Forum:Theme Pages

Forums - Theme Pages

This page is waiting to be archived by an administrator. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Considering that themes like Legends of Chima and Hero Factory probably would account for a large number of readers, the fact that nobody can really view them probably doesn't help Brickimedia. It also makes general navigation frustrating, and increases the difficulty on updating those themes' respective pages. Therefore, as a temporary solution, I suggest splitting up these theme's pages into multiple, smaller pages, such as "Legends of Chima/Sets" or "Legends of Chima/Background", and perhaps doing the same for year pages as well, if either of these is possible. There would basically be one page, such as "Legends of Chima", keeping the introduction and infobox, and then underneath, the others would be linked to, perhaps in a nice-looking template. :P It's not an ideal solution, but it'd be better than nothing at the moment, I think. BrickfilmNut (talk) 21:15, 19 April 2014 (UTC) All we need is a server upgrade. A couple donations could fix that, and we'll need an upgrade eventually anyways. Our current server will run out of disk space eventually, and it already doesn't meet our needs memory/RAM-wise, so we'll need to upgrade at some point. --ToaMeiko (talk) 21:54, 19 April 2014 (UTC) Yes, but how long will it be until then? BrickfilmNut (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC) Until we have sufficient funds. That comes faster with donations or better ad revenue (which would come from more viewership). --ToaMeiko (talk) 22:25, 19 April 2014 (UTC) Agreed, I'd say having our some of most popular pages inaccessible (themes, years and video games) is probably what's really hurting us the most right now. We can simply turn stuff into a list instead of a nice table, like how 2014 currently is. The problem is usually either in SMW calls or just the sheer size of some of the tables, so moving things like the background elsewhere won't help. Any rough estimate on much longer it'd take to get money for an upgrade (based on current projections?) NovaHawk 03:33, 20 April 2014 (UTC) It depends on what we upgrade to. It could take several months. --ToaMeiko (talk) 03:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC) There were a few cases, such as with the Mixels page, where actually it was the additions to the background I made that didn't enable the page to work anymore, forcing me to stop. BrickfilmNut (talk) 15:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC) An alternative to upgrading the server (which is inevitable in the long run) would be to delete all the broken pages and rewrite them. If we were to fix them and have them using the same or similar content as lego.wikia.com has, Google's anti-plagiarism algorithms would kick in and it wouldn't help our search rankings. Rewriting them would avoid that issue, which practically all of our articles currently face. It's a more time-consuming method, but wouldn't have many downsides. I don't want to split the pages up, since that only makes navigation more difficult. --ToaMeiko (talk) 03:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC) This would work, as the pages probably weren't amazing anyway, its just a question of finding someone with time to do such things. CJC95 (talk) 11:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC) There were one or two I did get to C1 and FA. I'd rather not lose those while Brickia keeps them, personally. Berrybrick (talk) 14:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC) I'd be fine with that, I guess. BrickfilmNut (talk) 15:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC) If we do go ahead and do this, start the articles on Sandbox pages before deleting them. --ToaMeiko (talk) 16:47, 20 April 2014 (UTC) How is this an alternative to upgrading? We need a half-presentable list of sets, there isn't enough RAM to display this. So nomatter how pretty the paragraphs on an article's background are, the page will still have nothing on the Brickia article because most people when they go to a theme page are just looking for a list of sets. And like Berrybrick, I wouldn't want to spend my time rewriting featured/good/complete articles that people contributing here have written, although I'd be more than ok with doing some of the more popoular themes that didn't reach such a status. (off-topic, sorry for my lack of activity lately, I'm not around too much) NovaHawk 23:33, 20 April 2014 (UTC) Per Nova. (also, per Nova's small text.) -Cligra Question: How much actual money will the server upgrade actually cost? -Cligra Twice what we're paying now at least. For the next best option from our provider, I believe it would be either $15 or $30 per month (I forget which we're on currently). The next best from our current provider still might not be enough, and they don't have too many options better than the one we're on now. If we change providers to get better specs in the server than we can get with our current provider, we'd be looking at $80/mo or $160/mo. --ToaMeiko (talk) 23:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)