MediaWiki talk:Community Portal/Archive23

Section Naming II!

Here's an idea for a compromise I can't believe I didn't think of before. What about:

==Fiction==

===Generation 1===

====Cartoon continuity====

====Marvel Comics continuity====

====Dreamwave comics continuity====

====IDW comics continuity====

===Armada Worlds' Collide===

===IDW Evolutions: Hearts of Steel===

Or something similar -- cache all the Generation 1 sub-sections under a single heading within the fiction section, instead of relying on the G1 continuity family heading like I've been saying. After all, there's really no reason why things like IDW G1 and IDW Evolutions NEED to be next to one another, right? Is this a compromise we can all work with and fine-tune? --Xaaron 17:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I was looking for a standard in the Style Guide. Is that a proposed standard Xaaron? What about G2?—Starfield 12:03, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, it was proposed by me, here. But I don't think that's what you meant. I think Jackpot's user page has some prepared standards on it. As for G2, I'd say put it under Marvel Comics as "Transformers: Generation 2 series". As counter-intuitive as it seems sometimes, G2 really IS a part of the G1 continuity universes, isn't it? --Xaaron 19:19, 25 September 2008 (EDT)

I... thought we agreed on "Generation 1 cartoon"? And ditching "continuity" when it's not needed? —Interrobang 14:09, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

I remember you writing "impasse" several times. I remember coming up with the above Blue Box about a month after the impasse as a suggestion, and getting no responses. I don't remember ever reaching an agreement. --Xaaron 15:57, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

"Again, the cartoon headings, granted...there may not BE a better label for the original series than "Generation 1 cartoon"."

I'm pretty sure I said this before, but "continuity" shouldn't be used except in headers linking different fictions. It's redundant in most cases. You also agreed that "continuity" was unnecessary, but didn't feel like fighting with Walky over it back then. —Interrobang 16:47, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

Yehbuhwha...? Those were off-hand remarks I made in the middle of the discussion -- I was inviting further critical thinking, not declaring a consensus. I had no idea you would to take that to mean the matter was suddenly settled.

But arguing over whether there was a consensus in the past is moot...obviously there isn't one now. So, please -- what do you (ANY of you out there in TV land), think of the suggestion I made above? --Xaaron 18:18, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

I don't like connecting all of the "Generation 1" fiction under one heading. That creates the impression that there are continuity connections between them when there aren't. "Armada Worlds Collide" is overspecific. "Dreamwave Armada comic" is sufficient. Ditto for "IDW Evolutions: Hearts of Steel" when just "Hearts of Steel" will do. I'm sure those aren't the main thrust of your point, anyway. —Interrobang 19:14, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

There is a continuity connection -- they're all Generation 1 universes. They're a TFWiki-approved Continuity Family. We put little (G1)s after any article that originates from those fictions. --Xaaron 22:53, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

Well, they're connected in that they all base from the Generation 1 set of characters/settings, even if they do different things with those characters and settings. The addition of the word "continuity" makes it clear enough that though they all have a common well to draw from, they each do their own thing outside of that.

I suppose the real problem with this sort of thing is trying to come up with the whole tree of how the continuities do and don't relate to each other in the first place... --Jeysie 19:26, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

Well, YOU agreed to that, with yourself, at some point. Lord knows I didn't! I don't even recall a discussion about it. --ItsWalky 14:28, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

I think there was a general agreement (not here,) somewhere, to use 'continuity' when the fiction section included secondary sources. "Cybertron cartoon" becomes "cybertron cartoon continuity" if you include events from text-stories (since they are not actually part of the CARTOON itself.)

AFAIK, there hadn't been a discussion about how that would apply to higher-level headers. -Derik 17:02, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

I think we only do that with the Animated comics, since that's a special exception, what with the story editor writing it and making sure neither conflict the other. —Interrobang 17:11, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

Article structure: comic vs. cartoon

This conversation was moved from Talk:Gone but Not Forgotten!.

I'm not sure if there's a better place to bring this up, but the style guide uses this page as the archetypal example for all comic articles, so it seemed appropriate. I've noticed that the structure of the average cartoon article (again, linking to the style guide's example) has a more versatile "Notes" section, and I wonder if it would do us well to imitate it in the comic pages. For instance, I added an entry to the "Errors" section of The Gathering issue 4 that I really felt like putting under "Continuity errors," had it existed. Having seen cartoon articles fill out, I do think there's a substantive difference between art errors and continuity errors, between real-world references and Transformers references and mere miscellania... and why shouldn't comics have a "Quotes" section? - Jackpot 16:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I basically agree on all levels. --M Sipher 17:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Cool. For the record, if we do get a general consensus on this, I'll say right now that I don't have the time or gumption to actually make this change. But I figured I'd run it up the ol' flagpole. - Jackpot 17:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree but I think continuity errors should be separated out between those within a story (e.g. a character being shown in a location when the story has them elsewhere) and continuity errors between stories (as these are often contentious as to whether they're an error in the first place). Timrollpickering 17:13, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I think a lot of the within-the-story errors like your example would end up covered under an "Art errors" section (which would replace "Animation errors"). In fact, comics should probably get an additional section for notable typos, inappropriate narration, etc.... I'd say "Writing errors," but that sounds too broad. "Script errors," maybe? I think that would leave "Continuity errors" free to cover the more nebulous story tangles. - Jackpot 17:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thinking about continuity, perhaps we should have a continuity-note at the top of comic articles (related to the "next/previous issue" box?) that indicates where the story fits into chronology if the series numbering isn't enough information. I'm considering specifically the Spotlight issues. If I hadn't been keeping up to date this whole time, I'd probably be quite confused about it all, since even IDW's sub-numbering system falls short (and now they're abandoning it entirely). I would welcome a resource that could tell me the "real order" of all the IDW issues. Publication date is the most objective standard I can think of. This could certainly apply to other series as well, like Marvel's Headmasters and G.I. Joe and the Transformers. In fact, now I'm thinking of two continuity-notes: the publication-order one at that top (indicating what the previous- and next-published issues were, regardless of numbering), then a timeline-order one in the Notes ("This story takes place between X Story and Y Story") for in-universe chronology, to further clarify things like the Spotlight issues that are set in the past. How do these ideas sound? - Jackpot 17:36, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What about stories that past and present events in them. The Shockwave Spotlight takes place mostly in the past, but ending is in the (then) present. Of course the IDW timeline page attempts to make sense of it all. --MistaTee 18:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The in-fiction continuity note could be as specific and multifaceted as necessary. A lot of pages already have them; this would just be a formalization of the process. But I don't want to get sidetracked on that idea too much, since it's not key to what I'm really getting at: Let's take the Headmasters cartoon. I've never seen the show, so when Chris McFeely wrote summaries of all the episodes, I loved being able to just click-click-click from one to the next and read through the whole series. That's one of the best things this wiki has to offer, as far as I'm concerned. But if I tried to do the same for the IDW comics, the current navigation would skip right over the Spotlights, Megatron Origin, Avengers crossover, and whatever the hell other minis, spin-offs, and what-have-yous IDW will make in the future. I see no reason why we shouldn't add a publication-date nav that can guide the reader through the entire run, unimpeded by IDW's numbering/titling madness. - Jackpot 01:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

We might end up having to just acknowledge that reading-order is a real thing worthy of its own pages when it gets too complicated (like we have Disambiguation pages.) "Okay, you could say five different things come next..."

Oh, and I cannto say emphatically enough- reading order, not chronological order. Chronological order woudl be a nightmare- and nto very useful (what with flashbacks.) Reading order is relatively ambiguous ("What story, occuring in this continuity, published relatively close to this... would you read next if you wanted to read everything without getting too lost?")

Reading order is good. Whatever format we use will have to be flexible though-- does anyone have an idea what such navigation would look like? Where it would go relative to the 'publication order' links we have now? Visual language (if any) to communicate that the order is the same as the publication order? (Oh, well... I suppose you could 'gray out' the buttons while keeping them clickable. ...not that we have buttons for the comicnav template yet.)

I'm talking really fast? Do i read like I'm talking really fast? Because I totally am. Also I think I might be posting replies to my own posts before I make them. -Derik 07:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

"Script Errors" sounds like it has room to be confused with Continuity Errors-- "the writer screwed up the continuity while scripting the issue, right?" What about "Text errors?" It's a much less "squishy" term. (Rimmer's Ooptician would probably be a text error even though it's part of the art... but we don't usually classify all the misspelled signs in G1 background paintings as "animation errors," 'text' feels rightish?

Which category does a paste-up error go in? (Misdirected word balloon.) I'm thinking text. -Derik 07:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Comic issue template

So, I made this template, uh, last year. An example of the template in action is at First Encounter!. I'd like to resurrect it, and I want to see what others think of using this instead of the current setup we have for the credits and stuff. Personally, I prefer the infobox approach, since it doesn't waste a section or whitespace on what amounts as very brief information, and is a pretty standard approach on almost all Wikis, but I dunno what you guys think. —Interrobang 21:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Hrm, I rather like that. Much cleaner and neater than our current infobox setup. My only request would be that the series link (Transformers: Armada in this case) be moved up top, to make it very visible and immediately obvious what the page is a part of. The only obvious downside: the notion of converting several hundred comic book pages to a new format makes my wrists hurt. -- Repowers 18:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

It certainly doesn't have to be an immediate thing. Slow replacement is fine with me (I'm probably going to do most of them, anyway...). 18:49, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Should editor and editor-in-chief (for Marvel US, if nothing else) also be in there? Tribimat 19:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

If they're credited inside a issue, yes. It's easy to add more fields as needed. —Interrobang 19:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Great, another new template after I implemented the comicinfo one on about 70 issues. As long as all the same info in the current one could be added. Also, would it support 2 different navs, like for Marvel US and Marvel UK? I also don't like the grays in the borders. The blue link on the gray is especially ugly, but I'm sure that can be easily fixed. --MistaTee 20:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I've added the second nav, as seen in All Fall Down. I don't care about the colors, so I just picked one at random; feel free to change them. —Interrobang 21:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

...that actually looks rather nice. (and I am not a fan of infoboxes.) -Derik 21:57, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I have complaint about this new infobox template. The next last issue/next issue buttons are PUNY and not very prominent compared to the old template. When I looked at some pages with the new template I was thinking "where the hell is the link for the next issue?" Is there any way to make the arrows or symbols or whatever much more prominent? --FFN 06:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Having just run into this problem, I'd like to second that. Tiny unmarked arrows over on the right side of the page do not draw the eye very effectively. -- Greenygal 13:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

New comic/cartoon infobox needs serious reworking

Since nobody addressed this problem when I brought it up a month ago, here we go again. The links for the previous and next issue/episode in this new infobox are too fucking small. Whenever I see this new format of comic/cartoon episode, I have to search for the button to go to the next story, and I shouldn't bloody have to do that. If I am having trouble, you can bloody well be sure that the users with whom we are making this content for are having trouble.So I suggest whomever designed the template redesign it so the links to the previous and next stories are MUCH more prominent. Perhaps try to work it somehow where the link for Previous Issue/episode is spelt as a word and goes over the story/episode title, with Next Issue/episode going underneath the story/episode title. --FFN 21:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I personally would vote to do this in the title bar (although the if/else for adding in the extra line breaks and spaces only if needed would take some extra finagling to work for comics with just the "next" link):

Comic Title #1

<<Previous Issue | Next Issue>>

Comic Title #2

<<Previous Issue | Next Issue>>

A bit less icky-looking than putting links above and below the titles, IMHO. Jeysie 22:13, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind changing the links. Whatever you guys decide, me (or Derik, if he approves) will implement it. —Interrobang 22:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I hate those tiny buttons too. I actually had an idea about them... it's a CSS thing so an Admin would have to do it. I should probably test it out so people can try for themselves. -Derik 22:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

While you're at it, can you make the first bar of the comic template to be the same as the episode template's? —Interrobang 22:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

You mean with the prev/next links all the way out to the edge and the title centered? -Derik 01:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Add in the white if you wanna. —Interrobang 03:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

The white isn't cosmetic- the entire area of the white button is clickable, unlike the text-links where you have to actually hit the (relatively small) double-chevron character. The larger footprint of the active area actually makes it easier use, not just prettier to look at.-Derik 03:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

The links for the previous and next issue/episode in this new infobox are too fucking small.

I just wanted to voice my whole-hearted agreement. I like the new format otherwise, though. -- Repowers 00:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Try sticking this at the top of your CSS file.

@import "[[http://www.emopanda.com/tmp/monaco-testbed3.css]]";

Any responses? How does that look? -Derik 02:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks noice on the episode title at first glance. Any chance of seeing how it'd look on the comics with double titles? Jeysie 02:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Can someone point me to an episode with double titles first? (I've asked this before, but I can't find the link now, grr.)

It'll be easier to work out the secondary navigation's appearance on the episode template then port it over to the other to the comic one. -Derik 03:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

You mean, like Distribution? Two series titles? —Interrobang 03:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I mean one that has two "previous" episodes and two "next" episodes.  :( -Derik 03:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I personally meant like Prisoner_of_War! or any of the other comics that are a part of two separate series at the same time and thus have two sets of previous/next links. (Are there any episodes that have the same situation going?) Jeysie 03:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Some of Energon, thanks to dropping "Return! Our Scorponok", and the first two seasons of Generation 1, thanks to fucked up Japanese order and Japanese-only clip shows. I haven't set up any infoboxes for those yet. —Interrobang 03:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Secondary navigation is now pretty, I think. Is there any other style 'tics you can think of for this?

Also, could you port this over to a couple Cybertron or BM episodes? I know this doesn't support seasons yet (*groan*) and I'd prefer to de-bug it there instead of the Generation 1 or BW episodes. -Derik 05:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Foreign name format (2)

• Archive9 - Foreign name formatI just came up with a format as below:

(space)
:''Alternative name:'' '''name'''
:''Nickname:'' '''name'''
:''Preliminary name (or Working name):'' '''name'''
:''Japanese name:'' '''name'''
:''Foreign name (note):'' '''name (non-English word, "meaning")'''
(space)}}

Take Optimus Primal for example,

:''Japanese name (Bat):'' '''Convobat / Conbobat'''
:''Japanese name (Gorilla):'' '''Convoy / Beast Convoy'''
:''Japanese name (Transmetal):'' '''Metals Convoy'''
:''Japanese name (Optimal Optimus):'' '''Powered Convoy'''
:''Japanese joke name (Beast Machines):'' '''Ybonco'''<ref>This joke name is first seen in the intro part from Japanese dub version of the episode "[[Fallout]]". "Ybonco" (イボンコ) is the reverse of "Convoy" (コンボイ). </ref>
:''Italian name (original body):'' '''Black Jack'''
:''Italian name (Transmetal):'' '''Metal Gorilla'''
:''Italian name (Optimal Optimus):'' '''Optimus Primal''' - what the ''hell'', Italy?
:''Polish name:'' '''Optimus Naczelny''' ("Optimus Primal")
:''Chinese name (Taiwan):'' '''Jīn-gāng Wáng''' (金剛王, "King King Kong")
:''Cantonese name:'' '''Odim'''

This format can prevent too many words in a line in order to provide a visual convenience in some ways. --TX55^TALK 14:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Links in navboxes

Lately, I've been noticing that the links in Television navigation templates have been directing to nowhere. I assumed that this was a modification prior to the move, but it's getting a little difficult to navigate the episodes. -- SFH 02:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

There went my theory that "It's Labor Day, no one will notice that!"

(It broke yesterday 'cuz I forgot to do something before I broke on holiday. I thought of it right after I left and it'sbeen bugging me all weekend.)

Might take a couple hours for everything to de-cache, but it's fixed. -Derik 19:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Combiner article format (Opinions wanted!)

I've tweaked the intro Aerialbot (G1) article to make it less informative, and I propose we should do the same for the other combiner articles. (hear me out!) This is the old version, and while it's very similar at first blush (though providing more information about the members,) I think there's a key difference; you can scan the new format- you had to read the old one.Normally I'm all for forcing our users to read- TT1 isn't a quick reference, you get more depth-of-information that way, etc... but in the case of combiner groups I often want to switch from one member to another, and do so by jumping 'up' to the group page. Since the intro's are often used like disambiguation pages, we should format the intro for quick navigation like disambiguation pages are.I'd also like to dump the "Combiner group" article format with the 'banner' group pic as seen on Combaticon and Constructicon (G1). We came up with it really early on, but I think it clashes badly with the look and feel that we use on all other pages. Thoughts? Concerns? Ideas? ...Apathy? -Derik 10:05, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Username Blacklist

You probably should look into this: [[1]] - SanityOrMadness 22:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

RTFM?

I'm a bit embarrassed to ask, but...is there an "instruction manual" of sorts for the added wiki functions one can access as a moderator? I'm not clear on what some of them do (or even if I know all of them), so I'm hesitant to use them.--Apcog 23:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

There's this here, but for the most part, the MediaWiki documentation is all sorta scattered. It's not even all on one site; that's the moderator guide on Wikimedia (the group that runs Wikipedia), but there's also documentation on the MediaWiki software website. If you're not sure what something does, you can search on both, or just ask; I might already know. --Suki Brits 18:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

That's more than I knew before about where to look, thanks. My current ignorance focused on the Rollback function mainly. Now I'm also seeing an option to mark pages as "patrolled", but I don't know if that's Mod-only or not, much less what it means. I'll check those reference sites when I have a bit more time. Thanks again.--Apcog 19:13, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Random Article Navbar Images

I love these. Is there anywhere to see a full listing of all of them? And is there a way to add new ones? --Salt-Man Z 01:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Those are seeded by Template:Goicons, which can always get s'more added.--Rosicrucian^Talk 01:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. Is there a template handy? I'd be tempted to do ones for some of the fan-terminology articles; Transquito, G2 Slingshot, "neon" and so forth. Hooper X 11:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I have a layered PSD file (so the white around the arrow and GO! will be consistent), but the wiki won't let me upload PSDs. --M Sipher 13:40, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I constructed my own layered PSP file to match as closely as I could, but they're still not exactly the same. If you email me the PSD, I'll put it on my webspace and link to it from the Goicons page. What version of PS was it saved in? (I think I can open PSD files from up to PS6.) --Salt-Man Z 18:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Better yet: you can upload PSD files to the wiki now. --Suki Brits 21:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Double storylinks

On some (relatively rare) occasions, you end up with two storylinks that refer to the same event-- not because the same event was referred to twice (like flashing back from multiple perspectives,) but because there are multiple more-or-less identical "tellings" of the same event. (The episode "Big Broadcast of 2006" and the comic, for example.)So over in Pennsylvania, I've got two storylinks, one for the Movie prequel, one for the "beginnings" DVD exclusive-- which re-tells the comic... but also makes enough alterations to make it it's own continuity.They're distinct continuities... so in theory I should actually have two continuity headers, repeating the same information with different storylinks... but that's retarded so we're not gonna even discuss that. The question-- I guess... is whether there is (or even should be) a way to reflect "Multiple versions of what's essentially the 'same' event" in storylinks? (The fact the events of TF:TM occour, as portrayed, in literally dozens of continuities besides just the cartoon might be more important.) It's not a distinction it's important to make often... but I feel like sometimes it might be in some circumstances? -Derik 15:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it, personally... if I came across a page like that, what I would think is, "This event takes place in/applies to both stories." That is what you were going for, isn't it?

My only suggestion might be if there's some way to have the two storylinks bump together with no whitespace, just to make it clear that both stories apply to that event (rather than an editing mistake or implying that fiction needs to be placed in between down the road, or somesuch). --Jeysie 15:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps a "stacked" storylink, a double-decker one to conserve horizontal space? --M Sipher 15:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The identicalness of the Zone manga and cartoon comes to mind, as well. - Chris McFeely 16:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Also Animated cartoon and comic adaptation.—Starfield 16:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Stacked... is a bit problematic. (Storylinks are inline.) I agree that it's not, um... make-or-break/life-or-death... but it does have some use. If anyone comes up with a good treatment/approach/concept, please throw it out. -Derik 03:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Move ability

Is there someway that we can tweak the move ability to make it so that someone can only move a certain amount of pages within a twenty four hour period? Because, if I know vandals, this isn't going to stop anytime soon. In fact, it's only going to get worse. -- SFH 04:38, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

As another spam prevention measure, I'd like to see character limits on user names. Suki says she'll look into it.

As a side note, the admins get a special REVERT button on moves. It restores the original page AND has an option to delete the new page, all in one swoop -- no muss, no fuss. If you see an admin (well, me, at least) block one of our special friends, it'll avoid a lot of confusion if you just give me a few minutes to nuke the junk pages and undo the moves. If I block the person, it means I'm also aware of the damage they've done and will probably fix it ASAP. Hopefully we can keep from tripping all over each other that way. -- Repowers 04:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I for one would not mind at all if we restricted the ability to move pages to registered and logged in users. There is no reason at all for an anonymous IP to be able to move a page.--Rosicrucian^Talk 05:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

And, am I misremembering or is there a way to similarly restrict "new" accounts? I know on Wikipedia when they semiprotect a page it can't be edited by freshly registered accounts either. Which, if applied to moving pages, would take away half of what Assaulthead currently does here.--Rosicrucian^Talk 05:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Those both sound like good ideas to me. -- Repowers 05:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous users already can't move pages, but now newly registered accounts can't, either. I've also implemented a reasonable character limit to usernames. --Suki Brits 20:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Another thing we may want to do specifically for Assaulthead is place the image filenames on the Blacklist page. He's uploading his images under the same name, so that would slow him down. -- SFH 19:59, 21 September 2008 (EDT)