https://en.brickimedia.org/w/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=108.173.7.175&feedformat=atom Brickipedia - User contributions [en] 2024-03-28T22:05:47Z User contributions MediaWiki 1.35.13 https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:CustomsGallery&diff=1059138 Template:CustomsGallery 2016-06-12T22:14:55Z <p>108.173.7.175: Fixing links</p> <hr /> <div>&lt;gallery mode=&quot;packed-hover&quot; style=&quot;text-align:center;&quot; heights=&quot;150&quot;&gt;<br /> NexusBMC1.JPG|Killer Croc Shipwreck Ambush by {{U|Nexus}}|link=Fan:Killer Croc Shipwreck Ambush<br /> KyleRayner-GL.png|Green Lantern (Kyle Rayner) by {{U|Berrybrick}}|link=Fan:Green Lantern (Kyle Rayner)<br /> FAS-Soup.jpg|[[Forest Animal Sanctuary]] by {{u|Soupperson1}}|link=Fan:Forest Animal Sanctuary<br /> Zuvio.png|[[Constable Zuvio]] by {{u|Npgcole}}|link=Fan:Constable Zuvio<br /> &lt;/gallery&gt;</div> 108.173.7.175 https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&diff=1059129 Brickipedia:Forum 2016-06-12T17:58:28Z <p>108.173.7.175: /* Descriptive Videos on Set Articles */</p> <hr /> <div>[[File:Forums.svg|center]]<br /> __NEWSECTIONLINK__<br /> Welcome to '''Brickipedia's forum'''. This is the place to propose and discuss any amendments to the [[Brickipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] or suggest new policies. To make a new proposal, please [http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new make a new section at the bottom of the page]. Please see [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive|the archives]] for past discussions - [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2014|2014]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2015|2015]], 2016 ([[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/1|Jan - Feb]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/2|Mar - onwards]]).<br /> <br /> For recent updates to the site and any policy changes, please see [[Brickipedia:Site updates]].<br /> <br /> -----<br /> Also, don't forget to check '''[[Forum:Index]]''' for a number of unresolved forums.<br /> -----<br /> <br /> <br /> == Minifigure Galleries ==<br /> {{archive<br /> |result=implement<br /> |content=<br /> It's annoying putting alternative faces and back printing in galleries and people often forget to do it. I made [[User:Soupperson1/MinifigGallery]] and I think it would work better compared to our current format. Thoughts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Looks great! But having it on 3 separate galleries seems like it might take up a lot of room on an article unnecessarily. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:23, 8 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :*There should be that many pictures on the article anyway. On larger articles like Batman it will save space as the gallery is overcrowded {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* I like the idea, but I'm not a fan of having three galleries, it makes this area way too long. I still think we should have tabs which let you switch angles for each variant (which I suggested about a year ago but noone paid attention- [[User_talk:NovaHawk/MG2|link to example]], [[User:NovaHawk/common.js|link to JS you'll need to put in your personal common.js]])<br /> :::*I like the tab idea but your example isn't working for me, it's just the normal Anakin. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::* Yep, like I said, you need to copy the code from [[User:NovaHawk/common.js]] to {{USERNAME}}/common.js for it to work {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::*Ooh that works, though I think the videogame variant should have its own section. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::* Of course- that was simply for testing, I should have specified that, sorry :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :::::::*I tried doing multiple mini figures together it didn't work, I'll leave that stuff to people who know what they're doing :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::::::*Yeah, it's only set up for one- the JS code is probably going to be quite long if it's going to accomodate like 20 entries, so I didn't bother because I'm lazy :P It can definitely be set up to work with more though. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::*Your the opposite of lazy! Your our most valuable contributor {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :*Why does it need more than the current three? (I would say &quot;I'll add more entries&quot;, but we all know I'd forget :P) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 08:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Did this ever get used? Or does it still need to be updated&gt; [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I don't know, does it have enough support? If so I'll work on the code required to get it operational {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:34, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** It looks like there is support, from the whole four of us who discussed. I don't know who will use it any time soon, but could be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==Stop treating DC and Marvel as subthemes?==<br /> {{Archive|result=Split them|content=<br /> * Just wondering people think about not having DC Comics and Marvel as subthemes of Super Heroes, and instead rename the pages &quot;DC Comics Super Heroes&quot; and &quot;Marvel Super Heores&quot;. To me they're more like parallel themes as they don't really share any of the same characters, universe, etc so it doesn't make sense to have them under the same theme :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:33, 30 October 2015 (UTC)<br /> ** I understand your thinking behind this but I'm having a hard time figuring if it's the best route to take or not. Neutral for now. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 16:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)<br /> **I believe it was only listed as one theme when it was introduced at NYCC, I agree they should be seperated now as they haven't been grouped together since.. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ===Vote===<br /> ;Split<br /> #{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> # *shrug* - in some places they already are it seems. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ;Don't split<br /> <br /> ;Comments<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ===Enacting===<br /> This needs to be enacted. When we have enacted it, please note it here so we can archive this. If there are any issues with implementing this, then discuss below. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Infobox colours changed, Marvel moved to [[Marvel Super Heroes]], DC Comics moved to [[DC Comics Super Heroes]]. The only problem is what to do with [[Super Heroes]]- I was going to turn it into a disambig page, but then I saw it's an FA and would feel bad doing that {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:58, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The content seems mostly split into theme sections, so we can not take the DC stuff, move it there, Marvel stuff, move it there and make them both FAs, then leave any other stuff on the Super Heroes page / make it a redirect. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==New namespace: Help/Brickipedia Help?==<br /> * Just wondering what people would think of a new namespace designed for people to ask questions. It'd basically be a fifth tab along with &quot;Page&quot;/&quot;Discussion&quot;/&quot;Inventory&quot;/&quot;Reviews&quot;. Have questions about a set/minifig/video game? Hit the &quot;help&quot; tab and type in your question. Basically I'm thinking of this as an alternative to Brickipedia Answers which never happened because we don't have enough technical people who can make this happen, and it saves you from going to another wiki to ask a question anyway. Yes we have [[Special:Wikiforum|forums]], but noone looks at those. Either that, or we could open up the Talk namespace to be about the set as well, not just the article- just because Wikipedia/Wookieepedia/every other wiki reserves their talk namespace for article talk, doesn't mean we have to. And it's not like the talk pages get used a whole lot here- we could just split the talk article into two parts. Anyway, just an idea I randomly had. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:23, 18 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Given our young audience having the 'Talk' tab is quite confusing as one would automatically assume that it's a page to talk about the subject and not necessarily about what could be done to correct certain information or otherwise improve the content of the article. Allowing a discussion area of some sort closely tied to the article itself would help boost interaction on the site though it would need monitoring and logged accordingly. None of us want a repeat of the disaster with article comments we had back at (dare I say it) Wikia. {{User:SKP4472/sig2014}} 02:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Per SKP (except I don't dare). Maybe we could even rename &quot;talk&quot; to maintenance, or something like it but shorter? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 06:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd like to see more discussion on this, but its not going to happen here in the middle of the forum. I'll talk about it with you if I ever see you on Chat Nova. I'll close this in a day or so, and when we have considered this more/aren't in the middle of other big changes, we can discuss this again [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Let's talk: Navbars==<br /> ===Design===<br /> How do we unify the design of them all (although most are similar already)? Do we make it look more like our other templates? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> On a side note should we make the edges curved or add pictures, or the logo for the theme instead of the font? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> * I believe there is (in that, there was at some point), some sort of design guidelines for the site in general being worked on, so really it depends on those. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ===Types===<br /> What sort of things should have navbars? Currently most themes have one for sets and minifigures. I imagine there are a few niche ones floating around out there though. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :We have an animal one, figure one, I'm not sure what else. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> : We have a [[Template:Weapons|weapons]] one as well, and [[Template:People]], and LEGOLAND stuff, and pretty much everything else in [[:Category:Navigation templates]] :P We could use some subcategories there. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Started a list at [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates]]. Please add any you know. That way we have some orderly way of upgrading them. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Information overload===<br /> What do people think of the way big themes are split into years? How can we make navigating large swathes of information (e.g. {{tl|SWfigs}}) usable without comprising information.<br /> *I was going to experiment with something like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:The_Beach_Boys ]. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Based on something Codyn suggested, I made [[User:CJC95/Sandbox]]. Obviously all I did was take two different bits of code and stick them inside each other without much thought, but the basic idea is the important thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Absolutely love this idea. :P Aesthetics could of course be improved but the functionality is what's important, we can improve on looks later [[User:Codyn329|Codyn329]] ([[User talk:Codyn329|talk]]) 22:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Liking the idea of tabbers- I'll write some CSS to fix the colours later. I'm thinking we could group things further, like in &quot;Galactic Republic&quot;, have columns like Clone Troopers, Senators, Droids, etc. Also since the info isn't being shown all at once, maybe we should double up, eg have Leia in both Rebel Alliance and Resistance? But for sets, if we just had one template and used tabbers, that'd be great. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Is there a way to get a specific one to be default for an individual page? Can we get it so that a 2013 Star Wars set can show the 2013 tab when it opens? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Mobile===<br /> Some appear to be unusable on mobile - A few don't scale too badly but don't look like they belong with the mobile skin that much. Mobile use of navboxes is a hard one to deal with. Wikipedia handles it by just disabling them on the mobile site. I don't like that solution (it annoys me when I'm on mobile Wikipedia), but I'm not too sure how to address this directly yet. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :[[mw:+2|+2]] to this; mobile is a very important segment and it deserves the appropriate attention (and if you ask me, Brickimedia's mobile support is pretty awesome) and &quot;it doesn't work on mobile, let's disable it&quot; is a non-solution. We have a lot of clever, technically-oriented people who can solve this problem; I'm sure of that. So let's build something that has never been seen before! --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === When do we split them ===<br /> I'm just curious when a navbar is big enough to be split and how big we want each section to be. http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Template:DCFigs&amp;oldid=605762 is much smaller then the mini-doll figure section at {{t|FriendsFigs}} but do we want to split it? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Generally its UCS really, as it depends on the theme etc. How would you split up the Friends? If there is a logical way to split it, feel free to at least see what it looks like. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Non physical section or not ===<br /> I never liked non physical sections, if [[Victor Zsasz]] is a villain why can't he be in the villains section? I know you could argue were supposed to sell sets and what not, but are we not technically promoting the video games? Plus a lot of characters such as Peter isn't in production, so we wouldn't be selling anything besides second hand stuff. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I was going to suggest this - well, I was going to just do it and see what it looked like :P - I was going to suggest like, a superscript (cross) and then a note at the bottom saying &quot;video game only&quot;, etc. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I think I'm the opposite of CJC here- I hate having these in line with physical figs. Eg, [[Template:NinjagoFigs]], the Creatures section and to a lesser extent the Ninja allies section just looks a mess to me. If you did this with {{tl|MarvelFigs}} where 2/3 of the characters are VG only, you'd have a very hard time finding the actual minifigures, which is what I'd be guessing a significant portion of people who visit here actually care about. If we went with the tabber idea, I think it could work for everyone though, eg VG SW Republic characters could be further split into Clone Troopers, Senators, etc, and non-physical? They'd be in Republic, just not the smaller category. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Tabbers does solve this problem afaic, as you can just put smaller VG only sections on each category. This solve the issue with the VG only sections in current form. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::[[User:NovaHawk/tabberInfobox|Here's]] an example with tabs I've been working on, let me know if anything needs to be changed. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 09:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Naming===<br /> [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates|Here]] is an incomplete list of current navbars. The main reason is the lack of naming conventions. Some use just the theme name for a template, and hence they are missing from the list currently. Some use &quot;Figs&quot; and &quot;Sets&quot;, others use &quot;sets&quot; and &quot;figs&quot;. Some use initials for the theme name, others don't (this disparity even exists within a theme, so we have JWfigs but JurassicWorldsets.<br /> All these make it very confusing to actually find what template you want. Hence when they are updated and upgraded I suggest renaming them on the convention &quot;Theme Name&quot; + &quot; figs&quot; or &quot; sets&quot;. (Note also the space between words). Discuss if you please. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * A whole theme name with a space is so tiring to type though :P Yes, sounds good to have some consistency, I'm always having to check what the names are for themes I'm not editing all the time, not having to think and just type the theme name would be good. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Status===<br /> Where are we on design wise? I'd like to move forward with this. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Well there was no response on the example, so I wasn't sure whether to move forward with it. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was referring more to the apparent design guideline things that are in the works, although when I'm back on pc, I'll look again at yours and just start changing things (so next Friday probably) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==BoTM minimum threshold==<br /> It was decided (see the [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016|archive]], where it shall be within a short while of me submitting this) that there should be a minimum threshold for a nominee to gain Brickipedian of the Month. However no specific threshold was discussed. This should probably be decided, or else the minimum threshold policy is hard to enforce. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Anyone? :P If not I'll just set the minimum as three. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Three sounds fine. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> {{Archive|result=exclude BoTM from unanimous rule of voting|content=<br /> ;Exclusion request.<br /> *BoTM needs to be excluded from [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016#Global &quot;unanimous rule&quot; for voting|the global unanimous rule]]. It is necessary for a BoTM to last a month. As there is no opposes, they are all unanimous, as long as they have one supporter. This would mean any threshold would not ever be used, as every BoTM request would pass instantly after a week. So obviously the global unanimous rule can no longer be global. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Oh yeah, definitely. forgot about that one, sorry {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==A change to the &quot;featured article&quot;==<br /> * By &quot;featured article&quot;, I mean the box on the main page. Currently, every month it shows [[Black Knights]]. I'd like to propose changing &quot;Featured article&quot; to some other name (please add suggestions), and showcase a complete article for 2 weeks, giving priority to articles recently promoted to complete status. Any future FA's take priority, and run for a month as before. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 08:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*'''Strongly disagree''', I like FA as they are. Besides if we do this no one will write FAs anymore. If we want variation we can just change it to an existing FA? If we want to share waste complete articles, we can add a section called &quot;articles with the ratings recently changed&quot; {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Can we still call it a featured article, and differentiate it from the complete ones somehow? :P If we want a new name though, I suggest Showdog, with the [[Dog Show Judge]] (once he is released) as a mascot. When he shows up, people will know it is special. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was thinking something more along the lines of something boring like &quot;promoted article&quot; :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Sure. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Or we could finally use our mascot :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Request for comment: Implement more ads across Brickimedia ==<br /> <br /> This is a critical topic currently and probably will have a lot of mixed feelings. Considering the amount of ads were a fundamental reason we moved ''off'' Wikia, I'm not expecting a lot of support here, but as it stands right now, we don't generate enough income off a single ad to keep up with our expenses. Our site's expensive, and we only need more and more performance out of our server and right now we've got just about as much server as we can afford. Then we add in the fact that we have to ship contest prizes which is not cheap (actually usually costs more to ship one prize to one person than we pay monthly for the server.....), and I don't want to pay out of pocket for them, nor would [[User:Ajraddatz|Adrian]] want to. Hence, we need more income, and since we can't rely on donations that we almost never get (except that one time from [[User:NBP3.0|NBP3.0]]), we have to resort to advertising. As a result, I want to ask for feedback, please comment stating whether you '''support''' or '''oppose''' an increase of ads per page (1-2 more perhaps), and if you support, suggest ad placements if you have any suggestions, or if you oppose, give some reason why. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:10, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *I'm fine with this as long as they aren't like, pop-ups or covering up text or anything. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:12, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I too would be fine with having a &lt;i&gt;few&lt;/i&gt; more ads, as-long as they're non-intrusive to our content. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:16, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Can we trade in some of the sets LEGO gave us in exchange for them paying for shipping? It's honestly ridiculous how much that costs. Beyond that, some questions that I want to see addressed before proceeding with this: 1. Would there be a significant revenue increase? We're actually breaking even on the hosting costs these days ($45 last month, -$40 for hosting). 2. How much are we planning on spending for shipping things around? I'm coming to a point in my life where the finances are a bigger concern (as in, moving out and getting a job after the degree). I have no problem still paying for hosting and shipping contest prizes, but I want to make sure we have as much info as possible that I can include in my budget. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 21:23, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Quick answer, no we can't rely on LEGO to ship for us. They'll ship to one person who will then handle everything from there. At that point, TLG is out of the logistics equation, and the only involvement they want after that is us to send them a link to what the set(s) were used for. With more ads, we would get an increase in revenue, especially if they're prominent. Right now, with it being at the bottom of the page, I don't think they're getting much impressions and as a result not generating much revenue. For example, I've had https://www.harrellsecurities.com up for a little over a week and generated nearly $20 already, with a tiny fraction of the traffic Brickimedia gets. That's why I think we need to have some more ads, perhaps one near the top of the page as well since that will probably generate ''much'' more revenue than the one at the bottom. I see what you're saying about finances are a bigger concern for you now. They are for me too, that's why I can't pay out of pocket for anything for this site, since all my money gets reinvested into business or business-related travel, and anything I have left over has to go into savings. However, if we can ensure we break even and have some extra income to spare for times when we don't break even or need to ship out expensive prizes, I'm happy and able to take over the financial side of things here. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would we be able to add more adds on certain sections, like reviews or blog posts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** Perhaps, but those wouldn't be very effective since those don't get as much views. Blog posts especially don't get many views by visitors, and chances are none of our registered users will click them. Better to just put another ad placement or two on ''every'' page than on specific ones that could just be a hit or a miss as far as revenue creation is concerned. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * '''Support''', but as per CJC and CGCJ. And honestly, I'd much prefer it if any set we got from LEGO was just reviewed by whoever it's sent to so we don't have to pay out shipping costs all the time. It'd be nice to actually be making money on this site for once, and maybe pay back Ajr/NBP/Meiko who have already sunk so much money into the site. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''' I honestly had never noticed that this site had ads until a few weeks ago. Anyway, I strongly support having more ads on articles. One solitary advertisement at the bottom of the page is not going to make much of a difference. This site generated $45.00 last month. Barnick's generated $20.00 in a little over ''a week''. This site surely has many more viewers than the one that he linked. If we are barely making enough to keep this boat afloat, something needs to change. [[User:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;lime&quot;&gt;LCF&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;([[User talk:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;#6600FF&quot;&gt;talk!&lt;/font&gt;]])&lt;/sup&gt; 01:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * So, would the ad in the sitenotice be considered unintrusive by the people supporting only if the ads are unintrusive? I honestly don't know because I have adblocker and just saw a huge empty white gap (which I quickly took care of) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The way I look at it, it's not in the content, it's not in front of the content, and it doesn't cover the content, so it's not really intrusive. All the content is still there, just 90px farther down (or less on mobile). If other people feel otherwise it can be changed but there aren't too many good ad placements in our interface other than that which wouldn't be within the content section. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 06:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I don't see the issue in it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''': With the ad adversity, I trust that this will be handled carefully. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Comment''': I applied for the [http://shop.lego.com/en-US/Affiliate-Program LEGO Shop Affiliate Program], got approved, and now converted most of our ads to LEGO ads. They generate revenue a bit differently so we'll see how it plays out in comparison to the current Google Ad at the bottom of each page. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:16, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ooh, awesome. I'll try to remember to click a link on here before buying stuff for the May the 4th promotion. Also, do we have some sort of affiliate id we can stick on the end of URLs? I was thinking we could make a change to {{tl|QuoteLEGO.com}} and stick something on the end of those links to the shop as well. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** I haven't looked into all of it but I believe we do. This is one of the codes (among many) it offers me:&lt;pre&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;offerid=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot; &gt;The Official LEGO Shop: The best selection of LEGO bricks in the world!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;IMG border=0 width=1 height=1 src=&quot;http://ad.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/show?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;bids=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot;&gt;&lt;/pre&gt; I don't know if that &lt;code&gt;img&lt;/code&gt; tag is necessary or whatever but maybe the only part we need is the &lt;code&gt;href&lt;/code&gt;? idk what do you think? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** FYI also, linksynergy.com seemed to be blacklisted earlier which is part of why I'm using iframes to load these ads instead of using wikicode. [[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] might know how to bypass that blacklist for this? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would it be possible to have the advertisement in the bottom corner not be a gif? It's extremely distracting. I can see some people who just look at images and info on the site finding the top advertisement annoying, but if your a reader you can just scroll down. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** {{replyto|Soupperson1}} All of the available graphic ads at that size are gifs. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 22:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ugh, we have gifs now? Isn't that a bit 90's/early 00's? Please tell me it isn't one of those fast-flashing banners saying you've won $1,000,000:P Would definitely support changing to still images if that was possible {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** {{replyto|NovaHawk}} No, they're LEGO Affiliate ads. [http://cache.lego.com/2057/images/shop/Affiliate/2014/sandcrawler/star-wars-75059-125x125.gif Example] --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 17:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The only gifs I've seen are teh LEGO ones if you scroll down the sidebar. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == [[76052]] Live Build with Beyond The Brick ==<br /> [//www.youtube.com/user/BeyondTheBrickTV Beyond The Brick] asked me if I'd like to live build [[76052 Batman Classic TV Series - Batcave]] with them for their channel. Considering this would count as RLUG activity with this round of LUG support, and saves us the trouble of having to pay for shipping on a set this large (and heavy), is anyone opposed to this? Could manage to give us some publicity again which we haven't gotten from another online LEGO community in a while. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sounds good to me. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Neutral. It sounds like a great opportunity and would usually instantly support it. However, I believe it was scheduled for Berry to review, I'd feel bad supporting if it meant taking that off him... {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 21:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Wasn't aware of that because I can't really keep track of those things. Guess we better start saving then because that's gonna be pricey to ship... --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Just checked, apparently the proposal hasn't been closed (I've given up paying attention prizes/budget stuff), but it has 3 suporting votes and 0 opposing, the last comment taking place on February 17. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 03:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support but if it was meant for Berrybrick like Nova said, then Berrybrick should do it. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm guessing as usual, this has discussion has turned into nothing and any opportunity has passed anyway? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Administrative footnotes in regards to user rights and potential mergers. Feel free to ignore. ==<br /> <br /> === Customs ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here:<br /> * BFN has admin there. He also has admin here if he becomes activity again - No issue here.<br /> * MeikoBot has admin there. I assume that was for a specific task, and bots can have admin for specific tasks if needed here. No issue.<br /> * Nexus has patroller there. He lost patroller here due to being inactive, but can have it when he comes back to activity. No issue.<br /> * 1999bug has admin there. He is not currently active, so this is not a major issue, however I'd suggest to be able to administrate the new customs namespace here he would need to pass an RfA here. However, as he is not active, we have no real issue.<br /> <br /> So basically, no issues, but this is just a note for the archive, so to speak. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Meta ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here. There is more users than Customs and so I have split them into appropriate groupings:<br /> ;Already have similar rights here if they return to activity<br /> * BFN has admin<br /> * Cligra has admin<br /> * KoN has admin<br /> * NBP has admin<br /> * SKP has admin<br /> <br /> ;Cases where I'd propose that they need to pass an RfR here for their rights to transfer<br /> * 1999bug has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Codyn has admin and functionary.<br /> * LEGOSuperDKong has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Latenightguy has admin<br /> * Lcawte has admin. although has sysadmin here, and inactive.<br /> * Sammy has admin. Inactive.<br /> * Vector Prime has admin. Inactive<br /> <br /> ;Cases where admin at meta is for maintenance or a specific task and would not be needed anyway<br /> * CJCbot has admin &amp; bot. no longer needed. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently.<br /> * Edward Nigma has admin. rights given recently for specific maintenance tasks. Task is over. <br /> * LcawteBot has admin, bot. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently. <br /> * NXTBot has admin.<br /> * Bawt has bot.<br /> <br /> ;Misc.<br /> *Adrian (Brickimedia) has admin. user has a normal account with admin here, and this account has sysadmin anyway<br /> *The five bureaucrats at Meta (Ajr, myself, Nova, SKP, NXT) have (or can when they are active have) admin here. The two ranks are synonymous here, so no issue.<br /> * Nova has functionary there. He has had checkuser in the past here (and possibly functionary? I don't know when the merge of rights there happened), he doesn't currently. This may be due to personal request or confusion during moving accounts or something, I'm not sure, but I assume if Nova wanted them he would (or at the very least could) have them :P<br /> * Jack Phoenix has patroller there. He could have patroller here if he needed it. <br /> <br /> '''Summary:''' basically, as for customs above, this is more of an administrative footnote for the archives of the forum than anything useful for us to discuss. Once again, I am proposing that no rights be automatically imported over here during any merger - the only active users affected by this will be Latenightguy and Codyn. I'm not sure what their views are on this topic, but as there is no formal RfR process at meta, I'd have to suggest that they pass an RfR here to keep said rights. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm good to not have functionary here, don't really need it since the spambots are gone {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I don't know how the community would feel as me as an admin, but I think I can bring some good to the table. RFR for it like you said? As for functionary it can go either way [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 02:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** RfA for admin and RfFunctionary would be needed. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Merging the Magazine namespace back into main ==<br /> {| style=&quot;border-top: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-bottom: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-right: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-left: 1px solid #aaaaaa;padding: 5px;background:#D9F0FF; margin-top:7px;&quot;<br /> |-<br /> ||''The following section is preserved as an archive. &lt;font color=red&gt;'''Please do not modify it.'''&lt;/font&gt;{{#if:Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)|&amp;nbsp;The result was Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)}}<br /> ------<br /> It's really not needed. We don't have one for books, or for episodes of TV shows, etc. The reason is because we had a few scans of a couple of UK mags, but that's not enough to justify a namespace. Just stick those scans on the articles in the main space. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:20, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Is there actually any content in said namespace or can the Magazine namespace pages just be deleted? Support either way. It's a useless namespace that 99% of people don't know exists. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** there is content, but all formatted as mainspace articles, so it just needs to be moved back. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 01:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * If its useless then we should get rid of it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 01:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Rip magazines :(. I'm OK with it being removed. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 05:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Wait we're still having magazine articles aren't we? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:12, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Sure --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 10:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Really, the last one was 4 years ago. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 11:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ****** [[LEGO Friends magazines|I beg to differ]] :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ******* I don't think he meant the release of magazines, but the articles being created for individual issues. There are more actual magazines then ever - there was a LEGO Star Wars one in the supermarket the other day :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Yep, just merging the existing ones back into the mainspace. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Since we have enough support to merge it, I guess we'll do it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> {{done|All pages moved without leaving a redirect.}}[[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:56, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> |}<br /> <br /> == Increasing positive communication within users ==<br /> <br /> I want to talk about increasing positive communication within users: Although we generally have nice, calm conversations in chat (which is great!), that doesn't need much improvement. What I think needs to specifically improve to increase this, is how we welcome users. Right now, welcoming others are based on a pre-formatted, maybe half-arsed template, and simply substituting the transcluded template on user talk pages. Although I do understand that if the resources are low, it would be more realistic to make such thing to make an automated message on people's talk page.<br /> <br /> However, let's say we do have the resources - or we just work harder. Whenever I joined other wikis, and saw that the message was just one of those annoying bots saying &quot;Hey, thanks for you edit on 'so and so' page, bla bla bla etc...&quot;, it's really annoying. It'd be nice to know that, &quot;Hey, a user hand-wrote this message to me. It's ''real''. It's not from a bot or automated.&quot; It has this little spice of appreciation, and I'd say &quot;It's all the little moments that make life big.&quot; ( originally quoted by Echo Park). <br /> <br /> There wouldn't be a full-blasted guideline or policy on here on how to write messages, it just has to be real and honest. You just ''write'' it. And knowing, that a person would voluntarily spend their time writing something for a person they don't even know is powerful. And hey, maybe the message doesn't contain everything a user needs to know about a site - but just writing it I believe would cause the welcomed user to get curious, and actually have a higher chance of staying on the wiki. Not only that, it'd increase the likelyhood of that user ''responding'' back to the welcomer. Thus, 1-1 communication, 2 people at the time. If everyone did this, these tiny numbers could stack up and make this site overall hopefully a better place.<br /> <br /> What do you think? More user-written welcomes? Less welcome templates? Maybe even deleting it?<br /> <br /> [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # As nominator [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Definitely. I (try to) do this at BS01. Even a &quot;hi&quot; after the welcome template could make a difference, or at least I'd like to think so. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Agree. --[[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] [[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:blue&quot;&gt;CPplayer90210&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sub&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sub&gt; 10:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Oppose deleting the welcome template at least. If people want to do custom-written welcomes every time, fine, I'm not saying welcome templates should replace that. But people make an edit, they get welcomed. Unless you want to wait for them to make like 10 edits to get a feel for the user (which I think would be a bad idea, no welcome at all after an edit or two would be weird), I can't see there being a whole lot of variation in anyone's custom welcome to people. I can also see custom welcomes being less useful if they don't supply the information the welcome template does (assuming the information on the welcome template is useful, it's been a while since I looked at one). Basically, totally ok with a &quot;hi&quot; after a welcome template or something similar (I usually try to remember to hit the &quot;thank&quot; button on a new user's first edit), but against removing the welcome template altogether. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # I agree 100% with Nova. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> *I agree with Codyn's sentiments, but also Nova's concerns. &lt;s&gt;I think I missed any suggestion of deleting the welcome template though?&lt;/s&gt; (Silly Berry.) Anyway, if voted into effect, what exactly would be done? Surely this is more of a behavioral thing than a policy thing? I definitely will not oppose (because I do like the idea) but making it a policy sort of makes it fake in my opinion. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I don't think our current welcome templates are that great, perhaps suffering from too many pointless links, but I don't think the idealised world you are attempting to describe above is one that will happen. What will happen is that every message will be basically identical anyway, just &quot;Hi! Nice edit on X. Any questions just ask!&quot; to welcome all users instead. Or maybe sometimes I'd end up typing &quot;Hello&quot; instead of &quot;Hi&quot;. or &quot;good&quot; instead of &quot;great&quot;. But it won't be personal really. So I don't care for the idea, or our current method, but I'd point out that we can't enforce a policy to write &quot;real&quot; messages. I guess I'm leaning towards oppose, but it can stick here in the discussion for now. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:44, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *What we really need is better warning/notice templates for talk page messages. Right now we have very vague and ugly boxes that don't tell a user what they did wrong and how to fix it in the future, plus hardly anybody uses those templates anymore. So 90% of the time someone does something wrong, their edit gets reverted but only rarely does someone put something on their talk page explaining why the edit(s) was reverted. Compare the rather lacking selection of warnings and notices we have, [[Category talk:Warning templates]], with English Wikipedia for example [[wp:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]]. Also note that ours are all boxes that imply the user did something bad, whereas Wikipedia's are inline text with a signature at the end making it read more like a human message, and the first couple levels of warnings are a bit more forgiving as well. Just an idea/concern I've had for a long time. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:00, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Edits from Brickia ==<br /> <br /> We have at least one user ({{U|GoldNinjaMX}}) who has recently come here from Brickia and wants to move some edits he made. What is to be done? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I just googled it and there doesn't seem to be a way to do that. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Well, &lt;s&gt;most contributions here seem to be customs,&lt;/s&gt; as Customs have always been treated as the creator's property (both on here and Brickia), I have no problem with that being moved once we have Customs merged to here (and would similarly have no problem if people moved back to Brickia and took their Customs with them). As for the rest, not so sure. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Wait, sorry, only saw one page. 1894 mainspace edits, 1089 customs edits. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Oh, sorry, I should have been more explanatory. He wants to move mainspace content from Brickia to here. I think at least one article in question was [[Ninjago (World)]]. Basically, what would we have to do for that to be legal (it is CC-BY-SA licensing), and then would it be ethical and worth any potential trouble? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::: Import them, using [[Special:Import]] after exporting them from Wikia. It is best to change them a bit here once imported, not for copyright reasons, but to not be penalized by search engines. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 01:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd think that moving is customs here is completely fine, as well as pages made entirely by him. The harder part would be adding over his edits. If you carried over his edits you would have to move over the edits of other users that haven't joined here. I would say to stay away from bringing edits over.[[User:Albus Potter|Albus Potter]] ([[User talk:Albus Potter|talk]])<br /> *I'd warn against making this a regular thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:43, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I'm a bit uneasy about it myself, we have a good thing going with Brickia at the moment- they don't copy our stuff and we don't copy theirs, basically we go our own ways. I would hate to see that change. We did also say that we wouldn't take any edits of theirs after February 2014, this would go against the &quot;agreement&quot; to me. '''Oppose'''. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** The main issue as I see it is that other users have edited the page since GoldNinjaMX has. If he was the only one who edited, then fine, he can take them and put them wherever he likes, but as soon as someone just changes one character on that page, we have to import it and then we can, like you say, start some tit-for-tat thing. Additionally, moving in versions of pages we have hear just means someone (and I can imagine it would be at most one of five people :P) would have to compare the edit histories to ensure we don't lose any content, don't add any rubbish, and I'm not sure that is worth the hassle. I guess I am basically '''opposed''' to this, now I think it out more. At the very least, I'm troubled by it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:32, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Import requires admin or sysadmin rights. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Re-)Enabling Gifts (and more!) ==<br /> The [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile extension]], which provides avatars, [[User:Jack Phoenix|structured social user profile pages]] and more, contains some features which are [[github:470|not (yet) enabled on Brickipedia]]. These features include '''system gifts, or awards''', which are automatically handed out by the wiki software after a user reaches certain thresholds, which administrators can configure; such as having 5 friends or having made 50 (mainspace) edits, and so on.&lt;br /&gt;Then there are '''gifts''', ordinary user-to-user gifts which users can give out to each other after administrators have set up some gifts.<br /> <br /> '''Friends''' and '''foes''' are pretty self-explanatory, and to a degree, this &quot;feature&quot; ''does'' exist, but many references to it have been &quot;hacked out&quot; or explicitly toggled off; as such, the amount of friends (and/or foes) isn't prominently shown in the User Interface of the site. Some special pages, like [{{fullurl:Special:TopFansByStatistic|stat=friends_count}} Special:TopFansByStatistic], expose the amount (but not the &quot;who's whose friend&quot; relations normally shown on profile pages) of friends, for example. [[Special:Editcount|And edit count, on the other hand, has been public info for a long time.]]<br /> <br /> Finally there's the [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#User Board|User Board]] and the related [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#Board Blast|Board Blast]] feature. User Boards are visible on users' profiles and they allow users to easily post a message — even a private message — to each other, without having to go to the user's talk page. Board Blast allows to send a user board message to multiple recipients at once.<br /> <br /> In the bug ticket linked to earlier on, [[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] noted his concern about the possible abuse of these tools (specifically the gifting feature) as well as the extra burden of work these tools can create for administrators. I don't share this concern nor the conclusions. Why? Because with ''everything'', especially so on a ''wiki'', things ''can'' and ''will'' be abused by malicious people. That's life. But just because someone decides to vandalize the [[LEGO]] page doesn't mean we put the wiki in full lock-down mode. Likewise, I believe that gifts and other such features mentioned above can be used to promote positive user interaction and engagement, and as such, these tools should be available to our users. If someone abuses them, we will simply ensure that the user in question can't do that anymore.<br /> <br /> It is, of course, up to the community to decide how to use these and what policies, if any, govern their usage. But again, we assume a lot of things already and give our users some leeway — there are no ''technical'' restrictions on making 50 consecutive, single-character edits in order to bump up one's edit count; there are ''social'' limitations which, directly or indirectly, imply that such behavior is neither desired nor tolerated.&lt;br /&gt;Jimbo Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, might be a controversial person with controversial opinions, but I think that his [https://web.archive.org/web/20080129145752/http://www.wikia.com/wiki/User:Datrio steak knife analogy] is quite fitting for this situation.<br /> <br /> '''tl,dr:''' Let's re-enable a bunch of features (gifts, awards, user boards, friends &amp; foes) present in [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile]] by default. Who's with me? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # Obviously. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 21:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Like Meiko, I'm against having foes enabled though {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:36, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Sure, like Nova and Meiko I'm not sure about the benefits of foes, but the rest sounds great. Getting those badges on wiki was a popular feature, so I'm sure gifts will be too. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> # But not foes! [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 18:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Weak oppose per my comment but won't prevent this from being passed if I'm the only opposition. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> * My 2 cents: Friends - We can have these but I don't see any fundamental reason why. The way I see it, our community is so tight knit, everyone would be friends with each other... We're not a social network and I don't think there's ever anyone here who doesn't know every other active user. We have no need for foes and even back when we had friends, we didn't have foes. I don't think foes is a constructive feature. I don't like UserBoard either. Everything it's good for can be done on talk pages or in email. Having two places where you leave messages for other users confuses people and many people never know when to set it to private or public (e.g. when it's used for contests and they're asked to set it to private, hardly anyone does that). There's also no notifications for new Board messages, except for in automated emails which [[github:300|get flagged as spam]]. Gifts I don't see a need for either, but awards maybe. However, that requires an admin set them up and keep them &quot;fresh&quot;, which requires time out of admins' already-busy workload. We had a ton of badges at Wikia and transferring that over to here will be nothing but a nightmare and frustration that will take time away from doing more essential things around here our admins are tasked with. IMO the current social features we have are enough. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everybody should be friends with each other, indeed, yet things like Facebook are amazingly popular nevertheless. :) Humans are social beings, and we cannot blindly stare at statistics and such. For example, one could argue that [[Special:Chat|MediaWikiChat]] is a mere social addition to the wiki and is not relevant since it doesn't directly increase the amount of (quality) edits. That would be true. And likely the same would also be true for friend (and/or foe) lists. But people like having those things around as they improve the wiki's atmosphere and bring editors together. So why not?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding foes: you wouldn't be the first person to suggest that it's an unneeded/unwanted feature, and I understand that it might be controversial. To understand this feature, you need to understand some of the underlying history. [[mw:Social tools|Social tools]] were first developed at ArmchairGM, which was (well, technically &quot;is&quot;, but...) a sports wiki. The developers, as well as pretty much all users were American. Needless to say, some people on the wiki had strong opinions about certain sports-related things, which differed from other people's views. This is, to my understanding, how the foes feature came to be. Furthermore, the feature is also related to the [[mw:Extension:Challenge|Challenge extension]], which, as the name suggests, allowed challenging other users. Although I don't know how it was used in practise, but the theoretical goal was to fuel wiki growth and quality edits ''via foeships'' &amp;mdash; people who were foes would challenge each other and the loser would need to edit a certain wiki page or somesuch. All this being said, though, personally I feel that people are somehow (too) intimidated by the name &quot;foes&quot; &amp;mdash; it has been around for a long time, much like social tools in general, and I have yet to see people abuse it in some way.&lt;br /&gt;UserBoard is another attempt at solving the ages-old problem with talk pages &amp;mdash; or in this case, as the name suggests, the problem with ''user'' talk pages. Talk pages are like a blank sheet of paper, and depending on who you are and what your background with computers and/or wikis in general is, this may or may not be a good thing. Because users are the heart and the soul of essentially ''any'' wiki out there, lowering the barrier to entry is important. Having a more structured mechanism (UserBoard) might prove to be useful to some newer users, because a blank sheet of paper (normal wiki talk pages) ''can'' be confusing. That being said, it's not a this-or-that choice, if and when both exist; people can choose whichever option they prefer.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding notifications: that's not ''totally'' correct. There ''are'' notifications, but &amp;mdash; once again due to historical reasons &amp;mdash; they're not as obvious as you'd think. Many wikis with SocialProfile have the [[mw:Extension:UserWelcome|UserWelcome extension]] (actually bundled with SocialProfile for years) and the [[mw:Extension:WikiTextLoggedInOut|WikiTextLoggedInOut extension]] installed, which allows them to have something like &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;loggedin&amp;gt;&amp;lt;welcomeUser &amp;gt;&amp;lt;/loggedout&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; on the [[Main Page]], which then shows the user's personal social info to them if they're logged in. Needless to say, this is quite archaic when you take into account the fact that [[mw:Notifications|Echo]] has been a thing for a few years now. You'll be pleased to know I've submitted [[gerrit:278868|an experimental, definitely-nowhere-near-ready-for-production changeset]] to address [[phab:T64520]] to bring Echo support to SocialProfile. I believe we can get it finished in a reasonable time. Testers &amp; developers welcome! ;-)&lt;br /&gt;The &quot;emails get flagged as spam&quot;, which is largely a separate issue, is likely an issue with the big email providers like Google &amp;mdash; their automated algorithms mark MW emails as spam for a variety of reasons (which we can't know for sure) and contacting them about this is hard, if not outright impossible. One possible reason could be that since most installations don't bother customizing these emails and there are a ''lot'' of MW wikis out there, Google sees a lot of really similar emails and thinks &quot;well, the difference is only a few characters (username/IP/site name/site URL), but since it matches a certain pattern, it's probably spam&quot;. So one possible workaround could be to customize the emails, but I realize it can be hard to do and it doesn't really scale (because of i18n, for example).&lt;br /&gt;I'm not sure ''why'' awards would need to be kept &quot;fresh&quot; &amp;mdash; they're largely (IMO) a &quot;set up once and forget about it&quot; thing. Setting them up initially will take a few minutes, but I'll be more than glad to do that once we have a consensus on them (names/thresholds/images). --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Somehow) stop spambots from creating accounts ==<br /> <br /> I have noticed lots of spambot accounts being created every day, and i'm thinking that there has got to be a way to stop this. They seem to be getting past the captcha just fine, but they are stopped by the abuse filter. So, in otherwords, we need to try and stop automated spam account creation from happening altogether. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :We simply need any other account creation captcha than the one we have right now. However it's good to note that spambots are often better at solving captchas nowadays than humans, so the question is is it worth the extra step and inconvenience for human users to prevent spambots from creating accounts? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Theres also recaptcha, or we could restrict account creation to a certain user group. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::That would mean only people who had accounts could create accounts? So we'd have no new users? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::People could request to have accounts created. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::That is not worth the hassle it involves (can we stop adding jobs for the admins to do? :P), and while stopping spambot accounts, would decimate legitimate account creation. Honestly, the current situation where we just have lots of spambots that can't do anything is fine. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:57, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::: Agreed with CJC here, this has also been discussed originally in [[github:449]]. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 22:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::I am agreeing more with {{u|ToaMeiko}}. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::You're right, not only there has to be but there '''is''' a way to stop some spambot registrations. It's the [[meta:MediaWiki:Email-blacklist|email blacklist]], which is a part of the [[mw:Extension:SpamBlacklist|SpamBlacklist extension]]. Of course it's not a perfect solution since it requires people to maintain it, since spambot (operators) will always find a way around such limitations, but it will catch some of them...or rather, ''would'' &amp;mdash; for whatever reason it doesn't appear to be functioning correctly because over the past three days, 18 accounts were registered with a mailcatch.com address, for example. I'm quite puzzled by this, and as such, I've asked some helpful core MediaWiki devs for input. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::Thats a good point. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::One somehow got through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 16:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::I just went on to GBC and Ideas and found lots of pages that to me looked like spam. (especially Ideas). All are marked. It looks like the Abuse filter on Ideas was not set to disallow, thus allowing spambots to create pages. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::Thanks for notifying us about this! In the future, I think you can skip the tagging part altogether (since these pages in question were obviously spam and totally unrelated to LEGO) and just ping me or another [[Special:ListUsers/sysadmin|sysadmin]] and we'll take care of it. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 04:44, 4 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::Lots of sites use ReCaptcha NoCaptcha, and it seems to work really well. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::It also looks like some of the spambots are getting through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::::There has been another mass of spam pages on GBC. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::::@LegoFan4000 - Thanks for the notice, blocked locally and globally (including the IP), and mass-deleted the spam pages. :) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Widening scope of TV show pages==<br /> * Currently, we seem to only allow &quot;major&quot; TV show character to have pages, other pages end up on pages like [[List of Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu Characters|this]]. As far as I know, we don't have an official policy on the scope. Anyway, here's what I'd like to do:<br /> ** Allow pages for any named character (ie, named in the show, or in the credits)<br /> ** Have a different category for characters that appear only in the TV show, eg, &quot;Category:Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu characters&quot;. This would be a subcategory of &quot;Category:Ninjago minifigures&quot;.<br /> ** Put these TV-exclusive characters in a separate tab in the navbox<br /> :? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> #Sounds sane. &quot;List of X characters&quot; (where ''X'' = something like TV series, movie trilogy, video game, book series, etc.) is a Wikipedia-ism, because Wikipedians don't like having detailed character pages for each Pokémon; obviously such material would be very much warranted on a Pokémon wiki. Because Brickipedia is a Lego wiki, we'll obviously want lots and lots of detailed information on all things Lego, and often (but not always) &quot;list of...&quot; pages go against this. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Okay. Would the TV show category also go on articles for minifigures which also appear in the show? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #'''Support''', per Jack and I didn't think we even did those list pages. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> #[[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:28, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Oppose ===<br /> === Discussion ===<br /> <br /> == Interviews ==<br /> Should we try and get interviews with LEGO related people? And if we did get one where would it go? Under news or a user blog? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Great idea, however who would be willing to be the interviewer? Who would we specifically interview - LEGO Ideas project creators, LEGO designers(etc)? As for the second question you asked, I'd say Brickipedia News section. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Anyone who's officially involved with LEGO (if any of those people would give us the time of day :P) {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *They'd go under news. If you want to interview LEGO Group employees that has to be done through LEGO's PR department so please contact me before attempting an interview with those individuals. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 18:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Sure, what does attempting a review involve anyway? I'd assume it just be tracking them down and emailing them a few questions. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Minifigure gallery ordering? ==<br /> <br /> Is there a rule for how to order? Alphabetically I assume, but I can't find that in BP:MoS, unless I haven't looked hard enough. It wasn't in the theme section at any rate. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Is this on theme pages? I didn't think that having minifigure galleries at all was in the MoS. :P [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It may not be on the MoS, but every theme page seems to have them :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::(oh, the site isn't locked). It was voted to remove them from theme pages (I'm pretty sure in the MoS overhaul, Berrybrick proposed removing them because they're so long and difficult to maintain, I supported, and noone else commented so it was passed), but we never actively went around removing them. There is no rule in place for ordering as far as I'm aware. Possible alternatives for use in sets would be order that they appear on the box, or alphabetically. No idea for minifigure pages- for licensed minifigures with a lot of variants I like to do chronologically so all the remakes of the same variant are grouped together ([http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/Luke_Skywalker#Gallery_of_variants example]) :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::Well this is the definition of a late reply. :P Could we not use {ThemeGallery} if the minifigure galleries are hard to matin, that's automatic right? I do agree with Nova on the licensed minifigure pages though. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::If that is the template we experimented with for a while, it would include video game characters and exclude variants. Plus it looked a bit off (though I'm sure our developers could probably find a way to fix that). [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Clean up the interwiki table ==<br /> [[Special:Interwiki|Interwikis]] allow to link to certain &amp;mdash; usually external (=non-Brickimedia), usually wiki &amp;mdash; sites somewhat quicker than by using the standard external link syntax, and when using an interwiki link as opposed to an external link, the external link arrow isn't shown next to the link, [[Main Page|just like with normal links (such as this one)]].<br /> <br /> While our [[Special:Interwiki|interwiki table]] is considerably cleaner than most sites', I'd still like to propose at least some removals:<br /> * '''all non-wikia: Wikia interwikis''' &amp;mdash; typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[bionicle-wikia:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; is almost exactly as long as typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:c:bionicle:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;. You can link to any Wikimedia site (Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, etc.) by using the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[project:language code:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikipedia:fr:France]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the French Wikipedia's page &quot;France&quot; or &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wiktionary:fi:lollapalooza]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiktionary's page &quot;lollapalooza&quot;. Likewise, you can link to any ShoutWiki site with the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:subdomain:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:fi.24:Jack Bauer]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiki 24's page &quot;Jack Bauer&quot;, so I'm not sure what's the benefit of having multiple .wikia.com interwikis. For prefixes like &quot;wookie&quot; or &quot;wookiee&quot;, most users don't remember offhand how many e's there is in that word, so they'll likely find it easier to type &quot;wikia:c:starwars:Page&quot; when they mean &quot;Page on Wikia's Star Wars wiki&quot;.<br /> * '''acronym: and dictionary:''' &amp;mdash; I'm under the impression that these aren't really used anywhere, and truthfully, why would they when we have [[wiktionary:|Wiktionary]]?<br /> * '''mediazilla:''' &amp;mdash; Bugzilla is dead, long live Bugzilla! But actual bug reports against any and all MediaWiki things developed upstream are to be made in [https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/ Phabricator].<br /> * '''sourceforge:''' &amp;mdash; [[wikipedia:SourceForge|SourceForge]] ♥ adware. (There's also the fact that this is relatively unused here, given that Brickimedia's software is developed either in GitHub (original, first-party additions, like the Refreshed skin etc.) or on Wikimedia's infrastructure at wikimedia.org.)<br /> * '''wikinfo:''' &amp;mdash; oh look, it's [[wikipedia:History of wikis#Wikinfo|an outdated fork of the English Wikipedia which allows original research.]] (There's also the fact that its URL is outdated, so if we want to keep it in the interwiki table, its URL has to be updated.)<br /> <br /> Thoughts, comments, suggestions, feedback? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :+2 ;) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Looks like it'll make everything less confusing. --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 15:34, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Sure {{C|although, would really like to keep &quot;wookiee:&quot; as an alternative extra, because I know I'll forget about this and wonder why the link doesn't work. And it's so much shorter :P}}. Just wondering why we need the &quot;c:&quot; for the Wikia links? Why not just &quot;wikia:harrypotter&quot; instead of &quot;wikia:c:harrypotter&quot;? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It's largely a leftover from the days when &quot;Wikia&quot; was known as '''W'''iki'''c'''ities, hence w:c: (on Wikia sites; other, off-Wikia sites use wikia:c: as the w: interwiki prefix is either left for Wikipedia or left unused). http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:harrypotter:Hermione_Granger redirects to http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Hermione_Granger, as you'd expect and want, but if you leave out the c: part, you're redirected to a page called &quot;Harrypotter:Hermione Granger&quot; on www.wikia.com, Wikia's corporate site.&lt;br /&gt;That being said, we could change the wikia: prefix so that it includes the c: part, too; right now the wikia: prefix points to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/$1 but we could change that to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:$1 so that you'd only need to type &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:harrypotter:Hermione Granger]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the aforementioned page. The only &quot;disadvantage&quot; of this is that the wikia: prefix then cannot be used to link to pages on Wikia's corporate/main site, www.wikia.com, but given that the &quot;old&quot; www.wikia.com was rebranded as &quot;Community Central&quot; years ago and moved to community.wikia.com, I'm not sure if anyone even needs to link to the current corporate domain. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :{{Support}}, I can have my bot find-and-replace as necessary upon removal of certain prefixes. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Can we request concept art? ==<br /> Out of curiosity can we ask for concept art from the RULG? They don't seem to mind sharing concept art in general, such as having a whole site dedicated to concept art of Chima. So could we ask them for like non licensed concept art? I'd personally love to see Friends and Ninjago, and it be a great &quot;exclusive reveal&quot; for us. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Minifigs: a picture is worth a thousand words ==<br /> <br /> (Credit to CJC95 for the title)<br /> <br /> Currently minifig articles have lengthy parts/print descriptions. That seems counterproductive to me. Chances are, when visitors search for minifig articles, they want to see an image, not a description. Minifig articles already have lots of pictures, so why should visitors bother reading about a minifig's torso print when they can just look at it? And certainly if the descriptions aren't being read, the time spent writing them could be put to better use improving the site in other ways.<br /> <br /> An argument could be made that descriptions fill up minifig articles with content. But if the content isn't particularly insightful, what's the point of having it? All it does is detract from useful and interesting material, which is what visitors come to the site for. Pages like [[Batman]] and [[Obi-Wan Kenobi]] are prime examples of this. There's so much text, but (respectfully) it says so little of consequence! Thanks to all that text the images--the good stuff--are relegated to the bottom of the page. If visitors load the page only to see a wall of text instead of the images they came looking for, they're going to continue their search on another site.<br /> <br /> I suggest an alternative to the current system. Minifig pages should focus on images, not descriptions. Place the images in the very first section of content. Next to each minifig, place at most a few bullet points of description focusing only on particularly noteworthy aspects of that minifig.<br /> <br /> What are your thoughts? -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 23:56, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Edit: the above applies to the &quot;Background&quot; sections too. Brickipedia isn't primarily a storyline wiki. IMO any story information should exist exclusively on those pages detailing the media where the story actually took place. To use the Batman example, there shouldn't be any story info from the DC comics (they don't even have to do with Lego!), and story info from, say, ''Lego Batman 2'' should exist solely on the ''Lego Batman 2'' page. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Numerical analysis - I stuck the Batman description in a word-counter. It was just shy of 3700 words, about 1 in 50 of those words are &quot;suit&quot;, and would apparently take someone with an average reading level 13 minutes to read. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:58, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Completely agree, I suggested removing descriptions from minifigure articles a couple of years ago but it got shot down. As long as we have images of every angle of the minifigure (front, back, side, alt face expression, and a shot with gear which covers head/body removed), I think we could stick all the shots in some sort of new template, get rid of the descriptions and as you said, have a section for any relevant notes about that particular minifigure variant. Not sure about the background suggestion- I think it's good to have info on who the minifigure's actually based on, although a lot of them could be cut down. Also not all characters have a LEGO-based backstory, they just appear in sets (eg, [[Quinlan Vos]]) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Hmm, good point: some description is necessary. Maybe descriptions could be moved to the intro of the page? For Quinlan Vos, it could be something like: &quot;Quinlan Vos is a minifigure released in 2011, as a part of the Star Wars theme. Vos was a Jedi Master who fell to the Dark Side while on an undercover mission. After turning back to the light, he served as a general in the Clone Wars and survived Order 66.&quot; We already link to Wookieepedia at the bottom of the page, so people interested in reading more can do so. Maybe we could incorporate the Wookieepedia link more prominently though. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **:I think its more important just to limit the background to stuff that at least relates to LEGO sets. There was what, one set based on the dark knight trilogy, but we have a few paragraphs on the movies. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I've made this sometime ago but I haven't publicly posted it except with people on chat, but I'll share it with you guys :) https://jsfiddle.net/codynguyen1116/p1c3h30f/ a MediaWiki gallery component reimagined, with an arrow that'd bring up the description on a click. That part hasn't been written in JS yet, but currently it has most of what the idea is. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sure. I wouldn't mind asking in a survey, but sure. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good point, I'd support holding off on any change until we see if readers actually find this content useful- it'd be stupid to remove it all only to find people actually wanted it there. That is, if that survey ever actually happens. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Good idea! --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 01:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * What would be the point in the site if we got rid of descriptions? :S The only thing that would seperate from other sites would be the background sections, which are much harder to write by the way. Someone may be wondering what the symbol on one varation of a Stormtrooper is or what Maya's skirt is called. '''Oppose''' {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *: It's not getting rid of every description. You can still say what the symbols and stuff are, because that is useful information.. But do you really think that people will gain something from being told that Batman's trousers are black (as the Batman article no doubt says for every variation). At least we can all agree that the [[Darth Vader]] article does this much better than say the way [[Anakin Skywalker]] does. Would anyone (including yourself) read that? Even if there is a good piece of information about the symbols on his belt in there, no one will ever find it. Ever. There doesn't need to have every word removed, just...all the crap, useless ones. ('''summary''' - I, and I assume most others here, wouldn't even care if we kept descriptions, but they need to be actually reader friendly, not just spurting every bit of information.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *::What would updated descriptions even look like? I tried my best to make [[Olivia]]'s as short as possible, but she lacks detail. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *:::Well, that would work better if the bit that said &quot;In 41100 Heartlake Private Jet&quot; had a picture of that one next to the description, and &quot;In 41034 Summer Caravan,&quot; also had that picture. Pictures would help the description surely. Why should I care what colour her top is in that set if I don't know what it looks like? :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> : Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:NovaHawk/mfg|This]] is just an idea of a new minifig page layout- obviously the template needs to be made prettier so there aren't awkward white spaces and the tabs need to be layed out differently, but you get the idea. Note the &quot;seaweed&quot; variant has a notes section for important notes about that particular variant, which would replace the description. I think this length background would be good for a max length as well. I dunno, just an idea, let me know what you think. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good response. Thanks everyone. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Well, it was either write a one line nothing response or put off responding until I had time to actually look at it properly and be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:08, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Overall I'd be interested in seeing a version with the formatting improved. Some potential issues with a) low-res images b) big blank space when no back printing/alternative face c) minifigures with 15 or so variants d) Mobile - it don't work. e) large stretched out infobox on the RHS. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Fan namespace==<br /> Ok, so the LEGO Fanatics Wiki has been imported into the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. All the Customs and Stories have been imported here, and any userpages from Customs have also been imported (anyone who had userpages on there should have received a message on their talk page here). There are still a few things that need to be cleared up:<br /> * Most links won't be working since all pages are in a different namespace. I've made a simple template, {{tl|fan}}, if you want to fix any links {{C|eg, &lt;nowiki&gt;{{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}&lt;/nowiki&gt; goes to {{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}}}<br /> * Categories were not imported in the dump, and I've intentionally not done this as [[User:NovaHawk/FanCats|an organised category structure]] was passed on the wiki before it closed but wasn't implemented, so please don't go around making any categories just because they're redlinks.<br /> * Main page needs to be updated to at least acknowledge this part of the site.<br /> * Change to Customs infoboxes- for any new customs- just type your name in next to Creator, ie, |Creator={{USERNAME}}. This will generate appropriate autocategories. If it's a co-creation with another user, you can use |Creator2= and |Creator3= for second and third users. If there are more needed, I can add them.<br /> * Infoboxes- The Stories infobox ([[Fan:Team_Kitten|eg]]) doesn't match the rest of the site, I'd like to bring it more in line with templates like {{tl|Part}} or {{tl|Review}}. Opinions? Also, the Customs infoboxes used to have a choice between two styles- the style currently used most of our infoboxes like {{tl|Set}}, and an old style like {{tl|set}} from like 2010 or something. I haven't imported the Customs infobox template so they all now all are based on whatever the current infobox style is for the rest of the wiki, hope that's ok.<br /> * Quizzes- do we still want this? As far as I know, it was never set up. And remember, you can only have one quiz per wiki with this extension- do we want it for the fan namespace?<br /> * The wiki was called LEGO Fanatics Wiki, and after the move, was put in the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. What do we want to call this section of the site (we can't use LEGO Fanatics '''Wiki'''), and do we still want the namespace called &quot;Fan&quot;?<br /> :{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ------<br /> * @bottom two sections-<br /> ** My vote's to not use the quiz extension as a part of the fan namespace- we can set it up as a general LEGO trivia game if we want to use it at all.<br /> ** Brickipedia Creations? (to match naming style of Brickipedia Reviews) with a &quot;Creation&quot; namespace? I don't really care, but I don't think Brickipedia Fanatics is going to work.<br /> ::{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::I'm neutral to whatever we decide to do. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:33, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Fan is the best namespace option, because Fanatics (as both a namespace and a wiki name) is rubbish. I don't know how quiz works, but if its not set up it won't be anytime soon, so I wouldn't worry about it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 09:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** &quot;Brickipedia Fans&quot; sounds like Fans of Brickipedia to me :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * &quot;Fan&quot; sounds okay to me...no quiz here...infobox is okay. One thing I'm wondering about is the skin. Everybody probably knows I'm against the different colors, ''but'' it might be good to have them with the wikis merged again. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I pefer fanatics to fans, but like Nova it may come across as a self tribute. Though the argument could be made Brickipedia reviews aren't reviews of the site.{{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ==Vote/Rating extension broken?==<br /> * Anyone else having problems leaving a rating or a vote? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:14, 15 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*I thought you meant page ratings, with the ratings for customs I do. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* That hasn't been set up yet, will get it set up in the next 24 hrs or so {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::* Should be working now {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Contests ==<br /> Okay are last contest was a mess, I'm (wo?)man enough to admit that, but the fact of the matter is contests get us new viewers and &quot;potentially&quot; new users. We still have all the DTCs of the year and the maze, I doubt reviewing any of them will get much traction (though I personally still want to see Berry's bat cave review, that we never sent despite being green lit :P). I suggest we give away the Star Wars hoth set as that's been reviewed and complained about to death and unless we can add something new (a positive review) I'm not sure it's worth doing. I have an idea for a contest here, [[User:Soupperson1/JuneContest]]. It's basic but after the last two contests I don't want any potential negative feedback. We could also use Nova's &quot;coming soon&quot; olympics themed contest, but perhaps we could advertise that to the side of a regular contest as it'll be going on for months. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I don't know what sets we have available since it changes every so often (I think the Batcave is gone). Only Meiko would know. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I am not aware as to the status of sets to give away. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Meiko was kind enough to remind me of what we have on the table: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; he says that either the site or the recipient will need to pay the shipping fees though. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Pride month celebration for Brickipedia ==<br /> <br /> June is officially pride month (which includes LGBTQ for example), and in celebration of this I was thinking that we as Brickipedia should do something to celebrate! First idea is to make our logo rainbow-y, although I don't quite have any other ideas. Who supports this? :D [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *As far as I can tell June is only LGBTQ pride month (at least in the US). Are you sure it isn't just sexual pride month? I'm only skimming a Wikipedia article, so please redirect me. :P I'm not fond of this idea though because I think that if we recognized this month it would only be fair to recognize others...that might be kind of fun if we still did themed logos, but I don't know. It's also a political action and I really do not want to politicize things here. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everything is or can be interpreted as a political action. The fact that we don't charge readers, let alone reusers of our content, a fee for accessing the site? Politics. The fact that we don't stamp huge, obtrusive watermarks on our images and/or other media files? Politics. When we support or oppose a proposition? Politics.&lt;br /&gt;Complete neutrality, while desireable in a way, is probably never possible. Even Wikipedia, Google and several other high-profile websites based in the US [[wikipedia:Protests against SOPA and PIPA|spoke against some controversial bills]] not that many years ago &amp;mdash; in ways which were far more radical and visible than just slightly altering the logo. This is, of course, far from being a simple question, but I don't see this being harmful to Brickipedia and/or our mission.&lt;br /&gt;'''tl,dr:''' No objections to Cody's proposal from me. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 03:50, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Fair. But I don't think that this is a necessary political action whereas the issues you've listed are things that we would have to take a stance on just by virtue of being an online encyclopedia. This is an outside agenda though and I am frankly not okay with that. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 12:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Cool with me. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:24, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Strong oppose. Not not the month itself or anything, just featuring it on here. This has absolutely nothing to do with Lego and we're a wiki, not Facebook. Basically, same as Berrybrick, I don't want to drag this site into political issues. And I don't think featuring any sexuality issue on a site dedicated to what many perceive to be a little kids toy is remotely appropriate {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I just looked up &quot;LGBTQ&quot;, and I agree with Nova. --&lt;font face=&quot;corbel,segoe ui,sans-serif&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;CP&lt;/b&gt;]][[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#ff6363&quot;&gt;player&lt;/b&gt;]] ~ [[special:Contributions/CPplayer90210|&lt;i style=&quot;color:#333&quot;&gt;LEGO rules!&lt;/i&gt;]]&lt;/font&gt; 23:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I wrote a long thing but deleted it, as I basically found myself repeating myself a lot. The issue I currently see isn't with the month$ itself (I, and I'm sure everyone here in this forum, is pro-LGBT), but more of the implications - once you take a stand on one thing%, anything you don't take a stand on can be taken as a view - if someone asks us to mark black history or domestic abuse awareness month, we can't say no without making it seem like we oppose them. So, I have nothing against the month, the concept, putting a rainbow in the logo, or promoting LGBT awareness on the wiki - I worry about a precedent being set. Footnotes: ($ - Per Berry, the only thing I can find for pride month is the LGBTQ component. % - I am here including things that don't naturally concern us - yes, things like SOPA are political issues, but they would concern us, as we are a website. I don't see Wikipedia and Google taking a stance on SOPA as radical because it would (potentially) affect them - it is no different to a food manufacturer protesting food packaging laws, or what not. It would be radical if Wikipedia decided that it was going to campaign for abortion rights.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Pretty sure everyone on here is a liberal or at least OK with LGBT+ rights, but I don't think we need to do any advertising of it here. We're a website about LEGO. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 22:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Strong Oppose''', per Nova. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *If were justing changing the logo for a week, whats the big deal? :P Im more open to celebrating holidays, but this is one of the more tricker ones. I don't think there's any gay characters in any LEGO sets and the only gay actor to have a minifigure is Luke Evans, so we cant write a blog or anything. If you have ideas for anything else, sure. And @ the rest of you Im not sure we should really classify this as a political statement, more than us being inclusive. Its like not celebrating April's Fools or Christmas. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> **We are already inclusive. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***I don't think that there are any LGBTQ &quot;yellow&quot; LEGO characters (though very few of them have any defined sexuality at all) but there are a few licensed ones at least in the Simpsons Series 2 and some video games, and there are some gay pairings BIONICLE fans like to promote even if they are non-canon. On the next note, I'm still going to consider it as a political statement, whether or not it is an &quot;inclusive&quot; one. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ****Between what Berry said and what Soup said, I think a blog would work, and might be cool. It's not super political (not as much as a logo), and Brickset's certainly written articles with less material to work off of. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 17:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *****I stand by that doing it at all would be more political than I would like though. :P [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:50, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == LEGO set offer requests ==<br /> <br /> We used to handle this on Admin, but since that's been abolished, where do we want to do it now? Someplace like Forums where we discuss it or something sort of like FA and BotM where it gets its own page where we can vote or discuss? I would almost suggest giving something to BoTM or people who have otherwise done a lot of good stuff, but someone would have to pay for shipping. Moreover, do admins get first dibs, at least so we can set stuff aside for special occasions without requests taking up everything? Where can we find an easy access list of available sets? Tthat might be a small detraction to having it here. A policy should probably be drawn up. Any other things we ought to discuss? (And, in case it is relevant, this is what we've currently got: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; Meiko is holding onto them right now, so I don't ''think'' we are in danger of losing them, but LEGO probably wants to see us using them.) Thank you many grazis. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Pardon for doing this as an anon. I think it would be nice to, at least as a ''start'', have the exact same pages/system as we had on the admin wiki. Including that helpful table of what has currently been purchased, and what resources are left. Maybe an added column on what the set's current state is too (for example, &quot;In Meiko's temporary possession&quot;), because I can't remember if we had that before. For BotM, I always thought that the honour/template was enough of a rush. :P It would be nice to give them something small, like a CMF, but I believe the last time that was discussed, it was decided that the shipping costs to do that were ridiculous? It would be great if there was something digital we could give away... In response to LEGO wanting to see us using the sets, and regarding how late it is to review some them, any ideas on other stuff we could do with them, something that might be creative or get us some press? Nothing immediately comes to mind (I'll update this if something does later), but you guys may have ideas. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::We don't have a budget anymore, but LEGO offers us certain sets, which is why Meiko has them. If I remember correctly, we can still ask for sets that they haven't offered, but I don't think it would be good practice to do that when we haven't used the ones they have given us well. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:17, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Descriptive Videos on Set Articles ==<br /> <br /> Sorry for doing a second posting as an anon, but a thought popped in my head during the discussion of &quot;what to do with sets&quot;/&quot;what could the wiki use&quot;, and I wanted to post it before I forget. You know how in Descriptions, when talking about a function like &quot;applying pressure to the two joints at the side will cause the gears to move, which moves up the wings and creates...&quot;, might it be helpful to have little clips of these features in action, to act as a bit of a visual aid? It's something that would set us apart from other sites (&amp; Brickia), something that is genuinely useful (you don't have to hunt down a review, skim through the whole thing to find the clip, etc.), something that adds clarity when the descriptions are too complex to explain with few words, etc. Most of us, I imagine, have the capacitiy to record and upload short clips. And for sets that none of us own, maybe we can get permission from people like LEGOJANG to download, cut out (maybe mute talking), and upload these tiny portions from their video reviews? Ooh, actually, contrary to the idea of muting, it would actually be great to get and post some audio from sound bricks that LEGO has included in their sets. Anyway, hope that this idea seems helpful, and do-able. Let me know your thoughts. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Though I am skeptical that anyone would ever do anything (me included :P ) a large '''''YES'''''. One question though, if two sets have an identical feature (I'm thinking the turntable waists on this year's Toa) would a video that showed how the function worked using a Tahu set be acceptable on Gali's article? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The &quot;skeptical anyone would do anything&quot; was an issue, I realize. However, everyone has a smartphone, I assume, so a quick vid isn't a huge investment like, say, a review. When I get back, I'd definitely be happy to work on this. As for the identical features thing, yes, I think that would work, so long as a note/caption is included explaining they are identical. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 17:40, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** I don't have a smartphone. :D I do have a camera though, so I guess that doesn't relieve me. :P I would like to see some guidelines on this though, such as what the audio should be (muted with no background noise or obnoxious music, please). [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:47, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** I wouldn't say muting is always necessary, since some might count the &quot;clicks&quot; and stuff as part of the experience. But yeah, definitely nothing other than the set itself included audio-wise. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 17:58, 12 June 2016 (UTC)</div> 108.173.7.175 https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&diff=1059126 Brickipedia:Forum 2016-06-12T17:40:36Z <p>108.173.7.175: /* Descriptive Videos on Set Articles */</p> <hr /> <div>[[File:Forums.svg|center]]<br /> __NEWSECTIONLINK__<br /> Welcome to '''Brickipedia's forum'''. This is the place to propose and discuss any amendments to the [[Brickipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] or suggest new policies. To make a new proposal, please [http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new make a new section at the bottom of the page]. Please see [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive|the archives]] for past discussions - [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2014|2014]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2015|2015]], 2016 ([[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/1|Jan - Feb]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/2|Mar - onwards]]).<br /> <br /> For recent updates to the site and any policy changes, please see [[Brickipedia:Site updates]].<br /> <br /> -----<br /> Also, don't forget to check '''[[Forum:Index]]''' for a number of unresolved forums.<br /> -----<br /> <br /> <br /> == Minifigure Galleries ==<br /> {{archive<br /> |result=implement<br /> |content=<br /> It's annoying putting alternative faces and back printing in galleries and people often forget to do it. I made [[User:Soupperson1/MinifigGallery]] and I think it would work better compared to our current format. Thoughts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Looks great! But having it on 3 separate galleries seems like it might take up a lot of room on an article unnecessarily. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:23, 8 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :*There should be that many pictures on the article anyway. On larger articles like Batman it will save space as the gallery is overcrowded {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* I like the idea, but I'm not a fan of having three galleries, it makes this area way too long. I still think we should have tabs which let you switch angles for each variant (which I suggested about a year ago but noone paid attention- [[User_talk:NovaHawk/MG2|link to example]], [[User:NovaHawk/common.js|link to JS you'll need to put in your personal common.js]])<br /> :::*I like the tab idea but your example isn't working for me, it's just the normal Anakin. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::* Yep, like I said, you need to copy the code from [[User:NovaHawk/common.js]] to {{USERNAME}}/common.js for it to work {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::*Ooh that works, though I think the videogame variant should have its own section. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::* Of course- that was simply for testing, I should have specified that, sorry :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :::::::*I tried doing multiple mini figures together it didn't work, I'll leave that stuff to people who know what they're doing :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::::::*Yeah, it's only set up for one- the JS code is probably going to be quite long if it's going to accomodate like 20 entries, so I didn't bother because I'm lazy :P It can definitely be set up to work with more though. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::*Your the opposite of lazy! Your our most valuable contributor {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :*Why does it need more than the current three? (I would say &quot;I'll add more entries&quot;, but we all know I'd forget :P) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 08:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Did this ever get used? Or does it still need to be updated&gt; [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I don't know, does it have enough support? If so I'll work on the code required to get it operational {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:34, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** It looks like there is support, from the whole four of us who discussed. I don't know who will use it any time soon, but could be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==Stop treating DC and Marvel as subthemes?==<br /> {{Archive|result=Split them|content=<br /> * Just wondering people think about not having DC Comics and Marvel as subthemes of Super Heroes, and instead rename the pages &quot;DC Comics Super Heroes&quot; and &quot;Marvel Super Heores&quot;. To me they're more like parallel themes as they don't really share any of the same characters, universe, etc so it doesn't make sense to have them under the same theme :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:33, 30 October 2015 (UTC)<br /> ** I understand your thinking behind this but I'm having a hard time figuring if it's the best route to take or not. Neutral for now. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 16:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)<br /> **I believe it was only listed as one theme when it was introduced at NYCC, I agree they should be seperated now as they haven't been grouped together since.. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ===Vote===<br /> ;Split<br /> #{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> # *shrug* - in some places they already are it seems. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ;Don't split<br /> <br /> ;Comments<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ===Enacting===<br /> This needs to be enacted. When we have enacted it, please note it here so we can archive this. If there are any issues with implementing this, then discuss below. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Infobox colours changed, Marvel moved to [[Marvel Super Heroes]], DC Comics moved to [[DC Comics Super Heroes]]. The only problem is what to do with [[Super Heroes]]- I was going to turn it into a disambig page, but then I saw it's an FA and would feel bad doing that {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:58, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The content seems mostly split into theme sections, so we can not take the DC stuff, move it there, Marvel stuff, move it there and make them both FAs, then leave any other stuff on the Super Heroes page / make it a redirect. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==New namespace: Help/Brickipedia Help?==<br /> * Just wondering what people would think of a new namespace designed for people to ask questions. It'd basically be a fifth tab along with &quot;Page&quot;/&quot;Discussion&quot;/&quot;Inventory&quot;/&quot;Reviews&quot;. Have questions about a set/minifig/video game? Hit the &quot;help&quot; tab and type in your question. Basically I'm thinking of this as an alternative to Brickipedia Answers which never happened because we don't have enough technical people who can make this happen, and it saves you from going to another wiki to ask a question anyway. Yes we have [[Special:Wikiforum|forums]], but noone looks at those. Either that, or we could open up the Talk namespace to be about the set as well, not just the article- just because Wikipedia/Wookieepedia/every other wiki reserves their talk namespace for article talk, doesn't mean we have to. And it's not like the talk pages get used a whole lot here- we could just split the talk article into two parts. Anyway, just an idea I randomly had. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:23, 18 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Given our young audience having the 'Talk' tab is quite confusing as one would automatically assume that it's a page to talk about the subject and not necessarily about what could be done to correct certain information or otherwise improve the content of the article. Allowing a discussion area of some sort closely tied to the article itself would help boost interaction on the site though it would need monitoring and logged accordingly. None of us want a repeat of the disaster with article comments we had back at (dare I say it) Wikia. {{User:SKP4472/sig2014}} 02:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Per SKP (except I don't dare). Maybe we could even rename &quot;talk&quot; to maintenance, or something like it but shorter? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 06:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd like to see more discussion on this, but its not going to happen here in the middle of the forum. I'll talk about it with you if I ever see you on Chat Nova. I'll close this in a day or so, and when we have considered this more/aren't in the middle of other big changes, we can discuss this again [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Let's talk: Navbars==<br /> ===Design===<br /> How do we unify the design of them all (although most are similar already)? Do we make it look more like our other templates? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> On a side note should we make the edges curved or add pictures, or the logo for the theme instead of the font? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> * I believe there is (in that, there was at some point), some sort of design guidelines for the site in general being worked on, so really it depends on those. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ===Types===<br /> What sort of things should have navbars? Currently most themes have one for sets and minifigures. I imagine there are a few niche ones floating around out there though. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :We have an animal one, figure one, I'm not sure what else. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> : We have a [[Template:Weapons|weapons]] one as well, and [[Template:People]], and LEGOLAND stuff, and pretty much everything else in [[:Category:Navigation templates]] :P We could use some subcategories there. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Started a list at [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates]]. Please add any you know. That way we have some orderly way of upgrading them. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Information overload===<br /> What do people think of the way big themes are split into years? How can we make navigating large swathes of information (e.g. {{tl|SWfigs}}) usable without comprising information.<br /> *I was going to experiment with something like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:The_Beach_Boys ]. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Based on something Codyn suggested, I made [[User:CJC95/Sandbox]]. Obviously all I did was take two different bits of code and stick them inside each other without much thought, but the basic idea is the important thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Absolutely love this idea. :P Aesthetics could of course be improved but the functionality is what's important, we can improve on looks later [[User:Codyn329|Codyn329]] ([[User talk:Codyn329|talk]]) 22:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Liking the idea of tabbers- I'll write some CSS to fix the colours later. I'm thinking we could group things further, like in &quot;Galactic Republic&quot;, have columns like Clone Troopers, Senators, Droids, etc. Also since the info isn't being shown all at once, maybe we should double up, eg have Leia in both Rebel Alliance and Resistance? But for sets, if we just had one template and used tabbers, that'd be great. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Is there a way to get a specific one to be default for an individual page? Can we get it so that a 2013 Star Wars set can show the 2013 tab when it opens? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Mobile===<br /> Some appear to be unusable on mobile - A few don't scale too badly but don't look like they belong with the mobile skin that much. Mobile use of navboxes is a hard one to deal with. Wikipedia handles it by just disabling them on the mobile site. I don't like that solution (it annoys me when I'm on mobile Wikipedia), but I'm not too sure how to address this directly yet. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :[[mw:+2|+2]] to this; mobile is a very important segment and it deserves the appropriate attention (and if you ask me, Brickimedia's mobile support is pretty awesome) and &quot;it doesn't work on mobile, let's disable it&quot; is a non-solution. We have a lot of clever, technically-oriented people who can solve this problem; I'm sure of that. So let's build something that has never been seen before! --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === When do we split them ===<br /> I'm just curious when a navbar is big enough to be split and how big we want each section to be. http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Template:DCFigs&amp;oldid=605762 is much smaller then the mini-doll figure section at {{t|FriendsFigs}} but do we want to split it? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Generally its UCS really, as it depends on the theme etc. How would you split up the Friends? If there is a logical way to split it, feel free to at least see what it looks like. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Non physical section or not ===<br /> I never liked non physical sections, if [[Victor Zsasz]] is a villain why can't he be in the villains section? I know you could argue were supposed to sell sets and what not, but are we not technically promoting the video games? Plus a lot of characters such as Peter isn't in production, so we wouldn't be selling anything besides second hand stuff. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I was going to suggest this - well, I was going to just do it and see what it looked like :P - I was going to suggest like, a superscript (cross) and then a note at the bottom saying &quot;video game only&quot;, etc. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I think I'm the opposite of CJC here- I hate having these in line with physical figs. Eg, [[Template:NinjagoFigs]], the Creatures section and to a lesser extent the Ninja allies section just looks a mess to me. If you did this with {{tl|MarvelFigs}} where 2/3 of the characters are VG only, you'd have a very hard time finding the actual minifigures, which is what I'd be guessing a significant portion of people who visit here actually care about. If we went with the tabber idea, I think it could work for everyone though, eg VG SW Republic characters could be further split into Clone Troopers, Senators, etc, and non-physical? They'd be in Republic, just not the smaller category. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Tabbers does solve this problem afaic, as you can just put smaller VG only sections on each category. This solve the issue with the VG only sections in current form. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::[[User:NovaHawk/tabberInfobox|Here's]] an example with tabs I've been working on, let me know if anything needs to be changed. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 09:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Naming===<br /> [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates|Here]] is an incomplete list of current navbars. The main reason is the lack of naming conventions. Some use just the theme name for a template, and hence they are missing from the list currently. Some use &quot;Figs&quot; and &quot;Sets&quot;, others use &quot;sets&quot; and &quot;figs&quot;. Some use initials for the theme name, others don't (this disparity even exists within a theme, so we have JWfigs but JurassicWorldsets.<br /> All these make it very confusing to actually find what template you want. Hence when they are updated and upgraded I suggest renaming them on the convention &quot;Theme Name&quot; + &quot; figs&quot; or &quot; sets&quot;. (Note also the space between words). Discuss if you please. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * A whole theme name with a space is so tiring to type though :P Yes, sounds good to have some consistency, I'm always having to check what the names are for themes I'm not editing all the time, not having to think and just type the theme name would be good. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Status===<br /> Where are we on design wise? I'd like to move forward with this. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Well there was no response on the example, so I wasn't sure whether to move forward with it. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was referring more to the apparent design guideline things that are in the works, although when I'm back on pc, I'll look again at yours and just start changing things (so next Friday probably) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==BoTM minimum threshold==<br /> It was decided (see the [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016|archive]], where it shall be within a short while of me submitting this) that there should be a minimum threshold for a nominee to gain Brickipedian of the Month. However no specific threshold was discussed. This should probably be decided, or else the minimum threshold policy is hard to enforce. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Anyone? :P If not I'll just set the minimum as three. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Three sounds fine. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> {{Archive|result=exclude BoTM from unanimous rule of voting|content=<br /> ;Exclusion request.<br /> *BoTM needs to be excluded from [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016#Global &quot;unanimous rule&quot; for voting|the global unanimous rule]]. It is necessary for a BoTM to last a month. As there is no opposes, they are all unanimous, as long as they have one supporter. This would mean any threshold would not ever be used, as every BoTM request would pass instantly after a week. So obviously the global unanimous rule can no longer be global. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Oh yeah, definitely. forgot about that one, sorry {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==A change to the &quot;featured article&quot;==<br /> * By &quot;featured article&quot;, I mean the box on the main page. Currently, every month it shows [[Black Knights]]. I'd like to propose changing &quot;Featured article&quot; to some other name (please add suggestions), and showcase a complete article for 2 weeks, giving priority to articles recently promoted to complete status. Any future FA's take priority, and run for a month as before. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 08:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*'''Strongly disagree''', I like FA as they are. Besides if we do this no one will write FAs anymore. If we want variation we can just change it to an existing FA? If we want to share waste complete articles, we can add a section called &quot;articles with the ratings recently changed&quot; {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Can we still call it a featured article, and differentiate it from the complete ones somehow? :P If we want a new name though, I suggest Showdog, with the [[Dog Show Judge]] (once he is released) as a mascot. When he shows up, people will know it is special. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was thinking something more along the lines of something boring like &quot;promoted article&quot; :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Sure. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Or we could finally use our mascot :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Request for comment: Implement more ads across Brickimedia ==<br /> <br /> This is a critical topic currently and probably will have a lot of mixed feelings. Considering the amount of ads were a fundamental reason we moved ''off'' Wikia, I'm not expecting a lot of support here, but as it stands right now, we don't generate enough income off a single ad to keep up with our expenses. Our site's expensive, and we only need more and more performance out of our server and right now we've got just about as much server as we can afford. Then we add in the fact that we have to ship contest prizes which is not cheap (actually usually costs more to ship one prize to one person than we pay monthly for the server.....), and I don't want to pay out of pocket for them, nor would [[User:Ajraddatz|Adrian]] want to. Hence, we need more income, and since we can't rely on donations that we almost never get (except that one time from [[User:NBP3.0|NBP3.0]]), we have to resort to advertising. As a result, I want to ask for feedback, please comment stating whether you '''support''' or '''oppose''' an increase of ads per page (1-2 more perhaps), and if you support, suggest ad placements if you have any suggestions, or if you oppose, give some reason why. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:10, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *I'm fine with this as long as they aren't like, pop-ups or covering up text or anything. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:12, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I too would be fine with having a &lt;i&gt;few&lt;/i&gt; more ads, as-long as they're non-intrusive to our content. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:16, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Can we trade in some of the sets LEGO gave us in exchange for them paying for shipping? It's honestly ridiculous how much that costs. Beyond that, some questions that I want to see addressed before proceeding with this: 1. Would there be a significant revenue increase? We're actually breaking even on the hosting costs these days ($45 last month, -$40 for hosting). 2. How much are we planning on spending for shipping things around? I'm coming to a point in my life where the finances are a bigger concern (as in, moving out and getting a job after the degree). I have no problem still paying for hosting and shipping contest prizes, but I want to make sure we have as much info as possible that I can include in my budget. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 21:23, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Quick answer, no we can't rely on LEGO to ship for us. They'll ship to one person who will then handle everything from there. At that point, TLG is out of the logistics equation, and the only involvement they want after that is us to send them a link to what the set(s) were used for. With more ads, we would get an increase in revenue, especially if they're prominent. Right now, with it being at the bottom of the page, I don't think they're getting much impressions and as a result not generating much revenue. For example, I've had https://www.harrellsecurities.com up for a little over a week and generated nearly $20 already, with a tiny fraction of the traffic Brickimedia gets. That's why I think we need to have some more ads, perhaps one near the top of the page as well since that will probably generate ''much'' more revenue than the one at the bottom. I see what you're saying about finances are a bigger concern for you now. They are for me too, that's why I can't pay out of pocket for anything for this site, since all my money gets reinvested into business or business-related travel, and anything I have left over has to go into savings. However, if we can ensure we break even and have some extra income to spare for times when we don't break even or need to ship out expensive prizes, I'm happy and able to take over the financial side of things here. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would we be able to add more adds on certain sections, like reviews or blog posts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** Perhaps, but those wouldn't be very effective since those don't get as much views. Blog posts especially don't get many views by visitors, and chances are none of our registered users will click them. Better to just put another ad placement or two on ''every'' page than on specific ones that could just be a hit or a miss as far as revenue creation is concerned. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * '''Support''', but as per CJC and CGCJ. And honestly, I'd much prefer it if any set we got from LEGO was just reviewed by whoever it's sent to so we don't have to pay out shipping costs all the time. It'd be nice to actually be making money on this site for once, and maybe pay back Ajr/NBP/Meiko who have already sunk so much money into the site. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''' I honestly had never noticed that this site had ads until a few weeks ago. Anyway, I strongly support having more ads on articles. One solitary advertisement at the bottom of the page is not going to make much of a difference. This site generated $45.00 last month. Barnick's generated $20.00 in a little over ''a week''. This site surely has many more viewers than the one that he linked. If we are barely making enough to keep this boat afloat, something needs to change. [[User:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;lime&quot;&gt;LCF&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;([[User talk:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;#6600FF&quot;&gt;talk!&lt;/font&gt;]])&lt;/sup&gt; 01:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * So, would the ad in the sitenotice be considered unintrusive by the people supporting only if the ads are unintrusive? I honestly don't know because I have adblocker and just saw a huge empty white gap (which I quickly took care of) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The way I look at it, it's not in the content, it's not in front of the content, and it doesn't cover the content, so it's not really intrusive. All the content is still there, just 90px farther down (or less on mobile). If other people feel otherwise it can be changed but there aren't too many good ad placements in our interface other than that which wouldn't be within the content section. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 06:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I don't see the issue in it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''': With the ad adversity, I trust that this will be handled carefully. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Comment''': I applied for the [http://shop.lego.com/en-US/Affiliate-Program LEGO Shop Affiliate Program], got approved, and now converted most of our ads to LEGO ads. They generate revenue a bit differently so we'll see how it plays out in comparison to the current Google Ad at the bottom of each page. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:16, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ooh, awesome. I'll try to remember to click a link on here before buying stuff for the May the 4th promotion. Also, do we have some sort of affiliate id we can stick on the end of URLs? I was thinking we could make a change to {{tl|QuoteLEGO.com}} and stick something on the end of those links to the shop as well. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** I haven't looked into all of it but I believe we do. This is one of the codes (among many) it offers me:&lt;pre&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;offerid=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot; &gt;The Official LEGO Shop: The best selection of LEGO bricks in the world!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;IMG border=0 width=1 height=1 src=&quot;http://ad.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/show?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;bids=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot;&gt;&lt;/pre&gt; I don't know if that &lt;code&gt;img&lt;/code&gt; tag is necessary or whatever but maybe the only part we need is the &lt;code&gt;href&lt;/code&gt;? idk what do you think? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** FYI also, linksynergy.com seemed to be blacklisted earlier which is part of why I'm using iframes to load these ads instead of using wikicode. [[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] might know how to bypass that blacklist for this? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would it be possible to have the advertisement in the bottom corner not be a gif? It's extremely distracting. I can see some people who just look at images and info on the site finding the top advertisement annoying, but if your a reader you can just scroll down. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** {{replyto|Soupperson1}} All of the available graphic ads at that size are gifs. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 22:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ugh, we have gifs now? Isn't that a bit 90's/early 00's? Please tell me it isn't one of those fast-flashing banners saying you've won $1,000,000:P Would definitely support changing to still images if that was possible {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** {{replyto|NovaHawk}} No, they're LEGO Affiliate ads. [http://cache.lego.com/2057/images/shop/Affiliate/2014/sandcrawler/star-wars-75059-125x125.gif Example] --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 17:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The only gifs I've seen are teh LEGO ones if you scroll down the sidebar. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == [[76052]] Live Build with Beyond The Brick ==<br /> [//www.youtube.com/user/BeyondTheBrickTV Beyond The Brick] asked me if I'd like to live build [[76052 Batman Classic TV Series - Batcave]] with them for their channel. Considering this would count as RLUG activity with this round of LUG support, and saves us the trouble of having to pay for shipping on a set this large (and heavy), is anyone opposed to this? Could manage to give us some publicity again which we haven't gotten from another online LEGO community in a while. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sounds good to me. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Neutral. It sounds like a great opportunity and would usually instantly support it. However, I believe it was scheduled for Berry to review, I'd feel bad supporting if it meant taking that off him... {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 21:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Wasn't aware of that because I can't really keep track of those things. Guess we better start saving then because that's gonna be pricey to ship... --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Just checked, apparently the proposal hasn't been closed (I've given up paying attention prizes/budget stuff), but it has 3 suporting votes and 0 opposing, the last comment taking place on February 17. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 03:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support but if it was meant for Berrybrick like Nova said, then Berrybrick should do it. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm guessing as usual, this has discussion has turned into nothing and any opportunity has passed anyway? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Administrative footnotes in regards to user rights and potential mergers. Feel free to ignore. ==<br /> <br /> === Customs ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here:<br /> * BFN has admin there. He also has admin here if he becomes activity again - No issue here.<br /> * MeikoBot has admin there. I assume that was for a specific task, and bots can have admin for specific tasks if needed here. No issue.<br /> * Nexus has patroller there. He lost patroller here due to being inactive, but can have it when he comes back to activity. No issue.<br /> * 1999bug has admin there. He is not currently active, so this is not a major issue, however I'd suggest to be able to administrate the new customs namespace here he would need to pass an RfA here. However, as he is not active, we have no real issue.<br /> <br /> So basically, no issues, but this is just a note for the archive, so to speak. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Meta ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here. There is more users than Customs and so I have split them into appropriate groupings:<br /> ;Already have similar rights here if they return to activity<br /> * BFN has admin<br /> * Cligra has admin<br /> * KoN has admin<br /> * NBP has admin<br /> * SKP has admin<br /> <br /> ;Cases where I'd propose that they need to pass an RfR here for their rights to transfer<br /> * 1999bug has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Codyn has admin and functionary.<br /> * LEGOSuperDKong has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Latenightguy has admin<br /> * Lcawte has admin. although has sysadmin here, and inactive.<br /> * Sammy has admin. Inactive.<br /> * Vector Prime has admin. Inactive<br /> <br /> ;Cases where admin at meta is for maintenance or a specific task and would not be needed anyway<br /> * CJCbot has admin &amp; bot. no longer needed. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently.<br /> * Edward Nigma has admin. rights given recently for specific maintenance tasks. Task is over. <br /> * LcawteBot has admin, bot. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently. <br /> * NXTBot has admin.<br /> * Bawt has bot.<br /> <br /> ;Misc.<br /> *Adrian (Brickimedia) has admin. user has a normal account with admin here, and this account has sysadmin anyway<br /> *The five bureaucrats at Meta (Ajr, myself, Nova, SKP, NXT) have (or can when they are active have) admin here. The two ranks are synonymous here, so no issue.<br /> * Nova has functionary there. He has had checkuser in the past here (and possibly functionary? I don't know when the merge of rights there happened), he doesn't currently. This may be due to personal request or confusion during moving accounts or something, I'm not sure, but I assume if Nova wanted them he would (or at the very least could) have them :P<br /> * Jack Phoenix has patroller there. He could have patroller here if he needed it. <br /> <br /> '''Summary:''' basically, as for customs above, this is more of an administrative footnote for the archives of the forum than anything useful for us to discuss. Once again, I am proposing that no rights be automatically imported over here during any merger - the only active users affected by this will be Latenightguy and Codyn. I'm not sure what their views are on this topic, but as there is no formal RfR process at meta, I'd have to suggest that they pass an RfR here to keep said rights. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm good to not have functionary here, don't really need it since the spambots are gone {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I don't know how the community would feel as me as an admin, but I think I can bring some good to the table. RFR for it like you said? As for functionary it can go either way [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 02:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** RfA for admin and RfFunctionary would be needed. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Merging the Magazine namespace back into main ==<br /> {| style=&quot;border-top: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-bottom: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-right: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-left: 1px solid #aaaaaa;padding: 5px;background:#D9F0FF; margin-top:7px;&quot;<br /> |-<br /> ||''The following section is preserved as an archive. &lt;font color=red&gt;'''Please do not modify it.'''&lt;/font&gt;{{#if:Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)|&amp;nbsp;The result was Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)}}<br /> ------<br /> It's really not needed. We don't have one for books, or for episodes of TV shows, etc. The reason is because we had a few scans of a couple of UK mags, but that's not enough to justify a namespace. Just stick those scans on the articles in the main space. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:20, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Is there actually any content in said namespace or can the Magazine namespace pages just be deleted? Support either way. It's a useless namespace that 99% of people don't know exists. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** there is content, but all formatted as mainspace articles, so it just needs to be moved back. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 01:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * If its useless then we should get rid of it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 01:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Rip magazines :(. I'm OK with it being removed. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 05:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Wait we're still having magazine articles aren't we? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:12, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Sure --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 10:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Really, the last one was 4 years ago. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 11:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ****** [[LEGO Friends magazines|I beg to differ]] :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ******* I don't think he meant the release of magazines, but the articles being created for individual issues. There are more actual magazines then ever - there was a LEGO Star Wars one in the supermarket the other day :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Yep, just merging the existing ones back into the mainspace. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Since we have enough support to merge it, I guess we'll do it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> {{done|All pages moved without leaving a redirect.}}[[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:56, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> |}<br /> <br /> == Increasing positive communication within users ==<br /> <br /> I want to talk about increasing positive communication within users: Although we generally have nice, calm conversations in chat (which is great!), that doesn't need much improvement. What I think needs to specifically improve to increase this, is how we welcome users. Right now, welcoming others are based on a pre-formatted, maybe half-arsed template, and simply substituting the transcluded template on user talk pages. Although I do understand that if the resources are low, it would be more realistic to make such thing to make an automated message on people's talk page.<br /> <br /> However, let's say we do have the resources - or we just work harder. Whenever I joined other wikis, and saw that the message was just one of those annoying bots saying &quot;Hey, thanks for you edit on 'so and so' page, bla bla bla etc...&quot;, it's really annoying. It'd be nice to know that, &quot;Hey, a user hand-wrote this message to me. It's ''real''. It's not from a bot or automated.&quot; It has this little spice of appreciation, and I'd say &quot;It's all the little moments that make life big.&quot; ( originally quoted by Echo Park). <br /> <br /> There wouldn't be a full-blasted guideline or policy on here on how to write messages, it just has to be real and honest. You just ''write'' it. And knowing, that a person would voluntarily spend their time writing something for a person they don't even know is powerful. And hey, maybe the message doesn't contain everything a user needs to know about a site - but just writing it I believe would cause the welcomed user to get curious, and actually have a higher chance of staying on the wiki. Not only that, it'd increase the likelyhood of that user ''responding'' back to the welcomer. Thus, 1-1 communication, 2 people at the time. If everyone did this, these tiny numbers could stack up and make this site overall hopefully a better place.<br /> <br /> What do you think? More user-written welcomes? Less welcome templates? Maybe even deleting it?<br /> <br /> [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # As nominator [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Definitely. I (try to) do this at BS01. Even a &quot;hi&quot; after the welcome template could make a difference, or at least I'd like to think so. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Agree. --[[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] [[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:blue&quot;&gt;CPplayer90210&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sub&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sub&gt; 10:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Oppose deleting the welcome template at least. If people want to do custom-written welcomes every time, fine, I'm not saying welcome templates should replace that. But people make an edit, they get welcomed. Unless you want to wait for them to make like 10 edits to get a feel for the user (which I think would be a bad idea, no welcome at all after an edit or two would be weird), I can't see there being a whole lot of variation in anyone's custom welcome to people. I can also see custom welcomes being less useful if they don't supply the information the welcome template does (assuming the information on the welcome template is useful, it's been a while since I looked at one). Basically, totally ok with a &quot;hi&quot; after a welcome template or something similar (I usually try to remember to hit the &quot;thank&quot; button on a new user's first edit), but against removing the welcome template altogether. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # I agree 100% with Nova. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> *I agree with Codyn's sentiments, but also Nova's concerns. &lt;s&gt;I think I missed any suggestion of deleting the welcome template though?&lt;/s&gt; (Silly Berry.) Anyway, if voted into effect, what exactly would be done? Surely this is more of a behavioral thing than a policy thing? I definitely will not oppose (because I do like the idea) but making it a policy sort of makes it fake in my opinion. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I don't think our current welcome templates are that great, perhaps suffering from too many pointless links, but I don't think the idealised world you are attempting to describe above is one that will happen. What will happen is that every message will be basically identical anyway, just &quot;Hi! Nice edit on X. Any questions just ask!&quot; to welcome all users instead. Or maybe sometimes I'd end up typing &quot;Hello&quot; instead of &quot;Hi&quot;. or &quot;good&quot; instead of &quot;great&quot;. But it won't be personal really. So I don't care for the idea, or our current method, but I'd point out that we can't enforce a policy to write &quot;real&quot; messages. I guess I'm leaning towards oppose, but it can stick here in the discussion for now. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:44, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *What we really need is better warning/notice templates for talk page messages. Right now we have very vague and ugly boxes that don't tell a user what they did wrong and how to fix it in the future, plus hardly anybody uses those templates anymore. So 90% of the time someone does something wrong, their edit gets reverted but only rarely does someone put something on their talk page explaining why the edit(s) was reverted. Compare the rather lacking selection of warnings and notices we have, [[Category talk:Warning templates]], with English Wikipedia for example [[wp:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]]. Also note that ours are all boxes that imply the user did something bad, whereas Wikipedia's are inline text with a signature at the end making it read more like a human message, and the first couple levels of warnings are a bit more forgiving as well. Just an idea/concern I've had for a long time. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:00, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Edits from Brickia ==<br /> <br /> We have at least one user ({{U|GoldNinjaMX}}) who has recently come here from Brickia and wants to move some edits he made. What is to be done? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I just googled it and there doesn't seem to be a way to do that. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Well, &lt;s&gt;most contributions here seem to be customs,&lt;/s&gt; as Customs have always been treated as the creator's property (both on here and Brickia), I have no problem with that being moved once we have Customs merged to here (and would similarly have no problem if people moved back to Brickia and took their Customs with them). As for the rest, not so sure. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Wait, sorry, only saw one page. 1894 mainspace edits, 1089 customs edits. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Oh, sorry, I should have been more explanatory. He wants to move mainspace content from Brickia to here. I think at least one article in question was [[Ninjago (World)]]. Basically, what would we have to do for that to be legal (it is CC-BY-SA licensing), and then would it be ethical and worth any potential trouble? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::: Import them, using [[Special:Import]] after exporting them from Wikia. It is best to change them a bit here once imported, not for copyright reasons, but to not be penalized by search engines. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 01:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd think that moving is customs here is completely fine, as well as pages made entirely by him. The harder part would be adding over his edits. If you carried over his edits you would have to move over the edits of other users that haven't joined here. I would say to stay away from bringing edits over.[[User:Albus Potter|Albus Potter]] ([[User talk:Albus Potter|talk]])<br /> *I'd warn against making this a regular thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:43, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I'm a bit uneasy about it myself, we have a good thing going with Brickia at the moment- they don't copy our stuff and we don't copy theirs, basically we go our own ways. I would hate to see that change. We did also say that we wouldn't take any edits of theirs after February 2014, this would go against the &quot;agreement&quot; to me. '''Oppose'''. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** The main issue as I see it is that other users have edited the page since GoldNinjaMX has. If he was the only one who edited, then fine, he can take them and put them wherever he likes, but as soon as someone just changes one character on that page, we have to import it and then we can, like you say, start some tit-for-tat thing. Additionally, moving in versions of pages we have hear just means someone (and I can imagine it would be at most one of five people :P) would have to compare the edit histories to ensure we don't lose any content, don't add any rubbish, and I'm not sure that is worth the hassle. I guess I am basically '''opposed''' to this, now I think it out more. At the very least, I'm troubled by it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:32, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Import requires admin or sysadmin rights. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Re-)Enabling Gifts (and more!) ==<br /> The [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile extension]], which provides avatars, [[User:Jack Phoenix|structured social user profile pages]] and more, contains some features which are [[github:470|not (yet) enabled on Brickipedia]]. These features include '''system gifts, or awards''', which are automatically handed out by the wiki software after a user reaches certain thresholds, which administrators can configure; such as having 5 friends or having made 50 (mainspace) edits, and so on.&lt;br /&gt;Then there are '''gifts''', ordinary user-to-user gifts which users can give out to each other after administrators have set up some gifts.<br /> <br /> '''Friends''' and '''foes''' are pretty self-explanatory, and to a degree, this &quot;feature&quot; ''does'' exist, but many references to it have been &quot;hacked out&quot; or explicitly toggled off; as such, the amount of friends (and/or foes) isn't prominently shown in the User Interface of the site. Some special pages, like [{{fullurl:Special:TopFansByStatistic|stat=friends_count}} Special:TopFansByStatistic], expose the amount (but not the &quot;who's whose friend&quot; relations normally shown on profile pages) of friends, for example. [[Special:Editcount|And edit count, on the other hand, has been public info for a long time.]]<br /> <br /> Finally there's the [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#User Board|User Board]] and the related [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#Board Blast|Board Blast]] feature. User Boards are visible on users' profiles and they allow users to easily post a message — even a private message — to each other, without having to go to the user's talk page. Board Blast allows to send a user board message to multiple recipients at once.<br /> <br /> In the bug ticket linked to earlier on, [[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] noted his concern about the possible abuse of these tools (specifically the gifting feature) as well as the extra burden of work these tools can create for administrators. I don't share this concern nor the conclusions. Why? Because with ''everything'', especially so on a ''wiki'', things ''can'' and ''will'' be abused by malicious people. That's life. But just because someone decides to vandalize the [[LEGO]] page doesn't mean we put the wiki in full lock-down mode. Likewise, I believe that gifts and other such features mentioned above can be used to promote positive user interaction and engagement, and as such, these tools should be available to our users. If someone abuses them, we will simply ensure that the user in question can't do that anymore.<br /> <br /> It is, of course, up to the community to decide how to use these and what policies, if any, govern their usage. But again, we assume a lot of things already and give our users some leeway — there are no ''technical'' restrictions on making 50 consecutive, single-character edits in order to bump up one's edit count; there are ''social'' limitations which, directly or indirectly, imply that such behavior is neither desired nor tolerated.&lt;br /&gt;Jimbo Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, might be a controversial person with controversial opinions, but I think that his [https://web.archive.org/web/20080129145752/http://www.wikia.com/wiki/User:Datrio steak knife analogy] is quite fitting for this situation.<br /> <br /> '''tl,dr:''' Let's re-enable a bunch of features (gifts, awards, user boards, friends &amp; foes) present in [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile]] by default. Who's with me? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # Obviously. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 21:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Like Meiko, I'm against having foes enabled though {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:36, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Sure, like Nova and Meiko I'm not sure about the benefits of foes, but the rest sounds great. Getting those badges on wiki was a popular feature, so I'm sure gifts will be too. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> # But not foes! [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 18:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Weak oppose per my comment but won't prevent this from being passed if I'm the only opposition. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> * My 2 cents: Friends - We can have these but I don't see any fundamental reason why. The way I see it, our community is so tight knit, everyone would be friends with each other... We're not a social network and I don't think there's ever anyone here who doesn't know every other active user. We have no need for foes and even back when we had friends, we didn't have foes. I don't think foes is a constructive feature. I don't like UserBoard either. Everything it's good for can be done on talk pages or in email. Having two places where you leave messages for other users confuses people and many people never know when to set it to private or public (e.g. when it's used for contests and they're asked to set it to private, hardly anyone does that). There's also no notifications for new Board messages, except for in automated emails which [[github:300|get flagged as spam]]. Gifts I don't see a need for either, but awards maybe. However, that requires an admin set them up and keep them &quot;fresh&quot;, which requires time out of admins' already-busy workload. We had a ton of badges at Wikia and transferring that over to here will be nothing but a nightmare and frustration that will take time away from doing more essential things around here our admins are tasked with. IMO the current social features we have are enough. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everybody should be friends with each other, indeed, yet things like Facebook are amazingly popular nevertheless. :) Humans are social beings, and we cannot blindly stare at statistics and such. For example, one could argue that [[Special:Chat|MediaWikiChat]] is a mere social addition to the wiki and is not relevant since it doesn't directly increase the amount of (quality) edits. That would be true. And likely the same would also be true for friend (and/or foe) lists. But people like having those things around as they improve the wiki's atmosphere and bring editors together. So why not?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding foes: you wouldn't be the first person to suggest that it's an unneeded/unwanted feature, and I understand that it might be controversial. To understand this feature, you need to understand some of the underlying history. [[mw:Social tools|Social tools]] were first developed at ArmchairGM, which was (well, technically &quot;is&quot;, but...) a sports wiki. The developers, as well as pretty much all users were American. Needless to say, some people on the wiki had strong opinions about certain sports-related things, which differed from other people's views. This is, to my understanding, how the foes feature came to be. Furthermore, the feature is also related to the [[mw:Extension:Challenge|Challenge extension]], which, as the name suggests, allowed challenging other users. Although I don't know how it was used in practise, but the theoretical goal was to fuel wiki growth and quality edits ''via foeships'' &amp;mdash; people who were foes would challenge each other and the loser would need to edit a certain wiki page or somesuch. All this being said, though, personally I feel that people are somehow (too) intimidated by the name &quot;foes&quot; &amp;mdash; it has been around for a long time, much like social tools in general, and I have yet to see people abuse it in some way.&lt;br /&gt;UserBoard is another attempt at solving the ages-old problem with talk pages &amp;mdash; or in this case, as the name suggests, the problem with ''user'' talk pages. Talk pages are like a blank sheet of paper, and depending on who you are and what your background with computers and/or wikis in general is, this may or may not be a good thing. Because users are the heart and the soul of essentially ''any'' wiki out there, lowering the barrier to entry is important. Having a more structured mechanism (UserBoard) might prove to be useful to some newer users, because a blank sheet of paper (normal wiki talk pages) ''can'' be confusing. That being said, it's not a this-or-that choice, if and when both exist; people can choose whichever option they prefer.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding notifications: that's not ''totally'' correct. There ''are'' notifications, but &amp;mdash; once again due to historical reasons &amp;mdash; they're not as obvious as you'd think. Many wikis with SocialProfile have the [[mw:Extension:UserWelcome|UserWelcome extension]] (actually bundled with SocialProfile for years) and the [[mw:Extension:WikiTextLoggedInOut|WikiTextLoggedInOut extension]] installed, which allows them to have something like &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;loggedin&amp;gt;&amp;lt;welcomeUser &amp;gt;&amp;lt;/loggedout&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; on the [[Main Page]], which then shows the user's personal social info to them if they're logged in. Needless to say, this is quite archaic when you take into account the fact that [[mw:Notifications|Echo]] has been a thing for a few years now. You'll be pleased to know I've submitted [[gerrit:278868|an experimental, definitely-nowhere-near-ready-for-production changeset]] to address [[phab:T64520]] to bring Echo support to SocialProfile. I believe we can get it finished in a reasonable time. Testers &amp; developers welcome! ;-)&lt;br /&gt;The &quot;emails get flagged as spam&quot;, which is largely a separate issue, is likely an issue with the big email providers like Google &amp;mdash; their automated algorithms mark MW emails as spam for a variety of reasons (which we can't know for sure) and contacting them about this is hard, if not outright impossible. One possible reason could be that since most installations don't bother customizing these emails and there are a ''lot'' of MW wikis out there, Google sees a lot of really similar emails and thinks &quot;well, the difference is only a few characters (username/IP/site name/site URL), but since it matches a certain pattern, it's probably spam&quot;. So one possible workaround could be to customize the emails, but I realize it can be hard to do and it doesn't really scale (because of i18n, for example).&lt;br /&gt;I'm not sure ''why'' awards would need to be kept &quot;fresh&quot; &amp;mdash; they're largely (IMO) a &quot;set up once and forget about it&quot; thing. Setting them up initially will take a few minutes, but I'll be more than glad to do that once we have a consensus on them (names/thresholds/images). --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Somehow) stop spambots from creating accounts ==<br /> <br /> I have noticed lots of spambot accounts being created every day, and i'm thinking that there has got to be a way to stop this. They seem to be getting past the captcha just fine, but they are stopped by the abuse filter. So, in otherwords, we need to try and stop automated spam account creation from happening altogether. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :We simply need any other account creation captcha than the one we have right now. However it's good to note that spambots are often better at solving captchas nowadays than humans, so the question is is it worth the extra step and inconvenience for human users to prevent spambots from creating accounts? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Theres also recaptcha, or we could restrict account creation to a certain user group. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::That would mean only people who had accounts could create accounts? So we'd have no new users? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::People could request to have accounts created. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::That is not worth the hassle it involves (can we stop adding jobs for the admins to do? :P), and while stopping spambot accounts, would decimate legitimate account creation. Honestly, the current situation where we just have lots of spambots that can't do anything is fine. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:57, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::: Agreed with CJC here, this has also been discussed originally in [[github:449]]. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 22:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::I am agreeing more with {{u|ToaMeiko}}. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::You're right, not only there has to be but there '''is''' a way to stop some spambot registrations. It's the [[meta:MediaWiki:Email-blacklist|email blacklist]], which is a part of the [[mw:Extension:SpamBlacklist|SpamBlacklist extension]]. Of course it's not a perfect solution since it requires people to maintain it, since spambot (operators) will always find a way around such limitations, but it will catch some of them...or rather, ''would'' &amp;mdash; for whatever reason it doesn't appear to be functioning correctly because over the past three days, 18 accounts were registered with a mailcatch.com address, for example. I'm quite puzzled by this, and as such, I've asked some helpful core MediaWiki devs for input. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::Thats a good point. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::One somehow got through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 16:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::I just went on to GBC and Ideas and found lots of pages that to me looked like spam. (especially Ideas). All are marked. It looks like the Abuse filter on Ideas was not set to disallow, thus allowing spambots to create pages. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::Thanks for notifying us about this! In the future, I think you can skip the tagging part altogether (since these pages in question were obviously spam and totally unrelated to LEGO) and just ping me or another [[Special:ListUsers/sysadmin|sysadmin]] and we'll take care of it. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 04:44, 4 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::Lots of sites use ReCaptcha NoCaptcha, and it seems to work really well. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::It also looks like some of the spambots are getting through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::::There has been another mass of spam pages on GBC. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::::@LegoFan4000 - Thanks for the notice, blocked locally and globally (including the IP), and mass-deleted the spam pages. :) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Widening scope of TV show pages==<br /> * Currently, we seem to only allow &quot;major&quot; TV show character to have pages, other pages end up on pages like [[List of Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu Characters|this]]. As far as I know, we don't have an official policy on the scope. Anyway, here's what I'd like to do:<br /> ** Allow pages for any named character (ie, named in the show, or in the credits)<br /> ** Have a different category for characters that appear only in the TV show, eg, &quot;Category:Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu characters&quot;. This would be a subcategory of &quot;Category:Ninjago minifigures&quot;.<br /> ** Put these TV-exclusive characters in a separate tab in the navbox<br /> :? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> #Sounds sane. &quot;List of X characters&quot; (where ''X'' = something like TV series, movie trilogy, video game, book series, etc.) is a Wikipedia-ism, because Wikipedians don't like having detailed character pages for each Pokémon; obviously such material would be very much warranted on a Pokémon wiki. Because Brickipedia is a Lego wiki, we'll obviously want lots and lots of detailed information on all things Lego, and often (but not always) &quot;list of...&quot; pages go against this. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Okay. Would the TV show category also go on articles for minifigures which also appear in the show? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #'''Support''', per Jack and I didn't think we even did those list pages. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> #[[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:28, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Oppose ===<br /> === Discussion ===<br /> <br /> == Interviews ==<br /> Should we try and get interviews with LEGO related people? And if we did get one where would it go? Under news or a user blog? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Great idea, however who would be willing to be the interviewer? Who would we specifically interview - LEGO Ideas project creators, LEGO designers(etc)? As for the second question you asked, I'd say Brickipedia News section. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Anyone who's officially involved with LEGO (if any of those people would give us the time of day :P) {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *They'd go under news. If you want to interview LEGO Group employees that has to be done through LEGO's PR department so please contact me before attempting an interview with those individuals. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 18:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Sure, what does attempting a review involve anyway? I'd assume it just be tracking them down and emailing them a few questions. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Minifigure gallery ordering? ==<br /> <br /> Is there a rule for how to order? Alphabetically I assume, but I can't find that in BP:MoS, unless I haven't looked hard enough. It wasn't in the theme section at any rate. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Is this on theme pages? I didn't think that having minifigure galleries at all was in the MoS. :P [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It may not be on the MoS, but every theme page seems to have them :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::(oh, the site isn't locked). It was voted to remove them from theme pages (I'm pretty sure in the MoS overhaul, Berrybrick proposed removing them because they're so long and difficult to maintain, I supported, and noone else commented so it was passed), but we never actively went around removing them. There is no rule in place for ordering as far as I'm aware. Possible alternatives for use in sets would be order that they appear on the box, or alphabetically. No idea for minifigure pages- for licensed minifigures with a lot of variants I like to do chronologically so all the remakes of the same variant are grouped together ([http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/Luke_Skywalker#Gallery_of_variants example]) :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::Well this is the definition of a late reply. :P Could we not use {ThemeGallery} if the minifigure galleries are hard to matin, that's automatic right? I do agree with Nova on the licensed minifigure pages though. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::If that is the template we experimented with for a while, it would include video game characters and exclude variants. Plus it looked a bit off (though I'm sure our developers could probably find a way to fix that). [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Clean up the interwiki table ==<br /> [[Special:Interwiki|Interwikis]] allow to link to certain &amp;mdash; usually external (=non-Brickimedia), usually wiki &amp;mdash; sites somewhat quicker than by using the standard external link syntax, and when using an interwiki link as opposed to an external link, the external link arrow isn't shown next to the link, [[Main Page|just like with normal links (such as this one)]].<br /> <br /> While our [[Special:Interwiki|interwiki table]] is considerably cleaner than most sites', I'd still like to propose at least some removals:<br /> * '''all non-wikia: Wikia interwikis''' &amp;mdash; typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[bionicle-wikia:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; is almost exactly as long as typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:c:bionicle:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;. You can link to any Wikimedia site (Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, etc.) by using the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[project:language code:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikipedia:fr:France]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the French Wikipedia's page &quot;France&quot; or &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wiktionary:fi:lollapalooza]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiktionary's page &quot;lollapalooza&quot;. Likewise, you can link to any ShoutWiki site with the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:subdomain:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:fi.24:Jack Bauer]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiki 24's page &quot;Jack Bauer&quot;, so I'm not sure what's the benefit of having multiple .wikia.com interwikis. For prefixes like &quot;wookie&quot; or &quot;wookiee&quot;, most users don't remember offhand how many e's there is in that word, so they'll likely find it easier to type &quot;wikia:c:starwars:Page&quot; when they mean &quot;Page on Wikia's Star Wars wiki&quot;.<br /> * '''acronym: and dictionary:''' &amp;mdash; I'm under the impression that these aren't really used anywhere, and truthfully, why would they when we have [[wiktionary:|Wiktionary]]?<br /> * '''mediazilla:''' &amp;mdash; Bugzilla is dead, long live Bugzilla! But actual bug reports against any and all MediaWiki things developed upstream are to be made in [https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/ Phabricator].<br /> * '''sourceforge:''' &amp;mdash; [[wikipedia:SourceForge|SourceForge]] ♥ adware. (There's also the fact that this is relatively unused here, given that Brickimedia's software is developed either in GitHub (original, first-party additions, like the Refreshed skin etc.) or on Wikimedia's infrastructure at wikimedia.org.)<br /> * '''wikinfo:''' &amp;mdash; oh look, it's [[wikipedia:History of wikis#Wikinfo|an outdated fork of the English Wikipedia which allows original research.]] (There's also the fact that its URL is outdated, so if we want to keep it in the interwiki table, its URL has to be updated.)<br /> <br /> Thoughts, comments, suggestions, feedback? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :+2 ;) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Looks like it'll make everything less confusing. --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 15:34, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Sure {{C|although, would really like to keep &quot;wookiee:&quot; as an alternative extra, because I know I'll forget about this and wonder why the link doesn't work. And it's so much shorter :P}}. Just wondering why we need the &quot;c:&quot; for the Wikia links? Why not just &quot;wikia:harrypotter&quot; instead of &quot;wikia:c:harrypotter&quot;? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It's largely a leftover from the days when &quot;Wikia&quot; was known as '''W'''iki'''c'''ities, hence w:c: (on Wikia sites; other, off-Wikia sites use wikia:c: as the w: interwiki prefix is either left for Wikipedia or left unused). http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:harrypotter:Hermione_Granger redirects to http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Hermione_Granger, as you'd expect and want, but if you leave out the c: part, you're redirected to a page called &quot;Harrypotter:Hermione Granger&quot; on www.wikia.com, Wikia's corporate site.&lt;br /&gt;That being said, we could change the wikia: prefix so that it includes the c: part, too; right now the wikia: prefix points to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/$1 but we could change that to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:$1 so that you'd only need to type &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:harrypotter:Hermione Granger]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the aforementioned page. The only &quot;disadvantage&quot; of this is that the wikia: prefix then cannot be used to link to pages on Wikia's corporate/main site, www.wikia.com, but given that the &quot;old&quot; www.wikia.com was rebranded as &quot;Community Central&quot; years ago and moved to community.wikia.com, I'm not sure if anyone even needs to link to the current corporate domain. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :{{Support}}, I can have my bot find-and-replace as necessary upon removal of certain prefixes. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Can we request concept art? ==<br /> Out of curiosity can we ask for concept art from the RULG? They don't seem to mind sharing concept art in general, such as having a whole site dedicated to concept art of Chima. So could we ask them for like non licensed concept art? I'd personally love to see Friends and Ninjago, and it be a great &quot;exclusive reveal&quot; for us. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Minifigs: a picture is worth a thousand words ==<br /> <br /> (Credit to CJC95 for the title)<br /> <br /> Currently minifig articles have lengthy parts/print descriptions. That seems counterproductive to me. Chances are, when visitors search for minifig articles, they want to see an image, not a description. Minifig articles already have lots of pictures, so why should visitors bother reading about a minifig's torso print when they can just look at it? And certainly if the descriptions aren't being read, the time spent writing them could be put to better use improving the site in other ways.<br /> <br /> An argument could be made that descriptions fill up minifig articles with content. But if the content isn't particularly insightful, what's the point of having it? All it does is detract from useful and interesting material, which is what visitors come to the site for. Pages like [[Batman]] and [[Obi-Wan Kenobi]] are prime examples of this. There's so much text, but (respectfully) it says so little of consequence! Thanks to all that text the images--the good stuff--are relegated to the bottom of the page. If visitors load the page only to see a wall of text instead of the images they came looking for, they're going to continue their search on another site.<br /> <br /> I suggest an alternative to the current system. Minifig pages should focus on images, not descriptions. Place the images in the very first section of content. Next to each minifig, place at most a few bullet points of description focusing only on particularly noteworthy aspects of that minifig.<br /> <br /> What are your thoughts? -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 23:56, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Edit: the above applies to the &quot;Background&quot; sections too. Brickipedia isn't primarily a storyline wiki. IMO any story information should exist exclusively on those pages detailing the media where the story actually took place. To use the Batman example, there shouldn't be any story info from the DC comics (they don't even have to do with Lego!), and story info from, say, ''Lego Batman 2'' should exist solely on the ''Lego Batman 2'' page. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Numerical analysis - I stuck the Batman description in a word-counter. It was just shy of 3700 words, about 1 in 50 of those words are &quot;suit&quot;, and would apparently take someone with an average reading level 13 minutes to read. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:58, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Completely agree, I suggested removing descriptions from minifigure articles a couple of years ago but it got shot down. As long as we have images of every angle of the minifigure (front, back, side, alt face expression, and a shot with gear which covers head/body removed), I think we could stick all the shots in some sort of new template, get rid of the descriptions and as you said, have a section for any relevant notes about that particular minifigure variant. Not sure about the background suggestion- I think it's good to have info on who the minifigure's actually based on, although a lot of them could be cut down. Also not all characters have a LEGO-based backstory, they just appear in sets (eg, [[Quinlan Vos]]) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Hmm, good point: some description is necessary. Maybe descriptions could be moved to the intro of the page? For Quinlan Vos, it could be something like: &quot;Quinlan Vos is a minifigure released in 2011, as a part of the Star Wars theme. Vos was a Jedi Master who fell to the Dark Side while on an undercover mission. After turning back to the light, he served as a general in the Clone Wars and survived Order 66.&quot; We already link to Wookieepedia at the bottom of the page, so people interested in reading more can do so. Maybe we could incorporate the Wookieepedia link more prominently though. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **:I think its more important just to limit the background to stuff that at least relates to LEGO sets. There was what, one set based on the dark knight trilogy, but we have a few paragraphs on the movies. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I've made this sometime ago but I haven't publicly posted it except with people on chat, but I'll share it with you guys :) https://jsfiddle.net/codynguyen1116/p1c3h30f/ a MediaWiki gallery component reimagined, with an arrow that'd bring up the description on a click. That part hasn't been written in JS yet, but currently it has most of what the idea is. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sure. I wouldn't mind asking in a survey, but sure. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good point, I'd support holding off on any change until we see if readers actually find this content useful- it'd be stupid to remove it all only to find people actually wanted it there. That is, if that survey ever actually happens. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Good idea! --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 01:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * What would be the point in the site if we got rid of descriptions? :S The only thing that would seperate from other sites would be the background sections, which are much harder to write by the way. Someone may be wondering what the symbol on one varation of a Stormtrooper is or what Maya's skirt is called. '''Oppose''' {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *: It's not getting rid of every description. You can still say what the symbols and stuff are, because that is useful information.. But do you really think that people will gain something from being told that Batman's trousers are black (as the Batman article no doubt says for every variation). At least we can all agree that the [[Darth Vader]] article does this much better than say the way [[Anakin Skywalker]] does. Would anyone (including yourself) read that? Even if there is a good piece of information about the symbols on his belt in there, no one will ever find it. Ever. There doesn't need to have every word removed, just...all the crap, useless ones. ('''summary''' - I, and I assume most others here, wouldn't even care if we kept descriptions, but they need to be actually reader friendly, not just spurting every bit of information.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *::What would updated descriptions even look like? I tried my best to make [[Olivia]]'s as short as possible, but she lacks detail. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *:::Well, that would work better if the bit that said &quot;In 41100 Heartlake Private Jet&quot; had a picture of that one next to the description, and &quot;In 41034 Summer Caravan,&quot; also had that picture. Pictures would help the description surely. Why should I care what colour her top is in that set if I don't know what it looks like? :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> : Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:NovaHawk/mfg|This]] is just an idea of a new minifig page layout- obviously the template needs to be made prettier so there aren't awkward white spaces and the tabs need to be layed out differently, but you get the idea. Note the &quot;seaweed&quot; variant has a notes section for important notes about that particular variant, which would replace the description. I think this length background would be good for a max length as well. I dunno, just an idea, let me know what you think. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good response. Thanks everyone. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Well, it was either write a one line nothing response or put off responding until I had time to actually look at it properly and be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:08, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Overall I'd be interested in seeing a version with the formatting improved. Some potential issues with a) low-res images b) big blank space when no back printing/alternative face c) minifigures with 15 or so variants d) Mobile - it don't work. e) large stretched out infobox on the RHS. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Fan namespace==<br /> Ok, so the LEGO Fanatics Wiki has been imported into the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. All the Customs and Stories have been imported here, and any userpages from Customs have also been imported (anyone who had userpages on there should have received a message on their talk page here). There are still a few things that need to be cleared up:<br /> * Most links won't be working since all pages are in a different namespace. I've made a simple template, {{tl|fan}}, if you want to fix any links {{C|eg, &lt;nowiki&gt;{{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}&lt;/nowiki&gt; goes to {{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}}}<br /> * Categories were not imported in the dump, and I've intentionally not done this as [[User:NovaHawk/FanCats|an organised category structure]] was passed on the wiki before it closed but wasn't implemented, so please don't go around making any categories just because they're redlinks.<br /> * Main page needs to be updated to at least acknowledge this part of the site.<br /> * Change to Customs infoboxes- for any new customs- just type your name in next to Creator, ie, |Creator={{USERNAME}}. This will generate appropriate autocategories. If it's a co-creation with another user, you can use |Creator2= and |Creator3= for second and third users. If there are more needed, I can add them.<br /> * Infoboxes- The Stories infobox ([[Fan:Team_Kitten|eg]]) doesn't match the rest of the site, I'd like to bring it more in line with templates like {{tl|Part}} or {{tl|Review}}. Opinions? Also, the Customs infoboxes used to have a choice between two styles- the style currently used most of our infoboxes like {{tl|Set}}, and an old style like {{tl|set}} from like 2010 or something. I haven't imported the Customs infobox template so they all now all are based on whatever the current infobox style is for the rest of the wiki, hope that's ok.<br /> * Quizzes- do we still want this? As far as I know, it was never set up. And remember, you can only have one quiz per wiki with this extension- do we want it for the fan namespace?<br /> * The wiki was called LEGO Fanatics Wiki, and after the move, was put in the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. What do we want to call this section of the site (we can't use LEGO Fanatics '''Wiki'''), and do we still want the namespace called &quot;Fan&quot;?<br /> :{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ------<br /> * @bottom two sections-<br /> ** My vote's to not use the quiz extension as a part of the fan namespace- we can set it up as a general LEGO trivia game if we want to use it at all.<br /> ** Brickipedia Creations? (to match naming style of Brickipedia Reviews) with a &quot;Creation&quot; namespace? I don't really care, but I don't think Brickipedia Fanatics is going to work.<br /> ::{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::I'm neutral to whatever we decide to do. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:33, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Fan is the best namespace option, because Fanatics (as both a namespace and a wiki name) is rubbish. I don't know how quiz works, but if its not set up it won't be anytime soon, so I wouldn't worry about it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 09:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** &quot;Brickipedia Fans&quot; sounds like Fans of Brickipedia to me :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * &quot;Fan&quot; sounds okay to me...no quiz here...infobox is okay. One thing I'm wondering about is the skin. Everybody probably knows I'm against the different colors, ''but'' it might be good to have them with the wikis merged again. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I pefer fanatics to fans, but like Nova it may come across as a self tribute. Though the argument could be made Brickipedia reviews aren't reviews of the site.{{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ==Vote/Rating extension broken?==<br /> * Anyone else having problems leaving a rating or a vote? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:14, 15 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*I thought you meant page ratings, with the ratings for customs I do. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* That hasn't been set up yet, will get it set up in the next 24 hrs or so {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::* Should be working now {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Contests ==<br /> Okay are last contest was a mess, I'm (wo?)man enough to admit that, but the fact of the matter is contests get us new viewers and &quot;potentially&quot; new users. We still have all the DTCs of the year and the maze, I doubt reviewing any of them will get much traction (though I personally still want to see Berry's bat cave review, that we never sent despite being green lit :P). I suggest we give away the Star Wars hoth set as that's been reviewed and complained about to death and unless we can add something new (a positive review) I'm not sure it's worth doing. I have an idea for a contest here, [[User:Soupperson1/JuneContest]]. It's basic but after the last two contests I don't want any potential negative feedback. We could also use Nova's &quot;coming soon&quot; olympics themed contest, but perhaps we could advertise that to the side of a regular contest as it'll be going on for months. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I don't know what sets we have available since it changes every so often (I think the Batcave is gone). Only Meiko would know. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I am not aware as to the status of sets to give away. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Meiko was kind enough to remind me of what we have on the table: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; he says that either the site or the recipient will need to pay the shipping fees though. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Pride month celebration for Brickipedia ==<br /> <br /> June is officially pride month (which includes LGBTQ for example), and in celebration of this I was thinking that we as Brickipedia should do something to celebrate! First idea is to make our logo rainbow-y, although I don't quite have any other ideas. Who supports this? :D [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *As far as I can tell June is only LGBTQ pride month (at least in the US). Are you sure it isn't just sexual pride month? I'm only skimming a Wikipedia article, so please redirect me. :P I'm not fond of this idea though because I think that if we recognized this month it would only be fair to recognize others...that might be kind of fun if we still did themed logos, but I don't know. It's also a political action and I really do not want to politicize things here. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everything is or can be interpreted as a political action. The fact that we don't charge readers, let alone reusers of our content, a fee for accessing the site? Politics. The fact that we don't stamp huge, obtrusive watermarks on our images and/or other media files? Politics. When we support or oppose a proposition? Politics.&lt;br /&gt;Complete neutrality, while desireable in a way, is probably never possible. Even Wikipedia, Google and several other high-profile websites based in the US [[wikipedia:Protests against SOPA and PIPA|spoke against some controversial bills]] not that many years ago &amp;mdash; in ways which were far more radical and visible than just slightly altering the logo. This is, of course, far from being a simple question, but I don't see this being harmful to Brickipedia and/or our mission.&lt;br /&gt;'''tl,dr:''' No objections to Cody's proposal from me. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 03:50, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Fair. But I don't think that this is a necessary political action whereas the issues you've listed are things that we would have to take a stance on just by virtue of being an online encyclopedia. This is an outside agenda though and I am frankly not okay with that. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 12:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Cool with me. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:24, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Strong oppose. Not not the month itself or anything, just featuring it on here. This has absolutely nothing to do with Lego and we're a wiki, not Facebook. Basically, same as Berrybrick, I don't want to drag this site into political issues. And I don't think featuring any sexuality issue on a site dedicated to what many perceive to be a little kids toy is remotely appropriate {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I just looked up &quot;LGBTQ&quot;, and I agree with Nova. --&lt;font face=&quot;corbel,segoe ui,sans-serif&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;CP&lt;/b&gt;]][[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#ff6363&quot;&gt;player&lt;/b&gt;]] ~ [[special:Contributions/CPplayer90210|&lt;i style=&quot;color:#333&quot;&gt;LEGO rules!&lt;/i&gt;]]&lt;/font&gt; 23:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I wrote a long thing but deleted it, as I basically found myself repeating myself a lot. The issue I currently see isn't with the month$ itself (I, and I'm sure everyone here in this forum, is pro-LGBT), but more of the implications - once you take a stand on one thing%, anything you don't take a stand on can be taken as a view - if someone asks us to mark black history or domestic abuse awareness month, we can't say no without making it seem like we oppose them. So, I have nothing against the month, the concept, putting a rainbow in the logo, or promoting LGBT awareness on the wiki - I worry about a precedent being set. Footnotes: ($ - Per Berry, the only thing I can find for pride month is the LGBTQ component. % - I am here including things that don't naturally concern us - yes, things like SOPA are political issues, but they would concern us, as we are a website. I don't see Wikipedia and Google taking a stance on SOPA as radical because it would (potentially) affect them - it is no different to a food manufacturer protesting food packaging laws, or what not. It would be radical if Wikipedia decided that it was going to campaign for abortion rights.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Pretty sure everyone on here is a liberal or at least OK with LGBT+ rights, but I don't think we need to do any advertising of it here. We're a website about LEGO. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 22:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Strong Oppose''', per Nova. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *If were justing changing the logo for a week, whats the big deal? :P Im more open to celebrating holidays, but this is one of the more tricker ones. I don't think there's any gay characters in any LEGO sets and the only gay actor to have a minifigure is Luke Evans, so we cant write a blog or anything. If you have ideas for anything else, sure. And @ the rest of you Im not sure we should really classify this as a political statement, more than us being inclusive. Its like not celebrating April's Fools or Christmas. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> **We are already inclusive. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***I don't think that there are any LGBTQ &quot;yellow&quot; LEGO characters (though very few of them have any defined sexuality at all) but there are a few licensed ones at least in the Simpsons Series 2 and some video games, and there are some gay pairings BIONICLE fans like to promote even if they are non-canon. On the next note, I'm still going to consider it as a political statement, whether or not it is an &quot;inclusive&quot; one. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ****Between what Berry said and what Soup said, I think a blog would work, and might be cool. It's not super political (not as much as a logo), and Brickset's certainly written articles with less material to work off of. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 17:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == LEGO set offer requests ==<br /> <br /> We used to handle this on Admin, but since that's been abolished, where do we want to do it now? Someplace like Forums where we discuss it or something sort of like FA and BotM where it gets its own page where we can vote or discuss? I would almost suggest giving something to BoTM or people who have otherwise done a lot of good stuff, but someone would have to pay for shipping. Moreover, do admins get first dibs, at least so we can set stuff aside for special occasions without requests taking up everything? Where can we find an easy access list of available sets? Tthat might be a small detraction to having it here. A policy should probably be drawn up. Any other things we ought to discuss? (And, in case it is relevant, this is what we've currently got: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; Meiko is holding onto them right now, so I don't ''think'' we are in danger of losing them, but LEGO probably wants to see us using them.) Thank you many grazis. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Pardon for doing this as an anon. I think it would be nice to, at least as a ''start'', have the exact same pages/system as we had on the admin wiki. Including that helpful table of what has currently been purchased, and what resources are left. Maybe an added column on what the set's current state is too (for example, &quot;In Meiko's temporary possession&quot;), because I can't remember if we had that before. For BotM, I always thought that the honour/template was enough of a rush. :P It would be nice to give them something small, like a CMF, but I believe the last time that was discussed, it was decided that the shipping costs to do that were ridiculous? It would be great if there was something digital we could give away... In response to LEGO wanting to see us using the sets, and regarding how late it is to review some them, any ideas on other stuff we could do with them, something that might be creative or get us some press? Nothing immediately comes to mind (I'll update this if something does later), but you guys may have ideas. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::We don't have a budget anymore, but LEGO offers us certain sets, which is why Meiko has them. If I remember correctly, we can still ask for sets that they haven't offered, but I don't think it would be good practice to do that when we haven't used the ones they have given us well. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:17, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Descriptive Videos on Set Articles ==<br /> <br /> Sorry for doing a second posting as an anon, but a thought popped in my head during the discussion of &quot;what to do with sets&quot;/&quot;what could the wiki use&quot;, and I wanted to post it before I forget. You know how in Descriptions, when talking about a function like &quot;applying pressure to the two joints at the side will cause the gears to move, which moves up the wings and creates...&quot;, might it be helpful to have little clips of these features in action, to act as a bit of a visual aid? It's something that would set us apart from other sites (&amp; Brickia), something that is genuinely useful (you don't have to hunt down a review, skim through the whole thing to find the clip, etc.), something that adds clarity when the descriptions are too complex to explain with few words, etc. Most of us, I imagine, have the capacitiy to record and upload short clips. And for sets that none of us own, maybe we can get permission from people like LEGOJANG to download, cut out (maybe mute talking), and upload these tiny portions from their video reviews? Ooh, actually, contrary to the idea of muting, it would actually be great to get and post some audio from sound bricks that LEGO has included in their sets. Anyway, hope that this idea seems helpful, and do-able. Let me know your thoughts. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Though I am skeptical that anyone would ever do anything (me included :P ) a large '''''YES'''''. One question though, if two sets have an identical feature (I'm thinking the turntable waists on this year's Toa) would a video that showed how the function worked using a Tahu set be acceptable on Gali's article? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The &quot;skeptical anyone would do anything&quot; was an issue, I realize. However, everyone has a smartphone, I assume, so a quick vid isn't a huge investment like, say, a review. When I get back, I'd definitely be happy to work on this. As for the identical features thing, yes, I think that would work, so long as a note/caption is included explaining they are identical. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 17:40, 12 June 2016 (UTC)</div> 108.173.7.175 https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&diff=1059125 Brickipedia:Forum 2016-06-12T17:37:04Z <p>108.173.7.175: /* Pride month celebration for Brickipedia */</p> <hr /> <div>[[File:Forums.svg|center]]<br /> __NEWSECTIONLINK__<br /> Welcome to '''Brickipedia's forum'''. This is the place to propose and discuss any amendments to the [[Brickipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] or suggest new policies. To make a new proposal, please [http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new make a new section at the bottom of the page]. Please see [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive|the archives]] for past discussions - [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2014|2014]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2015|2015]], 2016 ([[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/1|Jan - Feb]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/2|Mar - onwards]]).<br /> <br /> For recent updates to the site and any policy changes, please see [[Brickipedia:Site updates]].<br /> <br /> -----<br /> Also, don't forget to check '''[[Forum:Index]]''' for a number of unresolved forums.<br /> -----<br /> <br /> <br /> == Minifigure Galleries ==<br /> {{archive<br /> |result=implement<br /> |content=<br /> It's annoying putting alternative faces and back printing in galleries and people often forget to do it. I made [[User:Soupperson1/MinifigGallery]] and I think it would work better compared to our current format. Thoughts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Looks great! But having it on 3 separate galleries seems like it might take up a lot of room on an article unnecessarily. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:23, 8 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :*There should be that many pictures on the article anyway. On larger articles like Batman it will save space as the gallery is overcrowded {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* I like the idea, but I'm not a fan of having three galleries, it makes this area way too long. I still think we should have tabs which let you switch angles for each variant (which I suggested about a year ago but noone paid attention- [[User_talk:NovaHawk/MG2|link to example]], [[User:NovaHawk/common.js|link to JS you'll need to put in your personal common.js]])<br /> :::*I like the tab idea but your example isn't working for me, it's just the normal Anakin. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::* Yep, like I said, you need to copy the code from [[User:NovaHawk/common.js]] to {{USERNAME}}/common.js for it to work {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::*Ooh that works, though I think the videogame variant should have its own section. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::* Of course- that was simply for testing, I should have specified that, sorry :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :::::::*I tried doing multiple mini figures together it didn't work, I'll leave that stuff to people who know what they're doing :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::::::*Yeah, it's only set up for one- the JS code is probably going to be quite long if it's going to accomodate like 20 entries, so I didn't bother because I'm lazy :P It can definitely be set up to work with more though. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::*Your the opposite of lazy! Your our most valuable contributor {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :*Why does it need more than the current three? (I would say &quot;I'll add more entries&quot;, but we all know I'd forget :P) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 08:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Did this ever get used? Or does it still need to be updated&gt; [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I don't know, does it have enough support? If so I'll work on the code required to get it operational {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:34, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** It looks like there is support, from the whole four of us who discussed. I don't know who will use it any time soon, but could be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==Stop treating DC and Marvel as subthemes?==<br /> {{Archive|result=Split them|content=<br /> * Just wondering people think about not having DC Comics and Marvel as subthemes of Super Heroes, and instead rename the pages &quot;DC Comics Super Heroes&quot; and &quot;Marvel Super Heores&quot;. To me they're more like parallel themes as they don't really share any of the same characters, universe, etc so it doesn't make sense to have them under the same theme :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:33, 30 October 2015 (UTC)<br /> ** I understand your thinking behind this but I'm having a hard time figuring if it's the best route to take or not. Neutral for now. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 16:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)<br /> **I believe it was only listed as one theme when it was introduced at NYCC, I agree they should be seperated now as they haven't been grouped together since.. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ===Vote===<br /> ;Split<br /> #{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> # *shrug* - in some places they already are it seems. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ;Don't split<br /> <br /> ;Comments<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ===Enacting===<br /> This needs to be enacted. When we have enacted it, please note it here so we can archive this. If there are any issues with implementing this, then discuss below. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Infobox colours changed, Marvel moved to [[Marvel Super Heroes]], DC Comics moved to [[DC Comics Super Heroes]]. The only problem is what to do with [[Super Heroes]]- I was going to turn it into a disambig page, but then I saw it's an FA and would feel bad doing that {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:58, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The content seems mostly split into theme sections, so we can not take the DC stuff, move it there, Marvel stuff, move it there and make them both FAs, then leave any other stuff on the Super Heroes page / make it a redirect. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==New namespace: Help/Brickipedia Help?==<br /> * Just wondering what people would think of a new namespace designed for people to ask questions. It'd basically be a fifth tab along with &quot;Page&quot;/&quot;Discussion&quot;/&quot;Inventory&quot;/&quot;Reviews&quot;. Have questions about a set/minifig/video game? Hit the &quot;help&quot; tab and type in your question. Basically I'm thinking of this as an alternative to Brickipedia Answers which never happened because we don't have enough technical people who can make this happen, and it saves you from going to another wiki to ask a question anyway. Yes we have [[Special:Wikiforum|forums]], but noone looks at those. Either that, or we could open up the Talk namespace to be about the set as well, not just the article- just because Wikipedia/Wookieepedia/every other wiki reserves their talk namespace for article talk, doesn't mean we have to. And it's not like the talk pages get used a whole lot here- we could just split the talk article into two parts. Anyway, just an idea I randomly had. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:23, 18 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Given our young audience having the 'Talk' tab is quite confusing as one would automatically assume that it's a page to talk about the subject and not necessarily about what could be done to correct certain information or otherwise improve the content of the article. Allowing a discussion area of some sort closely tied to the article itself would help boost interaction on the site though it would need monitoring and logged accordingly. None of us want a repeat of the disaster with article comments we had back at (dare I say it) Wikia. {{User:SKP4472/sig2014}} 02:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Per SKP (except I don't dare). Maybe we could even rename &quot;talk&quot; to maintenance, or something like it but shorter? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 06:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd like to see more discussion on this, but its not going to happen here in the middle of the forum. I'll talk about it with you if I ever see you on Chat Nova. I'll close this in a day or so, and when we have considered this more/aren't in the middle of other big changes, we can discuss this again [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Let's talk: Navbars==<br /> ===Design===<br /> How do we unify the design of them all (although most are similar already)? Do we make it look more like our other templates? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> On a side note should we make the edges curved or add pictures, or the logo for the theme instead of the font? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> * I believe there is (in that, there was at some point), some sort of design guidelines for the site in general being worked on, so really it depends on those. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ===Types===<br /> What sort of things should have navbars? Currently most themes have one for sets and minifigures. I imagine there are a few niche ones floating around out there though. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :We have an animal one, figure one, I'm not sure what else. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> : We have a [[Template:Weapons|weapons]] one as well, and [[Template:People]], and LEGOLAND stuff, and pretty much everything else in [[:Category:Navigation templates]] :P We could use some subcategories there. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Started a list at [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates]]. Please add any you know. That way we have some orderly way of upgrading them. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Information overload===<br /> What do people think of the way big themes are split into years? How can we make navigating large swathes of information (e.g. {{tl|SWfigs}}) usable without comprising information.<br /> *I was going to experiment with something like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:The_Beach_Boys ]. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Based on something Codyn suggested, I made [[User:CJC95/Sandbox]]. Obviously all I did was take two different bits of code and stick them inside each other without much thought, but the basic idea is the important thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Absolutely love this idea. :P Aesthetics could of course be improved but the functionality is what's important, we can improve on looks later [[User:Codyn329|Codyn329]] ([[User talk:Codyn329|talk]]) 22:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Liking the idea of tabbers- I'll write some CSS to fix the colours later. I'm thinking we could group things further, like in &quot;Galactic Republic&quot;, have columns like Clone Troopers, Senators, Droids, etc. Also since the info isn't being shown all at once, maybe we should double up, eg have Leia in both Rebel Alliance and Resistance? But for sets, if we just had one template and used tabbers, that'd be great. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Is there a way to get a specific one to be default for an individual page? Can we get it so that a 2013 Star Wars set can show the 2013 tab when it opens? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Mobile===<br /> Some appear to be unusable on mobile - A few don't scale too badly but don't look like they belong with the mobile skin that much. Mobile use of navboxes is a hard one to deal with. Wikipedia handles it by just disabling them on the mobile site. I don't like that solution (it annoys me when I'm on mobile Wikipedia), but I'm not too sure how to address this directly yet. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :[[mw:+2|+2]] to this; mobile is a very important segment and it deserves the appropriate attention (and if you ask me, Brickimedia's mobile support is pretty awesome) and &quot;it doesn't work on mobile, let's disable it&quot; is a non-solution. We have a lot of clever, technically-oriented people who can solve this problem; I'm sure of that. So let's build something that has never been seen before! --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === When do we split them ===<br /> I'm just curious when a navbar is big enough to be split and how big we want each section to be. http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Template:DCFigs&amp;oldid=605762 is much smaller then the mini-doll figure section at {{t|FriendsFigs}} but do we want to split it? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Generally its UCS really, as it depends on the theme etc. How would you split up the Friends? If there is a logical way to split it, feel free to at least see what it looks like. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Non physical section or not ===<br /> I never liked non physical sections, if [[Victor Zsasz]] is a villain why can't he be in the villains section? I know you could argue were supposed to sell sets and what not, but are we not technically promoting the video games? Plus a lot of characters such as Peter isn't in production, so we wouldn't be selling anything besides second hand stuff. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I was going to suggest this - well, I was going to just do it and see what it looked like :P - I was going to suggest like, a superscript (cross) and then a note at the bottom saying &quot;video game only&quot;, etc. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I think I'm the opposite of CJC here- I hate having these in line with physical figs. Eg, [[Template:NinjagoFigs]], the Creatures section and to a lesser extent the Ninja allies section just looks a mess to me. If you did this with {{tl|MarvelFigs}} where 2/3 of the characters are VG only, you'd have a very hard time finding the actual minifigures, which is what I'd be guessing a significant portion of people who visit here actually care about. If we went with the tabber idea, I think it could work for everyone though, eg VG SW Republic characters could be further split into Clone Troopers, Senators, etc, and non-physical? They'd be in Republic, just not the smaller category. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Tabbers does solve this problem afaic, as you can just put smaller VG only sections on each category. This solve the issue with the VG only sections in current form. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::[[User:NovaHawk/tabberInfobox|Here's]] an example with tabs I've been working on, let me know if anything needs to be changed. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 09:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Naming===<br /> [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates|Here]] is an incomplete list of current navbars. The main reason is the lack of naming conventions. Some use just the theme name for a template, and hence they are missing from the list currently. Some use &quot;Figs&quot; and &quot;Sets&quot;, others use &quot;sets&quot; and &quot;figs&quot;. Some use initials for the theme name, others don't (this disparity even exists within a theme, so we have JWfigs but JurassicWorldsets.<br /> All these make it very confusing to actually find what template you want. Hence when they are updated and upgraded I suggest renaming them on the convention &quot;Theme Name&quot; + &quot; figs&quot; or &quot; sets&quot;. (Note also the space between words). Discuss if you please. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * A whole theme name with a space is so tiring to type though :P Yes, sounds good to have some consistency, I'm always having to check what the names are for themes I'm not editing all the time, not having to think and just type the theme name would be good. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Status===<br /> Where are we on design wise? I'd like to move forward with this. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Well there was no response on the example, so I wasn't sure whether to move forward with it. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was referring more to the apparent design guideline things that are in the works, although when I'm back on pc, I'll look again at yours and just start changing things (so next Friday probably) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==BoTM minimum threshold==<br /> It was decided (see the [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016|archive]], where it shall be within a short while of me submitting this) that there should be a minimum threshold for a nominee to gain Brickipedian of the Month. However no specific threshold was discussed. This should probably be decided, or else the minimum threshold policy is hard to enforce. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Anyone? :P If not I'll just set the minimum as three. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Three sounds fine. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> {{Archive|result=exclude BoTM from unanimous rule of voting|content=<br /> ;Exclusion request.<br /> *BoTM needs to be excluded from [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016#Global &quot;unanimous rule&quot; for voting|the global unanimous rule]]. It is necessary for a BoTM to last a month. As there is no opposes, they are all unanimous, as long as they have one supporter. This would mean any threshold would not ever be used, as every BoTM request would pass instantly after a week. So obviously the global unanimous rule can no longer be global. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Oh yeah, definitely. forgot about that one, sorry {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==A change to the &quot;featured article&quot;==<br /> * By &quot;featured article&quot;, I mean the box on the main page. Currently, every month it shows [[Black Knights]]. I'd like to propose changing &quot;Featured article&quot; to some other name (please add suggestions), and showcase a complete article for 2 weeks, giving priority to articles recently promoted to complete status. Any future FA's take priority, and run for a month as before. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 08:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*'''Strongly disagree''', I like FA as they are. Besides if we do this no one will write FAs anymore. If we want variation we can just change it to an existing FA? If we want to share waste complete articles, we can add a section called &quot;articles with the ratings recently changed&quot; {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Can we still call it a featured article, and differentiate it from the complete ones somehow? :P If we want a new name though, I suggest Showdog, with the [[Dog Show Judge]] (once he is released) as a mascot. When he shows up, people will know it is special. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was thinking something more along the lines of something boring like &quot;promoted article&quot; :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Sure. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Or we could finally use our mascot :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Request for comment: Implement more ads across Brickimedia ==<br /> <br /> This is a critical topic currently and probably will have a lot of mixed feelings. Considering the amount of ads were a fundamental reason we moved ''off'' Wikia, I'm not expecting a lot of support here, but as it stands right now, we don't generate enough income off a single ad to keep up with our expenses. Our site's expensive, and we only need more and more performance out of our server and right now we've got just about as much server as we can afford. Then we add in the fact that we have to ship contest prizes which is not cheap (actually usually costs more to ship one prize to one person than we pay monthly for the server.....), and I don't want to pay out of pocket for them, nor would [[User:Ajraddatz|Adrian]] want to. Hence, we need more income, and since we can't rely on donations that we almost never get (except that one time from [[User:NBP3.0|NBP3.0]]), we have to resort to advertising. As a result, I want to ask for feedback, please comment stating whether you '''support''' or '''oppose''' an increase of ads per page (1-2 more perhaps), and if you support, suggest ad placements if you have any suggestions, or if you oppose, give some reason why. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:10, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *I'm fine with this as long as they aren't like, pop-ups or covering up text or anything. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:12, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I too would be fine with having a &lt;i&gt;few&lt;/i&gt; more ads, as-long as they're non-intrusive to our content. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:16, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Can we trade in some of the sets LEGO gave us in exchange for them paying for shipping? It's honestly ridiculous how much that costs. Beyond that, some questions that I want to see addressed before proceeding with this: 1. Would there be a significant revenue increase? We're actually breaking even on the hosting costs these days ($45 last month, -$40 for hosting). 2. How much are we planning on spending for shipping things around? I'm coming to a point in my life where the finances are a bigger concern (as in, moving out and getting a job after the degree). I have no problem still paying for hosting and shipping contest prizes, but I want to make sure we have as much info as possible that I can include in my budget. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 21:23, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Quick answer, no we can't rely on LEGO to ship for us. They'll ship to one person who will then handle everything from there. At that point, TLG is out of the logistics equation, and the only involvement they want after that is us to send them a link to what the set(s) were used for. With more ads, we would get an increase in revenue, especially if they're prominent. Right now, with it being at the bottom of the page, I don't think they're getting much impressions and as a result not generating much revenue. For example, I've had https://www.harrellsecurities.com up for a little over a week and generated nearly $20 already, with a tiny fraction of the traffic Brickimedia gets. That's why I think we need to have some more ads, perhaps one near the top of the page as well since that will probably generate ''much'' more revenue than the one at the bottom. I see what you're saying about finances are a bigger concern for you now. They are for me too, that's why I can't pay out of pocket for anything for this site, since all my money gets reinvested into business or business-related travel, and anything I have left over has to go into savings. However, if we can ensure we break even and have some extra income to spare for times when we don't break even or need to ship out expensive prizes, I'm happy and able to take over the financial side of things here. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would we be able to add more adds on certain sections, like reviews or blog posts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** Perhaps, but those wouldn't be very effective since those don't get as much views. Blog posts especially don't get many views by visitors, and chances are none of our registered users will click them. Better to just put another ad placement or two on ''every'' page than on specific ones that could just be a hit or a miss as far as revenue creation is concerned. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * '''Support''', but as per CJC and CGCJ. And honestly, I'd much prefer it if any set we got from LEGO was just reviewed by whoever it's sent to so we don't have to pay out shipping costs all the time. It'd be nice to actually be making money on this site for once, and maybe pay back Ajr/NBP/Meiko who have already sunk so much money into the site. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''' I honestly had never noticed that this site had ads until a few weeks ago. Anyway, I strongly support having more ads on articles. One solitary advertisement at the bottom of the page is not going to make much of a difference. This site generated $45.00 last month. Barnick's generated $20.00 in a little over ''a week''. This site surely has many more viewers than the one that he linked. If we are barely making enough to keep this boat afloat, something needs to change. [[User:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;lime&quot;&gt;LCF&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;([[User talk:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;#6600FF&quot;&gt;talk!&lt;/font&gt;]])&lt;/sup&gt; 01:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * So, would the ad in the sitenotice be considered unintrusive by the people supporting only if the ads are unintrusive? I honestly don't know because I have adblocker and just saw a huge empty white gap (which I quickly took care of) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The way I look at it, it's not in the content, it's not in front of the content, and it doesn't cover the content, so it's not really intrusive. All the content is still there, just 90px farther down (or less on mobile). If other people feel otherwise it can be changed but there aren't too many good ad placements in our interface other than that which wouldn't be within the content section. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 06:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I don't see the issue in it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''': With the ad adversity, I trust that this will be handled carefully. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Comment''': I applied for the [http://shop.lego.com/en-US/Affiliate-Program LEGO Shop Affiliate Program], got approved, and now converted most of our ads to LEGO ads. They generate revenue a bit differently so we'll see how it plays out in comparison to the current Google Ad at the bottom of each page. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:16, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ooh, awesome. I'll try to remember to click a link on here before buying stuff for the May the 4th promotion. Also, do we have some sort of affiliate id we can stick on the end of URLs? I was thinking we could make a change to {{tl|QuoteLEGO.com}} and stick something on the end of those links to the shop as well. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** I haven't looked into all of it but I believe we do. This is one of the codes (among many) it offers me:&lt;pre&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;offerid=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot; &gt;The Official LEGO Shop: The best selection of LEGO bricks in the world!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;IMG border=0 width=1 height=1 src=&quot;http://ad.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/show?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;bids=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot;&gt;&lt;/pre&gt; I don't know if that &lt;code&gt;img&lt;/code&gt; tag is necessary or whatever but maybe the only part we need is the &lt;code&gt;href&lt;/code&gt;? idk what do you think? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** FYI also, linksynergy.com seemed to be blacklisted earlier which is part of why I'm using iframes to load these ads instead of using wikicode. [[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] might know how to bypass that blacklist for this? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would it be possible to have the advertisement in the bottom corner not be a gif? It's extremely distracting. I can see some people who just look at images and info on the site finding the top advertisement annoying, but if your a reader you can just scroll down. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** {{replyto|Soupperson1}} All of the available graphic ads at that size are gifs. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 22:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ugh, we have gifs now? Isn't that a bit 90's/early 00's? Please tell me it isn't one of those fast-flashing banners saying you've won $1,000,000:P Would definitely support changing to still images if that was possible {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** {{replyto|NovaHawk}} No, they're LEGO Affiliate ads. [http://cache.lego.com/2057/images/shop/Affiliate/2014/sandcrawler/star-wars-75059-125x125.gif Example] --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 17:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The only gifs I've seen are teh LEGO ones if you scroll down the sidebar. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == [[76052]] Live Build with Beyond The Brick ==<br /> [//www.youtube.com/user/BeyondTheBrickTV Beyond The Brick] asked me if I'd like to live build [[76052 Batman Classic TV Series - Batcave]] with them for their channel. Considering this would count as RLUG activity with this round of LUG support, and saves us the trouble of having to pay for shipping on a set this large (and heavy), is anyone opposed to this? Could manage to give us some publicity again which we haven't gotten from another online LEGO community in a while. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sounds good to me. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Neutral. It sounds like a great opportunity and would usually instantly support it. However, I believe it was scheduled for Berry to review, I'd feel bad supporting if it meant taking that off him... {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 21:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Wasn't aware of that because I can't really keep track of those things. Guess we better start saving then because that's gonna be pricey to ship... --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Just checked, apparently the proposal hasn't been closed (I've given up paying attention prizes/budget stuff), but it has 3 suporting votes and 0 opposing, the last comment taking place on February 17. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 03:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support but if it was meant for Berrybrick like Nova said, then Berrybrick should do it. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm guessing as usual, this has discussion has turned into nothing and any opportunity has passed anyway? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Administrative footnotes in regards to user rights and potential mergers. Feel free to ignore. ==<br /> <br /> === Customs ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here:<br /> * BFN has admin there. He also has admin here if he becomes activity again - No issue here.<br /> * MeikoBot has admin there. I assume that was for a specific task, and bots can have admin for specific tasks if needed here. No issue.<br /> * Nexus has patroller there. He lost patroller here due to being inactive, but can have it when he comes back to activity. No issue.<br /> * 1999bug has admin there. He is not currently active, so this is not a major issue, however I'd suggest to be able to administrate the new customs namespace here he would need to pass an RfA here. However, as he is not active, we have no real issue.<br /> <br /> So basically, no issues, but this is just a note for the archive, so to speak. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Meta ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here. There is more users than Customs and so I have split them into appropriate groupings:<br /> ;Already have similar rights here if they return to activity<br /> * BFN has admin<br /> * Cligra has admin<br /> * KoN has admin<br /> * NBP has admin<br /> * SKP has admin<br /> <br /> ;Cases where I'd propose that they need to pass an RfR here for their rights to transfer<br /> * 1999bug has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Codyn has admin and functionary.<br /> * LEGOSuperDKong has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Latenightguy has admin<br /> * Lcawte has admin. although has sysadmin here, and inactive.<br /> * Sammy has admin. Inactive.<br /> * Vector Prime has admin. Inactive<br /> <br /> ;Cases where admin at meta is for maintenance or a specific task and would not be needed anyway<br /> * CJCbot has admin &amp; bot. no longer needed. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently.<br /> * Edward Nigma has admin. rights given recently for specific maintenance tasks. Task is over. <br /> * LcawteBot has admin, bot. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently. <br /> * NXTBot has admin.<br /> * Bawt has bot.<br /> <br /> ;Misc.<br /> *Adrian (Brickimedia) has admin. user has a normal account with admin here, and this account has sysadmin anyway<br /> *The five bureaucrats at Meta (Ajr, myself, Nova, SKP, NXT) have (or can when they are active have) admin here. The two ranks are synonymous here, so no issue.<br /> * Nova has functionary there. He has had checkuser in the past here (and possibly functionary? I don't know when the merge of rights there happened), he doesn't currently. This may be due to personal request or confusion during moving accounts or something, I'm not sure, but I assume if Nova wanted them he would (or at the very least could) have them :P<br /> * Jack Phoenix has patroller there. He could have patroller here if he needed it. <br /> <br /> '''Summary:''' basically, as for customs above, this is more of an administrative footnote for the archives of the forum than anything useful for us to discuss. Once again, I am proposing that no rights be automatically imported over here during any merger - the only active users affected by this will be Latenightguy and Codyn. I'm not sure what their views are on this topic, but as there is no formal RfR process at meta, I'd have to suggest that they pass an RfR here to keep said rights. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm good to not have functionary here, don't really need it since the spambots are gone {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I don't know how the community would feel as me as an admin, but I think I can bring some good to the table. RFR for it like you said? As for functionary it can go either way [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 02:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** RfA for admin and RfFunctionary would be needed. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Merging the Magazine namespace back into main ==<br /> {| style=&quot;border-top: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-bottom: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-right: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-left: 1px solid #aaaaaa;padding: 5px;background:#D9F0FF; margin-top:7px;&quot;<br /> |-<br /> ||''The following section is preserved as an archive. &lt;font color=red&gt;'''Please do not modify it.'''&lt;/font&gt;{{#if:Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)|&amp;nbsp;The result was Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)}}<br /> ------<br /> It's really not needed. We don't have one for books, or for episodes of TV shows, etc. The reason is because we had a few scans of a couple of UK mags, but that's not enough to justify a namespace. Just stick those scans on the articles in the main space. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:20, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Is there actually any content in said namespace or can the Magazine namespace pages just be deleted? Support either way. It's a useless namespace that 99% of people don't know exists. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** there is content, but all formatted as mainspace articles, so it just needs to be moved back. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 01:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * If its useless then we should get rid of it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 01:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Rip magazines :(. I'm OK with it being removed. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 05:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Wait we're still having magazine articles aren't we? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:12, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Sure --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 10:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Really, the last one was 4 years ago. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 11:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ****** [[LEGO Friends magazines|I beg to differ]] :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ******* I don't think he meant the release of magazines, but the articles being created for individual issues. There are more actual magazines then ever - there was a LEGO Star Wars one in the supermarket the other day :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Yep, just merging the existing ones back into the mainspace. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Since we have enough support to merge it, I guess we'll do it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> {{done|All pages moved without leaving a redirect.}}[[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:56, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> |}<br /> <br /> == Increasing positive communication within users ==<br /> <br /> I want to talk about increasing positive communication within users: Although we generally have nice, calm conversations in chat (which is great!), that doesn't need much improvement. What I think needs to specifically improve to increase this, is how we welcome users. Right now, welcoming others are based on a pre-formatted, maybe half-arsed template, and simply substituting the transcluded template on user talk pages. Although I do understand that if the resources are low, it would be more realistic to make such thing to make an automated message on people's talk page.<br /> <br /> However, let's say we do have the resources - or we just work harder. Whenever I joined other wikis, and saw that the message was just one of those annoying bots saying &quot;Hey, thanks for you edit on 'so and so' page, bla bla bla etc...&quot;, it's really annoying. It'd be nice to know that, &quot;Hey, a user hand-wrote this message to me. It's ''real''. It's not from a bot or automated.&quot; It has this little spice of appreciation, and I'd say &quot;It's all the little moments that make life big.&quot; ( originally quoted by Echo Park). <br /> <br /> There wouldn't be a full-blasted guideline or policy on here on how to write messages, it just has to be real and honest. You just ''write'' it. And knowing, that a person would voluntarily spend their time writing something for a person they don't even know is powerful. And hey, maybe the message doesn't contain everything a user needs to know about a site - but just writing it I believe would cause the welcomed user to get curious, and actually have a higher chance of staying on the wiki. Not only that, it'd increase the likelyhood of that user ''responding'' back to the welcomer. Thus, 1-1 communication, 2 people at the time. If everyone did this, these tiny numbers could stack up and make this site overall hopefully a better place.<br /> <br /> What do you think? More user-written welcomes? Less welcome templates? Maybe even deleting it?<br /> <br /> [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # As nominator [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Definitely. I (try to) do this at BS01. Even a &quot;hi&quot; after the welcome template could make a difference, or at least I'd like to think so. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Agree. --[[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] [[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:blue&quot;&gt;CPplayer90210&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sub&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sub&gt; 10:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Oppose deleting the welcome template at least. If people want to do custom-written welcomes every time, fine, I'm not saying welcome templates should replace that. But people make an edit, they get welcomed. Unless you want to wait for them to make like 10 edits to get a feel for the user (which I think would be a bad idea, no welcome at all after an edit or two would be weird), I can't see there being a whole lot of variation in anyone's custom welcome to people. I can also see custom welcomes being less useful if they don't supply the information the welcome template does (assuming the information on the welcome template is useful, it's been a while since I looked at one). Basically, totally ok with a &quot;hi&quot; after a welcome template or something similar (I usually try to remember to hit the &quot;thank&quot; button on a new user's first edit), but against removing the welcome template altogether. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # I agree 100% with Nova. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> *I agree with Codyn's sentiments, but also Nova's concerns. &lt;s&gt;I think I missed any suggestion of deleting the welcome template though?&lt;/s&gt; (Silly Berry.) Anyway, if voted into effect, what exactly would be done? Surely this is more of a behavioral thing than a policy thing? I definitely will not oppose (because I do like the idea) but making it a policy sort of makes it fake in my opinion. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I don't think our current welcome templates are that great, perhaps suffering from too many pointless links, but I don't think the idealised world you are attempting to describe above is one that will happen. What will happen is that every message will be basically identical anyway, just &quot;Hi! Nice edit on X. Any questions just ask!&quot; to welcome all users instead. Or maybe sometimes I'd end up typing &quot;Hello&quot; instead of &quot;Hi&quot;. or &quot;good&quot; instead of &quot;great&quot;. But it won't be personal really. So I don't care for the idea, or our current method, but I'd point out that we can't enforce a policy to write &quot;real&quot; messages. I guess I'm leaning towards oppose, but it can stick here in the discussion for now. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:44, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *What we really need is better warning/notice templates for talk page messages. Right now we have very vague and ugly boxes that don't tell a user what they did wrong and how to fix it in the future, plus hardly anybody uses those templates anymore. So 90% of the time someone does something wrong, their edit gets reverted but only rarely does someone put something on their talk page explaining why the edit(s) was reverted. Compare the rather lacking selection of warnings and notices we have, [[Category talk:Warning templates]], with English Wikipedia for example [[wp:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]]. Also note that ours are all boxes that imply the user did something bad, whereas Wikipedia's are inline text with a signature at the end making it read more like a human message, and the first couple levels of warnings are a bit more forgiving as well. Just an idea/concern I've had for a long time. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:00, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Edits from Brickia ==<br /> <br /> We have at least one user ({{U|GoldNinjaMX}}) who has recently come here from Brickia and wants to move some edits he made. What is to be done? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I just googled it and there doesn't seem to be a way to do that. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Well, &lt;s&gt;most contributions here seem to be customs,&lt;/s&gt; as Customs have always been treated as the creator's property (both on here and Brickia), I have no problem with that being moved once we have Customs merged to here (and would similarly have no problem if people moved back to Brickia and took their Customs with them). As for the rest, not so sure. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Wait, sorry, only saw one page. 1894 mainspace edits, 1089 customs edits. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Oh, sorry, I should have been more explanatory. He wants to move mainspace content from Brickia to here. I think at least one article in question was [[Ninjago (World)]]. Basically, what would we have to do for that to be legal (it is CC-BY-SA licensing), and then would it be ethical and worth any potential trouble? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::: Import them, using [[Special:Import]] after exporting them from Wikia. It is best to change them a bit here once imported, not for copyright reasons, but to not be penalized by search engines. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 01:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd think that moving is customs here is completely fine, as well as pages made entirely by him. The harder part would be adding over his edits. If you carried over his edits you would have to move over the edits of other users that haven't joined here. I would say to stay away from bringing edits over.[[User:Albus Potter|Albus Potter]] ([[User talk:Albus Potter|talk]])<br /> *I'd warn against making this a regular thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:43, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I'm a bit uneasy about it myself, we have a good thing going with Brickia at the moment- they don't copy our stuff and we don't copy theirs, basically we go our own ways. I would hate to see that change. We did also say that we wouldn't take any edits of theirs after February 2014, this would go against the &quot;agreement&quot; to me. '''Oppose'''. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** The main issue as I see it is that other users have edited the page since GoldNinjaMX has. If he was the only one who edited, then fine, he can take them and put them wherever he likes, but as soon as someone just changes one character on that page, we have to import it and then we can, like you say, start some tit-for-tat thing. Additionally, moving in versions of pages we have hear just means someone (and I can imagine it would be at most one of five people :P) would have to compare the edit histories to ensure we don't lose any content, don't add any rubbish, and I'm not sure that is worth the hassle. I guess I am basically '''opposed''' to this, now I think it out more. At the very least, I'm troubled by it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:32, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Import requires admin or sysadmin rights. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Re-)Enabling Gifts (and more!) ==<br /> The [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile extension]], which provides avatars, [[User:Jack Phoenix|structured social user profile pages]] and more, contains some features which are [[github:470|not (yet) enabled on Brickipedia]]. These features include '''system gifts, or awards''', which are automatically handed out by the wiki software after a user reaches certain thresholds, which administrators can configure; such as having 5 friends or having made 50 (mainspace) edits, and so on.&lt;br /&gt;Then there are '''gifts''', ordinary user-to-user gifts which users can give out to each other after administrators have set up some gifts.<br /> <br /> '''Friends''' and '''foes''' are pretty self-explanatory, and to a degree, this &quot;feature&quot; ''does'' exist, but many references to it have been &quot;hacked out&quot; or explicitly toggled off; as such, the amount of friends (and/or foes) isn't prominently shown in the User Interface of the site. Some special pages, like [{{fullurl:Special:TopFansByStatistic|stat=friends_count}} Special:TopFansByStatistic], expose the amount (but not the &quot;who's whose friend&quot; relations normally shown on profile pages) of friends, for example. [[Special:Editcount|And edit count, on the other hand, has been public info for a long time.]]<br /> <br /> Finally there's the [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#User Board|User Board]] and the related [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#Board Blast|Board Blast]] feature. User Boards are visible on users' profiles and they allow users to easily post a message — even a private message — to each other, without having to go to the user's talk page. Board Blast allows to send a user board message to multiple recipients at once.<br /> <br /> In the bug ticket linked to earlier on, [[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] noted his concern about the possible abuse of these tools (specifically the gifting feature) as well as the extra burden of work these tools can create for administrators. I don't share this concern nor the conclusions. Why? Because with ''everything'', especially so on a ''wiki'', things ''can'' and ''will'' be abused by malicious people. That's life. But just because someone decides to vandalize the [[LEGO]] page doesn't mean we put the wiki in full lock-down mode. Likewise, I believe that gifts and other such features mentioned above can be used to promote positive user interaction and engagement, and as such, these tools should be available to our users. If someone abuses them, we will simply ensure that the user in question can't do that anymore.<br /> <br /> It is, of course, up to the community to decide how to use these and what policies, if any, govern their usage. But again, we assume a lot of things already and give our users some leeway — there are no ''technical'' restrictions on making 50 consecutive, single-character edits in order to bump up one's edit count; there are ''social'' limitations which, directly or indirectly, imply that such behavior is neither desired nor tolerated.&lt;br /&gt;Jimbo Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, might be a controversial person with controversial opinions, but I think that his [https://web.archive.org/web/20080129145752/http://www.wikia.com/wiki/User:Datrio steak knife analogy] is quite fitting for this situation.<br /> <br /> '''tl,dr:''' Let's re-enable a bunch of features (gifts, awards, user boards, friends &amp; foes) present in [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile]] by default. Who's with me? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # Obviously. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 21:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Like Meiko, I'm against having foes enabled though {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:36, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Sure, like Nova and Meiko I'm not sure about the benefits of foes, but the rest sounds great. Getting those badges on wiki was a popular feature, so I'm sure gifts will be too. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> # But not foes! [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 18:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Weak oppose per my comment but won't prevent this from being passed if I'm the only opposition. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> * My 2 cents: Friends - We can have these but I don't see any fundamental reason why. The way I see it, our community is so tight knit, everyone would be friends with each other... We're not a social network and I don't think there's ever anyone here who doesn't know every other active user. We have no need for foes and even back when we had friends, we didn't have foes. I don't think foes is a constructive feature. I don't like UserBoard either. Everything it's good for can be done on talk pages or in email. Having two places where you leave messages for other users confuses people and many people never know when to set it to private or public (e.g. when it's used for contests and they're asked to set it to private, hardly anyone does that). There's also no notifications for new Board messages, except for in automated emails which [[github:300|get flagged as spam]]. Gifts I don't see a need for either, but awards maybe. However, that requires an admin set them up and keep them &quot;fresh&quot;, which requires time out of admins' already-busy workload. We had a ton of badges at Wikia and transferring that over to here will be nothing but a nightmare and frustration that will take time away from doing more essential things around here our admins are tasked with. IMO the current social features we have are enough. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everybody should be friends with each other, indeed, yet things like Facebook are amazingly popular nevertheless. :) Humans are social beings, and we cannot blindly stare at statistics and such. For example, one could argue that [[Special:Chat|MediaWikiChat]] is a mere social addition to the wiki and is not relevant since it doesn't directly increase the amount of (quality) edits. That would be true. And likely the same would also be true for friend (and/or foe) lists. But people like having those things around as they improve the wiki's atmosphere and bring editors together. So why not?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding foes: you wouldn't be the first person to suggest that it's an unneeded/unwanted feature, and I understand that it might be controversial. To understand this feature, you need to understand some of the underlying history. [[mw:Social tools|Social tools]] were first developed at ArmchairGM, which was (well, technically &quot;is&quot;, but...) a sports wiki. The developers, as well as pretty much all users were American. Needless to say, some people on the wiki had strong opinions about certain sports-related things, which differed from other people's views. This is, to my understanding, how the foes feature came to be. Furthermore, the feature is also related to the [[mw:Extension:Challenge|Challenge extension]], which, as the name suggests, allowed challenging other users. Although I don't know how it was used in practise, but the theoretical goal was to fuel wiki growth and quality edits ''via foeships'' &amp;mdash; people who were foes would challenge each other and the loser would need to edit a certain wiki page or somesuch. All this being said, though, personally I feel that people are somehow (too) intimidated by the name &quot;foes&quot; &amp;mdash; it has been around for a long time, much like social tools in general, and I have yet to see people abuse it in some way.&lt;br /&gt;UserBoard is another attempt at solving the ages-old problem with talk pages &amp;mdash; or in this case, as the name suggests, the problem with ''user'' talk pages. Talk pages are like a blank sheet of paper, and depending on who you are and what your background with computers and/or wikis in general is, this may or may not be a good thing. Because users are the heart and the soul of essentially ''any'' wiki out there, lowering the barrier to entry is important. Having a more structured mechanism (UserBoard) might prove to be useful to some newer users, because a blank sheet of paper (normal wiki talk pages) ''can'' be confusing. That being said, it's not a this-or-that choice, if and when both exist; people can choose whichever option they prefer.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding notifications: that's not ''totally'' correct. There ''are'' notifications, but &amp;mdash; once again due to historical reasons &amp;mdash; they're not as obvious as you'd think. Many wikis with SocialProfile have the [[mw:Extension:UserWelcome|UserWelcome extension]] (actually bundled with SocialProfile for years) and the [[mw:Extension:WikiTextLoggedInOut|WikiTextLoggedInOut extension]] installed, which allows them to have something like &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;loggedin&amp;gt;&amp;lt;welcomeUser &amp;gt;&amp;lt;/loggedout&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; on the [[Main Page]], which then shows the user's personal social info to them if they're logged in. Needless to say, this is quite archaic when you take into account the fact that [[mw:Notifications|Echo]] has been a thing for a few years now. You'll be pleased to know I've submitted [[gerrit:278868|an experimental, definitely-nowhere-near-ready-for-production changeset]] to address [[phab:T64520]] to bring Echo support to SocialProfile. I believe we can get it finished in a reasonable time. Testers &amp; developers welcome! ;-)&lt;br /&gt;The &quot;emails get flagged as spam&quot;, which is largely a separate issue, is likely an issue with the big email providers like Google &amp;mdash; their automated algorithms mark MW emails as spam for a variety of reasons (which we can't know for sure) and contacting them about this is hard, if not outright impossible. One possible reason could be that since most installations don't bother customizing these emails and there are a ''lot'' of MW wikis out there, Google sees a lot of really similar emails and thinks &quot;well, the difference is only a few characters (username/IP/site name/site URL), but since it matches a certain pattern, it's probably spam&quot;. So one possible workaround could be to customize the emails, but I realize it can be hard to do and it doesn't really scale (because of i18n, for example).&lt;br /&gt;I'm not sure ''why'' awards would need to be kept &quot;fresh&quot; &amp;mdash; they're largely (IMO) a &quot;set up once and forget about it&quot; thing. Setting them up initially will take a few minutes, but I'll be more than glad to do that once we have a consensus on them (names/thresholds/images). --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Somehow) stop spambots from creating accounts ==<br /> <br /> I have noticed lots of spambot accounts being created every day, and i'm thinking that there has got to be a way to stop this. They seem to be getting past the captcha just fine, but they are stopped by the abuse filter. So, in otherwords, we need to try and stop automated spam account creation from happening altogether. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :We simply need any other account creation captcha than the one we have right now. However it's good to note that spambots are often better at solving captchas nowadays than humans, so the question is is it worth the extra step and inconvenience for human users to prevent spambots from creating accounts? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Theres also recaptcha, or we could restrict account creation to a certain user group. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::That would mean only people who had accounts could create accounts? So we'd have no new users? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::People could request to have accounts created. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::That is not worth the hassle it involves (can we stop adding jobs for the admins to do? :P), and while stopping spambot accounts, would decimate legitimate account creation. Honestly, the current situation where we just have lots of spambots that can't do anything is fine. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:57, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::: Agreed with CJC here, this has also been discussed originally in [[github:449]]. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 22:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::I am agreeing more with {{u|ToaMeiko}}. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::You're right, not only there has to be but there '''is''' a way to stop some spambot registrations. It's the [[meta:MediaWiki:Email-blacklist|email blacklist]], which is a part of the [[mw:Extension:SpamBlacklist|SpamBlacklist extension]]. Of course it's not a perfect solution since it requires people to maintain it, since spambot (operators) will always find a way around such limitations, but it will catch some of them...or rather, ''would'' &amp;mdash; for whatever reason it doesn't appear to be functioning correctly because over the past three days, 18 accounts were registered with a mailcatch.com address, for example. I'm quite puzzled by this, and as such, I've asked some helpful core MediaWiki devs for input. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::Thats a good point. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::One somehow got through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 16:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::I just went on to GBC and Ideas and found lots of pages that to me looked like spam. (especially Ideas). All are marked. It looks like the Abuse filter on Ideas was not set to disallow, thus allowing spambots to create pages. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::Thanks for notifying us about this! In the future, I think you can skip the tagging part altogether (since these pages in question were obviously spam and totally unrelated to LEGO) and just ping me or another [[Special:ListUsers/sysadmin|sysadmin]] and we'll take care of it. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 04:44, 4 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::Lots of sites use ReCaptcha NoCaptcha, and it seems to work really well. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::It also looks like some of the spambots are getting through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::::There has been another mass of spam pages on GBC. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::::@LegoFan4000 - Thanks for the notice, blocked locally and globally (including the IP), and mass-deleted the spam pages. :) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Widening scope of TV show pages==<br /> * Currently, we seem to only allow &quot;major&quot; TV show character to have pages, other pages end up on pages like [[List of Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu Characters|this]]. As far as I know, we don't have an official policy on the scope. Anyway, here's what I'd like to do:<br /> ** Allow pages for any named character (ie, named in the show, or in the credits)<br /> ** Have a different category for characters that appear only in the TV show, eg, &quot;Category:Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu characters&quot;. This would be a subcategory of &quot;Category:Ninjago minifigures&quot;.<br /> ** Put these TV-exclusive characters in a separate tab in the navbox<br /> :? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> #Sounds sane. &quot;List of X characters&quot; (where ''X'' = something like TV series, movie trilogy, video game, book series, etc.) is a Wikipedia-ism, because Wikipedians don't like having detailed character pages for each Pokémon; obviously such material would be very much warranted on a Pokémon wiki. Because Brickipedia is a Lego wiki, we'll obviously want lots and lots of detailed information on all things Lego, and often (but not always) &quot;list of...&quot; pages go against this. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Okay. Would the TV show category also go on articles for minifigures which also appear in the show? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #'''Support''', per Jack and I didn't think we even did those list pages. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> #[[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:28, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Oppose ===<br /> === Discussion ===<br /> <br /> == Interviews ==<br /> Should we try and get interviews with LEGO related people? And if we did get one where would it go? Under news or a user blog? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Great idea, however who would be willing to be the interviewer? Who would we specifically interview - LEGO Ideas project creators, LEGO designers(etc)? As for the second question you asked, I'd say Brickipedia News section. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Anyone who's officially involved with LEGO (if any of those people would give us the time of day :P) {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *They'd go under news. If you want to interview LEGO Group employees that has to be done through LEGO's PR department so please contact me before attempting an interview with those individuals. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 18:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Sure, what does attempting a review involve anyway? I'd assume it just be tracking them down and emailing them a few questions. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Minifigure gallery ordering? ==<br /> <br /> Is there a rule for how to order? Alphabetically I assume, but I can't find that in BP:MoS, unless I haven't looked hard enough. It wasn't in the theme section at any rate. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Is this on theme pages? I didn't think that having minifigure galleries at all was in the MoS. :P [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It may not be on the MoS, but every theme page seems to have them :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::(oh, the site isn't locked). It was voted to remove them from theme pages (I'm pretty sure in the MoS overhaul, Berrybrick proposed removing them because they're so long and difficult to maintain, I supported, and noone else commented so it was passed), but we never actively went around removing them. There is no rule in place for ordering as far as I'm aware. Possible alternatives for use in sets would be order that they appear on the box, or alphabetically. No idea for minifigure pages- for licensed minifigures with a lot of variants I like to do chronologically so all the remakes of the same variant are grouped together ([http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/Luke_Skywalker#Gallery_of_variants example]) :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::Well this is the definition of a late reply. :P Could we not use {ThemeGallery} if the minifigure galleries are hard to matin, that's automatic right? I do agree with Nova on the licensed minifigure pages though. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::If that is the template we experimented with for a while, it would include video game characters and exclude variants. Plus it looked a bit off (though I'm sure our developers could probably find a way to fix that). [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Clean up the interwiki table ==<br /> [[Special:Interwiki|Interwikis]] allow to link to certain &amp;mdash; usually external (=non-Brickimedia), usually wiki &amp;mdash; sites somewhat quicker than by using the standard external link syntax, and when using an interwiki link as opposed to an external link, the external link arrow isn't shown next to the link, [[Main Page|just like with normal links (such as this one)]].<br /> <br /> While our [[Special:Interwiki|interwiki table]] is considerably cleaner than most sites', I'd still like to propose at least some removals:<br /> * '''all non-wikia: Wikia interwikis''' &amp;mdash; typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[bionicle-wikia:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; is almost exactly as long as typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:c:bionicle:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;. You can link to any Wikimedia site (Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, etc.) by using the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[project:language code:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikipedia:fr:France]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the French Wikipedia's page &quot;France&quot; or &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wiktionary:fi:lollapalooza]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiktionary's page &quot;lollapalooza&quot;. Likewise, you can link to any ShoutWiki site with the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:subdomain:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:fi.24:Jack Bauer]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiki 24's page &quot;Jack Bauer&quot;, so I'm not sure what's the benefit of having multiple .wikia.com interwikis. For prefixes like &quot;wookie&quot; or &quot;wookiee&quot;, most users don't remember offhand how many e's there is in that word, so they'll likely find it easier to type &quot;wikia:c:starwars:Page&quot; when they mean &quot;Page on Wikia's Star Wars wiki&quot;.<br /> * '''acronym: and dictionary:''' &amp;mdash; I'm under the impression that these aren't really used anywhere, and truthfully, why would they when we have [[wiktionary:|Wiktionary]]?<br /> * '''mediazilla:''' &amp;mdash; Bugzilla is dead, long live Bugzilla! But actual bug reports against any and all MediaWiki things developed upstream are to be made in [https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/ Phabricator].<br /> * '''sourceforge:''' &amp;mdash; [[wikipedia:SourceForge|SourceForge]] ♥ adware. (There's also the fact that this is relatively unused here, given that Brickimedia's software is developed either in GitHub (original, first-party additions, like the Refreshed skin etc.) or on Wikimedia's infrastructure at wikimedia.org.)<br /> * '''wikinfo:''' &amp;mdash; oh look, it's [[wikipedia:History of wikis#Wikinfo|an outdated fork of the English Wikipedia which allows original research.]] (There's also the fact that its URL is outdated, so if we want to keep it in the interwiki table, its URL has to be updated.)<br /> <br /> Thoughts, comments, suggestions, feedback? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :+2 ;) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Looks like it'll make everything less confusing. --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 15:34, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Sure {{C|although, would really like to keep &quot;wookiee:&quot; as an alternative extra, because I know I'll forget about this and wonder why the link doesn't work. And it's so much shorter :P}}. Just wondering why we need the &quot;c:&quot; for the Wikia links? Why not just &quot;wikia:harrypotter&quot; instead of &quot;wikia:c:harrypotter&quot;? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It's largely a leftover from the days when &quot;Wikia&quot; was known as '''W'''iki'''c'''ities, hence w:c: (on Wikia sites; other, off-Wikia sites use wikia:c: as the w: interwiki prefix is either left for Wikipedia or left unused). http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:harrypotter:Hermione_Granger redirects to http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Hermione_Granger, as you'd expect and want, but if you leave out the c: part, you're redirected to a page called &quot;Harrypotter:Hermione Granger&quot; on www.wikia.com, Wikia's corporate site.&lt;br /&gt;That being said, we could change the wikia: prefix so that it includes the c: part, too; right now the wikia: prefix points to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/$1 but we could change that to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:$1 so that you'd only need to type &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:harrypotter:Hermione Granger]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the aforementioned page. The only &quot;disadvantage&quot; of this is that the wikia: prefix then cannot be used to link to pages on Wikia's corporate/main site, www.wikia.com, but given that the &quot;old&quot; www.wikia.com was rebranded as &quot;Community Central&quot; years ago and moved to community.wikia.com, I'm not sure if anyone even needs to link to the current corporate domain. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :{{Support}}, I can have my bot find-and-replace as necessary upon removal of certain prefixes. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Can we request concept art? ==<br /> Out of curiosity can we ask for concept art from the RULG? They don't seem to mind sharing concept art in general, such as having a whole site dedicated to concept art of Chima. So could we ask them for like non licensed concept art? I'd personally love to see Friends and Ninjago, and it be a great &quot;exclusive reveal&quot; for us. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Minifigs: a picture is worth a thousand words ==<br /> <br /> (Credit to CJC95 for the title)<br /> <br /> Currently minifig articles have lengthy parts/print descriptions. That seems counterproductive to me. Chances are, when visitors search for minifig articles, they want to see an image, not a description. Minifig articles already have lots of pictures, so why should visitors bother reading about a minifig's torso print when they can just look at it? And certainly if the descriptions aren't being read, the time spent writing them could be put to better use improving the site in other ways.<br /> <br /> An argument could be made that descriptions fill up minifig articles with content. But if the content isn't particularly insightful, what's the point of having it? All it does is detract from useful and interesting material, which is what visitors come to the site for. Pages like [[Batman]] and [[Obi-Wan Kenobi]] are prime examples of this. There's so much text, but (respectfully) it says so little of consequence! Thanks to all that text the images--the good stuff--are relegated to the bottom of the page. If visitors load the page only to see a wall of text instead of the images they came looking for, they're going to continue their search on another site.<br /> <br /> I suggest an alternative to the current system. Minifig pages should focus on images, not descriptions. Place the images in the very first section of content. Next to each minifig, place at most a few bullet points of description focusing only on particularly noteworthy aspects of that minifig.<br /> <br /> What are your thoughts? -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 23:56, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Edit: the above applies to the &quot;Background&quot; sections too. Brickipedia isn't primarily a storyline wiki. IMO any story information should exist exclusively on those pages detailing the media where the story actually took place. To use the Batman example, there shouldn't be any story info from the DC comics (they don't even have to do with Lego!), and story info from, say, ''Lego Batman 2'' should exist solely on the ''Lego Batman 2'' page. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Numerical analysis - I stuck the Batman description in a word-counter. It was just shy of 3700 words, about 1 in 50 of those words are &quot;suit&quot;, and would apparently take someone with an average reading level 13 minutes to read. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:58, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Completely agree, I suggested removing descriptions from minifigure articles a couple of years ago but it got shot down. As long as we have images of every angle of the minifigure (front, back, side, alt face expression, and a shot with gear which covers head/body removed), I think we could stick all the shots in some sort of new template, get rid of the descriptions and as you said, have a section for any relevant notes about that particular minifigure variant. Not sure about the background suggestion- I think it's good to have info on who the minifigure's actually based on, although a lot of them could be cut down. Also not all characters have a LEGO-based backstory, they just appear in sets (eg, [[Quinlan Vos]]) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Hmm, good point: some description is necessary. Maybe descriptions could be moved to the intro of the page? For Quinlan Vos, it could be something like: &quot;Quinlan Vos is a minifigure released in 2011, as a part of the Star Wars theme. Vos was a Jedi Master who fell to the Dark Side while on an undercover mission. After turning back to the light, he served as a general in the Clone Wars and survived Order 66.&quot; We already link to Wookieepedia at the bottom of the page, so people interested in reading more can do so. Maybe we could incorporate the Wookieepedia link more prominently though. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **:I think its more important just to limit the background to stuff that at least relates to LEGO sets. There was what, one set based on the dark knight trilogy, but we have a few paragraphs on the movies. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I've made this sometime ago but I haven't publicly posted it except with people on chat, but I'll share it with you guys :) https://jsfiddle.net/codynguyen1116/p1c3h30f/ a MediaWiki gallery component reimagined, with an arrow that'd bring up the description on a click. That part hasn't been written in JS yet, but currently it has most of what the idea is. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sure. I wouldn't mind asking in a survey, but sure. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good point, I'd support holding off on any change until we see if readers actually find this content useful- it'd be stupid to remove it all only to find people actually wanted it there. That is, if that survey ever actually happens. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Good idea! --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 01:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * What would be the point in the site if we got rid of descriptions? :S The only thing that would seperate from other sites would be the background sections, which are much harder to write by the way. Someone may be wondering what the symbol on one varation of a Stormtrooper is or what Maya's skirt is called. '''Oppose''' {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *: It's not getting rid of every description. You can still say what the symbols and stuff are, because that is useful information.. But do you really think that people will gain something from being told that Batman's trousers are black (as the Batman article no doubt says for every variation). At least we can all agree that the [[Darth Vader]] article does this much better than say the way [[Anakin Skywalker]] does. Would anyone (including yourself) read that? Even if there is a good piece of information about the symbols on his belt in there, no one will ever find it. Ever. There doesn't need to have every word removed, just...all the crap, useless ones. ('''summary''' - I, and I assume most others here, wouldn't even care if we kept descriptions, but they need to be actually reader friendly, not just spurting every bit of information.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *::What would updated descriptions even look like? I tried my best to make [[Olivia]]'s as short as possible, but she lacks detail. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *:::Well, that would work better if the bit that said &quot;In 41100 Heartlake Private Jet&quot; had a picture of that one next to the description, and &quot;In 41034 Summer Caravan,&quot; also had that picture. Pictures would help the description surely. Why should I care what colour her top is in that set if I don't know what it looks like? :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> : Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:NovaHawk/mfg|This]] is just an idea of a new minifig page layout- obviously the template needs to be made prettier so there aren't awkward white spaces and the tabs need to be layed out differently, but you get the idea. Note the &quot;seaweed&quot; variant has a notes section for important notes about that particular variant, which would replace the description. I think this length background would be good for a max length as well. I dunno, just an idea, let me know what you think. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good response. Thanks everyone. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Well, it was either write a one line nothing response or put off responding until I had time to actually look at it properly and be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:08, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Overall I'd be interested in seeing a version with the formatting improved. Some potential issues with a) low-res images b) big blank space when no back printing/alternative face c) minifigures with 15 or so variants d) Mobile - it don't work. e) large stretched out infobox on the RHS. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Fan namespace==<br /> Ok, so the LEGO Fanatics Wiki has been imported into the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. All the Customs and Stories have been imported here, and any userpages from Customs have also been imported (anyone who had userpages on there should have received a message on their talk page here). There are still a few things that need to be cleared up:<br /> * Most links won't be working since all pages are in a different namespace. I've made a simple template, {{tl|fan}}, if you want to fix any links {{C|eg, &lt;nowiki&gt;{{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}&lt;/nowiki&gt; goes to {{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}}}<br /> * Categories were not imported in the dump, and I've intentionally not done this as [[User:NovaHawk/FanCats|an organised category structure]] was passed on the wiki before it closed but wasn't implemented, so please don't go around making any categories just because they're redlinks.<br /> * Main page needs to be updated to at least acknowledge this part of the site.<br /> * Change to Customs infoboxes- for any new customs- just type your name in next to Creator, ie, |Creator={{USERNAME}}. This will generate appropriate autocategories. If it's a co-creation with another user, you can use |Creator2= and |Creator3= for second and third users. If there are more needed, I can add them.<br /> * Infoboxes- The Stories infobox ([[Fan:Team_Kitten|eg]]) doesn't match the rest of the site, I'd like to bring it more in line with templates like {{tl|Part}} or {{tl|Review}}. Opinions? Also, the Customs infoboxes used to have a choice between two styles- the style currently used most of our infoboxes like {{tl|Set}}, and an old style like {{tl|set}} from like 2010 or something. I haven't imported the Customs infobox template so they all now all are based on whatever the current infobox style is for the rest of the wiki, hope that's ok.<br /> * Quizzes- do we still want this? As far as I know, it was never set up. And remember, you can only have one quiz per wiki with this extension- do we want it for the fan namespace?<br /> * The wiki was called LEGO Fanatics Wiki, and after the move, was put in the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. What do we want to call this section of the site (we can't use LEGO Fanatics '''Wiki'''), and do we still want the namespace called &quot;Fan&quot;?<br /> :{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ------<br /> * @bottom two sections-<br /> ** My vote's to not use the quiz extension as a part of the fan namespace- we can set it up as a general LEGO trivia game if we want to use it at all.<br /> ** Brickipedia Creations? (to match naming style of Brickipedia Reviews) with a &quot;Creation&quot; namespace? I don't really care, but I don't think Brickipedia Fanatics is going to work.<br /> ::{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::I'm neutral to whatever we decide to do. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:33, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Fan is the best namespace option, because Fanatics (as both a namespace and a wiki name) is rubbish. I don't know how quiz works, but if its not set up it won't be anytime soon, so I wouldn't worry about it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 09:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** &quot;Brickipedia Fans&quot; sounds like Fans of Brickipedia to me :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * &quot;Fan&quot; sounds okay to me...no quiz here...infobox is okay. One thing I'm wondering about is the skin. Everybody probably knows I'm against the different colors, ''but'' it might be good to have them with the wikis merged again. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I pefer fanatics to fans, but like Nova it may come across as a self tribute. Though the argument could be made Brickipedia reviews aren't reviews of the site.{{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ==Vote/Rating extension broken?==<br /> * Anyone else having problems leaving a rating or a vote? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:14, 15 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*I thought you meant page ratings, with the ratings for customs I do. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* That hasn't been set up yet, will get it set up in the next 24 hrs or so {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::* Should be working now {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Contests ==<br /> Okay are last contest was a mess, I'm (wo?)man enough to admit that, but the fact of the matter is contests get us new viewers and &quot;potentially&quot; new users. We still have all the DTCs of the year and the maze, I doubt reviewing any of them will get much traction (though I personally still want to see Berry's bat cave review, that we never sent despite being green lit :P). I suggest we give away the Star Wars hoth set as that's been reviewed and complained about to death and unless we can add something new (a positive review) I'm not sure it's worth doing. I have an idea for a contest here, [[User:Soupperson1/JuneContest]]. It's basic but after the last two contests I don't want any potential negative feedback. We could also use Nova's &quot;coming soon&quot; olympics themed contest, but perhaps we could advertise that to the side of a regular contest as it'll be going on for months. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I don't know what sets we have available since it changes every so often (I think the Batcave is gone). Only Meiko would know. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I am not aware as to the status of sets to give away. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Meiko was kind enough to remind me of what we have on the table: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; he says that either the site or the recipient will need to pay the shipping fees though. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Pride month celebration for Brickipedia ==<br /> <br /> June is officially pride month (which includes LGBTQ for example), and in celebration of this I was thinking that we as Brickipedia should do something to celebrate! First idea is to make our logo rainbow-y, although I don't quite have any other ideas. Who supports this? :D [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *As far as I can tell June is only LGBTQ pride month (at least in the US). Are you sure it isn't just sexual pride month? I'm only skimming a Wikipedia article, so please redirect me. :P I'm not fond of this idea though because I think that if we recognized this month it would only be fair to recognize others...that might be kind of fun if we still did themed logos, but I don't know. It's also a political action and I really do not want to politicize things here. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everything is or can be interpreted as a political action. The fact that we don't charge readers, let alone reusers of our content, a fee for accessing the site? Politics. The fact that we don't stamp huge, obtrusive watermarks on our images and/or other media files? Politics. When we support or oppose a proposition? Politics.&lt;br /&gt;Complete neutrality, while desireable in a way, is probably never possible. Even Wikipedia, Google and several other high-profile websites based in the US [[wikipedia:Protests against SOPA and PIPA|spoke against some controversial bills]] not that many years ago &amp;mdash; in ways which were far more radical and visible than just slightly altering the logo. This is, of course, far from being a simple question, but I don't see this being harmful to Brickipedia and/or our mission.&lt;br /&gt;'''tl,dr:''' No objections to Cody's proposal from me. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 03:50, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Fair. But I don't think that this is a necessary political action whereas the issues you've listed are things that we would have to take a stance on just by virtue of being an online encyclopedia. This is an outside agenda though and I am frankly not okay with that. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 12:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Cool with me. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:24, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Strong oppose. Not not the month itself or anything, just featuring it on here. This has absolutely nothing to do with Lego and we're a wiki, not Facebook. Basically, same as Berrybrick, I don't want to drag this site into political issues. And I don't think featuring any sexuality issue on a site dedicated to what many perceive to be a little kids toy is remotely appropriate {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I just looked up &quot;LGBTQ&quot;, and I agree with Nova. --&lt;font face=&quot;corbel,segoe ui,sans-serif&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;CP&lt;/b&gt;]][[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#ff6363&quot;&gt;player&lt;/b&gt;]] ~ [[special:Contributions/CPplayer90210|&lt;i style=&quot;color:#333&quot;&gt;LEGO rules!&lt;/i&gt;]]&lt;/font&gt; 23:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I wrote a long thing but deleted it, as I basically found myself repeating myself a lot. The issue I currently see isn't with the month$ itself (I, and I'm sure everyone here in this forum, is pro-LGBT), but more of the implications - once you take a stand on one thing%, anything you don't take a stand on can be taken as a view - if someone asks us to mark black history or domestic abuse awareness month, we can't say no without making it seem like we oppose them. So, I have nothing against the month, the concept, putting a rainbow in the logo, or promoting LGBT awareness on the wiki - I worry about a precedent being set. Footnotes: ($ - Per Berry, the only thing I can find for pride month is the LGBTQ component. % - I am here including things that don't naturally concern us - yes, things like SOPA are political issues, but they would concern us, as we are a website. I don't see Wikipedia and Google taking a stance on SOPA as radical because it would (potentially) affect them - it is no different to a food manufacturer protesting food packaging laws, or what not. It would be radical if Wikipedia decided that it was going to campaign for abortion rights.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Pretty sure everyone on here is a liberal or at least OK with LGBT+ rights, but I don't think we need to do any advertising of it here. We're a website about LEGO. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 22:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Strong Oppose''', per Nova. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *If were justing changing the logo for a week, whats the big deal? :P Im more open to celebrating holidays, but this is one of the more tricker ones. I don't think there's any gay characters in any LEGO sets and the only gay actor to have a minifigure is Luke Evans, so we cant write a blog or anything. If you have ideas for anything else, sure. And @ the rest of you Im not sure we should really classify this as a political statement, more than us being inclusive. Its like not celebrating April's Fools or Christmas. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> **We are already inclusive. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***I don't think that there are any LGBTQ &quot;yellow&quot; LEGO characters (though very few of them have any defined sexuality at all) but there are a few licensed ones at least in the Simpsons Series 2 and some video games, and there are some gay pairings BIONICLE fans like to promote even if they are non-canon. On the next note, I'm still going to consider it as a political statement, whether or not it is an &quot;inclusive&quot; one. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ****Between what Berry said and what Soup said, I think a blog would work, and might be cool. It's not super political (not as much as a logo), and Brickset's certainly written articles with less material to work off of. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 17:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == LEGO set offer requests ==<br /> <br /> We used to handle this on Admin, but since that's been abolished, where do we want to do it now? Someplace like Forums where we discuss it or something sort of like FA and BotM where it gets its own page where we can vote or discuss? I would almost suggest giving something to BoTM or people who have otherwise done a lot of good stuff, but someone would have to pay for shipping. Moreover, do admins get first dibs, at least so we can set stuff aside for special occasions without requests taking up everything? Where can we find an easy access list of available sets? Tthat might be a small detraction to having it here. A policy should probably be drawn up. Any other things we ought to discuss? (And, in case it is relevant, this is what we've currently got: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; Meiko is holding onto them right now, so I don't ''think'' we are in danger of losing them, but LEGO probably wants to see us using them.) Thank you many grazis. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Pardon for doing this as an anon. I think it would be nice to, at least as a ''start'', have the exact same pages/system as we had on the admin wiki. Including that helpful table of what has currently been purchased, and what resources are left. Maybe an added column on what the set's current state is too (for example, &quot;In Meiko's temporary possession&quot;), because I can't remember if we had that before. For BotM, I always thought that the honour/template was enough of a rush. :P It would be nice to give them something small, like a CMF, but I believe the last time that was discussed, it was decided that the shipping costs to do that were ridiculous? It would be great if there was something digital we could give away... In response to LEGO wanting to see us using the sets, and regarding how late it is to review some them, any ideas on other stuff we could do with them, something that might be creative or get us some press? Nothing immediately comes to mind (I'll update this if something does later), but you guys may have ideas. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::We don't have a budget anymore, but LEGO offers us certain sets, which is why Meiko has them. If I remember correctly, we can still ask for sets that they haven't offered, but I don't think it would be good practice to do that when we haven't used the ones they have given us well. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:17, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Descriptive Videos on Set Articles ==<br /> <br /> Sorry for doing a second posting as an anon, but a thought popped in my head during the discussion of &quot;what to do with sets&quot;/&quot;what could the wiki use&quot;, and I wanted to post it before I forget. You know how in Descriptions, when talking about a function like &quot;applying pressure to the two joints at the side will cause the gears to move, which moves up the wings and creates...&quot;, might it be helpful to have little clips of these features in action, to act as a bit of a visual aid? It's something that would set us apart from other sites (&amp; Brickia), something that is genuinely useful (you don't have to hunt down a review, skim through the whole thing to find the clip, etc.), something that adds clarity when the descriptions are too complex to explain with few words, etc. Most of us, I imagine, have the capacitiy to record and upload short clips. And for sets that none of us own, maybe we can get permission from people like LEGOJANG to download, cut out (maybe mute talking), and upload these tiny portions from their video reviews? Ooh, actually, contrary to the idea of muting, it would actually be great to get and post some audio from sound bricks that LEGO has included in their sets. Anyway, hope that this idea seems helpful, and do-able. Let me know your thoughts. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Though I am skeptical that anyone would ever do anything (me included :P ) a large '''''YES'''''. One question though, if two sets have an identical feature (I'm thinking the turntable waists on this year's Toa) would a video that showed how the function worked using a Tahu set be acceptable on Gali's article? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)</div> 108.173.7.175 https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&diff=1059121 Brickipedia:Forum 2016-06-12T16:21:55Z <p>108.173.7.175: /* Descriptive Videos on Set Articles */ new section</p> <hr /> <div>[[File:Forums.svg|center]]<br /> __NEWSECTIONLINK__<br /> Welcome to '''Brickipedia's forum'''. This is the place to propose and discuss any amendments to the [[Brickipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] or suggest new policies. To make a new proposal, please [http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new make a new section at the bottom of the page]. Please see [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive|the archives]] for past discussions - [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2014|2014]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2015|2015]], 2016 ([[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/1|Jan - Feb]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/2|Mar - onwards]]).<br /> <br /> For recent updates to the site and any policy changes, please see [[Brickipedia:Site updates]].<br /> <br /> -----<br /> Also, don't forget to check '''[[Forum:Index]]''' for a number of unresolved forums.<br /> -----<br /> <br /> <br /> == Minifigure Galleries ==<br /> {{archive<br /> |result=implement<br /> |content=<br /> It's annoying putting alternative faces and back printing in galleries and people often forget to do it. I made [[User:Soupperson1/MinifigGallery]] and I think it would work better compared to our current format. Thoughts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Looks great! But having it on 3 separate galleries seems like it might take up a lot of room on an article unnecessarily. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:23, 8 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :*There should be that many pictures on the article anyway. On larger articles like Batman it will save space as the gallery is overcrowded {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* I like the idea, but I'm not a fan of having three galleries, it makes this area way too long. I still think we should have tabs which let you switch angles for each variant (which I suggested about a year ago but noone paid attention- [[User_talk:NovaHawk/MG2|link to example]], [[User:NovaHawk/common.js|link to JS you'll need to put in your personal common.js]])<br /> :::*I like the tab idea but your example isn't working for me, it's just the normal Anakin. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::* Yep, like I said, you need to copy the code from [[User:NovaHawk/common.js]] to {{USERNAME}}/common.js for it to work {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::*Ooh that works, though I think the videogame variant should have its own section. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::* Of course- that was simply for testing, I should have specified that, sorry :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :::::::*I tried doing multiple mini figures together it didn't work, I'll leave that stuff to people who know what they're doing :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::::::*Yeah, it's only set up for one- the JS code is probably going to be quite long if it's going to accomodate like 20 entries, so I didn't bother because I'm lazy :P It can definitely be set up to work with more though. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::*Your the opposite of lazy! Your our most valuable contributor {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :*Why does it need more than the current three? (I would say &quot;I'll add more entries&quot;, but we all know I'd forget :P) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 08:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Did this ever get used? Or does it still need to be updated&gt; [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I don't know, does it have enough support? If so I'll work on the code required to get it operational {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:34, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** It looks like there is support, from the whole four of us who discussed. I don't know who will use it any time soon, but could be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==Stop treating DC and Marvel as subthemes?==<br /> {{Archive|result=Split them|content=<br /> * Just wondering people think about not having DC Comics and Marvel as subthemes of Super Heroes, and instead rename the pages &quot;DC Comics Super Heroes&quot; and &quot;Marvel Super Heores&quot;. To me they're more like parallel themes as they don't really share any of the same characters, universe, etc so it doesn't make sense to have them under the same theme :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:33, 30 October 2015 (UTC)<br /> ** I understand your thinking behind this but I'm having a hard time figuring if it's the best route to take or not. Neutral for now. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 16:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)<br /> **I believe it was only listed as one theme when it was introduced at NYCC, I agree they should be seperated now as they haven't been grouped together since.. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ===Vote===<br /> ;Split<br /> #{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> # *shrug* - in some places they already are it seems. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ;Don't split<br /> <br /> ;Comments<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ===Enacting===<br /> This needs to be enacted. When we have enacted it, please note it here so we can archive this. If there are any issues with implementing this, then discuss below. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Infobox colours changed, Marvel moved to [[Marvel Super Heroes]], DC Comics moved to [[DC Comics Super Heroes]]. The only problem is what to do with [[Super Heroes]]- I was going to turn it into a disambig page, but then I saw it's an FA and would feel bad doing that {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:58, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The content seems mostly split into theme sections, so we can not take the DC stuff, move it there, Marvel stuff, move it there and make them both FAs, then leave any other stuff on the Super Heroes page / make it a redirect. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==New namespace: Help/Brickipedia Help?==<br /> * Just wondering what people would think of a new namespace designed for people to ask questions. It'd basically be a fifth tab along with &quot;Page&quot;/&quot;Discussion&quot;/&quot;Inventory&quot;/&quot;Reviews&quot;. Have questions about a set/minifig/video game? Hit the &quot;help&quot; tab and type in your question. Basically I'm thinking of this as an alternative to Brickipedia Answers which never happened because we don't have enough technical people who can make this happen, and it saves you from going to another wiki to ask a question anyway. Yes we have [[Special:Wikiforum|forums]], but noone looks at those. Either that, or we could open up the Talk namespace to be about the set as well, not just the article- just because Wikipedia/Wookieepedia/every other wiki reserves their talk namespace for article talk, doesn't mean we have to. And it's not like the talk pages get used a whole lot here- we could just split the talk article into two parts. Anyway, just an idea I randomly had. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:23, 18 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Given our young audience having the 'Talk' tab is quite confusing as one would automatically assume that it's a page to talk about the subject and not necessarily about what could be done to correct certain information or otherwise improve the content of the article. Allowing a discussion area of some sort closely tied to the article itself would help boost interaction on the site though it would need monitoring and logged accordingly. None of us want a repeat of the disaster with article comments we had back at (dare I say it) Wikia. {{User:SKP4472/sig2014}} 02:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Per SKP (except I don't dare). Maybe we could even rename &quot;talk&quot; to maintenance, or something like it but shorter? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 06:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd like to see more discussion on this, but its not going to happen here in the middle of the forum. I'll talk about it with you if I ever see you on Chat Nova. I'll close this in a day or so, and when we have considered this more/aren't in the middle of other big changes, we can discuss this again [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Let's talk: Navbars==<br /> ===Design===<br /> How do we unify the design of them all (although most are similar already)? Do we make it look more like our other templates? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> On a side note should we make the edges curved or add pictures, or the logo for the theme instead of the font? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> * I believe there is (in that, there was at some point), some sort of design guidelines for the site in general being worked on, so really it depends on those. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ===Types===<br /> What sort of things should have navbars? Currently most themes have one for sets and minifigures. I imagine there are a few niche ones floating around out there though. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :We have an animal one, figure one, I'm not sure what else. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> : We have a [[Template:Weapons|weapons]] one as well, and [[Template:People]], and LEGOLAND stuff, and pretty much everything else in [[:Category:Navigation templates]] :P We could use some subcategories there. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Started a list at [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates]]. Please add any you know. That way we have some orderly way of upgrading them. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Information overload===<br /> What do people think of the way big themes are split into years? How can we make navigating large swathes of information (e.g. {{tl|SWfigs}}) usable without comprising information.<br /> *I was going to experiment with something like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:The_Beach_Boys ]. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Based on something Codyn suggested, I made [[User:CJC95/Sandbox]]. Obviously all I did was take two different bits of code and stick them inside each other without much thought, but the basic idea is the important thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Absolutely love this idea. :P Aesthetics could of course be improved but the functionality is what's important, we can improve on looks later [[User:Codyn329|Codyn329]] ([[User talk:Codyn329|talk]]) 22:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Liking the idea of tabbers- I'll write some CSS to fix the colours later. I'm thinking we could group things further, like in &quot;Galactic Republic&quot;, have columns like Clone Troopers, Senators, Droids, etc. Also since the info isn't being shown all at once, maybe we should double up, eg have Leia in both Rebel Alliance and Resistance? But for sets, if we just had one template and used tabbers, that'd be great. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Is there a way to get a specific one to be default for an individual page? Can we get it so that a 2013 Star Wars set can show the 2013 tab when it opens? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Mobile===<br /> Some appear to be unusable on mobile - A few don't scale too badly but don't look like they belong with the mobile skin that much. Mobile use of navboxes is a hard one to deal with. Wikipedia handles it by just disabling them on the mobile site. I don't like that solution (it annoys me when I'm on mobile Wikipedia), but I'm not too sure how to address this directly yet. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :[[mw:+2|+2]] to this; mobile is a very important segment and it deserves the appropriate attention (and if you ask me, Brickimedia's mobile support is pretty awesome) and &quot;it doesn't work on mobile, let's disable it&quot; is a non-solution. We have a lot of clever, technically-oriented people who can solve this problem; I'm sure of that. So let's build something that has never been seen before! --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === When do we split them ===<br /> I'm just curious when a navbar is big enough to be split and how big we want each section to be. http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Template:DCFigs&amp;oldid=605762 is much smaller then the mini-doll figure section at {{t|FriendsFigs}} but do we want to split it? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Generally its UCS really, as it depends on the theme etc. How would you split up the Friends? If there is a logical way to split it, feel free to at least see what it looks like. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Non physical section or not ===<br /> I never liked non physical sections, if [[Victor Zsasz]] is a villain why can't he be in the villains section? I know you could argue were supposed to sell sets and what not, but are we not technically promoting the video games? Plus a lot of characters such as Peter isn't in production, so we wouldn't be selling anything besides second hand stuff. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I was going to suggest this - well, I was going to just do it and see what it looked like :P - I was going to suggest like, a superscript (cross) and then a note at the bottom saying &quot;video game only&quot;, etc. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I think I'm the opposite of CJC here- I hate having these in line with physical figs. Eg, [[Template:NinjagoFigs]], the Creatures section and to a lesser extent the Ninja allies section just looks a mess to me. If you did this with {{tl|MarvelFigs}} where 2/3 of the characters are VG only, you'd have a very hard time finding the actual minifigures, which is what I'd be guessing a significant portion of people who visit here actually care about. If we went with the tabber idea, I think it could work for everyone though, eg VG SW Republic characters could be further split into Clone Troopers, Senators, etc, and non-physical? They'd be in Republic, just not the smaller category. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Tabbers does solve this problem afaic, as you can just put smaller VG only sections on each category. This solve the issue with the VG only sections in current form. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::[[User:NovaHawk/tabberInfobox|Here's]] an example with tabs I've been working on, let me know if anything needs to be changed. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 09:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Naming===<br /> [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates|Here]] is an incomplete list of current navbars. The main reason is the lack of naming conventions. Some use just the theme name for a template, and hence they are missing from the list currently. Some use &quot;Figs&quot; and &quot;Sets&quot;, others use &quot;sets&quot; and &quot;figs&quot;. Some use initials for the theme name, others don't (this disparity even exists within a theme, so we have JWfigs but JurassicWorldsets.<br /> All these make it very confusing to actually find what template you want. Hence when they are updated and upgraded I suggest renaming them on the convention &quot;Theme Name&quot; + &quot; figs&quot; or &quot; sets&quot;. (Note also the space between words). Discuss if you please. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * A whole theme name with a space is so tiring to type though :P Yes, sounds good to have some consistency, I'm always having to check what the names are for themes I'm not editing all the time, not having to think and just type the theme name would be good. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Status===<br /> Where are we on design wise? I'd like to move forward with this. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Well there was no response on the example, so I wasn't sure whether to move forward with it. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was referring more to the apparent design guideline things that are in the works, although when I'm back on pc, I'll look again at yours and just start changing things (so next Friday probably) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==BoTM minimum threshold==<br /> It was decided (see the [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016|archive]], where it shall be within a short while of me submitting this) that there should be a minimum threshold for a nominee to gain Brickipedian of the Month. However no specific threshold was discussed. This should probably be decided, or else the minimum threshold policy is hard to enforce. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Anyone? :P If not I'll just set the minimum as three. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Three sounds fine. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> {{Archive|result=exclude BoTM from unanimous rule of voting|content=<br /> ;Exclusion request.<br /> *BoTM needs to be excluded from [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016#Global &quot;unanimous rule&quot; for voting|the global unanimous rule]]. It is necessary for a BoTM to last a month. As there is no opposes, they are all unanimous, as long as they have one supporter. This would mean any threshold would not ever be used, as every BoTM request would pass instantly after a week. So obviously the global unanimous rule can no longer be global. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Oh yeah, definitely. forgot about that one, sorry {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==A change to the &quot;featured article&quot;==<br /> * By &quot;featured article&quot;, I mean the box on the main page. Currently, every month it shows [[Black Knights]]. I'd like to propose changing &quot;Featured article&quot; to some other name (please add suggestions), and showcase a complete article for 2 weeks, giving priority to articles recently promoted to complete status. Any future FA's take priority, and run for a month as before. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 08:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*'''Strongly disagree''', I like FA as they are. Besides if we do this no one will write FAs anymore. If we want variation we can just change it to an existing FA? If we want to share waste complete articles, we can add a section called &quot;articles with the ratings recently changed&quot; {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Can we still call it a featured article, and differentiate it from the complete ones somehow? :P If we want a new name though, I suggest Showdog, with the [[Dog Show Judge]] (once he is released) as a mascot. When he shows up, people will know it is special. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was thinking something more along the lines of something boring like &quot;promoted article&quot; :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Sure. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Or we could finally use our mascot :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Request for comment: Implement more ads across Brickimedia ==<br /> <br /> This is a critical topic currently and probably will have a lot of mixed feelings. Considering the amount of ads were a fundamental reason we moved ''off'' Wikia, I'm not expecting a lot of support here, but as it stands right now, we don't generate enough income off a single ad to keep up with our expenses. Our site's expensive, and we only need more and more performance out of our server and right now we've got just about as much server as we can afford. Then we add in the fact that we have to ship contest prizes which is not cheap (actually usually costs more to ship one prize to one person than we pay monthly for the server.....), and I don't want to pay out of pocket for them, nor would [[User:Ajraddatz|Adrian]] want to. Hence, we need more income, and since we can't rely on donations that we almost never get (except that one time from [[User:NBP3.0|NBP3.0]]), we have to resort to advertising. As a result, I want to ask for feedback, please comment stating whether you '''support''' or '''oppose''' an increase of ads per page (1-2 more perhaps), and if you support, suggest ad placements if you have any suggestions, or if you oppose, give some reason why. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:10, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *I'm fine with this as long as they aren't like, pop-ups or covering up text or anything. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:12, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I too would be fine with having a &lt;i&gt;few&lt;/i&gt; more ads, as-long as they're non-intrusive to our content. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:16, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Can we trade in some of the sets LEGO gave us in exchange for them paying for shipping? It's honestly ridiculous how much that costs. Beyond that, some questions that I want to see addressed before proceeding with this: 1. Would there be a significant revenue increase? We're actually breaking even on the hosting costs these days ($45 last month, -$40 for hosting). 2. How much are we planning on spending for shipping things around? I'm coming to a point in my life where the finances are a bigger concern (as in, moving out and getting a job after the degree). I have no problem still paying for hosting and shipping contest prizes, but I want to make sure we have as much info as possible that I can include in my budget. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 21:23, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Quick answer, no we can't rely on LEGO to ship for us. They'll ship to one person who will then handle everything from there. At that point, TLG is out of the logistics equation, and the only involvement they want after that is us to send them a link to what the set(s) were used for. With more ads, we would get an increase in revenue, especially if they're prominent. Right now, with it being at the bottom of the page, I don't think they're getting much impressions and as a result not generating much revenue. For example, I've had https://www.harrellsecurities.com up for a little over a week and generated nearly $20 already, with a tiny fraction of the traffic Brickimedia gets. That's why I think we need to have some more ads, perhaps one near the top of the page as well since that will probably generate ''much'' more revenue than the one at the bottom. I see what you're saying about finances are a bigger concern for you now. They are for me too, that's why I can't pay out of pocket for anything for this site, since all my money gets reinvested into business or business-related travel, and anything I have left over has to go into savings. However, if we can ensure we break even and have some extra income to spare for times when we don't break even or need to ship out expensive prizes, I'm happy and able to take over the financial side of things here. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would we be able to add more adds on certain sections, like reviews or blog posts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** Perhaps, but those wouldn't be very effective since those don't get as much views. Blog posts especially don't get many views by visitors, and chances are none of our registered users will click them. Better to just put another ad placement or two on ''every'' page than on specific ones that could just be a hit or a miss as far as revenue creation is concerned. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * '''Support''', but as per CJC and CGCJ. And honestly, I'd much prefer it if any set we got from LEGO was just reviewed by whoever it's sent to so we don't have to pay out shipping costs all the time. It'd be nice to actually be making money on this site for once, and maybe pay back Ajr/NBP/Meiko who have already sunk so much money into the site. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''' I honestly had never noticed that this site had ads until a few weeks ago. Anyway, I strongly support having more ads on articles. One solitary advertisement at the bottom of the page is not going to make much of a difference. This site generated $45.00 last month. Barnick's generated $20.00 in a little over ''a week''. This site surely has many more viewers than the one that he linked. If we are barely making enough to keep this boat afloat, something needs to change. [[User:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;lime&quot;&gt;LCF&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;([[User talk:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;#6600FF&quot;&gt;talk!&lt;/font&gt;]])&lt;/sup&gt; 01:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * So, would the ad in the sitenotice be considered unintrusive by the people supporting only if the ads are unintrusive? I honestly don't know because I have adblocker and just saw a huge empty white gap (which I quickly took care of) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The way I look at it, it's not in the content, it's not in front of the content, and it doesn't cover the content, so it's not really intrusive. All the content is still there, just 90px farther down (or less on mobile). If other people feel otherwise it can be changed but there aren't too many good ad placements in our interface other than that which wouldn't be within the content section. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 06:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I don't see the issue in it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''': With the ad adversity, I trust that this will be handled carefully. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Comment''': I applied for the [http://shop.lego.com/en-US/Affiliate-Program LEGO Shop Affiliate Program], got approved, and now converted most of our ads to LEGO ads. They generate revenue a bit differently so we'll see how it plays out in comparison to the current Google Ad at the bottom of each page. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:16, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ooh, awesome. I'll try to remember to click a link on here before buying stuff for the May the 4th promotion. Also, do we have some sort of affiliate id we can stick on the end of URLs? I was thinking we could make a change to {{tl|QuoteLEGO.com}} and stick something on the end of those links to the shop as well. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** I haven't looked into all of it but I believe we do. This is one of the codes (among many) it offers me:&lt;pre&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;offerid=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot; &gt;The Official LEGO Shop: The best selection of LEGO bricks in the world!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;IMG border=0 width=1 height=1 src=&quot;http://ad.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/show?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;bids=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot;&gt;&lt;/pre&gt; I don't know if that &lt;code&gt;img&lt;/code&gt; tag is necessary or whatever but maybe the only part we need is the &lt;code&gt;href&lt;/code&gt;? idk what do you think? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** FYI also, linksynergy.com seemed to be blacklisted earlier which is part of why I'm using iframes to load these ads instead of using wikicode. [[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] might know how to bypass that blacklist for this? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would it be possible to have the advertisement in the bottom corner not be a gif? It's extremely distracting. I can see some people who just look at images and info on the site finding the top advertisement annoying, but if your a reader you can just scroll down. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** {{replyto|Soupperson1}} All of the available graphic ads at that size are gifs. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 22:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ugh, we have gifs now? Isn't that a bit 90's/early 00's? Please tell me it isn't one of those fast-flashing banners saying you've won $1,000,000:P Would definitely support changing to still images if that was possible {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** {{replyto|NovaHawk}} No, they're LEGO Affiliate ads. [http://cache.lego.com/2057/images/shop/Affiliate/2014/sandcrawler/star-wars-75059-125x125.gif Example] --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 17:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The only gifs I've seen are teh LEGO ones if you scroll down the sidebar. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == [[76052]] Live Build with Beyond The Brick ==<br /> [//www.youtube.com/user/BeyondTheBrickTV Beyond The Brick] asked me if I'd like to live build [[76052 Batman Classic TV Series - Batcave]] with them for their channel. Considering this would count as RLUG activity with this round of LUG support, and saves us the trouble of having to pay for shipping on a set this large (and heavy), is anyone opposed to this? Could manage to give us some publicity again which we haven't gotten from another online LEGO community in a while. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sounds good to me. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Neutral. It sounds like a great opportunity and would usually instantly support it. However, I believe it was scheduled for Berry to review, I'd feel bad supporting if it meant taking that off him... {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 21:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Wasn't aware of that because I can't really keep track of those things. Guess we better start saving then because that's gonna be pricey to ship... --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Just checked, apparently the proposal hasn't been closed (I've given up paying attention prizes/budget stuff), but it has 3 suporting votes and 0 opposing, the last comment taking place on February 17. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 03:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support but if it was meant for Berrybrick like Nova said, then Berrybrick should do it. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm guessing as usual, this has discussion has turned into nothing and any opportunity has passed anyway? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Administrative footnotes in regards to user rights and potential mergers. Feel free to ignore. ==<br /> <br /> === Customs ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here:<br /> * BFN has admin there. He also has admin here if he becomes activity again - No issue here.<br /> * MeikoBot has admin there. I assume that was for a specific task, and bots can have admin for specific tasks if needed here. No issue.<br /> * Nexus has patroller there. He lost patroller here due to being inactive, but can have it when he comes back to activity. No issue.<br /> * 1999bug has admin there. He is not currently active, so this is not a major issue, however I'd suggest to be able to administrate the new customs namespace here he would need to pass an RfA here. However, as he is not active, we have no real issue.<br /> <br /> So basically, no issues, but this is just a note for the archive, so to speak. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Meta ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here. There is more users than Customs and so I have split them into appropriate groupings:<br /> ;Already have similar rights here if they return to activity<br /> * BFN has admin<br /> * Cligra has admin<br /> * KoN has admin<br /> * NBP has admin<br /> * SKP has admin<br /> <br /> ;Cases where I'd propose that they need to pass an RfR here for their rights to transfer<br /> * 1999bug has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Codyn has admin and functionary.<br /> * LEGOSuperDKong has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Latenightguy has admin<br /> * Lcawte has admin. although has sysadmin here, and inactive.<br /> * Sammy has admin. Inactive.<br /> * Vector Prime has admin. Inactive<br /> <br /> ;Cases where admin at meta is for maintenance or a specific task and would not be needed anyway<br /> * CJCbot has admin &amp; bot. no longer needed. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently.<br /> * Edward Nigma has admin. rights given recently for specific maintenance tasks. Task is over. <br /> * LcawteBot has admin, bot. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently. <br /> * NXTBot has admin.<br /> * Bawt has bot.<br /> <br /> ;Misc.<br /> *Adrian (Brickimedia) has admin. user has a normal account with admin here, and this account has sysadmin anyway<br /> *The five bureaucrats at Meta (Ajr, myself, Nova, SKP, NXT) have (or can when they are active have) admin here. The two ranks are synonymous here, so no issue.<br /> * Nova has functionary there. He has had checkuser in the past here (and possibly functionary? I don't know when the merge of rights there happened), he doesn't currently. This may be due to personal request or confusion during moving accounts or something, I'm not sure, but I assume if Nova wanted them he would (or at the very least could) have them :P<br /> * Jack Phoenix has patroller there. He could have patroller here if he needed it. <br /> <br /> '''Summary:''' basically, as for customs above, this is more of an administrative footnote for the archives of the forum than anything useful for us to discuss. Once again, I am proposing that no rights be automatically imported over here during any merger - the only active users affected by this will be Latenightguy and Codyn. I'm not sure what their views are on this topic, but as there is no formal RfR process at meta, I'd have to suggest that they pass an RfR here to keep said rights. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm good to not have functionary here, don't really need it since the spambots are gone {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I don't know how the community would feel as me as an admin, but I think I can bring some good to the table. RFR for it like you said? As for functionary it can go either way [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 02:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** RfA for admin and RfFunctionary would be needed. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Merging the Magazine namespace back into main ==<br /> {| style=&quot;border-top: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-bottom: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-right: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-left: 1px solid #aaaaaa;padding: 5px;background:#D9F0FF; margin-top:7px;&quot;<br /> |-<br /> ||''The following section is preserved as an archive. &lt;font color=red&gt;'''Please do not modify it.'''&lt;/font&gt;{{#if:Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)|&amp;nbsp;The result was Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)}}<br /> ------<br /> It's really not needed. We don't have one for books, or for episodes of TV shows, etc. The reason is because we had a few scans of a couple of UK mags, but that's not enough to justify a namespace. Just stick those scans on the articles in the main space. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:20, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Is there actually any content in said namespace or can the Magazine namespace pages just be deleted? Support either way. It's a useless namespace that 99% of people don't know exists. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** there is content, but all formatted as mainspace articles, so it just needs to be moved back. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 01:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * If its useless then we should get rid of it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 01:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Rip magazines :(. I'm OK with it being removed. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 05:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Wait we're still having magazine articles aren't we? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:12, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Sure --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 10:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Really, the last one was 4 years ago. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 11:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ****** [[LEGO Friends magazines|I beg to differ]] :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ******* I don't think he meant the release of magazines, but the articles being created for individual issues. There are more actual magazines then ever - there was a LEGO Star Wars one in the supermarket the other day :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Yep, just merging the existing ones back into the mainspace. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Since we have enough support to merge it, I guess we'll do it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> {{done|All pages moved without leaving a redirect.}}[[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:56, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> |}<br /> <br /> == Increasing positive communication within users ==<br /> <br /> I want to talk about increasing positive communication within users: Although we generally have nice, calm conversations in chat (which is great!), that doesn't need much improvement. What I think needs to specifically improve to increase this, is how we welcome users. Right now, welcoming others are based on a pre-formatted, maybe half-arsed template, and simply substituting the transcluded template on user talk pages. Although I do understand that if the resources are low, it would be more realistic to make such thing to make an automated message on people's talk page.<br /> <br /> However, let's say we do have the resources - or we just work harder. Whenever I joined other wikis, and saw that the message was just one of those annoying bots saying &quot;Hey, thanks for you edit on 'so and so' page, bla bla bla etc...&quot;, it's really annoying. It'd be nice to know that, &quot;Hey, a user hand-wrote this message to me. It's ''real''. It's not from a bot or automated.&quot; It has this little spice of appreciation, and I'd say &quot;It's all the little moments that make life big.&quot; ( originally quoted by Echo Park). <br /> <br /> There wouldn't be a full-blasted guideline or policy on here on how to write messages, it just has to be real and honest. You just ''write'' it. And knowing, that a person would voluntarily spend their time writing something for a person they don't even know is powerful. And hey, maybe the message doesn't contain everything a user needs to know about a site - but just writing it I believe would cause the welcomed user to get curious, and actually have a higher chance of staying on the wiki. Not only that, it'd increase the likelyhood of that user ''responding'' back to the welcomer. Thus, 1-1 communication, 2 people at the time. If everyone did this, these tiny numbers could stack up and make this site overall hopefully a better place.<br /> <br /> What do you think? More user-written welcomes? Less welcome templates? Maybe even deleting it?<br /> <br /> [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # As nominator [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Definitely. I (try to) do this at BS01. Even a &quot;hi&quot; after the welcome template could make a difference, or at least I'd like to think so. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Agree. --[[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] [[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:blue&quot;&gt;CPplayer90210&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sub&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sub&gt; 10:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Oppose deleting the welcome template at least. If people want to do custom-written welcomes every time, fine, I'm not saying welcome templates should replace that. But people make an edit, they get welcomed. Unless you want to wait for them to make like 10 edits to get a feel for the user (which I think would be a bad idea, no welcome at all after an edit or two would be weird), I can't see there being a whole lot of variation in anyone's custom welcome to people. I can also see custom welcomes being less useful if they don't supply the information the welcome template does (assuming the information on the welcome template is useful, it's been a while since I looked at one). Basically, totally ok with a &quot;hi&quot; after a welcome template or something similar (I usually try to remember to hit the &quot;thank&quot; button on a new user's first edit), but against removing the welcome template altogether. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # I agree 100% with Nova. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> *I agree with Codyn's sentiments, but also Nova's concerns. &lt;s&gt;I think I missed any suggestion of deleting the welcome template though?&lt;/s&gt; (Silly Berry.) Anyway, if voted into effect, what exactly would be done? Surely this is more of a behavioral thing than a policy thing? I definitely will not oppose (because I do like the idea) but making it a policy sort of makes it fake in my opinion. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I don't think our current welcome templates are that great, perhaps suffering from too many pointless links, but I don't think the idealised world you are attempting to describe above is one that will happen. What will happen is that every message will be basically identical anyway, just &quot;Hi! Nice edit on X. Any questions just ask!&quot; to welcome all users instead. Or maybe sometimes I'd end up typing &quot;Hello&quot; instead of &quot;Hi&quot;. or &quot;good&quot; instead of &quot;great&quot;. But it won't be personal really. So I don't care for the idea, or our current method, but I'd point out that we can't enforce a policy to write &quot;real&quot; messages. I guess I'm leaning towards oppose, but it can stick here in the discussion for now. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:44, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *What we really need is better warning/notice templates for talk page messages. Right now we have very vague and ugly boxes that don't tell a user what they did wrong and how to fix it in the future, plus hardly anybody uses those templates anymore. So 90% of the time someone does something wrong, their edit gets reverted but only rarely does someone put something on their talk page explaining why the edit(s) was reverted. Compare the rather lacking selection of warnings and notices we have, [[Category talk:Warning templates]], with English Wikipedia for example [[wp:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]]. Also note that ours are all boxes that imply the user did something bad, whereas Wikipedia's are inline text with a signature at the end making it read more like a human message, and the first couple levels of warnings are a bit more forgiving as well. Just an idea/concern I've had for a long time. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:00, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Edits from Brickia ==<br /> <br /> We have at least one user ({{U|GoldNinjaMX}}) who has recently come here from Brickia and wants to move some edits he made. What is to be done? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I just googled it and there doesn't seem to be a way to do that. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Well, &lt;s&gt;most contributions here seem to be customs,&lt;/s&gt; as Customs have always been treated as the creator's property (both on here and Brickia), I have no problem with that being moved once we have Customs merged to here (and would similarly have no problem if people moved back to Brickia and took their Customs with them). As for the rest, not so sure. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Wait, sorry, only saw one page. 1894 mainspace edits, 1089 customs edits. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Oh, sorry, I should have been more explanatory. He wants to move mainspace content from Brickia to here. I think at least one article in question was [[Ninjago (World)]]. Basically, what would we have to do for that to be legal (it is CC-BY-SA licensing), and then would it be ethical and worth any potential trouble? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::: Import them, using [[Special:Import]] after exporting them from Wikia. It is best to change them a bit here once imported, not for copyright reasons, but to not be penalized by search engines. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 01:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd think that moving is customs here is completely fine, as well as pages made entirely by him. The harder part would be adding over his edits. If you carried over his edits you would have to move over the edits of other users that haven't joined here. I would say to stay away from bringing edits over.[[User:Albus Potter|Albus Potter]] ([[User talk:Albus Potter|talk]])<br /> *I'd warn against making this a regular thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:43, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I'm a bit uneasy about it myself, we have a good thing going with Brickia at the moment- they don't copy our stuff and we don't copy theirs, basically we go our own ways. I would hate to see that change. We did also say that we wouldn't take any edits of theirs after February 2014, this would go against the &quot;agreement&quot; to me. '''Oppose'''. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** The main issue as I see it is that other users have edited the page since GoldNinjaMX has. If he was the only one who edited, then fine, he can take them and put them wherever he likes, but as soon as someone just changes one character on that page, we have to import it and then we can, like you say, start some tit-for-tat thing. Additionally, moving in versions of pages we have hear just means someone (and I can imagine it would be at most one of five people :P) would have to compare the edit histories to ensure we don't lose any content, don't add any rubbish, and I'm not sure that is worth the hassle. I guess I am basically '''opposed''' to this, now I think it out more. At the very least, I'm troubled by it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:32, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Import requires admin or sysadmin rights. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Re-)Enabling Gifts (and more!) ==<br /> The [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile extension]], which provides avatars, [[User:Jack Phoenix|structured social user profile pages]] and more, contains some features which are [[github:470|not (yet) enabled on Brickipedia]]. These features include '''system gifts, or awards''', which are automatically handed out by the wiki software after a user reaches certain thresholds, which administrators can configure; such as having 5 friends or having made 50 (mainspace) edits, and so on.&lt;br /&gt;Then there are '''gifts''', ordinary user-to-user gifts which users can give out to each other after administrators have set up some gifts.<br /> <br /> '''Friends''' and '''foes''' are pretty self-explanatory, and to a degree, this &quot;feature&quot; ''does'' exist, but many references to it have been &quot;hacked out&quot; or explicitly toggled off; as such, the amount of friends (and/or foes) isn't prominently shown in the User Interface of the site. Some special pages, like [{{fullurl:Special:TopFansByStatistic|stat=friends_count}} Special:TopFansByStatistic], expose the amount (but not the &quot;who's whose friend&quot; relations normally shown on profile pages) of friends, for example. [[Special:Editcount|And edit count, on the other hand, has been public info for a long time.]]<br /> <br /> Finally there's the [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#User Board|User Board]] and the related [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#Board Blast|Board Blast]] feature. User Boards are visible on users' profiles and they allow users to easily post a message — even a private message — to each other, without having to go to the user's talk page. Board Blast allows to send a user board message to multiple recipients at once.<br /> <br /> In the bug ticket linked to earlier on, [[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] noted his concern about the possible abuse of these tools (specifically the gifting feature) as well as the extra burden of work these tools can create for administrators. I don't share this concern nor the conclusions. Why? Because with ''everything'', especially so on a ''wiki'', things ''can'' and ''will'' be abused by malicious people. That's life. But just because someone decides to vandalize the [[LEGO]] page doesn't mean we put the wiki in full lock-down mode. Likewise, I believe that gifts and other such features mentioned above can be used to promote positive user interaction and engagement, and as such, these tools should be available to our users. If someone abuses them, we will simply ensure that the user in question can't do that anymore.<br /> <br /> It is, of course, up to the community to decide how to use these and what policies, if any, govern their usage. But again, we assume a lot of things already and give our users some leeway — there are no ''technical'' restrictions on making 50 consecutive, single-character edits in order to bump up one's edit count; there are ''social'' limitations which, directly or indirectly, imply that such behavior is neither desired nor tolerated.&lt;br /&gt;Jimbo Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, might be a controversial person with controversial opinions, but I think that his [https://web.archive.org/web/20080129145752/http://www.wikia.com/wiki/User:Datrio steak knife analogy] is quite fitting for this situation.<br /> <br /> '''tl,dr:''' Let's re-enable a bunch of features (gifts, awards, user boards, friends &amp; foes) present in [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile]] by default. Who's with me? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # Obviously. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 21:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Like Meiko, I'm against having foes enabled though {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:36, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Sure, like Nova and Meiko I'm not sure about the benefits of foes, but the rest sounds great. Getting those badges on wiki was a popular feature, so I'm sure gifts will be too. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> # But not foes! [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 18:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Weak oppose per my comment but won't prevent this from being passed if I'm the only opposition. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> * My 2 cents: Friends - We can have these but I don't see any fundamental reason why. The way I see it, our community is so tight knit, everyone would be friends with each other... We're not a social network and I don't think there's ever anyone here who doesn't know every other active user. We have no need for foes and even back when we had friends, we didn't have foes. I don't think foes is a constructive feature. I don't like UserBoard either. Everything it's good for can be done on talk pages or in email. Having two places where you leave messages for other users confuses people and many people never know when to set it to private or public (e.g. when it's used for contests and they're asked to set it to private, hardly anyone does that). There's also no notifications for new Board messages, except for in automated emails which [[github:300|get flagged as spam]]. Gifts I don't see a need for either, but awards maybe. However, that requires an admin set them up and keep them &quot;fresh&quot;, which requires time out of admins' already-busy workload. We had a ton of badges at Wikia and transferring that over to here will be nothing but a nightmare and frustration that will take time away from doing more essential things around here our admins are tasked with. IMO the current social features we have are enough. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everybody should be friends with each other, indeed, yet things like Facebook are amazingly popular nevertheless. :) Humans are social beings, and we cannot blindly stare at statistics and such. For example, one could argue that [[Special:Chat|MediaWikiChat]] is a mere social addition to the wiki and is not relevant since it doesn't directly increase the amount of (quality) edits. That would be true. And likely the same would also be true for friend (and/or foe) lists. But people like having those things around as they improve the wiki's atmosphere and bring editors together. So why not?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding foes: you wouldn't be the first person to suggest that it's an unneeded/unwanted feature, and I understand that it might be controversial. To understand this feature, you need to understand some of the underlying history. [[mw:Social tools|Social tools]] were first developed at ArmchairGM, which was (well, technically &quot;is&quot;, but...) a sports wiki. The developers, as well as pretty much all users were American. Needless to say, some people on the wiki had strong opinions about certain sports-related things, which differed from other people's views. This is, to my understanding, how the foes feature came to be. Furthermore, the feature is also related to the [[mw:Extension:Challenge|Challenge extension]], which, as the name suggests, allowed challenging other users. Although I don't know how it was used in practise, but the theoretical goal was to fuel wiki growth and quality edits ''via foeships'' &amp;mdash; people who were foes would challenge each other and the loser would need to edit a certain wiki page or somesuch. All this being said, though, personally I feel that people are somehow (too) intimidated by the name &quot;foes&quot; &amp;mdash; it has been around for a long time, much like social tools in general, and I have yet to see people abuse it in some way.&lt;br /&gt;UserBoard is another attempt at solving the ages-old problem with talk pages &amp;mdash; or in this case, as the name suggests, the problem with ''user'' talk pages. Talk pages are like a blank sheet of paper, and depending on who you are and what your background with computers and/or wikis in general is, this may or may not be a good thing. Because users are the heart and the soul of essentially ''any'' wiki out there, lowering the barrier to entry is important. Having a more structured mechanism (UserBoard) might prove to be useful to some newer users, because a blank sheet of paper (normal wiki talk pages) ''can'' be confusing. That being said, it's not a this-or-that choice, if and when both exist; people can choose whichever option they prefer.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding notifications: that's not ''totally'' correct. There ''are'' notifications, but &amp;mdash; once again due to historical reasons &amp;mdash; they're not as obvious as you'd think. Many wikis with SocialProfile have the [[mw:Extension:UserWelcome|UserWelcome extension]] (actually bundled with SocialProfile for years) and the [[mw:Extension:WikiTextLoggedInOut|WikiTextLoggedInOut extension]] installed, which allows them to have something like &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;loggedin&amp;gt;&amp;lt;welcomeUser &amp;gt;&amp;lt;/loggedout&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; on the [[Main Page]], which then shows the user's personal social info to them if they're logged in. Needless to say, this is quite archaic when you take into account the fact that [[mw:Notifications|Echo]] has been a thing for a few years now. You'll be pleased to know I've submitted [[gerrit:278868|an experimental, definitely-nowhere-near-ready-for-production changeset]] to address [[phab:T64520]] to bring Echo support to SocialProfile. I believe we can get it finished in a reasonable time. Testers &amp; developers welcome! ;-)&lt;br /&gt;The &quot;emails get flagged as spam&quot;, which is largely a separate issue, is likely an issue with the big email providers like Google &amp;mdash; their automated algorithms mark MW emails as spam for a variety of reasons (which we can't know for sure) and contacting them about this is hard, if not outright impossible. One possible reason could be that since most installations don't bother customizing these emails and there are a ''lot'' of MW wikis out there, Google sees a lot of really similar emails and thinks &quot;well, the difference is only a few characters (username/IP/site name/site URL), but since it matches a certain pattern, it's probably spam&quot;. So one possible workaround could be to customize the emails, but I realize it can be hard to do and it doesn't really scale (because of i18n, for example).&lt;br /&gt;I'm not sure ''why'' awards would need to be kept &quot;fresh&quot; &amp;mdash; they're largely (IMO) a &quot;set up once and forget about it&quot; thing. Setting them up initially will take a few minutes, but I'll be more than glad to do that once we have a consensus on them (names/thresholds/images). --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Somehow) stop spambots from creating accounts ==<br /> <br /> I have noticed lots of spambot accounts being created every day, and i'm thinking that there has got to be a way to stop this. They seem to be getting past the captcha just fine, but they are stopped by the abuse filter. So, in otherwords, we need to try and stop automated spam account creation from happening altogether. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :We simply need any other account creation captcha than the one we have right now. However it's good to note that spambots are often better at solving captchas nowadays than humans, so the question is is it worth the extra step and inconvenience for human users to prevent spambots from creating accounts? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Theres also recaptcha, or we could restrict account creation to a certain user group. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::That would mean only people who had accounts could create accounts? So we'd have no new users? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::People could request to have accounts created. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::That is not worth the hassle it involves (can we stop adding jobs for the admins to do? :P), and while stopping spambot accounts, would decimate legitimate account creation. Honestly, the current situation where we just have lots of spambots that can't do anything is fine. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:57, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::: Agreed with CJC here, this has also been discussed originally in [[github:449]]. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 22:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::I am agreeing more with {{u|ToaMeiko}}. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::You're right, not only there has to be but there '''is''' a way to stop some spambot registrations. It's the [[meta:MediaWiki:Email-blacklist|email blacklist]], which is a part of the [[mw:Extension:SpamBlacklist|SpamBlacklist extension]]. Of course it's not a perfect solution since it requires people to maintain it, since spambot (operators) will always find a way around such limitations, but it will catch some of them...or rather, ''would'' &amp;mdash; for whatever reason it doesn't appear to be functioning correctly because over the past three days, 18 accounts were registered with a mailcatch.com address, for example. I'm quite puzzled by this, and as such, I've asked some helpful core MediaWiki devs for input. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::Thats a good point. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::One somehow got through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 16:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::I just went on to GBC and Ideas and found lots of pages that to me looked like spam. (especially Ideas). All are marked. It looks like the Abuse filter on Ideas was not set to disallow, thus allowing spambots to create pages. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::Thanks for notifying us about this! In the future, I think you can skip the tagging part altogether (since these pages in question were obviously spam and totally unrelated to LEGO) and just ping me or another [[Special:ListUsers/sysadmin|sysadmin]] and we'll take care of it. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 04:44, 4 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::Lots of sites use ReCaptcha NoCaptcha, and it seems to work really well. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::It also looks like some of the spambots are getting through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::::There has been another mass of spam pages on GBC. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::::@LegoFan4000 - Thanks for the notice, blocked locally and globally (including the IP), and mass-deleted the spam pages. :) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Widening scope of TV show pages==<br /> * Currently, we seem to only allow &quot;major&quot; TV show character to have pages, other pages end up on pages like [[List of Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu Characters|this]]. As far as I know, we don't have an official policy on the scope. Anyway, here's what I'd like to do:<br /> ** Allow pages for any named character (ie, named in the show, or in the credits)<br /> ** Have a different category for characters that appear only in the TV show, eg, &quot;Category:Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu characters&quot;. This would be a subcategory of &quot;Category:Ninjago minifigures&quot;.<br /> ** Put these TV-exclusive characters in a separate tab in the navbox<br /> :? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> #Sounds sane. &quot;List of X characters&quot; (where ''X'' = something like TV series, movie trilogy, video game, book series, etc.) is a Wikipedia-ism, because Wikipedians don't like having detailed character pages for each Pokémon; obviously such material would be very much warranted on a Pokémon wiki. Because Brickipedia is a Lego wiki, we'll obviously want lots and lots of detailed information on all things Lego, and often (but not always) &quot;list of...&quot; pages go against this. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Okay. Would the TV show category also go on articles for minifigures which also appear in the show? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #'''Support''', per Jack and I didn't think we even did those list pages. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> #[[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:28, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Oppose ===<br /> === Discussion ===<br /> <br /> == Interviews ==<br /> Should we try and get interviews with LEGO related people? And if we did get one where would it go? Under news or a user blog? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Great idea, however who would be willing to be the interviewer? Who would we specifically interview - LEGO Ideas project creators, LEGO designers(etc)? As for the second question you asked, I'd say Brickipedia News section. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Anyone who's officially involved with LEGO (if any of those people would give us the time of day :P) {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *They'd go under news. If you want to interview LEGO Group employees that has to be done through LEGO's PR department so please contact me before attempting an interview with those individuals. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 18:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Sure, what does attempting a review involve anyway? I'd assume it just be tracking them down and emailing them a few questions. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Minifigure gallery ordering? ==<br /> <br /> Is there a rule for how to order? Alphabetically I assume, but I can't find that in BP:MoS, unless I haven't looked hard enough. It wasn't in the theme section at any rate. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Is this on theme pages? I didn't think that having minifigure galleries at all was in the MoS. :P [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It may not be on the MoS, but every theme page seems to have them :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::(oh, the site isn't locked). It was voted to remove them from theme pages (I'm pretty sure in the MoS overhaul, Berrybrick proposed removing them because they're so long and difficult to maintain, I supported, and noone else commented so it was passed), but we never actively went around removing them. There is no rule in place for ordering as far as I'm aware. Possible alternatives for use in sets would be order that they appear on the box, or alphabetically. No idea for minifigure pages- for licensed minifigures with a lot of variants I like to do chronologically so all the remakes of the same variant are grouped together ([http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/Luke_Skywalker#Gallery_of_variants example]) :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::Well this is the definition of a late reply. :P Could we not use {ThemeGallery} if the minifigure galleries are hard to matin, that's automatic right? I do agree with Nova on the licensed minifigure pages though. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::If that is the template we experimented with for a while, it would include video game characters and exclude variants. Plus it looked a bit off (though I'm sure our developers could probably find a way to fix that). [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Clean up the interwiki table ==<br /> [[Special:Interwiki|Interwikis]] allow to link to certain &amp;mdash; usually external (=non-Brickimedia), usually wiki &amp;mdash; sites somewhat quicker than by using the standard external link syntax, and when using an interwiki link as opposed to an external link, the external link arrow isn't shown next to the link, [[Main Page|just like with normal links (such as this one)]].<br /> <br /> While our [[Special:Interwiki|interwiki table]] is considerably cleaner than most sites', I'd still like to propose at least some removals:<br /> * '''all non-wikia: Wikia interwikis''' &amp;mdash; typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[bionicle-wikia:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; is almost exactly as long as typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:c:bionicle:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;. You can link to any Wikimedia site (Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, etc.) by using the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[project:language code:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikipedia:fr:France]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the French Wikipedia's page &quot;France&quot; or &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wiktionary:fi:lollapalooza]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiktionary's page &quot;lollapalooza&quot;. Likewise, you can link to any ShoutWiki site with the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:subdomain:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:fi.24:Jack Bauer]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiki 24's page &quot;Jack Bauer&quot;, so I'm not sure what's the benefit of having multiple .wikia.com interwikis. For prefixes like &quot;wookie&quot; or &quot;wookiee&quot;, most users don't remember offhand how many e's there is in that word, so they'll likely find it easier to type &quot;wikia:c:starwars:Page&quot; when they mean &quot;Page on Wikia's Star Wars wiki&quot;.<br /> * '''acronym: and dictionary:''' &amp;mdash; I'm under the impression that these aren't really used anywhere, and truthfully, why would they when we have [[wiktionary:|Wiktionary]]?<br /> * '''mediazilla:''' &amp;mdash; Bugzilla is dead, long live Bugzilla! But actual bug reports against any and all MediaWiki things developed upstream are to be made in [https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/ Phabricator].<br /> * '''sourceforge:''' &amp;mdash; [[wikipedia:SourceForge|SourceForge]] ♥ adware. (There's also the fact that this is relatively unused here, given that Brickimedia's software is developed either in GitHub (original, first-party additions, like the Refreshed skin etc.) or on Wikimedia's infrastructure at wikimedia.org.)<br /> * '''wikinfo:''' &amp;mdash; oh look, it's [[wikipedia:History of wikis#Wikinfo|an outdated fork of the English Wikipedia which allows original research.]] (There's also the fact that its URL is outdated, so if we want to keep it in the interwiki table, its URL has to be updated.)<br /> <br /> Thoughts, comments, suggestions, feedback? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :+2 ;) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Looks like it'll make everything less confusing. --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 15:34, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Sure {{C|although, would really like to keep &quot;wookiee:&quot; as an alternative extra, because I know I'll forget about this and wonder why the link doesn't work. And it's so much shorter :P}}. Just wondering why we need the &quot;c:&quot; for the Wikia links? Why not just &quot;wikia:harrypotter&quot; instead of &quot;wikia:c:harrypotter&quot;? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It's largely a leftover from the days when &quot;Wikia&quot; was known as '''W'''iki'''c'''ities, hence w:c: (on Wikia sites; other, off-Wikia sites use wikia:c: as the w: interwiki prefix is either left for Wikipedia or left unused). http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:harrypotter:Hermione_Granger redirects to http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Hermione_Granger, as you'd expect and want, but if you leave out the c: part, you're redirected to a page called &quot;Harrypotter:Hermione Granger&quot; on www.wikia.com, Wikia's corporate site.&lt;br /&gt;That being said, we could change the wikia: prefix so that it includes the c: part, too; right now the wikia: prefix points to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/$1 but we could change that to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:$1 so that you'd only need to type &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:harrypotter:Hermione Granger]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the aforementioned page. The only &quot;disadvantage&quot; of this is that the wikia: prefix then cannot be used to link to pages on Wikia's corporate/main site, www.wikia.com, but given that the &quot;old&quot; www.wikia.com was rebranded as &quot;Community Central&quot; years ago and moved to community.wikia.com, I'm not sure if anyone even needs to link to the current corporate domain. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :{{Support}}, I can have my bot find-and-replace as necessary upon removal of certain prefixes. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Can we request concept art? ==<br /> Out of curiosity can we ask for concept art from the RULG? They don't seem to mind sharing concept art in general, such as having a whole site dedicated to concept art of Chima. So could we ask them for like non licensed concept art? I'd personally love to see Friends and Ninjago, and it be a great &quot;exclusive reveal&quot; for us. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Minifigs: a picture is worth a thousand words ==<br /> <br /> (Credit to CJC95 for the title)<br /> <br /> Currently minifig articles have lengthy parts/print descriptions. That seems counterproductive to me. Chances are, when visitors search for minifig articles, they want to see an image, not a description. Minifig articles already have lots of pictures, so why should visitors bother reading about a minifig's torso print when they can just look at it? And certainly if the descriptions aren't being read, the time spent writing them could be put to better use improving the site in other ways.<br /> <br /> An argument could be made that descriptions fill up minifig articles with content. But if the content isn't particularly insightful, what's the point of having it? All it does is detract from useful and interesting material, which is what visitors come to the site for. Pages like [[Batman]] and [[Obi-Wan Kenobi]] are prime examples of this. There's so much text, but (respectfully) it says so little of consequence! Thanks to all that text the images--the good stuff--are relegated to the bottom of the page. If visitors load the page only to see a wall of text instead of the images they came looking for, they're going to continue their search on another site.<br /> <br /> I suggest an alternative to the current system. Minifig pages should focus on images, not descriptions. Place the images in the very first section of content. Next to each minifig, place at most a few bullet points of description focusing only on particularly noteworthy aspects of that minifig.<br /> <br /> What are your thoughts? -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 23:56, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Edit: the above applies to the &quot;Background&quot; sections too. Brickipedia isn't primarily a storyline wiki. IMO any story information should exist exclusively on those pages detailing the media where the story actually took place. To use the Batman example, there shouldn't be any story info from the DC comics (they don't even have to do with Lego!), and story info from, say, ''Lego Batman 2'' should exist solely on the ''Lego Batman 2'' page. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Numerical analysis - I stuck the Batman description in a word-counter. It was just shy of 3700 words, about 1 in 50 of those words are &quot;suit&quot;, and would apparently take someone with an average reading level 13 minutes to read. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:58, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Completely agree, I suggested removing descriptions from minifigure articles a couple of years ago but it got shot down. As long as we have images of every angle of the minifigure (front, back, side, alt face expression, and a shot with gear which covers head/body removed), I think we could stick all the shots in some sort of new template, get rid of the descriptions and as you said, have a section for any relevant notes about that particular minifigure variant. Not sure about the background suggestion- I think it's good to have info on who the minifigure's actually based on, although a lot of them could be cut down. Also not all characters have a LEGO-based backstory, they just appear in sets (eg, [[Quinlan Vos]]) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Hmm, good point: some description is necessary. Maybe descriptions could be moved to the intro of the page? For Quinlan Vos, it could be something like: &quot;Quinlan Vos is a minifigure released in 2011, as a part of the Star Wars theme. Vos was a Jedi Master who fell to the Dark Side while on an undercover mission. After turning back to the light, he served as a general in the Clone Wars and survived Order 66.&quot; We already link to Wookieepedia at the bottom of the page, so people interested in reading more can do so. Maybe we could incorporate the Wookieepedia link more prominently though. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **:I think its more important just to limit the background to stuff that at least relates to LEGO sets. There was what, one set based on the dark knight trilogy, but we have a few paragraphs on the movies. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I've made this sometime ago but I haven't publicly posted it except with people on chat, but I'll share it with you guys :) https://jsfiddle.net/codynguyen1116/p1c3h30f/ a MediaWiki gallery component reimagined, with an arrow that'd bring up the description on a click. That part hasn't been written in JS yet, but currently it has most of what the idea is. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sure. I wouldn't mind asking in a survey, but sure. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good point, I'd support holding off on any change until we see if readers actually find this content useful- it'd be stupid to remove it all only to find people actually wanted it there. That is, if that survey ever actually happens. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Good idea! --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 01:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * What would be the point in the site if we got rid of descriptions? :S The only thing that would seperate from other sites would be the background sections, which are much harder to write by the way. Someone may be wondering what the symbol on one varation of a Stormtrooper is or what Maya's skirt is called. '''Oppose''' {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *: It's not getting rid of every description. You can still say what the symbols and stuff are, because that is useful information.. But do you really think that people will gain something from being told that Batman's trousers are black (as the Batman article no doubt says for every variation). At least we can all agree that the [[Darth Vader]] article does this much better than say the way [[Anakin Skywalker]] does. Would anyone (including yourself) read that? Even if there is a good piece of information about the symbols on his belt in there, no one will ever find it. Ever. There doesn't need to have every word removed, just...all the crap, useless ones. ('''summary''' - I, and I assume most others here, wouldn't even care if we kept descriptions, but they need to be actually reader friendly, not just spurting every bit of information.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *::What would updated descriptions even look like? I tried my best to make [[Olivia]]'s as short as possible, but she lacks detail. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *:::Well, that would work better if the bit that said &quot;In 41100 Heartlake Private Jet&quot; had a picture of that one next to the description, and &quot;In 41034 Summer Caravan,&quot; also had that picture. Pictures would help the description surely. Why should I care what colour her top is in that set if I don't know what it looks like? :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> : Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:NovaHawk/mfg|This]] is just an idea of a new minifig page layout- obviously the template needs to be made prettier so there aren't awkward white spaces and the tabs need to be layed out differently, but you get the idea. Note the &quot;seaweed&quot; variant has a notes section for important notes about that particular variant, which would replace the description. I think this length background would be good for a max length as well. I dunno, just an idea, let me know what you think. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good response. Thanks everyone. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Well, it was either write a one line nothing response or put off responding until I had time to actually look at it properly and be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:08, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Overall I'd be interested in seeing a version with the formatting improved. Some potential issues with a) low-res images b) big blank space when no back printing/alternative face c) minifigures with 15 or so variants d) Mobile - it don't work. e) large stretched out infobox on the RHS. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Fan namespace==<br /> Ok, so the LEGO Fanatics Wiki has been imported into the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. All the Customs and Stories have been imported here, and any userpages from Customs have also been imported (anyone who had userpages on there should have received a message on their talk page here). There are still a few things that need to be cleared up:<br /> * Most links won't be working since all pages are in a different namespace. I've made a simple template, {{tl|fan}}, if you want to fix any links {{C|eg, &lt;nowiki&gt;{{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}&lt;/nowiki&gt; goes to {{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}}}<br /> * Categories were not imported in the dump, and I've intentionally not done this as [[User:NovaHawk/FanCats|an organised category structure]] was passed on the wiki before it closed but wasn't implemented, so please don't go around making any categories just because they're redlinks.<br /> * Main page needs to be updated to at least acknowledge this part of the site.<br /> * Change to Customs infoboxes- for any new customs- just type your name in next to Creator, ie, |Creator={{USERNAME}}. This will generate appropriate autocategories. If it's a co-creation with another user, you can use |Creator2= and |Creator3= for second and third users. If there are more needed, I can add them.<br /> * Infoboxes- The Stories infobox ([[Fan:Team_Kitten|eg]]) doesn't match the rest of the site, I'd like to bring it more in line with templates like {{tl|Part}} or {{tl|Review}}. Opinions? Also, the Customs infoboxes used to have a choice between two styles- the style currently used most of our infoboxes like {{tl|Set}}, and an old style like {{tl|set}} from like 2010 or something. I haven't imported the Customs infobox template so they all now all are based on whatever the current infobox style is for the rest of the wiki, hope that's ok.<br /> * Quizzes- do we still want this? As far as I know, it was never set up. And remember, you can only have one quiz per wiki with this extension- do we want it for the fan namespace?<br /> * The wiki was called LEGO Fanatics Wiki, and after the move, was put in the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. What do we want to call this section of the site (we can't use LEGO Fanatics '''Wiki'''), and do we still want the namespace called &quot;Fan&quot;?<br /> :{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ------<br /> * @bottom two sections-<br /> ** My vote's to not use the quiz extension as a part of the fan namespace- we can set it up as a general LEGO trivia game if we want to use it at all.<br /> ** Brickipedia Creations? (to match naming style of Brickipedia Reviews) with a &quot;Creation&quot; namespace? I don't really care, but I don't think Brickipedia Fanatics is going to work.<br /> ::{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::I'm neutral to whatever we decide to do. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:33, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Fan is the best namespace option, because Fanatics (as both a namespace and a wiki name) is rubbish. I don't know how quiz works, but if its not set up it won't be anytime soon, so I wouldn't worry about it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 09:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** &quot;Brickipedia Fans&quot; sounds like Fans of Brickipedia to me :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * &quot;Fan&quot; sounds okay to me...no quiz here...infobox is okay. One thing I'm wondering about is the skin. Everybody probably knows I'm against the different colors, ''but'' it might be good to have them with the wikis merged again. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I pefer fanatics to fans, but like Nova it may come across as a self tribute. Though the argument could be made Brickipedia reviews aren't reviews of the site.{{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ==Vote/Rating extension broken?==<br /> * Anyone else having problems leaving a rating or a vote? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:14, 15 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*I thought you meant page ratings, with the ratings for customs I do. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* That hasn't been set up yet, will get it set up in the next 24 hrs or so {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::* Should be working now {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Contests ==<br /> Okay are last contest was a mess, I'm (wo?)man enough to admit that, but the fact of the matter is contests get us new viewers and &quot;potentially&quot; new users. We still have all the DTCs of the year and the maze, I doubt reviewing any of them will get much traction (though I personally still want to see Berry's bat cave review, that we never sent despite being green lit :P). I suggest we give away the Star Wars hoth set as that's been reviewed and complained about to death and unless we can add something new (a positive review) I'm not sure it's worth doing. I have an idea for a contest here, [[User:Soupperson1/JuneContest]]. It's basic but after the last two contests I don't want any potential negative feedback. We could also use Nova's &quot;coming soon&quot; olympics themed contest, but perhaps we could advertise that to the side of a regular contest as it'll be going on for months. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I don't know what sets we have available since it changes every so often (I think the Batcave is gone). Only Meiko would know. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I am not aware as to the status of sets to give away. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Meiko was kind enough to remind me of what we have on the table: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; he says that either the site or the recipient will need to pay the shipping fees though. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Pride month celebration for Brickipedia ==<br /> <br /> June is officially pride month (which includes LGBTQ for example), and in celebration of this I was thinking that we as Brickipedia should do something to celebrate! First idea is to make our logo rainbow-y, although I don't quite have any other ideas. Who supports this? :D [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *As far as I can tell June is only LGBTQ pride month (at least in the US). Are you sure it isn't just sexual pride month? I'm only skimming a Wikipedia article, so please redirect me. :P I'm not fond of this idea though because I think that if we recognized this month it would only be fair to recognize others...that might be kind of fun if we still did themed logos, but I don't know. It's also a political action and I really do not want to politicize things here. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everything is or can be interpreted as a political action. The fact that we don't charge readers, let alone reusers of our content, a fee for accessing the site? Politics. The fact that we don't stamp huge, obtrusive watermarks on our images and/or other media files? Politics. When we support or oppose a proposition? Politics.&lt;br /&gt;Complete neutrality, while desireable in a way, is probably never possible. Even Wikipedia, Google and several other high-profile websites based in the US [[wikipedia:Protests against SOPA and PIPA|spoke against some controversial bills]] not that many years ago &amp;mdash; in ways which were far more radical and visible than just slightly altering the logo. This is, of course, far from being a simple question, but I don't see this being harmful to Brickipedia and/or our mission.&lt;br /&gt;'''tl,dr:''' No objections to Cody's proposal from me. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 03:50, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Fair. But I don't think that this is a necessary political action whereas the issues you've listed are things that we would have to take a stance on just by virtue of being an online encyclopedia. This is an outside agenda though and I am frankly not okay with that. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 12:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Cool with me. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:24, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Strong oppose. Not not the month itself or anything, just featuring it on here. This has absolutely nothing to do with Lego and we're a wiki, not Facebook. Basically, same as Berrybrick, I don't want to drag this site into political issues. And I don't think featuring any sexuality issue on a site dedicated to what many perceive to be a little kids toy is remotely appropriate {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I just looked up &quot;LGBTQ&quot;, and I agree with Nova. --&lt;font face=&quot;corbel,segoe ui,sans-serif&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;CP&lt;/b&gt;]][[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#ff6363&quot;&gt;player&lt;/b&gt;]] ~ [[special:Contributions/CPplayer90210|&lt;i style=&quot;color:#333&quot;&gt;LEGO rules!&lt;/i&gt;]]&lt;/font&gt; 23:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I wrote a long thing but deleted it, as I basically found myself repeating myself a lot. The issue I currently see isn't with the month$ itself (I, and I'm sure everyone here in this forum, is pro-LGBT), but more of the implications - once you take a stand on one thing%, anything you don't take a stand on can be taken as a view - if someone asks us to mark black history or domestic abuse awareness month, we can't say no without making it seem like we oppose them. So, I have nothing against the month, the concept, putting a rainbow in the logo, or promoting LGBT awareness on the wiki - I worry about a precedent being set. Footnotes: ($ - Per Berry, the only thing I can find for pride month is the LGBTQ component. % - I am here including things that don't naturally concern us - yes, things like SOPA are political issues, but they would concern us, as we are a website. I don't see Wikipedia and Google taking a stance on SOPA as radical because it would (potentially) affect them - it is no different to a food manufacturer protesting food packaging laws, or what not. It would be radical if Wikipedia decided that it was going to campaign for abortion rights.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Pretty sure everyone on here is a liberal or at least OK with LGBT+ rights, but I don't think we need to do any advertising of it here. We're a website about LEGO. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 22:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Strong Oppose''', per Nova. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *If were justing changing the logo for a week, whats the big deal? :P Im more open to celebrating holidays, but this is one of the more tricker ones. I don't think there's any gay characters in any LEGO sets and the only gay actor to have a minifigure is Luke Evans, so we cant write a blog or anything. If you have ideas for anything else, sure. And @ the rest of you Im not sure we should really classify this as a political statement, more than us being inclusive. Its like not celebrating April's Fools or Christmas. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> **We are already inclusive. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == LEGO set offer requests ==<br /> <br /> We used to handle this on Admin, but since that's been abolished, where do we want to do it now? Someplace like Forums where we discuss it or something sort of like FA and BotM where it gets its own page where we can vote or discuss? I would almost suggest giving something to BoTM or people who have otherwise done a lot of good stuff, but someone would have to pay for shipping. Moreover, do admins get first dibs, at least so we can set stuff aside for special occasions without requests taking up everything? Where can we find an easy access list of available sets? Tthat might be a small detraction to having it here. A policy should probably be drawn up. Any other things we ought to discuss? (And, in case it is relevant, this is what we've currently got: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; Meiko is holding onto them right now, so I don't ''think'' we are in danger of losing them, but LEGO probably wants to see us using them.) Thank you many grazis. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Pardon for doing this as an anon. I think it would be nice to, at least as a ''start'', have the exact same pages/system as we had on the admin wiki. Including that helpful table of what has currently been purchased, and what resources are left. Maybe an added column on what the set's current state is too (for example, &quot;In Meiko's temporary possession&quot;), because I can't remember if we had that before. For BotM, I always thought that the honour/template was enough of a rush. :P It would be nice to give them something small, like a CMF, but I believe the last time that was discussed, it was decided that the shipping costs to do that were ridiculous? It would be great if there was something digital we could give away... In response to LEGO wanting to see us using the sets, and regarding how late it is to review some them, any ideas on other stuff we could do with them, something that might be creative or get us some press? Nothing immediately comes to mind (I'll update this if something does later), but you guys may have ideas. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Descriptive Videos on Set Articles ==<br /> <br /> Sorry for doing a second posting as an anon, but a thought popped in my head during the discussion of &quot;what to do with sets&quot;/&quot;what could the wiki use&quot;, and I wanted to post it before I forget. You know how in Descriptions, when talking about a function like &quot;applying pressure to the two joints at the side will cause the gears to move, which moves up the wings and creates...&quot;, might it be helpful to have little clips of these features in action, to act as a bit of a visual aid? It's something that would set us apart from other sites (&amp; Brickia), something that is genuinely useful (you don't have to hunt down a review, skim through the whole thing to find the clip, etc.), something that adds clarity when the descriptions are too complex to explain with few words, etc. Most of us, I imagine, have the capacitiy to record and upload short clips. And for sets that none of us own, maybe we can get permission from people like LEGOJANG to download, cut out (maybe mute talking), and upload these tiny portions from their video reviews? Ooh, actually, contrary to the idea of muting, it would actually be great to get and post some audio from sound bricks that LEGO has included in their sets. Anyway, hope that this idea seems helpful, and do-able. Let me know your thoughts. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)</div> 108.173.7.175 https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&diff=1059120 Brickipedia:Forum 2016-06-12T16:05:38Z <p>108.173.7.175: /* LEGO set offer requests */</p> <hr /> <div>[[File:Forums.svg|center]]<br /> __NEWSECTIONLINK__<br /> Welcome to '''Brickipedia's forum'''. This is the place to propose and discuss any amendments to the [[Brickipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] or suggest new policies. To make a new proposal, please [http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Forum&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new make a new section at the bottom of the page]. Please see [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive|the archives]] for past discussions - [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2014|2014]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2015|2015]], 2016 ([[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/1|Jan - Feb]], [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016/2|Mar - onwards]]).<br /> <br /> For recent updates to the site and any policy changes, please see [[Brickipedia:Site updates]].<br /> <br /> -----<br /> Also, don't forget to check '''[[Forum:Index]]''' for a number of unresolved forums.<br /> -----<br /> <br /> <br /> == Minifigure Galleries ==<br /> {{archive<br /> |result=implement<br /> |content=<br /> It's annoying putting alternative faces and back printing in galleries and people often forget to do it. I made [[User:Soupperson1/MinifigGallery]] and I think it would work better compared to our current format. Thoughts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Looks great! But having it on 3 separate galleries seems like it might take up a lot of room on an article unnecessarily. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:23, 8 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :*There should be that many pictures on the article anyway. On larger articles like Batman it will save space as the gallery is overcrowded {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* I like the idea, but I'm not a fan of having three galleries, it makes this area way too long. I still think we should have tabs which let you switch angles for each variant (which I suggested about a year ago but noone paid attention- [[User_talk:NovaHawk/MG2|link to example]], [[User:NovaHawk/common.js|link to JS you'll need to put in your personal common.js]])<br /> :::*I like the tab idea but your example isn't working for me, it's just the normal Anakin. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::* Yep, like I said, you need to copy the code from [[User:NovaHawk/common.js]] to {{USERNAME}}/common.js for it to work {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::*Ooh that works, though I think the videogame variant should have its own section. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::* Of course- that was simply for testing, I should have specified that, sorry :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> :::::::*I tried doing multiple mini figures together it didn't work, I'll leave that stuff to people who know what they're doing :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::::::::*Yeah, it's only set up for one- the JS code is probably going to be quite long if it's going to accomodate like 20 entries, so I didn't bother because I'm lazy :P It can definitely be set up to work with more though. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::*Your the opposite of lazy! Your our most valuable contributor {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :*Why does it need more than the current three? (I would say &quot;I'll add more entries&quot;, but we all know I'd forget :P) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 08:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Did this ever get used? Or does it still need to be updated&gt; [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I don't know, does it have enough support? If so I'll work on the code required to get it operational {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:34, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** It looks like there is support, from the whole four of us who discussed. I don't know who will use it any time soon, but could be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==Stop treating DC and Marvel as subthemes?==<br /> {{Archive|result=Split them|content=<br /> * Just wondering people think about not having DC Comics and Marvel as subthemes of Super Heroes, and instead rename the pages &quot;DC Comics Super Heroes&quot; and &quot;Marvel Super Heores&quot;. To me they're more like parallel themes as they don't really share any of the same characters, universe, etc so it doesn't make sense to have them under the same theme :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:33, 30 October 2015 (UTC)<br /> ** I understand your thinking behind this but I'm having a hard time figuring if it's the best route to take or not. Neutral for now. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 16:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)<br /> **I believe it was only listed as one theme when it was introduced at NYCC, I agree they should be seperated now as they haven't been grouped together since.. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ===Vote===<br /> ;Split<br /> #{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> # *shrug* - in some places they already are it seems. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ;Don't split<br /> <br /> ;Comments<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ===Enacting===<br /> This needs to be enacted. When we have enacted it, please note it here so we can archive this. If there are any issues with implementing this, then discuss below. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Infobox colours changed, Marvel moved to [[Marvel Super Heroes]], DC Comics moved to [[DC Comics Super Heroes]]. The only problem is what to do with [[Super Heroes]]- I was going to turn it into a disambig page, but then I saw it's an FA and would feel bad doing that {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:58, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The content seems mostly split into theme sections, so we can not take the DC stuff, move it there, Marvel stuff, move it there and make them both FAs, then leave any other stuff on the Super Heroes page / make it a redirect. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 12:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==New namespace: Help/Brickipedia Help?==<br /> * Just wondering what people would think of a new namespace designed for people to ask questions. It'd basically be a fifth tab along with &quot;Page&quot;/&quot;Discussion&quot;/&quot;Inventory&quot;/&quot;Reviews&quot;. Have questions about a set/minifig/video game? Hit the &quot;help&quot; tab and type in your question. Basically I'm thinking of this as an alternative to Brickipedia Answers which never happened because we don't have enough technical people who can make this happen, and it saves you from going to another wiki to ask a question anyway. Yes we have [[Special:Wikiforum|forums]], but noone looks at those. Either that, or we could open up the Talk namespace to be about the set as well, not just the article- just because Wikipedia/Wookieepedia/every other wiki reserves their talk namespace for article talk, doesn't mean we have to. And it's not like the talk pages get used a whole lot here- we could just split the talk article into two parts. Anyway, just an idea I randomly had. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:23, 18 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Given our young audience having the 'Talk' tab is quite confusing as one would automatically assume that it's a page to talk about the subject and not necessarily about what could be done to correct certain information or otherwise improve the content of the article. Allowing a discussion area of some sort closely tied to the article itself would help boost interaction on the site though it would need monitoring and logged accordingly. None of us want a repeat of the disaster with article comments we had back at (dare I say it) Wikia. {{User:SKP4472/sig2014}} 02:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Per SKP (except I don't dare). Maybe we could even rename &quot;talk&quot; to maintenance, or something like it but shorter? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 06:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd like to see more discussion on this, but its not going to happen here in the middle of the forum. I'll talk about it with you if I ever see you on Chat Nova. I'll close this in a day or so, and when we have considered this more/aren't in the middle of other big changes, we can discuss this again [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Let's talk: Navbars==<br /> ===Design===<br /> How do we unify the design of them all (although most are similar already)? Do we make it look more like our other templates? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> On a side note should we make the edges curved or add pictures, or the logo for the theme instead of the font? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> * I believe there is (in that, there was at some point), some sort of design guidelines for the site in general being worked on, so really it depends on those. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ===Types===<br /> What sort of things should have navbars? Currently most themes have one for sets and minifigures. I imagine there are a few niche ones floating around out there though. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :We have an animal one, figure one, I'm not sure what else. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> : We have a [[Template:Weapons|weapons]] one as well, and [[Template:People]], and LEGOLAND stuff, and pretty much everything else in [[:Category:Navigation templates]] :P We could use some subcategories there. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Started a list at [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates]]. Please add any you know. That way we have some orderly way of upgrading them. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Information overload===<br /> What do people think of the way big themes are split into years? How can we make navigating large swathes of information (e.g. {{tl|SWfigs}}) usable without comprising information.<br /> *I was going to experiment with something like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:The_Beach_Boys ]. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Based on something Codyn suggested, I made [[User:CJC95/Sandbox]]. Obviously all I did was take two different bits of code and stick them inside each other without much thought, but the basic idea is the important thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Absolutely love this idea. :P Aesthetics could of course be improved but the functionality is what's important, we can improve on looks later [[User:Codyn329|Codyn329]] ([[User talk:Codyn329|talk]]) 22:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Liking the idea of tabbers- I'll write some CSS to fix the colours later. I'm thinking we could group things further, like in &quot;Galactic Republic&quot;, have columns like Clone Troopers, Senators, Droids, etc. Also since the info isn't being shown all at once, maybe we should double up, eg have Leia in both Rebel Alliance and Resistance? But for sets, if we just had one template and used tabbers, that'd be great. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Is there a way to get a specific one to be default for an individual page? Can we get it so that a 2013 Star Wars set can show the 2013 tab when it opens? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Mobile===<br /> Some appear to be unusable on mobile - A few don't scale too badly but don't look like they belong with the mobile skin that much. Mobile use of navboxes is a hard one to deal with. Wikipedia handles it by just disabling them on the mobile site. I don't like that solution (it annoys me when I'm on mobile Wikipedia), but I'm not too sure how to address this directly yet. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :[[mw:+2|+2]] to this; mobile is a very important segment and it deserves the appropriate attention (and if you ask me, Brickimedia's mobile support is pretty awesome) and &quot;it doesn't work on mobile, let's disable it&quot; is a non-solution. We have a lot of clever, technically-oriented people who can solve this problem; I'm sure of that. So let's build something that has never been seen before! --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === When do we split them ===<br /> I'm just curious when a navbar is big enough to be split and how big we want each section to be. http://en.brickimedia.org/index.php?title=Template:DCFigs&amp;oldid=605762 is much smaller then the mini-doll figure section at {{t|FriendsFigs}} but do we want to split it? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Generally its UCS really, as it depends on the theme etc. How would you split up the Friends? If there is a logical way to split it, feel free to at least see what it looks like. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Non physical section or not ===<br /> I never liked non physical sections, if [[Victor Zsasz]] is a villain why can't he be in the villains section? I know you could argue were supposed to sell sets and what not, but are we not technically promoting the video games? Plus a lot of characters such as Peter isn't in production, so we wouldn't be selling anything besides second hand stuff. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I was going to suggest this - well, I was going to just do it and see what it looked like :P - I was going to suggest like, a superscript (cross) and then a note at the bottom saying &quot;video game only&quot;, etc. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I think I'm the opposite of CJC here- I hate having these in line with physical figs. Eg, [[Template:NinjagoFigs]], the Creatures section and to a lesser extent the Ninja allies section just looks a mess to me. If you did this with {{tl|MarvelFigs}} where 2/3 of the characters are VG only, you'd have a very hard time finding the actual minifigures, which is what I'd be guessing a significant portion of people who visit here actually care about. If we went with the tabber idea, I think it could work for everyone though, eg VG SW Republic characters could be further split into Clone Troopers, Senators, etc, and non-physical? They'd be in Republic, just not the smaller category. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 02:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Tabbers does solve this problem afaic, as you can just put smaller VG only sections on each category. This solve the issue with the VG only sections in current form. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::[[User:NovaHawk/tabberInfobox|Here's]] an example with tabs I've been working on, let me know if anything needs to be changed. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 09:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Naming===<br /> [[Brickipedia:Navigational templates|Here]] is an incomplete list of current navbars. The main reason is the lack of naming conventions. Some use just the theme name for a template, and hence they are missing from the list currently. Some use &quot;Figs&quot; and &quot;Sets&quot;, others use &quot;sets&quot; and &quot;figs&quot;. Some use initials for the theme name, others don't (this disparity even exists within a theme, so we have JWfigs but JurassicWorldsets.<br /> All these make it very confusing to actually find what template you want. Hence when they are updated and upgraded I suggest renaming them on the convention &quot;Theme Name&quot; + &quot; figs&quot; or &quot; sets&quot;. (Note also the space between words). Discuss if you please. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> * A whole theme name with a space is so tiring to type though :P Yes, sounds good to have some consistency, I'm always having to check what the names are for themes I'm not editing all the time, not having to think and just type the theme name would be good. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Status===<br /> Where are we on design wise? I'd like to move forward with this. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Well there was no response on the example, so I wasn't sure whether to move forward with it. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was referring more to the apparent design guideline things that are in the works, although when I'm back on pc, I'll look again at yours and just start changing things (so next Friday probably) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==BoTM minimum threshold==<br /> It was decided (see the [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016|archive]], where it shall be within a short while of me submitting this) that there should be a minimum threshold for a nominee to gain Brickipedian of the Month. However no specific threshold was discussed. This should probably be decided, or else the minimum threshold policy is hard to enforce. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Anyone? :P If not I'll just set the minimum as three. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Three sounds fine. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> {{Archive|result=exclude BoTM from unanimous rule of voting|content=<br /> ;Exclusion request.<br /> *BoTM needs to be excluded from [[Brickipedia:Forum/Archive/2016#Global &quot;unanimous rule&quot; for voting|the global unanimous rule]]. It is necessary for a BoTM to last a month. As there is no opposes, they are all unanimous, as long as they have one supporter. This would mean any threshold would not ever be used, as every BoTM request would pass instantly after a week. So obviously the global unanimous rule can no longer be global. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Oh yeah, definitely. forgot about that one, sorry {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> ==A change to the &quot;featured article&quot;==<br /> * By &quot;featured article&quot;, I mean the box on the main page. Currently, every month it shows [[Black Knights]]. I'd like to propose changing &quot;Featured article&quot; to some other name (please add suggestions), and showcase a complete article for 2 weeks, giving priority to articles recently promoted to complete status. Any future FA's take priority, and run for a month as before. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 08:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*'''Strongly disagree''', I like FA as they are. Besides if we do this no one will write FAs anymore. If we want variation we can just change it to an existing FA? If we want to share waste complete articles, we can add a section called &quot;articles with the ratings recently changed&quot; {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Can we still call it a featured article, and differentiate it from the complete ones somehow? :P If we want a new name though, I suggest Showdog, with the [[Dog Show Judge]] (once he is released) as a mascot. When he shows up, people will know it is special. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I was thinking something more along the lines of something boring like &quot;promoted article&quot; :P {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Sure. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Or we could finally use our mascot :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Request for comment: Implement more ads across Brickimedia ==<br /> <br /> This is a critical topic currently and probably will have a lot of mixed feelings. Considering the amount of ads were a fundamental reason we moved ''off'' Wikia, I'm not expecting a lot of support here, but as it stands right now, we don't generate enough income off a single ad to keep up with our expenses. Our site's expensive, and we only need more and more performance out of our server and right now we've got just about as much server as we can afford. Then we add in the fact that we have to ship contest prizes which is not cheap (actually usually costs more to ship one prize to one person than we pay monthly for the server.....), and I don't want to pay out of pocket for them, nor would [[User:Ajraddatz|Adrian]] want to. Hence, we need more income, and since we can't rely on donations that we almost never get (except that one time from [[User:NBP3.0|NBP3.0]]), we have to resort to advertising. As a result, I want to ask for feedback, please comment stating whether you '''support''' or '''oppose''' an increase of ads per page (1-2 more perhaps), and if you support, suggest ad placements if you have any suggestions, or if you oppose, give some reason why. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:10, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *I'm fine with this as long as they aren't like, pop-ups or covering up text or anything. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:12, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I too would be fine with having a &lt;i&gt;few&lt;/i&gt; more ads, as-long as they're non-intrusive to our content. {{User:Clone gunner commander jedi/signature}} 21:16, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Can we trade in some of the sets LEGO gave us in exchange for them paying for shipping? It's honestly ridiculous how much that costs. Beyond that, some questions that I want to see addressed before proceeding with this: 1. Would there be a significant revenue increase? We're actually breaking even on the hosting costs these days ($45 last month, -$40 for hosting). 2. How much are we planning on spending for shipping things around? I'm coming to a point in my life where the finances are a bigger concern (as in, moving out and getting a job after the degree). I have no problem still paying for hosting and shipping contest prizes, but I want to make sure we have as much info as possible that I can include in my budget. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 21:23, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Quick answer, no we can't rely on LEGO to ship for us. They'll ship to one person who will then handle everything from there. At that point, TLG is out of the logistics equation, and the only involvement they want after that is us to send them a link to what the set(s) were used for. With more ads, we would get an increase in revenue, especially if they're prominent. Right now, with it being at the bottom of the page, I don't think they're getting much impressions and as a result not generating much revenue. For example, I've had https://www.harrellsecurities.com up for a little over a week and generated nearly $20 already, with a tiny fraction of the traffic Brickimedia gets. That's why I think we need to have some more ads, perhaps one near the top of the page as well since that will probably generate ''much'' more revenue than the one at the bottom. I see what you're saying about finances are a bigger concern for you now. They are for me too, that's why I can't pay out of pocket for anything for this site, since all my money gets reinvested into business or business-related travel, and anything I have left over has to go into savings. However, if we can ensure we break even and have some extra income to spare for times when we don't break even or need to ship out expensive prizes, I'm happy and able to take over the financial side of things here. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 21:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would we be able to add more adds on certain sections, like reviews or blog posts? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** Perhaps, but those wouldn't be very effective since those don't get as much views. Blog posts especially don't get many views by visitors, and chances are none of our registered users will click them. Better to just put another ad placement or two on ''every'' page than on specific ones that could just be a hit or a miss as far as revenue creation is concerned. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * '''Support''', but as per CJC and CGCJ. And honestly, I'd much prefer it if any set we got from LEGO was just reviewed by whoever it's sent to so we don't have to pay out shipping costs all the time. It'd be nice to actually be making money on this site for once, and maybe pay back Ajr/NBP/Meiko who have already sunk so much money into the site. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''' I honestly had never noticed that this site had ads until a few weeks ago. Anyway, I strongly support having more ads on articles. One solitary advertisement at the bottom of the page is not going to make much of a difference. This site generated $45.00 last month. Barnick's generated $20.00 in a little over ''a week''. This site surely has many more viewers than the one that he linked. If we are barely making enough to keep this boat afloat, something needs to change. [[User:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;lime&quot;&gt;LCF&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;([[User talk:Edward Nigma|&lt;font color=&quot;#6600FF&quot;&gt;talk!&lt;/font&gt;]])&lt;/sup&gt; 01:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * So, would the ad in the sitenotice be considered unintrusive by the people supporting only if the ads are unintrusive? I honestly don't know because I have adblocker and just saw a huge empty white gap (which I quickly took care of) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The way I look at it, it's not in the content, it's not in front of the content, and it doesn't cover the content, so it's not really intrusive. All the content is still there, just 90px farther down (or less on mobile). If other people feel otherwise it can be changed but there aren't too many good ad placements in our interface other than that which wouldn't be within the content section. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 06:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I don't see the issue in it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Support''': With the ad adversity, I trust that this will be handled carefully. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Comment''': I applied for the [http://shop.lego.com/en-US/Affiliate-Program LEGO Shop Affiliate Program], got approved, and now converted most of our ads to LEGO ads. They generate revenue a bit differently so we'll see how it plays out in comparison to the current Google Ad at the bottom of each page. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:16, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ooh, awesome. I'll try to remember to click a link on here before buying stuff for the May the 4th promotion. Also, do we have some sort of affiliate id we can stick on the end of URLs? I was thinking we could make a change to {{tl|QuoteLEGO.com}} and stick something on the end of those links to the shop as well. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** I haven't looked into all of it but I believe we do. This is one of the codes (among many) it offers me:&lt;pre&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;offerid=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot; &gt;The Official LEGO Shop: The best selection of LEGO bricks in the world!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;IMG border=0 width=1 height=1 src=&quot;http://ad.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/show?id=flo3EmTGydA&amp;bids=115554.10000011&amp;type=3&amp;subid=0&quot;&gt;&lt;/pre&gt; I don't know if that &lt;code&gt;img&lt;/code&gt; tag is necessary or whatever but maybe the only part we need is the &lt;code&gt;href&lt;/code&gt;? idk what do you think? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** FYI also, linksynergy.com seemed to be blacklisted earlier which is part of why I'm using iframes to load these ads instead of using wikicode. [[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] might know how to bypass that blacklist for this? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 23:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Would it be possible to have the advertisement in the bottom corner not be a gif? It's extremely distracting. I can see some people who just look at images and info on the site finding the top advertisement annoying, but if your a reader you can just scroll down. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ** {{replyto|Soupperson1}} All of the available graphic ads at that size are gifs. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 22:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Ugh, we have gifs now? Isn't that a bit 90's/early 00's? Please tell me it isn't one of those fast-flashing banners saying you've won $1,000,000:P Would definitely support changing to still images if that was possible {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** {{replyto|NovaHawk}} No, they're LEGO Affiliate ads. [http://cache.lego.com/2057/images/shop/Affiliate/2014/sandcrawler/star-wars-75059-125x125.gif Example] --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 17:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** The only gifs I've seen are teh LEGO ones if you scroll down the sidebar. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == [[76052]] Live Build with Beyond The Brick ==<br /> [//www.youtube.com/user/BeyondTheBrickTV Beyond The Brick] asked me if I'd like to live build [[76052 Batman Classic TV Series - Batcave]] with them for their channel. Considering this would count as RLUG activity with this round of LUG support, and saves us the trouble of having to pay for shipping on a set this large (and heavy), is anyone opposed to this? Could manage to give us some publicity again which we haven't gotten from another online LEGO community in a while. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sounds good to me. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Neutral. It sounds like a great opportunity and would usually instantly support it. However, I believe it was scheduled for Berry to review, I'd feel bad supporting if it meant taking that off him... {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 21:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Wasn't aware of that because I can't really keep track of those things. Guess we better start saving then because that's gonna be pricey to ship... --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Just checked, apparently the proposal hasn't been closed (I've given up paying attention prizes/budget stuff), but it has 3 suporting votes and 0 opposing, the last comment taking place on February 17. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 03:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support but if it was meant for Berrybrick like Nova said, then Berrybrick should do it. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm guessing as usual, this has discussion has turned into nothing and any opportunity has passed anyway? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Administrative footnotes in regards to user rights and potential mergers. Feel free to ignore. ==<br /> <br /> === Customs ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here:<br /> * BFN has admin there. He also has admin here if he becomes activity again - No issue here.<br /> * MeikoBot has admin there. I assume that was for a specific task, and bots can have admin for specific tasks if needed here. No issue.<br /> * Nexus has patroller there. He lost patroller here due to being inactive, but can have it when he comes back to activity. No issue.<br /> * 1999bug has admin there. He is not currently active, so this is not a major issue, however I'd suggest to be able to administrate the new customs namespace here he would need to pass an RfA here. However, as he is not active, we have no real issue.<br /> <br /> So basically, no issues, but this is just a note for the archive, so to speak. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Meta ===<br /> A note that the following accounts have user rights at customs that they don't have here, and notes regarding their status here. There is more users than Customs and so I have split them into appropriate groupings:<br /> ;Already have similar rights here if they return to activity<br /> * BFN has admin<br /> * Cligra has admin<br /> * KoN has admin<br /> * NBP has admin<br /> * SKP has admin<br /> <br /> ;Cases where I'd propose that they need to pass an RfR here for their rights to transfer<br /> * 1999bug has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Codyn has admin and functionary.<br /> * LEGOSuperDKong has admin. although inactive anyway<br /> * Latenightguy has admin<br /> * Lcawte has admin. although has sysadmin here, and inactive.<br /> * Sammy has admin. Inactive.<br /> * Vector Prime has admin. Inactive<br /> <br /> ;Cases where admin at meta is for maintenance or a specific task and would not be needed anyway<br /> * CJCbot has admin &amp; bot. no longer needed. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently.<br /> * Edward Nigma has admin. rights given recently for specific maintenance tasks. Task is over. <br /> * LcawteBot has admin, bot. Bot here removed due to inactivity recently. <br /> * NXTBot has admin.<br /> * Bawt has bot.<br /> <br /> ;Misc.<br /> *Adrian (Brickimedia) has admin. user has a normal account with admin here, and this account has sysadmin anyway<br /> *The five bureaucrats at Meta (Ajr, myself, Nova, SKP, NXT) have (or can when they are active have) admin here. The two ranks are synonymous here, so no issue.<br /> * Nova has functionary there. He has had checkuser in the past here (and possibly functionary? I don't know when the merge of rights there happened), he doesn't currently. This may be due to personal request or confusion during moving accounts or something, I'm not sure, but I assume if Nova wanted them he would (or at the very least could) have them :P<br /> * Jack Phoenix has patroller there. He could have patroller here if he needed it. <br /> <br /> '''Summary:''' basically, as for customs above, this is more of an administrative footnote for the archives of the forum than anything useful for us to discuss. Once again, I am proposing that no rights be automatically imported over here during any merger - the only active users affected by this will be Latenightguy and Codyn. I'm not sure what their views are on this topic, but as there is no formal RfR process at meta, I'd have to suggest that they pass an RfR here to keep said rights. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 16:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I'm good to not have functionary here, don't really need it since the spambots are gone {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 01:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I don't know how the community would feel as me as an admin, but I think I can bring some good to the table. RFR for it like you said? As for functionary it can go either way [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 02:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** RfA for admin and RfFunctionary would be needed. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 00:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Merging the Magazine namespace back into main ==<br /> {| style=&quot;border-top: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-bottom: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-right: 1px solid #aaaaaa; border-left: 1px solid #aaaaaa;padding: 5px;background:#D9F0FF; margin-top:7px;&quot;<br /> |-<br /> ||''The following section is preserved as an archive. &lt;font color=red&gt;'''Please do not modify it.'''&lt;/font&gt;{{#if:Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)|&amp;nbsp;The result was Pages moved. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 13:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)}}<br /> ------<br /> It's really not needed. We don't have one for books, or for episodes of TV shows, etc. The reason is because we had a few scans of a couple of UK mags, but that's not enough to justify a namespace. Just stick those scans on the articles in the main space. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 15:20, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Support {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Is there actually any content in said namespace or can the Magazine namespace pages just be deleted? Support either way. It's a useless namespace that 99% of people don't know exists. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 00:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** there is content, but all formatted as mainspace articles, so it just needs to be moved back. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 01:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> * If its useless then we should get rid of it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 01:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Rip magazines :(. I'm OK with it being removed. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 05:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Wait we're still having magazine articles aren't we? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:12, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Sure --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 10:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Really, the last one was 4 years ago. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 11:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ****** [[LEGO Friends magazines|I beg to differ]] :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ******* I don't think he meant the release of magazines, but the articles being created for individual issues. There are more actual magazines then ever - there was a LEGO Star Wars one in the supermarket the other day :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Yep, just merging the existing ones back into the mainspace. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***** Since we have enough support to merge it, I guess we'll do it. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> {{done|All pages moved without leaving a redirect.}}[[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:56, 13 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> |}<br /> <br /> == Increasing positive communication within users ==<br /> <br /> I want to talk about increasing positive communication within users: Although we generally have nice, calm conversations in chat (which is great!), that doesn't need much improvement. What I think needs to specifically improve to increase this, is how we welcome users. Right now, welcoming others are based on a pre-formatted, maybe half-arsed template, and simply substituting the transcluded template on user talk pages. Although I do understand that if the resources are low, it would be more realistic to make such thing to make an automated message on people's talk page.<br /> <br /> However, let's say we do have the resources - or we just work harder. Whenever I joined other wikis, and saw that the message was just one of those annoying bots saying &quot;Hey, thanks for you edit on 'so and so' page, bla bla bla etc...&quot;, it's really annoying. It'd be nice to know that, &quot;Hey, a user hand-wrote this message to me. It's ''real''. It's not from a bot or automated.&quot; It has this little spice of appreciation, and I'd say &quot;It's all the little moments that make life big.&quot; ( originally quoted by Echo Park). <br /> <br /> There wouldn't be a full-blasted guideline or policy on here on how to write messages, it just has to be real and honest. You just ''write'' it. And knowing, that a person would voluntarily spend their time writing something for a person they don't even know is powerful. And hey, maybe the message doesn't contain everything a user needs to know about a site - but just writing it I believe would cause the welcomed user to get curious, and actually have a higher chance of staying on the wiki. Not only that, it'd increase the likelyhood of that user ''responding'' back to the welcomer. Thus, 1-1 communication, 2 people at the time. If everyone did this, these tiny numbers could stack up and make this site overall hopefully a better place.<br /> <br /> What do you think? More user-written welcomes? Less welcome templates? Maybe even deleting it?<br /> <br /> [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # As nominator [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Definitely. I (try to) do this at BS01. Even a &quot;hi&quot; after the welcome template could make a difference, or at least I'd like to think so. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Agree. --[[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] [[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:blue&quot;&gt;CPplayer90210&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sub&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sub&gt; 10:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Oppose deleting the welcome template at least. If people want to do custom-written welcomes every time, fine, I'm not saying welcome templates should replace that. But people make an edit, they get welcomed. Unless you want to wait for them to make like 10 edits to get a feel for the user (which I think would be a bad idea, no welcome at all after an edit or two would be weird), I can't see there being a whole lot of variation in anyone's custom welcome to people. I can also see custom welcomes being less useful if they don't supply the information the welcome template does (assuming the information on the welcome template is useful, it's been a while since I looked at one). Basically, totally ok with a &quot;hi&quot; after a welcome template or something similar (I usually try to remember to hit the &quot;thank&quot; button on a new user's first edit), but against removing the welcome template altogether. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # I agree 100% with Nova. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> *I agree with Codyn's sentiments, but also Nova's concerns. &lt;s&gt;I think I missed any suggestion of deleting the welcome template though?&lt;/s&gt; (Silly Berry.) Anyway, if voted into effect, what exactly would be done? Surely this is more of a behavioral thing than a policy thing? I definitely will not oppose (because I do like the idea) but making it a policy sort of makes it fake in my opinion. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I don't think our current welcome templates are that great, perhaps suffering from too many pointless links, but I don't think the idealised world you are attempting to describe above is one that will happen. What will happen is that every message will be basically identical anyway, just &quot;Hi! Nice edit on X. Any questions just ask!&quot; to welcome all users instead. Or maybe sometimes I'd end up typing &quot;Hello&quot; instead of &quot;Hi&quot;. or &quot;good&quot; instead of &quot;great&quot;. But it won't be personal really. So I don't care for the idea, or our current method, but I'd point out that we can't enforce a policy to write &quot;real&quot; messages. I guess I'm leaning towards oppose, but it can stick here in the discussion for now. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 18:44, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *What we really need is better warning/notice templates for talk page messages. Right now we have very vague and ugly boxes that don't tell a user what they did wrong and how to fix it in the future, plus hardly anybody uses those templates anymore. So 90% of the time someone does something wrong, their edit gets reverted but only rarely does someone put something on their talk page explaining why the edit(s) was reverted. Compare the rather lacking selection of warnings and notices we have, [[Category talk:Warning templates]], with English Wikipedia for example [[wp:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]]. Also note that ours are all boxes that imply the user did something bad, whereas Wikipedia's are inline text with a signature at the end making it read more like a human message, and the first couple levels of warnings are a bit more forgiving as well. Just an idea/concern I've had for a long time. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:00, 17 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Edits from Brickia ==<br /> <br /> We have at least one user ({{U|GoldNinjaMX}}) who has recently come here from Brickia and wants to move some edits he made. What is to be done? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :I just googled it and there doesn't seem to be a way to do that. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Well, &lt;s&gt;most contributions here seem to be customs,&lt;/s&gt; as Customs have always been treated as the creator's property (both on here and Brickia), I have no problem with that being moved once we have Customs merged to here (and would similarly have no problem if people moved back to Brickia and took their Customs with them). As for the rest, not so sure. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Wait, sorry, only saw one page. 1894 mainspace edits, 1089 customs edits. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 23:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::: Oh, sorry, I should have been more explanatory. He wants to move mainspace content from Brickia to here. I think at least one article in question was [[Ninjago (World)]]. Basically, what would we have to do for that to be legal (it is CC-BY-SA licensing), and then would it be ethical and worth any potential trouble? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::: Import them, using [[Special:Import]] after exporting them from Wikia. It is best to change them a bit here once imported, not for copyright reasons, but to not be penalized by search engines. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 01:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I'd think that moving is customs here is completely fine, as well as pages made entirely by him. The harder part would be adding over his edits. If you carried over his edits you would have to move over the edits of other users that haven't joined here. I would say to stay away from bringing edits over.[[User:Albus Potter|Albus Potter]] ([[User talk:Albus Potter|talk]])<br /> *I'd warn against making this a regular thing. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:43, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** I'm a bit uneasy about it myself, we have a good thing going with Brickia at the moment- they don't copy our stuff and we don't copy theirs, basically we go our own ways. I would hate to see that change. We did also say that we wouldn't take any edits of theirs after February 2014, this would go against the &quot;agreement&quot; to me. '''Oppose'''. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 10:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** The main issue as I see it is that other users have edited the page since GoldNinjaMX has. If he was the only one who edited, then fine, he can take them and put them wherever he likes, but as soon as someone just changes one character on that page, we have to import it and then we can, like you say, start some tit-for-tat thing. Additionally, moving in versions of pages we have hear just means someone (and I can imagine it would be at most one of five people :P) would have to compare the edit histories to ensure we don't lose any content, don't add any rubbish, and I'm not sure that is worth the hassle. I guess I am basically '''opposed''' to this, now I think it out more. At the very least, I'm troubled by it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 11:32, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> **** Import requires admin or sysadmin rights. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 12:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Re-)Enabling Gifts (and more!) ==<br /> The [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile extension]], which provides avatars, [[User:Jack Phoenix|structured social user profile pages]] and more, contains some features which are [[github:470|not (yet) enabled on Brickipedia]]. These features include '''system gifts, or awards''', which are automatically handed out by the wiki software after a user reaches certain thresholds, which administrators can configure; such as having 5 friends or having made 50 (mainspace) edits, and so on.&lt;br /&gt;Then there are '''gifts''', ordinary user-to-user gifts which users can give out to each other after administrators have set up some gifts.<br /> <br /> '''Friends''' and '''foes''' are pretty self-explanatory, and to a degree, this &quot;feature&quot; ''does'' exist, but many references to it have been &quot;hacked out&quot; or explicitly toggled off; as such, the amount of friends (and/or foes) isn't prominently shown in the User Interface of the site. Some special pages, like [{{fullurl:Special:TopFansByStatistic|stat=friends_count}} Special:TopFansByStatistic], expose the amount (but not the &quot;who's whose friend&quot; relations normally shown on profile pages) of friends, for example. [[Special:Editcount|And edit count, on the other hand, has been public info for a long time.]]<br /> <br /> Finally there's the [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#User Board|User Board]] and the related [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile/Screenshots#Board Blast|Board Blast]] feature. User Boards are visible on users' profiles and they allow users to easily post a message — even a private message — to each other, without having to go to the user's talk page. Board Blast allows to send a user board message to multiple recipients at once.<br /> <br /> In the bug ticket linked to earlier on, [[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] noted his concern about the possible abuse of these tools (specifically the gifting feature) as well as the extra burden of work these tools can create for administrators. I don't share this concern nor the conclusions. Why? Because with ''everything'', especially so on a ''wiki'', things ''can'' and ''will'' be abused by malicious people. That's life. But just because someone decides to vandalize the [[LEGO]] page doesn't mean we put the wiki in full lock-down mode. Likewise, I believe that gifts and other such features mentioned above can be used to promote positive user interaction and engagement, and as such, these tools should be available to our users. If someone abuses them, we will simply ensure that the user in question can't do that anymore.<br /> <br /> It is, of course, up to the community to decide how to use these and what policies, if any, govern their usage. But again, we assume a lot of things already and give our users some leeway — there are no ''technical'' restrictions on making 50 consecutive, single-character edits in order to bump up one's edit count; there are ''social'' limitations which, directly or indirectly, imply that such behavior is neither desired nor tolerated.&lt;br /&gt;Jimbo Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, might be a controversial person with controversial opinions, but I think that his [https://web.archive.org/web/20080129145752/http://www.wikia.com/wiki/User:Datrio steak knife analogy] is quite fitting for this situation.<br /> <br /> '''tl,dr:''' Let's re-enable a bunch of features (gifts, awards, user boards, friends &amp; foes) present in [[mw:Extension:SocialProfile|SocialProfile]] by default. Who's with me? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> # Obviously. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 21:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 21:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Like Meiko, I'm against having foes enabled though {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 22:36, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> # Sure, like Nova and Meiko I'm not sure about the benefits of foes, but the rest sounds great. Getting those badges on wiki was a popular feature, so I'm sure gifts will be too. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> # But not foes! [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 18:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Oppose ===<br /> # Weak oppose per my comment but won't prevent this from being passed if I'm the only opposition. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Discussion ===<br /> * My 2 cents: Friends - We can have these but I don't see any fundamental reason why. The way I see it, our community is so tight knit, everyone would be friends with each other... We're not a social network and I don't think there's ever anyone here who doesn't know every other active user. We have no need for foes and even back when we had friends, we didn't have foes. I don't think foes is a constructive feature. I don't like UserBoard either. Everything it's good for can be done on talk pages or in email. Having two places where you leave messages for other users confuses people and many people never know when to set it to private or public (e.g. when it's used for contests and they're asked to set it to private, hardly anyone does that). There's also no notifications for new Board messages, except for in automated emails which [[github:300|get flagged as spam]]. Gifts I don't see a need for either, but awards maybe. However, that requires an admin set them up and keep them &quot;fresh&quot;, which requires time out of admins' already-busy workload. We had a ton of badges at Wikia and transferring that over to here will be nothing but a nightmare and frustration that will take time away from doing more essential things around here our admins are tasked with. IMO the current social features we have are enough. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 04:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everybody should be friends with each other, indeed, yet things like Facebook are amazingly popular nevertheless. :) Humans are social beings, and we cannot blindly stare at statistics and such. For example, one could argue that [[Special:Chat|MediaWikiChat]] is a mere social addition to the wiki and is not relevant since it doesn't directly increase the amount of (quality) edits. That would be true. And likely the same would also be true for friend (and/or foe) lists. But people like having those things around as they improve the wiki's atmosphere and bring editors together. So why not?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding foes: you wouldn't be the first person to suggest that it's an unneeded/unwanted feature, and I understand that it might be controversial. To understand this feature, you need to understand some of the underlying history. [[mw:Social tools|Social tools]] were first developed at ArmchairGM, which was (well, technically &quot;is&quot;, but...) a sports wiki. The developers, as well as pretty much all users were American. Needless to say, some people on the wiki had strong opinions about certain sports-related things, which differed from other people's views. This is, to my understanding, how the foes feature came to be. Furthermore, the feature is also related to the [[mw:Extension:Challenge|Challenge extension]], which, as the name suggests, allowed challenging other users. Although I don't know how it was used in practise, but the theoretical goal was to fuel wiki growth and quality edits ''via foeships'' &amp;mdash; people who were foes would challenge each other and the loser would need to edit a certain wiki page or somesuch. All this being said, though, personally I feel that people are somehow (too) intimidated by the name &quot;foes&quot; &amp;mdash; it has been around for a long time, much like social tools in general, and I have yet to see people abuse it in some way.&lt;br /&gt;UserBoard is another attempt at solving the ages-old problem with talk pages &amp;mdash; or in this case, as the name suggests, the problem with ''user'' talk pages. Talk pages are like a blank sheet of paper, and depending on who you are and what your background with computers and/or wikis in general is, this may or may not be a good thing. Because users are the heart and the soul of essentially ''any'' wiki out there, lowering the barrier to entry is important. Having a more structured mechanism (UserBoard) might prove to be useful to some newer users, because a blank sheet of paper (normal wiki talk pages) ''can'' be confusing. That being said, it's not a this-or-that choice, if and when both exist; people can choose whichever option they prefer.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regarding notifications: that's not ''totally'' correct. There ''are'' notifications, but &amp;mdash; once again due to historical reasons &amp;mdash; they're not as obvious as you'd think. Many wikis with SocialProfile have the [[mw:Extension:UserWelcome|UserWelcome extension]] (actually bundled with SocialProfile for years) and the [[mw:Extension:WikiTextLoggedInOut|WikiTextLoggedInOut extension]] installed, which allows them to have something like &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;loggedin&amp;gt;&amp;lt;welcomeUser &amp;gt;&amp;lt;/loggedout&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; on the [[Main Page]], which then shows the user's personal social info to them if they're logged in. Needless to say, this is quite archaic when you take into account the fact that [[mw:Notifications|Echo]] has been a thing for a few years now. You'll be pleased to know I've submitted [[gerrit:278868|an experimental, definitely-nowhere-near-ready-for-production changeset]] to address [[phab:T64520]] to bring Echo support to SocialProfile. I believe we can get it finished in a reasonable time. Testers &amp; developers welcome! ;-)&lt;br /&gt;The &quot;emails get flagged as spam&quot;, which is largely a separate issue, is likely an issue with the big email providers like Google &amp;mdash; their automated algorithms mark MW emails as spam for a variety of reasons (which we can't know for sure) and contacting them about this is hard, if not outright impossible. One possible reason could be that since most installations don't bother customizing these emails and there are a ''lot'' of MW wikis out there, Google sees a lot of really similar emails and thinks &quot;well, the difference is only a few characters (username/IP/site name/site URL), but since it matches a certain pattern, it's probably spam&quot;. So one possible workaround could be to customize the emails, but I realize it can be hard to do and it doesn't really scale (because of i18n, for example).&lt;br /&gt;I'm not sure ''why'' awards would need to be kept &quot;fresh&quot; &amp;mdash; they're largely (IMO) a &quot;set up once and forget about it&quot; thing. Setting them up initially will take a few minutes, but I'll be more than glad to do that once we have a consensus on them (names/thresholds/images). --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == (Somehow) stop spambots from creating accounts ==<br /> <br /> I have noticed lots of spambot accounts being created every day, and i'm thinking that there has got to be a way to stop this. They seem to be getting past the captcha just fine, but they are stopped by the abuse filter. So, in otherwords, we need to try and stop automated spam account creation from happening altogether. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :We simply need any other account creation captcha than the one we have right now. However it's good to note that spambots are often better at solving captchas nowadays than humans, so the question is is it worth the extra step and inconvenience for human users to prevent spambots from creating accounts? --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::Theres also recaptcha, or we could restrict account creation to a certain user group. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::That would mean only people who had accounts could create accounts? So we'd have no new users? [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::People could request to have accounts created. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 21:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::That is not worth the hassle it involves (can we stop adding jobs for the admins to do? :P), and while stopping spambot accounts, would decimate legitimate account creation. Honestly, the current situation where we just have lots of spambots that can't do anything is fine. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:57, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::: Agreed with CJC here, this has also been discussed originally in [[github:449]]. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 22:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::I am agreeing more with {{u|ToaMeiko}}. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::You're right, not only there has to be but there '''is''' a way to stop some spambot registrations. It's the [[meta:MediaWiki:Email-blacklist|email blacklist]], which is a part of the [[mw:Extension:SpamBlacklist|SpamBlacklist extension]]. Of course it's not a perfect solution since it requires people to maintain it, since spambot (operators) will always find a way around such limitations, but it will catch some of them...or rather, ''would'' &amp;mdash; for whatever reason it doesn't appear to be functioning correctly because over the past three days, 18 accounts were registered with a mailcatch.com address, for example. I'm quite puzzled by this, and as such, I've asked some helpful core MediaWiki devs for input. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::Thats a good point. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::One somehow got through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 16:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::I just went on to GBC and Ideas and found lots of pages that to me looked like spam. (especially Ideas). All are marked. It looks like the Abuse filter on Ideas was not set to disallow, thus allowing spambots to create pages. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 23:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::Thanks for notifying us about this! In the future, I think you can skip the tagging part altogether (since these pages in question were obviously spam and totally unrelated to LEGO) and just ping me or another [[Special:ListUsers/sysadmin|sysadmin]] and we'll take care of it. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 04:44, 4 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::Lots of sites use ReCaptcha NoCaptcha, and it seems to work really well. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::It also looks like some of the spambots are getting through the abuse filter. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 18:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::::::::::::::There has been another mass of spam pages on GBC. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::::::::::::::@LegoFan4000 - Thanks for the notice, blocked locally and globally (including the IP), and mass-deleted the spam pages. :) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Widening scope of TV show pages==<br /> * Currently, we seem to only allow &quot;major&quot; TV show character to have pages, other pages end up on pages like [[List of Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu Characters|this]]. As far as I know, we don't have an official policy on the scope. Anyway, here's what I'd like to do:<br /> ** Allow pages for any named character (ie, named in the show, or in the credits)<br /> ** Have a different category for characters that appear only in the TV show, eg, &quot;Category:Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu characters&quot;. This would be a subcategory of &quot;Category:Ninjago minifigures&quot;.<br /> ** Put these TV-exclusive characters in a separate tab in the navbox<br /> :? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> === Support ===<br /> #Sounds sane. &quot;List of X characters&quot; (where ''X'' = something like TV series, movie trilogy, video game, book series, etc.) is a Wikipedia-ism, because Wikipedians don't like having detailed character pages for each Pokémon; obviously such material would be very much warranted on a Pokémon wiki. Because Brickipedia is a Lego wiki, we'll obviously want lots and lots of detailed information on all things Lego, and often (but not always) &quot;list of...&quot; pages go against this. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #Okay. Would the TV show category also go on articles for minifigures which also appear in the show? [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 23:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> #'''Support''', per Jack and I didn't think we even did those list pages. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> #[[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 23:28, 23 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> === Oppose ===<br /> === Discussion ===<br /> <br /> == Interviews ==<br /> Should we try and get interviews with LEGO related people? And if we did get one where would it go? Under news or a user blog? {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *Great idea, however who would be willing to be the interviewer? Who would we specifically interview - LEGO Ideas project creators, LEGO designers(etc)? As for the second question you asked, I'd say Brickipedia News section. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 17:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Anyone who's officially involved with LEGO (if any of those people would give us the time of day :P) {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *They'd go under news. If you want to interview LEGO Group employees that has to be done through LEGO's PR department so please contact me before attempting an interview with those individuals. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 18:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*Sure, what does attempting a review involve anyway? I'd assume it just be tracking them down and emailing them a few questions. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> == Minifigure gallery ordering? ==<br /> <br /> Is there a rule for how to order? Alphabetically I assume, but I can't find that in BP:MoS, unless I haven't looked hard enough. It wasn't in the theme section at any rate. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Is this on theme pages? I didn't think that having minifigure galleries at all was in the MoS. :P [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 20:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It may not be on the MoS, but every theme page seems to have them :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 20:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::(oh, the site isn't locked). It was voted to remove them from theme pages (I'm pretty sure in the MoS overhaul, Berrybrick proposed removing them because they're so long and difficult to maintain, I supported, and noone else commented so it was passed), but we never actively went around removing them. There is no rule in place for ordering as far as I'm aware. Possible alternatives for use in sets would be order that they appear on the box, or alphabetically. No idea for minifigure pages- for licensed minifigures with a lot of variants I like to do chronologically so all the remakes of the same variant are grouped together ([http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/Luke_Skywalker#Gallery_of_variants example]) :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 07:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::::Well this is the definition of a late reply. :P Could we not use {ThemeGallery} if the minifigure galleries are hard to matin, that's automatic right? I do agree with Nova on the licensed minifigure pages though. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :::::If that is the template we experimented with for a while, it would include video game characters and exclude variants. Plus it looked a bit off (though I'm sure our developers could probably find a way to fix that). [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Clean up the interwiki table ==<br /> [[Special:Interwiki|Interwikis]] allow to link to certain &amp;mdash; usually external (=non-Brickimedia), usually wiki &amp;mdash; sites somewhat quicker than by using the standard external link syntax, and when using an interwiki link as opposed to an external link, the external link arrow isn't shown next to the link, [[Main Page|just like with normal links (such as this one)]].<br /> <br /> While our [[Special:Interwiki|interwiki table]] is considerably cleaner than most sites', I'd still like to propose at least some removals:<br /> * '''all non-wikia: Wikia interwikis''' &amp;mdash; typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[bionicle-wikia:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; is almost exactly as long as typing &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:c:bionicle:Some page]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;. You can link to any Wikimedia site (Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, etc.) by using the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[project:language code:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikipedia:fr:France]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the French Wikipedia's page &quot;France&quot; or &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wiktionary:fi:lollapalooza]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiktionary's page &quot;lollapalooza&quot;. Likewise, you can link to any ShoutWiki site with the syntax &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:subdomain:Page name]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt;, i.e. &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[shoutwiki:w:fi.24:Jack Bauer]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the Finnish Wiki 24's page &quot;Jack Bauer&quot;, so I'm not sure what's the benefit of having multiple .wikia.com interwikis. For prefixes like &quot;wookie&quot; or &quot;wookiee&quot;, most users don't remember offhand how many e's there is in that word, so they'll likely find it easier to type &quot;wikia:c:starwars:Page&quot; when they mean &quot;Page on Wikia's Star Wars wiki&quot;.<br /> * '''acronym: and dictionary:''' &amp;mdash; I'm under the impression that these aren't really used anywhere, and truthfully, why would they when we have [[wiktionary:|Wiktionary]]?<br /> * '''mediazilla:''' &amp;mdash; Bugzilla is dead, long live Bugzilla! But actual bug reports against any and all MediaWiki things developed upstream are to be made in [https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/ Phabricator].<br /> * '''sourceforge:''' &amp;mdash; [[wikipedia:SourceForge|SourceForge]] ♥ adware. (There's also the fact that this is relatively unused here, given that Brickimedia's software is developed either in GitHub (original, first-party additions, like the Refreshed skin etc.) or on Wikimedia's infrastructure at wikimedia.org.)<br /> * '''wikinfo:''' &amp;mdash; oh look, it's [[wikipedia:History of wikis#Wikinfo|an outdated fork of the English Wikipedia which allows original research.]] (There's also the fact that its URL is outdated, so if we want to keep it in the interwiki table, its URL has to be updated.)<br /> <br /> Thoughts, comments, suggestions, feedback? --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 16:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :+2 ;) [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Looks like it'll make everything less confusing. --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 15:34, 14 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Sure {{C|although, would really like to keep &quot;wookiee:&quot; as an alternative extra, because I know I'll forget about this and wonder why the link doesn't work. And it's so much shorter :P}}. Just wondering why we need the &quot;c:&quot; for the Wikia links? Why not just &quot;wikia:harrypotter&quot; instead of &quot;wikia:c:harrypotter&quot;? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 11:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ::It's largely a leftover from the days when &quot;Wikia&quot; was known as '''W'''iki'''c'''ities, hence w:c: (on Wikia sites; other, off-Wikia sites use wikia:c: as the w: interwiki prefix is either left for Wikipedia or left unused). http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:harrypotter:Hermione_Granger redirects to http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Hermione_Granger, as you'd expect and want, but if you leave out the c: part, you're redirected to a page called &quot;Harrypotter:Hermione Granger&quot; on www.wikia.com, Wikia's corporate site.&lt;br /&gt;That being said, we could change the wikia: prefix so that it includes the c: part, too; right now the wikia: prefix points to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/$1 but we could change that to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:$1 so that you'd only need to type &lt;code&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;[[wikia:harrypotter:Hermione Granger]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/code&gt; to link to the aforementioned page. The only &quot;disadvantage&quot; of this is that the wikia: prefix then cannot be used to link to pages on Wikia's corporate/main site, www.wikia.com, but given that the &quot;old&quot; www.wikia.com was rebranded as &quot;Community Central&quot; years ago and moved to community.wikia.com, I'm not sure if anyone even needs to link to the current corporate domain. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 12:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> :{{Support}}, I can have my bot find-and-replace as necessary upon removal of certain prefixes. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 19:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Can we request concept art? ==<br /> Out of curiosity can we ask for concept art from the RULG? They don't seem to mind sharing concept art in general, such as having a whole site dedicated to concept art of Chima. So could we ask them for like non licensed concept art? I'd personally love to see Friends and Ninjago, and it be a great &quot;exclusive reveal&quot; for us. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Minifigs: a picture is worth a thousand words ==<br /> <br /> (Credit to CJC95 for the title)<br /> <br /> Currently minifig articles have lengthy parts/print descriptions. That seems counterproductive to me. Chances are, when visitors search for minifig articles, they want to see an image, not a description. Minifig articles already have lots of pictures, so why should visitors bother reading about a minifig's torso print when they can just look at it? And certainly if the descriptions aren't being read, the time spent writing them could be put to better use improving the site in other ways.<br /> <br /> An argument could be made that descriptions fill up minifig articles with content. But if the content isn't particularly insightful, what's the point of having it? All it does is detract from useful and interesting material, which is what visitors come to the site for. Pages like [[Batman]] and [[Obi-Wan Kenobi]] are prime examples of this. There's so much text, but (respectfully) it says so little of consequence! Thanks to all that text the images--the good stuff--are relegated to the bottom of the page. If visitors load the page only to see a wall of text instead of the images they came looking for, they're going to continue their search on another site.<br /> <br /> I suggest an alternative to the current system. Minifig pages should focus on images, not descriptions. Place the images in the very first section of content. Next to each minifig, place at most a few bullet points of description focusing only on particularly noteworthy aspects of that minifig.<br /> <br /> What are your thoughts? -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 23:56, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Edit: the above applies to the &quot;Background&quot; sections too. Brickipedia isn't primarily a storyline wiki. IMO any story information should exist exclusively on those pages detailing the media where the story actually took place. To use the Batman example, there shouldn't be any story info from the DC comics (they don't even have to do with Lego!), and story info from, say, ''Lego Batman 2'' should exist solely on the ''Lego Batman 2'' page. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Numerical analysis - I stuck the Batman description in a word-counter. It was just shy of 3700 words, about 1 in 50 of those words are &quot;suit&quot;, and would apparently take someone with an average reading level 13 minutes to read. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 23:58, 16 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Completely agree, I suggested removing descriptions from minifigure articles a couple of years ago but it got shot down. As long as we have images of every angle of the minifigure (front, back, side, alt face expression, and a shot with gear which covers head/body removed), I think we could stick all the shots in some sort of new template, get rid of the descriptions and as you said, have a section for any relevant notes about that particular minifigure variant. Not sure about the background suggestion- I think it's good to have info on who the minifigure's actually based on, although a lot of them could be cut down. Also not all characters have a LEGO-based backstory, they just appear in sets (eg, [[Quinlan Vos]]) {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **Hmm, good point: some description is necessary. Maybe descriptions could be moved to the intro of the page? For Quinlan Vos, it could be something like: &quot;Quinlan Vos is a minifigure released in 2011, as a part of the Star Wars theme. Vos was a Jedi Master who fell to the Dark Side while on an undercover mission. After turning back to the light, he served as a general in the Clone Wars and survived Order 66.&quot; We already link to Wookieepedia at the bottom of the page, so people interested in reading more can do so. Maybe we could incorporate the Wookieepedia link more prominently though. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 00:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> **:I think its more important just to limit the background to stuff that at least relates to LEGO sets. There was what, one set based on the dark knight trilogy, but we have a few paragraphs on the movies. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I've made this sometime ago but I haven't publicly posted it except with people on chat, but I'll share it with you guys :) https://jsfiddle.net/codynguyen1116/p1c3h30f/ a MediaWiki gallery component reimagined, with an arrow that'd bring up the description on a click. That part hasn't been written in JS yet, but currently it has most of what the idea is. [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 00:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Sure. I wouldn't mind asking in a survey, but sure. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 00:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good point, I'd support holding off on any change until we see if readers actually find this content useful- it'd be stupid to remove it all only to find people actually wanted it there. That is, if that survey ever actually happens. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 05:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Good idea! --[[File:Brushing teeth.png|x28px]] &lt;font face=&quot;tahoma&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;CPplayer&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:sienna&quot;&gt;Leave a message!&lt;/b&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/font&gt; [[File:worlds ocean1.jpg|x28px]] 01:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * What would be the point in the site if we got rid of descriptions? :S The only thing that would seperate from other sites would be the background sections, which are much harder to write by the way. Someone may be wondering what the symbol on one varation of a Stormtrooper is or what Maya's skirt is called. '''Oppose''' {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *: It's not getting rid of every description. You can still say what the symbols and stuff are, because that is useful information.. But do you really think that people will gain something from being told that Batman's trousers are black (as the Batman article no doubt says for every variation). At least we can all agree that the [[Darth Vader]] article does this much better than say the way [[Anakin Skywalker]] does. Would anyone (including yourself) read that? Even if there is a good piece of information about the symbols on his belt in there, no one will ever find it. Ever. There doesn't need to have every word removed, just...all the crap, useless ones. ('''summary''' - I, and I assume most others here, wouldn't even care if we kept descriptions, but they need to be actually reader friendly, not just spurting every bit of information.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> *::What would updated descriptions even look like? I tried my best to make [[Olivia]]'s as short as possible, but she lacks detail. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> *:::Well, that would work better if the bit that said &quot;In 41100 Heartlake Private Jet&quot; had a picture of that one next to the description, and &quot;In 41034 Summer Caravan,&quot; also had that picture. Pictures would help the description surely. Why should I care what colour her top is in that set if I don't know what it looks like? :P [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 21:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> : Ok with me. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 15:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> * [[User:NovaHawk/mfg|This]] is just an idea of a new minifig page layout- obviously the template needs to be made prettier so there aren't awkward white spaces and the tabs need to be layed out differently, but you get the idea. Note the &quot;seaweed&quot; variant has a notes section for important notes about that particular variant, which would replace the description. I think this length background would be good for a max length as well. I dunno, just an idea, let me know what you think. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 06:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Good response. Thanks everyone. {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Well, it was either write a one line nothing response or put off responding until I had time to actually look at it properly and be useful. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 13:08, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ***Overall I'd be interested in seeing a version with the formatting improved. Some potential issues with a) low-res images b) big blank space when no back printing/alternative face c) minifigures with 15 or so variants d) Mobile - it don't work. e) large stretched out infobox on the RHS. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Fan namespace==<br /> Ok, so the LEGO Fanatics Wiki has been imported into the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. All the Customs and Stories have been imported here, and any userpages from Customs have also been imported (anyone who had userpages on there should have received a message on their talk page here). There are still a few things that need to be cleared up:<br /> * Most links won't be working since all pages are in a different namespace. I've made a simple template, {{tl|fan}}, if you want to fix any links {{C|eg, &lt;nowiki&gt;{{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}&lt;/nowiki&gt; goes to {{fan|Pet Shop Chaos!}}}}<br /> * Categories were not imported in the dump, and I've intentionally not done this as [[User:NovaHawk/FanCats|an organised category structure]] was passed on the wiki before it closed but wasn't implemented, so please don't go around making any categories just because they're redlinks.<br /> * Main page needs to be updated to at least acknowledge this part of the site.<br /> * Change to Customs infoboxes- for any new customs- just type your name in next to Creator, ie, |Creator={{USERNAME}}. This will generate appropriate autocategories. If it's a co-creation with another user, you can use |Creator2= and |Creator3= for second and third users. If there are more needed, I can add them.<br /> * Infoboxes- The Stories infobox ([[Fan:Team_Kitten|eg]]) doesn't match the rest of the site, I'd like to bring it more in line with templates like {{tl|Part}} or {{tl|Review}}. Opinions? Also, the Customs infoboxes used to have a choice between two styles- the style currently used most of our infoboxes like {{tl|Set}}, and an old style like {{tl|set}} from like 2010 or something. I haven't imported the Customs infobox template so they all now all are based on whatever the current infobox style is for the rest of the wiki, hope that's ok.<br /> * Quizzes- do we still want this? As far as I know, it was never set up. And remember, you can only have one quiz per wiki with this extension- do we want it for the fan namespace?<br /> * The wiki was called LEGO Fanatics Wiki, and after the move, was put in the &quot;Fan&quot; namespace. What do we want to call this section of the site (we can't use LEGO Fanatics '''Wiki'''), and do we still want the namespace called &quot;Fan&quot;?<br /> :{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ------<br /> * @bottom two sections-<br /> ** My vote's to not use the quiz extension as a part of the fan namespace- we can set it up as a general LEGO trivia game if we want to use it at all.<br /> ** Brickipedia Creations? (to match naming style of Brickipedia Reviews) with a &quot;Creation&quot; namespace? I don't really care, but I don't think Brickipedia Fanatics is going to work.<br /> ::{{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::I'm neutral to whatever we decide to do. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:33, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Fan is the best namespace option, because Fanatics (as both a namespace and a wiki name) is rubbish. I don't know how quiz works, but if its not set up it won't be anytime soon, so I wouldn't worry about it. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 09:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** &quot;Brickipedia Fans&quot; sounds like Fans of Brickipedia to me :S {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * &quot;Fan&quot; sounds okay to me...no quiz here...infobox is okay. One thing I'm wondering about is the skin. Everybody probably knows I'm against the different colors, ''but'' it might be good to have them with the wikis merged again. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 17:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I pefer fanatics to fans, but like Nova it may come across as a self tribute. Though the argument could be made Brickipedia reviews aren't reviews of the site.{{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> <br /> ==Vote/Rating extension broken?==<br /> * Anyone else having problems leaving a rating or a vote? {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:14, 15 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :*I thought you meant page ratings, with the ratings for customs I do. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> ::* That hasn't been set up yet, will get it set up in the next 24 hrs or so {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 12:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> :::* Should be working now {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 00:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Contests ==<br /> Okay are last contest was a mess, I'm (wo?)man enough to admit that, but the fact of the matter is contests get us new viewers and &quot;potentially&quot; new users. We still have all the DTCs of the year and the maze, I doubt reviewing any of them will get much traction (though I personally still want to see Berry's bat cave review, that we never sent despite being green lit :P). I suggest we give away the Star Wars hoth set as that's been reviewed and complained about to death and unless we can add something new (a positive review) I'm not sure it's worth doing. I have an idea for a contest here, [[User:Soupperson1/JuneContest]]. It's basic but after the last two contests I don't want any potential negative feedback. We could also use Nova's &quot;coming soon&quot; olympics themed contest, but perhaps we could advertise that to the side of a regular contest as it'll be going on for months. {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> :I don't know what sets we have available since it changes every so often (I think the Batcave is gone). Only Meiko would know. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 14:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)<br /> *I am not aware as to the status of sets to give away. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 19:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Meiko was kind enough to remind me of what we have on the table: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; he says that either the site or the recipient will need to pay the shipping fees though. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Pride month celebration for Brickipedia ==<br /> <br /> June is officially pride month (which includes LGBTQ for example), and in celebration of this I was thinking that we as Brickipedia should do something to celebrate! First idea is to make our logo rainbow-y, although I don't quite have any other ideas. Who supports this? :D [[User:Codynguyen1116|Codynguyen1116]] ([[User talk:Codynguyen1116|talk]]) 03:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *As far as I can tell June is only LGBTQ pride month (at least in the US). Are you sure it isn't just sexual pride month? I'm only skimming a Wikipedia article, so please redirect me. :P I'm not fond of this idea though because I think that if we recognized this month it would only be fair to recognize others...that might be kind of fun if we still did themed logos, but I don't know. It's also a political action and I really do not want to politicize things here. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 03:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> ** Everything is or can be interpreted as a political action. The fact that we don't charge readers, let alone reusers of our content, a fee for accessing the site? Politics. The fact that we don't stamp huge, obtrusive watermarks on our images and/or other media files? Politics. When we support or oppose a proposition? Politics.&lt;br /&gt;Complete neutrality, while desireable in a way, is probably never possible. Even Wikipedia, Google and several other high-profile websites based in the US [[wikipedia:Protests against SOPA and PIPA|spoke against some controversial bills]] not that many years ago &amp;mdash; in ways which were far more radical and visible than just slightly altering the logo. This is, of course, far from being a simple question, but I don't see this being harmful to Brickipedia and/or our mission.&lt;br /&gt;'''tl,dr:''' No objections to Cody's proposal from me. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 03:50, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *** Fair. But I don't think that this is a necessary political action whereas the issues you've listed are things that we would have to take a stance on just by virtue of being an online encyclopedia. This is an outside agenda though and I am frankly not okay with that. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 12:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Cool with me. -- [[User:MtMNC|MtMNC]] ([[User talk:MtMNC|talk]]) 04:24, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * Strong oppose. Not not the month itself or anything, just featuring it on here. This has absolutely nothing to do with Lego and we're a wiki, not Facebook. Basically, same as Berrybrick, I don't want to drag this site into political issues. And I don't think featuring any sexuality issue on a site dedicated to what many perceive to be a little kids toy is remotely appropriate {{User:NovaHawk/sig}} 04:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> **I just looked up &quot;LGBTQ&quot;, and I agree with Nova. --&lt;font face=&quot;corbel,segoe ui,sans-serif&quot;&gt;[[User:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#c378d0&quot;&gt;CP&lt;/b&gt;]][[User talk:CPplayer90210|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#ff6363&quot;&gt;player&lt;/b&gt;]] ~ [[special:Contributions/CPplayer90210|&lt;i style=&quot;color:#333&quot;&gt;LEGO rules!&lt;/i&gt;]]&lt;/font&gt; 23:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> * I wrote a long thing but deleted it, as I basically found myself repeating myself a lot. The issue I currently see isn't with the month$ itself (I, and I'm sure everyone here in this forum, is pro-LGBT), but more of the implications - once you take a stand on one thing%, anything you don't take a stand on can be taken as a view - if someone asks us to mark black history or domestic abuse awareness month, we can't say no without making it seem like we oppose them. So, I have nothing against the month, the concept, putting a rainbow in the logo, or promoting LGBT awareness on the wiki - I worry about a precedent being set. Footnotes: ($ - Per Berry, the only thing I can find for pride month is the LGBTQ component. % - I am here including things that don't naturally concern us - yes, things like SOPA are political issues, but they would concern us, as we are a website. I don't see Wikipedia and Google taking a stance on SOPA as radical because it would (potentially) affect them - it is no different to a food manufacturer protesting food packaging laws, or what not. It would be radical if Wikipedia decided that it was going to campaign for abortion rights.) [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 14:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *Pretty sure everyone on here is a liberal or at least OK with LGBT+ rights, but I don't think we need to do any advertising of it here. We're a website about LEGO. [[User:Ajraddatz|Ajraddatz]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Ajraddatz|talk]])&lt;/small&gt; 22:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *'''Strong Oppose''', per Nova. [[user:LegoFan4000|&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;LegoFan4000&lt;/span&gt;]] [[user talk:LegoFan4000|&lt;sup&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:green;font-family:Courier&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 00:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> *If were justing changing the logo for a week, whats the big deal? :P Im more open to celebrating holidays, but this is one of the more tricker ones. I don't think there's any gay characters in any LEGO sets and the only gay actor to have a minifigure is Luke Evans, so we cant write a blog or anything. If you have ideas for anything else, sure. And @ the rest of you Im not sure we should really classify this as a political statement, more than us being inclusive. Its like not celebrating April's Fools or Christmas. :P {{User:Soupperson1/Sig}}<br /> **We are already inclusive. [[User:CJC95|CJC95]] ([[User talk:CJC95|talk]]) 10:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == LEGO set offer requests ==<br /> <br /> We used to handle this on Admin, but since that's been abolished, where do we want to do it now? Someplace like Forums where we discuss it or something sort of like FA and BotM where it gets its own page where we can vote or discuss? I would almost suggest giving something to BoTM or people who have otherwise done a lot of good stuff, but someone would have to pay for shipping. Moreover, do admins get first dibs, at least so we can set stuff aside for special occasions without requests taking up everything? Where can we find an easy access list of available sets? Tthat might be a small detraction to having it here. A policy should probably be drawn up. Any other things we ought to discuss? (And, in case it is relevant, this is what we've currently got: Brick Bank, Assault on Hoth, Classic Batcave, Ghostbusters HQ, Burj Khalifa, Venice, Minifigures Series 15, Disney Minifigures; Meiko is holding onto them right now, so I don't ''think'' we are in danger of losing them, but LEGO probably wants to see us using them.) Thank you many grazis. [[User:Berrybrick|Berrybrick]] ([[User talk:Berrybrick|talk]]) 02:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)<br /> :Pardon for doing this as an anon. I think it would be nice to, at least as a ''start'', have the exact same pages/system as we had on the admin wiki. Including that helpful table of what has currently been purchased, and what resources are left. Maybe an added column on what the set's current state is too (for example, &quot;In Meiko's temporary possession&quot;), because I can't remember if we had that before. For BotM, I always thought that the honour/template was enough of a rush. :P It would be nice to give them something small, like a CMF, but I believe the last time that was discussed, it was decided that the shipping costs to do that were ridiculous? It would be great if there was something digital we could give away... In response to LEGO wanting to see us using the sets, and regarding how late it is to review some them, any ideas on other stuff we could do with them, something that might be creative or get us some press? Nothing immediately comes to mind (I'll update this if something does later), but you guys may have ideas. [[Special:Contributions/108.173.7.175|108.173.7.175]] 16:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)</div> 108.173.7.175