MediaWiki talk:Community Portal/Archive1

	Community Portal / Archive1   e	[[{{#sub:MediaWiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive1|0|-0}}|»]]
from~April 7, 2006 to~May 16, 2006 notes:

This is archived talk, kept around for future reference. If you want to talk about any of this stuff, please restart discussion on the currently active talk page.

Please look at the section about copyright tags at the bottom. --Suki Brits 04:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I got Ben Yee's permision to use some of his texts via E-mail Ben Yee said... "Please use only certain text (not say, entire episode reviews or anything like that) and credit my site accordingly. Thanks!" X-BoB58

Do we know who has administrative powers on this Wiki? --User:ItsWalky

There's been a vandal who's screwed around with a few pages, and this is probably going to come up fairly often. The wikipedia page on reverting[1] is something that most people should read, so you know how to put things back to how they were, when something like that happens aggain. --Suki Brits 03:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I reverted the Main Page after someone replaced it with a message insulting the intelligence of this Wiki.-Shadow Mask Prime

Contact in case of problems

As you haven't an active admin at the moment, I've left contact information on my user page and will call in regularly to see if you need any help. If anyone knows why someone is blanking pages, that would be useful. Are there copyright issues? Has stuff been copied without full (and GFDL compatible) permission? If so, we may have to remove and rewrite the pages. I'll pop back tomorrow to see if there has been more blanking. -- sannse (talk) 16:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

New Admins

The other thing to consider is who should be your new admin(s). You all know your wiki better than I, so any suggestions? Who has experience of admin buttons (not vital, they are pretty easy to follow), is active on this wiki, and knows the subject well enough to know what is valid and what is vandalism? The main criteria as far as I'm concerned are some good sense and a lot of enthusiasm :) -- sannse (talk) 13:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I fit most of the requirements, but don't know wiki's particular admin setup. If you say they're easy to follow, then I suppose they can't be much different from admin-ing elsewhere. If anything, I just want to keep that one guy from deleting whole pages. I also think User:Suki Brits would make a good Admin, if she would want to be. --User:ItsWalky

I had just typed up that I'd also nominate Walky as an admin when he edited his post-- oops, I guess that seems sorta hollow now. Regardless, he's probably the best choice for an admin here, as he certainly knows what he's doing, and has put lot of time into this already; definitely fits the requirements.

And I wouldn't mind myself, either. --Suki Brits 18:13, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Having seen Walky's posts and conversations thus far, I'd trust him to be a fair and enthusiastic admin --User:G.B. Blackrock (talk)

I think that Suki seems to know the system better --X-BoB58

"NO The Constructicons Form DEVESTATOR! The Most Powerful Robot! They Should Rule!"

I honestly can't believe I'm the first one to use that quote here. I mean, come on, really. Get your heads in the game.

That Said: In all honesty, I agree with the mutual respect goin to'ard Walky or Suki being Admin. Since Walky's added more to the Wiki then everyone else put together, and Suki seems to have done much of the admin-lite duties round here.

Heck, I vote for Suki.--Octopus Prime- King of the Road! 22:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I would gladly put my support behind Walky and/or Suki Brits as admins. --Steve-o 06:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Walky and "Suki Brits" would be fine mods. FOR ME TO OVERTHROW. Hooper X 20:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

A nice bit of agreement here :) Walky and Suki Brits are now your admins. Let me know if you need any help at all -- sannse (talk) 12:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, thanks, everyone. Hopefully I won't actually need to do many admin type functions, but I'll be glad to whenever I can. --Suki Brits 17:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Deletion policy

One thing that I'd really rather not happen to this is we get bogged down by too many policies and rules, since that's distracting from the real purpose of the whole thing. We're all big kids, if someone's not doing things right, we don't need to redirect them to endless piles of policy pages. But with that said, there are a couple things we do need to deal with: like deleting crap. There's a lot of garbage that needs to go, but I don't want to delete something accidentally that others think should be kept.

My proposal: we make a page for listing pages that should be deleted, with dates appended beside each nominee for deletion, and a {{tobedeleted}} tag put at the top of the page to be deleted itself. If nobody objects after three days, the page'll be deleted. Obviously, anyone can nominate a page to be deleted.

Does this sound like a good idea? --Suki Brits 17:36, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Sounds fair to me.--G.B. Blackrock 18:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Whats the advantage of a catagory over a list?

I liked the lists

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT

As some might have noticed, we've had an image removed due to copyright issues; if at all possible, I'd like to avoid that sort of thing happening again. I've drafted up two additional copyright templates, Template:Comiccover and Template:Comicinterior, the uses of which should be fairly obvious. I'd like for people to overview these to make sure they're acceptable, and after that, please start putting them on any applicable pages.

As Wikipedia demonstrates, fair use is a pretty neat blanket that we can fit under, but we need to actually start labeling these images appropriately, or we're going to get more issues coming up. --Suki Brits 04:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The Image Copyright template is... incomplete. Not all images are the sole domain of Hasbro. This is sufficient for, say, stills from most cartoons- but IIRC part of the reason The Ultimate guide couldn't cover riD properly was the visual was co-owned by Disney because they bought out Saban. Do we have a general 'copyrighted image, fair use' template that DOESN'T say Hasbro? (That'd be sufficient so long as the image source is attributed correctly in the text. the problem, legally speaking, arises if you cite a template saying hasbro owns somethign they do not- like a picture of Pepsiman. Plus yhere's some stuff hasbro DOESN'T own that Takara does that we'll have/do have snaps of.) -D-rok

I agree, which is why I didn't mention Template:Image Copyright in that post; it's not particularly good. I have, however, drafted up two additional tags which should be used for everything else, providing they're acceptable: Template:Hastak and Template:Fairuse, which should cover virtually all images. The "this image belongs to Hasbro" template should definitely be depreciated. Any comments? --Suki Brits 20:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

From an organizational standpoint this is good, but the language of the first is too passive, and the section too loose and confusing. but that's the kind of thing easy to work with later. LEGALLY speaking, they say the right things they need to. -Derik

What is the Community Portal?

We seem to be using this Community Portal as a talk page. That... probably isn't for the best. I would think that the Community Portal should hold announcements that are relevant to all or a large portion of the editors. It would be useful to have a "central" place for editors to discuss site-wide issues, but I think that this page's Talk page would be much more appropriate for that. I propose moving all this discussion to the talk page and writing a new Community Portal which can list "current" initiatives or news about the Wiki. --Steve-o 00:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a lot to add to this, but I think that sounds like a good idea. Something I'll try to look into, however, is seeing if the sidebar to the left can be changed at all. We probably will never use the "Current events" bit, but if we have a different general talk page from the Community Portal, it could be good to have a link there. --Suki Brits 01:07, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I checked, and we can indeed replace the "Current events" link with one to a general talk page. --Suki Brits 01:19, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Cool. So... what do we want to do, then? Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal is a reasonable place to put general talk. Creating a new page for general talk doesn't seem necessary to me. Removing the link to "current events" make sense, but I don't know that we need anything else in its place. --Steve-o 01:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Er, yeah, Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal is what I meant. Sorry if that wasn't clear. --Suki Brits 05:42, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

The Golden Disk/Disc

I have recently begun an entry for the Golden Disc in Beast Wars. It has come to my attention, though, that there are two spelling being used: "disc" and "disk." This is becoming a problem in making sure pages link to the entry on the Golden Disc. I am not sure how to get "Golden Disk" to forward to "Golden Disc." In fact, I have yet to find anything that confirms how the word "disk/disc" should be spelled. Any help would rock. --Sontair

Everything recently spells it "Golden Disk," including Beast Wars 10th Anniversary packaging copy and the upcoming BotCon set. --ItsWalky 18:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I started typing this trying to insist that we stick with disc, since that's clearly the sensical spelling despite what official media might call it; unfortunately, I haven't really managed to find much to support that. In general, disc is supposed to refer to the round type, whereas a disk is something else. For example, compact disc and digital versatile disc are indisputably the correct spellings. The problem is the Golden Disc in question is a record, and nobody really ever called records "discs", so there isn't enough precedent. I was only able to find one source indicating which convention a record would be subject to. It sure would be nice if the Botcon set just spelled it properly and removed any doubt as to how it should be, but that sure isn't happening. --Suki Brits 21:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone else goes by the "disc=round" thing? Oh, thank God. I told Steve-o this and he looked at me as if I were from Mars. All the "Golden Disk" stuff recently had been setting me on edge. --ItsWalky 21:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

From the dictionary I keep in my office....

-disc: 1 A phonograph record. 2 DISK [Var. of DISK]

-disk: 1 A flat, more or less circular plate of any material. 2 Any surface that is flat and circular. 3 A quoit or discus. 4 A phonograph record.

Obviously, language is a fluid thing, but it seems to me that a) the two terms are pretty much interchangable, and b) if one HAS to choose a spelling, the evidence is (oddly) in favor of "disk", between the official packaging, and the fact that BOTH definitions of "disc" connect with "disk".--G.B. Blackrock 22:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)