Brickipedia:Forum

Welcome to Brickipedia's forum. This is the place to propose and discuss any amendments to the Manual of Style or suggest new policies. To make a new proposal, please make a new section at the bottom of the page. Please see the archives for past discussions - 2014, 2015.

For recent updates to the site and any policy changes, please see Brickipedia:Site updates.

---

Also, don't forget to check Forum:Index for a number of unresolved forums.

---

Reviews of multiple sets

How should we go about handling reviews of multiple sets? Examples would be a wave of Mixels, a series of Collectible minifigures, or a group of Bionicle sets. Not every set needs a review of its own, and a common thing to do is review a couple similar sets at once especially when they're in the same wave. We have no format to do this though which I imagine could complicate things very easily... Any suggestions for a way to go about this would be appreciated. --ToaMeiko (talk) 03:34, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the "master page" for all of them, but they could be interconnected by separate review pages where it says something like "For a review of <set name> with <others> please see <here>" Berrybrick (talk) 03:39, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

• Because of switchtabs and the way reviewpages are set up, the only thing I can think of which would actually work would be to just pick one set to do it on, and redirect the other names to that page. NovaHawk 05:56, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
• Take a page, say Review:Mixel Season 1. Now, this will not play too nicely for that review page, but we can just pretend it doesn't exist. Now, for each set in season 1, on that page, put a little "this is reviewed as part of season 1 here". Ta dah. CJC95 (talk) 10:48, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
• Stupid question- is there a reason why they can't be reviewed separately? They are separate sets after all. As for a series of collectable minifigures- review the series page. NovaHawk 10:58, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

  Because the person reviewing them has written a piece that focuses on the way the sets interact as a series, and not just how good the individual sets are? Like how, writing an album review is very different to reviewing a song. CJC95 (talk) 12:04, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

  Like CJC said. It takes way too much time both to write and to read. Especially on things like Mixels, the sets are so tiny I cannot imagine people reading 9 different reviews for each individual set in a series, but they could more easily read 3 reviews (one for each tribe) or 1 review (for the whole wave). --ToaMeiko (talk) 17:03, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

  Not until there's a demand for it, I'm the only person who writes reviews remotely often and I don't think anyone has enough sets to do this idea anyway. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

  User talk:ToaMeiko CJC95 (talk) 18:34, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

  I was going to make the same comment as CJC, so per him. -NBP3.0 (talk) 19:58, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

  According to his brickset collection he dosnt have a wave of anything to review Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

  Because everyone must always have their Brickset collection up to date. CJC95 (talk) 10:33, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

  To look stylish (Im preety sure he does :P) User:Soupperspn1/Sig

  I really don't keep it up to date well (and I do in fact have a complete wave of Mixels series 1). --ToaMeiko (talk) 20:31, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

  I'm in support of having this feature happen in any way. Myself, along with two other Mixel Wiki-based members have big reviews coming up that would greatly benefit from being able to do multiple sets reviewed at once. --ZootyCutie (talk) 05:36, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Mixel reviews aren't big reviews :P, as the sets are small. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

    • I know the sets are small...but having to repeat some of the same stuff over-and-over (like, say we reviewed the Max for that tribe, it would be the same thing on each review) on each separate review would just get redundant and inconvenient. Having them in one place would make it a lot easier and put-together. --ZootyCutie (talk) 21:20, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Ok, I think I might have worked out a way which doesn't mess up everything else, or cause us to create a reviewpage for every possible combination of sets ever. I've made a template, {{ReviewMultiple}}. All you have to do is make a review as normal on one of the sets being reviewed, and put this template at the top of the review (well, on the line below the one that says "please start your review below this line"). Then it'll show up on all the review pages of the sets being reviewed. For example, I made Review:Test1/NovaFlare, and the template had {{ReviewMultiple|Test1|Test2|Test3}}. As you can see, the review is showing up on Review:Test1, Review:Test2 and Review:Test3. So... let me know if this is an ok method for doing things or if there are any problems. NovaHawk 09:35, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Forgot to mention, the first parameter in the template (in the example, "Test1") must be the name of the set where the review is actually located (eg, Review:Test1/NovaFlare), otherwise it won't work NovaHawk 09:37, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
    • That's a good way to do it. The only thing that still bothers me is the page name will look like it's a review of one set in the URL and when you want to search for it. --ToaMeiko (talk) 18:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
      • If we search for 41000 a ton of different names come up for one set, you could just redirect the pages. The only thing we can't do is the URL Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
  • Can we not have some "special" review pages, say Review:Mixels Season 1? And then use the above template? CJC95 (talk) 20:26, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
    • That's what I was thinking. Then have some special parameters in {{ReviewPage}} to specify that it contains multiple sets like the template Nova made. --ToaMeiko (talk) 20:31, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
      • Well, as for the title, I was thinking we could simply use DISPLAYTITLE in a noinclude tag, save us from creating a billion reviewpages, all of which won't have a working switchtab since it doesn't link to a corresponding set/inventory. NovaHawk 22:16, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
        • I never like to consider DISPLAYTITLE a solution to anything. It's just confusing when it comes to linking to things, and works against us as far as SEO goes. When it comes to SEO, CJC's idea will work best. --ToaMeiko (talk) 22:20, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
    • Well, if we use the multiple review template so the multiple reviews show up on all of the individual set review pages but don't create a reviewpage for each combination of sets, that wouldn't cause any problems for switchtabs or SMW, and would mean we wouldn't need an infinite amount of reviewpages. The template would just need an extra parameter for the review title. NovaHawk 04:29, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Humans

Which humans deserve pages? Voice actors? Staff on video games/ other media? Designers? (It be really cool if LEGO let us interview the designers :P) Also what photos should go on these pages? Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Photos of them. CJC95 (talk) 21:14, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

What photos though childhood? Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

No. Photos of them at the beach. Obviously I just mean photos of them, like say a Wikipedia article would have, not a photo gallery of them at every birthday, or a picture of them eating ice cream or something like that... CJC95 (talk) 16:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Well sorry for not taking your generic comment generically. :P JK. I think we could have childhood photos, photos of designers with sets, photos of actors in their movies, photos with their siblings kids or grand kids. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Ideally we should have pages for every designer. Any significant people in the company, e.g. chief executives, founders, maybe board members, should also have articles. Not sure about voice actors because anyone who's anyone can be a voice actor for one thing and then have no further involvement with anything LEGO. And it's very easy to get interviews with LEGO designers through LEGO's press department. It's even easier to interview designers whom I'm personally friends with. --ToaMeiko (talk) 21:21, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

It be great if you could interview one of your friends as a trial interview for the site. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• I'd say everyone directly affiliated with a LEGO product (incl. actors/voice actors, directors, etc), just limit their bio mainly to their LEGO-related works NovaHawk 01:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I suggest we include detailed bios on how they got their jobs though, especially if they're a set designer. People often like to know what work it took a person to get to where they are (especially for fellow LEGO fans who dream of one day being a designer). --ToaMeiko (talk) 22:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Yeah, sure, I meant moreso we don't want to go into detail on every movie an actor's been in, or get into their personal lives too much (kids, marriages, divorces, etc unless it's really relevant) NovaHawk 07:12, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Ah okay, that makes sense. --ToaMeiko (talk) 05:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Here's an example of a voice actor page:Chris Pratt. Is anything else needed? Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Dunno, because we don't have a MoS. Maybe check out this? NovaHawk 22:21, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I personally think they should have descriptions as we'd be unique :P Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Colours

I think we need to vote on this: Do we use LEGO's colour name e.g. Bright Purple, the scientific colour name Barbie pink, the name lego characters refer it as raspberry or just what people refer it as "pink" —Unsigned comment by Soupperson1 (talk • contribs).

The official name, but in instances of commonly used terms for the colour there may be a redirect (e.g. "light bley" to "medium stone grey"). In instances where there may be multiple colors referred to by the same name, such as "blue", there should be a disambiguation page. --ToaMeiko (talk) 21:25, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Official name (thought it would be a no-brainer). Redirects and disambigs wouldn't hurt though of course NovaHawk 01:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I actually ment referring to colours on pages, I need to explain things better :P Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• Oh, right :P I tend to use what's most readable (but link to the official name), but a set policy on this would be a good idea NovaHawk 12:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Animals

Do we count animals as figures included? There seems to be a lack of agreement over this amongst pages. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Personally I don't think it's necessary. Maybe in a separate section than "Minifigures Included", but I think it could be better-saved for the set's inventory. I'm willing to hear what others think about this though. --ToaMeiko (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

• I'm always confused by what to do too, I was wondering if we should have a separate infobox field? :S Same goes for things like Skeletons, and creatures (like Dragons, Rancors, Wampas, Thestrals, etc). NovaHawk 01:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
• I'd support having a separate field in the infobox, and a separate MinifigGallery template. -Cligra

I second Cligra's idea, mabey it could be called other characters included and we can put build-able characters such as Uni-Kitty, animals and the other characters hawk suggested Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• I'm indifferent about the separate infobox field. Normally if an animal figure is included, it's either not important as minifigures to most readers or already a prominent portion of the set in a way that the image gives it away. On the other hand, it couldn't hurt. As for a separate minifigure gallery, it sounds like a good idea. I think that we shouldn't be too strict about things like Skeletons or Battle Droids, though, and just include them with the minifigures. basically, if the figure is something you'd find within the minifigure lineup on the set's box, include it in the Minifigure Gallery. BrickfilmNut (talk) 16:43, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Forum Results

In the future, when a forum topic is resolved, could we have that posted in the Sitenotice, so that people actually know something has happened?
Something along the lines of "We just concluded a vote on whether or not Brickimedia should change its name to "Splarp". The result was an overwhelming "yes". To see the archived topic, click here."
-Cligra

I'd prefer "Splerp" to "Splarp". CJC95 (talk) 11:09, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Well your in the underwhelming minority Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

I'd rather not personally. The sitenotice to me should be used for something relevant to everyone, whereas policy changes a usually just for regulars. I wouldn't mind seeing a page like "Brickipedia:Recent policy changes" or something though NovaHawk 22:21, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I think a message about the outcome could be left on everyone who commented in the fourm if we can't do Nova's idea Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

I would not be opposed to installing MassMessage here. Works great on Wikimedia. --ToaMeiko (talk) 02:14, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

@NovaHawk: Also there is MediaWiki:Anonnotice which can be used to provide a different message to anonymous contributors. That would make MediaWiki:Sitenotice applicable for logged in users only. Either way, should I install MassMessage? I can see if being useful. --ToaMeiko (talk) 05:43, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Nova on the sitenotice, though it's still important that everyone knows when and why policy changes are going into effect. Perhaps we should look into the extension mentioned above. As someone that doesn't frequent the forums on Brickipedia, it'd be useful for me. Surely it would be the same for plenty of others. - Bug (talk) 06:12, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

• Just a note- I've started Brickipedia:Site updates anyway- I'm not saying this is the way to solve this, it's just there partly to help with the issue. (It's also partly so when someone does something that's against policy, I don't say "it's against policy", and while I'm typing it I start to wonder if I'm just making it up, then spend hours digging through old forums. If the results are all in the one place, it's easier to check) NovaHawk 11:22, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
• I'm a little late on this topic (as well as a lot of other ones here), but I'd support either Meiko's or Nova's solutions. BrickfilmNut (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Birthday ideas

This should probably be called anniversary ideas but birthday is easier to spell and more LEGOey :P Anyway.. I think we should start planning for February 1st now as we're unorganized as it is, if we leave the plans to last second the day will fly by unnoticed. So to prevent this we should start planning or at least suggesting ideas now.

This would be the perfect opportunity to try out the podcast thingy, and most people would show up because the sites a year old. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

I like it, "Brickipedia's Birthday Podcast." I'd be happy to be a part of this. It would also give us a chance to do the YouTube channel idea as well. BrikkyyTalk

We could have a cake building contest as I have an unfair advantage in the baking department (because female-feminists must hate me :P). Also building is more LEGOey. Eurobricks turtle contest was very popular and this would be in similar to style to that. If we all make a cake it'd turn out great. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Brickipedia's "birthday" is January 29. --ToaMeiko (talk) 03:55, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

"1 February: Brickimedia is officially open!" From the main site :S Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

January 29, 2006 = the date Brickipedia opened (on Wikia) NovaHawk 11:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

We have too many birthdays... SKP4472 (Admin) 22:00, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Just have a four-day birthday extravaganza. CJC95 (talk) 22:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

That wouldn't be too unusual-- BZPower celebrates their anniversary as their "anniversary week" with perks throughout that entire week. We should recognize 29 January as our official birthday/anniversary though as it's when we were originally founded (we didn't leave that kind of historical event behind when we left Wikia; we still need to hold onto our site's history). 1 February was just a good date that I decided I'd call the official opening since it was the earliest "good" date after we more or less finished development. --ToaMeiko (talk) 03:04, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Then let's do it! :P Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Oh, I thought this was for me. :P I like the cake building contest idea. Berrybrick (talk) 22:47, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Maybe it will secretly be for you disguised as Brickimedia's birthday Soupperson1 ^Jeepers!

A cake-building contest is actually an excellent idea. It's somewhat unique, it's not too intensive but still fun, and it definitely allows for creativity. And nothing could really fit better. :P BrickfilmNut (talk) 16:48, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Review team

Seeing how the QCG is dead, half of users in it haven't wrote a review since the merge, I think we should do a review team. I think this is a necessary idea to revive the review sub site. I think the reviews of this team should be featured on the homepage similar to what brickset does. But I don't know some things: should it only include admins or be treated like the news reporter group, should there be creative freedom or a guideline. Anyway I think if the site works together I'm sure we can get over a hundred reviews within a year. Also small sets take short time to review and we allow reviews for collectible minifigures and pollybags so everyone can join without hassle or bankruptcy. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• Support as nominator. Soupperson1 ^Jeepers!
• Support the idea. --LK901 22:37, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Notes

• Since we have this years DTCs: http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/Brickipedia_News:2015_Gift_with_Purchases_and_DTCs_revealed , the set of the month should be the featured review unless no one has the set, but I'm sure there's a set which reflects that moth that LEGO has made a set of.
  • The QCG isn't related to reviews? CJC95 (talk) 16:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Nope, that's BP:RQM. But since the ratings extension doesn't even work in the reviews namespace, I don't see a point to it NovaHawk 03:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Oh good - I was gonna say, I don't remember being a review quality person :P CJC95 (talk) 22:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
        • The ratings extension doesn't work in the reviews namespace? Do you want it to? ;) UltrasonicNXT (talk)
          • Yes please :D And the inventory space as well if you could- I thought you said there was some problem with it working in more than one namespace, so had to disable it before? NovaHawk 22:28, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
            • And the new Part: namespace as well if you could :P NovaHawk 06:12, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
              • Done. This actually should have already been happening (it did surprise me a little), just some localsettings statements were in the wrong order. (Hmm I think I rewrote that bit of the code after that so that's irrelevent) UltrasonicNXT (talk)

YouTube channel

On my last blog post I suggested the idea of using our YouTube channel to its full potential, kind of like how BZP uses theirs. Maybe we should give certain users access to the channel (via their own channels) so they can begin uploading reviews/news/etc. Once the videos are up, people will find them and hopefully come to the wiki and start editing, and we may finally have as much traffic as (*shudders*) wikia. Thoughts? BrikkyyTalk

As I stated on your blog, I'm not really in favor. If someone wants to do it, fine. But, I'm not volunteering :P --LK901 22:36, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

-*cough*I hope people take this seriously this time *cough*- (Sibo2808)

I have some experience with YTube now, and what I've found out to do for attention is to post news ... Sibo2808 (talk) 22:42, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Per LK. It's definitely a good idea, but not one I have the skills or desire to really run. We do have a YT somewhere, but I don't think it has had any videos since before the first launch. Berrybrick (talk) 22:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I think I've stated before (if I haven't I've said it here now) that I'd be happy to do it for us, I'd just need someone to add my channel to the page BrikkyyTalk 22:46, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Who currently has access? CJC95 (talk) 22:54, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

BFN might. I think he made the trailer. Otherwise, I'd ask Meiko. Berrybrick (talk) 23:02, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Me and only me right now. --ToaMeiko (talk) 03:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I'd rather avoid giving anyone else access to the account right now, one because it's on a personal Google account of mine, and two because I don't want too little accountability for what's posted, e.g. I'd like to be able to keep track of who's posting what before we go giving too many people access (more to have to keep track of and entrust with it). Whoever runs it to start (probably me since it's my account right now and until I manage to change it to not be associated with me) can just upload other people's things they send via email or whatever. Before we go uploading random stuff I'd also like to ensure we have some quality standards and guidelines, e.g. I'd like to avoid poorly made videos with someone's cell phone that they can't hold still while they film it). I'd like to make sure anyone who's contributing content to the YouTube channel has the adequate resources to put together a halfway decent video. I'm not saying we need to invest in a studio like BrickNerd and The Brick Show, but anyone filming things for our channel should have decent lighting and filming equipment and have basic editing software and skills at least. I'd also like to make sure, since we'll probably have multiple people from various places contributing to it, that there's decent consistency among videos. For example I don't want a video that one person adds to have superb lighting and filmography and then have someone else's video be too dark, washed out, with bad sound and all. Without consistency I don't see our channel doing well, because any subscribers/viewers won't know what to expect from us. If we really want to be serious about this, I wouldn't like to rush into it without this kind of planning and more. I myself haven't stumbled much into videography even though I'm a professional photographer. I only have basic understandings of film equipment and editing currently, and I don't know what kinds of knowledge anyone else has on this technical end of a YouTube channel. I have personal friends (not involved in the LEGO community at all) through my work as a photographer who have better experience with this that if we want to be serious about, I could ask them for help. The only problem is they're in the same town as me, not in every town all of you are in, so they'd only be able to help me in any videos I do. This is my biggest concern about starting this channel is that very few of us are near each other, so it could be hard to coordinate any of this technical work between all of our YouTube contributors. If we had more disposable income I'd be willing to use it to get equipment for various YouTube contributors for our site, but unfortunately we don't have those kinds of resources currently. --ToaMeiko (talk) 03:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

• :P your 17 and a professional photographer?! Anyway couldn't we just make a new account and you can keep your own email's account. I've edited YouTube videos before and it's not hard to find materials for news videos like Windows Movie Maker. I assume it's not hard to give guidelines for videos and just change the password if the person doesn't follow them. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
  • Yeah, I'm a professional automotive photographer (my portfolio). :) I can just set it up to not have anything associating the existing account to me. I should have been more clean— it's on a personal email account of mine, but it's not an email account that I use, so it's not a big deal. --ToaMeiko (talk) 22:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
    • So why the speech xP I don't think Instagram makes you a professional photographer, but nice pictures anyway :) Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
      • The fact that I make the vast majority of my income from photography and get hired for photography jobs makes me a professional. I linked to my Instagram because I figured it was easiest for you to browse. You can also find me on 500px or just look at my website. --ToaMeiko (talk) 22:14, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
        • Next time link your website :P I thought you just ment having an Instagram made you a photographer Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
• Firstly, if it's connected to your personal account we can always create a new account, under a different easier name such as "Brickipedia" rather than "Brickimedia Association." Then to avoid any confusion, you can give access to users via the add manager link I pointed out. Finally, I completely agree about quality standards. Lighting is a big issue, you don't want a video review to have a yellow glow to it :/ . I personally have a pretty good setup with my Nikon that can even support a green screen (though I haven't used it much, my channel only has 2 LEGO related videos and they were right before I got my setup, I've just been too lazy to upload anything), but other people might not. As for that final thing, we start off by giving only a few users access who have proven that they meet quality standards and who can coordinate the videos. BrikkyyTalk 01:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't think we can have video reviews as we all have different accents, and set ups (including lighting, background, pitch ext.]] which may be distracting for the viewer and become a turn off. I think we should try and focus on writing reviews as we need more, rather then diving into video set reviews which every Tom, Dick, and Harry seems to be doing. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
  • I'd like to avoid making any new accounts. Anyone who already subscribes to one account will get confused, and there is already a YouTube account called "Brickipedia" that I don't have access to and don't know who does. Making a third channel will make things more difficult for everyone. All I'd have to do is change the password to the email account and rename the channel... that's no big task. --ToaMeiko (talk) 22:14, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Well, when the general consensus among users is in favor of this channel we should definitely look into it. BrikkyyTalk 00:07, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

More reviews things

• Just some more ideas to try and get reviews going:
  • Changing the infobox to look more like Template:Part/new- the review infobox at the moment is very large, and you have to scroll on some screens to even see that there are reviews.
  • A rating section between the infobox and reviews- basically, a vote box where people rate the set out of 5 stars (like in infoboxes on Customs)
  • Probably the most controversial- a comments box underneath the reviews. I don't think reviews is getting a whole lot of activity because people don't want to write novels. If there's a comments box, people can write mini-reviews, and since it doesn't seem like Answers will ever get off the ground, people can ask questions about the set in this area as well.

Anyways, that's about all I've come up with in the last month or so to try and fix reviews NovaHawk 00:09, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm fine with the first two. I'm okay with the third but are you saying underneath {{ReviewPage}} or at the end of an individual review? I do the latter already and I've seen people ask questions there. Not sure how necessary it'd be on the former, but it could work. I wouldn't mind. --ToaMeiko (talk) 00:12, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah, I meant a "master comments" section on the reviewpage underneath all of the reviews NovaHawk 00:35, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

All sounds good to me. Berrybrick (talk) 01:31, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

• I like the first idea but I think the info box is so large, because we don't have any reviews. :P We should probably change it anyway for the select sets that have reviews. The second mightn't work as we'd have trolls who be like 1, 1!! MWHAHA or younger uneducated users who would be like:GIRLS SET EW!!!-1/BOYS SET EW!!! - 1. I like the third but I think we should have a review team where select users write reviews. Users who want to write 'novels' can simply join the team :P Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• Those troll comments would be easy to delete. One thing that I think would be nice is before a person can post a mini-review, they have to say that they own the set. I'm not sure how easy (and non-intrusively) that could be done though. Berrybrick (talk) 15:56, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

• I don't think we can remove votes. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• Admins can. :P Berrybrick (talk) 16:23, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

• I think Soup means that they'll vote 1 star purely to be idiots, not make a spammy comment (I can't see this being a massive issue, if we get enough people voting, it should only have a small impact on the average) NovaHawk 08:13, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

• I don't think we have enough users at the instant, I know 38 is a reasonable number but if you think everyone's going to vote they're not. If you link anything site related in chat everyone's like D: I say we have 15 users who are willing to vote, but we'd all have to vote on all the sets to look professional but most of our users buy less than 50 sets a year (do not include me in this xP) so it be hard to get an honest opinion on some sets. Also we'd probably need a guideline to vote on. E.G. The Disney Princess sets aren't remotely accurate but they have useful pieces but I don't think children (readers we need) care about those factors. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• Somehow I read "votes" as "comments" (or maybe it did say that and it was changed :P ). I don't see what buying less than 50 sets a year really has to do with anything. 40 still seems like a lot to me, as does 30 or 25 or 15. And though you might think that the Disney Princess sets are bad (which I'm not arguing, they kind of are :P ) doesn't mean that everyone thinks they are bad. That's kind of the point of a poll, to gauge the popular opinion. People are probably more likely to do something if it involves pressing just a button, as opposed to reading a wall of text. I see your point about troll votes, so we don't need to implement that if we really want to play it safe, but I'd kind of like to get the comment thing as soon as possible if there are no problems there. When I write a review, I kind of feel like I do need to write a novel, so I end up with very little quantity. The only big issue I see with the mini-reviews, myself, is that if we use comment tags (which I assume we would) they couldn't be edited. Berrybrick (talk) 02:40, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

• But why would you vote on a set you don't own? Then you don't know if it's good or not as you haven't bought it :/ What I mean is out of our 38 users 10 will vote, we probally have 200 different sets between us, that's 400 pages with not votes. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• It's fine to have an opinion on something you don't own. It might not be the most educated opinion, but it's fine to ask. We won't be using the data for research, just to make the namespace more interactive. Or, at least, that was my takeaway. Berrybrick (talk) 22:34, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

• ^ That's what I was after- people like clicking little star boxes, so it might keep them around longer. If the results are skewed- who really cares? :P Besides, the ratings on Customs seem to be pretty fair the vast majority of the time, so it shouldn't be too bad here NovaHawk 22:38, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

• new infobox? NovaHawk 00:29, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Indicators

MediaWiki 1.25 will implement a new featured: <indicator> tags. What these are is essentially the things we have that we position in the top corner of articles using CSS like the ratings. The indicator tag integrates these into the skin so the CSS hacks aren't necessary, which as a result makes it compatible on all skins that have various layouts. I'd like to convert our templates to use indicator tags soon. It's an easy conversion. All it requires is to make a template like {{Rating}} and have a rating tag inside an indicator tag. Then when you transclude {{Rating}}, the rating tag will be implemented as an indicator. Indicator tags have not yet been implemented in our current version of the Refreshed skin however, but they are implemented in the upcoming Refreshed 3.0 update that will be deployed soon. I'll be posting an announcement soon before the new skin is depoloyed, but when it is, I'd like us to be ready to take advantage of the new features. This is mainly just an announcement to you all since I didn't see it fit for a blog post. :) You can read more about them here. --ToaMeiko (talk) 23:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

• That's a good feature to have, I didn't see it when I was going through the changes :) However, as far as I'm aware, we don't have any templates which actually need that anymore- everything's done through the ratings extension (<rating/>) so... (and stupid question- just tried using indicator, and it didn't work- I'm guessing it isn't enabled yet?) NovaHawk 00:23, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
  • DeepSea and Refreshed 2.* don't support it. Rating tags aren't automatically placed in the upper corner though. That's something that's being done on a per-skin basis with JavaScript and CSS. Doing <indicator><rating /></indicator> in {{Rating}} and then transcluding {{Rating}} (almost like how we used to :P) will include the rating tag as an indicator and will automatically be placed wherever each skin defines indicators to be, without the need for CSS/JS hacks that won't work as soon as a skin changes its layout or we add a new skin. :) If you look at Refreshed 3.0 you'll see the page status indicator is automatically placed up in the corner with just the indicator tag and no CSS since all the placement is determined by the skin itself (so Vector, Monobook, etc will all have it in the appropriate location, no custom CSS needed for each skin). You can line a bunch of indicators up and they'll all be in the correct location without you having to put in a bunch of position:absolute; CSS coordinates. :) Plus if we reform how ratings/content improvement are done like how CJC and I were talking about in chat today, we'll be able to put icons like "stub", "featured", etc up there similar to how such tags may appear on Wikipedia. --ToaMeiko (talk) 01:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
• Stupid me, just fixed a mistake. These aren't added in 1.24, they're added in 1.25. So we'll have some time before we have to worry about using them. My bad! --ToaMeiko (talk) 01:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
• We need to come up with a solution so ratings are still shown on DeepSea etc. Not tricky at all, but needs to be done. (Probably just this template just including one of the new thingys plus an old style rating, then the new one can be set to display:none in skin css for the old skins, and the old one can be set to display:none in skin css for the new skins.) UltrasonicNXT (talk)
  • We can make DeepSea support it. Nobody's really maintaining DeepSea's code anymore but it only requires an addition of one line of code to support indicators. That's not hard to just throw in there as soon as we update to 1.25. --ToaMeiko (talk) 21:02, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Okay, if it's that easy. UltrasonicNXT (talk)

Customs + Stories = ♥

Warning: This section breaks protocol. Reader discretion is advised.

It's a sad day when someone comes to these forums to get something recognized. The only other option seemed to be a blog, and maybe I'll try that too because now that I think about it that might make more sense. Anyway, Customs has a tendency to die and nothing was getting done in regards to the stories merge, so I thought I would bring it up here. I'm basically looking for ideas because I have no idea what to do. The only things that I recall discussing with Bug (and in a forum before it died) are:

• SirComputer requested that we keep the visual identity of Stories intact. This is kind of vague, but something that we would like to honor, though, to be totally honest, I have no idea how to do that.

• We also want to use the opportunity to give Customs a makeover. There was a bit of debate, and then the forum just sort of died without any results.

• Whether we want to import stories upon request or just import them all at once.

Knight said that Stories should be to Customs what Reviews is to En and I kind of agree, but to be honest, the implementation between the two is awful and feels inorganic. (I know we are trying to fix it, and I've thrown around some ideas myself, but anything that our site tries to get done in regards to redesign, aside from the upcoming Refreshed layout I suppose, seems slow since most of these are issues we have had for years.) That is something I want to avoid. I want to find a way to integrate stories into the wiki better and to encourage people to write them, even if it is something short. I want it to be clear that it is there. Perhaps not in-your-face, but not something to ignore either.

So, basically I posted this in the wrong spot because I need ideas and to see those ideas actually come to light. I will move it to a blog if I absolutely must (and even if I don't, I might to account for some users who don't read the forums but might have feedback I would like) but I am not relegating this to Customs where Bug and I will be responsible for everything because we can't do it alone. People don't go there to discuss policy, only to upload MOCs. Sure, I can prod them on chat to check every time there is an update, but who wants that? Berrybrick (talk) 23:10, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Not all at once, guys. :P Kahuka just linked to [1] this on chat and I thought, if we are going to allow stories, why not fan art? Might as well add that option while we are (hopefully) transitioning to bigger and better things. Berrybrick (talk) 21:22, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

+1 --ToaMeiko (talk) 04:23, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm definitely up for fan art, but I'd like to avoid things like poorly photoshopped video game covers. This would mean that policies defining art would have to be put into place. - Bug (talk) 02:40, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Do you think you would be able to come up with that? I'm not the person who is good at defining what constitutes art and what doesn't, but I could probably say something sounds reasonable. :P Berrybrick (talk) 23:24, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Sure. I could just stick something on that article requirements page once we've combined. - Bug (talk) 03:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't want to import every page on account of the majority being from authors that have never contributed to Brickimedia. It'd take mere minutes to transfer the work of our own authors (regardless of requests), which would keep the site organized and easier to maintain. - Bug (talk) 02:40, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree. --Knight

I don't know if Sherman would be okay with this, but I don't have any strong feelings of my own going either way. Berrybrick (talk) 23:21, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Exactly why I didn't want to mention it prior to you bringing it up. - Bug (talk) 03:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Is Stories going to be on a different namespace? Like, the colors change in a similar fashion to Reviews here on En? I'd totally be on board with that, and it'd probably make it easier to maintain their style and stuff. Also, would it be possible for me to change how only Stories looks in my cache CSS whatever it is? --Knight

Read Berry's second paragraph. - Bug (talk) 02:49, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

And, while on the subject, I agree with him. - Bug (talk) 02:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I already read that, I just wanted to put more discussion on it. :P One suggestion I have to make it feel more organic is to have it have a lot of representation on the main page. As much as the MOCs. Like, it'd have Featured Story, WotM, etc. I dunno what we'd do with the MOC gallery, but we could do something. We could also have some colour-coding on the WotM and Featured Story to make it quick to realize they're different namespaces and to make them stand out. --Knight

I'm not sure why you asked the question if you already knew that it was still up for debate, but I digress. Anyhow, I don't think the lack of representation is what makes it feel "inorganic." I do agree that it feels this way, however. Regardless, you won't have to worry about integration; Berry and I have already discussed the main page. - Bug (talk) 03:15, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Any other suggestions on how to make it feel more organic? --Knight

Not at the moment (I'm trying to work on that) but what I basically meant was I don't want it to feel like two totally different sites when they are the same wiki. Berrybrick (talk) 05:23, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

We could have something like Story: or Fiction: in front of the titles of any stories, but leave the background the same. - Bug (talk) 03:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Anyone know if it would be possible to make it so a page can only be edited by its author and any admins/moderators (preferably with the ability to add other authors)? People editing others' pages isn't really an issue at all, but I think people might appreciate the security if it's possible. Still coming up with other ideas (kinda) but thought I'd ask this. :b Berrybrick (talk) 23:21, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I've seen a few fanfic wikis that plaster a warning template on the top of their pages. This isn't foolproof, but I'm sure it'd give some authors peace of mind. Perhaps we could integrate something into the infoboxes..? - Bug (talk) 03:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Ideally there should just be a policy and a notice about that and the etiquette of it all. There is the ability to do this kind of thing and there are similar extensions already available (but for this particular implementation we'd have to write our own I believe). It's not something I'd advise doing because it does make things a little frustrating especially when a user (non-admin) wants to do some cleanup, fix a template, etc and doesn't have permission (BS01 Wiki has this kind of protection on user pages and it was always frustrating before I was an admin there). --ToaMeiko (talk) 03:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

People pages, part 2

• This has been nagging at me for a couple of weeks, but now there's been a James May minifigure made, I can't ignore it any longer- how do we deal with real-life people who have made some sort of contribution to warrant an article here, but have also been minifigures? For example, James May (now a promo minifigure, but also hosted a LEGO episode of Toy Stories), Adam West (a minifigure, but voiced by the actual Adam West, so would count as a voice actor) and Stan Lee (same as Adam West). What MoS should they follow (minifigure, person [which still hasn't been made], or a separate new MoS)? Or should they be split into two articles (eg, Stan Lee (person) and Stan Lee (minifigure))? NovaHawk 01:14, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
  • This is tricky. For James May, he definitely deserves a Category:People article because of the Toy Stories involvement, however for ones like Adam West or Stan Lee I'm not quite sure. I would say for those two have it be just the minifigure article and have a note saying "Adam West voiced his minifigure in media name here". Same thing for Shaquille O'Neal who voiced his minifigure in The LEGO Movie. That's not all that big of a contribution to deserve a People article as well. I'd say James May should stay as a People article and doesn't need a minifigure article either. Since the minifigure appeared in a video promo instead of something like a game, there's not all that much to write about it so it doesn't really need its own article. --ToaMeiko (talk) 05:25, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
• Can we add a description to people pages too? :P Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Change to Refreshed skin colour

File:Refreshed3-light.jpg

Example of a lighter theme

• Following on from this, now that we have Refreshed 3.0, I thought I'd bring it up now so that if it was to change, it'd change at around the same time as the new skin, to save us from having two major changes. Should we stick to the dark blue scheme, or go to a lighter, more Deep Sea coloured theme? NovaHawk 04:54, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Keep dark

Switch to light

1. Not really bothered that much, but a very slightly lighter themem would be nice. --LK901 11:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
2. Not the shade shown at the right, but I really don't like the dark blue we have now. It makes the background look like some sort of abyss. Berrybrick (talk) 12:58, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
3. Yes pls Ajraddatz (talk) 14:37, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
4. Even though I don't use Refreshed, it would be better. ~~ Regards, Sibo the First (talk) 10:00, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
5. Definitely. This was bugging me for a while, and I brought it up before, but I wasn't sure if I was the odd one out. BrickfilmNut (talk) 16:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
6. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Comments

• Like before, I'm not too worried either way. Unless I switch to the new Refreshed, which I might. But then if I prefer the light scheme, I can just use my custom CSS :P NovaHawk 04:54, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
• I could adjust to a lighter skin but not that light. In that screenshot the background is nearly as bright as the content (and grabs attention more than the content due to the color) which is the opposite of how it should be. A readers eyes should naturally see the content first, not the background (or in Wikia's case, ads :P). --ToaMeiko (talk) 05:17, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

  Agreed. CJC95 (talk) 11:07, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

• Would it be possible for us to choose different colours for our skin based on the colour palette? Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

  If you mean set your personal skin differently, then that is possibly through your personal css. To use ones from the colour palette you would need their html colour code. CJC95 (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Wait we can change the color based on preference? How?! :P I want to know, I think the wiki would look good in a light green :) BrikkyyTalk 12:35, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

    • You need to create User:Brikkyy13/Refreshed.css and add the css to that. I can't remember the exact code of the top of my head, but if I have time later I'll find it (providing no one else comes and tells you) CJC95 (talk) 12:44, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

      • I should do that too :o :-P ~~ Regards, Sibo the First (talk) 10:00, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

        • User:NovaHawk/refreshed.css, and change the colours to whatever you want NovaHawk 10:12, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
• Neutral BrikkyyTalk 12:35, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
• ^ Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Help!

• Does anyone know if there's a way to pass a parameter to two separate templates? Eg, if I want to pass the text "hi!" to Template:Num1 and Template:Num2, is there a way to do it without entering the same data twice, like {{Num1|hi!}} {{Num2|hi!}}? There are two things I want it for, but can't think of a way to do it without SMW, and SMW would be bad since you'd be grabbing data from the same page :/ NovaHawk 11:51, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
  • You could make a template called num which took the paramater and then put them into each template? CJC95 (talk) 12:03, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
  • What exactly are you trying to do? But yeah, another template in the middle is probably the way do it, as CJC suggests. UltrasonicNXT (talk)
• Sorry, I probably should have just explained one of the problems :P I don't think having one big template would work, as it would probably mean encapsulating a whole page in a template. The main one I'm thinking of is on the part page redesign- if you see here, I'm trying to get an automatic list for parts by doing an SMW query for Element ID, and also supplying colour information with the colour ID through {{PartAppearances}}. At the moment for PartAppearances, you have to input the Element and Colour IDs manually, which is stupid, because you already have to put that information in the main infobox. Ideally what I'd do is get all filled out Element ID parameters from the infobox and do a series of queries, then all you'd have in the "Appearances" section is simply {{PartAppearances}}. There's also another thing I'm thinking of to do with minifigure pages, where I'm thinking we could have it so that if you clicked a variant name in the infobox, it could get the image name from the minifigureGallery and display a pic of that particular variant you clicked on as the infobox image (that'd have to go through a forum of course, but I don't want to work on it if it's not even possible) NovaHawk 05:22, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Nah, it's gonna be SMW or a big template then :/ UltrasonicNXT (talk)
    •  :( Ok, thanks anyway, I guess I'll test it and see how it goes sometime. (a bit off-topic- do you know if the newer versions of SMW are noticeably better? I saw that SMW2.0 "brings many stability improvements and enhancements", but doesn't go into any detail as to what they are) NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

News reporter rights

Following in the aftermath of some drama that I was unaware of (until I searched through the past revisions of this page), I would like to suggest that we remove the news reporters group and allow autoconfirmed users or registered users to submit news articles. Admins, or maybe the current NR members would then approve it for quality, truth, news worthiness, etc. Admins (and NR if we kept the group), would be able to instantly publish an article. I'm not sure if it is possible to do this via current extensions/core functionality, or whether we would have to develop/install something. --LK901 20:22, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for reposting this. Yes, this is exactly what I proposed yesterday. Brickipedia is "the LEGO wiki that anyone can edit". News is part of that, so anyone should be able to contribute to news without going through a request process for rights that shouldn't be necessary. Anyone is able to contribute to mainspace, reviews, etc, so the same should be for news. If someone's news article isn't the best quality, other members can help them improve it. That's what a wiki is about-- collaboration. --ToaMeiko (talk) 20:26, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Then we should let everyone ban & kick too because of spam and such. Actually, Yay, let's remove every single user right! ~~ Sibo the First (talk) 20:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Unlike reporting news or writing an article, kicking and banning isn't contributing to the site. It is moderating the site. Berrybrick (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

It was kinda a joke you know :-P ~~ Sibo the First (talk) 06:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

• In terms of practicality, this can be done as follows:
  • It wouldn't enter the rss feed until approved by someone. Hence not on the main page, nor an rss reader or any twitters that take our rss, until someone approves it.
  • Also note that this would not mean any old news article could end up on the Twitter either, since any news posted there is done manually by someone with access (currently myself, Meiko, Berry and probably Lcawte).
• In terms of usefulness of this:
  • People who find news can report it.
  • Anyone who can write in English can write something.
• In terms of why this won't lead to spam or bad articles:
  • It won't enter the feed until its approved - so it will only be found by those in RC until then, basically.
  • If an article is good but needs editing to fit style, it can be done by an admin/news group person before it enters the feed, so we get more good content (similar to how newspaper reports would be edited before publication).
  • Rubbish/content that isn't news/duplicate stories/spam can be deleted.
• Basically, this is no different to me and Berry reading Nexus's stories yesterday and editing them and then publishing. CJC95 (talk) 20:34, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

• I don't think this will work as people were once gun ho about ratings and now look where we are. Also people will make reports on MOCS/fan ficus ect. We need a MoS for news before we do this Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
  • No one was ever that excited about ratings.
  • Then they won't get published on the RSS or Twitter. They would be deleted.
  • No we don't - we never needed one for news reporters, so why would we need one now? I'd trust the same people who write reports now to judge whether something is good or not. CJC95 (talk) 21:23, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

• • • Why did everyone sign up off the QCG then :P But people won't know what isn't news and what is. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

• Oh. It seems I must have misunderstood before- from the way the original post read, I thought there was going to be a lengthy approval process for each article. I'm totally fine with what CJC's saying. If it's just a quick yes/no from a news reporter like how it's a quick yes/no from a QCG member for the lower tier ratings, then that sounds ok to me. How would the protection for the namespace work though? It shouldn't be autoconfirmed, as it would mean anyone could post articles that go straight out to RSS feeds, but it shoudn't be sysop either? Or just keep it news group protected and have it so the submissions for news articles can be posted in the Brickipedia: namespace? NovaHawk 21:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • The idea would be that the article would exist in the news space, but wouldn't go to the RSS until its been approved. So anyone can post in the namespace, but that doesn't automatically mean it will go to the RSS feed, it will wait until its been approved by a reporter. So, if say someone posted spam there, it wouldn't go to the RSS or main page. It can just be deleted. CJC95 (talk) 21:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
    • If that was to happen, it's going to be a real pain to code... NovaHawk 01:18, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
• In the terms of "the LEGO wiki anyone can edit," I do not believe "special" articles are covered in that. News is not Ninjago, you can't have anybody writing it. Yes if this idea gets through there will be the approval, but really think about it, who would really use it other than the current news reporters? Isn't the approval process you're suggesting exactly the same as Brickipedia News:Reports? Reports is never used, so why would a process essentially identical to that be used too? BrikkyyTalk 22:28, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

• I didn't even know that Reporters existed until you used it briefly, to be honest. I don't see it linked to here, on any individual articles, or on the main page, which is where I would look to find it. Berrybrick (talk) 22:49, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

• (By "Reporters" I meant Brickipedia News: Reports. I obviously knew what reporters are. :P ) Berrybrick (talk) 14:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

• All people ever used that page for was to post a link to a news story, and then one of us had to write it. That is not the point of the proposed system. CJC95 (talk) 17:49, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

• The only thing is that I don't see why anonymous users can't contribute news articles. Is it because we are worried about spambots? Something similar to what is described here could probably implemented, right? Anyway, I support this idea (as I did yesterday, I just didn't understand that one part and wanted it clarified :P ). Berrybrick (talk) 22:49, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
• Per Brikkyy. Also, I don't see why changing everything would improve this site: We are in a community where people have (also had) their places in a community. Like News Reporters. They are our journalists. A Rollbacker/Admin could be seen as our police, or representatives. I'm just saying that if such change would be set in action, it wouldn't get us forward. Most people see the news themselves. Then they won't bother sharing it. Unless they have NR. :-P ~~ Sibo the First (talk) 06:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
• Food for thought: All opposition has given reasons why this might not work. Are there any concerns about why it might actually be damaging? Berrybrick (talk) 17:27, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • We tweet out stupid reports like:New Kai/Emma fan fiction is out! :P Or you know a moc news report that isn't dedicated to this site Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
    • You are presumably suggesting that Me or Berry would decide to tweet that out? Because, you know, if we wanted to do that we could now... CJC95 (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
      • lol BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
• Honestly, CJC's system sounds practical, and it'd be nice for people who actually care about news to write it instead of forcing people who don't care about it to write the reports because they're the only ones that can. I imagine the ones written by those who actually care would be more comprehensive. And there's no good opposition I've seen to this idea. Worst case, if we try it and a totally unexpected problem arises, we just revert back to the old system. BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Admins unable to alter news reporter rights?

• Just noticed this- shouldn't admins be able to give/remove news reporter rights? I'm pretty sure bureacrats could, and it was decided that admin+'crat should merged, so... NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

People Pages: the people page section to end all people page sections

• We've had a few forums on this already, but nothing's getting decided. So I'll set up a forum with straight votes, and go through them step by step. The first thing is- what articles on real-life people should we have on the wiki? Feel free to add other sections for other types of people if you can think of any NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Set designers

Support

1. NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
2. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
3. No-brainer. BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
4. Berrybrick (talk) 19:47, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

Creators of LEGO Ideas projects which are made into real sets

Support

1. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
2. Seems like there'd be enough interest for this. BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

Voice actors for LEGO films/video games/web thingies

Support

1. NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
2. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
3. ...I'd say for main characters, character's we'd have pages for. If it's like a super-short cameo or something, maybe pass. BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

People actually in LEGO movies

Support

1. OK, I think this is just Will Ferrel and that kid at the moment, but anyway... NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Name the pages: The Man Upstairs and Finn, official names. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

Comments

People involved in making LEGO video games, films etc

TV/film directors/producers, etc, game directors (Arthur Parsons), etc

Support

1. NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
2. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
3. BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

People involved in the running of the LEGO Group

Ole Kirk Christiansen, etc

Support

1. NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
2. Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}
3. BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

Certified Master Builders

Support

1. NovaHawk 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
2. BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I don't think they're involved enough in the LEGO group Soupperson1 ^{Friends are Forever! <3}

   Readers would be interested in this sort of thing, though, wouldn't they? Also, I don't see how they'd be less involved than voice actors. BrickfilmNut (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments

Members of the LEGO Ambassador Program

Support

Oppose

Comments