MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (film)

2009-06-26T16:09:56Z

82.7.126.27: /* Not-Bonecrusher */

Where's Chromia? She is confirmed! I added her why is she gone? And what about Ratchet? {{unsigned|Godziboy1993}}
:They haven't been "confirmed". They got stolen from factories in China. That is not an official confirmation. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 15:58, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Ok, this is ridiculous. Yes it IS AN OFFICIAL CONFIRMATION. She was even in the god damn trailer! And why isn't Ratchet and Longhaul up on that either? Stolen from factories give me a break. Put them back on. [[User:Godziboy1993|Godziboy1993]] 21:55, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Oh and Barricade is on there too. His toy was stolen from a factory. Why the hell not Chromia, Ratchet, and Longhaul.
:Because it is '''illegally acquired information'''. That simple. We'll add them once Roberto Orci confirms their presence, or Hasbro releases ''official photographs'' of the toys. To find out more, refer to [[Help:Official info]]. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 22:10, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

== Paramount pictures cast list. ==

[http://l.yimg.com/img.omg.yahoo.com/omg/us/img/83/a2/9019_3705651155.jpg?y=660&x=616&q=75&n=0&sig=Zvqw8NxIBWHyJFhaLEhOeQ-- This poster] looks like a pretty official cast list. FFN, you think it's dubious? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 06:50, 2 April 2009 (EDT)
:Well, for a Starter, Overload should be added to the list of constructicons. {{unsigned|GUIGUI|17:20, 2 April 2009 EDT}}
::I agree, they didn't pull that name out of the æther. But it might be premature to spell it "Longhaul", or move The Fallen to the Decepticon column, or move Jetfire to the Autobot column. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 21:31, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

I really do not understand how this is set up. Why is Demolisher a seperate character? Who is the 7th constructicon when only six are shown combining into Devastator?{{unsigned|Godziboy1993|19:36, 6 April 2009 EDT}}
:Who knows? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:40, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

== Japanese world premiere. ==

With the premiere in Japan, does that mean ROTF characters are <nowiki>[[Category:Japanese-original characters]]</nowiki>? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 10:50, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
:You'd better be joking. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 11:12, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

==Transmitter at official site==

What was the necessary stuff to log in again for the Transmitter? I can't remember if it was Derik or Detour that had posted up some things for it... Not that it's updated much. << >> --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 23:45, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

==How about an actual article?==
This thing is basically a list of info. Why isn't this a bit more organized, like on Wikipedia? And is the stuff about the Writers' Strike really neccesary? I'd edit it, but I do not appear to have that privilege. [[User:Jim Java|Jim Java]] 16:56, 8 May 2009 (EDT)
:Yes it's a list of info, because right now all we have is info. It's better than Wikipedia's page because it focuses on confirmed news only and not rumors, stolen toys and third-hand reports. Yes, the stuff about the Writer's Strike is necessary, since it did affect production of Revenge Of The Fallen. No, you can't edit it, because the page is protected on account of so many anonymous users and new users making additions based on rumors, stolen toys and third-hand reports. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 17:28, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

:In about a month and a half, this article will get a total top-to-bottom re-write, when... y'know... we see the movie. Till then, there's not a lot of point in dramatic changes; they'd just be swept away under the deluge of information that we'll have when the film is released.
:That said, I feel your pain. "Writer such-and-such has envisioned a storyline involving the Constructicons" seems like a ridiculous bit of information to have right upfront at this point in the game, when we've ''seen them in the trailer''. '''ETA:''' If you'd seriously like to have a go at cleaning it up, you could always set up a temp page somewhere. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 17:33, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

::At the same time, I don't really see the point of doing a page like the Wikipedia. We'll never be able to compete with them in terms of sheer information on things like production, and were are restricted by our rule of only using information that has been released by Hasbro/Takara, Dreamworks, Paramount and their partners (and they generally don't release much in the way of information). Besides, as I've understood this wiki, our focus is on the ''content of the fiction itself'' and ''the characters'' starring in it, which is what differentiates us from the Wikipedia. We're not really here to tell people about how the director of photography and camera personnel filmed the 2007 movie on a mechanical bull or something. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 21:06, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

Could we at least organize this in paragraph form? It wouldn't take very long, but it would look way better. Just thought I'd ask. [[User:Jim Java|Jim Java]] 20:50, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
:I don't think that would make the article better at all. The article as-is is a list of things. Making that list into a big block of text is not going to help anything. We don't need to pretend that this article isn't a list. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:18, 11 May 2009 (EDT)
::I'm gonna throw my hat in here and tell you to just wait. It's like Repowers said, give just over a month and the entire article will be totally redone top to bottom, just like you want Jim Java. Until then look at the Wikipedia article, I'm pretty sure they have it broken into paragraphs and make it an "actual article" as I'm sure you're insinuating.--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 22:22, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

==UK Release 19th June = World Premiere==
As I write this the UK will be getting this a whole week before the States. So like, can we come and get started on the articles, or will there be Dubya-like emphasis on US civil (=Spoiler) liberties? [[Special:Contributions/82.7.126.27|82.7.126.27]] 12:58, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
:I figure it'll be okay if articles are filled out following the UK release. After all, most of Animated Season 2 aired a week early in Canada, and we still updated those pages even though they hadn't aired stateside yet. As long as media is officially released in a language we can understand (unlike that whole Dubai incident last year), it's fair game. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] 01:40, 28 May 2009 (EDT)

== World premiere was today, June 8, in Japan ==

As the title says. Do we need a new, updated "No spoilers" disclaimer in this article and maybe also on the main page?--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 16:35, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
:Yes and yes and then some. We should have heavy disclaimage on ALL the in-movie character pages, and also make them--as well as, obviously, this page itself--off-limits to anonymous editors. (Also, holy shit, am I actually editing on IE now? Miracle!) --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 16:47, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

==Score==
Should the score's info be added? Samples are up at [http://www.amazon.de/Transformers-Revenge-Fallen-Score/dp/B002DDIXLA/ref=sr_shvl_album_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1245109298&sr=301-2 Amazon Germany's listing]. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 20:04, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

== Bay wanted to have German soldiers in the movie, German government said "no" ==

Source: [http://newsticker.sueddeutsche.de/list/id/657558 Press conference from German premiere]

Translation:

:''Bundeswehr soldiers in the cinematic end fight between humans and alien machines: That's how Hollywood warhorse director Michael Bay ("Armageddon") had planned it for his action flick ''Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen''.''

:''But German authorities threw a monkey wrench in his plans. The Bundeswehr soldiers at an Air Force base in the American desert state of New Mexico had been thrilled, "but unfortunately, the German government said no", the 44 year old director said at Sunday's German premiere of the science fiction flick. The cooperation with the US Department of Defense, on the other hand, hadn't been a problem - he had a direct connection there.''

Will probably work it into the article once we go from pre-release to full article.--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 19:14, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

:What? Germany isn't allowed to -have- a military.{{unsigned|173.11.36.165|10:02, 24 June 2009}}
::You are [[wikipedia:Bundeswehr|mistaken]], sir.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 11:29, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

==Errors and Inconsistencies==
I've just seen the film. I'm not sure how the final ROTF page will look, but if the previous movie is used as a template, then I can suggest NOW that the Errors/Inconsistencies section be spawned off onto its own page? [[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 19:52, 20 June 2009 (EDT)
:Basic outline here: [[Revenge of the Fallen (film)/outline]]. Not sure when we should drop it in, but it should be soon. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] 20:13, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

== Unnamed Decepticons ==

Do we have any way of getting names for the unnamed decepticons, like the Ravage hairballs seen in the trailer and comic-books? The movie's not going to help, as it was ''incredibly'' lax on providing names for characters.[[User:KrytenKoro|KrytenKoro]] 03:31, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

== Mysterious voice credits ==
Frank Welker is credited as "Reedman" along with Soundwave and Ravage, and Kevin Michael Richardson is both one of the Primes and "Skipjack". Do we know who these characters are? It doesn't help that both actors are known for Random Monster Noises roles. -[[User:LV|LV]] 03:53, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
:Edit: I may mean Soundwave, Devastator and Reedman. The point is, Reedman: WTF? -[[User:LV|LV]] 04:06, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
::I too saw those credits and wondered... but, I could also swear that I remember someone, maybe Ironhide, saying the name "Skipjack" aloud at one point in the film (at one of the base scenes, maybe?). For the life of me, though, I can't think of the context it was in. --
:::Did we happen to catch credits for Demolishor, Rampage, or any other growly-roary-types? - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 07:24, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Devastator clearly said "DEVASTATOR!" during the big overhead shot of him slowly bearing down on the twins. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 07:37, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I definitely interpreted that as Megatron shouting "DEVASTATOR!" at Devastator for no particular reason. As for Demolishor...he must have had a voice actor, since he had actual dialogue, but I don't recall seeing it. -[[User:LV|LV]] 11:15, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::Yeah, I couldn't decide if the roar of "DEVASTATOR!" was Megatron, or if Devastator had decided to declare his own name for some reason (which wouldn't be ''that'' odd, given that Megatron did it in the first movie). - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 11:40, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::It sure sounded like Megatron's voice to me. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:16, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::I'm also with that Megatron's the one calling to Devastator. --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] 01:45, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Surely he was calling to get Devastator to stop playing with the humans and come wreck up the pyramid? [[Special:Contributions/137.195.68.169|137.195.68.169]] 10:50, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::In the IMAX it was clearly Megatron based on where the sound was coming from. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 22:49, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
Demolisher is in the credits as Wheelbot. But I kept missing it. First time, some dickhead at the back started sticking his hands in front of the projector and blocking it. As for Devastator, he NEVER speaks. Megs yells Devastator's name. Welker just handled roars and snarls (some blatant Welker animal noises are in there)[[User:Eire]] 15.57 25th June 09

:Reedman ''has'' to be the raptor-like thing formed by the [[Marble bots]]. He's a reed-thin man.
:Sweet, nice to know he has a name. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:41, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::This seems to be corroborated by the Decepticons DS game (not the best source, given the divergence of video game plots, but an official one): before the mission to steal the All Spark shard you're told that "Ravage and Reed Man" have been sent ahead to secure the target... presumably referencing the skinny con's theft of the object in question. --[[User:Inevitable Betrayal|Inevitable Betrayal]] 17:44, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Any chance you can get an exact quote on that? (Because it seems to present Reedman has his own character, rather than a remote probe controlled by Ravage, and I'd like to be able to cite it.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 17:56, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::::I'm afraid not. The dialogue popped up on the map screen between missions instead of within the mission itself, so it's not replayable, and I was surprised enough by it the first time I didn't think to write it down. I could start another file and play through to that point again (though I'd rather not, it's a bit of a letdown compared to the first movie's DS games), but at the moment all I can say for sure is that it referred to them as a duo, "Ravage and Reed Man," with Reed Man parsed as two words like that, not one.--[[User:Inevitable Betrayal|Inevitable Betrayal]] 02:35, 26 June 2009 (EDT)
:Well jeez! Sounded like a people-name! I wonder who "Skipjack" is, then? He... he couldn't be the little guy who gets killed for parts, could be? That guy didn't speak words, but he did make a sort of cry/yelp of protest as he was set upon. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 17:46, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::That was one of the film's legions of Constructicons. Probably not a "Skyjack." -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 17:54, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::''Skip''jack. But, eh, i'm just tossin' it out there. The identity of the sacrificial guy does not really seem to be confirmed - people are just assuming he's a Constructicon because the other three were Long Haul, Mixmaster and Rampage, and Hightower's vehicle was on the barge, but no-one's actually identified the guy based on his physical robot appearance (and as a dirty great crane, Hightower would hardly be "the little one"). - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 17:58, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::I paid attention to the "little one"'s silhouette when I saw the movie again yesterday, and it most resembled Scrapper. Particularly its skinny legs. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 18:16, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Let's see, that was about 40 minutes in so... ''*runs up MP3 of the movie's audio*''
::::No, the 'parts' con doesn't make more than a few Ewok burbles.
::::Could he be the jackhammer-Decepticon that kidnapped Ron and Judy? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:14, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::No, Starscream specifically calls him Rampage. (And he is Rampage.) --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 18:16, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::Wasn't Devastator already formed by that point? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:19, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Sure, but there were lots of Constructicons running around the same time as Devastator was formed (the group from the barge turn up with Ravage partway through the fight). --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:31, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::It just sounds like a likely name for his color-swap. (Which in this case, i guess... was forming Devastator.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:16, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

==It's UpGrade Time==
So, can we start working on this now or what? [[User:Eire]] 12.44 June 24 09
: Yes. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 09:36, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

== Foreign titles ==

Are foreign titles usually included if they just mean "Revenge of The Fallen" in their own language? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 11:37, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
: They shouldn't be. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:45, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
:: The frensh versin is called "transformers: the revenge"(le révange?)--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 11:47, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
::: That's different enough. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:48, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
:::: The Brazilian title (Portuguese) renders as "The Revenge of the Defeated" when I put it through Google Translate. Is that different enough?--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 12:35, 24 June 2009 (EDT)
::::: Inasmuch as "defeated" doesn't have the same additional connotations of "falling from grace" or "killed in battle" as the original English, I'd say so.[[Special:Contributions/137.195.68.169|137.195.68.169]] 10:47, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

== Trivia cull ==

One is long overdue in my opinion. Much of this "trivia" is snippets of news on who was cast, and has since been unequivocally confirmed and properly organized in the locations it ''should'' be.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 21:33, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

== Not-Bonecrusher ==

I'm assuming that the guy who wasn't Bonecrusher was actually [[Constructicon Scout]]. Is that a safe guess to go with? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 11:46, 26 June 2009 (EDT)
: I didn't see any Bonecrusher in the film. People just say they saw Bonecrusher's altmode, the Buffalo. No robot mode, far as I'm aware. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:48, 26 June 2009 (EDT)
:: I think he was running around during the Egypt battle. You could see him standing behind some pillars. Since there were multiple Constructicons running around, this was evidently was not the very-dead Bonecrusher.[[Special:Contributions/67.242.198.238|67.242.198.238]] 12:07, 26 June 2009 (EDT)
:::It was definitely a use of the CGI Bonecrusher model in robot mode. [[Special:Contributions/82.7.126.27|82.7.126.27]] 12:09, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2009-06-16T19:38:19Z

82.7.126.27: /* Anonymous users */

__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)

== (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)

== 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)

== 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)
===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)

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2009-06-16T18:07:25Z

82.7.126.27: /* Anonymous users */

__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)

== (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)

== 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)

== 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)
===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)

== Featured Article Symbol/Notice ==

I forget which talk page it was on at this point, but I remember there being a discussion about how to reduce the Featured Article notice down to something that looks less cluttered at the top of a page. 
Since most other wikis just put a Featured Article symbol at the right of the page, but our Faction symbols are there... it occurred to me today, could we co-opt the factions template a little? Set up an extra "Featuredarticle" option that displays larger than the faction symbols and is set off a bit (maybe by custom CSS or just putting extra whitespace in a custom FA icon). 
It's definitely hacky (since FA status isn't a faction, obviously), but it would do the trick without a lot of extra coding involved, especially since making a new template that essentially sits comfortably next to the Factions anyway might be problematic. 
I guess we could even use a "FeaturedArticles" redirect to the factions template for those FA pages that aren't character articles, to maintain labelling clarity. --[[User:Jeysie|Jeysie]] 13:29, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

Windsweeper

2009-06-13T20:32:43Z

82.7.126.27: /* IDW comics continuity */ pic txt

{{factions|decepticon}}
{{picsneeded|G1 alt mode fictional appearance}}

:''Windsweeper is a <s>neatfreak</s> [[Decepticon]] [[Triggercon]] in the [[Generation 1]] [[continuity family]].''

[[Image:Windsweeper.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Germs, germs, germs are everywhere!]]
Neatness is an admirable quality in any creature. '''Windsweeper''' admires it very much. Head of Cybertronic sanitation, he dislikes being called a fancy garbage bot, but he loves to keep the world clean and pure, free of litter and stains. Litter and stains and slimy drippy oil spots and grubby rusty things, ugh. They make him feel itchy and dirty all over. Itchy and dirty. He hates the lazy litterbots who leave them behind. He hates them worst when they throw garbage at him and he has to scrub, scrub, scrub himself until he feels clean again.

As bad as Cybertron would be if he didn't constantly lock up oil-drippers and litterbugs in deep and dark (but clean) dungeons, other planets are far worse, covered in dirt, with the clean, blank sky full of disgusting clouds and birds and flying kites, and everything simply alive with creepy, crawly bugs. They give him the shakes, so he has to burn them and kill them dead, dead, dead with fire, pure, clean fire.

==Fiction==
===Marvel Comics continuity===
{{noteukonly}}
Windsweeper and his fellow Triggercons were active on Cybertron during the early days of the war, when [[Optimus Prime (G1)|Optimus Prime]] and [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] were just beginning their feud. While tracking the Autobot leader and the [[Triggerbot|Triggerbots]], Megatron and the Triggercons executed the keepers of [[Boltax]] and attempted to steal the power of the [[Underbase]]. They failed once Optimus Prime launched the Underbase into space to keep it out of Megatron's hands. {{storylink|The Flames of Boltax}}

[[Image:ThunderwingComic.jpg|left|200px|thumb|ulp...uh, help?]]
''Millions of years later, Windsweeper and the Triggercons were toiling under the hedonistic decadence of the [[Triumvirate]]. This trio had brought down the Decepticon Army, reducing their interests to a series of gladiatorial games. Once [[Straxus (G1)|"Megatron"]] returned and offered the Decepticons a return to the old ways, the Triggercons eagerly agreed and shot their current leaders in the back. {{storylink|The Fall and Rise of the Decepticon Empire}}''

Windsweeper and his Triggercon partner [[Ruckus (G1)|Ruckus]] were soon reassigned to [[Thunderwing (G1)|Lord Thunderwing]]. They became involved in Thunderwing's obsessive quest to acquire the power of the Autobots' [[Creation Matrix]] for himself. In the last battle with the Autobot "Matrix hunter" units, Windsweeper was nearly killed by a [[Matrix-spawn]] while his leader was focused on claiming his prize. After Thunderwing's ultimate defeat, Windsweeper and the other Decepticons were taken into Autobot custody on the ''Ark'' without a fight. {{storylink|Matrix Quest}}
{{-}}

====Marvel UK future timelines====
''In 2009, Windsweeper and his fellow Triggercons helped [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]] disable an Autobot resistance movement on Cybertron. {{storylink|Aspects of Evil!|Aspects of Evil!}}''

===IDW comics continuity===
[[Image:Stormbringer4 Decepticonfliers.jpg|left|180px|thumb|Where's W-(aldo)-indsweeper? Answer, he's not in this pic.]]
Windsweeper belongs to the crew of the [[Thanatos]], operating under [[Razorclaw (G1)|Razorclaw]] and the [[Predacon (G1)|Predacons]]. He was led into aerial combat by [[Divebomb (G1)|Divebomb]] during the battle with Thunderwing on [[Cybertron (planet)|Cybertron]]. {{storylink|Stormbringer issue 4|Stormbringer issue 4}}
{{-}}

==Toys==
===Generation 1===
[[Image:G1Windsweeper toy.jpg|right|180px|thumb|Windsweeper hates that he is out of his package, therefore no longer a germ-free toy.]]
*'''Windsweeper''' (Triggercon, 1988)

: Windsweeper transforms from robot to modified B-1B Lancer bomber. Activating his [[Triggercon]] gimmick causes a pair of spring-loaded guns to flip out from his wings and point forward.

::*''[http://www.tfu.info/1988/Decepticon/Windsweeper/windsweeper.htm More information on Windsweeper at TFU.info]''

{{-}}

==Trivia==
* It has been speculated that Windsweeper was originally supposed to be a [[Triggerbot]], not a Triggercon. His chromed, spring-loaded guns line up with the two ground-based Triggerbots, while the Autobot flier [[Dogfight]]'s unchromed, gear-turning guns would make him seem a more likely match with the Decepticons.

==External links==
*[http://www.ntfa.net/universe/english/index.php?act=view&char=Windsweeper Windsweeper's Marvel Universe profile at NTFA.net]

[[Category:Decepticons]]
[[Category:Generation 1 characters]]

Talk:Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (film)

2009-05-18T16:58:40Z

82.7.126.27:

Devastator (ROTF)

2009-05-13T18:40:45Z

82.7.126.27: /* Supreme Class toys */

{{factions|decepticon}}
{{disambig3|Devastator}}

:''Devastator is a [[Decepticon]] [[Combiner]] from the [[Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)|Revenge of the Fallen franchise]] in the [[Live-action film series|live-action film]] [[continuity family]].''
[[Image:ROTF Devastator Bay clip.jpg|thumb|300px|No! Bad dog! Drop the Autobot! Drop it!]]

Whether he's formed from six or seven [[Constructicon (ROTF)|Constructicon]]s, '''Devastator''' is pretty fragging big. Topping 120 feet in height, he towers over the competition.

Devastator is made up of:
*[[Scavenger (ROTF)|Scavenger]]<ref>It is currently unclear what relationship, if any, Demolishor has to Scavenger. Official packaging photos for Demolishor's Voyager class toy clearly show his name to be Demolishor, yet a component in the Constructicon Devastator toy set that has an identical vehicle mode to Demolishor has "SCVNGR" [[tampograph]]ed on the side of the vehicle and the official image files from Hasbro for the toy component are named "scavenger". On April 1st, 2009, screen writers [[Roberto Orci]] and [[Alex Kurtzman]] added to the confusion by referring to Demolishor as a separate character from the other Constructicons, and that Devastator is made up of seven Constructicons, including Scavenger (but not Demolishor) and a new character named Overload.([http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2009-04-01-transformers-first-look_N.htm Various characters revealed on USA Today.com. April 1, 2009.])</ref>
*[[Hightower (ROTF)|Hightower]]
*[[Long Haul (ROTF)|Long Haul]]
*[[Mixmaster (ROTF)|Mixmaster]]
*[[Overload (ROTF)|Overload]] (Sometimes omitted, such as on the [[#Supreme Class toys|Supreme Class toy]].)
*[[Rampage (ROTF)|Rampage]]
*[[Scrapper (ROTF)|Scrapper]]

{{quote|Spielberg saw [Devastator] and said, 'This is ''(expletive)'' awesome!' It's always nice when you can make him swear.|[[Michael Bay]]|"[http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2009-04-01-transformers-first-look_N.htm First look: Robo-brawlers big, small in new 'Transformers']" in the ''USA Today'' ([[April 3]], [[2009]])}}

==Fiction==
===''Revenge of the Fallen'' movie===
{{comingsoon}}

==Toys==
===Revenge of the Fallen===
====Legends Class toys====
[[Image:ROTF Devastator ezcollectiondx.jpg|right|250px|thumb|]]
*'''Constructicon Devastator''' (2009)

:Like the on-screen combiner, but unlike the Supreme class Devastator toy, the Legends class Devastator is comprised of seven Constructicons, including the elusive [[Overload (ROTF)|Overload]].

{{Comingsoontoy}}

{{-}}

====Supreme Class toys====
[[Image:ROTF Devastator combiner toy.jpg|right|250px|thumb|I come in peace, shoot to kill!]]
*'''Constructicon Devastator''' (2009)

:Likely due to the complexity of his character design, Devastator is formed from the combination of six transforming construction vehicles that do not appear to have individual robot modes. Unlike [[Duocon|prior]] [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Optimus_Prime_(Armada)_toys#Energon cases] of this format, Devastator's vehicles represent separate transformers, and [[Rampage_(ROTF)|some]] [[Demolishor_(ROTF)|of]] [[Mixmaster_(ROTF)|them]] have been depicted with non-combiner toys.

{{Comingsoontoy}}
{{-}}

====Mega Power Bots====
[[Image:ROTF MegaPowerBots Devastator.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Not a Power Rangers Megazord.]]
*'''Constructicon Devastator''' (2009)

{{Comingsoontoy}}
{{-}}

==Merchandise==
===Revenge of the Fallen===
====RPMs - Robot Powered Machines====
=====Track Set=====
[[Image:ROTF RPM Devastator Showdown Playset.jpg|right|150px|thumb|Devastator transforms into a snake.]]
*'''Devastator Showdown''' (2009/unreleased)
**'''Includes:''' [[Skids (ROTF)|Skids]] [[Mini-Vehicle]].
A remold from an Indiana Jones race track. This playset is compatible with the other Transformers RPM vehicles. It fires the car on a track to a area that (when a car goes over it) releases a boulder and the Devastator head lights up and makes sounds. The boulder will follow the car down the track until the tracks stop.

{{Comingsoontoy}}
{{-}}

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Constructicons]]
[[Category:Decepticons]]
[[Category:Combined forms]]
[[Category:Revenge of the Fallen characters]]