a news update-- the epilogue was provided by the game itself. So you ''should'' have the most up to date version.
:Uh, I suppose there might have been a "he's weakening, keep at it" update, but that's pretty content-null. It'd be nice to know the date Mainframe went down... but again, it looks like you've got 99% of everything preserved here. :)~
:And now we can properly cite the Chevy Autobots being allspark mutations! (Or at least a result of Chevy's experimentation with Energon as an alternative fuel source.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:27, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

== Possible Relicensing? ==

So, Wikipedia is moving from the GFDL to a Creative Commons license, which will make it incompatible with most Wikia sites from then on. (Presumably; I haven't heard if Wikia at large or any of its individual wikis--like the old Transformers one-- are making the same transition.) Should TFWiki consider switching, too? Pretty much everyone outside the Wikipedia/Wikia family goes with CC, which is a lot simpler in a lot of ways than the GFDL.

[[wikipedia:GFDL#Compatibility with CC-BY-SA|Apparently, GFDL-licensed wikis can only make the change before August 1, 2009]]. And unlike them, we probably wouldn't have to worry about having added any content from non-wiki GFDL-licensed things, at least. And it would completely eliminate legal copying/pasting between this wiki and its rival. --[[User:Fleb|Fleb]] 17:47, 6 June 2009 (EDT)

:I would support this, at least tentatively. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:16, 6 June 2009 (EDT)
::On the surface, at least, it looks like a good move. It keeps the same free-info spirit, but is incompatible with Wikia's license ''and'' any info-quoting or copying from us further requires attributing the wiki, if I'm reading it right. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:18, 6 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Hmm. I thought about bringing this Creative Commons thing up awhile back, but I'm not Legal Smarts (S-M-R-T) enough to fully understand it. Perhaps our staff should comment on this? The final decision is probably theirs. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 04:06, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::I don't really have much to say, other than it sounds like a good idea. If nothing else, the legal terms of the GFDL are nightmarish at best and I'd be happy to never think of them again. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 14:02, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
IANAL, but [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update based on Wikimedia's page,] it ''looks'' like "relicensing" the site is just a matter of changing all the text that mentions "GFDL" now. The one requirement is that we're using [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html version 1.3.] [[Transformers Wiki:Copyrights]] doesn't specify a version, and neither does the edit page or the footer, so that's probably okay. (''[[Transformers Wiki:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License|If the Document does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published (not as a draft) by the Free Software Foundation.]]'') --[[User:Fleb|fleb]] 18:30, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::One thing that's confusing me, looking again at that - Wikipedia's new licensing structure seems confusing in that all non-imported-under-a-CC-licence content will still be dual-licensed under the GDFL. If we adopted that, Wikia could import from us, but we couldn't import from Wikia. CAN the GDFL be dropped completely? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:31, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:Oh, definitely. The dual-licensing is just ''Wikipedia's'' own, weird thing to keep the Free Software Foundation loyalists from bitching and Leaving Forever. (Those CC-only things should actually "poison" individual pages so they're not truly GFDL-licensable anymore without reverting, so they'll probably eventually drop it completely.) --[[User:Fleb|fleb]] 22:05, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

Which CC license would we use? Seems like [[wikipedia:Creative_Commons_licenses#Original_licenses|from the Wikipedia CC page]] that a by-nc-nd license would be what we're after? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:16, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:It would be [[wikipedia:Share-alike|CC-by-sa]]. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:23, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::That looks like a good idea to me. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:07, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Definitely By-SA -- If we do a No-Derivatives, how would we even edit any of our own pages? --[[User:Fleb|fleb]] 22:05, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Seems I misunderstood how the licensing applied. :) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:44, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

===ARE we going to relicence?===
So, are we going to do it, is it being investigated, or are we going to just leave it until the grace period expires and we have to stick with the GDFL after all? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:09, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:I vote we do it. Anyone else? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:14, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
::It seems to be a less onerous license, and one which we have a window of opportunity to switch to. I'd say go for it.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 20:18, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::+1 vote in favor of relicensing. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:29, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::: -1, I'm against it unless we find a copyright lawyer. The GFDL provides no provisions against re-use in commercial projects. While I'm all for 'Hasbro' poking around on this wiki and recycling bios/names/ideas/what-have-you, if someone else decides to redistribute this content for commercial purposes (for example, selling an iPhone/Android app that's basically an offline cache of the wiki,) I want to make sure that we're not on the hook for it. I get that Hasbro is turning a gleefully blind eye to us as long as we're just trying to stay alive as a volunteer effort, but if we end up attached to someone's attempt to profit off of our work, which is in itself a derivative work of at least a dozen various IP holders, the resulting storm of litigation would shut us down within hours. (And no, I am in fact the 'least' qualified person around to give advice on this situation. I'm just a paranoid freak.) --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 12:07, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

== Asking for permission to post links==

I'm the current Bureaucrat at [http://ghostbusters.wikia.com Ghostbusters Wiki], and there was interest in placing links to articles on this wiki to Ghostbusters wiki articles, and likewise placing links on Ghostbusters wiki to articles relating to content which has been brought up. I don't know a great deal of your wikis past dealings, other than wikia apparently kept your old wiki's content when you moved. Anyways, the wiki would rather reference to your present wiki than the one currently at wikia. We are hoping you wouldn't mind the links to our characters on pages related to the [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Race_with_the_Devil Race with the Devil] article. [http://ghostbusters.wikia.com/wiki/User:Devilmanozzy Devilmanozzy] 02:10, June 8, 2009 (EDT)

:Can you give a few examples of articles on your wiki which would benefit from having links to this site? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:37, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::IIRC it's whatshername's assistants-- the ones from the Earthforce story (Running with the Devil?) that Wildman based on the RGB models.
::(I personally have no problem with the links. Though I think this guy added 'em once, misformatted, and they got reverted.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 13:06, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::That wasn't Nozzy but Liberal Noob, while not logged in. I told the original guy to take a step back and mind their P's and Q's before we start crosslinking, especially since it was an anonymous IP at the time. But yeah, he wants to crosslink with Race the Devil and Susan Hoffman.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 13:43, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Only direct link between the Ghostbusters Cartoon and the G1 Transformers cartoon is [[Frank Welker]] sounded like one of his TF roles when he voiced a ghost from time to time. I a am sorry for my wanton linking and it will not happen again. --[[User:Liberal Noob|Liberal Noob]] 22:57, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::I meant which pages on the Ghostbusters wiki would benefit from having links on them to our wiki. I'm curious, because I regard myself as reasonably familiar with Ghostbusters, and I can't think offhand of any references to Transformers in it. Perhaps in one of the cartoons? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:55, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Thanks for the replies on this matter. A good user Liberal Noob had requested that I would more address this, apparently the mod needed to say something and form a partnership in order to have links posted related to one anothers material. To answer the question of what articles would be hyperlinked, I believe he was planning on linking to the animated pages for Peter Venkman, Egon Spengler, and Ray Stantz. Thats what I understand is being requested to being linked to.[[User:Devilmanozzy|Devilmanozzy]] 19:42, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::We're not wondering which pages on our wiki would link to your wiki. We were wondering which pages on your wiki would need to link to our wiki. We didn't know there ''were'' any Transformers references in any Ghostbusters media, and thus didn't know you'd need to link to us from your wiki. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:59, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::[[Race with the Devil]], [[Susan Hoffman]], [[Starscream's Ghost]], [[Horri-Bull]], and a few others. Links will be on is a article on [http://ghostbusters.wikia.com/wiki/Ghostbusters_Cameos Ghostbusters Cameos]. Note I believe that the section will be better built soon.[[User:Devilmanozzy|Devilmanozzy]] 20:21, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Seems like there's a few other connections in terms of voice actors ([[Tara Strong]], [[Frank Welker]], [[Maurice LaMarche]] etc) as well. I think linking between the two sites is a good idea. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:37, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Yeah I had noticed that too as I looked around here the last few days. Never knew how much Ghostbusters and Transformers had in common.[[User:Devilmanozzy|Devilmanozzy]] 23:40, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::While I'm broadly in favour of this, could you maybe change "[[Starscream's Ghost]]" to "[[Starscream (G1)|Starscream's ghost]]" - I understand you want to keep the ghost theme going but the first is a link to an unrelated episode of the cartoon series, rather than the character himself. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 07:02, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::OK Emvee, I fixed the link on the Ghostbusters wiki as you requested. Devilmanozzy, ''[[Star Wars]]'' also has a [[Darth Vader|lot in common]] with ''Transformers''. --[[User:Liberal Noob|Liberal Noob]] 14:52, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::We know, we got named an official friend of Wookiepedia about a week into the [[Project: Bookworm Crash]]. If we hadn't been scrambling to pick up the pieces, our pages would probably reflect this more. (I assume we'll integrate more when Clone Wars starts up again, since we love to attention-whore ourselves that way.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:56, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::::[http://www.therealeffingdeal.com/blog/dan-akroyd-ghostbusterhero/ Here is] an obscure crossover from [[The Real Effing Deal]]. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:09, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

== Quick Links? ==

You know, now that I think about it, one thing Wikia actually did do right was having some "Quick Links" on the sidebar. I find myself missing being able to quickly get to the main continuities/series without having to search or click to the Main Page first. (Especially now that there's lots o' ROTF toys to keep tabs on...)

Nothing extensive necessary; just one linkie thingy with a fly-out menu for our six main continuities and the full series list would probably work nicely. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 03:03, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

:I think notably M.Sipher *really* hated that because any time a cursor went within a parsec of the menu, it would pop out in an annoying manner. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 04:09, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::Wasn't just Sipher - it drove me nuts too. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 09:09, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Well, in that case, maybe just an extra sidemenu then, kind of like the "Campaign Navigation" box on [http://trinsic.alienharmony.com/Main_Page this sidebar]? I just figured that a fly-out menu would save space, but an extra link sidebar would work for me too.
:::But I'd definitely like something. As Abates points out below, we don't currently have any sidebar links for actually ''browsing''. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:47, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Could we make so that they're fly-out menus, but that they only fly-out if you actually click on the title? That would save room while avoiding things jumping out when you're waving the cursor around. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:11, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

:I think having a link on the sidebar for Revenge of the Fallen would be good too. While the Community portal and Recent Changes links are great for us Editors, they're not likely to be used much by casual visitors. We should be using the menu to draw attention to major articles. While I'm thinking about it, we could probably change the Main Page link to read "Transformers Wiki"... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:11, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

Would anyone object if I went ahead and popped a link to [[Revenge of the Fallen (film)|Revenge of the Fallen]] in the navigation menu? I'm thinking between "Main Page" and "Community portal". --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:44, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:I'm not of the upper brass but given the increasing coverage of ROTF as we come down the wire, it'd make the most sense. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 19:00, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

== We need a new adspace ==

The TFwiki on our new server is doing super mega amounts of bandwidth! (Note I've broken up the OPtimus Prime (G1) page, because, dude, that thing was a monster.) So, uh, I think we need to add a new adspace. One that's *above* the fold, since the ones we have are shoved down in the corner where no one can see them. What advertiser would want to dump loads of money on those? What I'm proposing is a 486x60 banner-shaped ad up above the "article/discussion/edit/history/delete/move/watch" links, nestled in between the Teletraan 1 image and the personal toolbar. (You know, OUTSIDE of the content.) If this is a terrible idea, I will also accept $5 donations. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:14, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:I've no qualms with that. That was one of the "acceptable" adspaces, if I recall from the old discussions.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 11:18, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::Long as they don't dance or talk or sing, that'll work. Are we actively pursuing advertisers these days? -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 11:22, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Well, "actively pursuing advertisers" is somewhat incompatible with our current ad setup. To put an ad on our site now, that requires signing up with Project Wonderful and bidding. This is good for us because it's mostly automated. If we were to set up a "real" in the traditional sense, we'd need a full-time ad pursuer to fill those spots. The best we can do in our current situation is to try to convince Big Bad Toy Store and its ilk to sign up for Project Wonderful. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:33, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:IIRC, above-the-article is what we wanted Wikia to switch ''back'' to. I have no objection. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:20, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:Works for me. How does Ant handle TFU.info's advertising? [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 12:35, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

:Doesn't bother me... but can we either put it ''under'' the personal bar, or somehow make it so the personal bar would wrap? Otherwise, I'm staring at the top of my screen and realizing that I'd have an annoying horizontal scroll bar afterwards whenever I'm logged in.
:I have to admit I'm kind of befuddled that we're apparently doing so much more traffic after the move than we were before, to the point of having all those initial problems because we weren't expecting it. Did the new server somehow improve our traffic, it is sheer coincidence that traffic increased for other reasons, or was it more like the old server wasn't keeping track of bandwidth or anything, so we had no idea how we were actually doing? --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:38, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::Hosting with Bookworm was cheap. I mean, he was doing it at-cost. Or would have, if he ever invoiced us. Now that we've moved on, we're purchasing hosting from people who actually want to make money off us. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 12:41, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Well, the money's part of it, but I was also thinking about how most of our initial operational troubles seemed to stem from having more traffic to deal with than we realized we were going to have, to the point of even having to run a caching setup I'm guessing we weren't running on the old server. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:45, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::The way Bookworm had his servers set up, it was difficult for him to separate out what was our traffic versus what was other traffic on the same server. He gave us an estimate which turned out to be wrong. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 12:55, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Aah, OK. Wasn't sure if it was something we needed to worry about or not. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 13:29, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I was kinda expecting this :( I'm cool with more banners, and I think you should beg us for money now and then. We may be able to help when we can. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 13:15, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Caching is what most mediawiki installations '''do.''' We happened to start off on the most resource-intensive wiki software imaginable, and any stats from Bookworm were not only inaccurate based on whatever he was doing in the logs, but also because back then, ''the wiki was constantly crashing.'' You get zero hits per hour when it's down, and no stats in the world would help clear ''that'' up. I'm still tweaking the hit stats, and it'll be at least a week before I can start extrapolating growth numbers, but suffice it to say, we're going to go over our current bandwidth limit before the month is out, and while we won't get shut down, we ''will'' get billed for overages. Think of it like a normal cellphone plan instead of a pre-paid one. --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:47, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

::Yeah, that's mainly what I thought Walky meant. Nestled between the personal bar and the article tabs seems like fertile ground for a banner ad.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 13:39, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
I've got the ad code ready to go, whenever we can edit the CSS or whatever to make room. Here is our awesome new placeholder "please bid here" graphic: [https://www.projectwonderful.com/imagewrapper.php?img=img/uploads/pics/20719-1244569575.jpg&rand=439981] --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:48, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:Looks good so far. Potentially odd question: are these particular dimensions popular with Project Wonderful?--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:55, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::The Leaderboard (700ishx90) and the Big Box (300x250) are the most popular sizes, but those would really ugly up our page. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:58, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::And now it has its first client! That was fast.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 01:52, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Ahhh, Dreamland Chronicles is awesome. I spent a week a few months back reading through their archives after following an ad on our sidebar. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:20, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::One interesting thing looking at the Project Wonderful stats is that our ad hits are ''stabilizing'' now, and they're stabilizing fairly high relative to where they were when the site was still spotty. That's got to look good for advertisers, and if the site holds up to the abuse that the film debut is going to subject it to that's only beneficial to us in the end.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:48, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

[[Image:Ptbar-notmeanttobehere.png|thumb|This = bad]]
Uh, I'm using Monobook, and as a result of this, the watchlist/preferences/etc bar has somehow ended up at the ''bottom'' of the page, just above the About Transformers Wiki/Powered by MediaWiki/etc... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:36, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:I got that on a couple of pages, too, and alt+F5ing didn't work. How I fixed it was I signed out and viewed those same pages as an anon. The userbar went back to where it should be, and it stayed there when I logged in again. - [[User:Magnus Maximus|Magnus Maximus]] 10:49, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::Tried that, didn't work.
::In fact, it's worse than I thought, because I didn't notice at first that the page/discussion/edit tabs have gone wandering too, and are floating around the place (the "discussion" and "edit" tabs are currently in the middle of this edit box, and I can't see the others anywhere). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:58, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::'''THE PROBLEM IS IN common.css'''.
:::The following CSS borks monobook. This is why you should use the specific stylesheets for each skin, NOT the common file:
<pre>
#p-personal {
position: relative;
}

#p-personal .pBody {
float: right;
}

#p-cactions {
position: relative;
}

#content {
margin-top: 16px !important;
position: relative;
}</pre>
:::-[[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:30, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

The new ad space at the top of the page, which was fine yesterday, is now looking screwy in Firefox, with the ad behind the top of the Autobot symbol in the logo and the tabs at the top of the bar. Like so: [[Image:Top-ad-screwy.jpg|thumb]] --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:43, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:Works fine for me in 3.0.10 and 3.5b99, both after clearing cache.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:47, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:I made some CSS modifications in response to SanityOrMadness's issue, which may cache improperly. Try a hard refresh/clearing your cache. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 16:51, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::Okay, clearing my cache fixed it. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 20:19, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

{{-}}

==Consolidate front page?==
[[Image:Newfrontpage062009.jpg|thumb]]
Man, that front banner is huge! Can it be smaller? And when we make it smaller, can we stack up the top-most two boxes next to it like so? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:58, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
: The cropped image shown, of course, is just a placeholder. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:00, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::That looks about as clunky as Wikia's frontpage, IMO.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:05, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Well, it's not fine-tuned or anything. Thing is, either that banner's going to be cut down or removed entirely. It's huge, it's bandwidth-wasting, and it pushes all our real content down off the page. What's your choice? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:07, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::I'm probably knee-jerking based on the placement of the boxes. I guess it could be made to work if it's finessed a bit. It's not like we're running a ginormous ad there like Wikia was suggesting.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:31, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I dunno, personally I like this new idea. It reminds me of how our franchise navs look: Logo on the left, linkage on the right. Plus, yeah, unlike Wikia, our content on the right of the logo will actually be... content.
:::::As for logo ideas, why don't we make a few different options where it's the TFWiki.net logo over a pic of a single character? We could have one for Prime, Megatron, Starscream, Jazz, etc. using the <OPTION> thingy. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:37, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::As long as the site-name logo thing itself is HUGE. I really want to make sure the URL is shoved in your face. Branding continues to be important as we war against Wikia for Google prominence. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:40, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::If branding's important, why not change the actual on-every-page logo to use the actual TFWiki.net logo? And put TFWiki.net in the page <title>? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:01, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Alternately, each one could be a group shot from a different franchise, with the font altered to match. Play up how many different continuities there are, eh?--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 17:00, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
[[Image:Newfrontpage062009b.jpg|thumb]]
::::::::This image to the right is what I'm now thinking. And it should probably have movie characters predominantly, at least for the next few months. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:04, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::I'm inclined to agree with sticking with the movie characters now, considering it's almost two weeks till the US premiere/release. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 17:19, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

That's pretty darn good. Brings a lot more info above the fold, and the layout's pretty clean. The white background is good too, so any other images in the rotation should follow that example.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 17:21, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:How do we make it done? The table markup on the frontpage is foreign to me. I'll upload the new image itself... --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:32, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::Since Derik doesn't seem to be about yet, I'll have a go with it. Hmm. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:42, 9 June 2009 (EDT)--[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:42, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Actually, we're really going to have to do something like your first example above, with the Continuity/Category tables underneath each other instead of side-by-side, because trying to fit the logo and the two tables all side-by-side looks hideously awful on a 1024px-wide screen. I tried just simply having the smaller logo, the text notices under it, and the two tables on the right, but it looked kind of... eh. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:04, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Mrr. OK, I made ''an'' attempt at tweaking, although I think it's going to need some external CSS tweaks at least, if only to center the Continuities table. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 03:44, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Looks okay, but the jarring thing about it is that the red and blue boxes aren't the same width, though they share a column.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:19, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::That's something Derik needs to tweak in the Featured box template and/or external CSS... I can't do it just by editing the page itself.
::::::Also, yea or nay on the link buttons? It just seemed a little more "Click me!" than the paragraph o' links. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:49, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I dig 'em. Good design decision, IMO. --[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:52, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Quite aside from anything else... what's the point in liking to tfwiki.info with an image link. It ''just about'' made sense as a text link, but is only going to confuse people who click on the Autobot symbol and end up back where they started. We need to cut down on main page-to-main page links, '''not''' obfuscate where they link to. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:30, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Visual consistency. (And the mouseover text indicated it was an "alternate URL".) But, I tried tweaking it again. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:52, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::It's fixed! Huzzah!--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 20:46, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::I realized I was just approaching it the wrong way. Eheh. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:15, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

: I'm a little ambivalent towards the "new" logo, just because I think it's a little bland, although I'm sure it's a work in progress. I am all for putting "TFWIKI.net" in the header and all over the fucking place as a branding effort, though. On a slightly related note, I'd consider flipping the "current series" in said box, so ROTF is closer to the center of the page and Animated is on the outside - if we're really trying to bring in ROTF traffic, having that logo front and center is probably a pretty smart idea. I also like the idea of a rotating logo box - maybe we even jigger it so that it links directly to the article for whoever's in it - like the Go! Boxes, but focused entirely on core characters (More Fallen, Movie Optimus, etc., less Irwin Spoon and Dinobots Strike Back). Stick with primary Movie-verse guys for now, and then in a month or so when the hype dies down, we can start to shuffle in some sufficiently advanced and significant articles (making sure that the characters are both important to the fiction and that their articles are nearly, if not entirely complete). [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 11:17, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:That sounds like a good idea. I'm down with that. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 17:00, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

[[Image:Boxswap.jpg|right|350px]]
I has new idea for what module ought to be above the fold, and more ROTF promotiony stuff. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:15, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:Sure, I'd go for it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:26, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

Considering how crowded and text-heavy the front page is, I think the best way to draw attention to the banner is to surround it in as much empty space as possible, [[User:Magnus Maximus/Temp|something like this]], especially as the new banner's white background assimilates the page's whitespace so easily. - [[User:Magnus Maximus|Magnus Maximus]] 03:10, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:I'm not sure how that's really different than it is now, other than putting the site notice at the top... which I kind of hate doing, because that pushes all of the content stuff down. The site notice is temporary anyway.
:I was thinking we ought to make the movie stuff more prominent, rather than the continuity/category modules. I was also thinking of placing the banner, site notice, and external website links in one cell instead of two like it is now, which further creates whitespace... I just didn't think of that until after I made the layout change proposal pic.
:I do agree/think maybe we could stand to lose a few modules, though... maybe ditch the Categories module entirely, and consolidate the Holy Grails and Editing Tips somehow. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 03:32, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
::Oh yeah, you're running a 1024 desktop, aren't you? I changed my res to 1024, and you're right, it really doesn't look much different. But [http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/3349/tfwikitemp1280.jpg this] is how it looks in 1280, and even that little bit of extra space makes a huge difference compared with how it is [http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/4606/tfwikinow1280.jpg now] (in my opinion).
::I agree about the notice, but I couldn't think where else to put it. Putting it under the banner (thus between the blue and grey boxes) made it seem wedged-in and out of place. Lesser of two evils, you dig?
::I also agree about making the movie stuff more prominent, but the red and blue boxes are narrower, so they take up less of the horizontal space. I did think that maybe we could change the featured series box so that ROTF is ''on top'' of Animated instead of beside it, and shift that up next to the banner somewhat like it is on my temp page now. That also adapts to 1024 better, I think.
::And yeah, losing some of the boxes would not be the worst thing in the world. - [[User:Magnus Maximus|Magnus Maximus]] 03:52, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Ehh... my problem with that idea is that, one of the reasons we redesigned the Main Page to begin with is because our greeting was so big that it was pushing useful content down below the fold. This sort of recreates that exact same problem.
:::But, I tried tweaking my Main Page design here: [[User:Jeysie/Main Page]] to give more whitespace. I figure that once the movie's been out for a while and we don't need to pimp it as much, we can replace the Featured Characters box with the Continuities box. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 11:50, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

::I was looking at the front page right now and thinking about some things - I'm glad to see most of them are in line with what's already considered. :)
::That said, I suggest taking TFA out of the featured series box, even if only temporarily, and using the [[:Image:Revenge fallen logo.jpg|logo from the franchise page]]. I feel it's more recognisable as the ROTF logo than the more colourful one we have there, plus we can make it a bit bigger.
::I also wonder if we should have "Transformers Wiki" written on there somewhere other than the site logo in the sidebar. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:11, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
{{-}}

:::: "TFWIKI.net - THE Transformers Wiki"? [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 07:49, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I made up a [[:Image:Wikilogo big.psd|PSD template]] of just such a logo this morning. It's layered, so the transparent overlay of the Autobot leaders is optional.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 12:18, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::I definitely prefer the font of the current TFWIKI.NET logo to that one.
::::::Whatever we ultimately do though, surely we should use the same logo EVERYWHERE, including for the top-left logo, ja? (There's also the recurring thought that we have a G1 Autobot sigil for the top-left logo, but a '''G2''' Autobot sigil for the favicon. I understand that the G2 favicon is unique, which was the main reason we went for it, but if we're thinking about branding...) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 12:37, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

===Logo===
[[Image:TFwikilogomock.png|right]]
If we want to be movie-centric AND use the TFWiki.net logo extensively for branding reasons, shouldn't we change the Animated-based logo to something more like this? (NB: Quick mock to make a point, '''not''' intended to be actually used, and may clash with the Teletraan on the Monacobook skin). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:30, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:I think we do need to keep some visual distinctiveness. If we go too far into the grey look of the movie we end up with understandable confusion concerning its resemblance to [http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/File:Monaco-logo.png this].--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 17:59, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::Yeah. I'm really really fine with keeping our current page design/color scheme. The Wikia site is really gray, and I'd rather not veer to close to that. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 20:48, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::[Joke Suggestion] How about we make ours ''on fire''? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 04:27, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
::::It wouldn't actually be ''that'' hard to do... -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:08, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

===Featured-series box===
<div style="float:right">
{|width="50%",
|-
|
{{Featurebox
|Featured Series
|color=#999
|id=featured-series
|content={{User:SanityOrMadness/featured-series}}
|view=User:SanityOrMadness/featured-series
}}
|}</div>
Should we perhaps rebalance the featured-series box to be more like this? (Yes, I know there's a too-high gap between the two lines to the right of the TFA logo. It didn't preview like that, and I can't see why it's doing that.) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 14:41, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:That's pretty darn sweet-looking, IMHO. I tried swapping around [[User:Jeysie/Main Page|my take on the Main Page]] to include a slightly modified version of it. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 15:16, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
::The way it is on the mainpage right now looks really great. Good density of info above-the-fold.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:19, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Or rather on Jeysie's test page, I see now.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:21, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Thing about including [[Main Page/featured-characters]] in it like that (which I just edited to increase the header-size to be visually bigger than the character names, and debold the character names themselves) is that if you separate that from above AND below with a line, you visually make it into a franchise by itself. TFA needs a stronger separator from ROTF than the ROTF stuff does within itself. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 15:39, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
<div style="float:right">
{|width="50%",
|-
|
{{Featurebox
|Featured Series
|color=#999
|id=featured-series
|content={{:Main Page/featured-series}}
|view=Main Page/featured-series
}}
|}</div>
How about this? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 15:41, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:Works for me. I added it to my test Main Page with a few minor formatting tweaks. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:38, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
::That looks excellent to me! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:23, 13 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Are we doing to do this then? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:06, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Was wondering that myself. Any more tweaks or suggestions to add, or should we go with my mockup? --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 13:02, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::The mockup looks pretty solid to me.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 14:11, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I say go for it! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:46, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::Looking again at the featured-characters bit... is Sideswipe really the best choice for that fourth spot on row 1? I already changed Soundwave to Devastator, because the latter has been a LOT more prominent in promos for the movie, but I'm not sure who would be best for a fourth Autobot. Jetfire? Skids & Mudflap? (I'm not even sure if Ironhide is best for the third slot). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:54, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I was trying to think of a balance between which characters were most prominent and which people were likely to be excited about... we could go for Optimus, Bumblebee, Jetfire, and Skids & Mudflap together in the last spot. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:03, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Made that change for now, then. I think "prominence" should probably be the main factor, if we want to grab users. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:14, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
{{-}}

===Featured article===
Now that the featured series box has been sorted... nothing against Kup, but do we have a movie/ROTF article that could possibly take the featured spot at some point between now and the 19th? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:57, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:[[The Fallen]] is at Featured Article status. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:07, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::And has been the Featured Article for awhile at A Certain Other Place. I'd rather not mirror them in that respect, personally.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 18:22, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::In that case... I've got no idea. None of the rest are at FA status, and I can't think of which one would be most relevant to pick on for cleanup. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:31, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Surely the three most obvious non-Fallen articles "to pick on for cleanup" are [[Optimus Prime (Movie)]], [[Bumblebee (Movie)]] and [[Sam Witwicky]], ja? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:51, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Simmons might be mroe fun. ;)
:::::And Megatron more enlightening, if someone wants to take a whack at his DS-game backstory. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:17, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Looks like Primal Prime is the featured article at that other place, not The Fallen. In fact, it looks like their Fallen article has a cleanup tag, not a featured tag... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:07, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Yeah, someone replaced it a couple of days ago after noticing that their "The Fallen" article wasn't up to scratch. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:40, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Any objection to us featuring our superior The Fallen article after all, then? --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:08, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::Yeah, on the 24th, the Fallen's page is going up. ESPECIALLY if it's also up at Wikia. Our Fallen page has to supercede theirs, and burying it on the most important week of its life isn't gonna work in our favor. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 18:19, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

Hell, if we want to upstage 'em over at Wikia, just put [[Sideswipe (ROTF)|Sideswipe]] as one of the featured characters. I was over there just to see how far the site had gone downhill and it surprised me. They ''don't even have a page for Sideswipe'', it just redirects you to G1 Sideswipe. How sad is that?--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 00:13, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:How hard did you look? I wont link it for obvious reasons, but there IS a page for him. - [[User:Cattleprod|Cattleprod]] 00:22, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::I think he got messed up by the fact that the Main Page links to "Sideswipe" without the parenthetical, which does indeed redirect to G1 Sideswipe.
::Having said that, their proper ROTF Sideswipe page is still miserable compared to ours, as is the fact that they got the Main Page linking wrong.
::Not only that... I also noticed that one of their registered users, while editing their Main Page, managed to change their Twitter link to our Twitter in the process. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 00:44, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Yeah I didn't look very hard (alcohol is a helluva thing), the link was what I went for. Obviously someone over there screwed up. You got a problem with it Cattleprod, kiss my shiny, metal ass.--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 01:29, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

===Text Purging===
Next possible round of changes:
I've tweaked [[User:Jeysie/Main Page|my setup]] to remove the Categories module (is it really that useful?) and try to reduce/consolidate the Editing Tips/Holy Grails section.

I also think we should do a purge of the Series box and stick to just the "major" series/franchises: Generation 1, Generation 2, Beast Wars, Robots in Disguise, Armada, Energon, Cybertron, Animated, the two movies, and Universe. (Possibly also Classics and/or Beast Machines). We have the comprehensive list linked to for anyone who really wants to look at everything. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:52, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:The categories box is useful for two reasons: (1) In and of itself, it's useful. I certainly use it. (2) Without it, your mockup has an empty white space in the right column almost the exact size and shape of the categories box... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:49, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:I further note that, [[:Image:Mainpage analytics-06-05-09.png|per Derik's statdump]], it ''gets used''. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:53, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
::Well, if you can suggest other ways to clean up our Main Page, I'm all for it. As it is, I agree with Walky that it's getting to be too much of a sea of text, and that struck me as being one of the least useful of the modules. I guess we could consolidate it somehow with the Continuities module as a sort of "Quick Links" box...
::We possibly could also get rid of the Editing Tips and Holy Grail modules, but I kind of hate doing that, as it's nice to try to encourage new editors to look at that sort of information. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:02, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

::Thing is, if I click on the first link in the Categories box because I want to find a particular character, I get a big confusing list of subcategories and... [[Mickey Mouse]]. If I'm a casual user looking for,say, [[Soundwave (G1)|Soundwave]], that doesn't help me much, because then I have to hunt through the subcategories for something that looks like it might lead me there. Yes, it's possible that I might notice the search box and use that instead, but that kinda takes away from the point of having that there in the first place.
::Though technically I guess I'm complaining about the organisation of the Characters category rather than the box itself. :) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:20, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

== Jokes? ==

It is sometimes very hard to find relevant information on this wiki among all the juvenile humor. It's a little off-putting for a casual user like myself. I know this wiki is about robots who turn into cars, but, c'mon... Maybe tone it down a bit?[[Special:Contributions/71.107.102.102|71.107.102.102]] 16:56, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

:No. [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 17:00, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

::If you can point out specific instances where the humor is getting in the way of the information, we'll take those under consideration for adjusting, but on the whole we here tend to appreciate the humor. (Including this editor back when she was a newbie/casual reader.) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:04, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:::As does the overwhelming majority of the readership, it seems. We've gotten praise from all circles for the "do not take it too seriously" approach, even from industry professionals. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 15:22, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

== Tech Upgrades ==

Since we're cracking 1.5 million hits per day, I'm running an alternate webserver for testing over on [http://tfwiki.net:8080/ port 8080.] It's *not* cached, so I expect it to be a smidge slower, but I'm also aggressively tweaking it for better content compression and lower memory usage. It probably doesn't matter *now,* but I suspect that as we close in on the movie, and then as the movie is released and the edits go up, we're going to need to squeeze out every last ounce of performance available to us. That said, can you guys try to break it via logging in/out, editing articles, etc.? It's all on the same database, so any changes made there WILL show up here (and vice versa,) but my major concern is that we don't have those damned login session problems and their ilk going forward. Thanks! --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:05, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:So... an "editing copy" on one server, and a cached copy on another? Because 99% of TFWiki readers aren't editors? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:53, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
::Let's not overcomplicate it. Test on the new link, the software driving that will replace the existing (more resource intensive) software '''if it's any good.''' At this point, I want to find out if there are any bugs, and that's that. --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 16:38, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:I got a 405 error when I tried to upload an image on there, but otherwise it seems to be working great. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:41, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

=="Wikia wiki" boilerplate==
Between FortMax, Skyjammer and myself, I believe all instances of "Teletraan-I a wikia wiki" etc have been removed from our webpages. Huzzah! Hopefully that will help our Google stats and suchlike, unless I am mis-remembering how those things work... --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] 18:31, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:*thumbsup!* --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 07:28, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

== Special:Imagelist ==

Is there any way to strip out the deleted images from [[Special:Imagelist]]? It's kinda useless as things stand. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:11, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

== Anonymous users ==

Right, the movie goes wide-release in the UK on Friday (I think there may be some previews on Thursday). Thinking about the chaos that may result [and noting that Memory Alpha - much to Wikia's displeasure - disabled ALL editing between the first opening of ''Star Trek'' and its' wide release in the US.]... I think we should give serious consideration to disabling anonymous editing from at least the 18th to the 26th of June.

Thoughts? Objections? Flames? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:26, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

:I've been advocating that for over a month. It's the same thing we did with Animated: material is blocked for anons until it comes out in America. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 22:51, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

::I wasn't talking about blocking specific pages, though (in the way a load of ''Animated'' pages were semi-protected) - just a blanket ban on anonymous editing until ''at least'' the 26th (and I would prefer a week or two beyond that). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:57, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

:::I'd much prefer if it wasn't a total block. Block anons on all the movie char character articles, etc. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:02, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

::::Block until a week after the movie's released in the States, namely the chara articles and the film page itself (who knows what poor soul will "unknowingly" put in spoilerific in the synopsis/trivia/notes/what-have-you). It's already difficult enough with the adaptation... --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 23:06, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

:::::I'm not just worried about spoilers, but about the casual vandalism associated with a sudden & short-lived spike in visitor numbers, which probably wouldn't be limited to the movie pages. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 23:10, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

::::::If we do so, should we have a site-wide message like Memory Alpha? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 02:08, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:::::::At least I know we can use [[MediaWiki:Sitenotice]], I'm not sure whether there is any other similar message. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 07:37, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

::::::::Wow, some serious US-centric bias being spouted. If you don't want spoiled, then don't visit. It's now well established internet etiquette to avoid forums about a week before a film's release. Same should apply here. Or..... wait til the DVD is released before unlocking movie edits, just in case you're stuck in Outer Mongolia at the time of the cinema release. Anonymous editing should be blocked, if only to stop the inevitable trolling and vandalism. [[Special:Contributions/82.7.126.27|82.7.126.27]] 14:07, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Er, no. For one, the 24th is the '''world''' premiere, meaning the vast majority of countries are getting it on that date, not just the US.
:::::::::For two, we need to be able to monitor all edits made to ROTF articles to make sure they're accurate and factual, and we can't do that if most of the wiki's regular editors haven't even seen the movie.
:::::::::So this has less to do with spoilers, and more with the entirely practical aim of being able to keep tabs on all ROTF edits effectively. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 14:19, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Gosh, thanks, I'll take your advice under consideration.... wait, no, I really won't. If you have a problem with "U.S.-centric bias," you are in the wrong place: this is openly stated as a U.S.-centric wiki. We blocked anonymous edits to the new ''Animated'' episodes that for some damnfool reason were aired first in Dubai, until they were uploaded online for everyone to see. Our U.S.-based editors shouldn't have to stop working on a website that, to a large extent, ''they created'', just out of fear that some collection of I.P. numbers will thoughtlessly spoil the movie for them. Better to just anon-protect all the movie-related pages until after all the major markets have had their premieres. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 15:12, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

My vote is for blocking all anons from the movie-related pages for at least one week after the world premier, maybe two. I would not be opposed to a site-wide block, however. I really have no interest in cleaning up after a flood of one-timers and trolls and crap. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 15:23, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

::Hey, I'm all for the lockage. But to stop the wave of trolls that will come. Not because Americans seem to think they have the <insert deity>-given right to subjugate the free speech of others who have the rare opportuity to experience something before the Americans do. That hardly ever happens. America gets everything first; cars, movies, fat, gadgets, first dibs on invasion etc. Thankfully they don't get irony first.[[Special:Contributions/82.7.126.27|82.7.126.27]] 15:38, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Did you even read the post where I pointed out the vast majority of TF fans, both US and non-US, won't be seeing the movie before the 24th, because the vast majority of countries in general aren't getting it until the 24th?
:::Basically, all TF fans not in the UK and Japan aren't going to be getting to see the movie before the 24th. It's not as if we're making editing wait because everyone else is getting the movie early and the US is the only country that isn't.
:::All of our Canadian, Australian, non-UK European, non-Japan Asian, etc. editors are likely equally glad we're waiting. Maybe you should stop and actually think before you go off spouting jerkass strawman accusations. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 15:46, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:::Are you ''intentionally'' aiming for self-parody, or did you actually seriously just try to frame your potentially being locked out of our privately-run, privately-financed web site about giant alien space robots for a few days as a ''freedom of speech'' issue? 'Cause that right there is some serious comedy gold, sir. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 15:54, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:::I'm afraid there are no Internet Oscars for maudlin self-victimization, otherwise you'd be a shoo-in. Here we only talk about Transformers. You are free to start doing that any old time. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 15:55, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Hahaha, did he just equate being able to post to a wiki about cartoon robots for a few days... to the right to free speech? Man, and I thought education was bad over HERE! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:03, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

===One derailment later...===
So, then, back on the subject... I still think we should do it. Mr Anon isn't making me think less of it as an idea. And yes, a [[MediaWiki:Sitenotice]] would be essential. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:33, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:So, we're all for blocking anons for a week after the 24th? --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 00:31, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::They're gonna get pissy, but sounds good to me. But what about the editors who can't log in, is that still a problem?--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 09:52, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Most likely. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 12:48, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Which editors who can't log in? The problem with IE users not being able to log in was fixed when McFly fixed all the other problems on the site. I haven't heard of any reports of anyone else having the problem... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:32, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

== "Transformers Comic" ==

Okay, I've got three issues at present with the titling treatment of the Titan Movie comics:
#Ambiguity - if you look at, say, [[Transformers Comic issue 9]], there's ''at least'' three Transformers #9s with no subtitle - [[DIS-Integrated Circuits!|Marvel G1 US #9]], [[Man of Iron!|Marvel G1 UK #9]], and [[Transformers Comic issue 9|Titan Movie #9]]; and currently the only one at "Transformers Comic issue 9" is the Titan Movie issue
#DO we go by issue, or by story? - We're all over the shop on this:
#*The Marvel US issues are all at the story titles, but these pages incorporate any "Transformers Universe" bio material
#*The Marvel UK issues almost all have multiple stories or parts of stories, and I think there may even be some issues with multiple UK-originated/non-reprint stories, and each story is at its' own page, ''which incorporates multiple issues'' (e.g., [[Time Wars]]), leaving aside editorial and other non-story material.
#*The Marvel G2 issues almost all have backups, sometimes nominal, sometimes not, and they're all at the title of the lead/non-"Tales of Earth" story (e.g. [[New Dawn]]).
#*The ''first'' Panini Armada issue is at the story title ([[First Encounter!]]), while the ''rest'' are at "Panini Armada issue X" (e.g., [[Panini Armada issue 2]]).
#*The IDW issues are at the issue title even where the issue is split into multiple, titled. stories (e.g. [[The Arrival issue 4]])
#The actual title of the Titan Movie issues - Titan Movie v1 #22-25 are actually titled ''Transformers: Universe'' #22-25 (mostly in reflection of it absorbing the cancelled ''Animated'' comic), but are still at "Transformers Comic issue XX"; while v2, titled ''Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen'' #XX, is at the truly bizarre "Transformers Comic 2.XX". Really, just because the letters page said 2.x once, rather than "Revenge of the Fallen (Titan) issue X", which is what's on the cover?
What are we doing with this? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:17, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:As I've said before, I do NOT favor consistency here. A one-size-fits-all approach will inevitably fail to encompass the widely variable situations with various comic series.
:The Marvel US book are under the story titles because, for all intents and purposes, the story and the issue are one and the same. Likewise for most of Dreamwave's G1 run. Sure, we could move 'em all to "The Transformers issue 2 (Marvel US)", but what do we ''gain''? How is this any better than "Power Play!"? What is the benefit? Mere consistency is insufficient reason.
:This is much, much less true with the UK comic, where stories were broken into two and even three parts, and multiple stories shared page space in the same issue. Now, I've heard rumblings to the effect that each UK issue should have its own page, and there's merit to that, insofar as each issue's contents are a mixed bag - minicomics, letters pages, and pieces and parts of various stories. It might make sense to have a page for each issue, basically a list of its contents, with ''See main article'' links to the entire story -- so, say, UK #88, #89, #90, or whatever, all link to a single page for "Target: 2006".
:With G2, it absolutely makes complete sense to combine the two stories. The "backup" strips are such in name only; they are absolutely integral to the main strip, and neither can be read without the other. Separating "Tales of Earth" bits into their own pages is only going to confuse things and make them ''less informative''. Furthermore, the main strip clearly ''is'' the MAIN strip. It makes sense to cover the whole story under that strip's title. Our current system for G2 acknowledges this, while still distinguishing between the contents of each section. The alternative is to move each page to "Generation 2 issue 2" or whatever... and I don't see what we gain by doing this.
:The Titan comics should be moved to whatever the cover and indicia call them. If they're just ''Transformers'' or something equally generic, well, that's what parenthetical disambigs are for. Likewise for the ROTF reboot. A simple (Titan) should cover the bases well enough, yes?
:A recent trend has been issues with 2 discreet stories, such as the ''Animated'' books you mention. I've long been in favor of having a single page for the ''issue'' for such books, with ''See main article'' links to the individual stories within them - so "Animated: The Arrival issue 2" would be a list of stuff, with two prominent links within to pages about the two stories it contains. Still, I can understand if people see that as unnecessarily messy -- so long as they can agree that, since the stories are pretty much co-equal, it would make no sense at all to give one or the other naming precedence.
:So, that's my take. Case-by-case basis FTW, baby. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 21:43, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:Also, to address item #1 specifically... if we do stick with "Transformers" as the title, there should be a disambig note for Transformers at the top. Unless "Comic" is in the title, it shouldn't be in there. I'm thinking the article names should be "Transformers issue 1 (Titan)", etc., with the parenthetical at the end of the page title, rather than the middle.
:These books generally have stories from different continuities, don't they? That's a point in favor of separating the story content out from the containing issue. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 11:19, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

== Non-movie (Movie) characters vs. movie (ROTF) characters with the same name ==

Anyone else think we should, at the very least, have {{tl|disambig2}}s on pages like [[Jetfire (Movie)]] and [[Mudflap (Movie)]] to the ROTF characters of the same name? Yes, I realise users could go via the disambig page, but I see it as making things simpler & easier for newbies, and in that scenario one click is always better than two. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:20, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:I think I'd cautiously support adding a <nowiki>{{disambig2}}</nowiki> for characters of the same name within the same continuity if there seems like a good chance for confusion. I'd oppose imposing it as an across-the-board standard though. (You're nto suggesting that though.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:23, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::I oppose it on the principle that multiple disambig templates on a page is ugly. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 22:47, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Ugly, and you can get to where you need to go through the disambig. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:48, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::::As long as there's a link to the same-universe namesake in the intro, I see no need for an additional disambig template. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 01:21, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2009-06-18T16:07:23Z

64.206.123.1: /* ARE we going to relicence? */

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:

'''The move away from Wikia:'''
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki:Community Portal/Complaints]]

'''Our policy on having ads in the wiki:'''
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads]]

'''The Bookworm database-crash:'''
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Damage Control Central]]
* [[Project:Bookworm Crash]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving2]]

'''The server move:'''
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2]]

{{chapters
|title=Community Portal Archives
|content=*[[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive1|Archive 1]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive2|Archive 2]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive3|Archive 3]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive4|Archive 4]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive5|Archive 5]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive6|Archive 6]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive7|Archive 7]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive8|Archive 8]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive9|Archive 9]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive10|Archive 10]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive11|Archive 11]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive12|Archive 12]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive13|Archive 13]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive14|Archive 14]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive15|Archive 15]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive16|Archive 16]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive17|Archive 17]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive18|Archive 18]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive19|Archive 19]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive20|Archive 20]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive21|Archive 21]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive22|Archive 22]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive23|Archive 23]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive24|Archive 24]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive25|Archive 25]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive26|Archive 26]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive27|Archive 27]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive28|Archive 28]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive29|Archive 29]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive30|Archive 30]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive31|Archive 31]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive32|Archive 32]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive33|Archive 33]]
}}

== Quotes ==
{{note|This discussion was moved from [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Damage Control Central#Quotes]].}}

Quotes now seem to look like this:

{{quote|Freedom is the right of all sentient beings|Optimus Prime}}

when IIRC before the crash they look like this:

{{bigquote|Freedom is the right of all sentient beings|Optimus Prime}}

Now, it seems we can get the second result using the <nowiki>{{bigquote}}</nowiki> template instead of the basic <nowiki>{{quote}}</nowiki> template that is currently populating most of the pages.

I'm of the opinion that the bigquote look is much more pleasing to the eye and it also seemed to be the norm before the crash. Should we change the quotes to bigquotes on individual pages or just have someone with template knowledge make a change there? --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 23:29, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
:Discussion on [[Template_talk:Quote]] suggests that bigquote is the old style and quote is the new style. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:37, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
::Mind you I didn't ''ask'' anyone before swapping styles-- the intention was to give people a chance to evaluate the new look, but we only had it for a few days before the crash... so I don't think anyone noticed. :p
::It's my opinion that the old quote template took up too much space-- which is find for a single quote at the top of an article when you want to make a big thing of it, but I thought ''most'' uses of the template would look nicer with s smaller visual footprint. (Plus the html is more contextual.)
::Some people seem to dislike the chevron-style quoting... it's consistent with what, at the time, were our new reference templates-- also lost in the crash. The real appeal, to me, is that it lets you put quotes ''inside'' the quote template (such as an exchange between characters) without looking weird. The way we ''used'' to do that was multiple quote templates in a row, which (being oversize already) resulted in a massive on-screen footprint.
::If the consensus is to switch to the bigQuote format for all quotes instead of the smaller one, I guess that's the community's perogative... but I'm gonna argue against it until that decision is made.
::I ''like'' bitQuote-- it's great if you want a quote to be a big thing. Most of the time you don't. When you do-- why not just use <nowiki>{{bigquote}}</nowiki>? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:48, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
:::Ahhh, my mistake! I coulda sworn I'd seen quote in use longer! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:55, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

::Why I don't like "quote":
::#It's ugly.
::#It's '''bigger''' than bigQuote. That seems to defeat the whole point.
::#Single guillemots ''don't get used as quotation marks in English'' and so '''they don't parse as quotation marks'''.
::#It's '''incredibly''' ugly.
::#And finally-if-slightly-tangentially, there's a conscious effort, it seems, to change all "bigquotes" to "quotes", which defeats the whole point of having two templates.
::Definite vote to revert - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:35, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

I vote against the revert. I do not like the old quote style, as noted on the above-linked discussion page. All we need to do is change the guillemots to quote marks and it's fine by me. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 04:08, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
In accordance with the general wishes of the community, the quotes have been changed from guillemots to standard quotation... though I think it looks terribly ''silly'' that way. You can see just how silly over at [[Template_talk:Quote]]. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:57, 10 April 2009 (EDT)
:Well, one day after updating the quote template, I finally ran into ''exactly'' the scenario I was talking about in regards to quotes within quotes. I need to quote this passage (which includes but is not composed exclusively of dialog) for an article.
{{quote|"Farewell Optimus prime," [Starscream] whispered to himself. "Time for Endspark."|[[Starscream (Movie)|Starscream]]|[[Ghosts of Yesterday]] p280}}
:That looks absolutely retarded. The guillemots may have been ugly-- but they were at least ''clear''. And none of the user suggestions (including [[User:Abates]] idea of using multiple parameters for a series of quotes) applies here-- because the text is ''inline''.
:You all suck. Does anyone have any suggestions ''other'' than guillemots to make that look less retarded? Because <nowiki>{{bigquote}}</nowiki> looks even ''worse''. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 02:53, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
::[http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp Rule four] suggests it should look like this:
{{quote|'Farewell Optimus prime,' [Starscream] whispered to himself. 'Time for Endspark.'|[[Starscream (Movie)|Starscream]]|[[Ghosts of Yesterday]] p280}}
::although you could also use ‘ and ’ maybe? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:33, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
:::I have restore the guillemots as an ''optional flag.'' (style=2) The entire ''point'' of using a non-english quotation mark was to avoid conflicts with English quotation marks, so the guillemots seem like a good fallback position when there is a conflict.
{{quote|'Farewell Optimus prime,' [Starscream] whispered to himself. 'Time for Endspark.'|[[Starscream (Movie)|Starscream]]|[[Ghosts of Yesterday]] p280|style=2}}
:::This necessitated html and css changes, so some quotes may look funny for the next 24 hours or so until the pages de-cache. (They'll preview properly, and if you save them they'll look right... but left on their own they will re-cache with the updated <nowiki>{{quote}}</nowiki> HTML in short order, so don't bother.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:50, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

::Uh, why not take the easy route. '''Leave out the opening and closing quotation marks when you post''', and the template fills them in. i.e.,
{{quote|Farewell Optimus prime," [Starscream] whispered to himself. "Time for Endspark.|[[Starscream (Movie)|Starscream]]|[[Ghosts of Yesterday]] p280}}
::There you go, simple and doesn't involve guillemots that don't parse for anyone. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 05:01, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
:::What a lovely mix of smart and dumb quotes you have created. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 05:46, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
::::Given the use of a monospaced font, it doesn't make sense to use "smart" quotation marks anyway... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 07:24, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

:I prefer the old style quotes. Nobody can make me use the new ones. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 06:09, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
::I agree, for all the reasons that SanityOrMadness listed above (especially points 1, 2 and 4)[[Special:Contributions/81.108.237.26|81.108.237.26]] 13:44, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
::I completely don't care about this discussion, but I must take the time to point out that it's "guillemet". "Guillemot" is a bird, which is decidedly not relevant to this discussion. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 03:49, 16 April 2009 (EDT)

I don't think the normal quotes show up properly in IE6 and a normal quote overlaps an image on http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Protoform so that needs to be fixed or bigquote restored.[[Special:Contributions/81.108.237.26|81.108.237.26]] 11:08, 22 May 2009 (EDT)
:That's a note, not a quote. The site unfortunately has plenty of problems in IE6, mostly caused by Microsoft's crappy rendering engine. A few of them linger in IE7 too... We really need to come up with a replacement for the messageboxes which doesn't lose the right-hand edge for one thing. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:48, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

== Redirects while editing ==

Go to [[User:Derik/Sandbox7]], hit edit, then ''preview''. (Hitting shift-refresh might be required to clear out your CSS cache if the effect isn't apparent.)

Links to redirects are highlighted ''in preview mode only''. If it's not highlighted, you know you're pointing to an actual page rather than a redirect. Should probably make it easier to just ''guess'' on a lot of links while still being assured you're picking valid ones.

(Pink is a terrible color to use for this. Any suggestions on how this should be styled? Sparkle-background?) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:46, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
:Would making them simply underlined be too subtle? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:15, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
::I worry it's too subtle. What about this?
::If that's too subtle I could break out the sparkling text and have the wiki chant "Septus, Dominus!" every time you mouse over it...-[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:30, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

Aw, what's wrong with the pink? I think that one's clear enough. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 00:39, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Not bad. At least this way it'll be easier to catch the redirects, applying changes when necessary. Although pink... I think it'd be better if the color was a different contrast if it's in the colored section of the templates (as in the episode/comic templates). --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 01:34, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:Abates suggested underlining... since the redirects ''only'' show up that way when in preview mode, I think it'd be a good idea to have multiple visual indications. (I don't think the previous/next links on the comicnav, for example, will change color... because they already ''have'' a color set. If you have multiple indicators (color underline, etc...) chances are at least one will remain noticable no matter what happens.
:Does anyone hate the blinking? (It's a firefox-only style.) Normally I HATE anything that blinks because its distracting, but the whole point here is to be able to easily spot the redirects. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:58, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::Eh, blinking's fine. Not that of a biggy for me. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 02:08, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

::It's only in the preview and not in the saved pages, so the blinking is ok so far as I'm concerned! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:15, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::I think the feature is great? But yes, I hate the blinking. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 10:03, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
This might be a good time to mention this, but just because a link is pink and flashy doesn't necessarily mean it is a mistake needing fixing, right? It is sometimes OK to use redirect links. If you are talking about Goldbug it is OK (and preferable in my opinion) to link to [[Goldbug (G1)]] and let the redirect do the work. I think having it stand out so much would tend to have editors feel the need to clean them all out. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 10:17, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:::There is potential for that. I agree that sometimes redirects are okay... <nowiki>*shrug*</nowiki> -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:44, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

How about "safety orange" or yellow? Those are universal "danger/warning" colors. (And less puke-inducing for me than pink). I don't mind the blinking either, considering that the idea is that the indicator is ''supposed'' to annoy the hell out of you until you change it. (FWIW, the whole thing works fine in Opera 9.63, too.)

As for Starfield's comment, eh, I just don't see it 99% of the time. If I wanted to link to something like Goldbug or Rodimus Prime, I would do <nowiki>[[Bumblebee (G1)|Goldbug]]</nowiki> or <nowiki>[[Hot Rod (G1)|Rodimus Prime]]</nowiki> instead. About the only time I could see it useful is if you were doing linking related to a spoiler (like Longarm Prime vs. Shockwave, for instance), but even then you'd still only need to do it for a month at most. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:15, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:I don't personally see the sense in manually redirecting to Hot Rod when you are talking Rodimus Prime when there is perfectly valid actual redirect to use. You aren't talking about "Hot Rod". It is like word-linking that way, like you are trying to fake out the reader. "Rodimus Prime" is that character's name in that point of the story. I always thought that was the primary purpose of having redirects, and search boxes were secondary.
:Plus there is the added benefit of when you use the "what links here" page, you see what pages link to "Rodimus Prime", which is interesting information that is lost if everything links to "Hot Rod". - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 17:53, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::Because it's the same character. We say "Spike" or "Daniel", but link to their full name. If someone refers to Bumblebee as a "giant yellow Volkswagon robot" in something, we might use that phrasing in the synopsis, but we'd still link to Bumblebee, not to "giant yellow Volkswagon robot" as a redirect. Etc. It's not a fakeout, it's just using the proper contextual name in the text, but cutting out the middleman for the actual link.
::Redirects can make linking easier for editors who don't know immediately what the proper link might be, so we don't end up with accidental duplicate pages (or as a shorter way to link to something like an oft-used section link), but on the whole I think it's mostly useful for searches.
::In short, while not all redirect linking is something to worry about, per se, I don't see anything wrong with encouraging editors to hunt down the correct linkage, even in those sorts of edge cases. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:19, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:::"Goldbug" was a character in the comic [[Used Autobots]], the character was ''not'' "Bumblebee". In that way, it is different than using Spike's full name, or even [[Peter Parker]] vs [[Spider-Man]]. I think a link on the [[Used Autobots]] article to <nowiki>[[Bumblebee (G1)|Goldbug]]</nowiki> is incorrect because there was no "Bumblebee" in the story. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 18:36, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::::And yet, Bumblebee and Goldbug don't have separate articles, because we treat them as being the same character. *shrugs a little* I don't ''care'' either way, really, and wouldn't consider it worth worrying about if someone linked to Goldbug, I just don't see that as more correct. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:47, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::Bumblebee/Goldbug is the same character. That is ''why'' I think it is OK to link to "Goldbug", even more correct to do so when you are talking about Goldbug. "Goldbug" is not a nickname for "Bumblebee", Goldbug is that character, at that point in the story. The article could be named "Goldbug (G1)" with Bumblebee redirecting to it or "Bumblebee/Goldbug", but for our, somewhat arbitrary, naming rules. I don't disagree with the naming rules, but just because the article is called "Bumblebee" doesn't mean that that always linking to "Bumblebee" is correct. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:00, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::And yet, even if you link to Goldbug, when you click on the link, you still end up at a page titled "Bumblebee (G1)". Is the little "redirected from" note really that crucial a difference? (Especially since the intro mentions the Goldbug change right at the top anyway.) It just seems like a difference that makes no difference to me. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:05, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Yes, when you link to Goldbug, you end up at the right spot, so why the big push to not link to Goldbug when you are talking about Goldbug? And yes, in some way I like seeing "redirected from", it lets me know that Goldbug is just as correct but the title is called "Bumblebee" out of convenience. And don't forget about the "What links here" feature. It is a little useful being able to sort out the Goldbug references. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:19, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::Someone requested I link-fix a bunch of minor variants of Hot Rod/Rodimus Prime ot all point to "Hot Rod (G1)". Instead I split them, pointing to "Hot Rod (G1)" and "Rodimus Prime (G1)" as appropriate-- in case we one day decide to split the articles like we do Megatron/Galvatron.
::::::The same principle applies. A split is ''unlikely'', but this way if we ''do'' split the articles, all the links are already pointing to the appropriate destination, instead of having to sort through 500+ incoming links ''by hand'' (that's abotu the number Hot Rod has...) to figure out which need to go where. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:57, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

::::::::''Is the little "redirected from" note really that crucial a difference?''
::::::::For me, yes, it kinda is. It lets me know that the powers-that-be have decided that "Goldbug" is heavily subordinate to the character of Bumblebee, that they are well and truly one and the same, that there's not some other Goldbug article out there that I'm missing. That in itself is a significant bit of information, even before I've started reading the text. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 20:09, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

I think that the "What Links Here" issue is a fair point. But IMHO if you need the little "redirected from" note to tell you're in the right place instead of just by reading the intro, you're either lazy or the intro needs rewriting. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:14, 22 April 2009 (EDT) 
Edit: Realized I should mention that I'm liking the blinky thingy so far... it used to be annoying having to click through every new link I was adding to make sure it was the proper direct link instead of a redirect. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:18, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
:We should have one standard for linking or not linking to redirect pages. I much prefer being able to link to redirect pages and not get reverted, but I would go along with the other way if that is the standard. I started a draft proposal for a standard to be added to the style guide at my [[User:Starfield/Redirect linking|sandbox]]. Please feel free to comment or edit it or add reasons for/against. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 10:51, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

==Franchise identifier consistency==
At the moment, we have 34 "G1" articles with an identifier of a specific Japanese sub-franchise to distinguish them from articles on usually Western/G1 material. We also have about 9 "G1" articles who use a different kind of identifier, on basis that the Japanese continuities are G1. 
This already led to a bit of moving around with the Grandus article between (G1) and (ROC) when the Animated guy was introduced. To prevent that happening with the Dai Atlas, Sky Garry and possibly Cancer articles, I'd like to have the community make a decision on how to deal with the (G1) identifier vs the (Headmasters), (Masterforce), (Victory), (Zone), (ROC) and (OC) identifiers vs whatever else can be/is used as identifier. 
My preference would be to use the Japanese sub-franchise identifiers. Simple and in line with the whole "from the (Japanese franchise) portion of the G1 continuity" on top of those pages. For convenience, here's a list of the moves it would mean:
*Sandstorm (Autobot) -> Sandstorm (G1) (Note: we have a SG Sandstorm now, so (Autobot) it can't stay anyway.)
*Sandstorm (Decepticon) -> Sandstorm (OC)
*Falcon (Predator) -> Falcon (G1)
*Falcon (Micromaster) -> Falcon (OC)
*Ricochet (G1 Autobot) -> Ricochet (Headmasters)
*Metrotitan (G1) -> Metrotitan (Zone)
*Grandus (G1) -> Grandus (ROC)
*Star Saber (G1) -> Star Saber (Victory)
*Joe (Micromaster) -> Joe (ROC)
*Circuit (Action Master) -> Circuit (G1)
*Circuit (Micromaster) -> Circuit (OC)
*Convertor (Micromaster) -> Convertor (OC)
*Convertor (Recyclon) -> Convertor (G1), but I'm in favour of leaving this one as (Recyclon) because all other Recyclons with an identifier use (Recyclon).
Thoughts? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 03:48, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

:Sky Garry etc... all fall under (G1.) Widest possible identifier when there's no conflict.
:This confuses people because we use specific franchises for UT characters... but the UT has SO MUCH name overlap it'd be pointless-- no one would have the (UT) identifier even if it was standard. G1 has little enough name overlap internal to itself we can make (G1) the default.
:So it's inconsistent--but it's at least ''consistently'' inconsistent. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 06:55, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
::Diver, Planet X, Hydra, maaaaybe Overlord... No, we're not consistently inconsistent either. And now I'm only looking at G1 West vs Japan. With BW, we do seem to be consistent in acknowledging its Japanese sub-franchises in identifiers. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 07:20, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

::What's this "widest possible identifier," Derik? Didn't we go through that huge "Swarm (G1)" debate (which seems to have been ''completely lost'' in the Bookworm crash, fantastic) to cement the franchise-of-origin rule forever and ever amen? The only question here is: What counts as a separate franchise? To my mind, ''Zone'' bears about the same relationship to G1 as G2 does. And, as the Swarm debate established, G2 is never ever G1 as far as parentheticals are concerned. The UT example has nothing to do with what you said and everything to do with our one simple rule. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 00:21, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::...I don't remember anymore. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:31, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::At least remember to curse the name of Bookworm for three to seven generations. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 00:59, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::Side note: Actually, the bit of the discussion that was on my User Page subpage isn't lost. I just didn't upload it anywhere because we never actually determined a good permanent place to move it to, so I didn't know ''where'' to upload it to. After a quickie Google search, it turns out there's still a good cache file for the Insecticon Swarm talk page, too. Anyhoo. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 02:19, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::Hey, whatever you can find and restore, please do. The biggest value of preserving a debate like that is never having to go through it again. I'd say you should re-make your Sandbox and its Talk page exactly as they were before. I don't think a more "permanent" place is necessary; it's an aborted experiment, so it can stay on an "experimental" page. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 03:11, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

:::::I'm for moving those pages. Except for "OC" since it's based on a bad translation of a Japanese title. 合体大作戦 (''Gattai Daisakusen'') means "Great Combination Operation". Everybody who knows this, including me, just has been too lazy to correct it. (And Derik, the punctuation for a sentence is out of the parentheses. I'm not sure why you consistently make that mistake.) [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:54, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::Then maybe this is a good moment to correct it? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 03:55, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Well, problem is that "Operation Combination", as incorrect as it is, is what the majority of English people know it as. And then what to have the disambiguation parentheses as? "(GCO)"? I would prefer to have it as "Gattai Daisakusen", but my opinion of forgoing unofficial translations is decidedly unpopular. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:13, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Then it depends on what this wiki cares more about: helping people find information or providing them with the correct information. By what you're saying, I'd say Operation Combination should become a redirect to the correctly named article. And from there, I don't think (OC) is going to be anymore clear on what continuity it represents than (GCO) or (GD). I don't think many will immediately guess "OC" stands for Operation Combination, and that's also not the point of identifiers. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 08:21, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I'm in favor of using the Japanese sub-franchise names. I checked Beast Wars and we are using the sub-franchise names for that, (BWII), (BWN) so this would be consistent. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 08:51, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Except as someone (Interrobang?) keeps pointing out-- that's problematic in itself. There was no BWII Toyline. There was a BWII cartoon... and a Beast Wars Toyline. Japan considers all 4 BW series paer of 1 toyline franchise, much like Generation 1. (This argument hasn't received a lot of traction, but I'm bringing it up because it seems relevant.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:19, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::FortMax brought it up at least twice. One could argue that since we focus on fiction, we should base our disambiguation system on it, but I dunno how to reconcile that with [[Cryotek (RID)]]. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:13, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::Or [[Sideways (RID)]]. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:34, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::Sideways at least got a RID bio. All Cryotek gets is a quote. (And what if they have RID fiction with Cryotek in it? RID and BM are in two different continuity families which means we have to split the articles and argharghargh) [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 19:19, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::::Disambiguating by fiction has been argued. It doesn't work/help. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:52, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::::<nowiki>*bump*</nowiki> So, I like Geewunling's proposal. Objections? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:14, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::The Wiki calls Headmasters, Beast Wars II, etc. "franchises." I didn't know the weren't until just now. It seems useful enough to do so, even if it isn't 100% historically accurate. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:07, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

== Technical question: Firefox and history pages ==

Is anyone else running the latest version of Firefox and having trouble with the history pages? I'm running Firefox 3.0.10 and when I look at, say, the [http://tfwiki.net/w2/index.php?title=Optimus_Primal&limit=500&action=history Optimus Primal history page], Firefox locks up for half a minute while it runs the javasript to hide half of the radio buttons. It does it on two different computers running the same version of Firefox, but I don't have the same problem on Wikipedia or Wikia. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:56, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
:Oh wow, that ''was'' a pretty nasty stutter I got when I tried to reproduce your issue. Same version, same results.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 21:00, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::Ayep, same here. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:02, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
:::Issue also reproduced on my home PC, which has more get up and go than my workstation, with Firefox 3.5 beta 4.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 22:34, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::::Ditto on my notebook and tower unit. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 23:06, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::::...interesting. Why just firefox? (Clearly the 500+ items are an issue here-- but Safari has no problem with 500 items.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:26, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::I'd be curious to know as well. I specifically tried it again with the beta release because it uses a different (and supposedly more efficient) Javascript engine.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 23:30, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::And why only here and not on Wikipedia? Is there that much of a change in the Javascript between MediaWiki 1.12 and 1.14? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:32, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

Dropped down to Firefox 2...20 there to test, and clicking the radio buttons doesn't take very long, but the page DOES lock up for a while on initial load. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:28, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
:And FF 1.5.10 behaves as-FF2. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:38, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

== Bad images ==

My scanner is a piece o' crap. Is it better to upload dark and grainy pictures with a "badimage" tag or just put up a "picsneeded" tag? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 21:38, 3 May 2009 (EDT)
:Depends. With recent comic stuff, I think "pics needed" would be better, as there's a good chance that someone else will have the issue (or can find scans, *cough*). I replaced all the Defiance ones, for instance. If you have in mind specific scenes you would have scanned, you can always leave a suggestion in the picsneeded tag or on the talk page.
:On the other hand, for stuff that's old or rare, where it might be a choice between a bad image or never having an image, IMHO a bad image is better than nothing.
:(If you ever replace your scanner, I recommend the Canon MP210. I use it with Irfanview, and god I love the thing. Prints like a charm, too.) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 22:00, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

== New User Template ==

I remember... someone before the crash (FortMax maybe?) suggesting the idea of a template we can stick on the talk pages of new users to welcome them. I rather liked the idea, so I started a mockup idea here: [[User:Jeysie/NewUser]] Any ideas for a pic, info to add/change, etc?

Also, I noticed we don't have a New Users log enabled the way Wikia does... if we do create this sort of thing, having that sort of log would be helpful. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:21, 4 May 2009 (EDT)
:We'd need to either upgrade to MediaWiki 1.14 or install [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Newuserlog the extension] to get the new users log. It would be ''very'' useful, I'm thinking. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:35, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

== Screencap templates ==

Er... you know we can ''edit'' the text that appears on the file upload screen. Anyone got a list of screencap templates?

(I think you might even be able to set them up for one-click adding.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:37, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
:They are all listed at [[Transformers Wiki:Images]], to my knowledge. I added all the ones I knew of.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 20:42, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
::[[User:Derik/Sandbox7|This]] is what I'm looking at. It's kinda fugy. Anyone else want to take a whack at it? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:16, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

I'm also working at templating the comics images:
*{{tl|MarvelUScover}} (Marvel US G1), {{tl|HMcover}} (Marvel Headmasters mini) and {{tl|MarvelG2cover}} are maxed out.
*I ''think'' I've got all the extant & relevant images for {{tl|MarvelG2interior}} - although I can't absolutely swear to it
*I'm currently working as and when I have the chance on moving the Marvel US G1 interiors and HM interiors to {{tl|MarvelUSinterior}} and {{tl|HMinterior}} from a variety of copyright tags and the absence thereof (including the ones that lost their descriptions in the Bookworm Incident)
Like I say, the covers are maxed out, but there's always the chance that other interiors will be uploaded (Walky's done a few recently), and it would help if they were added too. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:58, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
:Propose a visually compact way of doing so. ;) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:10, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
{|border cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5" width="100%"
|-
!width=50%|General
!width=50%|Comic Cover
|-valign="top"
|width=50%|
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{hastak}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{comicinterior}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{comiccover}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{screencap}}</nowiki></charinsert>
|width=50%|
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelUScover|(description)|(issue number)|(issue title)|(artist list)|(last two digits of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{HMcover|(description)|(issue number)|(issue title)|(artist list)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelG2cover|(description) |(issue number) |(issue title) |(artist list) |(last digit of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
|-
!width=50%|Screencap
!width=50%|Comic Interior
|-valign="top"
|width=50%|
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{titlecard}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{G1cap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(last digit of premiere year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{RIDcap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(last digit of year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{BWcap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(last digit of year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{BMcap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{TFAcap|(imagedescription)|(episode name)|(year originally aired)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
|width=50%|
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelUSinterior|description=|issueno=|storytitle=|pageno=|panelno=|panelnos=|script=|line-art=|pencils=|inks=|colours=[[Nelson Yomtov]]|letters=|help=|year=(last two digits of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{HMinterior|description= |issueno= |storytitle= |pageno= |panelno= |panelnos= |letters= |help=}}</nowiki></charinsert>
*<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelG2interior|description= |issueno= |storytitle= |pageno= |panelno= |panelnos= |script= |pencils= |inks= |colours= |letters= |help= |year=(last digit of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>
|}
...I don't know about visually compact, exactly, but considering how many image templates we have, I'm not sure "visually compact" is possible... --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 23:06, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
:Well, it's something to work on. Unfortunately the '''charinsert''' plugin doesn't have any way to display s short piece of text while inserting a long one.
:There's a rabid wolverine scrabbling around the back of my brain licking carnival pennies... I feel like when he comes down off his ''filth high'' he might have some ideas about Stupid CSS Tricks to make that less loathesome. (Failing that we could do something with Javascript, but it'd be a bitch to update so that's a last choice.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:35, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::Yeah, it's pretty much the opposite... you can stick a description in the tooltip, but the actual text has to be visible. I honestly can't think of any way to do it in pure CSS without messing up the clickability of it.
::I guess we ''could'' just link to the plain vanilla templates with no parameters, but I kind of want to encourage people to be as thorough as possible with their info.
::I think we could also use a way to include a link to each template's page in case one needs to read the instructions. But I had trouble coming up with a way that's brief, clear, and won't get mistaken for the inserto-text link. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 01:53, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::Addendum: We could go for a fake form with OPTION or a CSS-based drop-down list, but I think those would both need JS. (Admittedly the CSS based drop-down would need less JS, and only for the style, not the functionality.) (Why do I always have extra thoughts right ''after'' hitting the "submit" button?) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 01:59, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
:::What about the Boilerplate plugin that was suggested a while back? Would that be more suitable for this sort of thing? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:04, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::::No, unfortunately... it only works for articles, not on file pages. (At least, if there is a way to get it to work on file pages, I couldn't figure it out.) Although I still think we should give that extension a whirl at some point, it won't help out with this specific thing. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 02:07, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::::My Wolverine stopped tripping long enough to say "<nowiki>{{MarvelG2}}</nowiki>:<charinsert><nowiki>{{MarvelG2interior|description=|issueno=|storytitle=|pageno=|panelno=|panelnos=|script=|pencils=|inks=|colours=|letters=|help=|year=(last digit of publication year)}}</nowiki></charinsert>."
::::He is a filthy, FILTHY beast, and the hackiness of that CSS shames me. (And it's still not ideal code anyway.)
::::I think Javascript is a likely fate here. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:03, 12 May 2009 (EDT)

== Upload Preview ==

Over at [[Template_talk:Screencap#Since_we_got_derailed.|Template talk:Screencap]], Mr. Bates (or possibly Doug-- I can't keep them straight) suggested we look at the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/Scripts/Upload_Preview Upload Preview script]-- a pure javascript solution to the lack of previews during image upload (which the MW software doesn't naively support.)

The script is currently available for anyone who has the [[User:Derik/kired tools|kired tools]] plugins installed. Please report your thoughts, and if there are any problems or conflicts. If user response is positive, I'm going to recommend the relevant code be added to the Wiki's common.js file. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:59, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
:It works great - very handy (I was the one who suggested it, BTW) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 05:59, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
::I finally figured out why I have such trouble telling you and Doug apart.
::I'm actually trying to tell "apog," "apog" and "abates" apart under the impression they are ''two'' people. '''No wonder''' I'm confused. -[[User:Deceptitran|Deceptitran]] 12:37, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
:::With no reported problems from the ppl running Kired Tools, this plugin has been moved to the common file, and is now loaded for all Wiki users.
:::So if anything unexpected breaks tonight please report it here, since the preview script will be the likely suspect. (But we don't expect it to.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:53, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

== (comic issue) vs. (issue) ==

Is there any protest against eliminating (comic issue) as a disambiguation parenthetical? Near as I can tell, it's totally redundant with the shorter, simpler (issue) parenthetical. (again, unless there's a "Child's Play (socioeconomic issue)" article that I'm unaware of...) -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 10:52, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
:No protest here. I was planning on doing it someday. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 14:58, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

== ROTF spoilers from novelizations and other adaptations ==

So, is information from the novelizations off-limits until the movie is in theaters, or what? (If so, we need to protect the hell out of a bunch of pages) --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 22:58, 20 May 2009 (EDT)
:It was discussed [[Talk:Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)|here]] and decided that no, they are not off limits, but please date the spoiler tags on character pages to a week after the film comes out. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 23:04, 20 May 2009 (EDT)
::I've been stubbing in articles where I feel it's appropriate... but I've also been tailoring my content to avoid major spoilers-- more to have the infrastructure in place and ready to fill in then the movie drops.
::(And realistically speaking, there's going to be a flood of detailed spoilers, including lists of every fatality and major surprise on the 10th-- the film premieres in Japan 18 days before it does here.)
::Incidentally, I don't ''trust'' the tie-in novels. Characters vanish suddenly, details are glossed over or changed... I harbor a suspicion that certain plot details are being kept out of the books-- or at least obscured-- to prevent fans from being 100% certain about anything. The climax of the two movie adaptions I've read so far are ''different'', they have '''noticeably''' divergent outcomes. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 00:12, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:::I do not want '''''any''''' novelization and adaptation spoilers on character pages or other related articles. Stuff from adaptations should stay on their respective articles. Most of my work on the wiki at the moment is updating and maintaining movie articles, so it would be a personal inconvenience to me if I had to avert my eyes every time I come across the ''Revenge of the Fallen'' movie sections of character articles. Not only that, but there will be people who will wander onto this wiki with the intention of refreshing themselves on the movie or to read prequel stuff leading up to ROTF, but have no intention of reading up on plot points of the movie itself. And, as Derik says, novelizations and adaptations often differ wildly from the final movie script.
:::I think it's more than bloody fair to expect that we only post ROTF-related stuff on the day of the movie's release around the world, not before. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 00:59, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
::::That'd apply to the British Isles contingent? UK and Ireland are getting general release June 19. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 02:48, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::That's a good question. (I have no opinion, I'm spoiling myself by reading the novel.)
:::::IIRC, back during Animated season 2 we were observing a 1-week moratorium on character-page updates, which more-or-less covered the biggest broadcast markets.
* 10th - Japan premiere
* 24th - US Premiere
* 26th - UK Premiere
:::::Since the period we're talking about is just a 16 day span, I assume the same idea applies-- hold off until the 26th (possibly plus a few days) out of respect for other TF-fans. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:23, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::As Lonegamer ''just said'', it's out here in the UK on the 19th. And the rule for TFA S2 seemed to be that "as soon as it was first aired in English, be it in the UK, US or Canada (all three had 'world premieres in English' at different points), go for it". - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:02, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I think that the modifier in that situation, though, was the fact that as soon as said Animated episodes had aired in English ''anywhere'', high-quality encodes of them were promptly available to download for anybody anywhere who wanted them, making it all pretty much fair game. Information could be added, and editors would not be left unable to verify that information, as they could download and see the episode themselves. The movie won't have that - US editors simply wont know if what anon IPs add is true or not, because they won't be able to see the movie to verify it and will have to operate on good faith, which is laudible, but we saw how well that worked with the Dubai Animated debalce and "Animated Waspinator". While I'll be seeing it opening day here in the UK, I know that I, personally, wasn't planning to add anything about it to the wiki until it screened in the US. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 11:03, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::::What Chris said. "Airing in English" was a polite euphemism for "we can see it too." It doesn't apply for a 2-and-a-half hour theatrical movie. American fans will still be in the dark until the 26th, and as far as I'm concerned the wiki should honor that. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 11:04, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::''While I'll be seeing it opening day here in the UK, I know that I, personally, wasn't planning to add anything about it to the wiki until it screened in the US.''
:::::::::''American fans will still be in the dark until the 26th''
:::::::::Can I take it that the UK and US premiere dates above are switched?--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 14:02, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::It's now been said '''thrice''' in this thread that the UK/Eire date is the 19th. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]]
:::::::::::Beg your pardon, then. It was late, and I wasn't paying close enough attention.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 13:08, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

::::::::::::Damn Americans think they're the centre of the Universe. If I was President of the US, I'd invade the UK and Ireland to protect American Transfan interests. 14:56, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

I read the novel and have this to say: As much detail as is in it, there's no doubt its different. First of all: there's alot more detail so that means some of the slower parts are probably shorter in the movie (novels often do that anyways so no problems there) and also: in one chapter it leads up to fight and then on the very next chapter all of a sudden Devestator appears and is fighting already as if he's been there the whole time (meaning they skipped a chunk of that fight)So as is obvious, there will be differences.--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]] (or was it 9?)<<not that it matters

==Forgive my attitude but==
what the flying f***! What happened to my account. I made one, I even remember what it looked like. Where is it and why can't I login and my username no longer exsists! What..the..hell. I've not signed in for a long time but I still go here regularly and everything, don't tell me you autodeleted my account! I mean, I’ve been here when it was at Wikia, I moved with you guys here and even made a new account here! Hell, my old accounts on Wikia all got deleted, so please don’t tell me you guys stooped to their level and deleted my account as well! I’ve done nothing wrong, aside from giving the appearance of being inactive because I’ve not logged in within awhile, but so what? What right does that give you to delete my account? (and if by some means it does give you the right to do so, please provide a link proving that)--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]] (or was it 9?)<< not that it matters
:[[Transformers Wiki:Bookworm Crash]]. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 15:59, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
Thank you. I'll just make a new account then.-sighs- Forgive if I bothered any of you with what I just said.--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]]
::Don't worry, incoherent rage is the '''proper''' response to the Bookworm crash... you're just slowpoking. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 13:17, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

== Main page ==

[[Image:Mainpage_analytics-06-05-09.png|thumb]]
I'll just leave this here...

(I'll check in after work and see if anyone has thoughts, I sure do.)

Number are per-individual-link BTW-- so two separate links to the same location have their clickthroughs tallied separately. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 13:16, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
: In which we learn nobody clicks anything! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:21, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::The numbers on the page ''should'' add up to 100%. It's just that a few links get vastly more traffic than the others so they show up as 0%. That might represent a few hundred clicks-- the Main Page ''is'' our most frequented page. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 16:12, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::And people are obviously clicking on [[Kup (G1)]] as the page has gained a thousand hits and jumped 30 places in the Popular Pages list in the last week or so. Any idea what time frame the data covers? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:20, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::That was pretty much my thought, too. XD Although it is kind of interesting that some of the categories/continuities/series sections seem more popular than others... it's just hard to tell which ones, since the number pop-ups are in weird spots.
::I also notice that the "images" link in the Editing Tips is popular... and that apparently the fake disambiguation links get some clicks. XD Speaking of which, we really should write up some more of those to replace the rotating ones that got lost in the crash... --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 13:26, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::I may have sternly directed people to our Images policy page. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 13:49, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::It's the most common thing people get wrong, so it's also our most thorough policy document.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 14:05, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::About 8% of clicks on the main page are to our "anyone can edit" but up top-- which just takes people to anchors within the page. (The Editing tips section and the Holy Grails section, which do not themselves then collect a lot of clicks.)
:::::This leads me to think that people who click on these things do ''not'' get what they want/are expecting. We should look at changing those links somehow.
:::::Another 8 % of clicks on the main page are on the "home" logo in the upper left (which takes you... back to the main page) and the "main page" link in the nav toolbar.
:::::If there's agreement, I'd like to set it so that the "Main Page" link in the navigation on the left is grayed out when you're on the main page, so it's clearer that "you're here." (The link would still be usable, it'd just have this visual indicator.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 16:10, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::We could simply de-link the "anyone can edit" links... they just seemed like a good way to get people to actually read our policies and what we need. Or maybe we could link that text directly to [[Help:Contents]] and get rid of the "Editing Tips" box altogether?
::::::I agree with the "Main Page" link being disabled when you're actually on the Main Page. It's pretty easy to do via CSS, and you can also change the cursor to be a regular arrow in CSS to further de-emphasize the links and say, "Hey, dude, you're already ''at'' the Main Page."
::::::Although I had actually thought that 8% of clicks was to the Recent Changes page, which would have made more sense to me. The oddness of where the stat boxes are in relation to the actual page links does make it hard to analyze. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:45, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::AS FAR AS I CAN TELL (which in a few cases - the continuities box especially - is less than 100%), these are all the numbers >1.0%:
:::::::*Logo (goes to Main Page): 4.0%
:::::::*"Navigation" sidebar:
:::::::**Main Page link in sidebar: 4.0%
:::::::**Recent changes: 5.3%
:::::::*Fake disambig:
:::::::**"anyone can edit" (goes to "editing-tips" subpage): 4.0%
:::::::**"add to" (goes to "holy-grails" subpage): 4.0%
:::::::*Categories:
:::::::**Characters: 1.8%
:::::::*Continuities:
:::::::**Live-action film: 1.4%
:::::::**Full Series Info: 4.0%
:::::::*Also, the cumulative links to the ROTF page appear to be >1%, even if no individual link is.
:::::::Thoughts on that... firstly, the links TO the main page ON the main page need to be nerfed. Not greyed out, killed. The logo can be just a logo, and the main page link can be replaced or removed. Secondly, there is no way in hell we should delink the stuff in the fake disambig, but redirecting to other places may be a better idea - take the "editing tips" box and turn it into a full page, linked from there (And from the ET box). Not quite so sure on "add to" - a list of stubs that we want filled out, perhaps? The "Holy Grails" box is too specific for 99.9% of potential editors, I expect. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:32, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

== Useful Extensions ==

Now that we have a working server again and more control over the techie side of things, I wonder if we should start up a list of extensions to install that might be useful.

My own picks:

*[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Newuserlog Extension:Newuserlog] to keep track of new users so we can give them a [[User:Jeysie/NewUser|friendly greeting]]. As opposed to our current status of new people not usually getting much of a "greeting" unless they screw up. :>
*[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:MultiBoilerplate Extension:MultiBoilerplate] to provide a drop-down menu of skeleton codes for new pages. I find this ''incredibly'' useful on my own wiki for being able to easily keep different types of pages all laid out the same, by inserting full page structures into new pages so you can then just fill in the information. For example, [http://trinsic.alienharmony.com/Template:D20RulesPlayercharacterpage here's one structure page] I use to give an idea of the sort of code you can inset.

:Mine:
:*[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Title_Blacklist Extension:Title Blacklist] blocks creation of pages depending on a regular expression.

:I will note that Newuserlog is built into MediaWiki 1.14.0, but we haven't discussed upgrading the software yet... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:25, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

::Honestly, those "friendly greetings" drive me spare. I'd really rather not have them.
::Suggestions:
::*[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:KeepYourHandsToYourself Extension:KeepYourHandsToYourself] (prevents users or anons editing User:* pages other than their own.) [Beta] - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:47, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::I'd be fine with blocking anons-- but I ''have'' been known to reach out and tweak someone's user page from time to time.
:::(Not that we've really had a problem with either.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:02, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::Why do they drive you spare? Giving new users a heads-up regards our policies ''before'' we have to slap a nastygram user notice on their page seems like a good idea to me. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:54, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::They drive me spare getting them while doing IP-edits. And chances are you'll get them again, and again, and again... -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:02, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Oh! No, no, no. I didn't mean doing them automatically on all new users, I was thinking, like, putting the greeting ''manually'' only for new ''registered'' users. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 20:09, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

==Rise of the Chevy Autobots==
Allright, I finally got around to putting this up. This is everything I have saved from the "Rise of the Chevy Autobots" online game - flash files, HTML, etc. It comes to nearly 60mb.

[http://www.obscuretf.com/ChevyAutobotGame.zip Chevy Autobots]

Unfortunately, I am most likely missing the last week or two of the story, but I figure it's better than nothing. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] 14:18, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:Monzo- I luvers you...
:And AFIK the defeat of Mainframe himself never got a news update-- the epilogue was provided by the game itself. So you ''should'' have the most up to date version.
:Uh, I suppose there might have been a "he's weakening, keep at it" update, but that's pretty content-null. It'd be nice to know the date Mainframe went down... but again, it looks like you've got 99% of everything preserved here. :)~
:And now we can properly cite the Chevy Autobots being allspark mutations! (Or at least a result of Chevy's experimentation with Energon as an alternative fuel source.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:27, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

== Possible Relicensing? ==

So, Wikipedia is moving from the GFDL to a Creative Commons license, which will make it incompatible with most Wikia sites from then on. (Presumably; I haven't heard if Wikia at large or any of its individual wikis--like the old Transformers one-- are making the same transition.) Should TFWiki consider switching, too? Pretty much everyone outside the Wikipedia/Wikia family goes with CC, which is a lot simpler in a lot of ways than the GFDL.

[[wikipedia:GFDL#Compatibility with CC-BY-SA|Apparently, GFDL-licensed wikis can only make the change before August 1, 2009]]. And unlike them, we probably wouldn't have to worry about having added any content from non-wiki GFDL-licensed things, at least. And it would completely eliminate legal copying/pasting between this wiki and its rival. --[[User:Fleb|Fleb]] 17:47, 6 June 2009 (EDT)

:I would support this, at least tentatively. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:16, 6 June 2009 (EDT)
::On the surface, at least, it looks like a good move. It keeps the same free-info spirit, but is incompatible with Wikia's license ''and'' any info-quoting or copying from us further requires attributing the wiki, if I'm reading it right. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:18, 6 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Hmm. I thought about bringing this Creative Commons thing up awhile back, but I'm not Legal Smarts (S-M-R-T) enough to fully understand it. Perhaps our staff should comment on this? The final decision is probably theirs. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 04:06, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::I don't really have much to say, other than it sounds like a good idea. If nothing else, the legal terms of the GFDL are nightmarish at best and I'd be happy to never think of them again. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 14:02, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
IANAL, but [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update based on Wikimedia's page,] it ''looks'' like "relicensing" the site is just a matter of changing all the text that mentions "GFDL" now. The one requirement is that we're using [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html version 1.3.] [[Transformers Wiki:Copyrights]] doesn't specify a version, and neither does the edit page or the footer, so that's probably okay. (''[[Transformers Wiki:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License|If the Document does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published (not as a draft) by the Free Software Foundation.]]'') --[[User:Fleb|fleb]] 18:30, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::One thing that's confusing me, looking again at that - Wikipedia's new licensing structure seems confusing in that all non-imported-under-a-CC-licence content will still be dual-licensed under the GDFL. If we adopted that, Wikia could import from us, but we couldn't import from Wikia. CAN the GDFL be dropped completely? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:31, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:Oh, definitely. The dual-licensing is just ''Wikipedia's'' own, weird thing to keep the Free Software Foundation loyalists from bitching and Leaving Forever. (Those CC-only things should actually "poison" individual pages so they're not truly GFDL-licensable anymore without reverting, so they'll probably eventually drop it completely.) --[[User:Fleb|fleb]] 22:05, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

Which CC license would we use? Seems like [[wikipedia:Creative_Commons_licenses#Original_licenses|from the Wikipedia CC page]] that a by-nc-nd license would be what we're after? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:16, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:It would be [[wikipedia:Share-alike|CC-by-sa]]. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:23, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::That looks like a good idea to me. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:07, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Definitely By-SA -- If we do a No-Derivatives, how would we even edit any of our own pages? --[[User:Fleb|fleb]] 22:05, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Seems I misunderstood how the licensing applied. :) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:44, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

===ARE we going to relicence?===
So, are we going to do it, is it being investigated, or are we going to just leave it until the grace period expires and we have to stick with the GDFL after all? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:09, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:I vote we do it. Anyone else? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:14, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
::It seems to be a less onerous license, and one which we have a window of opportunity to switch to. I'd say go for it.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 20:18, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::+1 vote in favor of relicensing. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:29, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::: -1, I'm against it unless we find a copyright lawyer. The GFDL provides no provisions against re-use in commercial projects. While I'm all for 'Hasbro' poking around on this wiki and recycling bios/names/ideas/what-have-you, if someone else decides to redistribute this content for commercial purposes (for example, selling an iPhone/Android app that's basically an offline cache of the wiki,) I want to make sure that we're not on the hook for it. I get that Hasbro is turning a gleefully blind eye to us as long as we're just trying to stay alive as a volunteer effort, but if we end up attached to someone's attempt to profit off of our work, which is in itself a derivative work of at least a dozen various IP holders, the resulting storm of litigation would shut us down within hours.

And no, I am in fact the 'least' qualified person around to give advice on this situation. I'm just a paranoid freak. --[[Special:Contributions/64.206.123.1|64.206.123.1]] 12:07, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

== Asking for permission to post links==

I'm the current Bureaucrat at [http://ghostbusters.wikia.com Ghostbusters Wiki], and there was interest in placing links to articles on this wiki to Ghostbusters wiki articles, and likewise placing links on Ghostbusters wiki to articles relating to content which has been brought up. I don't know a great deal of your wikis past dealings, other than wikia apparently kept your old wiki's content when you moved. Anyways, the wiki would rather reference to your present wiki than the one currently at wikia. We are hoping you wouldn't mind the links to our characters on pages related to the [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Race_with_the_Devil Race with the Devil] article. [http://ghostbusters.wikia.com/wiki/User:Devilmanozzy Devilmanozzy] 02:10, June 8, 2009 (EDT)

:Can you give a few examples of articles on your wiki which would benefit from having links to this site? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:37, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::IIRC it's whatshername's assistants-- the ones from the Earthforce story (Running with the Devil?) that Wildman based on the RGB models.
::(I personally have no problem with the links. Though I think this guy added 'em once, misformatted, and they got reverted.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 13:06, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::That wasn't Nozzy but Liberal Noob, while not logged in. I told the original guy to take a step back and mind their P's and Q's before we start crosslinking, especially since it was an anonymous IP at the time. But yeah, he wants to crosslink with Race the Devil and Susan Hoffman.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 13:43, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Only direct link between the Ghostbusters Cartoon and the G1 Transformers cartoon is [[Frank Welker]] sounded like one of his TF roles when he voiced a ghost from time to time. I a am sorry for my wanton linking and it will not happen again. --[[User:Liberal Noob|Liberal Noob]] 22:57, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::I meant which pages on the Ghostbusters wiki would benefit from having links on them to our wiki. I'm curious, because I regard myself as reasonably familiar with Ghostbusters, and I can't think offhand of any references to Transformers in it. Perhaps in one of the cartoons? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:55, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Thanks for the replies on this matter. A good user Liberal Noob had requested that I would more address this, apparently the mod needed to say something and form a partnership in order to have links posted related to one anothers material. To answer the question of what articles would be hyperlinked, I believe he was planning on linking to the animated pages for Peter Venkman, Egon Spengler, and Ray Stantz. Thats what I understand is being requested to being linked to.[[User:Devilmanozzy|Devilmanozzy]] 19:42, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::We're not wondering which pages on our wiki would link to your wiki. We were wondering which pages on your wiki would need to link to our wiki. We didn't know there ''were'' any Transformers references in any Ghostbusters media, and thus didn't know you'd need to link to us from your wiki. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:59, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::[[Race with the Devil]], [[Susan Hoffman]], [[Starscream's Ghost]], [[Horri-Bull]], and a few others. Links will be on is a article on [http://ghostbusters.wikia.com/wiki/Ghostbusters_Cameos Ghostbusters Cameos]. Note I believe that the section will be better built soon.[[User:Devilmanozzy|Devilmanozzy]] 20:21, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Seems like there's a few other connections in terms of voice actors ([[Tara Strong]], [[Frank Welker]], [[Maurice LaMarche]] etc) as well. I think linking between the two sites is a good idea. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:37, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Yeah I had noticed that too as I looked around here the last few days. Never knew how much Ghostbusters and Transformers had in common.[[User:Devilmanozzy|Devilmanozzy]] 23:40, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::While I'm broadly in favour of this, could you maybe change "[[Starscream's Ghost]]" to "[[Starscream (G1)|Starscream's ghost]]" - I understand you want to keep the ghost theme going but the first is a link to an unrelated episode of the cartoon series, rather than the character himself. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 07:02, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::OK Emvee, I fixed the link on the Ghostbusters wiki as you requested. Devilmanozzy, ''[[Star Wars]]'' also has a [[Darth Vader|lot in common]] with ''Transformers''. --[[User:Liberal Noob|Liberal Noob]] 14:52, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::We know, we got named an official friend of Wookiepedia about a week into the [[Project: Bookworm Crash]]. If we hadn't been scrambling to pick up the pieces, our pages would probably reflect this more. (I assume we'll integrate more when Clone Wars starts up again, since we love to attention-whore ourselves that way.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:56, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::::[http://www.therealeffingdeal.com/blog/dan-akroyd-ghostbusterhero/ Here is] an obscure crossover from [[The Real Effing Deal]]. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:09, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

== Quick Links? ==

You know, now that I think about it, one thing Wikia actually did do right was having some "Quick Links" on the sidebar. I find myself missing being able to quickly get to the main continuities/series without having to search or click to the Main Page first. (Especially now that there's lots o' ROTF toys to keep tabs on...)

Nothing extensive necessary; just one linkie thingy with a fly-out menu for our six main continuities and the full series list would probably work nicely. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 03:03, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

:I think notably M.Sipher *really* hated that because any time a cursor went within a parsec of the menu, it would pop out in an annoying manner. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 04:09, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::Wasn't just Sipher - it drove me nuts too. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 09:09, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Well, in that case, maybe just an extra sidemenu then, kind of like the "Campaign Navigation" box on [http://trinsic.alienharmony.com/Main_Page this sidebar]? I just figured that a fly-out menu would save space, but an extra link sidebar would work for me too.
:::But I'd definitely like something. As Abates points out below, we don't currently have any sidebar links for actually ''browsing''. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:47, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Could we make so that they're fly-out menus, but that they only fly-out if you actually click on the title? That would save room while avoiding things jumping out when you're waving the cursor around. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:11, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

:I think having a link on the sidebar for Revenge of the Fallen would be good too. While the Community portal and Recent Changes links are great for us Editors, they're not likely to be used much by casual visitors. We should be using the menu to draw attention to major articles. While I'm thinking about it, we could probably change the Main Page link to read "Transformers Wiki"... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:11, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

Would anyone object if I went ahead and popped a link to [[Revenge of the Fallen (film)|Revenge of the Fallen]] in the navigation menu? I'm thinking between "Main Page" and "Community portal". --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:44, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:I'm not of the upper brass but given the increasing coverage of ROTF as we come down the wire, it'd make the most sense. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 19:00, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

== We need a new adspace ==

The TFwiki on our new server is doing super mega amounts of bandwidth! (Note I've broken up the OPtimus Prime (G1) page, because, dude, that thing was a monster.) So, uh, I think we need to add a new adspace. One that's *above* the fold, since the ones we have are shoved down in the corner where no one can see them. What advertiser would want to dump loads of money on those? What I'm proposing is a 486x60 banner-shaped ad up above the "article/discussion/edit/history/delete/move/watch" links, nestled in between the Teletraan 1 image and the personal toolbar. (You know, OUTSIDE of the content.) If this is a terrible idea, I will also accept $5 donations. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:14, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:I've no qualms with that. That was one of the "acceptable" adspaces, if I recall from the old discussions.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 11:18, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::Long as they don't dance or talk or sing, that'll work. Are we actively pursuing advertisers these days? -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 11:22, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Well, "actively pursuing advertisers" is somewhat incompatible with our current ad setup. To put an ad on our site now, that requires signing up with Project Wonderful and bidding. This is good for us because it's mostly automated. If we were to set up a "real" in the traditional sense, we'd need a full-time ad pursuer to fill those spots. The best we can do in our current situation is to try to convince Big Bad Toy Store and its ilk to sign up for Project Wonderful. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:33, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:IIRC, above-the-article is what we wanted Wikia to switch ''back'' to. I have no objection. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:20, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:Works for me. How does Ant handle TFU.info's advertising? [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 12:35, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

:Doesn't bother me... but can we either put it ''under'' the personal bar, or somehow make it so the personal bar would wrap? Otherwise, I'm staring at the top of my screen and realizing that I'd have an annoying horizontal scroll bar afterwards whenever I'm logged in.
:I have to admit I'm kind of befuddled that we're apparently doing so much more traffic after the move than we were before, to the point of having all those initial problems because we weren't expecting it. Did the new server somehow improve our traffic, it is sheer coincidence that traffic increased for other reasons, or was it more like the old server wasn't keeping track of bandwidth or anything, so we had no idea how we were actually doing? --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:38, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::Hosting with Bookworm was cheap. I mean, he was doing it at-cost. Or would have, if he ever invoiced us. Now that we've moved on, we're purchasing hosting from people who actually want to make money off us. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 12:41, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Well, the money's part of it, but I was also thinking about how most of our initial operational troubles seemed to stem from having more traffic to deal with than we realized we were going to have, to the point of even having to run a caching setup I'm guessing we weren't running on the old server. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 12:45, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::The way Bookworm had his servers set up, it was difficult for him to separate out what was our traffic versus what was other traffic on the same server. He gave us an estimate which turned out to be wrong. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 12:55, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Aah, OK. Wasn't sure if it was something we needed to worry about or not. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 13:29, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I was kinda expecting this :( I'm cool with more banners, and I think you should beg us for money now and then. We may be able to help when we can. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 13:15, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Caching is what most mediawiki installations '''do.''' We happened to start off on the most resource-intensive wiki software imaginable, and any stats from Bookworm were not only inaccurate based on whatever he was doing in the logs, but also because back then, ''the wiki was constantly crashing.'' You get zero hits per hour when it's down, and no stats in the world would help clear ''that'' up. I'm still tweaking the hit stats, and it'll be at least a week before I can start extrapolating growth numbers, but suffice it to say, we're going to go over our current bandwidth limit before the month is out, and while we won't get shut down, we ''will'' get billed for overages. Think of it like a normal cellphone plan instead of a pre-paid one. --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:47, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

::Yeah, that's mainly what I thought Walky meant. Nestled between the personal bar and the article tabs seems like fertile ground for a banner ad.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 13:39, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
I've got the ad code ready to go, whenever we can edit the CSS or whatever to make room. Here is our awesome new placeholder "please bid here" graphic: [https://www.projectwonderful.com/imagewrapper.php?img=img/uploads/pics/20719-1244569575.jpg&rand=439981] --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:48, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:Looks good so far. Potentially odd question: are these particular dimensions popular with Project Wonderful?--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:55, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::The Leaderboard (700ishx90) and the Big Box (300x250) are the most popular sizes, but those would really ugly up our page. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:58, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::And now it has its first client! That was fast.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 01:52, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Ahhh, Dreamland Chronicles is awesome. I spent a week a few months back reading through their archives after following an ad on our sidebar. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:20, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::One interesting thing looking at the Project Wonderful stats is that our ad hits are ''stabilizing'' now, and they're stabilizing fairly high relative to where they were when the site was still spotty. That's got to look good for advertisers, and if the site holds up to the abuse that the film debut is going to subject it to that's only beneficial to us in the end.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:48, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

[[Image:Ptbar-notmeanttobehere.png|thumb|This = bad]]
Uh, I'm using Monobook, and as a result of this, the watchlist/preferences/etc bar has somehow ended up at the ''bottom'' of the page, just above the About Transformers Wiki/Powered by MediaWiki/etc... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:36, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:I got that on a couple of pages, too, and alt+F5ing didn't work. How I fixed it was I signed out and viewed those same pages as an anon. The userbar went back to where it should be, and it stayed there when I logged in again. - [[User:Magnus Maximus|Magnus Maximus]] 10:49, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::Tried that, didn't work.
::In fact, it's worse than I thought, because I didn't notice at first that the page/discussion/edit tabs have gone wandering too, and are floating around the place (the "discussion" and "edit" tabs are currently in the middle of this edit box, and I can't see the others anywhere). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:58, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::'''THE PROBLEM IS IN common.css'''.
:::The following CSS borks monobook. This is why you should use the specific stylesheets for each skin, NOT the common file:
<pre>
#p-personal {
position: relative;
}

#p-personal .pBody {
float: right;
}

#p-cactions {
position: relative;
}

#content {
margin-top: 16px !important;
position: relative;
}</pre>
:::-[[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:30, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

The new ad space at the top of the page, which was fine yesterday, is now looking screwy in Firefox, with the ad behind the top of the Autobot symbol in the logo and the tabs at the top of the bar. Like so: [[Image:Top-ad-screwy.jpg|thumb]] --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:43, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:Works fine for me in 3.0.10 and 3.5b99, both after clearing cache.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:47, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:I made some CSS modifications in response to SanityOrMadness's issue, which may cache improperly. Try a hard refresh/clearing your cache. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 16:51, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::Okay, clearing my cache fixed it. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 20:19, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

{{-}}

==Consolidate front page?==
[[Image:Newfrontpage062009.jpg|thumb]]
Man, that front banner is huge! Can it be smaller? And when we make it smaller, can we stack up the top-most two boxes next to it like so? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:58, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
: The cropped image shown, of course, is just a placeholder. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:00, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::That looks about as clunky as Wikia's frontpage, IMO.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:05, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Well, it's not fine-tuned or anything. Thing is, either that banner's going to be cut down or removed entirely. It's huge, it's bandwidth-wasting, and it pushes all our real content down off the page. What's your choice? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:07, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::I'm probably knee-jerking based on the placement of the boxes. I guess it could be made to work if it's finessed a bit. It's not like we're running a ginormous ad there like Wikia was suggesting.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:31, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I dunno, personally I like this new idea. It reminds me of how our franchise navs look: Logo on the left, linkage on the right. Plus, yeah, unlike Wikia, our content on the right of the logo will actually be... content.
:::::As for logo ideas, why don't we make a few different options where it's the TFWiki.net logo over a pic of a single character? We could have one for Prime, Megatron, Starscream, Jazz, etc. using the <OPTION> thingy. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:37, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::As long as the site-name logo thing itself is HUGE. I really want to make sure the URL is shoved in your face. Branding continues to be important as we war against Wikia for Google prominence. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:40, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::If branding's important, why not change the actual on-every-page logo to use the actual TFWiki.net logo? And put TFWiki.net in the page <title>? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:01, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Alternately, each one could be a group shot from a different franchise, with the font altered to match. Play up how many different continuities there are, eh?--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 17:00, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
[[Image:Newfrontpage062009b.jpg|thumb]]
::::::::This image to the right is what I'm now thinking. And it should probably have movie characters predominantly, at least for the next few months. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:04, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::I'm inclined to agree with sticking with the movie characters now, considering it's almost two weeks till the US premiere/release. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 17:19, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

That's pretty darn good. Brings a lot more info above the fold, and the layout's pretty clean. The white background is good too, so any other images in the rotation should follow that example.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 17:21, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:How do we make it done? The table markup on the frontpage is foreign to me. I'll upload the new image itself... --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:32, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::Since Derik doesn't seem to be about yet, I'll have a go with it. Hmm. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:42, 9 June 2009 (EDT)--[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:42, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Actually, we're really going to have to do something like your first example above, with the Continuity/Category tables underneath each other instead of side-by-side, because trying to fit the logo and the two tables all side-by-side looks hideously awful on a 1024px-wide screen. I tried just simply having the smaller logo, the text notices under it, and the two tables on the right, but it looked kind of... eh. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:04, 9 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Mrr. OK, I made ''an'' attempt at tweaking, although I think it's going to need some external CSS tweaks at least, if only to center the Continuities table. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 03:44, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Looks okay, but the jarring thing about it is that the red and blue boxes aren't the same width, though they share a column.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:19, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::That's something Derik needs to tweak in the Featured box template and/or external CSS... I can't do it just by editing the page itself.
::::::Also, yea or nay on the link buttons? It just seemed a little more "Click me!" than the paragraph o' links. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:49, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I dig 'em. Good design decision, IMO. --[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 16:52, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Quite aside from anything else... what's the point in liking to tfwiki.info with an image link. It ''just about'' made sense as a text link, but is only going to confuse people who click on the Autobot symbol and end up back where they started. We need to cut down on main page-to-main page links, '''not''' obfuscate where they link to. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:30, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Visual consistency. (And the mouseover text indicated it was an "alternate URL".) But, I tried tweaking it again. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:52, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::It's fixed! Huzzah!--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 20:46, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::I realized I was just approaching it the wrong way. Eheh. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:15, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

: I'm a little ambivalent towards the "new" logo, just because I think it's a little bland, although I'm sure it's a work in progress. I am all for putting "TFWIKI.net" in the header and all over the fucking place as a branding effort, though. On a slightly related note, I'd consider flipping the "current series" in said box, so ROTF is closer to the center of the page and Animated is on the outside - if we're really trying to bring in ROTF traffic, having that logo front and center is probably a pretty smart idea. I also like the idea of a rotating logo box - maybe we even jigger it so that it links directly to the article for whoever's in it - like the Go! Boxes, but focused entirely on core characters (More Fallen, Movie Optimus, etc., less Irwin Spoon and Dinobots Strike Back). Stick with primary Movie-verse guys for now, and then in a month or so when the hype dies down, we can start to shuffle in some sufficiently advanced and significant articles (making sure that the characters are both important to the fiction and that their articles are nearly, if not entirely complete). [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 11:17, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:That sounds like a good idea. I'm down with that. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 17:00, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

[[Image:Boxswap.jpg|right|350px]]
I has new idea for what module ought to be above the fold, and more ROTF promotiony stuff. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:15, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:Sure, I'd go for it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:26, 10 June 2009 (EDT)

Considering how crowded and text-heavy the front page is, I think the best way to draw attention to the banner is to surround it in as much empty space as possible, [[User:Magnus Maximus/Temp|something like this]], especially as the new banner's white background assimilates the page's whitespace so easily. - [[User:Magnus Maximus|Magnus Maximus]] 03:10, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:I'm not sure how that's really different than it is now, other than putting the site notice at the top... which I kind of hate doing, because that pushes all of the content stuff down. The site notice is temporary anyway.
:I was thinking we ought to make the movie stuff more prominent, rather than the continuity/category modules. I was also thinking of placing the banner, site notice, and external website links in one cell instead of two like it is now, which further creates whitespace... I just didn't think of that until after I made the layout change proposal pic.
:I do agree/think maybe we could stand to lose a few modules, though... maybe ditch the Categories module entirely, and consolidate the Holy Grails and Editing Tips somehow. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 03:32, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
::Oh yeah, you're running a 1024 desktop, aren't you? I changed my res to 1024, and you're right, it really doesn't look much different. But [http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/3349/tfwikitemp1280.jpg this] is how it looks in 1280, and even that little bit of extra space makes a huge difference compared with how it is [http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/4606/tfwikinow1280.jpg now] (in my opinion).
::I agree about the notice, but I couldn't think where else to put it. Putting it under the banner (thus between the blue and grey boxes) made it seem wedged-in and out of place. Lesser of two evils, you dig?
::I also agree about making the movie stuff more prominent, but the red and blue boxes are narrower, so they take up less of the horizontal space. I did think that maybe we could change the featured series box so that ROTF is ''on top'' of Animated instead of beside it, and shift that up next to the banner somewhat like it is on my temp page now. That also adapts to 1024 better, I think.
::And yeah, losing some of the boxes would not be the worst thing in the world. - [[User:Magnus Maximus|Magnus Maximus]] 03:52, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Ehh... my problem with that idea is that, one of the reasons we redesigned the Main Page to begin with is because our greeting was so big that it was pushing useful content down below the fold. This sort of recreates that exact same problem.
:::But, I tried tweaking my Main Page design here: [[User:Jeysie/Main Page]] to give more whitespace. I figure that once the movie's been out for a while and we don't need to pimp it as much, we can replace the Featured Characters box with the Continuities box. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 11:50, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

::I was looking at the front page right now and thinking about some things - I'm glad to see most of them are in line with what's already considered. :)
::That said, I suggest taking TFA out of the featured series box, even if only temporarily, and using the [[:Image:Revenge fallen logo.jpg|logo from the franchise page]]. I feel it's more recognisable as the ROTF logo than the more colourful one we have there, plus we can make it a bit bigger.
::I also wonder if we should have "Transformers Wiki" written on there somewhere other than the site logo in the sidebar. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:11, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
{{-}}

:::: "TFWIKI.net - THE Transformers Wiki"? [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 07:49, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I made up a [[:Image:Wikilogo big.psd|PSD template]] of just such a logo this morning. It's layered, so the transparent overlay of the Autobot leaders is optional.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 12:18, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::I definitely prefer the font of the current TFWIKI.NET logo to that one.
::::::Whatever we ultimately do though, surely we should use the same logo EVERYWHERE, including for the top-left logo, ja? (There's also the recurring thought that we have a G1 Autobot sigil for the top-left logo, but a '''G2''' Autobot sigil for the favicon. I understand that the G2 favicon is unique, which was the main reason we went for it, but if we're thinking about branding...) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 12:37, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

===Logo===
[[Image:TFwikilogomock.png|right]]
If we want to be movie-centric AND use the TFWiki.net logo extensively for branding reasons, shouldn't we change the Animated-based logo to something more like this? (NB: Quick mock to make a point, '''not''' intended to be actually used, and may clash with the Teletraan on the Monacobook skin). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:30, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:I think we do need to keep some visual distinctiveness. If we go too far into the grey look of the movie we end up with understandable confusion concerning its resemblance to [http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/File:Monaco-logo.png this].--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 17:59, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
::Yeah. I'm really really fine with keeping our current page design/color scheme. The Wikia site is really gray, and I'd rather not veer to close to that. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 20:48, 10 June 2009 (EDT)
:::[Joke Suggestion] How about we make ours ''on fire''? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 04:27, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
::::It wouldn't actually be ''that'' hard to do... -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:08, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

===Featured-series box===
<div style="float:right">
{|width="50%",
|-
|
{{Featurebox
|Featured Series
|color=#999
|id=featured-series
|content={{User:SanityOrMadness/featured-series}}
|view=User:SanityOrMadness/featured-series
}}
|}</div>
Should we perhaps rebalance the featured-series box to be more like this? (Yes, I know there's a too-high gap between the two lines to the right of the TFA logo. It didn't preview like that, and I can't see why it's doing that.) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 14:41, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:That's pretty darn sweet-looking, IMHO. I tried swapping around [[User:Jeysie/Main Page|my take on the Main Page]] to include a slightly modified version of it. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 15:16, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
::The way it is on the mainpage right now looks really great. Good density of info above-the-fold.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:19, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Or rather on Jeysie's test page, I see now.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:21, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Thing about including [[Main Page/featured-characters]] in it like that (which I just edited to increase the header-size to be visually bigger than the character names, and debold the character names themselves) is that if you separate that from above AND below with a line, you visually make it into a franchise by itself. TFA needs a stronger separator from ROTF than the ROTF stuff does within itself. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 15:39, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
<div style="float:right">
{|width="50%",
|-
|
{{Featurebox
|Featured Series
|color=#999
|id=featured-series
|content={{:Main Page/featured-series}}
|view=Main Page/featured-series
}}
|}</div>
How about this? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 15:41, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:Works for me. I added it to my test Main Page with a few minor formatting tweaks. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 16:38, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
::That looks excellent to me! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:23, 13 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Are we doing to do this then? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 11:06, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Was wondering that myself. Any more tweaks or suggestions to add, or should we go with my mockup? --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 13:02, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::The mockup looks pretty solid to me.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 14:11, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I say go for it! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:46, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::Looking again at the featured-characters bit... is Sideswipe really the best choice for that fourth spot on row 1? I already changed Soundwave to Devastator, because the latter has been a LOT more prominent in promos for the movie, but I'm not sure who would be best for a fourth Autobot. Jetfire? Skids & Mudflap? (I'm not even sure if Ironhide is best for the third slot). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:54, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I was trying to think of a balance between which characters were most prominent and which people were likely to be excited about... we could go for Optimus, Bumblebee, Jetfire, and Skids & Mudflap together in the last spot. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:03, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::Made that change for now, then. I think "prominence" should probably be the main factor, if we want to grab users. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:14, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
{{-}}

===Featured article===
Now that the featured series box has been sorted... nothing against Kup, but do we have a movie/ROTF article that could possibly take the featured spot at some point between now and the 19th? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:57, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:[[The Fallen]] is at Featured Article status. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:07, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::And has been the Featured Article for awhile at A Certain Other Place. I'd rather not mirror them in that respect, personally.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 18:22, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::In that case... I've got no idea. None of the rest are at FA status, and I can't think of which one would be most relevant to pick on for cleanup. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:31, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Surely the three most obvious non-Fallen articles "to pick on for cleanup" are [[Optimus Prime (Movie)]], [[Bumblebee (Movie)]] and [[Sam Witwicky]], ja? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 18:51, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Simmons might be mroe fun. ;)
:::::And Megatron more enlightening, if someone wants to take a whack at his DS-game backstory. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:17, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Looks like Primal Prime is the featured article at that other place, not The Fallen. In fact, it looks like their Fallen article has a cleanup tag, not a featured tag... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:07, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Yeah, someone replaced it a couple of days ago after noticing that their "The Fallen" article wasn't up to scratch. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:40, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Any objection to us featuring our superior The Fallen article after all, then? --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:08, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::Yeah, on the 24th, the Fallen's page is going up. ESPECIALLY if it's also up at Wikia. Our Fallen page has to supercede theirs, and burying it on the most important week of its life isn't gonna work in our favor. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 18:19, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

Hell, if we want to upstage 'em over at Wikia, just put [[Sideswipe (ROTF)|Sideswipe]] as one of the featured characters. I was over there just to see how far the site had gone downhill and it surprised me. They ''don't even have a page for Sideswipe'', it just redirects you to G1 Sideswipe. How sad is that?--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 00:13, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:How hard did you look? I wont link it for obvious reasons, but there IS a page for him. - [[User:Cattleprod|Cattleprod]] 00:22, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::I think he got messed up by the fact that the Main Page links to "Sideswipe" without the parenthetical, which does indeed redirect to G1 Sideswipe.
::Having said that, their proper ROTF Sideswipe page is still miserable compared to ours, as is the fact that they got the Main Page linking wrong.
::Not only that... I also noticed that one of their registered users, while editing their Main Page, managed to change their Twitter link to our Twitter in the process. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 00:44, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Yeah I didn't look very hard (alcohol is a helluva thing), the link was what I went for. Obviously someone over there screwed up. You got a problem with it Cattleprod, kiss my shiny, metal ass.--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 01:29, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

===Text Purging===
Next possible round of changes:
I've tweaked [[User:Jeysie/Main Page|my setup]] to remove the Categories module (is it really that useful?) and try to reduce/consolidate the Editing Tips/Holy Grails section.

I also think we should do a purge of the Series box and stick to just the "major" series/franchises: Generation 1, Generation 2, Beast Wars, Robots in Disguise, Armada, Energon, Cybertron, Animated, the two movies, and Universe. (Possibly also Classics and/or Beast Machines). We have the comprehensive list linked to for anyone who really wants to look at everything. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 19:52, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:The categories box is useful for two reasons: (1) In and of itself, it's useful. I certainly use it. (2) Without it, your mockup has an empty white space in the right column almost the exact size and shape of the categories box... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:49, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:I further note that, [[:Image:Mainpage analytics-06-05-09.png|per Derik's statdump]], it ''gets used''. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:53, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
::Well, if you can suggest other ways to clean up our Main Page, I'm all for it. As it is, I agree with Walky that it's getting to be too much of a sea of text, and that struck me as being one of the least useful of the modules. I guess we could consolidate it somehow with the Continuities module as a sort of "Quick Links" box...
::We possibly could also get rid of the Editing Tips and Holy Grail modules, but I kind of hate doing that, as it's nice to try to encourage new editors to look at that sort of information. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 21:02, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

::Thing is, if I click on the first link in the Categories box because I want to find a particular character, I get a big confusing list of subcategories and... [[Mickey Mouse]]. If I'm a casual user looking for,say, [[Soundwave (G1)|Soundwave]], that doesn't help me much, because then I have to hunt through the subcategories for something that looks like it might lead me there. Yes, it's possible that I might notice the search box and use that instead, but that kinda takes away from the point of having that there in the first place.
::Though technically I guess I'm complaining about the organisation of the Characters category rather than the box itself. :) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:20, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

== Jokes? ==

It is sometimes very hard to find relevant information on this wiki among all the juvenile humor. It's a little off-putting for a casual user like myself. I know this wiki is about robots who turn into cars, but, c'mon... Maybe tone it down a bit?[[Special:Contributions/71.107.102.102|71.107.102.102]] 16:56, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

:No. [[User:Hooper X|Hooper_X]] 17:00, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

::If you can point out specific instances where the humor is getting in the way of the information, we'll take those under consideration for adjusting, but on the whole we here tend to appreciate the humor. (Including this editor back when she was a newbie/casual reader.) --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 17:04, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
:::As does the overwhelming majority of the readership, it seems. We've gotten praise from all circles for the "do not take it too seriously" approach, even from industry professionals. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 15:22, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

== Tech Upgrades ==

Since we're cracking 1.5 million hits per day, I'm running an alternate webserver for testing over on [http://tfwiki.net:8080/ port 8080.] It's *not* cached, so I expect it to be a smidge slower, but I'm also aggressively tweaking it for better content compression and lower memory usage. It probably doesn't matter *now,* but I suspect that as we close in on the movie, and then as the movie is released and the edits go up, we're going to need to squeeze out every last ounce of performance available to us. That said, can you guys try to break it via logging in/out, editing articles, etc.? It's all on the same database, so any changes made there WILL show up here (and vice versa,) but my major concern is that we don't have those damned login session problems and their ilk going forward. Thanks! --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:05, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:So... an "editing copy" on one server, and a cached copy on another? Because 99% of TFWiki readers aren't editors? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:53, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
::Let's not overcomplicate it. Test on the new link, the software driving that will replace the existing (more resource intensive) software '''if it's any good.''' At this point, I want to find out if there are any bugs, and that's that. --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 16:38, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:I got a 405 error when I tried to upload an image on there, but otherwise it seems to be working great. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:41, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

=="Wikia wiki" boilerplate==
Between FortMax, Skyjammer and myself, I believe all instances of "Teletraan-I a wikia wiki" etc have been removed from our webpages. Huzzah! Hopefully that will help our Google stats and suchlike, unless I am mis-remembering how those things work... --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] 18:31, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
:*thumbsup!* --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 07:28, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

== Special:Imagelist ==

Is there any way to strip out the deleted images from [[Special:Imagelist]]? It's kinda useless as things stand. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:11, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

== Anonymous users ==

Right, the movie goes wide-release in the UK on Friday (I think there may be some previews on Thursday). Thinking about the chaos that may result [and noting that Memory Alpha - much to Wikia's displeasure - disabled ALL editing between the first opening of ''Star Trek'' and its' wide release in the US.]... I think we should give serious consideration to disabling anonymous editing from at least the 18th to the 26th of June.

Thoughts? Objections? Flames? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:26, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

:I've been advocating that for over a month. It's the same thing we did with Animated: material is blocked for anons until it comes out in America. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 22:51, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

::I wasn't talking about blocking specific pages, though (in the way a load of ''Animated'' pages were semi-protected) - just a blanket ban on anonymous editing until ''at least'' the 26th (and I would prefer a week or two beyond that). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:57, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

:::I'd much prefer if it wasn't a total block. Block anons on all the movie char character articles, etc. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 23:02, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

::::Block until a week after the movie's released in the States, namely the chara articles and the film page itself (who knows what poor soul will "unknowingly" put in spoilerific in the synopsis/trivia/notes/what-have-you). It's already difficult enough with the adaptation... --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 23:06, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

:::::I'm not just worried about spoilers, but about the casual vandalism associated with a sudden & short-lived spike in visitor numbers, which probably wouldn't be limited to the movie pages. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 23:10, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

::::::If we do so, should we have a site-wide message like Memory Alpha? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 02:08, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:::::::At least I know we can use [[MediaWiki:Sitenotice]], I'm not sure whether there is any other similar message. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 07:37, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

::::::::Wow, some serious US-centric bias being spouted. If you don't want spoiled, then don't visit. It's now well established internet etiquette to avoid forums about a week before a film's release. Same should apply here. Or..... wait til the DVD is released before unlocking movie edits, just in case you're stuck in Outer Mongolia at the time of the cinema release. Anonymous editing should be blocked, if only to stop the inevitable trolling and vandalism. [[Special:Contributions/82.7.126.27|82.7.126.27]] 14:07, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Er, no. For one, the 24th is the '''world''' premiere, meaning the vast majority of countries are getting it on that date, not just the US.
:::::::::For two, we need to be able to monitor all edits made to ROTF articles to make sure they're accurate and factual, and we can't do that if most of the wiki's regular editors haven't even seen the movie.
:::::::::So this has less to do with spoilers, and more with the entirely practical aim of being able to keep tabs on all ROTF edits effectively. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 14:19, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Gosh, thanks, I'll take your advice under consideration.... wait, no, I really won't. If you have a problem with "U.S.-centric bias," you are in the wrong place: this is openly stated as a U.S.-centric wiki. We blocked anonymous edits to the new ''Animated'' episodes that for some damnfool reason were aired first in Dubai, until they were uploaded online for everyone to see. Our U.S.-based editors shouldn't have to stop working on a website that, to a large extent, ''they created'', just out of fear that some collection of I.P. numbers will thoughtlessly spoil the movie for them. Better to just anon-protect all the movie-related pages until after all the major markets have had their premieres. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 15:12, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

My vote is for blocking all anons from the movie-related pages for at least one week after the world premier, maybe two. I would not be opposed to a site-wide block, however. I really have no interest in cleaning up after a flood of one-timers and trolls and crap. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 15:23, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

::Hey, I'm all for the lockage. But to stop the wave of trolls that will come. Not because Americans seem to think they have the <insert deity>-given right to subjugate the free speech of others who have the rare opportuity to experience something before the Americans do. That hardly ever happens. America gets everything first; cars, movies, fat, gadgets, first dibs on invasion etc. Thankfully they don't get irony first.[[Special:Contributions/82.7.126.27|82.7.126.27]] 15:38, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Did you even read the post where I pointed out the vast majority of TF fans, both US and non-US, won't be seeing the movie before the 24th, because the vast majority of countries in general aren't getting it until the 24th?
:::Basically, all TF fans not in the UK and Japan aren't going to be getting to see the movie before the 24th. It's not as if we're making editing wait because everyone else is getting the movie early and the US is the only country that isn't.
:::All of our Canadian, Australian, non-UK European, non-Japan Asian, etc. editors are likely equally glad we're waiting. Maybe you should stop and actually think before you go off spouting jerkass strawman accusations. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 15:46, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:::Are you ''intentionally'' aiming for self-parody, or did you actually seriously just try to frame your potentially being locked out of our privately-run, privately-financed web site about giant alien space robots for a few days as a ''freedom of speech'' issue? 'Cause that right there is some serious comedy gold, sir. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 15:54, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:::I'm afraid there are no Internet Oscars for maudlin self-victimization, otherwise you'd be a shoo-in. Here we only talk about Transformers. You are free to start doing that any old time. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 15:55, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Hahaha, did he just equate being able to post to a wiki about cartoon robots for a few days... to the right to free speech? Man, and I thought education was bad over HERE! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:03, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

===One derailment later...===
So, then, back on the subject... I still think we should do it. Mr Anon isn't making me think less of it as an idea. And yes, a [[MediaWiki:Sitenotice]] would be essential. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:33, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:So, we're all for blocking anons for a week after the 24th? --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 00:31, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::They're gonna get pissy, but sounds good to me. But what about the editors who can't log in, is that still a problem?--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 09:52, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Most likely. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 12:48, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Which editors who can't log in? The problem with IE users not being able to log in was fixed when McFly fixed all the other problems on the site. I haven't heard of any reports of anyone else having the problem... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:32, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

== "Transformers Comic" ==

Okay, I've got three issues at present with the titling treatment of the Titan Movie comics:
#Ambiguity - if you look at, say, [[Transformers Comic issue 9]], there's ''at least'' three Transformers #9s with no subtitle - [[DIS-Integrated Circuits!|Marvel G1 US #9]], [[Man of Iron!|Marvel G1 UK #9]], and [[Transformers Comic issue 9|Titan Movie #9]]; and currently the only one at "Transformers Comic issue 9" is the Titan Movie issue
#DO we go by issue, or by story? - We're all over the shop on this:
#*The Marvel US issues are all at the story titles, but these pages incorporate any "Transformers Universe" bio material
#*The Marvel UK issues almost all have multiple stories or parts of stories, and I think there may even be some issues with multiple UK-originated/non-reprint stories, and each story is at its' own page, ''which incorporates multiple issues'' (e.g., [[Time Wars]]), leaving aside editorial and other non-story material.
#*The Marvel G2 issues almost all have backups, sometimes nominal, sometimes not, and they're all at the title of the lead/non-"Tales of Earth" story (e.g. [[New Dawn]]).
#*The ''first'' Panini Armada issue is at the story title ([[First Encounter!]]), while the ''rest'' are at "Panini Armada issue X" (e.g., [[Panini Armada issue 2]]).
#*The IDW issues are at the issue title even where the issue is split into multiple, titled. stories (e.g. [[The Arrival issue 4]])
#The actual title of the Titan Movie issues - Titan Movie v1 #22-25 are actually titled ''Transformers: Universe'' #22-25 (mostly in reflection of it absorbing the cancelled ''Animated'' comic), but are still at "Transformers Comic issue XX"; while v2, titled ''Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen'' #XX, is at the truly bizarre "Transformers Comic 2.XX". Really, just because the letters page said 2.x once, rather than "Revenge of the Fallen (Titan) issue X", which is what's on the cover?
What are we doing with this? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:17, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:As I've said before, I do NOT favor consistency here. A one-size-fits-all approach will inevitably fail to encompass the widely variable situations with various comic series.
:The Marvel US book are under the story titles because, for all intents and purposes, the story and the issue are one and the same. Likewise for most of Dreamwave's G1 run. Sure, we could move 'em all to "The Transformers issue 2 (Marvel US)", but what do we ''gain''? How is this any better than "Power Play!"? What is the benefit? Mere consistency is insufficient reason.
:This is much, much less true with the UK comic, where stories were broken into two and even three parts, and multiple stories shared page space in the same issue. Now, I've heard rumblings to the effect that each UK issue should have its own page, and there's merit to that, insofar as each issue's contents are a mixed bag - minicomics, letters pages, and pieces and parts of various stories. It might make sense to have a page for each issue, basically a list of its contents, with ''See main article'' links to the entire story -- so, say, UK #88, #89, #90, or whatever, all link to a single page for "Target: 2006".
:With G2, it absolutely makes complete sense to combine the two stories. The "backup" strips are such in name only; they are absolutely integral to the main strip, and neither can be read without the other. Separating "Tales of Earth" bits into their own pages is only going to confuse things and make them ''less informative''. Furthermore, the main strip clearly ''is'' the MAIN strip. It makes sense to cover the whole story under that strip's title. Our current system for G2 acknowledges this, while still distinguishing between the contents of each section. The alternative is to move each page to "Generation 2 issue 2" or whatever... and I don't see what we gain by doing this.
:The Titan comics should be moved to whatever the cover and indicia call them. If they're just ''Transformers'' or something equally generic, well, that's what parenthetical disambigs are for. Likewise for the ROTF reboot. A simple (Titan) should cover the bases well enough, yes?
:A recent trend has been issues with 2 discreet stories, such as the ''Animated'' books you mention. I've long been in favor of having a single page for the ''issue'' for such books, with ''See main article'' links to the individual stories within them - so "Animated: The Arrival issue 2" would be a list of stuff, with two prominent links within to pages about the two stories it contains. Still, I can understand if people see that as unnecessarily messy -- so long as they can agree that, since the stories are pretty much co-equal, it would make no sense at all to give one or the other naming precedence.
:So, that's my take. Case-by-case basis FTW, baby. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 21:43, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:Also, to address item #1 specifically... if we do stick with "Transformers" as the title, there should be a disambig note for Transformers at the top. Unless "Comic" is in the title, it shouldn't be in there. I'm thinking the article names should be "Transformers issue 1 (Titan)", etc., with the parenthetical at the end of the page title, rather than the middle.
:These books generally have stories from different continuities, don't they? That's a point in favor of separating the story content out from the containing issue. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 11:19, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

== Non-movie (Movie) characters vs. movie (ROTF) characters with the same name ==

Anyone else think we should, at the very least, have {{tl|disambig2}}s on pages like [[Jetfire (Movie)]] and [[Mudflap (Movie)]] to the ROTF characters of the same name? Yes, I realise users could go via the disambig page, but I see it as making things simpler & easier for newbies, and in that scenario one click is always better than two. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:20, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:I think I'd cautiously support adding a <nowiki>{{disambig2}}</nowiki> for characters of the same name within the same continuity if there seems like a good chance for confusion. I'd oppose imposing it as an across-the-board standard though. (You're nto suggesting that though.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 22:23, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::I oppose it on the principle that multiple disambig templates on a page is ugly. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 22:47, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Ugly, and you can get to where you need to go through the disambig. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:48, 17 June 2009 (EDT)
::::As long as there's a link to the same-universe namesake in the intro, I see no need for an additional disambig template. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 01:21, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2

2009-06-04T15:50:39Z

64.206.123.1: /* Can't edit some pages when logged in */

== Many Happy Returns ==

Heeeeey, this is pretty good. --[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 17:15, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:It's speedier than the old server, but there's still some wonkiness. For instance, every time I tried editing just this section I got a blank page, but editing the whole page seems to have worked. Also, I keep getting logged out. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:00, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::I can't even log in. What's going on? -- SFH (cannot log in) 18:01, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:::I'm thinking there may be some wonkiness related to cookies made before, or even ''during'' the transition. I did get some "session data lost" messages, but after a log out and a log back in, that seems to be resolved.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 18:06, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::So what exactly do I have to do to be able to log in? -- SFH (desperately trying to log in) 18:19, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:::You could try clearing your cache and deleting your cookies and see if that helps. Other than that, I'm not sure what to suggest. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:23, 26 May 2009 (EDT)--[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 18:23, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:::What are you getting when you try to log in? A blank page? An error message? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:32, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::::"Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage". Does that help? -- SFH (unable to log in) 19:00, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:::Welp, I'm on firefox, and I'm logged in, and I'm only editing this section and it's displaying right, so... I'm happy! /:) - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 19:08, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::::Well, I tried Firefox, and it's working, but still not on Internet explorer. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:19, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::Tried here with IE6. No problems logging in, but when I attempted to log out, I got a "Cannot find server or DNS Error" error. The second logout attempt worked, but then when I went to log in again, I got the same error.
:::::Deleting the tfwiki cookie fixed the problem and I was able to log in. In fact now I'm not having any problem at all logging in and out on IE6. The sidebar on the login pages appears messed up in IE though (tis cutting off in the middle of the navigation menu). --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:39, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:::What is this "Internet Explorer" you speak of? Is it a 3rd party browser? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:37, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::I'm getting a lot of [http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/1395/tfwikierror.png "The requested URL could not be retrieved"] messages, and the occasional blank page or "loss of session data", myself. - [[User:Magnus Maximus|Magnus Maximus]] 19:47, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:::I occasionally get the message: ''Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data. Please try again. If it still doesn't work, try logging out and logging back in.'' - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 20:13, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::::So do I. And I did delete my tfwiki cookie, but I still get internet explorer cannot display the webpage. This is getting rediculous. -- SFH 20:18, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:::I have problems logging in, logging out and displaying the lefthand navigation and the user controls on top for the Recent Changes page: [http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t285/Detour84/NoBars.png] --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 20:36, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::::That happens on other pages too, as it turns out. Like the new Nexus Maximus image, or [[Cryotek (TransTech)]]. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 20:41, 26 May 2009 (EDT)

Trying to search for (not "Go" to) <tt>splinter</tt> or terms containing it such as <tt>splinter timeline</tt> gives a white screen of death. Also had trouble saving this post due to "a loss of session data". Trying hitting "Show preview" before "Save page" to see if that works...
[And shouldn't this be @ [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2]]? - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]]
:Ask and ye shall etc. etc.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 21:36, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:Searching for "splinter" works for me! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:42, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::Still not working for me, and no number of Shift-F5 or Ctrl-F5 forced refreshes is making it so. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 21:47, 26 May 2009 (EDT)

So, I'm getting no top or side bars (including the discussion/edit/history part up top), and there's incomplete wikicode showing up at the bottom of this specific page. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:50, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
:Yeah, I'm getting that too - that means the page isn't fully loading, since they're at the bottom of the HTML. I can't get [[Unicron]] to fully load even the text for love nor money, and [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] is even worse. And I'm getting those "loss of session data" messages about a fifth of the time, meaning I have to (re-)preview or show changes, then save. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:34, 26 May 2009 (EDT)
::Unicron works for me, but not Optimus. I'm wondering if these problems are caused not by MediaWiki, but by Squid, which we're using for caching. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 00:05, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
:::It definitely IS problems with Squid, not MediaWiki itself; right now I'm really uncertain as to what's causing them. Unfortunately I can't just disable Squid, since the wiki buckles massively under the pressure without it. I'm trying to look into it, it's baffling, because the issues are seemingly at random. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 00:34, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
::::[http://article.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical/36221 This], while old, may be relevant as it seems to be about blank pages getting stuck in the Squid cache and a workaround. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:41, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::<s>Oh my god, I love you, that ''does'' seem to fix the problem. Thank you so much!</s> Apparently I spoke too soon. I guess this will need more work. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 04:17, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::I was just able to log in on Internet Explorer just now. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:41, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Which version of IE are you using? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:58, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::IE7. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 22:06, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

==Bugs still remaining==
I've been doing a lot of behind the scenes work for the past few days. For all the currently remaining bugs logged here, could I have confirmation for every one that's still outstanding, that it hasn't been fixed? Obviously the long pages are still causing issues, but for the others, I need to know if there really is still a major problem, and if so, how I can replicate it. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 16:59, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
:Well, I get a '''lot''' of blank pages, including the login page. The weird part, though, is that when I access the wiki through the web proxy anonymouse.org (like I am right now), the wiki works just fine. No blank pages, no long pages not loading fully, just a wiki that works. Can't log in or use anything involving CAPTCHA, though, but that's because of the use of the proxy, not any of the wiki's problems. --[[Special:Contributions/193.200.150.152|193.200.150.152]] 17:17, 1 June 2009 (EDT) ([[User:Detour|Detour]])
:There's still a problem with the "loss of session data" message, although not as frequent as it was at its' peak, and an edit to [[Jazz (G1)/toys]] still gave me the old page until I Ctrl-F5ed it. The problem with replicating the errors is that most of them are transient and intermittent- they can happen on almost any page, and may or may not happen on any given load, with no obvious reason why it happens one time vs. another. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:33, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

:[[Paradron Medic]] is an example of a page which is currently coming up completely blank for me (on two different computers on different connections). If I log out, it works fine, log back in again, it's blank. Also still getting the "loss of session data" message when trying to save edits like right now. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:33, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
::I can see both that page and its' edit page while logged in. And got MANY "loss of session data" errors while trying to make this post. So much for "not as frequent"... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 17:39, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
:[[Soundwave (Shattered Glass)]] is now coming up blank for me as well. I have more information this time! The first time I loaded the page, the left-hand column was cut off before the goicon with the error message "Fatal error: Call to a member function children() on a non-object in /var/lib/mediawiki/skins/MonacoBook.php on line 165". When I hit reload, I got a completely blank page which no amount of reloading seems to change. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:59, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

:Internet Explorer 7 is still not working so far as being able to log in to the site goes. I'll add some more information under the bug report re some testing I've just done. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:47, 2 June 2009 (EDT)

We seem to be making little headway here. :( I noticed mentions while googling that a while back Wikia switched their caching software from Squid to [http://varnish.projects.linpro.no/ Varnish] (there's a relevant [http://swik.net/Varnish+MediaWiki configuration file here]) and wondered if it might be worth a try here. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 09:13, 2 June 2009 (EDT)

Does "the site was just down for two solid hours" count as a "bug", I wonder... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 15:47, 2 June 2009 (EDT)
:Not just that 2 hours, but it's been on and off for an hour or more at intervals over the past 10 hours. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 16:42, 2 June 2009 (EDT)
::And three more hours in a row after you posted that... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:10, 2 June 2009 (EDT)
:::I got sick and tired of waiting so I logged off. I've been able to make an hour's worth of editing work in 12 hours. That is not acceptable. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 06:31, 3 June 2009 (EDT)

== Bug reports ==
===Can't edit some pages when logged in===
{{bug
|title=Can't edit some pages when logged in
|color=#fdc689
|name=[[User:Derik|Derik]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=open
|description=Some pages (or even [http://tfwiki.net/w2/index.php?title=Colonel_Franklin&action=edit&section=0 ''sections'' of pages]) will always come up as '''white screens''' when I attempt to edit them-- but if I log out, they are editable.
*This does not appear browser of cookie-cache thing... the behavior repeats in Firefox, Safari, Opera and Chrome. (Did not bother testing IE.)
*Are ''other'' users able to edit these pages when logged in/out (use the Franklin-section link above to check.) Are the ''same'' pages whitescreening for all users experiencing this problem?
'''Current Workaround:''' Log out as needed. (Not ideal, may create problems for semi-protected pages.) 
'''More elaborate workaround:''' use the "revert" feature on the history page, this gets you into edit mode while bypassing the white-page. (Credit to Rosicrucian.)
|resolution=
}}

:I haven't explored any of these extensively, but I can give my experience of the past few hours, at least. All examples are from when I've been logged in on Firefox. Apologies in advance if this isn't the proper format for responding. Please feel free to rework as necessary.

:My attempt to review just the difference made by Derik's last edit to the [[Transformers Wiki:Community record|Community record]] page generated a white screen. To see the actual change he made, I had to link directly to the article, then its history page, then the "last" link for his edit.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 06:25, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

:I can no longer duplicate this. Has it been fixed? Also [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] is now loading fully every time... --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:24, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

::I ''believe'' I've fixed it. I need to know if anyone can replicate the issue or not. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 22:37, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

:::This just cropped up again when I tried to edit some images. :( --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:10, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
::::Which images? I need to know what I'm testing with. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 03:13, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::[[:Image:Moonracer vehicle.jpg]] and [[:Image:Moonracerg1.jpg]] are both currently giving me a blank page when I hit edit. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:29, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::I'm currently having this problem editing talk pages -- [[User:Tupka86]][[Special:Contributions/82.72.66.241|82.72.66.241]] 06:04, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I ran into this again today, after not seeing it for a few days over Botcon. Has anyone else been running into it? (Has it always been here, or is it just appearing again?)
:::::::Obnoxiously, the page in question is now editable for me, but it wasn't 30 minutes ago. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:08, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

The sneakiest way I've found around this one is to do a revert, and while doing so paste all the text you're "reverting" back in so that you're not really reverting, then make your edits. It seems to work.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 12:10, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
:That's even weirder... so there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the edit ''function'', even for that user of that page... just the edit ''mode'' for this user, for this page? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 12:19, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
::Like nearly everything we've had lately, it's caching. Squid treats the two of them as requests for different pages, because they're generated by (marginally) different URLs.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 13:59, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
:::...why are calls to the "edit" page being cached?
:::There are some dynamic pages where I guess you COULD sorta justify caching them... mode=edit is not one of them. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 17:02, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
::::There's a special "Cache-Control" header which MediaWiki is sending and Squid should be honouring to avoid such pages being cached. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:28, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Actually, Squid will pass-through '''anything''' with a question-mark in the URL at this point. Since any action (edit, purge, etc.,) does so, any "action" should bypass Squid entirely, with minimal header-futzing. --[[Special:Contributions/64.206.123.1|64.206.123.1]] 11:50, 4 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I got a whitepage on [[Dropshot (Universe)]] earlier today. Not editing the page... just trying to view it. I had to log out to view the page. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 16:54, 2 June 2009 (EDT)

===Persistent "loss of session data" error when saving edits.===
{{bug
|title=Persistent "loss of session data" error when saving edits.
|color=#fff799
|name=[[User:Derik|Derik]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=open
|description='''Normally''' if you try to save a page and your session has "Done Something Funky" since you began editing it, Mediawiki gives you a preview instead an an edit, and prompts you to re-save again, whereupon the problem has repaired itself. 
'''Now''' it simply gives you Session Error after Session Error-- the page remains impossible to save.
'''Workaround:''' Copy the text of your edit, go back to the page and click 'edit' again. You will now be able to save. (This error seems to hinge on the 'time you began editing' timestamp not re-setting itself if there was a problem.)
|resolution= (Low priority)
}}

:I had a problem like that a few hours ago with editing the [[Ruckus (Shattered Glass)]] page. I was able to open and edit the page, but once I was done and clicked "save", it returned a blank white page, ignoring several attempts to refresh. When I checked the Recent Changes list, though, I saw my edit listed, so I didn't bother to mess with it further.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 06:25, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
::Whitepage with the edit going through would be a slightly different sort of error. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:08, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
:Actually, the easiest workaround for this is to hit "Show preview" or "Show changes", THEN save. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:02, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

This is getting worse. When I was reverting Derik's dicking around there, it was taking five or six attempts to get the page to actually save. (May take the same here. 2...) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:29, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
:Same here. I keep getting loss of session data errors even when I click "show preview" and then "save page". --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 03:00, 28 May 2009 (EDT)

::It happens to me now when using FireFox. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 11:34, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
:::I am getting very angry about this. I can hardly ever save any edit without a session error coming up. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 06:20, 2 June 2009 (EDT)

===Some pages not loading fully===
{{bug
|title=Some pages not loading fully
|color=#f26c4f
|name=[[User:abates|abates]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=open
|description=Large pages ([[Optimus Prime (G1)]], [[Unicron]]) may not load fully, losing the bottom part of the page and the website kibble. The location of the cut-out point varies if the page is reloading, suggesting that Squid isn't caching the partial page and is possibly timing out when trying to retrieve the article.
|resolution=
}}

:Definitely getting this problem. Repeated refreshes of [[Optimus Prime (G1)]]'s page got the browser to cycle through several different cut-off versions of the page, some more complete than others, but none past about halfway through the IDW Comics Continuity section.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 06:25, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

::This does not seem to represent a hard limit-- running action=purge on the OP page kept giving me slightly different 'lengths.'
::Is this caused by the condom on our clownfish? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:08, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
:::I have trouble loading the full 500 changes on the Recent Changes page. Takes several reloads for the entire page to load. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 05:51, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
::::This is getting intolerable. Now when I click "edit" at the top pages, half of the time I get a blank white screen. This is especially annoying when I want to edit several sections in an article at once, or I want to edit the top section of an article. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 10:35, 31 May 2009 (EDT)
:::::I'm with you. I far too often either get blank screens or incomplete page loads. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 11:17, 31 May 2009 (EDT)
::::::I'm also getting all of these problems a LOT. (using Firefox, FWIW.) -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 02:17, 2 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::This is completely unacceptable. Not only are our friends Database Error and Server Not Bloody Working coming to visit, we can't even load the pages properly when the server is working. What the hell? What in the fucking hell? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 06:16, 2 June 2009 (EDT)

===Problems logging in/browsing while logged in with IE7===
{{bug
|title=Problems logging in/browsing while logged in with IE7
|color=#fff799
|name=[[User:abates|abates]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=open
|description=In Internet Explorer 7, when loading the login page/after logging in/browsing while logged in, pages would load and display then abruptly switch to a screen saying "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage". Problem appears to be related to Google analytics, as the one time this didn't happen was when a page didn't load fully and was broken off partway through the Google Analytics code. Problem does not seem to occur while logged out however. Purged cache and cookie files, but problem recurred after logging in.
'''Current workaround:''' Use an alternate browser,
|resolution=
}}

:Looks like this is now fixed. I'm not having any problems with the site in IE7 (other than the layout problems which were there before!) --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:50, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
::Not fixed for me. I can look at any page on the Wiki...so long as I don't try to log in. Then I get the above error and NONE of the pages will load until I exit out and then re-enter the Wiki. (Xaaron) --[[Special:Contributions/70.185.107.140|70.185.107.140]] 10:40, 31 May 2009 (EDT)

More interesting facts about this bug!
*The problem (trying to load a page in IE7 and getting a "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage" error) does not start occurring until you do one of the following:
**Access [[Special:Userlogin]]
**Save an edit to a page (while logged out).
*Once you trigger the problem by doing one of those, some pages will load, a few will partially load but stop halfway through the HTML, and many will give the error. Pages in the Special: namespace seem to particularly reliably give the error.
*If you exit out of IE7 and restart it, the problem goes away (until you do one of the triggers above).
*Meanwhile, in IE6, the login page refuses to load fully (as does the logout page). This may well be related to the IE7 problem.

So, something to do with the sessions, but I know not what. Equally, why no other browser has any problem with this is a mystery. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:24, 2 June 2009 (EDT)
:In IE6, the above all applies, however instead of getting the "cannot display" error, you get a page which is cut off right after the title. And sometimes it gets into an infinite loop of reloading the page by itself, as though it's infinitely redirecting to the page it's already on. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:25, 2 June 2009 (EDT)
::For the IE6 problem, I don't want to get *too* smug, but it's a dead browser, it's chock full of bugs, and even Microsoft is trying their hardest to go back in time and kill it with a shovel. As for IE7, well, here's the real fun part: Try reloading the login page, and then hit the Back button. Somehow, THAT magically gets us back to the proper page, and you *do* see it flicker before dumping to error. Something must be breaking the rendering on IE7, and Browser Holy Wars aside, that IS a showstopping bug. My money's on the Squid cache, so that's where I'm going to start looking. --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 10:32, 4 June 2009 (EDT)
:::What bugs? Before the Wiki moved, I never had ''any'' problems with ''any'' website using IE6. --[[Special:Contributions/193.200.150.82|193.200.150.82]][[User:Detour|Detour]]

===Database Error===
{{bug
|title=Database Error
|color=#fff799
|name=[[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=open
|description=Some pages are randomly showing as "Database Error"s rather than the pages (with full Wiki skin, plus the page categories. This shows as:<blockquote style="background:#eeefff">Database error ''[as page header, in place of the title]''
A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

(SQL query hidden)

from within function "MediaWikiBagOStuff::_doinsert". MySQL returned error "1213: Deadlock found when trying to get lock; try restarting transaction (localhost)".</blockquote>This ''appears'' to resolve itself for that specific page within a few minutes, but then recurs elsewhere.
'''Current workaround:''' Wait a few minutes, then refresh the page
|resolution=
}}

:Most of the google results for this seem to be for MediaWiki version 1.13.0. I haven't found any talking about it with 1.12.0 which offered a resolution, other than the suggestion of turning on memcached. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:40, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
::I'm getting these fucking errors every time I try to make a large edit. What the hell does this server want? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 06:15, 2 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Please reserve additions to bug reports to actual information, and not swear-laden complaints. This bug doesn't really require any browser/OS info, but *dates and times* are incredibly helpful. --[[User:McFly|McFly]] 10:35, 4 June 2009 (EDT)

===Pages not changing after save===
{{bug
|title=Pages not changing after save
|color=#fff799
|name=[[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=open
|description=I've had several cases now where a page has saved after an edit, but I get the original/unmodified page back on the post-save load. I have to force-reload it to see the edited page
'''Current workaround:''' Shift-F5/Ctrl-F5 the page
|resolution=
}}
:That sounds like a problem with the new caching module to me. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 17:27, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

===Top and side areas don't show up on the Recent Changes page, as well as some others.===
{{bug
|title=Top and side areas don't show up on the Recent Changes page, as well as some others.
|color=#fdc689
|name=[[User:Detour|Detour]]
|date=May 28, 2009
|status=open
|description=I haven't tested this on other browsers, but on IE6 when I go to the Recent Changes page neither the side bar with the GoBox and the Search or the top bar with the user ops and the "Special page" header load. [http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t285/Detour84/NoBars.png Here's how it looks.] It was actually working from... around the end of the afternoon/start of the evening. Stopped working again some time past midnight (the same as other recurring problems such as blank pages). On occasion it doesn't show up on other pages, which means I can't use the Edit and Discussion tabs on there.
|resolution=
}}

:Gah! Looks like the IE7 problem and the [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] problem have come back as well! WTF?! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:27, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
::Sometimes also happens on Safari. [[User:Tupka86]][[Special:Contributions/82.72.66.241|82.72.66.241]] 06:04, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
:::This is definitely caused by the page not loading entirely. It cuts off while loading the article/recent changes list, and doesn't even get to the side and top bars. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 17:50, 28 May 2009 (EDT)

===Database error when saving article===
{{bug
|title=Database error when saving article
|color=#fff799
|name=[[User:abates|abates]]
|date=May 29, 2009
|status=open
|description=I don't know how widespread this problem is, as I've only gotten it while editing [[User_talk:Magnus_Maximus]]. When saving the page, I get:
<blockquote style="background:#eeefff">A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was: 
 
(SQL query hidden) 
 
from within function "EmailNotification::actuallyNotifyOnPageChange". MySQL returned error "2006: MySQL server has gone away (localhost)".</blockquote>

After a couple of attempts, I was able to save the edit. Haven't had any problems with any other pages - could be because the page has a watch or something set on it?
|resolution=
}}

:I've encountered this issue quite often myself. I am increasingly turned off from editing this site. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 06:18, 2 June 2009 (EDT)

==Resolved issues==
===Faction icons invisible for me===
{{bug
|title=Faction icons invisible for me
|color=#7cc576
|name=[[User:Starfield|Starfield]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=fixed
|description=Self explanatory
|resolution= '''FIXED'''
}}

:The template is actually rendering correctly, the problem appears to be on the javascript-end. Either the code didn't get ported, or was deactivated while Scout was testing stuff or one of the MW Javascript-functions it depends on changed slightly witht he MegiaWiki version upgrade, and the code now needs tweaking.
:Other Javascript (like the search-suggest) is working. And... KiredTools is '''not'''?
:Did the name of the default skin change when we moved servers? Or maybe it's the post-body error output that's screwing up KiredTools loading... -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 01:28, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
::I very distinctly remember that they ''were'' working before. I'll put good money on it being the latter. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 02:54, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
:::''There.'' --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 03:12, 28 May 2009 (EDT)
::::Awesome. That fixes the other Javascript problems I was having too, they're all running now! -10:04, 28 May 2009 (EDT)

===Error messages in search-suggest===
{{bug
|title=Error messages in search-suggest
|color=#7cc576
|name=[[User:Derik|Derik]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=open
|description=When typing in the search box, the following error message appears below the suggestions: <tt>'''Fatal error:''' Unknown: Cannot find save handler mm in '''Unknown''' on line '''0'''</tt>
|resolution=Resolved: see below.
}}

==="Line 0" error in ''action=raw'' output===
{{bug
|title="Line 0" error in ''action=raw'' output
|color=#7cc576
|name=[[User:Derik|Derik]]
|date=May 27, 2009
|status=open
|description=When viewing a page's content in RAW mode, the error
<tt>'''Fatal error:''' Unknown: Cannot find save handler mm in '''Unknown''' on line '''0'''</tt> is appended. 
'''Example:''' Content of [[Image_talk:Animated_carerra.jpg]] in [http://tfwiki.net/w2/index.php?title=Image_talk:Animated_carerra.jpg&action=raw&ctype=text/css raw] mode, and in normal [http://tfwiki.net/w2/index.php?title=Image_talk:Animated_carerra.jpg&action=edit edit]mode. 
''(The text of the error is suggestive of caching, which makes me think this might be important.)''
|resolution= '''Fixed.''' Cause...?
}}

:Egads, a google suggests that's a PHP problem [http://www.torrentflux.com/forum/index.php?topic=4053.0] [http://www.phpbuilder.com/board/showthread.php?t=10327521] [http://forums.oscommerce.com/index.php?showtopic=181028&mode=linear] Also I presume this is what's causing the error on the search suggestions, so the two bugs are essentially one. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:13, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

:Actually, Derik, that's there on all pages, not just action=raw mode - look at the ''very'' bottom left of any page (you may have to highlight to see it, since it comes out as black text). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 19:28, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
::It appears at the bottom of the stylesheet/javascript files as well, which I'm sure isn't helping things. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:56, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

:::Fixed ~May 28th. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:58, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
::::This does actually still occur in a few places (e.g. if you use [[Special:Export]], the resulting xml file has the error at the bottom) but I haven't seen anywhere where it causes a major problem. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:28, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

User:McFly

2009-03-30T22:01:19Z

64.206.123.1: New page: Overall geek, burnout, and person who builds datacenters. Probably won't post much in the way of content, but will be quite pleased to help architect the best New New Hosting Solution and...

Overall geek, burnout, and person who builds datacenters. Probably won't post much in the way of content, but will be quite pleased to help architect the best New New Hosting Solution and keep it from drooling over itself.