MediaWiki talk:Community Portal/Archive33

[[{{#sub:MediaWiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive33|0|-0}}|«]]	Community Portal / Archive33   e	[[{{#sub:MediaWiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive33|0|-0}}|»]]
from~? to~? notes:

So what now?

This discussion has been moved to Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving2#So what now?.

Image aspect ratios

I notice a lot of Animated screencaps, like Image:SariLayingDown1.jpg, are out-of-aspect ratio, which is kinda annoying - neither NTSC (480i, typically 720x480, US/Japan) nor PAL (576i, typically 720x576, UK/Europe/Australia) use square pixels, while computers do. A screencap from a 4:3 NTSC source should really be resized to 640px wide for uploading here, while a screencap from a 4:3 PAL source should be resized to 768px wide. - SanityOrMadness 21:39, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

Since screen caps usually have to be trimmed of black borders, I'm not going to bugger about trying to get the aspect ratio correct. I just upload whatever my DVD software gives me. --FFN 03:05, 29 March 2009 (EDT)

News from Wookieepedia

A while back, one of the users here suggested a partnership between Wookieepedia and this wiki. In case you're wondering what happened with that, the ongoing nomination process is here. Silly Dan 22:44, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

Awesome! Now, settle this argument - could Death Star transformed as Darth Vader beat Unicron? --FFN 07:13, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Cool. I think I made a vague overture there at one point specifically about the coverage of Attacktix and that weird Star Wars vs. TF packaging - I understand there have been some direct and less-direct TF references in SW (which I imagine will only continue to crop up, given that the current and incoming generations of SW official content creators are likely to be of the age where they're at least casually aware of TF, if not fans in their own right), so this is probably a pretty reasonable networking opportunity. We can explain to you guys why the Optimus Prime that fought Darth Vader doesn't look like the one you had as a kid, and you can explain to us how the entire thing was totally non-canonical anyway. Heh heh. Hooper_X 07:54, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Purging redirects

I've noticed that the recovery process has been used as a good excuse for deleting useless redirects. I'm totally in support of this, and I'd like to figure out what counts as "useless." I used to think the more redirects, the better, since that would increase the chances of good results from people's misspelled or ill-informed searches. But now that we have that auto-drop-down suggestion thing, I've pulled a complete 180. Every redirect just clutters that menu up. To my mind, there are only five justifications for any redirect:

1. It's the base version of an otherwise parenthetically-disambiguated set (Optimus Prime)
2. It's an alternate official term (Rodimus Prime)
3. It's a fan-term that is equally or more prevalent than the official term (Big Floating Head)
4. It's an alternate parenthetical that had received notable support in discussion (I think Sideways (Armada) was heading in that direction before the crash)
5. It's a valid alternate spelling/parsing, especially if the auto-drop-down wouldn't naturally correct the user (STARS)

I can't think of any other valid reason for a redirect existing. I bring this up because I've noticed in repairing the S.T.A.R.S. articles that there are both vestigial redirects from past improper capitalization (Have the Decepticons Defeated Us Once and For All?) and newly-created redirects compensating for a grammatical mistake on Hasbro's part (Rodimus Prime remembers the Transformers' greatest battle on Earth.). I don't think either of those have sufficient reason to exist. What say you?
- Jackpot 12:38, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

The less redirects, the better, I think. They just clutter up the search suggestion box, thereby getting in the way rather than helping. Talk page redirects should be killed on sight.

But in this regard, we have Optimus (G1) redirecting to Optimus Prime (G1). Same for other Optimuses and Nemesises and the like. I'm in favour of getting rid of these as well (one such shortened version could stay to redirect to the dismabguation page, but that's it), but I'm not entirely sure. Geewunling 12:46, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Actually, looking at the auto-drop-down menu results for "Optimus (", it looks like every single series has its own version of that. That strikes me as silly; Optimus is all we need. But it depends on your approach: I'm taking a guilty-until-proven-innocent view, where redirects are assumed to be deletable unless they can be defended on the grounds stated above. I checked out how Wikipedia does it, and they seem to favor the opposite view, based on the logic that a deleted redirect can cause unforeseen breakages (like if other websites link to the now-defunct redirect). I personally find their arguments unconvincing, but I don't know how other people feel. - Jackpot 14:03, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Not to mention it is confusing, like in the case of Nemesis (G1)/Nemesis Prime (G1) - most "Nemesis (" are redirects to their respective Nemesis Prime, but Nemesis (G1) leads to the ship, breaking any sense of consistency. As far as common shortened versions of names go, I think all we need is one that redirects to the disambiguation page. Geewunling 14:58, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Absolutely agreed. - Jackpot 19:00, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

I believe we need to give a little leeway to those who are even less than a casual fan. Having extra redirects for characters vaguely remembered (Optimus, Soundwave). Some people may just find the search box, type, and hit enter without even taking into account the drop down menu. One thing I think should remain to a point as well are acronyms minus the periods, i.e. GI Joe or STARS. A quick type, enter, and it redirects. I say this especially with GI Joe in mind since we may be getting traffic with the new movie and the JoePedia seems deader than the wikia TF.

I agree with Jackpot when it comes to redirects being linked to. I highly doubt that will be a problem. In-wiki we have a great team to fix all links before the page is deleted. In the case of out-wiki links, those who place the most around the net are very unlikely to link to a redirect. Those that do I think are too much of a minority to tip the balance against cleanliness of page numbers. Savvy? :::--Bluestreak7 16:53, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Good point with the acronyms. I've added it to the list up above. I'm not sure what you mean about the "extra redirects for characters vaguely remembered", though. In the Optimus example, what less-than-casual fan is going to type "Optimus (G1)"? They're just going to type "Optimus", which will go to the disambig. All those "Optimus (__)" articles still seem completely useless to me. - Jackpot 19:00, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

I'd argue that gramatically correct forms of titles should remain as redirects. I don't want to expect a user to remember that one STARS flyer skimped on an apostrophe or that "Inferno Imprisoned" is actually spelled "Inferno Improsoned". Everything else I agree with you. —Interrobang 19:16, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Though both of those would be wrong because it's actually Improsoned Inferno. I'm not being needlessly nitpicky: It demonstrates the point that I always make a habit of double-checking my links if there's the slightest question about them (especially given how many disambig-pages we have these days). Plus does this mean we should have Scorponok (episode) and Transformers (Italy) pages?

That having been said, I'm not particularly die-hard about this question. The "improsoned" example doesn't bother me that much because it's such a short title and therefore people would likely try to link it from memory. "Rodimus Prime remembers the Transformers greatest battle on Earth.", on the other hand, is so ridiculously long that I wouldn't expect anybody to try to use without looking it up first. It certainly took me a while to get comfortable with it, and I'm the S.T.A.R.S. expert here. Plus having the two(!) apostrophe'd redirects adds a level of absurdity to the drop-down, since you can't even see the difference in the limited space.

Incidentally, right before we left Wikia, a feature was implemented that made the drop-down appear every time you typed a double-bracket while editing. I hadn't decided if that was awesome or annoying before it went away, but if it ever comes back, the argument for "correction" redirects will become even weaker, I think.

- Jackpot 20:13, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

While I agree about keeping useful redirects like the aforementioned STARS and Imprisoned Inferno, I do want to point out that our visitors are not either minimally knowledged on Transformers or complete retards. Someone with barely any knowledge on Transformers should still be able to find the correct article, if not through the search suggestion boxes, then through disambiguation banners or related pages (like "Energon (cartoon)" for Improsoned Inferno). And I doubt anyone would be annoyed about a tiny bit of searching. Geewunling 04:00, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

Speaking of the search suggestion box, is it possible to customise its behaviour to give priority to articles starting with whatever you type in? At the moment, if I type in "Megatron", I get a choice of "All Hail Megatron" issues rather than a choice of actual characters named "Megatron". This makes the suggestion thing less useful in my books, and it'd be better if it gave me a choice of articles with names starting with Megatron and then other articles with "Megatron" in the name. --abates 22:20, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

I don't think the search extension proper allows you to do this in settings, but it could be done by adjusting the code.

(You could also make it so redirects didn't show up in the search-suggestion box, which seems much more important to me.)

Hh. I just discovered something hilarious about redirects, I'm gonna make it a new topic. -Derik 22:38, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

I vote against the removal of redirects from the search-suggestion box. It would be ridiculous not to be suggested "Rodimus Prime (G1)" when searching for Rodimus because the article's name is "Hot Rod (G1)" with the other identity's name as redirect. Geewunling 00:47, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Can we have the search-menu program ignore redirects by default but have an option for exceptions? For instance, maybe there could be a template that we add to redirects that we actually WANT to have show up in the search-menu, like Rodimus Prime. I know nothing of the programming magic necessary to make this happen, so can someone in the know tell if this is feasible? - Jackpot 02:33, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

But... what purpose do redirects serve if not to help people find an article? The only ones I'm sparing are ones someone arguably could use for their search? Geewunling 02:38, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm gonna agree with Geewunling here. There is no meaningful way to differentiate redirects we want to show up in the searchbox from those we don't, and they are useful to show up as suggestions. The way to get that signal to noise ratio better is exactly what he's been doing, purging those redirects that are unlikely to be frequent search terms, and leaving the ones that people are likely to search by.--Rosicrucian^Talk 02:41, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

*Psst* "she". Geewunling 02:49, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

No, no, I already deleted that redirect. "He" is all we have left.--Rosicrucian^Talk 02:53, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Deleting "unworthy" redirects is a rather... violent solution. Even though I advocated it at the beginning of this discussion, I actually do prefer a surgical removal from just the search-menu instead if it's possible. As this discussion has shown, different people have different standards for what counts as worthwhile, and I'd rather see arguments revolve around something as easily changeable as a template than the creation/deletion of whole pages. Plus there's the sheer man-hours factor: My instinct is that more redirects are created by renaming badly-titled articles than because of valid alternates, and therefore it will be more work to cull all the worthless redirects than it will be to modify the good ones for menu-inclusion.

Plus I had another thought that might circumvent the need for any redirect-modification: What if typing the name of a redirect made the drop-down show only the actual article? For instance, the word "Rodimus" is in the name of four different redirects to Hot Rod (G1): [[Rodimus Prime]], [[Rodimus Prime (G1)]], [[Hot Rodimus]], and [[New Rodimus]]. For some reason only the last two currently show up in the drop-down when you type "Rodimus", but that's still twice as many as there ought to be. If it just said "Hot Rod (G1)" instead of any of those, then we'd be keeping the drop-down clean without blocking the user's path, plus there would be no need at all to delete, modify, or otherwise discriminate among redirects.

(Again, I have NO idea if this is programmatically feasible... but it's the best scenario I can envision.)

- Jackpot 02:33, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

There is no meaningful way to differentiate redirects we want to show up in the searchbox from those we don't

We could have the search function not return redirects, which was the way it behaved on wikia.

It's not a huge issue for most wikis-- but because we are so "disambiguated," (almost every major article having multiple disambigs and redirects,) it's kinda a big deal for us.

So we probably want Scour to edit SearchSuggest.php so that.

if($location == 1){
 
	$res = $db->select( 'page', 'page_title',
			array(  'page_namespace' => 0,
				'page_is_redirect' => 0,
				"UPPER(page_title) LIKE '%" .$db->strencode( strtoupper ($term)). "%'" ),
				"wfSajaxSearch",
				array( 'LIMIT' => $limit )
			);
} else {		

	$res = $db->select( 'page', 'page_title',
		array(  'page_namespace' => 0,
			'page_is_redirect' => 0,
			"UPPER(page_title) LIKE '". $db->strencode( strtoupper ($term)) ."%'" ),
			"wfSajaxSearch",
			array( 'LIMIT' => $limit )
		);		
}

We'd probably also want to set $location = 0; near the beginning of the file. (Match titles from the front only.) -Derik 07:23, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I can't tell what that code does, but from your description it sounds like it would just purge all redirects from the search drop-down. Thing is, so far you're the only one who thinks that's a good idea. I agree with Geewunling and Rosicrucian that at least some redirects are helpful, since there are so many valid alternate terms. So I've been suggesting middle-ground ideas, but I've got no clue if they can actually be done. What do you think of them? - Jackpot 07:33, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

When do you need a redirect in a search-suggestion? Searching for "Megatron" will give you a list of pages with disambigs after them. Searching for "Matrix" will give you a list of pages whose title starts with "Matrix." Matrix (Disambiguation) will be the first match because a "(" comes before any letter alphabetically.

What redirects do you want in there? "Humans" as well as "Human" You want "Brothers in Armor" (a redirect) to appear in addition to the real page "Brothers in Armor!!"

I assume you do have a reason why including redirects in the list of search suggestions would be an idea, an example-case I'm missing. Could you tell me what it is?

I mean-- we get 8 suggestions. There are more than 8 Optimus Primes. At this point I go to the (disambiguation) page, or click RiD Prime at random, then click its disambig link to navigate sideways to the Prime I want.

Wikia's search suggest nix'd redirects-- and a lot of times I just used it to to find a page title I knew was "right" rather than a redirect. So if I see the link to "Falcon" on this page is blinking because it's a redirect, I type "Falcon" into the search-suggest box to see what my options are. Having any redirects there, no matter how well-intentioned is bad. I don't WANT to see "Falcon" as a search-suggestion (it's the #1 match,) because that's a redirect.

When exactly is having a redirect in a search suggestion useful? -Derik 07:57, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

An example has already been brought up: Rodimus Prime. If you type that in and the menu doesn't show redirects, you'll get Rodimus Prime (Animated) and Rodimus Prime remembers the Transformers greatest battle on Earth., but you WON'T get Hot Rod (G1), which is most likely what you were looking for. If you want more examples than that, a couple have already jumped to mind, but I hope you'll agree without further persuasion that there are lots of cases like this. Hence my two suggestions: We exclude redirects by default and either 1) have a template we can throw onto valuable redirects so they're not excluded, or 2) make it so the core article actually shows up in the menu even if the word you're typing isn't in its title. Like I also said, I have NO idea if either of those is feasible. But without some intercessory factor like that, I think simply excluding redirects is a little too baby-with-the-bathwater. In the meantime, Geewunling is weeding through dozens of redirects, marking for deletion all of the ones she judges unworthy. I think THAT solution is dismayingly painstaking and severe (even though I suggested it in the first place), but in the absence of a programmatic solution, it might end up being the best. - Jackpot 09:04, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Geewunling likes to point out that she thinks a lot of these redirects should be fixed and/or deleted regardless. There's no point in keeping most of them, and they clog up things. I like some of the ideas mentioned here on how to have search suggestion box react on queries to exclude unhelpful redirects, but we should just get rid of a lot of them anyway. Btw, I've been wondering, is it possible to make the search suggestion box a bit longer than it currently is? Geewunling 09:30, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Sorry, I didn't mean to disparage your efforts; I appreciate orderliness as much as anyone, and it's pleasing to see useless redirects vanish. By all means, as long as you have the gumption for it, knock yourself out. What's "dismaying" about it to me, the more I think about it, is the idea of it becoming our official solution to the problem of a cluttered search menu. That's a lot of painstaking work to put on the shoulders of the wiki in general, especially since we're never going to see the end of useless redirects as the wiki grows. And the thing is, if we can find a programmatic solution for the search-menu issue, then the only area where redirects will really "clog up things" the annoying realm of double-redirects, which have been popping up at a very manageable rate so far. - Jackpot 09:47, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Double redirects are easy-- have the 'bot fix 'em.

And thank you Jackpot, "Rodimus Prime (G1)" is a good example of a time when redirects in search boxes would be useful-- my imagination failed me.

Here's the thing-- the thing you're suggesting... hiding all redirects except ones we flag in-page is... not possible, at least not without a fundamental change to the core functionality of the wiki, which is code I wouldn't touch with a ten foot laser pole. The "page_is_redirect" flag is a fundamental yes-no boolean database field associated with the page entry. We can reference that, but turning it into something squishier like "is redirect, or is a page we like" sounds nightmarish. I guess maybe you could totally rewrite the database query to use a join that tests against a category id... or more likely a category name that would be... ugh, it's giving me a headache just thinking about it... you'd be transforming a light ajax query that might be performed 10 times when you're typing a single word into an incredibly heavy cross-referencing string-match join query-- it's the difference between using a cup-holder and getting out of the car to fetch your drink from the trunk every time you want to take a sip. ...not to mention you'd be making core wiki functionality dependent on proprietary hacks-- in the service of a function that's supposed to be a minor enhancement.

Let me sketch another scenario for you.

1. I want Rodimus Prime! I type him in the search box.
2. I see several results, none of which looks like the one I want. Rather than "Rodimus (disambiguation)" I clock "Rodimus (Animated)," just ot be difficult.
3. This isn't the guy I want! Oh look, there's a link at the top-- "Other people called Rodimus Prime..." Hey, it's a list! And I want the first one on it!

You know-- that's assuming that the person clicks on the search-suggest. Most people don't. If they click "Search" it'll come up just liek ti always does. The suggest function is just a tiny helper, completely seperate from actual searching.

And finally (and this is the real thing) the search suggest function has been entirely replaced in the new version of MediaWiki. I don't know what's different about the new version, but I think it's stupid to sink too much time into making this version perfect. Slap it a few times to make it behave more like we want, but hold off on major changes until the upgrade.

And finally, I agree with Jackpot-- purging redirects (which may be linked to from off-site) in order to make the "search suggest" function work neater is incredibly wrong-headed. Purge redirects if you want-- we certainly need to get rid of some... but that should not be your reason.

We deleted the "Nest" -> "N.E.S.T." redirect yesterday. Because apparently no one will ever search for "Nest." This is out of control. -Derik 10:17, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

There is now a "NEST" -> "N.E.S.T." redirect and "NEST" comes up in the search box when you type "nest". And I click on the suggested list all the time. I think the only real improvement necessary is to assume that the what you are typing is the first word of the article. (so that "All Hail Megatron" doesn't come up when you type "Megatron") - Starfield 10:27, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm not feeling my work trivialized; most of the things you have said so far count as compliments to me. I'm merely stating what I believe to be the right solution for practical reasons. My current reasoning is that once we have this redirect purging done, it is easier to prevent in the future. A lot of our current redirects to me seem the result of misspellings, disagreements and/or need for an identifier, mostly from a time when we didn't have that awesome search suggestion thing and didn't have a bot to change links for us. I figure that with a clean slate and slightly better organization (like, mark the damn talk page redirect for deletion once you've moved a page), we can prevent the ridicilousness of redirects we currently have. And I disagree with Starfield's suggestion. While we need something for the Megatron search "problem", I have gotten a lot of redirects deleted on the basis that a later word in the query gets you the correct suggestion. Most recent example would be the "Headmasters" redirects to "The Headmasters" articles. But also in case of titles like all the doctors we have, just a correct combination of symbols anywhere should get you the proper suggestions. Geewunling 10:44, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

...crap, I forgot searches were case-insensitive, aren't they, even if the actual page links aren't. Bitchy complaint withdrawn.

And yeah, it's annoying as fuck to see page-after-page of redirect-flagging and deleting every time I check the wiki... but it's not exactly unneeded, and a bunch of that stems from imprort and page recovery, stuff that had moved etc... we're just getting it all at once and clearing out 2 years of accumulated deadwood all at once. I have no problem with that-- Deadwood should be cleared. As long as we're doing it for the right reasons. The volume will level off eventually. -Derik 12:52, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Thank you, Derik, for explaining why my idea #1 won't work. What about #2? Can the search-suggest, in the process of not displaying redirects, recognize where each redirect is going and display those pages in the menu too? As I said when I first suggested it, I actually think that's the BEST option of all. Based on your explanation, I'm guessing it's not feasible, but since you only mentioned my first idea, I want to be extra-sure no options are being dismissed out of hand.

I appreciate your point about the new MediaWiki, but given what happened the last time it was installed, do you really think we'll try again in the remotely near future? My instinct is that it's too far off to be a factor worth consideration. Besides, maybe we can find out right now if the whole point is moot or not. Do we know of any wikis that are using the new software?

- Jackpot 15:44, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

The last abortive attempt at a MediaWiki upgrade should not be taken as by any means typical, nor as an example of best practices performing such an upgrade. It can be done better, we know how to do it better, and the only reason it wasn't done better is because it was done by people other than the ones we generally trust with such things.--Rosicrucian^Talk 16:16, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Page load issues

For further information, see: Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving2

Wikia credits in redirects

I just discovered this... it looks liek all of our redirects have wikia credits in the code. They don't show up normally, but hit the edit button, and there they all are. --M Sipher 01:33, 30 March 2009 (EDT)

I noticed this as well, and pointed it out over on the Damage Control Central section.... What I'm curious about is, is there any way for a bot to seek and destroy these? Because there's no way to see them unless you hit the edit button... --Detour 01:42, 30 March 2009 (EDT)

I'm wondering if, when we move servers, we can run the same script we used when moving here in order to purge all Wikia links. --abates 01:47, 30 March 2009 (EDT)

I think we're gonna run a SQL database import when we move servers- so probably not.

I (finally) have a complete list of all wiki pages (as of about a week ago) including redirects. I'll rig my de-wikia-er script over the redirects tonight as soon as Big Sweep 2.0 is done-- at least on the 4000-odd redirects in the name namespace. (2.0 does about 1/3 of what I'd hoped it would... the regex's were just breaking my fucking balls, so I resigned myself to taking baby steps. Right now it's fixing one sort of in-page template and fixing all the escaped HTML-- so stuff will at least start looking more right, even if it's not properly template'd.) -Derik 01:21, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

Icons on external links

Derik is experimenting with sticking icons on the external links for common external link sites (both for branding, and because it lets you visually scan the links without reading them-- "I want the profile-- NTFA!") These icons require CSS3, and I THINK they work on all modern browsers... but I really dont' care because they fail silently (creating no problems) if they don't. These icons should only show up in the External Link section-- I'm worried they might screw up layouts elsewhere.

If you hate it, think it could be improved, or just want a site added- let me know. The community can feel free to vote to toss it out if it's annoying... I just thought it was worth trying. -Derik 01:12, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

Epnav working?

I remember someone complaining that our episode navigation was broken when we first did crash recovery. Is that still the case?

(Let's pretend that this inquiry is NOT related to me going through goggle analytics and realizing, to my horror, what % of page traffic passes through those previous/next links.) -Derik 04:06, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

I have no idea about the previous possible issues, but I'll point out here that some articles with epnavs converted so they look right, but when you edit them you'll see the epnav sectiosn were just converted to HTML equivalents of our epnav templates. I don't know if this is a problem, but I've placed a bookworm 2 on pages where I have found them regardless. --FFN 07:40, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Interrobang fixed any issues with that a couple of days ago, I think. --abates 08:14, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Project:

For whatever reason, links to "Project: Transtector" (see Japanese Self Defense Core and Minerva) are automagically translated into links to "Transformers Wiki:Transtector". I'm thinking that's probably not the intended result. --abates 08:44, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Seems to be a kludge to redirect links to wikiprojects.--Rosicrucian^Talk 13:51, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

Blue boxes

Not sure where else to ask this question: Is there a reason the blue boxes (stub, coming soon, etc) don't have right hand borders? Or is this just something wonky with my computer? This has bothered me for some time, just thought it would be a good time to fix this (if it isn't just me) while all the other corrections are being made post-disaster.Khajidha 13:44, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

Better suited for the community portal. The main page discussion is specifically for the main page itself. I've moved your question over.--Rosicrucian^Talk 13:50, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

Are you using IE 7? I lose the right-hand side of the stub box in that too. --abates 16:04, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

Orphaned pages

Now that things are starting to get in order, I've started my work on the orphaned page list again. I've noticed something odd. It seems there are a bunch of pages with special characters on the orphaned pages listing that are obviously not orphaned. It mostly seems to be Japanese voice actors and such. If you go to the pages and click the "What links here" button, there are pages linking to it.

At first I thought maybe it was an old list, but since then I have integrated in other orphaned pages and the list does continue update. The question is can we even do anything about this due to the automation? I really would like to get that list down at least to one page. Orphaned pages annoy me.--Bluestreak7 17:12, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

While I have no idea how to fix this, it seems like these special character pages have acquired some weird kind of duplicates. For example, type "rmun" into the search box, and the dropdown menu gives you two different "Jörmungandr" articles, apparently with the same name but using different URLs for the special characters: "Jo%CC%88rmungandr" and "J%C3%B6rmungandr". Wiki considers the former URL to be an orphaned article and the latter one to be "correct", but both lead to the same article, no Wiki redirects or nothing. --Apoc 17:38, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

I have some ideas about fixing the problem, but I'd rather set up a test server to try them on before doing them on the main site. --abates 17:41, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

FYI: Professor Gō has two entries in Category sections. One is real (and filed under "G") and one is messed up (and filed under "P"). It isn't a redirect, it is some kind of ghost. - Starfield 16:51, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I've also noticed that our page count on the Main Page seems to be in a state of flux. It gets up higher and then lowers. I wonder if this is due to these "duplicate" pages sometimes getting counted and other times not. --Bluestreak7 10:42, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

I think I am the fault of that. I'm not sure if it goes for all instances, but at least when I put the delete template on a redirect, it suddenly counts as a "page". Wait until someone has removed those pages marked for deletion - the count will lower again. Then wait for me to mark a few more and the page count will go up again. Geewunling 11:02, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Comics copyright

Right now, the comiccover template states that:

This image is the cover of a single issue of a comic book, the copyright for which is owned by either the publisher or the artist who produced this cover.

...and similarly, the comicinterior template says:

This image is a panel or sequence of panels of a comic book, the copyright for which is owned by either the publisher or the artist and/or writer who produced this issue.

Thing is, that's inaccurate in significant part - AIUI, Hasbro Transformers comic licencees have to surrender the copyrights on material published in a TF comic to Hasbro... with certain exceptions - primarily for our purposes, the publisher logos and publisher-owned characters. That's why Marvel went to the trouble of debuting Circuit Breaker and Death's Head (and others? Not counting issue 3 of the Marvel US series with long-established Spider-Man, Nick Fury, etc; of course) outside of their TF comics, so that they would retain the rights; and why Titan & IDW can reprint Marvel issues (although IDW seem to have a *lot* more trouble getting the rights to reprint the Marvel-owned stuff than Titan did).

Does anyone know enough of the details to write up versions of the templates suitable for Marvel US, Marvel UK, IDW, etc? [DW is more complicated, since their G1 ongoing and WW v3 fell into the black hole of their bankruptcy, when their earlier, nominally completed, stuff didn't] - SanityOrMadness 11:53, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

Moved talk pages

There should really be an option to delete the old talk page after it is moved instead of creating a redirect. - Starfield 12:20, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

DEFAULSORT problem?

Several of the entries in the voice actors category are listed both under their surname and their first name. These appear to be the actors with some accent in their name: Ireneusz Załóg, Márcio Seixas, Maurício Berger and Willi Röbke. Having accents, but not having this problem are Fátima Noya (but that's not DEFAULTSORTed), José Santacruz and José Sant'anna. Apparently, there's some problem DEFAULTSORT has with some of the accented vowels ([é] does work, [á], [ó], [í] and [ö] don't). Can this problem be solved? -- Tupka86 09:06, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

It's related to the Macron issue mentioned here. Once we fix that, the listing under their first name will disappear. --abates 21:07, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

Alt Mode Header Pictures?

So, this is a pretty big suggestion, but it struck me that a nice addition to the vast majority of character pages would be, at the top of the page just below the character image, another image of them in their alt mode. I realize that some of the character images already have both representations in them, but plenty of pages (I was at Shrapnel when the idea hit me) don't even have a single visual representation of a Transformer's altmode!

I realize (or at least suspect) that this would be quite the undertaking, given that it would mean a change of the site's format standard, but it's something that I think would genuinely contribute to the overall quality of this wiki. An altmode is just as much a part of who a Transformer is, after all, and a lot of character intros don't reflect that enough. Hell, I've also wondered why we don't have a section right before "Fiction" called "Altmode(s)."

Please consider and respond, because I really think this is a good idea (and sort of an obvious one, too), but it's also a very big idea, and very big ideas tend to be retarded ideas incognito (especially if said ideas seem obvious). Tell other people to weigh in on this too! Preferably the people in charge.

Keegman 16:32, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

Usually, we try to include their (fiction-specific) alternate modes in relevant fiction sections. We don't normally include them as part of the main image because some of the more popular characters have had too many vehicle modes, and often, the main pictures we use up top never had an accompanying vehicle mode image. Personally, I prefer consistency in images so I would rather have, say, an image of Optimus Prime and his vehicle mode having been drawn by the same artist in the same style for the same project, rather than from two entirely different pieces of art. --FFN 07:26, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Whenever I make a mainpic image, I include the altmode if there is one. (See Galvatron II, Soundwave (Cybertron), Fastlane, Flame (UK comic), and Cog (G1). I even did one for a subsection, Optimus Primal#Cybertron comic.) That's the way I personally prefer to see the idea executed, and it certainly doesn't require a change to the format of the wiki. You're not the first person to bring the idea up, so I'm kind of surprised I've never seen anyone but myself actually do it. I don't think it should ever be considered a requirement for a page, but I do consider it a preferred addition. - Jackpot 16:18, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I think it'd be nice for a lot of characters... but in many cases it simply doesn't exist, or it'd look awkward. Look at the main image on Optimus Prime, there simply is no vehicle mode art to match that beautiful body shot. And how do you present it? Verrtically? That'd push the dfirst section way down in most cases (it's already pushed down on most articles) whereas horizontally is unworkable for a bunch of other reasons.

The mainpics seem to represent a sort of compromise... even if the character has has multiple incarnations, they all presumably look more-or-less like their original robot mode-- even if the vehicle changes wildly.

And fundamentally-- I think you'd have people throwing fits if you squeezed an irrelevant Cheetah into Cheetor (BW)'s top section instead of his other robot modes. The beast mode is so... secondary. If we were gonna wedge more visuals into the main pics, vehicle modes would not be out first pic in many cases. -Derik 16:47, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Cover artists

Anyone got a list of cover artists, especially for the Marvel US G1 series? I'm trying to fill our the image description pages for those right now, and I'm being hampered by the lack of info on that score. - SanityOrMadness 21:19, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

I don't know of any pre-existing list. Some I can tell by the style, some I only can guess at due to the signature, and the rest who knows. They didn't credit those things back then beyond the signature, so... --ItsWalky 21:26, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

Well, most of the issue pages appear to have the artists listed (albeit buried at the bottom of the page...), and I've just found this page, so I've been filling them in.

One slightly problematic one though - Marvel US #62. There's two signatures, but the only intelligible one is "Rod Ramos" (Rodney Ramos, who as far as I'm aware works mostly as an inker), and he's given as the artist on the issue page. The current image-page description lists Geoff Senior as the artist, and I can believe it - but I'm not 100% sure, and he inked himself on the interiors. Can anyone confirm? - SanityOrMadness 19:02, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Anti-troll

After another you-know-who rampage earlier, whatever happened to blacklisting "Detour" and "Fuck" from being used in page & user names, and requiring autoconfirmed priviliges to upload files? Was that a casualty of the Big Crash? - SanityOrMadness 18:38, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I think plans to upgrade/add plugins to the software have been put on hold while the cleanup too place and we got ready for moving to a new host (how far away are we from setting a date for that anyway?). Perhaps it's time to revisit installing the title blacklist plugin? --abates 19:47, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Advertising Idea

So, I came up with a fun idea for advertising the wiki IRL. I decided to make an Autobot propaganda poster with the TFWiki.net watermark that people could print out and post in the colleges or whatever nerdy hangouts they use. I've uploaded it to my Photobucket account, so have a look and let me know what you think of it: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v168/Semysane/TFWiki%20Ads/OptimusPropaganda01-Beta.png This is just a test to see if I could make it not look like crap; it's still a work in progress (ie: still crap). If a more talented person wants to have a go at making a better one, go at it. BTW, the Ancient Autobot text there says "Till All Are One" -- Semysane 22:20, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I think it looks pretty good. Certainly in very eye-catching colours. :) --abates 06:30, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Thank you! I'm thinking of making a Decepticon one as well. Any ideas on a slogan for that one? The Cons don't have many awesome ones like Till All Are One. "Transform and Rise Up" maybe? -- Semysane 04:56, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

{{mainpic}}

I've made an alteration to {{mainpic}} that's going to start tracking how long (in months) these articles have lacked main pictures for. In theory this'll (eventually) give us a way to triage these neglected articles. In practice, the dates are starting from now, so there's gonna be a whole mess of articles with '0' months. It'll sort itself out over time.

This depends on me running a maintenece program every couple of weeks FYI, that replaces all instances of {{mainpic}} with {{mainpic|date}}. We'll see how that works.  ;) -Derik 09:58, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Marvel G2 issues

The G2 comic pages are listed under story titles (e.g., Dark Shadows! from G2 #11), but backup stories (in the case of G2 #11, "Tales of Earth Part Eight") are listed on the same pages.

Shouldn't the pages either be moved to a page named after the issue, the way the current UK Titan series appears to be treated, or else split along story lines? - SanityOrMadness 21:05, 24 April 2009 (EDT)