Forum:Splitting the content namespace
From SporeWiki, the knowledge base dedicated to Spore
|
So, after considering our options and talking to Morgoth1145 and Uberfuzzy ( |
[edit] Votes
Vote is now closed
| for | against |
|---|---|
|
Windu223 18:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Wormulon 19:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
HerbisoarEmpire 13:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Dark Noo Noo 14:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
OluapPlayer 09:42, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Fedelede 09:42, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Venomclaw 20:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Furby98 19:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Mjs961 9:27 22 May 2009 (EST)
Zagorian 12:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Honiahaka 00:39, 24 May 2009 (GMT)
94michael731 10:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Oozlebachr 3:19, 31 May 2009 (GMT)
User:Guineapigsrock 8:42, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
GeneralShroom 14:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Poisson14 02:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
tmy2u 05:13, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Tucar1 13:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Bib-lost 18 June 2009)
Jk981206 17 June 2009)
Some Fella 09:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
|
TimeMaster 01:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC) Armageddon11(DANIELSJ14) 18:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC) Dinomino21 18:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Tigernose 9 July 2009
User:Spleenman225 14 July 2009
|
[edit] Discussion
| archived discussion - do not continue |
|---|
Please use this section for questions, opinions and comments.  Ose t/c 18:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Just use the now working Spore Fanon Wiki. It'll need some work but it's possible. TimeMaster 01:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Try making the namespace thing , Fanon:(Name here) Venomclaw 20:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm all for it, this wiki does need a little organizing. When I'm playing Spore I often need to look up some information on this wiki for tips and guidelines, and sometimes the right info becomes hard to find, so I think it might work. Furby98 19:13, 7 May 2009 (UTC) I voted for this proposal BUT I would like to ask something; where do you draw the dividing line between an extensive content backstory and fan fiction? A few of my creations have large backstories which often links them to my other creations and while I have no problem with them being reclassified, I would like to know a bit more about this so I don't go creating a page in the wrong category. --Honiahaka 00.45, 24 May 2009 (GMT) Instead of making everything too complicated with 'Cell', 'Creature', ... Wouldn't it be a nice idea to just make an addable marker to a page which includes fiction? -Bib-lost 18 June 2009 The first thing I saw when I read about this, was that content articles were outnumbering editorial content. I have no idea how this project is going to solve this. In fact, what is Sporepedia for then? Or another solutioun could be to make a wiki for Spore creations? But moving on, to the main point. I disagree with making sub-namespaces or seperate namespaces altogether. I believe that the fiction work should all be moved to the Spore Fanon wiki, leaving user-created content here. Or uses Bid-lost's idea, which was stated just above. I think a tag or marker that distinguishes fiction articles for user-created ones could really help. TIGERNOSE(City Hall|Contribupedia) 17:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC) [edit] Which namespaces to add?So, the general opinion seems positive. Now the question is which ones to add? My suggestions are
Did I forget anything important? In my opinion the fiction namespace shouldn't be used too much; if the fiction is about a creature/planet, then make it a subpage of it's parent page. Does anyone have any other opinions?
I suggest that we also include: star system, empire and captain (when GA is released). Wormulon 12:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I would structure it like this:
My two cents on how this should be formatted. -tmy2u 05:16, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Hmm... is it at all possible for me to make a few new pages and remake the whole New Achievements page debate? Basically, I'll make the first page titled "New Achievements" or "New Achievemetnts Campaign". That can perhaps introduce what it is, everyone involved, and shall include every link to related topics. I'll also make all the different catagories, such as Cell, Creature, General, Creator etc. Each page shall be divided off into more sections, as seen on the current page. I'll try to make it all as neat as possible, and not colour code it. I hope we can all agree to this. I feel, as the New Achievements Campaign was an idea I started, on my page, and mainly my work, it is my responcibility to fix this. Also, I'd really like to help out in some way, and I actually enjoyed organizing and writing the page. Rebecca1208 19:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC) EDIT: Forgot to add. I would really like to make these new pages, but of course, the SporeWiki is not mine to control. Although the page is under my username, I wont change anything until I feel I am allowed to do so. I hope to hear from your responces soon.
After speaking to Morgoth, and alot of thought, I've decided I'm happy with changing it and shall get started. I'll set it all veery much like Tmy2u's layout, as I agree that it sums it up pretty well. Also, I certainly enjoy making these pages, and still feel obliged to fix the errors caused on my page & my project ;-) Rebecca1208 16:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC) |
[edit] Next
I intend to contact wikia about the technical details of namespace creation soon. However, I want you people to understand what I wish to do so that you can comment and perhaps come up with better ideas for some of it.
Below is a table with pages and templates that should be created and used. The link templates are very useful, as are the infoboxes, as they can contain semantic properties that can be used for searching and browsing databases.
When the namespaces are in place, the big work will be to move pages to their appropriate prefix, and changing links to point to the new page. I'll look into the possibility of a bot helping with this. Still, there will be plenty of other problems. For example, it might not be clear what the page is about, especially if it is not illustrated. I might be an idea to introduce a stub policy for content pages. For example, if the page is very short or has no images, someone could place a template ({{stub/content}}) on it warning that if it doesn't fulfill the requirements before a set date (30 days after the stub tagging or less in my opinion), it will be deleted. Getting rid of short and bad content pages will raise the quality of the wiki overall, so I think this is a good idea.
Comments? Ose t/c 17:09, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe we should. . . Um. . . Delete all the content redirects and imageless content pages with less than 500 bytes and no infobox either? Also should Spaceship come with Vehicle? And maybe you should make OseBot delete all the ones that have not been edited for a week. And then what happens to all the fiction? If someone gave me a list I'd be happy to move it to the other wiki (which is not in a clutter, Spyzombie and I have been working on it. He likes community projects.) And perhaps OseBot and Uberfuzzy can do it all with the moving. And what will become of the normal namespace? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 17:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Also, just wondering to help with the namespace stuff, normal users can only move 3 times in a period of 30 minutes. And I just remembered bots don't know if something in a plant or a building, or a creature, etc? I'm not sure what to do (except make some volunteers sysops then unsysop them) —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 17:38, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- So, I just want to get this straight. All pages currently in the Content namespace are going to end up in the above ones, except for the ones that are going to be blown up. So, in the end, what will happen to the Content namespace? Will there even be one? As for suggestions, deleting poor-quality, abandoned Content pages sounds like a good idea, we just need to find a criteria that most SporeWiki users agree on. As for TimeMaster's temporary Sysop idea, I think it could work. However, we would need to be careful as to who we give the temporary sysop statuses to. We would honestly (and I'm not just saying "give it to me!") need to give it to users like me, TimeMaster, Wormulon, etc, users that have been here, know how the Wiki works, won't abuse their powers, and will give them up once the project is done (obviously Darth Sidious would not be a good choice as a Sysop...)
Zagorian Comm/Contrib 20:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- So, I just want to get this straight. All pages currently in the Content namespace are going to end up in the above ones, except for the ones that are going to be blown up. So, in the end, what will happen to the Content namespace? Will there even be one? As for suggestions, deleting poor-quality, abandoned Content pages sounds like a good idea, we just need to find a criteria that most SporeWiki users agree on. As for TimeMaster's temporary Sysop idea, I think it could work. However, we would need to be careful as to who we give the temporary sysop statuses to. We would honestly (and I'm not just saying "give it to me!") need to give it to users like me, TimeMaster, Wormulon, etc, users that have been here, know how the Wiki works, won't abuse their powers, and will give them up once the project is done (obviously Darth Sidious would not be a good choice as a Sysop...)
- Who's Darth Sidious? As in a joke or is he a user? Anyway, will there be a Spaceship namespace, or will it go with Vehicle? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:41, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
- No, just wondering if he was a user or not LOL.
Ok. Ironically (considering my position here at the wiki), I've barely even played Spore. However, it is my impression that both land, air, water and space vehicles have so much in common that we can classify them together as vehicles. The move throttle can be temporarily lifted by wikia if they want to, so that shouldn't be a problem. And when the content namespace is empty, it can be removed. The main problem is that bots won't recognition the different types of pages. It should be possible to make it look at what templates/categories the page has and do something based on that information, but that would require someone more experienced with bot coding/RegEx than myself. Ose t/c 22:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
- That's fine if you classify them together. OR all the users could do that. Also Ose you really should look here, there's like 6 people asking. I could delete the stubs (along with Zagorian and Wormulon) without you having to do that whenever we mark one for deletion. And is that really even possible with bots? I had just been wondering about not being able to know if something is a building or vehicle. Also, like if it sees a creation with a creature infobox, it will move it to a creature namespace, and if it has no infobox and under 1000 bytes it will be deleted. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I was just thinking that maybe we should put a message somewere on the main page talking about this splitting project and asking (nicely) that no content pages be created until the project is over. This will make it a lot easier on both the content-creating users and on us. Also there should be a message talking about the new quality standards and the seven-day (which I beleive should be ten) limitation along with the requirements. Anyone agree? 
Zagorian Comm/Contrib 00:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- If it's made by a person who made it back in March or something and that is their only edit on the whole wiki it should be deleted right away. Also I want seven days not ten. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 18:40, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Alright, fine. Seven days it is. However, if someone misses the deadline and wants their page restored we let them (just like we do with concepts) as long as they promise to make the page fit requirements. Again, should we post the message on the home page? We could do it in the NewsFlash section, or the Announcements section, etc. Zagorian Comm/Contrib 22:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello? Did someone close the forum and not tell me about it? Zagorian Comm/Contrib 02:25, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Move it
The new namespaces are here! Now comes the long job of moving all the content pages. I have arranged so that everyone who has been on the wiki for more than for days now have the possibility to uncheck the "create a redirect" button on Special:MovePage. This means that you can move a page without leaving a redirect us admins have to delete later. But: when moving a page, it is important that you also check where there are links to that page and change them to the new name of the page. If you don't do that, and still supress the redirect, the links will turn red. You can find out which pages you need to change by clicking the "what links here" link in the sidebar. I have also made sure you can use templates like {{creature}}, {{cell}} and {{fiction}} to link (just like we already use {{content}} and {{taxon}}).
I suggest everybody start by moving their own content pages, since you all know best what your pages are about. Then you can move on to doing other ones. If you are unsure what the page is about (say, it has both an creature and a planet infobox on it), then you leave it and move on to the next page. Ose t/c 22:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Oh and I almost forgot, the move throttle has been lifted for autoconfirmed accounts, so that won't be a problem.
Ose t/c 23:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Taxon/creature pages
- Main article: Forum:Taxa reorganized
