Berrybrick (talk | contribs) |
Berrybrick (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 160: | Line 160: | ||
::I like it. '''Support'''. {{User:Cligra/Sig}} |
::I like it. '''Support'''. {{User:Cligra/Sig}} |
||
:::Great idea. '''Support''' {{User:LSCStealthNinja/RealSig}} |
:::Great idea. '''Support''' {{User:LSCStealthNinja/RealSig}} |
||
+ | :Okay {{User:Berrybrick/Sig}} 00:06, September 4, 2012 (UTC) |
||
=== App MoS === |
=== App MoS === |
Revision as of 00:06, 4 September 2012
Just thought putting this all in the one forum might make it easier to read, and someone might actually bother reading it. If you have other realated issues you want to bring up, please place them in a separate heading under the appropriate section. NightblazeSaber 23:17, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
Customs
The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was implemented
Manual of RequirementsEvery article must have an image of the custom depicted. A custom without an image is not a custom. - A lot of customs recently have involved a "custom" set, where the images are solely official minifigures. Allow this, or change the wording such that it must read that at least one image must be a custom?
SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Welcome to Click a Brick! 06:16, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
Power Jim Talk Blogz08:56, 6/14/2012 08:56, June 14, 2012 (UTC) (Same point as above) - This reads so that an image of the set must exist, yet again, many custom "sets" have had images which are only custom minifigures. Keep wording, or allow set page to have images only of the minifigures?
SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Welcome to Click a Brick! 06:16, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
Any custom themes must have at least two valid set articles contained within it, and these sets linked to. - Keep this, or change to "set and/or minifigure articles"?
|
Titles
I can't remember if we discussed this, please disregard if we have. Say someone made a custom minifigure at Custom:Superman, but someone else wants to create a custom Superman minifigure. What would happen?
- I would say that if this was a case the second user could make a page at Custom:Superman/<second user's username>, and would have the right to move the original page to Custom:Superman/<first user's username>, then make Custom:Superman a disambiguation page, which lists both user's creations. NightblazeSaber 07:03, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- That's what I've done in the past, when I've wanted to bother renaming pages. :P Redirects give me trouble. --Berrybrick (Talk) 10:07, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- That's what we've been doing before, to my recollection. - 10:20, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I would put my name beside it in parentheses like they do on some custom wikis.. βʊʛ™ Ʈҩƪҡ - Customs 23:17, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
Fan "Definitions"
Eg, Juniorization. Would it be ok to have things like this is the customs space? It definitely doesn't belong in the mainspace. If so, maybe we should make a "Category:Fan-based content" category, and things in that are excluded from the customnoimage rule? NightblazeSaber 00:54, June 26, 2012 (UTC)
Reviews
BP:RFD (reviews for deletion)
Have a system where reviews can be nominated for deletion if they are sub-standard (examples include reviews which are very short, contain only star ratings, or are full of bad spelling/grammar)? NightblazeSaber 01:18, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
IP's (reviews and customs)
The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was disallow IP reviews
Allow IP reviews?
|
The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was disallow IP customs
Allow IP customs?
|
Mainspace
Content in Description
Change description to images of minifigure usch as with/out cape, backwards etc, It'd be much. much better than words of it, as pictures tell 1000 words, thus being good for FA :P --Czech 04:53, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I would support if we had a huge team of photographers who can produce high-quality images with white backgrounds and who also own a massive variety of minifigures, but we don't, so oppose. NightblazeSaber 07:03, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Unless, we allow for two types of description sections- one with text OR one with a complete set of good quality front, side and back shots with any additional required shots (cape off/helmet off, etc). NightblazeSaber 07:06, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I could get all my minifigures and take these detailed photo's if you like? Clone gunner commander jedi talk
- But do you have thousands of minifigures? -Cligra Join the redlink war!
- No but I could take great pics of the minifigures I have, that would be a start.Clone gunner commander jedi talk
- But do you have thousands of minifigures? -Cligra Join the redlink war!
- I could get all my minifigures and take these detailed photo's if you like? Clone gunner commander jedi talk
- Unless, we allow for two types of description sections- one with text OR one with a complete set of good quality front, side and back shots with any additional required shots (cape off/helmet off, etc). NightblazeSaber 07:06, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
Power Jim Talk Blogz08:59, 6/14/2012 08:59, June 14, 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know about admins, but I do think that if this was to happen, a group (either a new one or maybe the QCG?) should do a quick check that all angles are covered, and that the quality of the images are satisfactory. I don't think we want to go and have any pre-existing description sections completely removed and then replaced with sub-standard images. The only thing I have against using images only is that those who have images turned off on their browsers for whatever reason or users that have sight impairments will no longer be able to get an idea as to what the figure looks like, but I guess this is only a very small percentage of our potential audience (if any) NightblazeSaber 09:09, June 14, 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah that sounds good I support that idea, also are these photo's good enough? [1], [2] Clone gunner commander jedi talk
- I don't know about admins, but I do think that if this was to happen, a group (either a new one or maybe the QCG?) should do a quick check that all angles are covered, and that the quality of the images are satisfactory. I don't think we want to go and have any pre-existing description sections completely removed and then replaced with sub-standard images. The only thing I have against using images only is that those who have images turned off on their browsers for whatever reason or users that have sight impairments will no longer be able to get an idea as to what the figure looks like, but I guess this is only a very small percentage of our potential audience (if any) NightblazeSaber 09:09, June 14, 2012 (UTC)
- Support I think that it would be a great idea. I can help with it. Charge talk Devoted editor of Brickipedia. 02:14, June 14, 2012 (UTC)
- I've seen a few wikis (okay, maybe two) which have a gallery subpage, rather than having every single image of something making an image wall. As much as I dislike subpages, what do you think about doing this minifigure image thing on one? --Berrybrick (Talk) 00:06, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
LEGOLAND/Miniland
Do we actually have a MoS for these pages? If so I need it :p - Zer0
- Since I was the only person who ever done them, no. It was one of those things I started that everyone just sort of ignores... ~ CJC 17:37, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Well that's OK as I just copy and past your articles and change the place names and dates. - Zer010
- I don't think we have one for video games either. --Berrybrick (Talk) 18:43, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, we definitely need to figure these out. Also real-world people NightblazeSaber 23:13, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I only bring this up as non of my LEGOland pages are getting rated as there's no official MoS - Zero
- Yeah, we definitely need to figure these out. Also real-world people NightblazeSaber 23:13, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think we have one for video games either. --Berrybrick (Talk) 18:43, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Well that's OK as I just copy and past your articles and change the place names and dates. - Zer010
Ordering
Minor point- the placement of the "notes" and "sources/references" sections are not specified in the MoS for minifigure articles- where should they go? Also, "sources/references" are always listed together, but they need separate headings, so which one should go first?
- Notes above appearances, sources/references below the gallery of variants, references before sources? NightblazeSaber 23:13, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
Power Jim Talk Blogz11:25, 7/3/2012 11:25, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, no I know it's an extremely minor thing, but everything else is clarified and we may as well have it there for those that do care. NightblazeSaber 11:57, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
Books
Which format should be used? this? or this?. Personally I think we should use the Ninjago version. Darth henry The Dojo Turtles! 16:40, July 4, 2012 (UTC)
- They look the same to me, except the Ninjago one's a bit more complete. This is my idea for the book MoS:
- A book infobox
- A lead section
- Plot summary
- Some heading about any content, eg exclusive minifigures, etc. Not sure what to call it
- Notes
- NightblazeSaber 01:35, August 5, 2012 (UTC)
TV Episode/Film MoS
- Episode infobox
- Intro section
- Synopsis
- List of appearances
- Appearances grouped, eg minifigures, vehicles, playsets, miscellaneous?
- Notes
- ? NightblazeSaber 01:06, August 5, 2012 (UTC)
- I like that idea! Really would benefit in making the Ninjago episode articles more detailed and future Lego films to come. :D -
Power Jim Talk Blogz01:47, 8/5/2012 01:47, August 5, 2012 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Support. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
- Would be much better. Support. StealthNinja Contact [[Special:Editcount/LSCStealthNinja|Special:Editcount/LSCStealthNinja Edits]]
- Sounds good. Support. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
Co-pack MoS
- Co-packs are most of the time, just a combination of existing sets. To avoid duplicate information, I was wondering if we should maybe do this?
- Under the description, use level three subheadings for each set, ie ===name of set===
- Have a Main article: 7153 Jango Fett's Slave I right under the set (replaced by the name of the set of course)
- Have a very brief description of the set.
- If something exists in the co-pack that doesn't exist on its own, have a level 3 subheading, but describe it fully in the section.
- Repeat for background.
- Notes, etc as normal
- Under the description, use level three subheadings for each set, ie ===name of set===
- NightblazeSaber 01:06, August 5, 2012 (UTC)
- I like it. Support. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
- Great idea. Support StealthNinja Contact [[Special:Editcount/LSCStealthNinja|Special:Editcount/LSCStealthNinja Edits]]
- I like it. Support. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
- Okay --Berrybrick (Talk) 00:06, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
App MoS
Currently, we don't have an MoS for Apps. My idea would be:
- Infobox
- Picture of the App Icon
- Gameplay
- Notes
- List of Characters, Vehicles, Items etc.
- Screenshots/Gallery
- iTunes or App Store Link
So, that's my idea. StealthNinja Contact [[Special:Editcount/LSCStealthNinja|Special:Editcount/LSCStealthNinja Edits]]
- Support. Yes, with the new apps coming out, it'll be good to have a section in the MoS for it. (But what of a gallery?)
Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge
- Good point. I'll add it. StealthNinja Contact [[Special:Editcount/LSCStealthNinja|Special:Editcount/LSCStealthNinja Edits]]
- Can't the link go in the infobox? I also think that the list should come before the notes, because those are usually things of interest which aren't covered elsewhere. --Berrybrick (Talk) 00:05, September 4, 2012 (UTC)