mNo edit summary |
|||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
* {{C|Just saying I've seen this, and need to think about it further before actually saying anything {{User:NightblazeSaber/sig}} 03:56, November 11, 2012 (UTC)}} |
* {{C|Just saying I've seen this, and need to think about it further before actually saying anything {{User:NightblazeSaber/sig}} 03:56, November 11, 2012 (UTC)}} |
||
** {{C|Okay. :P}} {{User:Jeyo/sig}} 07:09, November 11, 2012 (UTC) |
** {{C|Okay. :P}} {{User:Jeyo/sig}} 07:09, November 11, 2012 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | |||
* Moving to new names, and people recreating parts with old names: |
* Moving to new names, and people recreating parts with old names: |
||
** Aren't we redirecting from the fan-based names to the official ones when the pages are moved, meaning that this won't really be a problem (and I therefore don't really see a need to stop part creation :S If someone makes a wrongly named page, let them know on the talk page, if they persist after a few warnings, block, just like people going around incorrectly categorising pages) |
** Aren't we redirecting from the fan-based names to the official ones when the pages are moved, meaning that this won't really be a problem (and I therefore don't really see a need to stop part creation :S If someone makes a wrongly named page, let them know on the talk page, if they persist after a few warnings, block, just like people going around incorrectly categorising pages) |
||
Line 61: | Line 63: | ||
* Master pages- I'd be ok with that, but I think we should come up with a template for that instead of making people type them out manually- this would be very easy to do with Semantic (just list every page with a design ID of 76382 in its infobox, and stick a picture from the infobox into a part gallery) |
* Master pages- I'd be ok with that, but I think we should come up with a template for that instead of making people type them out manually- this would be very easy to do with Semantic (just list every page with a design ID of 76382 in its infobox, and stick a picture from the infobox into a part gallery) |
||
*: {{User:NightblazeSaber/sig}} 04:05, November 12, 2012 (UTC) |
*: {{User:NightblazeSaber/sig}} 04:05, November 12, 2012 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | *Re: Moving to new names, and people recreating parts with old names: |
||
+ | **Stopping part creation would be only temporary so we can update all the other part articles before moving on. But yes, your plan for that is better. |
||
+ | *Re: Same minifigure torso: |
||
+ | **I can't tell whether you're being sarcastic or not... |
||
+ | *Suggestion for names (like Part 76382/Pre Vizsla): |
||
+ | **I think the "76382-001" idea might work out, but would there be any order or pattern to the numbers? Or would we just assign the numbers randomly to whichever part we get to first? (A vague idea I had was naming it after the printing. "76382/Striped Suit Design" or something. I wasn't sure about it, though, so I didn't present it here.) |
||
+ | *Re: Master pages |
||
+ | **Template - Sounds good. |
||
+ | **Part Gallery - That was the plan. |
||
+ | *: {{User:Jeyo/sig}} 06:56, November 12, 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:56, 12 November 2012
To any bot owners
Per CJC. I think the message should say, "may be outdated" instead of the absolute "is outdated".
I'd also suggest adding a similar message to inventory articles. Something like this: "Brickipedia is currently undergoing a change with the naming of part articles and this inventory lists parts that may have incorrect or outdated design IDs."
Names?
ImplementationIf people suddenly start naming parts according to this new system, it'll be a bit crazy. We will have twice the problem as before because all around the wiki there will be Design IDs from two or more sources. No one will know which are correct and which aren't, save for the few who actually follow this sort of stuff. Looking around on Brickset, I noted that every single torso design of any colour, printed or not, that was ever released, has the design ID 76382. This creates another rather substantial problem, as the torso for a Stormtrooper is not the same as the one as Jay's, obviously. And yet they have the same ID. So what I'm suggesting is to create a "master page" for the torso part. (I'm using torsos just for example; this would apply to all parts.) This "master page" will include in the gallery of variants every single torso variation we know of and it will link to the individual variations' articles. We'll change the name of the variations like so: Part 973-1177c01 will be changed to Part 76382/Pre Vizsla. That will identify the variation as Pre Vizsla's torso piece while also linking to the master page. To implement this, we must first stop all part and inventory article creation. If people continue to use bricklink's and/or Peeron's system, we'll have the problem I mentioned in the beginning: a widespread problem of IDs from two sources. So to prevent that, we have to handle the part articles as I just mentioned, with the master pages. We can then proceed to convert the rest of the part names. What do you think?
|