User talk:Derik/2008

{{#if: |

[[Image:|left{{ #if: ||px|}}{{ #if: |||}}]] | }}

{{ #if: 2008 Archive |2008 Archive

|}}

This is an archive of Derik's User Talk from 2008, separated out for usability reasons. An abstract of this page summarizing anything important should remain on the original page, and this 2007 archive should be transcluded at User talk:Derik/Archive so that the entire user talk history can be easily viewed. {{ #if: |{{ #if: | |
}} talk page.|}}

Templates in categories

I just realized that you were intentionally putting some templates in the categories they add other articles to. I don't really like that idea, but I figured I should ask you about it before changing more of them. I do think there should be a reminder somewhere on the category page that there is a template in charge, but I prefer to do it in the "text" at the top of the category rather than placing a template in it. After all, the template itself is not a "character with no pictures", for example. --Steve-o 22:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

That works too. I just feel like the 'cat page should have a clear indicator- "And this is the template which controls this." I was simply being lazy about it! -Derik 07:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

How old are you ?

how old are you, like 15? You look really young and where did you get that shirt and if your really young how were you allowed to wear that shirt?!!! -User:FIELDMAN 298,JAN,08,04:44 PM

That's not me, my userpic is a rotating series of images which amuse me. -Derik 08:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Punch=Seeker?

Are you high? --FortMax 23:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I wish! -Derik 01:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Derik, did you not notice the disclaimer that accompanies the Mosaic pieces, declaring that they are fan works and not affiliated with IDW or Hasbro? They are not canon. --KilMichaelMcC 02:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

You're kidding, right? I thought we were taking that as seriously as the 'these stories don't count' notice in Legends, (not at all) and treating it like the 'lil formers or Microwhosits strips-- "the ones that make it into an official publication are real, the ones that don't aren't." There is some active choices being made on TDW's part after all- they're not going the choose to publish a strip about Death's Head, even though IIRC such a Mosaic is in the pipeline. "We cannot tell an 'official' story about Death's Head, because we don't own him." -Derik 06:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Reproduction page

Um hi. I was just wondering how Transformers reproduced and i came accross a VERY disturbing image. Is Blaster really....well...y'know.....doing it with Bumblebee?Destro oy 20:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, that was... explosive.

I suppose you've been pent up. Welcome back, Derik. Some discussions you might be interested in would be MediaWiki talk:AdminSkin and MediaWiki talk:Monaco-sidebar. We switched to Monaco as of around BotCon weekend, and most of the growing pains since then have been discussed in those two places.--Rosicrucian ^Talk 15:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Not pent up- I just knew my parole was in the pipeline so I brought along stuff to research during the Memorial Day weekend. (I seem to do 1 Legends story every time I'm at my parents cabin....) -Derik 16:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and other things during your absence. We managed to put together a coherent image policy (nothing really new there, just codifying stuff we already did) and started work on laying out a spoiler policy (which again is largely just trying to put into text the unspoken stuff we already do).--Rosicrucian ^Talk 15:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm tolerably familiar with the Monaco switch, I've tried to keep my toe in Wiki affairs without violating the terms of my ban (mostly monitor the community portal and main page talk to keep up on gossip) and I consulted for Suki on some of the CSS changes. For my sins I think she's nominated me to be TT1's liaison to Wikia-ops when complaining about Monaco problems we can't fix on our end. They've already implemented at least 1 global under-the-hood change to the search box in response to our specific requests.

I've seen the Image policy mentioned, but not seen the specifics... *goes to look* Heh, section on filesize of animated gifs... -Derik 16:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, when I was compiling it I mostly just tried to set down the random shit we'd always have to stick on a user talkpage when someone didn't get it. Programmer laziness meaning doing more work to mean less work later on (even if the returns aren't the same...) I'm certainly liking the ability to go "No, look here" instead of spelling myself out to each new user. I'm sure there are things I may have missed, but once other users started referring to the document I finally caved and slapped the policy tag on it.--Rosicrucian ^Talk 16:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I recognize some of the language here from various talk page convos. This seems like a pretty good coverage of our weird "here's what we permit, but then here's what we prefer" unwritten policiies as could be hoped for. I also feel like this got in there somehow... (I do vaguely recall offering that link months ago when someone was asking about our image policy as an exemplar of my understanding of it.) -Derik 16:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

From the other talk page

I'm not sure what you meant by the spoiler being in the subjectline - none of my edits that I have checked do that.

About the "consider that most of the frequent editors are also fans" - didn't detailed synopsis of Garbage In , Garbage Out and Black Friday go up long before they were available to anyone but BotCon attendees?KrytenKoro 18:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

If you click on a page for an upcoming episode, I think you risk being spoiled for whatever coming up. I avoid those pages.

But what I'm talking about are the kind of spoilers visible in the Recent Changes page- which I am exposed to involuntarily by inconsiderate editors. Comments that contain spoilers, new talk page headers that contain spoilers. Creating articles with specific headers that are, in themselves, spoilers. If I see that someone redirected Longarm Prime's page to Shockwave- that is a spoiler I have been exposed to due to the negligence of others.

And guess what? I saw Black Friday without any clue what it was about going in. I had no idea it was about BA or Prometheus Black. Because the Botcon atrtendees you so snarkily mocked exercised due consideration for others when making their edits, and I was able to participate on this wiki when that happened without having this upcoming experience ruined for me.

They have done it, therefore it is possible, and it is not an unrealistic standard to expect. -Derik 19:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Fine, but as far as I can see, I didn't put any actual spoilers in my edit summaries. At most, I put the word "spoilers" in an edit summary, but never a spoiler itself.KrytenKoro 02:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm vague about how this convo got started on the other talk page in the first place- I thought we were discussing this issue in the abstract when you questioned someone else's definition of spoilers. Hopefully I've been coming across as emphastic as i try to underline my main point, not accusatory, 'cuz the latter wasn't my intent. ^_^ -Derik 08:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for bringing this up here, then - it seemed like I had done something to offend you, and I was trying to figure out what. Cheers.KrytenKoro 02:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Not really no, but you're a new(ish) user, and it seemed worth discussing if you had questions. Spoilers and the logic behind them is kinda the 'topic of the moment' because of airings Dubai and the UK, and in my experience other users tend to listen into these Talk: convos, and often learn from them. This is a more useful conversation to have then by virtue of being public.

Anyway- meh. I had a point I wanted to communicate- and I think I have- but despite my emphatic manner (it's all the bold text, I know) it wasn't something I was mad about-- just something I felt was important to get across. -Derik 05:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

re:Dinobot Hunt

No Problem! Just trying to help where I can. --MistaTee 22:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

One thing...

I see what you're doing - but isn't display:block enough on its' own, without needing to fall back into tables? - SanityOrMadness 01:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Nope. I tested it on Wikia's ever-helpful test page. -Derik 01:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I love you. Now, all we need is a way to make Monobook the default. --FortMax 02:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, according to Toughpigs himself here, Monobook will suffer the same ads even if you manually select it. - SanityOrMadness 02:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

You could probably hide the ads withCSS- but doing so is a violation of wikia's terms of service. (Note: and individual user can choose to do so using THEIR CSS file, but the admins can not do so for the entire site.)

I want my damn Search button back! No wonder there was a 500% upswing in the number of searches performed- it was 5 times harder to find things! -Derik 02:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't adblock and the disambuig tables take care of the intrusiveness of the ads? I haven't seen a single ad below the wiki logo. --FortMax 02:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Adblock plus nukes 'em all anyway- seamlessly. The layout actually looks better if you have adblock. We're just worried about the anons mostly-- if the site is fugly no one wants to use it. -Derik 02:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

WHen I'm logged out I get two identical ads stacked verticly with the lower one covering important stuff. Is this what you're talking about? --FortMax 02:26, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The two banner ads at the top of the page partially obscuring things is a bug that just showed up today, it's unrelated ot the new layout and Wikia will probably have that fixed inside of 10 hours. -Derik 02:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

OK then. Other than that, everything is the same whether or not I'm logged in, and the stuff you have set up to use banner ads could be modified to work in Monobook should the setup be changed there or we decide to revert to Monobook if a bypass is found. --FortMax 02:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The banneradd logic would be the same for momobook as it is for Monaco. IIRC the only templates we have to change when we switched over to Monaco were the ones Monorail Guy broke through negligence. -Derik 02:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The second half of this 2008 talk page was wiped out by the Project:Bookworm Crash