Archives
| Project | Deletion | Opinion | Feature Article | Other Stuff |
Advertising
- Friends of the Warriors Wiki
Click the images, the URL to use for linking to the image (which should then be linked to this site) are available in the image summary.
Color Overhaul
I'm working my way through changes and updates to the Main Page. It's including image updates and the like, so it might take awhile. I'm taking a break now, but the rest will come today. Still a ways to go, plus the Cat Characters Template and Book Template will be overhauled to match the Main Page. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 16:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Deletion Discussions
All votes MUST be signed to count, and include a statement of YEA or NAY.
Voting will close in 1 week following opening, or when it is felt that the majority of active contributers have cast votes and a 24 hour final call has been given.
Book Cover Gallery
This old gallery is both disorganized and made up of an odd assortment of sizes and qualities. I'd like to propose the deletion of this gallery in favor of the ongoing project towards the individual book galleries. This deletion would include deleting the files not using the naming conventions and sizes established elsewhere.
VOTES
- YEA Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 00:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yea Eu 01:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yea Oglog 11:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Opinion Zone
Categories for Locations
The big question is what Categories to have for locations. My proposal is for Category:Locations as the main headquarters for linking ALL locations. Category:Locations (Forest) for those locations that are in the Original Series Forest. Category:Locations (Lake) for those locations that are in the New Prophecy Territory. Kitsufox 23:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
VOTE 1 (Closed)
Now, there are three distinct ways it could be done, here they are. For each idea a link or links will be worked into the World section that appears on the main page.
- 1 Category - Use only Category:Locations, which would be applied to all pages.
- 2 Category - Category:Locations (Forest) and Category:Locations (Lake) would be used, with one or the other being applied to each page.
- 3 Category - Category:Locations, Category:Locations (Forest), and Category:Locations (Lake) would be used, with two (Locations + a specific one) applied to each Location Page.
- 4 Category - The same as 2 Category, except both categories would be made subcategories of the larger , where any locations that do not appear in the forest or at the lake would be placed as well.
As the time has come to make a choice as to the details on the project need to be made, state which you feel would be most suitable, and sign with ~~~~.
- 2 Category Kitsufox 22:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- 2 Category Eu 01:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- 4 Category. Make Locations (Forest) and Locations (Lake) Subcategories of the big Locations category. Hobbes15(Tiger Headquarters) 03:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- I think your vote is technically for 3 category, Hobbes... But it's a way I didn't think of (and didn't come up during discussion phase) to address the issue. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 12:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- If you don't mind, I added a fourth option reflecting my proposal, as I realize I didn't read the three closely before. Hobbes15(Tiger Headquarters) 21:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- I think your vote is technically for 3 category, Hobbes... But it's a way I didn't think of (and didn't come up during discussion phase) to address the issue. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 12:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- 3 Category --~|ET|~ (Talk/Contribs) 21:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
In light of new options floating in, I think we can establish that a single category is fully out, but a new vote is called for, dropping single category and offering the new main+subs idea. I shall do that now. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 00:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
VOTE 2 (CLOSED)
As the time has come to make a choice as to the details on the project need to be made, state which you feel would be most suitable, and sign with ~~~~.
- 2 Categories: Category:Locations (Forest) and Category:Locations (Lake) would be used, with one or the other being applied to each page.
- 3 Categories: Category:Locations, Category:Locations (Forest), and Category:Locations (Lake) would be used, with two (Locations + a specific one) applied to each Location Page.
- Main & Sub Categories: Category:Locations would be the primary category used. Category:Locations (Forest) and Category:Locations (Lake) would become sub categories of Category:Locations and be used only when needed. It would be possible to add additional sub-categories with minimal work for additional zones that warranted such inclusions.
VOTES
- 3 - Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 00:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC) I know a good plan when I see it. Thanks Hobbes!
- 3 - ~|ET|~ (Talk/Contribs) 00:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC) Changing my mind here. I like this one more, especially the option to expand into further subcategories.
- 3 Gorse 23:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC) More organized = good thing. Enough said.
- 3 Hobbes15(Tiger Headquarters) 06:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- 3 Oglog 11:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC) three is gonna win i think.
As the majority of our active contributers have voted, I'm going to call a final 24 hours and close the vote on 25 October 2007 unless someone feels there's a reason to keep voting open longer. Just post asking for the extension if you feel it's needed. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 14:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Results
Today marks a resounding victory for the Main Category & Sub-Category Option. I'll be incorporating the instructions for this into the Locations Project as soon as I get it underway (this was basically step 1 to the process). Expect a list of categories and a rough out and a project foundation in the next 24 hours.
This discussion & vote will be archived in 24 hours.
Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 16:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Categories Needed
Do we really need a category for books when we have a list of books directly on the main page? Do we need a category for clans when we have them listed on the main page? Give opinions, people. I'd like to... Actually discuss it! I know when it was just me updating I ditched both of those cats for just those reasons. Kitsufox 20:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- Deleting it sounds good to me. Eu 22:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Why don't we make a final call for comments, and open voting starting the 20th for a final decision. Kitsufox 22:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
VOTES
Cast as YEA or NAY for elimination, making sure you sign your votes with ~~~~
- YEA Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 00:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- YEA Eu 01:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- NAY. Everything should be categorized, in the name of hyperinclusionist fanwankery (extreme detail) ;)! But seriously, keep them. Hobbes15(Tiger Headquarters) 03:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- Nay - We do need categories, they help group things together and show relations between pages. --~|ET|~ (Talk/Contribs) 10:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- NAY Oglog 11:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Categories for RP Characters
CoSC Character's Category
I had already planned this sort of category for established RP games in the Role Play Phenomenon section before there were people to question me and offer alternate points of view, and until someone brought this one up I didn't consider that their would be any distention as to the suitability of the Wiki for storing information relating to the Fanon Characters created on games that have been around long enough to prove they have staying power. So.. I figured it was appropriate to open a discussion if the idea before doing any further implementation on the idea.
- YEA I thought about it and the banner does say "and surrounding internet phenomenon". Eu 01:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- Vote hasn't exactly been called yet, Eu. The topic has hit the floor for discussion and people to get thoughts and feelings out. Sometimes discussion and the ideas of others can acctually change opinions, so it is an important step in the process. Particularly when you have a fairly small community that can take the time to really discuss things. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 12:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oops... sorry. Got a little carried away.
Eu 21:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Relevancy of Fourth Clan Guesses
Is this page relevant to a wiki environment? YEA or NAY votes, signed with ~~~~.
VOTES
- NAY Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 01:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- NAY Eu 21:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- NAY Gorse 23:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC) Red flag 1: Based on Rumor; Red flag 2: Said rumor proven to be false, as far as I know, quite a while ago; Conclusion: Why is it still here?
I'm putting out a final call for votes on this one. It's an unused page that isn't effecting anything and should be dealt with quickly. If someone feels the vote should not be called and given the full week, they need only to speak up. Vote will close in 24 hours (25 October 2007) unless someone requests the extension. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 14:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Relevancy of Tour Info
Is this page relevant to a wiki enviroment? YEA or NAY votes, signed with ~~~~.
VOTES
- NAY Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 01:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- YEA Eu 21:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC) BUT I think we should change it to include the Tour Dates instead of it's current content.
Family
Do you think that we should include extended family, such as cousins, in the family section of the template Charcat? YEA or NAY? Put your thoughts below, and voting will open October 23. Sign with ~~~~.
I think we should include the extended family. Do we exclude our cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. from our family?
- But, when people say "Write down your family", who do you write down? You write your mother, father, husband/wife, siblings, and offspring. Sometimes Grandparents. You don't generaly go about listing your great-aunts, aunts, uncles and cousins, now do you? Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 15:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
VOTE
- YEA Eu 14:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- NAY Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 15:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- YEA --~|ET|~ (Talk/Contribs) 21:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC) It's nice to show how all of these cats are connected. And we don't have to worry about the whole Family Tree fiasco, because we already have all relationships determined over on Wikipedia. --~|ET|~ (Talk/Contribs) 21:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- NAY Gorse Simply on the grounds that HOLY CRUD, have you LOOKED at some of those family trees on the official website? The template will be longer than the article if we link up every single character some of these cats are related to, because by the time we reach PoT, most of the cats in ThunderClan are related, however distantly. It's not worth it to chase after all those names and titles. --Gorse 23:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Further Comments
ET... I know that you lean towards super-inclusive information... But should the info-box designed to give an OVERVIEW of a character really an appropriate place for hyper-anal detail? Maybe adding a Detailed Family section under history might be more appropriate... or creating detailed family trees for those that we know... But doesn't it seem wrong to be cluttering up a box for basics about a character with things like their Paternal grea-aunt? and a full listing of their cousins? We do have to consdier ahead. Rumors expect a full series of additional books, which to me means another generation in the family. How much do you wish to have packed into those characters info-boxes? Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 23:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- A very valid point indead. So why not go with the family tree section (Though not as history, but in its own section after that)? Putting all of the information in the template really wouldn't make sense, but that doesn't mean we can't do it elsewhere, right? And to a comment above: The family trees are false. Very much so. The Wikipedia Warriors editors, though, have compiled information from the books and determined what should be accurate depictions of the family trees, so we already have the information available. --~|ET|~ (Talk/Contribs) 19:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- I meant to talk about adding it as an additional section, either above or below where history is (we'll be able to settle on a standard location during implementation, should it happen). And considering that Wikipedia isn't suposed to contain any researched items (don't have have something about that in their policies?) here will be a safer place for inclusion, as research is one of those things that make this Wiki go-round. Out of curiosity, where was it that the author(s) said that the family trees on the warriorscats site are false? I know there are errors in the map, based directly on book text. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 01:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it was at one of the tours that the Wikipedia editors went to... I know it's not completely verifiable because of that, but the trees already have such obvious mistakes on them, that it would be best not to trust them anyways. Oh, and, yeah, I'd go with having it below the history section. No problems there. --~|ET|~ (Talk/Contribs) 19:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- I meant to talk about adding it as an additional section, either above or below where history is (we'll be able to settle on a standard location during implementation, should it happen). And considering that Wikipedia isn't suposed to contain any researched items (don't have have something about that in their policies?) here will be a safer place for inclusion, as research is one of those things that make this Wiki go-round. Out of curiosity, where was it that the author(s) said that the family trees on the warriorscats site are false? I know there are errors in the map, based directly on book text. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 01:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
News Archives
How many news updates do we have to have before we can Archive them? It seems to be a good idea to have a set number, and keep things more organized. Eu 18:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have two options that I've been considering for proposal. One is that we could start Archiving on a monthly basis, and collecting each months news to a single archive page. Or we could pick a number like 5 of 10 for the number we keep on the newsbox at any given time, and then just pick a number for how many updates we store per archive page (10 is a nice one for that, or some other similarly round number). Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 18:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Tribe of Rushing Water Discussion
Thi is a discussion for the format of the Tribe's page. What do you think it should be? Place suggestions below, and voting will begin on October 29th.
- It's too soon to even consider a set date for voting, Eu. I think tribes should probobly be set along the lines of the same sort of thing as the Clans. And right now there's just some kinks getting worked out of the Clan pages. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 15:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Feature Article Suggestions
Just creating a place to take suggestions for feature articles. Please start all suggestions of what the feature article should be here, as a sub-topic under this headline.
Votes will be called either one week following proposal OR 24 hours after discussion dies down. Whichever comes first.
Education
I think that the featured article should be something telling people to add the Education details to the Cat's pages.
Eu 22:40, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- I think this would be better placed in the Characters Project as an information drive, really... Any other input on this? Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 00:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm in favor of changing the name to Content Drive, Improvement Drive, or Information Drive. The names of those are pretty much self-explanatory. Eventually, though, once we get big enough and our articles have relatively complete coverage, I'd be a supporter of creating a real FA program, showcasing our best articles. Hobbes15(Tiger Headquarters) 03:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm hoping to have a proper FA system in place, also. I was talking handing this over to Project Characters for the next Content Drive in their project rather than making it a FA. I'd like to have a real FA, since we haven't had once that's just been a finished article for rather a long time. Not since before my Hiatus. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 12:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm in favor of changing the name to Content Drive, Improvement Drive, or Information Drive. The names of those are pretty much self-explanatory. Eventually, though, once we get big enough and our articles have relatively complete coverage, I'd be a supporter of creating a real FA program, showcasing our best articles. Hobbes15(Tiger Headquarters) 03:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
VOTE (CLOSED)
Should Education be featured as an FA? Yay or Nay votes, signed with ~~~~. I consdier this a minor vote, as it's been featured in News, so I'll give it 24 hours before vote-close. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 14:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- NAY Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 14:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- NAY. Hobbes15(Tiger Headquarters) 06:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Results
Education will not be featured as a feature article. And due to the completion level of the issue, I don't feel project characters needs to worry about featuring it as a Content Drive, either.
This will be archived on 25 October 2007
Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 14:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Tawnypelt
As this article is surprisingly complete, I thought it might be a good option for one to feature for awhile. Kitsufox(Fox's Den) 00:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
News Submissions
Enter in your suggestions and submissions for news items here in the case that you know something the Sysops have missed and feel should be included. Credit will be given as it is due. Feel free to write the news piece up as you would like it to be in the Newsbox. Kitsufox 18:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)