HRWiki:Da Basement

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Guitar Tabs?)
(Main Page Redesign Notice: the logo redesign had its own notice)
 
(includes 295 intermediate revisions)
Line 1: Line 1:
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
 +
:''This is the administrative message board.'' {{for|basement featured in Homestar Runner toons|Basement of the Brothers Strong}}
[[Image:The_Basement.PNG|thumb|300px|Where all the cool guys hang out]]
[[Image:The_Basement.PNG|thumb|300px|Where all the cool guys hang out]]
{{shortcut|DB}}
{{shortcut|DB}}
Line 10: Line 11:
<div class="plainlinks" style="font-family: georgia; border: 1px dashed #06f; background: #eef; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em 0.5em 1em; text-align: center; font-size: 18px;">[http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Da_Basement&action=edit&section=new Start a new thread &raquo;]</div>
<div class="plainlinks" style="font-family: georgia; border: 1px dashed #06f; background: #eef; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em 0.5em 1em; text-align: center; font-size: 18px;">[http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Da_Basement&action=edit&section=new Start a new thread &raquo;]</div>
__TOC__
__TOC__
-
== Featured mark? ==
 
-
Shouldn't we have something on a page that tells you it is/was a featured article (like the star on [[Wikipedia:Main Page|Wikipedia]], or the alternate "Featured" logo on [http://www.uncyclopedia.org Uncyclopedia])? ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 17:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
+
== [[Weekly Fanstuff]] and [[Sketchbook]] linking ==
-
:On the talk page of every featured article there is the {{tl|featuredarticle}} template. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 18:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
+
Hi guys, after {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Annual_Checklist&diff=534194&oldid=534012 adding}} {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Annual_Checklist&diff=534195&oldid=534194 notes}} to the [[HRW:AC|Annual Checklist]] based on {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Suudsu&curid=14302&diff=534127&oldid=514203 some}} {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=alternate_universe&curid=22046&diff=534095&oldid=531458 edits}} [[User:OptimisticFool|OptimisticFool]] had to make, I realized there must be a better way to do this.  Since [[Weekly Fanstuff 2008]] and [[Sketchbook 2008]] already exist and now redirect to their current counterparts (which should from now one with the checklist in place), and since we have anchor redirects, I think the best course of action would be that any new Weekly Fanstuff and Sketchbook links be constructed as <code><nowiki>[[Weekly Fanstuff 2008#</nowiki>''anchor name here'']]</code>
 +
instead of <code><nowiki>[[Weekly Fanstuff#</nowiki>''anchor name here'']]</code> (and similarly for the Sketchbook).  This would save us the trouble of having to scour for these links at the end of the year, yet they'd still work correctly this year.  If we decide to follow this idea, how to we make this note prominent so that editors are aware of them when making such links? --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 09:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 +
:Occasionally, I ''do'' make such links when adding or fixing an anchor, or other similar edits. You make a good point, yes. This should probably be done. Nothing wrong with a little future-proofing. Or redirects, for that matter. That's why we have them. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 10:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 +
::I've {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=H*R.com_updates_2008&diff=535021&oldid=535019 switched}} the links in that page as discussed above. Following [[HRWiki_talk:Standards#.28Don.27t_Fear.29_The_Redirect|this section]] I'm guessing we think it's desirable. Comments? --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 16:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 +
:::Maybe it's trivial, but I think from [[Weekly Fanstuff|WF]] and [[Sketchbook|SK]], the "What Links Here" list is a mess and these are the types of changes that would clean it up.  It's a slow day at the wiki, so I think I'm going to get busy on it.  (Was going to see the new Indiana Jones movie, but there was a long line, so I gave up and now need something to do.)  {{User:OptimisticFool/sig}} 19:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 +
::::Our formatting of the pages has been quite inconsistent over the years, so I created a couple of formatting templates and added them to all the pages. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
-
::Oh, because I didn't see one on [[Strong Mad]]. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 19:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
+
== Two more for the history books ==
-
:::It's on [[Talk:Strong Mad]]. &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 19:26, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
+
Hey guys, I just ran into these two pages: [[HRWiki:Block log]] and [[HRWiki:Upload log]] which like [[HRWiki:Protection log]] and [[HRWiki:Deletion log]] should belong in [[:Category:HRWiki History]], but currently do not. They are all protected so I bring these up here. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 15:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
-
::::I think that The Mu's idea is good. It would give a quick indication of a featured article. I think something like Wikipedia's bronze star (see [[Wikipedia:Automatic number plate recognition]] for an example) would be good. It's non-instrusive and informative. - {{User:Super_Sam/sig}} 10:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
== Checklist Sign up Sheet ==
-
:::::Take a look at {{tl|featuredicon}}... the results of me experimenting with the Wikipedia template... {{User:Phlip/sig}} 12:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
While the [[Talk:Quote of the Week|Weeklies Checklist]] has been kept up beautifully. Other checklists like [[Talk:Strong Bad Email|Strong Bad Email]], which has become quite complex, (and [[Talk:Podstar Runner|Podstar Runner]] is new) seem to be falling into some level of disregard.  The most visible and common tasks have been taken care of, but the more tedious ones (like updating {{tl|StrongBadEmailInfo}}) may not be taken care of right away. To that end I would like to propose a Weekly Checklist Sign up Sheet whose purpose is ''solely'' to track whether or not one or more users ''verified'' that each item in the checklist (except for [[Strong Bad Email Statistics]]) was updated. This doesn't mean that the user has to update the list. The signature only means that all the items have been "checked off".  This would ensure that at least one pair of eyes went methodically through the list making sure no stone was left unturned. Currently, we have no way of knowing if a person actually went through the checklist, or was just trying to remember some steps from memory. I know some people may think is might be too much, but given how complex some of these lists can be, it is soon becoming a necessity. I welcome your opinions. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 17:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 +
:I have something in the works to help with the Strong Bad Email checklist. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 20:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
-
I disagree with marking our articles as featured, especially in the main namespace, not because the star isn't clever&mdash;it's plenty clever&mdash;but because we are so cavalier about which articles we choose. I am not saying that we should choose articles differently. We have a style of choosing that works for us. What I ''am'' saying is that it doesn't lend itself to permanent recognition. For example, today's featured article is the [[TV Time Toons Menu]], which is interesting, but hardly an example of "one of the best articles produced by the Homestar Runner community." &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 13:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
== Cleanup Committee ==
-
:I concur. Our method of choosing articles has little to do with whether or not they're among our finest articles. Rather, we have certain sequences to follow (such as featuring all the main characters) and we like to stick in other things that are major sections of or toons on the H*R.com itself. I don't think we should use that star. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 13:23, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
I have an idea. You probably guessed it from the heading, but I'm starting to feel the need for a committee dedicated to cleaning up the wiki. The various cleanup projects, namely [[HRWiki:Article Cleanup]], which deals with featured articles, have fallen into relative obscurity or the hands of only a few users. The cleanup committee would be similar in concept to the validation committee, but would focus on spelling, grammatical errors, and correct page format. It would also strive to boost the level of clarity and compellingness of our articles. It would also be more organized and hopefully encourage more users to participate in making our fair HRWiki a better and more fun place to be. Does this sound like a good concept at least? -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 22:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 +
:I think that it is the responsibility of every active user to cleanup the wiki, therefore having such a committee would be like having a userbox saying "this user edits hrwiki"... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 23:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 +
::Please don't shoot me down right away. I know every user is supposed to cleanup the wiki, but the majority don't really pay attention to articles that aren't the newest sbemail or character or what-have-you. What I'm suggesting is a much larger version of Article Cleanup, one that spanned the whole wiki and concentrated on spiffing up what we already have to make it even better. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 23:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
-
:True... I thought the same thing when {{tl|featuredarticle}} was being put on talk pages... we're not Wikipedia, which can have a new FA every day and still only pick the cream of the crop... we're limited by the number of articles we have. Looking back, the majority of the FA's are about an interesting aspect of H*R, rather than a necessarily good page on HRWiki (though the former can help with the latter, if only because it directs more eyes to the page). This is kinda why I didn't start putting {{tl|featuredicon}} on pages... {{User:Phlip/sig}}
+
== User space edits ==
-
::I have the same problem with {{tl|featuredarticle}} on talk pages, but there's just not ever been a good time to bring it up. At the very least, that template needs to be reworded. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 14:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
Since most userspace edits are nothing more than updating personal info or adding userboxes, is it possible to make a setting that gives users the option to not see them in recent changes? Just a thought. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 00:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 +
:Since the first thing anyone else would say (I know I would) would be "What'd stop vandals from using that option while vandalising other people's user pages?", let me postulate this: Supposing the option only appeared for the user whose page was being edited? This is at least theoretically possible, I'm sure. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 00:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 +
::BUT WUT IF THEY SAY NASTY THINGS ABOUT YOU AND YOU TOTALLY MISS THEMS? No, but seriously, what would stop those same users from posting inappropriate material on their own userpage? {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 00:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 +
:::I think that the original request was for the user ''looking at Recent Changes'' to not see the edits to User-space.... '''not''' for the user ''making the edits'' to opt-out of their edits showing up there. That said, one can choose "User" from the dropdown, hit the invert checkbox, and bookmark that page.  (Or, even change the "Recent Changes" link to it with a custom user javascript). {{User:GreenHelmet/sig}} 01:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
-
:::Agree and agree. &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 14:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
== Update main page ==
-
::::The verbiage of {{tl|featuredarticle}} was mentioned during the [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/General Discussion#Featured Template]] and [[HRWiki:Da Basement/Archive 2#Daily Features]] discussions, but never addressed. I think it could be reworded.&nbsp;-- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 17:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
A while back, someone suggested we update the main page to include links to the multi-lingual welcome pages, but the idea, although it did get a lot of noise made about it, ultimately failed. Since we have had the same style of main page for [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=prev&oldid=86533 three and half years now], does anyone else think it might be a good idea to redesign the main page just for the sake of having a new main page? --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 01:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 +
:Um, anyone home? --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 04:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 +
::I have said many times that I think this is a good idea, and have even designed several test pages. Right now, however, I've just got too much on my plate to do anything about it. Feel free to try your hand at it, though. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 05:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
-
:::::And <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Template:featuredarticle&curid=11400&diff=346353&oldid=217646 the recent change]</span> looks great!&nbsp;-- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 17:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
== 3RR Violation ==
-
::::::(Referring to the link Tom just posted) I changed the image and reworded the template. In both cases I tried to capture the essence of our selection process. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 17:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
See [[Math Kickers]] edit history.
 +
:Yeah, we don't really have 3RR here. Besides, it's been three reverts, not the four that would be required for a 3RR vio at Wikipedia. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 14:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
-
:::::::I also find that the new template better exemplifies our process of choosing featured articles. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 17:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
== "Fatal Error" ==
-
::::::::When I first made it, I just copied from Wikipedia. But now it realy have that HRWiki feel to it. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 17:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
+
Trying to see a previous vandal edit to Coach Z's article, I'm getting this:
 +
<pre>
 +
**He has occasionally [[Blubb-O's Commercial|attempted to be sent to prison]], since he would be guaranteed "three square meals a day".
 +
**He has occasionally [[Blubb-O's Commercial|attempted to be sent to prison]], since he would be guaranteed "three square meals a day".
 +
**He [[secret recipes|can't afford "money cost]]" ice cream.
 +
**He [[secret recipes|can't afford "money cost]]" ice cream.
-
:::::::::I still like the star better. --[[User:Trogga|Trogga]] 16:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 33554432 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 35 bytes) in /home/hrwiki/public_html/includes/DifferenceEngine.php(1211) : assert code on line 1
 +
</pre>
-
Without star, nothin'. The one big reason to place a badge in the upper-right corner of each featured article, regardless of what anyone might say, is that otherwise, it looks like nobody on the wiki knows how. You don't want that. {{User:Darth Katana X/sig}}
+
I don't exactly get the message, but I think it's trying to ask one of the Administrators to do something ("assert code on line 1"?). I also see the comment "<nowiki><!--LINE 278--></nowiki>" in the code source. --[[Special:Contributions/71.157.173.166|71.157.173.166]] 03:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
-
:I disagree. The fact that someone might think we lack wiki savvy is no reason to wield it in ways we do not need. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 09:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
+
:It was a vandalized state of the page that was fixed shortly after. I don't actually know what's in there, but something in the code broke the page good. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 03:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
-
::With the star, people can see that this is a featured article without goin' to the talk page. --[[User:Trogga|Trogga]] 11:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
+
::It was just some dumb ASCII art. Nothing to worry about. I took out the link. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 04:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
-
:::Yes, but it's not all that important to know if something's a featured article... as discussed above, if an article is featured it says more about the ''topic'' than it does about the article itself. {{User:Phlip/sig}} 12:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::::But we gotta look ''legit'', man! Even if the featured articles aren't anything to write home about, that doesn't mean a badge isn't in order. {{User:Darth Katana X/sig}}
+
== Idea for Page ==
 +
I'm sorry if this is the wrong place to post this, but I had no idea where else to go. <br>
 +
(Maybe this is something that needs to be stated a little clearer?)<br>
 +
I think there ought to be a page about 'Phonebooks' on the HRwiki because of its many mentions:<br>
 +
Eg. in the sbemails 'your funeral' and 'the movies'
-
The reason Wikipedia has stars is because there are tons and tons of pages about all sorts of things, and tons of vandals, and the pages can't be monitored and worked on by the entire community, so when one article is very good it deserves a marking. This isn't how we do it here, and because it's a smaller space based on one thing, every page is about on the same level of quality. I'm fine with the tag on the talk page. {{User:Salty/sig}} 23:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
+
I would have made it myself, but I was afraid of messing it up and infuriating fellow users. <br>
 +
Anyone down with the idea?
 +
--[[User:Lustmyeyes|lustmyeyes &lt;3]] 05:17, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 +
:It has to have at least 3 references to be a running gag, so no. {{User:MichaelXX2/sig}} 05:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
-
:That reasoning is still confusing, just like the reasoning for calling the Fhqwhgads Robot "Visor Robot" back then. No offense, but why not just do it? Are you doing this for yourself or the user, anyway? Most regular users wouldn't waste their time on talk pages, because if you're not a member of the community, it's irrelevant (I know I don't look at talk pages to wikis I don't contribute to). Besides, we could make a star like the one on Homestar's shirt. That would be cute and clever. {{User:Darth Katana X/sig}}
+
== Deletion category needing attention ==
-
::But it's also irrelevant to a casual reader which pages are featured and which aren't. To a casual reader, knowing which pages have been featured gives ''no'' information about the topic, or the quality of the page &ndash; ''all'' it says is that we think the topic is interesting. This is unlike Wikipedia where a featured star means that ''the article is high quality'', which is useful information for researchers using Wikipedia as a source... but it carries no such weight here. {{User:Phlip/sig}} 04:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
+
To my fellow sysops: We really need to get on cleaning out the deletion category. Things have been sitting in there for months with no discussion. I've done some, but I really would like a little help. Furthermore, as I'm going out of town in a few hours, I may not be able to do much for a bit. If a bunch of us do it, it'll go a lot faster. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 09:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 +
:I did as best i could with DorianGray's help for actual deletions given my inability to delete. I managed to clear off [[:Category:Pages for Discussion]] and about a third of [[:Category:Articles for Discussion]]. The rest of them are either lacking consensus and need more opinions, or else are SBCG4AP-related and outside my ability to really judge or even understand consensus. Hope i helped. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 10:15, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
-
:::Whatever. I still think we need one. Not having one just makes the wiki look like a n00b community. {{User:Darth Katana X/sig}}
+
== General Toons Checklist ==
-
::::Putting stars just for stars' sake is making us look like a n00b community. And the wiki would eventually look like Strong Bad's webpage.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 04:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::My opinion is that doing what need not be done is a hopeless waste of time. Also, why would the reader care that we think this or that is important? Don't talk down to them. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 04:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
+
I think that we should have a Generic Toons Checklist similar to the one seen in [[Talk:Strong Bad Email]] (albeit shorter).  The reason I'm saying this is that little steps such as {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki%3ASubtitles%2FData&diff=671537&oldid=667235 updating}} [[HRWiki:Subtitles/Data]] have been neglected in the past.  While there's no guarantee that the checklist itself won't be neglected, at least we can give some structure to the updates and have a place where we can see a list and make sure we haven't missed anything. Its location would be crucial, and I think [[Talk:Main Page]] would be the best place to put it in and it's the place with the most visibility.  (The checklist can explicitly point to the correct instuctions when updating [[Strong Bad Email]] or [[Weeklies]] as well.) What do you guys think? --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 13:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 +
:I'm for the idea, though I don't necessarily think it should be on the main page talk. [[HRWiki:Standards]], perhaps? &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 02:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 +
::Cool! I could have a section there for the checklist (along with links to other checklists from that page, or maybe even group them there so they're at a centralized location? -- I was thinking turning the most prominent ones into their own templates so they could be pasted in both their original and new locations). I would still like to see something in the main talk page linking to  [[HRWiki:Standards]] so that people know it's there; perhaps by amending the {{tl|Main Page Talk}} header? I'll start on making the checklist and go from there. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 20:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
-
==IRC scheduled chats==
+
== HRWiki store ==
-
I propose that we put the <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Sitenotice&oldid=179699 scheduled chat notice]</span> back in the sitenotice, as it was up until November, at which point it was apparently taken down due to spamming issues. However, with very few outright spamming attacks, the most recent being of a recently blocked user, who was subsequently banned without issue, the channel has no reason not to be advertised. In fact, it has reason for ''to'' be advertised, what with the unsatisfyingly low average user count. I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets nostalgic about those friendly Mondays and Fridays. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 15:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
+
The interwiki link needs changing for HRstore:. It is now homestarrunnerstore.com. Thanks! {{User:The Goblin/sig}} 13:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 +
:Done. Thanks! For my own records: http://homestarrunner.stores.yahoo.net/ &rarr; http://www.homestarrunnerstore.com/ (We should note that somewhere in an article.) Hmm. The old Yahoo! icon doesn't seem appropriate anymore for the link. What should we use? (Interestingly, on pages where they forget to declare a favicon, it defaults to the Yahoo! one.) &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 15:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 +
::Maybe it could be the sign from [[Bubs' Concession Stand]]? Nah, it'd be a little redundant because of &#123;{[[Template:u|u]]|cs}}. Maybe mash the H*R and Yahoo! favicons together? {{User:Soiled Bargains/sig}} 23:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
-
:I'm up for putting the notice up every now and then. &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 19:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
+
== Discuss before creating a new page ==
-
== Sysop Nominations ==
+
I'm not sure how it would work, or even whether it's a good idea, but I'd like to float the suggestion that—at least until the current lull is over—no new articles be created without discussion first. (This would apply only to our secondary and tertiary articles—the ones we make to chronicle objects and themes—not toons.) It seems that during the lean times we tend to actively look for articles that can be created, ones that we might not otherwise create. Sometimes this is a [[Bubs's Shady Business Practices|good thing]]; more often, however, {{p|l={{fullurl:Special:Log|offset=20100510220000&limit=2&type=delete&user=It's+dot+com}} it is not}}. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 +
:I actually rather like the idea, but there's no real easy way to implement this beyond what we're already doing. Still, we really *are* just scraping for new content... and it's beginning to boil down to random wiki searches for three instances of something that isn't otherwise noteworthy. I... actually may get it for this, but I'm beginning to wonder if the "three appearances" guideline shouldn't be changed somewhat. Three appearances of something in a webtoon that's been running at a rather constant pace for more than a decade really doesn't seem particularly significant anymore, especially given the incredible periods of time between them (one in 2001, one in 2002, and a very vague offhand mention in 2009 that may or may not even be related?). Maybe expand it to five? I don't know. But we're just creating pages for anything and everything these days, not really caring whether it's interesting or particularly relevant; there're many people on the "for" side of these pages whose argument is solely that they're within the technical guidelines. Not an especially compelling reason, really... but I'm getting off topic. I'd like to hear about your idea some more. -{{User:YK/sig}} 01:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 +
::The problem is that often articles aren't known if they'll be worth having until they develop some content, true, there are cases where you can tell just by the name that, say, "times homestar has said the word 'then'" won't make a good article. I therefore propose a 3 step process. First, a page in the HRWiki namespace where ideas for articles can be discussed. If it's agreed upfront to be a good idea, the article can skip the intermediate steps and be made immediately in the main namespace. The second step for an iffy article that needs time to develop, is to be made as a subpage of the new article discussions page, out of the way of the main namespace, until it is either approved or rejected. The third step is, obviously, if it is approved, it's moved into the main namespace, and if it's rejected, it ends up in deleto city. If we implement this, it might even be a good idea to disable page creation in the main namespace for regular users, and have the "you cannot create pages" message include a link to the new article discussion page, at least at first, so that people get the message. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 10:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 +
:::While I think this is a good idea for the purposes of running gags and inside jokes, I don't want to sit around and wait for one of my [[User:Super Martyo Brother/tab project|tablature pages]] to clear committee. If we implement this somehow, I don't think we should turn off page creation for normal users (unless someone wants to promote me to temporary sysop, but that seems impractical, and also, I would ideally not be the only one working on tabs). --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 08:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
::::I wouldn't worry about it. This idea seems to have died from lack of support, and even I wasn't super gung-ho on it to begin with. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 18:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
I'd like to revive this discussion. I support the discussion of pages, not as a mandatory requirement for all articles, but as an optional thing. I have a [[User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/Pages|whole bunch of pages]] I'd like to create, but I'm not sure whether they're good enough. I can't really start a discussion, because there's no centralized place to do that. A simple <nowiki>[[HRWiki:Article Discussions]]</nowiki> page or something of the sort would be good. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 23:01, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
-
Is there an open sysop nomination page? Just wondering. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 04:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
+
== Deletion categories ==
-
:Nope, we only add sysops when we think that we need them. {{User:Rogue Leader/sig}} 04:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::Also see [[HRWiki:FAQ#How do I become an admin or sysop?|here]]. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 09:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
== Question From a Sysop Wannabe ==
+
We need to clean out [[:Category:Articles for Discussion]], [[:Category:Pages for Discussion]], and [[:Category:Pages for Speedy Deletion]]. Some pages have been in those categories for nearly a whole year. Can we please clean them out? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:14, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
:It's kind of hard to clean out the former, since consensus needs to be reached, and I'm sure that a sysop will get around to the latter eventually. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 07:19, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
::RickyTommy, we keep telling you not to police the wiki because you're overdoing it. Please stop telling people what they should do. I mean it.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 07:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
:::I didn't tell anyone what they should do. I was just pointing out those categories and the lack of attention they're getting. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:31, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
::::Ah, I must have misunderstood "We need to clean out..." as saying that we need to clean out these categories.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 07:54, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
:::::Yes, maybe I was a bit rude when I said that, but I'm unable to clean out those categories myself, as some of the articles probably have consensus to delete. <s>PS. Should we make a page like Wikipedia's Articles for Deletion page, and give pages a limited time (like a week, just like at Wikipedia) to be discussed?</s> Never mind, with the lack of users using this Wiki at present, such a page wouldn't work that good. Anyway, should we start cleaning out those categories? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 06:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
::::::And this topic just dies down. I really don't want those articles to stay like that forever. Again, can we please clean the categories out? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
:::::::I agree that the category should be cleaned out. It's been eight years! {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 17:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
::::::::Almost nine years! {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 19:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
-
:Dear Sysops,
+
== Autosummary for replies? ==
-
::How would you get to be a sysop? I was also wondering if anyone could help me learn html (Okay, I'll learn HTML on my own....). Any help?? Please??
+
-
::::Sysop Wannabe,
+
Could we have an automatic summary for replies on talk pages? Who knows how many countless hours everyone has spent typing "reply" and variations thereof. Considering that that's more of a custom than a standard, I guess it might be a little unnecessary, but if it would be easy to do [[technology#Transcript|I'll be your best friend]]. {{User:Soiled Bargains/sig}} 18:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
-
:::{{User: Unme93/sig}}
+
:I don't think so. In [[User:It's dot com|Dot com]]'s case, he usually puts a general summary of what he said in the description. I usually try to do it too. Really I don't think it's necessary to have it and it would be more of a nuisance than a convenience to have it done automagically. {{User:MichaelXX2/sig}} 19:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
-
::[[HRWiki:FAQ#How do I become an admin or sysop?|Read this.]] --{{User:Jay/sig}} 19:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
+
I don't think the system could reasonably be expected to distinguish between bona-fide replies and other kinds of edits. Even in the most clear-cut case (text is added at the end of a section on a new line; no text is changed or removed; the text begins with one more colon than the previous line and ends with a four tildes for a signature), I still don't think I'd want the system making assumptions. Given how easy it is to navigate to the summary field, type "reply", and submit the form (without even using the mouse), the "countless hours" argument rings hollow for me. Sorry. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:16, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 +
:I'd also point out that the system DOES automatically put the name of the section in. If you don't make an edit summary, as I'm purposely leaving one out of this particular edit, it's generally assumed anyway to be a reply. I mean, come on, you probably saw this edit and thought it was a reply, right? Right? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 23:11, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
-
== Audio Articles ==
+
== Licensing drop-down list ==
-
While reading [[Swears]] out loud with a very bad English accent for my own weird amusment, I had an idea: How about we have audio versions (.ogg) of featured articles? Wikipedia have those and I think we should also. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 14:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:Although this would certainly be entertaining, I question the practicality of having audio versions of our articles. What is Wikipedia's reason for having them? Accessibility? &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 15:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Could a sysop or admin kindly populate [[MediaWiki:Licenses]] with the [[:Category:Image copyright tags|image copyright tags]] that have been created over the past few years? It would aid in choosing {{p|l={{fullurl:File:aquashot.png|diff=prev&oldid=717137}} the right license when uploading}}. Please and thanks, {{User:Soiled Bargains/sig|nodash=nodash}} 22:07, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
-
::Not really accessibility, but that's still a minor reason.  See [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia#Benefits]] for the full list.  I don't think it would work too well for us though, as we have significantly less content that it could be done with and those articles change quite a bit.  But hey, if you want to record it for kicks and see how many laughs you get, it might be funny.&nbsp;-- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 17:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
+
== MediaWiki system messages ==
-
:::You know what? I'll do it. I'll read [[Homestar Runner (body of work)]] and upload the ogg to the wiki, use it, delete it, it's up to you. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 17:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
+
I had a few concerns for the [[HRWiki:Sysops|sysops]] regarding some of the '''MediaWiki system messages'''. Please delete/modify or just comment on the following:
-
::::Well, crap. The microphone part of my audio card is busted, so I can't record anything for a while. Anyone else wants to do it? {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 17:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
+
{| class="wikitable"
 +
! Message
 +
!
 +
* Default
 +
* Current
 +
! Concern
 +
! Decision / remark
 +
|- style="background:#CCC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Anononlyblock]]
 +
|
 +
* anon. only
 +
* anonnies only
 +
| "anonnies"?
 +
| "Hey, [[HRW:G#A|anonny]], why don't you go... [[rock opera|brush up]] on [[anonny|your knowledge]] of the [[Homestar Runner (body of work)|Homestar Runner]] body of work or something and not attribute it to yourself!"
 +
|- style="background:#CCC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Autoredircomment]]
 +
|
 +
* Redirected page to [[$1]]
 +
* redirect to [[$1]]
 +
| present tense? lowercase? also, why not just default?
 +
| rowspan=3 | preference
 +
|- style="background:#CCC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Autosumm-blank]]
 +
|
 +
* Blanked the page
 +
* blanked the page
 +
| lowercase? why not just default?
-
:::::Eh, I'll do it. A bonus for those who don't join our [[Wikipedia:Skype|Skype]] calls. I'm afraid I don't have the means to convert it to vorbis, though. Perhaps someone can change it later. I'll start tomorrow. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}}
+
|- style="background:#CCC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Autosumm-replace]]
 +
|
 +
* Replaced content with '$1'
 +
* replaced the page with '$1'
 +
| lowercase?
-
::::::If you want, you can send me the file in any format you'd like and I'll turn it to .ogg<!--or .egg or .muffin--> {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 19:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
+
|- style="background:#CFC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Clearyourcache]]
 +
|
 +
* '''Note - After saving, you may have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes.''' '''Mozilla / Firefox / Safari:''' hold ''Shift'' while clicking ''Reload'', or press either ''Ctrl-F5'' or ''Ctrl-R'' (''Command-R'' on a Macintosh); '''Konqueror: '''click ''Reload'' or press ''F5''; '''Opera:''' clear the cache in ''Tools → Preferences''; '''Internet Explorer:''' hold ''Ctrl'' while clicking ''Refresh,'' or press ''Ctrl-F5''.
 +
* <nowiki>{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Special:Preferences|'''See [[Help:User Preferences]] for help deciphering the options.''' <nowiki></nowiki>}}</nowiki> '''Note:''' After saving, you may have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes. *'''Mozilla / Firefox:''' hold down ''Shift'' while clicking ''Reload'', or press ''Ctrl-Shift-R'' (''Cmd-Shift-R'' on Apple Mac) *'''Safari:''' press ''Cmd-Option-E'' *'''IE:''' hold ''Ctrl'' while clicking ''Refresh'', or press ''Ctrl-F5'' *'''Konqueror:''' simply click the ''Reload'' button, or press ''F5'' *'''Opera''' users may need to completely clear their cache in ''Tools&rarr;Preferences''.
 +
| I recommend we delete [[MediaWiki:Clearyourcache]] and move "See [[Help:User Preferences]] for help deciphering the options." onto [[MediaWiki:Preferences-summary]].
 +
| The entire preferences page was reworked beginning with the next version. This will need to be reviewed once we upgrade (whenever that is).
 +
|- style="background:#CFC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage]]
 +
|
 +
* Template:disambig
 +
* HRWiki:Links_to_disambiguating_pages
 +
| supposed to designate which template(s) are used to mark disambiguation pages. non-default setting breaks the functionality of [[Special:Disambiguations]]. also, [[HRWiki:Links to disambiguating pages]] is possibly pointless.
 +
| This was set in the earliest days of the wiki and should be reviewed and probably removed.
 +
|- style="background:#CCC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:History-title]]
 +
|
 +
* Revision history of "$1"
 +
* Revision history of $1
 +
| removal of quotes, just different for seemingly no reason - why not just default?
 +
| preference; likely inspired by the {{p|l=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:History-title&action=history same change}} at Wikipedia
 +
|- style="background:#CCC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Mailmypassword]]
 +
|
 +
* E-mail new password
 +
* Email new password
 +
| <s>"Email" generally should be spelled "E-mail"</s> nevermind, but still why not just keep the default?
 +
| "{{p|l=http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/never Never mind}}" should be two words.
 +
:Never_mind, then ;-) -- I guess I figured out why we have non-default on this, anyway -- probably for consistency with the H*R spelling, which is usually (always?) non-hyphenated. {{User:LobStoR/sig}} 20:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 +
|- style="background:#CFC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Movenologintext]]
 +
|
 +
* You must be a registered user and [[Special:UserLogin|logged in]] to move a page.
 +
* You must be a registered user and [[Special:Userlogin|logged in]] to move a page, or this page may be [[HRWiki:Protected page|protected]] from page moves.
 +
| This message is not even displayed for protected page move attempts. (in that case, it displays [[MediaWiki:Protectedpagetext]], which is defaulted to "This page has been locked to prevent editing.")
 +
| This change was probably correct back when it was implemented but after various upgrades is now out of date. It should be reviewed and probably removed.
 +
|- style="background:#CFC;"
 +
| [[MediaWiki:Right-edit]]
 +
|
 +
* Edit pages
 +
* Edit this page
 +
| Incorrect grammar for the list at [[Special:ListGroupRights]]<br />
 +
''edit:'' also feeds [[MediaWiki:Permissionserrorstext-withaction]] "You do not have permission to $2, for the following {{PLURAL:$1|reason|reasons}}:"
 +
| We need to see where else this is used. Obviously it was changed for some reason, but the change could be out of date and may need to be removed. If it's still current, then the amount of ''sense'' made on the group rights page (''grammar'' is not a problem per se) is potentially a secondary concern, not a primary one
 +
:I think it's $2 in [[MediaWiki:Permissionserrorstext-withaction]] -- "You do not have permission to $2, for the following {{PLURAL:$1|reason|reasons}}:" {{User:LobStoR/sig}} 20:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 +
|}
-
:::::::Try [http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ Audacity]. It's free and has the capability to export as Ogg Vorbis. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 20:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Please check these out, and leave comments regarding any decisions on any of these. Thanks, {{User:LobStoR/sig}} 18:43, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 +
:I replied to your, ahem, concerns. Thanks, Chaps, for not burdening us with more pressing matters, like toons, so we can take care of stuff like this. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 19:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 +
::Yeah, really helps us... err... refine our wiki :-) {{User:LobStoR/sig}} 19:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 +
:::I set the table row color by status -- green=pending, grey=no action. {{User:LobStoR/sig}} 20:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
-
::::::::That's what I was going to use. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 20:42, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
+
== Use of <code>id</code> in templates ==
 +
As work was being done on [[sightings]] pages, I noticed that {{t|sightingslanguagewarning}} makes use of the <code>id</code> attribute for its box. Its value, which references another template that has the same thing, is "<code>[[Template:inprogress|inprogress]]</code>". The <code>id</code> attribute is, in part, the replacement for the <code>name</code> attribute, which creates an anchor: a "link" to a specific part of the page.
-
:::::::::Oop. I was talking to Lapper. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 20:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Two <code>id</code>s can never be the same on a page, as stated in this sentence from [http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_8 section C.8 of the XHTML 1.0 specification]:
-
:I vote [[User:Rogue Leader|Rogue Leader]] to do the talking. :) (Seriously, if you haven't heard his voice, make it your goal to do so. It's awesome.) {{User:FireBird/sig}} 03:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
<blockquote>The values of these attributes must be unique within the document, valid, and any references to these fragment identifiers (both internal and external) must be updated should the values be changed during conversion.</blockquote>
-
::I completely and utterly agree!  Someone who is not a ruler of a variation of thieves
+
If a value for <code>id</code> is used more than once, it will invalidate the page, [http://validator.w3.org/check?uri={{urlencode:{{fullurl:HRWiki:Sandbox|oldid=731671}}|query}}&group=1 as demonstrated in this link] ({{p|l={{fullurl:HRWiki:Sandbox|oldid=731671&action=edit}} here's the code}}). Three errors are from multiple occurrences of the same <code>id</code> value. The remaining five demonstrate that there is a format to be followed, and an invalid format throw an error. In this example, headings that start with a number or special character generate invalid <code>id</code> values (see C.8). This is something MediaWiki does and it's practically out of our control. Note that headings with the same name are handled by MediaWiki to an extent.
-
:::Why, thank you kind annony who is in no way not me or my computer obsessed sister. I wouldn't mind doing it.  My voice does kick butt! {{User:Rogue Leader/sig}} 06:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Looking through [[MediaWiki:Common.css]] and [[MediaWiki:Monobook.css]], the only selection by <code>id</code> that's of concern is <code>#navbox</code>. However, those style rules are also applied to the class <code>navbox</code>, and I believe that most if not all navigation templates get their styles from using the <code>class</code> attribute.
-
::::Rogue, you're completely insane ''and'' obsessed with your own voice. Which, by the way, can't actually be "handome". I'm sure your sister had a fun time typing into the computer-box, as well. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 12:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Lastly, if this rant seems familiar, I did go on about [[HRWiki talk:Standards#ids|the use of this attribute on table rows]] a year and so ago.
-
Alright, you guys. The first spoken article is online [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Sandbox&oldid=360343]. It's not quite a featured article, but an... erm.. important part of the wiki nonetheless. Also, notice the new [[Template:Spoken_article_entry|template]] that goes on the description of the media file. We should set up a page, describing how to create and label spoken articles. And we might want to put something in place for claiming an article. Phlip nearly recorded [[Homestar Runner (body of work)]], not knowing that Lapper had already done that.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 11:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
''In summary'', I wish to recommend that users be cautious as to add <code>id</code> attributes to templates, or anything that may be used more than once on a page, and, likewise, using this attribute to apply styles. In addition, I wish to recommend that users who see an <code>id</code> attribute causing a ruckus  resolve it in some manner or remove it. {{User:Soiled Bargains/sig}} 21:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
-
:Now, I'm going to have to interject on that one. [[Homestar Runner (body of work)]] is actually first, in that (a) it's an article, and (b) the only reason it hasn't been uploaded yet is a restriction on server upload size. It should be done by this afternoon. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 12:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
== Dropdown Menu Support ==
-
::For the actual cartoons, we could capture the audio and then record the actions in between pauses. And Loafing, your voice sounds funny. :-P ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 02:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Will the HRWiki be compatible with dropdown menus sometime? Purple Wrench has a great idea for a restyling of the @StrongBadActual page, but a dropdown menu that would allow him to compact all the transcripts would benefit the page greatly. - {{User:Catjaz63/sig}} 03:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 +
:To generalize, having '''''any''''' sort of hide/show functionality for a section of text would help. In addition, the page (both as it appears now ''and'' if my redesign is used instead) will appear broken unless the issues regarding automatic resizing of gifs are sorted out. I am aware that both of these tasks are not trivial, but they would be necessary for a page that has the potential to grow very quickly and be populated with gifs. --{{User:Purple Wrench/sig}} 12:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 +
:: Sometime? Yes! Soon? Well... no promises, but I do intend to get back into active development for this site, and creating a better user experience for this day and age is tops on my list. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 22:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 +
:::If you just configured the server to resize [[:File:twitter sillysoolnds.gif|twitter sillysoolnds.gif]] correctly, I thank you for doing so. There are a few more gifs I uploaded in August for [[@StrongBadActual]] that don't resize yet ([[:File:heavenstaxforreals.gif|this]] and [[:File:Casiostaxx.gif|this]]). --{{User:Purple Wrench/sig}} 12:27, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 +
::::Looks like they're both working now too. Thanks! --{{User:Purple Wrench/sig}} 19:39, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
-
:::It seems E.L. Cool came up with two ideas at the same time; one of them flourishing, and one of them being quickly forgotten. I guess this project may have to wait for its turn. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 12:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
+
== Personal info of real persons ==
-
::::Hi, the new subtitles project doesn't mean this one have to stop. If my sound card wasn't busted then we would already have the first spoken article. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 21:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
+
I did a little digging and couldn't find anything on this subject (if anyone knows where we've talked about it before, please link to it here). Lately there's been an uptick of personal information on articles about real people that seems a little... over the line. I can't say for sure because to my knowledge we've never actually defined a line (other than limiting certain information about minors). So what should the line be? Obviously anything mentioned directly on the official site is fair game, but thus far we haven't limited ourselves to that. We include information from interviews and the like. That said, just because a scrap of data can be found on an obscure website somewhere doesn't automatically mean it should be here. This is a bit unfocused, so I think I'll stop talking and open the floor for others' thoughts and concerns. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 17:03, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 +
:There's all sorts of information about practically everyone in the world which really ought to be private information, which most people would probably prefer if it would remain private information, but which, because of the age we live is, is now easily accessible to anyone on the internet. I think that the natural cutoff point here is probably that anything which has been deliberately publicized in relation to The Family Chaps's creative endeavors is fine, but that out of respect to their privacy, information from any other source which is not directly linked to their public lives as writers/producers should be off-limits. Practically, that would mean that we should avoid making use of things like phonebook databases, people search services, background check engines, etc. On the other hand, any information from the toons, DVD commentaries, interviews, press releases, Strong Bad's social network accounts, TBC's other projects, and even databases like IMDB which are specifically geared toward the video entertainment industry ought to be fair game. I think it's only common decency to say that we don't publish any information that TBC themselves haven't already indicated is intended to be in the public eye. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:43, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 +
:::Please excuse my brevity, but I wholly agree with Defender's definition of "the line". Just because information can be found doesn't mean it should all be published. In addition to that, I believe that a new [[:Category:HRWiki Policy|Policy page]] be created to specifically explain what the line is and why we've drawn it. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 13:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 +
::::I agree with DeFender and Stux. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 18:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
-
How would one get an ogg player? {{User:Dacheatbot/sig}} 03:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
+
== AFJAOBN ==
-
:Try [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Media_help|this page]]. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 03:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
+
I think that [[HRWiki:April Fools' Jokes and Other Baleeted Nonsense]] has run its course. The wiki hasn't done a proper gag in years, and every single "prank" done by users is lame. No offense, but changing your sig and your user page has been ''done''. I get the strong feeling some people come back once a year just so that they can do something that gets posted on that page. I'd really like to lock it, and unless somebody can make an extremely good case for why it needs to stay open, I plan do to so. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 02:16, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
:Well, I think some people enjoy it and it isn't harming anyone or anything soooo... I feel like that's a pretty good reason? {{User:The thing/sig}} 02:18, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
::For about five years running you did exactly what I was talking about. The harm is that it's disruption not to be clever or funny but for its own sake. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 02:32, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
:::Much as it pains me to do so, I have to agree with Dot com. It was total loads of fun back in the wiki's heyday when we had a lot of active users who would do April Fools' stuff, and then would continue to interact with each other in ways relating to their joke. Now that the wiki is pretty much dead save for a handful of people, that isn't really how it happens anymore. We're basically left with a few edited userpages that no one would even be looking at were it not for the edits being made to them, along with some other disruptive behaviors such as adding nonsense that no one cares about to talk pages that no one has looked at in years. At this point, it's all just become stale. Sadly, there's not enough of a userbase for it not to be stale. We had a good run, but until and unless TBC start updating weekly again and we get a huge influx of users which causes the wiki to return to its former glory, we need to put Apro Foo Day out to pasture. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 11:33, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
::::I'm here in support of DC's and DeFender's position.  These days some users just simply want to one-up the previous year's or another user's randomness.  I'm fine with just keeping this page locked for historical purposes.  --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 12:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
:::::Oppose. This particular April Fools' Day has had more participants than any of the previous four years - without coinciding with a H*R update, no less. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 13:02, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
::::::To be clear, I'm not suggesting a wholesale ban on users changing their sigs or whatever they've been doing; I just don't think we should keep a record of it anymore. (If we ever do a wiki-wide prank again, that can still be noted.) &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 14:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
<pre>The April Fools’ Day page has brought so many people joy.
 +
And by “so many”, I mean those few it did not annoy.
 +
And if it’s locked forever, never to be changed again,
 +
Then April’s reemergence of those old users will end.
 +
No more rare appearances of people lost to time,
 +
Like wind caressing crystals in forgotten caves and mines.
 +
The truth is if the page gets its abilities revoked,
 +
That marks the end of The_thing’s twelve year streak of stupid jokes.
 +
And yes I know that certain men would love to see me sad,
 +
I purposely have vexed you for a decade, is that bad?
 +
So, if you must, protect the page and ruin all those dreams
 +
Left gazing into voids of empty memories unseen.</pre> {{User:The thing/sig}} 17:38, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
:Did you even read my comment above? We have no current plans to stop people from doing the stupid stuff they do on April 1. The only difference is we're not going to record what they do in a centralized place. If that's a dealbreaker—in other words, if someone is doing something ''only'' so they can be listed on that page—then they're doing it for the wrong reasons. That's precisely what locking the page aims to curb. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 19:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
::Personally I liked having all of the stuff in one place, so a user could look through all of them at once on any given day of the year. That said, I definitely see both sides of the issue here. If the page is locked... okay, it's still there for posterity. Then I'd just take the list of stuff I did and stick it on a page in my own userspace, and in that case I'd recommend other users do the same. --{{User:Purple Wrench/sig}} 23:50, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 +
:::You're free to list your own stuff, I guess, but we're not going to move a centralized list to the user space. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
-
I should probably get around to uploading this. It's been sitting around in my Documents folder for like two months now. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 03:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
+
== The Deleteheads Download Blockquote ==
-
Project page: '''[[HRWiki:Spoken Articles]]'''.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 06:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
+
I made a blockquote-type thing for the page [[The Deleteheads Download]], but I can't add it because I can't edit [[MediaWiki:Common.css]]. Can a sysop add this? Feel free to make any changes!
 +
<pre>
 +
.DeleteheadsDownload<!--you can change the title to whatever you want--> {
 +
    background: url(/images/c/c8/DeleteheadsDownloadBackground.png) repeat-y;
 +
    padding: .5em 1em 1em;
 +
    width: 600px
 +
}
 +
</pre>
 +
{{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 00:27, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 +
:Done. I went with just <code>.deleteheads</code> and made some small adjustments to the padding and width. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 00:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
-
== Don't get us mixed up ==
+
== Oldest Downloads Menu Mirror ==
-
Just so no one gets confused, I thought I'd explicitly mention that I'm setting up an account for my wife, Janene. She has volunteered to help handle some of the proprietor responsibilities around here like updating the ledger and activating forum accounts when we receive COPPA forms. I don't anticipate her doing much more than that, but in order for her to do these things I have granted her the sysop and proprietor roles here on the wiki and will grant her administrative privileges on the forum when I set her up over there. Her username is [[User:JaneneDay|JaneneDay]], and I'm sure she would appreciate a warm welcome, which I have no doubt will happen mere seconds after I post this. In fact, someone may notice her new account and welcome her ''before'' I've even posted this. You guys are always on the ball. Oh, and sorry I haven't been around much. I have more time on my hands now and would like to get more involved again, but I'd also like to get the Homestar Runner Network off the ground, so I may end up using my time over there. At any rate, I'm starting to miss all you crazy people. Cheers! &mdash; {{User:JoeyDay/sig}} 01:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Dear Sysops:<br>
 +
I [[User:CoachZiscool1978|CoachZiscool1978]] request that you create a mirror for the [[Oldest Downloads Menu]]. It may take as much time as it needs but, I have overwhelming support... (by overwhelming I mean one [[User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc|Gfdgsgxgzgdrc]].) Still! I hope you do it for me, in your eyes, I'm a wiki user, In my family's eyes, I'm a son, or grandson, or even nephew but in my heart I'm a Homestar Runner fan and I'm a historical preserver...<br>
 +
Anxiously awaiting a reply: {{User:CoachZiscool1978/sig}}
-
:It'll be great to have such a well-known new user on HRWiki, and I'm proud to have made such a welcome. I'm sure Janene (or JaneneDay) will be warmly regarded. We miss you, too, Joey. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}}
+
:I've changed it to a local mirror.&nbsp;-- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 01:28, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
-
::<!-- Uh... We could use a little help over at the fanstuff... Aw, I'm just kidding. Bonus points to you for finding this. -->Now we can truly say that the HRWiki is a family-run business. :-D ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 01:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
== Long-term inactivty ==
-
:::Hi Joey. Hi Janene. &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 01:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
Wikipedia (and if I'm not mistaken, every other Wiki in existence) has recently taken to desysopping admins who have not edited in a long time. Any chance we could do the same thing? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 10:05, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
:And the reason to do this would be...? --{{User:Jay/sig}} 10:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
::I ''slightly'' agree. After all, what's the point of an administrator who hasn't edited in a decade? By my calculations, about 1/5 admins haven't edited in eight or more years. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 20:10, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 +
:::Here's a full list of admins' most recent edits:
 +
<table width="25%">
 +
<autocolumn cols="3" style="font-size:85%">
 +
*2019 x5
 +
*2018 x2
 +
*2017
 +
*2016 x2
 +
*2015
 +
*2014 x2
 +
*2013 x2
 +
*2011 x3
 +
*2010
 +
*2009 x2
 +
*2008 x2
 +
*2006 x2
 +
*2005
 +
</autocolumn>
 +
</table>
 +
:::We have five active admins (those who have edited this year), eight inactive admins (those who have edited since 2014), and thirteen admins with practically no chance of ever editing again (those who haven't edited since 2014). That means exactly ''half'' of the admins haven't edited since [[April Fool 2014]]. Seven of them haven't even edited ''this decade''. And the decade is practically over! {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 19:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 +
::::Speaking of inactive sysops, there should probably be a few more sysops to replace the old ones. The last time someone was promoted was in 2007, and that user hasn't edited in over eight years. There are a lot of helpful active users nowadays who could do a lot of good with admin [[privileges|priv-a-le-ges... I guess]]. The wiki might run more smoothly and effectively when there aren't a select few people doing all the important stuff. Things might get done faster this way. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 02:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 +
:::::What things do you think are not getting done? -[[Special:Contributions/174.62.238.201|174.62.238.201]] 13:07, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 +
::::::I think that things like [[:Category:Pages for Speedy Deletion|deleting pages]], blocking vandals, [[:Category:Page Maintenance|discussions]] (like the ones on this very page), getting approval for important decisions (like this one), and so forth {{--}} even smaller, less important things, like changing the CSS for holidays or updating the featured content {{--}} might be done more quickly with more people involved. Also, the wiki runs on an outdated and unsupported version of MediaWiki from ten years ago, which is a bit dangerous for our security, and more active sysops might help fix that. In short, I think more help would be helpful. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 22:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 +
:::::::Of the things you listed, the only thing that really even applies to sysops is blocking vandals, which is generally a matter of luck as to whether there will be an active sysop when vandalism happens. True more sysops meaans more likelihood of there being one on when a vandal hits, but we don't get all that much vandalism and it's usually taken care of relatively quickly. As for the rest, let me explain why they don't apply to sysops:
 +
:::::::*Deleting pages - Most of the undeleted pages are due to lack of consensus on deletion discussions rather than lack of sysops to perform the deletions.
 +
:::::::*Discussions -  Anyone on the wiki can participate in discussions. You don't need to be a sysop to do that. Again, this is more a matter of a lack of general inactivity than it is lack of sysops. Having more sysops is not going to encourage more activity.
 +
:::::::*Getting approval for important decisions (like this one) - Only site admins can approve new sysops. Anything else that needs approval is done by consensus, not by sysop authority. There may be actions that only a sysop can take to make something happen once consensus has been reached, but as with deletion, it's a matter of having enough activity to get consensus.
 +
:::::::*And so forth -  And so forth.
 +
:::::::*Changing the CSS for holidays or updating the featured content - I believe that there are elements of both of these that can only be done by a site admin rather than a sysop, and at least the former tends to be done on a pretty reasonable timeframe.
 +
:::::::*The wiki runs on an outdated and unsupported version of MediaWiki - This one is definitely something that can only be done by a site admin. I'm certain they are aware of it and have plans to deal with it.
 +
:::::::In short, I doubt there's much need for more sysops, and the issues you raise mostly have more to do with general inactivity anyway. One last thing I'd point out is that the wiki's general sysop nomination policy is "[[HRWiki:FAQ#How do I become an admin or sysop?|don't call us, we'll call you]]", that suggestions to add more sysops have historically been met with suspicion and resentment from regular users, and that generally only the site admin team decides whether and when more sysops are necessary. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 23:51, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 +
::::::::Oh, okay. That makes sense. Nevermind then! {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 02:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
-
:I've now removed Janene from the sysop group. The permissions for the proprietor role have been modified so that she has exactly the access she needs to do the paperwork she'll be doing without any additional privileges she doesn't need. You should still welcome her, though, of course. ;) &mdash; {{User:JoeyDay/sig}} 03:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
== Outdated Chat Clients ==
 +
:''Moved from [[HRWiki talk:FAQ]]''
 +
I know for sure that there's still plenty of buzz going around about Homestar and the gang (Especially with the new sbemail released), but my concern is that not a whole lot of people use IRC anymore, I propose that the Admins make an Official Homestar Runner Wiki Discord Server. This way we can do get together and make editing and sharing thoughts a lot easier (If this already exists, Great! Let's try to make it more known) {{unsigned|DonPianta|19:43, 17 August 2017}}
 +
:I agree. IRC Channels are horribly outdated and this would be a great improvement for Wiki discussion. - {{User:Catjaz63/sig}} 22:31, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 +
::I agree as well. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 02:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 +
:::Now that the topic has been {{p|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=778426&oldid=777799 brought up again}} by an anonny, I still think this is a good idea. I've been on the IRC channel a few times, and it is very inactive. Plus, you can only see messages posted when you are online, whereas with Discord, you can view all messages, making discussions more convenient. This way, you don't have to be online 24/7, and if you exit, you can go back and read messages you've missed. Discord is less outdated and more useful in nearly every way. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 18:51, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
::::Also, this is an especially good idea considering how inactive the forum has been. Discord is a good alternative way to discuss toons and updates, and is practically guaranteed to be more active than the forum, considering how many people use Discord. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 23:37, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
:::::Guess what else is inactive? The Wiki. And as I've said numerous times, there's no point in making a significant change to a Wiki that has lost most of its userbase. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 02:16, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
::::::You use that as your excuse for everything. Yes, the wiki is less active than it used to be. So what? Why should that keep us from making changes to improve it, and maybe even make it more active? And who's to say this wiki won't become ''more'' active over the years? We may not have that many users right now, but the users we ''do'' have would surely appreciate a more convenient way to communicate. Inactivity shouldn't stop us from making a better wiki. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:25, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
::::::How is making a discord channel a “significant change to the wiki” even? -[[Special:Contributions/174.62.238.201|174.62.238.201]] 15:49, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
::::Um, what is this... "Discord" you speak of? [[Teen Girl Squad Issue 15|Is a... food?]] Shoehorned referencing aside, I know I'm only an anonymous contributor that only shows up for small things. I have to admit I haven't logged on to a forum for ten years (ugly memories) and have no social media accounts (I believe they are places of evil that consume their user's brains). So I'm a a lot [[Strong Bad's Technology|behind the times and I prefer it that way]]. So I guess having a dedicated chatroom doesn't really apply to me that much. Guess I'll probably go back to expressing myself in edit summaries and hope I'm understood. [[Special:Contributions/68.37.43.131|68.37.43.131]] 13:16, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 +
::::::::Right now, we have three users in favor, and one opposed. Anyone else? I see many reasons to do it, and no reasons not to. I think it'll make everything more convenient, and the wiki more active. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 19:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
-
== Subtitles ==
+
== Main Page Redesign Notice ==
-
Some of us have started working on subtitling Homestar Runner Flash cartoons to make them accessible to a wider audience. I would like to know what the HRWiki folks think about this. Should this be a part of the knowledge base wiki? Should it be separate? Would you help? The subtitles are based on the transcripts from the wiki, so there is a strong connection already. The [http://hstarsubs.awardspace.com/ subtitles project] is still beta, but it should work with Firefox and Internet Explorer. Most subtitles have been donated by Phlip from an older project, and I and Elcool have done the international ones. Check it out and let us know.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 22:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
In just over a week, it will be the two year anniversary of the suggestion to [[HRWiki:Main Page Talk Archive 46#Updated Main Page|redesign the Main Page]]. The [[HRWiki talk:Main page redesign|discussion]] hasn't been very active, and hardly anyone is contributing, despite the fact that this could be one of the largest, most important wiki edits in years. I suggest putting a header over the [[Main Page]], [[Template:recentchangesnotice|recent changes]], or even the [[MediaWiki:sitenotice|entire wiki]]. After all, we did it when we were {{p|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Template:recentchangesnotice&oldid=385175 redesigning the logo}}. Something like this, perhaps:
-
: I personally know one person who'd be interested in that... --{{User:Jay/sig}} 22:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
{| cellpadding=3 class="messagebox" style="margin:auto; background-color: #EEF; color:#000; text-align: center; border: 1px #00F solid; font-size: 90%;" |  
-
::I strongly support having some way to intergrate the subtitles files into the wiki. As a non-native speaker sometimes I need to go over the wiki transcript just to see what a word or two means. This way , it's already inside the toon window itself. Also, we could open the door for people with hearing problems who still want experiance Homestar Runner like the rest of us. Some flash artists like Weeble from Weeble and Bob and the people behind Too Much Spare Time Animation have already added subtitles to some of their toons. So If TBC aren't going to do it themselvs, we are here for them. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 22:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
| [[File:Logo Redesign Current Updated c static.png|40px]]
-
: The .xml file for Exp Film's Commentary doesn't work. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 22:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
| '''The Homestar Runner Wiki is considering [[HRWiki:Main page redesign|redesigning the Main Page]].'''<br /><small>Your input in the [[HRWiki talk:Main page redesign|discussion]] would be greatly appreciated.</small>
-
::Cheers, fixed the link. Also, listening to the commentary is currently not possible anyway, because of Flash security measures :-/ And I forgot to upload the experiment film subs, will have to wait until I'm back home.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:::We need this in the [[User:Phlip/Greasemonkey|Greasemonkey script]], pronto. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 02:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:Well, I showed it to the person I previously alluded. The biggest reason I got into H*R in the first place was because it allowed me to share the gift of Homestar with this person, who cannot hear. She says she likes the subtitled stuff better than the Wiki. "But no offense." --{{User:Jay/sig}} 03:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::Seriously, you just made my day :-D {{User:Loafing/sig}} 05:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:::Deaf watchers, eh? I'd assume ''captions'', as opposed to ''subtitles'' would be more important then, yes? (For the uninitiated: subtitles transcribe the words, captions transcribe all the sound effects too.) {{User:Phlip/sig}} 05:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::::Take 'em as they come. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 05:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:Okay, let's just say, hypothetically, I wanted to make one of these. How would I get the frame numbers to start/stop each line on? And how would I test it? --{{User:Jay/sig}} 06:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::We haven't quite worked out the standards for subtitles/captions yet, so the format may change a little. But if you want to try it now, then here's how you do it: You need Phlip's Firefox [[User:Phlip/Greasemonkey|Greasemonkey script]]. This will give you a seek bar for Flash toons from Homestarrunner.com. It also displays the current frame number. Then you grab one of the XML files from the subtitle site, scoop it empty, and use it as a skeleton. You probably also want to copy the text of the transcript into this file and split it up into short sections or sentences that you want to display as one title. Then use the seekbar to find the first and last frame numbers for each of the sections. It gets easy after you've done it once or twice. And you get to know the toon pretty well. Also note that each character has his or her own colour code. I'll put a page online soon with some more detailed hints, and I'll come up with a way of testing the titles. &mdash; I'm still not sure where to put the page with instructions. Do people believe this should be an HRWiki project, or should it be separate? {{User:Loafing/sig}} 06:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:::Aside from the frame numbers, I'd pretty much figured that all out. I have the beginnings of a [[Halloween Potion-ma-jig]] .xml file, but without frame numbers. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 06:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::::Sound promising :-) I'll come up with a test page soon(ish). And you've heard that before, but... you should really be on IRC ;-) {{User:Loafing/sig}} 06:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:::::I've never successfully managed to join IRC when a useful conversation is taking place. Plus, I have issues getting to it. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 06:40, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
Alright you guys, I finished the .XML file for Cool Tapes. [[User:The Mu/subtitleCoolThings|Ding!]] ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 03:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
Is there a talk page specifically for this project? I thought of some things to discuss, but we'd flood Da Basement. I think there should be some sort of central Wiki page for this project, even if it's in a User space. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 03:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
: I'm not in the mood for IRC right now, but I figured I'd give an update. I have all of the text in my .xml file. I do not, however, have any frame numbers past the three Coach Z/Pom Pom scenarios. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 06:47, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::Qermaq: Asked and ye shall [[HRWiki:Subtitles|recieve]]. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 10:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
==Expanding the gamut of styles==
+
-
'''Discussion moved to [[HRWiki talk:Logo redesign 2006]].'''
+
-
 
+
-
== Preserve birthday card as part of the history ==
+
-
 
+
-
I think Invisible Robot Fish did an outstanding job on Matt's [[User_talk:Invisible_Robot_Fish#The_Finished_Product|birthday card]]. Above and beyond the call of duty here. The finished product is a sight to behold. As such, I think it and the work that went into it should have a page and a link in the history, like, say, [[HRWiki:Matt's 2006 birthday card]]. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:Seconded. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 03:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:Third'd!{{User:Loafing/sig}} 03:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::Four!  uhh... d'd.--{{User:Bleed0range/sig}} 03:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:::Absolutely! {{User:Trey56/sig}} 04:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
Somehow I think we might do something like this again. Do we want to create a new page for each birthday card type thing, or should we put them all on one page?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 04:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:I say, let's cross that bridge when we come to it; it might be nice to take it in a little bit of a different direction next year (not necessarily [[:Image:sbemail28.PNG|gluing Matt's hands to his butt]], but maybe something other than another card).  Assuming this does become a yearly thing, then we probably will want to find a way to organize whatever greetings we choose to do... {{User:Trey56/sig}} 05:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::Gluing his hands to his butt sure got my vote! Oh wait, he can't make toons then. Scrap that!{{User:Loafing/sig}} 05:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:::Oh Wow, I had overlooked this section of Da Basement.  I'm glad that you guys appreciated my work.  I feel so...imortalized.  {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 14:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::Should we save the external images of people's sigs just incase they are deleted on that person's personal external page? {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 14:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::Sure. We can always save a sig as handsome as mine for later. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 16:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== Deletion Policy ==
+
-
 
+
-
As discussed on [[Talk:Homestar's Fashion Sense]], I feel the need for a deletion policy. We don't have one, and articles such as [[Marshie's Mother]] and [[jumbo/LARGE]] seem to pop up at every new email or toon (don't call me a hypocrite because I created that last one). They are short, one-toon-specific, and quite useless. The talk pages of these articles are usually filled with debate over whether to keep them or not, but it's not very organized and it's hard to tell when to pull the plug on an article. What I'm suggesting is a STUFF-like template that can be pulled out in situations like these so that these mini-articles may be dealt with faster. Thoughts? -[[User:Brightstar Shiner|<span style="color: #800080;">''Brightstar Shiner''</span>]] 19:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:First, I feel that formally voting on things should be reserved as a last resort. Perhaps more important than a formal process would be some guidelines as to what definitely merits a page and what definitely does not. Forming such a policy would serve the dual purpose of giving sysops an easier decision in whether a page should be deleted, as well as inform new page creators of what will not be accepted. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 19:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::Policy, guidelines, you know what I mean. But seriously, guidelines is a better idea. That way, it will serve the purpose I'm hoping to get across and be accessable ''before'' somebody creates one of those articles! Cool. -[[User:Brightstar Shiner|<span style="color: #800080;">''Brightstar Shiner''</span>]] 20:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:::We ''do'' have a deletion policy, which is clearly laid out at [[HRWiki:Deletion Policy]], stating in part "Pages clearly unrelated to Homestar Runner [should be deleted]", and otherwise should be voted upon for deletion if clearly not up to snuff. One-time articles are clearly a part of this wiki, whether we like it or not. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 20:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::Well, non-H*R makes for pretty clear deletion material. What's sometimes dicier is whether something should get its ''own'' page or be part of a larger one. And yes, I think laying out a little more formally where we stand would be good&mdash;but it would also be difficult. Some time ago, like a year or summat, there was a big "merge vs. delete" craze. Personally, I really, really have mixed feelings. On the one hand, [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not|wiki is not paper]], so there's no functional reason not to have a page for every little doo-dad. On the other hand, I always lament the idea of there being pages that no one would ever find without searching specifically for them. Plus it gets more unwieldy: more pages to patrol and more likelihood that substandard wikiwriting could slip past unnoticed; also, if the doo-dad shows up again later, it can be hard to remember that its page existed and update it. Like I say... mixed feelings. Maybe a starting point would be to say that a page should ''not'' exist if it ''doesn't'' offer a unique opportunity to expound on its topic in ways that aren't possible in other pages. &mdash;[[User:AbdiViklas|AbdiViklas]] 21:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::''edit conned'' That deletion policy gives us nothing when we try to figure out if [[Marshie's Mother]], [[jumbo/LARGE]], [[Coach Z Ale]], [[Jobar's Big Ol' Headache Medicine]], [[Marzipan's Purse]], and [[The Poopsmith's Shovel]] are worthy articles. The final decisions from the process are mostly good (the majority can't go wrong, right??), but it's highly irregular and not all articles are treated fairly. The fact that everyone has said that we need a deletion policy for so long, yet nobody has done it, shows how difficult it is to figure some guidelines out. The "keep" threshold is always different for an article about a character, a pseudocharacter, a product, a magazine, a foodstuff, an inside joke, an electronic item, a clothing item, a fictional band, a TV show, a movie, a book, or a computer program, and everybody has a different idea on where the threshold should be. There are also those ambiguous factors of how many appearances there are and how important the item was in the toon. Obviously the current deletion policy is not cut out for helping us decide these things. &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 21:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::::Therefore, we should stop fidgeting around and figure something out. Let's lay out some good guidelines for all to use, because the current deletion policy isn't cutting it. -[[User:Brightstar Shiner|<span style="color: #800080;">''Brightstar Shiner''</span>]] 21:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::::I believe the current unwritten rule regarding such things as running gags is a three use rule. Once isn't noteworthy, twice is a Fun Fact, and thrice usually warrants a page. This doesn't really clarify such instances as the various items however, nor does it work for characters, which usually get a page if they are seen, and especially if they are part of a group of established characters (Such as the recent creation of the [[Old-Timey Alien]] page, and to a more questionable extent, [[Don Knotts]]). However I do not belive these rules are written in stone anywhere, and I think it would be difficult to do so, since the fact is the lines between keep and delete are usually grey ones, it's rarely a case of black and white. In my opinion I think the status quo is working relatively well, though I'm rarely the first to suggest radical change. {{User:Thunderbird L17/Siggie}} 06:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::::::I don't think we are be aiming for a radical change. We just want to figure down some guidelines about what a certain type of article should be judged upon. For instance, TBird's first sentence about running gags is something that people already agree on, so we may as well write that down in the Deletion Policy while we're thinking about it. (*Waits for someone to jump at the opportunity*) &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 06:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::Even that rule, however, is not without it's loopholes. Instances such as "Homestar Running up a hill", though perhaps having happened three or more times, doesn't really warrant a page of its own, which is where the majority vote usually comes in. What's to say that doesn't warrant a page, whereas "Bubs Running", "Homsar's Walking Noise", or Marzipan Playing a Flute" might? Granted, that falls more in the question of "what is a running gag", rather than "when does a running gag get its own page", but it all falls under the larger banner of "when does a page get deleted or not?", which as I stated before isn't really an easy policy to nail down in writing. {{User:Thunderbird L17/Siggie}} 07:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::What is a running gag (and to a lesser extant an inside joke) is being discussed in [[HRWiki:RG]], although it's dormant at the moment. Here are some of ''my'' personal guidelines on whether to delete a page or not:
+
-
:::::::::#On supposed running gags page - Need at least three appearances on canon Homestar Runner toons and is spacial in some way to the Homestar Runner world in contrast to the real world.
+
-
:::::::::#On general items, actions or animals that does not relate to one another such as [[Pizza]] or [[Explosions]] - Need at least five to ten appearance (depending how general or common it is in the real world) on canon Homestar Runner toons.
+
-
:::::::::#On item pages - Need only one appearance on canon Homestar Runner toons, as long as it played some sort of role in the plot and not just a background item. Any item that is part of a character's outfit (Coach Z's Z, The Poopsmith's Shovel) does not merit a page and could be integrated into that character's biography page.
+
-
:::::::::#On character pages - Need only one appearance on canon Homestar Runner toons, as not as it is not a minor variation on one of the already established characters, a character in a costume or a different personality of that character. Movie and theatric character play characters are en exception.
+
-
:::::::::#Other pages - Any repeating, dominant or part of the canon Homestar Runner toons that could not be fitted into the toon's page as a fun fact ([[The Periodic Table of Candy Elements]]), part of the transcript ([[Experimental Film Visuals]]) or Easter egg ([[Strumstar Hammer]]) are allowed.
+
-
:::::::::When discussing on articles nominated for deletion, I look for those guidelines for help. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 12:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::And those are very good personal rules that could be integrated into the guidelines we're thinking about. To people that are saying this is a "gray area", I believe that's exactly what we're trying to fill in with our page. I suggest that all of us share our personal tactics for situations like these, such as E.L. Cool did, and we can pick, choose, and mesh them all together for the final product. Sound good? Here are mine:
+
-
::::::::::#Email-specific articles: Very minor characters, items, sayings, or places do not merit a page. If it was a major part of the email or toon, yes or maybe.
+
-
::::::::::#Articles with a character's name in the title: Usually merge with character page unless it is/becomes a running gag.
+
-
::::::::::#Spam, Spam, and more Spam: Obviously delete.
+
-
::::::::::#All Articles: If no more than five lines of text can be used to describe the subject, delete or merge. -[[User:Brightstar Shiner|<span style="color: #800080;">''Brightstar Shiner''</span>]] 21:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::::::::::I just discovered this thread as I was about to begin an identical one.  As someone who's created a couple very minor, deleteable articles in the last couple days, I sense a strong need to establish some guidelines.  And I think it's okay to be specific about the number of appearances necessary for a kind of item to get its own article &mdash; we can still be flexible and decide on an article's merit by voting, but establishing guidelines will prevent many of the wrong articles from being created in the first place.  I personally like E.L. Cool's suggestions very much (Brightstar, yours are good too, but his are a bit more specific). {{User:Trey56/sig}} 00:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
Thanks for noticing this again! I was beginning to think this was a lost cause, but maybe it could really happen! I know E. L. Cool's guidelines were better than mine; I just wanted to put my own personal ones up. Pages like [[Smoke Detector|this one]], [[Marshie's Mother|this one]], and [[Stooly|this one]] just bother me beyond reason. Also [[Wilbur|this one here]], but nobody agreed with me about that. Anyway, way too many small, useless articles are being created every day and we need some set guidelines to deal with them. Now, I'm not saying every one of these should be promptly deleted/merged/whatever else, I'm just saying that we need something to refer to so heated arguments don't erupt (at least as often) in regards to what should be done with said small, insignifigant article. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::::::While I like EL's list, [[Wilbur|this one here]] is a good example of why even with a list we need to realize there's a need to discuss most any article that may be put up for deletion no matter the rules.  I wouldn't mind having more "rules" as to what is suggested to be set to pending deletion or what's expected of a new article.  On the other hand there are a number of pages that are out there that I could see these suggestions bringing up for deletion, and while some of them maybe should go away.  But there is still debate to be had as to is something a gag, an important item, if it should be merged with something else. etc. etc.  Also, we need to continue to realize that "once deleted, always deleted" is not a rule.  There may be a better way to make an article, or a reason for it's existence that has not been thought of before, or additional appearances, or any number of possible reasons.  I just want to make sure we know exactly what we want a policy to do, and that we word it as such with thought given to possible ramifications.  - {{User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C/Sig}} 22:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::Tell you what; I'll make a possible guidelines article in Microsoft Word and make it one of my subpages. When I'm done, I'll link to it from here and we can critique it, adding, subtracting, rivising, etc. as we go to create a fine policy. Sound good? I'll go and do that now, so don't expect to hear from me for about an hour. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 22:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::Okay, here it is: [[User:Brightstar Shiner/Deletion Guidelines]]. I took the guidelines from the ideas posted in this disscussion, mainly E.L. Cool's. Note that this is but the first version; feel free to point out any problems or suggestions you might want to tell me. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 01:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== A Vandal? ==
+
-
 
+
-
72.130.213.123 seems to be doing mostly bad edits. Should they be banned?
+
-
Sorry if I'm speaking out of turn, although I guess you can't speak out of turn on a message board, right? I mean when's your turn, it's not 'til you reply. - [[User:Point7Q|Point7Q]] 01:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
+
-
:Looking at their [[Special:Contributions/72.130.213.123|contributions]], they've made one edit, which wasn't all that bad. I hardly think a block is needed. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]]
+
-
::Look to [[Special:Contributions/70.64.178.238|70.64.178.238]] for an example of blockable behavior. A simple bad edit is not necessarily vandalism. Also, blocking anonymous IPs is not a routine activity as many IPs are temporary - an appreciable block on an IP can potentially affect many innocent users. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 01:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== Semi-protection implemented ==
+
-
Back in March is was [[HRWiki:Da Basement/Archive 5#Semi-protecting|discussed]] that semi-protection would be a good idea to deter most main page template vandalism. This semi-protection has now been implemented for both Whatsnew and the current featured article. This will prevent anonymous users and recently created user accounts from editing. A section further explaining this will be added to [[HRWiki:Protected page]], which is linked to when a user attempts to edit a protected page. We would appreciate your thoughts on whether we should disclose on that page the exact amount of time it takes before a new user is able to edit. Thanks, [[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 02:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:By the way, the exact amount of time is 28 hours. The number was chosen intentionally to be just a little more than exactly one day. In addition, all page moves are disabled during this period, regardless of the protected status of a page. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::The two sides to the argument are pretty much equal, from what I can see.
+
-
::*'''Point:''' New users may be frustrated to find they can't move or edit certain pages, and then not know why they can't do so. It's only natural to place such information in a readily visible area.
+
-
::*'''Counterpoint:''' Few new users are knowledgeable enough to know how or to have a reason to move pages or edit semi-protected pages in their first 28 hours; therefore, it wouldn't have an impact on them.
+
-
::*'''Point:''' As this time-limitation would generally only thwart the casual vandal, said vandal would probably have no reason to check [[HRWiki:Protected page]] for information; the disclosure is safe there.
+
-
::*'''Counterpoint:''' Even a casual vandal would come across the link to [[HRWiki:Protected page]] quickly, scan the page for information, and have no problem waiting 28 hours until he or she can vandalize to his or her heart's content.
+
-
::In any case, I'm leaning towards '''opposed'''. I don't think we need this clause at [[HRWiki:Protected page]]. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 03:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::I would rather have a brief explanation on that page. We don't have so many vandals that we need to worry about it too much, and I don't want to give real new users the impression that editing here is harder than it actually is. I don't think we need to mention the exact duration, though.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 03:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::Regarding Lapper's point that vandals would check the [[HRWiki:Protected page]] to see how long they'd have to wait, I propose we just use language like "semi-protection prevents all unregistered or recently registered users from editing a page" and not include the exact time limit.&nbsp;-- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 03:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::Let's also bear in mind that this will not stop vandalism, it will simply make it more of a bother to vandalize certain key pages. A casual vandal will simply do what he can, perhaps to another page, and a dedicated vandal will figure it out and do it no matter what we do to try to stop him. But this would provide a certain level of insurance against high-visibility or mission-critical areas from being compromised. That's probably a good thing. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 04:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::::I agree with the above comments: the semi-protection is a good idea, but no need to disclose the exact length of time. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 04:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::I agree: Semi-protection should be mentioned, as we are an honorable wiki that does not lie to its users. Furthermore, semi-protection should be included on high visibility HRWiki pages such as The Stick. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 05:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::I just had a thought... why are we still full-protecting the images on the main page? Is there a reason we're not semi-protecting them too? {{User:Phlip/sig}} 06:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::I would say so that they don't get defaced whilst they are on the main page. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 12:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::No, no reason that I can think of. Just waiting for someone to bring it up (how passive of me...) &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 12:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::I still support ''full'' protection of images on the main page. They were fully protected when the main page templates weren't protected at all. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 14:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::::Ditto. It makes sense, too, coz semi-protection locks out just IPs (right?). But IPs can't upload images anyway (right?), so it doesn't do a whole lot for images. Also, no offense to anyone out there (coz I'm not thinking of anyone specific), but a lot of users can't make very good images. JPGs, poor cropping, etc. Aside from vandalism, no one wants that on the main page either. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 19:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::::Highly visible images need to retain their integrity at all times. In answer to Dorian's uncertainty, semi-protection locks out both IPs and users who are not yet auto-confirmed. IPs can't upload images, but I believe that users who aren't auto-confirmed still can; the lockout definitely includes moving and editing of semi-protected pages, but I'm not sure if they can upload. If they can, perhaps we should consider locking that off as well? &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 20:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::::::Hmmm that's a good question: clicking on "{{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=Tirecake.png upload file}}" does not preclude me from seeing the form.  I'd like to try uploading a picture over a protected page, but I'd rather work with a test picture -- unless Dot Com or Tom or one of the other guys know definitively if protection prevents the picture from being replaced? --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 04:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::::::It does. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 05:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== Limited editability for user pages ==
+
-
 
+
-
The only people who should ever need to edit a user page is that user themselves, and sysops (in case there's inappropriate material). Maybe there's a rare case where someone asks another user to help with their page, but it shouldn't be hard to set up a system where editing user pages is restricted to sysops, the selfsame user, and a list of usernames that that user trusts to edit their page. [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 14:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:Well, if there's inappropriate content, normal users can also remove or censor that, too. Not just sysops. Because, it's harder for inappropriate user content to be removed by only sysops when they just make up [[Special:Statistics|.3% of the population]]. Now, the other thing I'm worried about is this trusted user thing. If a user's on a trusted user list, and decides to start trolling, or vandalize friendly (as in, the two users edit each other's user pages non-stop), then only a few people can revert that. Now, that won't be MUCH of a problem, as sysops are constantly logged in and will be able to revert/block such trolls. Plus, we have the semi-protection system, which pretty much allows all trusted users to edit semi-protected pages. In conclusion, my point is, why try to perfect a pretty much perfected system? {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 15:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::Because twice now I've seen "I suck" added to a user page without the user's knowledge, once being my own and I think people's identities and descriptions would be a lot safer by my method. [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 15:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::Wait, identities and descriptions? Do you mean, what users put on their own user pages? That, and you've only seen it TWICE. Trust me, I've had it happen to me tons of times, and to be honest, it's not something to worry about. I bring up a vandal who, how do I put this, uploaded an inappropriate drawing done in MS Paint. Now, this user could set up an account, upload the file when the sysops aren't around, and then put it on his/her user page and trusted users have to sit there and wait. And that's why semi-protection works. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 15:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::Then how about a user rating system (say 1 to 10) where users can edit their own rating and lower, but not higher, i.e. sysops are a 10, anonamous IPs are a 0, and everyone else is somewhere in the middle, and the rating is an algorithm based on the number and frequency of useful (ie. not reverted, not talk page, not repeat edits to the same article) edits they have made. Such a system could also be useful for other things as well, such as:
+
-
::::*Giving the sysops an idea of who deserves to be made a sysop
+
-
::::*Listing edits made by ratings lower than x (which have a higher percentage of needing to be reverted, given that the lower numbers are the newer users, or the ones who make incorrect edits)
+
-
::::*Restricting editing access of featured articles to people above a certain rating
+
-
::::*allowing a few select non-sysop people (rating 9 and maybe 8) to edit the main page
+
-
::::just to name a few. We invented STUFF, why can't we invent this too? [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 16:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::::*Giving the sysops an idea of who deserves to be made a sysop: When they see someone who deserves it because of their amazing edits, not some ranking, they decide if they need to be a sysop.
+
-
:::::*Listing edits made by ratings lower than x (which have a higher percentage of needing to be reverted, given that the lower numbers are the newer users, or the ones who make incorrect edits): It seems to be a system where we only trust those with high numbers, and it's hard to climb up the status ladder.
+
-
:::::*Restricting editing access of featured articles to people above a certain rating: Well, we try to limit editing featured pages, and we restrict featured images, so it wouldn't hurt a lot if an annony makes a few small edits to something on the Main Page. Otherwise, we can revert them.
+
-
:::::*allowing a few select non-sysop people (rating 9 and maybe 8) to edit the main page: The Main Page is pretty much edited through templates that I believe most people can edit.
+
-
:::::In conclusion, it seems to be a complete social status system based on seniority or artificial trust, rather than on good edits or good faith. It also seems harder to climb the ladder, as I've said, making it basically a site for regulars only. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 16:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::Fair enough. [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 16:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== Strange "Testing" ==
+
-
 
+
-
I just wanted to mention that I've noticed a few edits ([http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=User_talk%3AShellabella17&diff=434055&oldid=434054] [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Apehodet&diff=prev&oldid=433754] [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Template:personal-image&diff=434141&oldid=434053]) that reveal an unusual pattern (I'd call in vandalism) in editing.  I know it's not big now, but I'm starting to wonder if this is a prelude to to a more automated... um... "attack". --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 16:28, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:Yeah, I noticed this too. At first, they didn't necessarily seem like bad-faith edits, but their consistency made me suspicious just as it did you. Fortunately, one of the sources of these edits [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Apehodet has been taken care of], along with an IP range, but time will tell if the problem persists. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 07:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== Redirects to userspaces ==
+
-
 
+
-
Some users have odd unusual characters in their usernames. It's awkward to remember all the accented and umlauted letters for the average American, to whom this wiki is targeted. I suggest we adopt the policy of allowing a redirect to users whose names contain one or more unusual characters which is spelled how a normal Americasn with a normal keyboard and a normal command of the English language would type it. Thoughts? {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
: I, personally, don't have a problem with this, and it is mildly frustrating when I want to reach Heimstern La-umlat-ufer's User/Talk/Contributions page... but at the same time, I don't exactly do that very frequently. Does anyone really believe we'll ever have a non-troll "Heimstern La-no-umlat-ufer" at any point? --{{User:Jay/sig}} 00:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::[[Special:Contributions/Heimstern_Laufer|Already have]]. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 00:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::He said "non-troll". Any user who joined with a name similar to Heimi's would be advised to change names anyway. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 00:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::Umm, Heimy, those are all troll edits. I agree that redirects of this type can be useful, voting '''yes'''... oh wait, this isn't a STUFF debate... [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 00:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:I would support a policy where we allow ''one'' redirect if a username has non-English characters in the name (or something that can't be typed easily into a URL, like a question mark). Similarly, if a user has a <u>widely-known</u> nickname, the user could use the redirect for that purpose (for example, I would expect to be allowed to redirect "User:Dot com" to my page). (Case-sensitive redirects will very soon be unnecessary, so that should not be a concern here.) &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 00:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::Dot com, what if someone has an odd char in their name AND a widely known nick? then what? [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 00:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::I'm wondering if we really do need those redirects, or if this can easily be handled by the search function. Interestingly, Heimi [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php/Special:Search?ns2=1&search=heimstern&searchx=Search can be found] without using an umlaut, while Dot com [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php/Special:Search?ns2=1&search=dot+com&searchx=Search can't be found] without "It's". Maybe we should have a look at the search algorithm to take care of these things automatically. It would save us a lot of hassle instead of debating which redirects are allowed and who exactly is a widely know user.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 00:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::DeFender: Then that user would have to decide which is more important. I think one should be the limit, with restrictions similar to the ones on [[HRWiki:Signature]], lest someone go crazy and create 20 redirects. Incidentally, a lot of users have a redirect from a username change, and we have quietly allowed those to exist. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 00:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== To be reorganized ==
+
-
 
+
-
I've thought for a while that the to be deleted/merged/redirected/moved/etc. templates, categories, and discussions have been needlessly fractured. Essentially, all of those templates and categories seek to answer just one question: whether any particular content should exist as its own article (or at all) on the wiki. On top of that, a lot of the time a discussion that starts out toward deletion suddenly swings toward merge (or vice versa), and tagging borderline articles to raise awareness of their existence tends to cause their creators (who are often new users) to panic. I therefore think we need to combine all of these functions into one process, and at the same shift the emphasis from ''deletion'' to ''discussion''.
+
-
 
+
-
'''Let me outline my master plan:'''
+
-
<div style="padding-left:1.5em;text-indent:-1.5em">
+
-
<p>A. Drop my grapes.</p>
+
-
<p>B. Redirect <code>{{t|tobedeleted}}</code>, <code>{{t|talktobedeleted}}</code>, <code>{{t|merge}}</code>, <code>{{t|mergetalk}}</code>, <code>{{t|redirect}}</code>, and <code>{{t|move}}</code> all to one new, over-arching template: <code>'''{{t|tobediscussed}}'''</code> (which will have the benefit of still being able to be abbreviated <code>{{t|tbd}}</code>).</p>
+
-
<p>C. Restructure the catgories:</p></div>
+
-
 
+
-
                                      |
+
-
                              HRWiki Maintenance
+
-
                                      |      |___...
+
-
                                      |
+
-
                              Page Maintenance
+
-
                                  |      |
+
-
                    ______________|      |______________
+
-
                    |                                  |
+
-
                    |                                  |
+
-
          Pages for Discussion            Pages for Speedy Deletion
+
-
            |                |                          |
+
-
            |                |________                  |
+
-
Articles for Discussion            |      (pages tagged with <nowiki>{{delete}}</nowiki>)
+
-
      |                            |
+
-
      |                            |
+
-
(articles/talk)      (pages/talk in other namespaces)
+
-
<div style="padding-left:1.5em;text-indent:-1.5em">
+
-
<p>D. Revert [[HRWiki:Deletion Policy]] so that it's just instructions to sysops on when is the correct time to delete a page.</p>
+
-
<p>E. Move the content that was just removed from the deletion policy and create [[HRWiki:Inclusion guidelines]]. (The guidelines on the current deletion policy are primarily about what to ''keep'', rather than remove.)</p>
+
-
<p>F. Uncover that cheat!</p></div>
+
-
I believe these suggestions will help make us a happier, more efficient wiki. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:Great system! I'll take it! I'll take twelve! [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 23:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::Well... a tad confusing, but it seems good (from what I understand). I'm all for it. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 23:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::I like it! When it's implemented, it'll be so much simpler than what we have now.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::Sounds great!&nbsp;-- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 00:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::::WERE A DIAPER! I'm convinced &mdash; it's a good idea. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 09:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:Re (B), what of {{t|mergefrom}}? {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 07:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::I think that one would just disappear entirely. {{tl|tobediscussed}} purposefully doesn't indicate whether an article has been proposed to be merged since article merit discussions often shift between merging and deleting. Since we don't specify ahead of time what the proposed action for an article is, we wouldn't put a template on the page that the article in question might be merged with. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 09:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::I don't see any reason for <nowiki>{{mergefrom}}</nowiki> to go anywhere. If there's a strong case for merging, it could still come in handy to draw attention to the discussion at the other end. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::That's a good point. I'd like to mention that the mergefrom template should also follow a similar style now to tobediscussed.  BTW the templates look great! Now to delete... er discuss! ;) --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 23:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
So based on {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=User%3AStux%2Fsandbox&diff=444089&oldid=433357 this test}} I've compiled what I beleive should be the changes in categories that would be necessary.  The following 4 categories are new:
+
-
 
+
-
[[:Category:Articles for Discussion|Articles for Discussion]] | [[:Category:Pages for Discussion|Pages for Discussion]] | [[:Category:Pages for Speedy Deletion|Pages for Speedy Deletion]] | [[:Category:Merge Targets|Merge Targets]].
+
-
 
+
-
The existing categories, along with my suggested moves/actions are as follows:
+
-
*[[:Category:Talk to be deleted|Talk to be deleted]] -> [[:Category:Articles for Discussion|Articles for Discussion]] (maybe)
+
-
*[[:Category:To be deleted|To be deleted]] -> [[:Category:Pages for Speedy Deletion|Pages for Speedy Deletion]] (move)
+
-
*[[:Category:To be merged|To be merged]] -> [[:Category:Merge Targets|Merge Targets]] (move)
+
-
*[[:Category:To be redirected|To be redirected]] (removed or moved to [[:Category:Pages for Discussion|Pages for Discussion]])
+
-
Hmmmm. That's about it. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 02:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:Nah, those all (except ttbd) pretty much need to go to [[:Category:Pages for Discussion]]. I've taken care of 'em. This has all now been implemented, for the most part. There will naturally be an adjustment period as we get used to it, and we may find some things we need to tweak (some of the category descriptions could be looked at, for example), but the basic structure and functionality should be fully in place. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 05:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
==Homsar Main Page==
+
-
(This discussion was originally on the sandbox and refers to [[User:DeFender1031/Homsar Main Page|this]])
+
-
 
+
-
I think we should make this an easter egg reached from the real main page somehow... anyone think it's a good/funny idea? [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 23:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:Dude, that would be AWESOME. But, for that we need a sysop, a hidden link, and this to be a subpage. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 23:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::And by the way, other people are trying to get actual WORK done. (What? ME? Work? No) --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 23:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::Don't touch my severance package.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::You could post it in the [[HRFWiki:|fanstuff]] wiki. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 23:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::What did Loafing mean? Nevermind. That was a "no". {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 23:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::Errm, who touched your severence package? ArE wE jUsT tHrOwInG iT dOwN tHe ToIlEt At ThIs PoInT? --<span class="plainlinks" style="white-space: nowrap">[http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php/Special:Contributions/Super_Martyo_Brother http://www.hrwiki.org/images/9/9b/Mario2.GIF] [[User:Super Martyo Brother|<span style="color:#DF0000;">sUpEr MaRtYo</span>]] [[User talk:Super Martyo Brother|<small><small><small><span style="color:#0000A0;">BoInG!</span></small></small></small>]]</span> 23:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::P.S. It would be kinda hard to post this on the Fanstuff Wiki.
+
-
:::::::It's a Homsar quote from [[Georgia_Tech#Part_II:_Q_.26_A]].{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:It could go on that baleeted nonsense page that one user made. {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 23:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::yeah, but it'd be REALLY cool on the main page [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 23:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::I know that and I'd like that too, but Loafing said not to touch his severance package. {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 23:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::yeah, he was joking:
+
-
<blockquote>
+
-
<Loaf|uni> personally, i like the idea. but also note my original edit summary<br />
+
-
<DeFender1031> you don't think DC will go for it?<br />
+
-
<Loaf|uni> i don't think so<br />
+
-
<DeFender1031> aww<br />
+
-
<Loaf|uni> and i'm not sure if it's a good idea, either<br />
+
-
<DeFender1031> that guy's too serious all the time<br />
+
-
<Loaf|uni> it would have been a perfect main page for april fools, though<br />
+
-
<DeFender1031> true<br />
+
-
<DeFender1031> but<br />
+
-
<DeFender1031> listen, it's a very characteristic thing to do<br />
+
-
<DeFender1031> homsar is always "the secwet guy"<br />
+
-
<DeFender1031> why not have a homsar main page?<br />
+
-
</blockquote>
+
-
[[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 00:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::Note how I said "and i'm not sure if it's a good idea, either".{{User:Loafing/sig}} 00:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::Yeah, you like the idea but aren't sure if it's a good one... that makes perfect sense. [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 00:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::If Dot com agreed to it,Loafing, would you? {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 00:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::I don't like where this is going. a) Dot Com is not the Oscar the Grouch of the wiki b) I do have my own opinion about things.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 00:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:I didn't mean for it to really sound like that. I have messed up what I have meant to say on this wiki several thymes. Plus I didn't expect you to notice that comment. {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 01:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
Okay, let me outline my master plan. I will A) Drop my grapes, b) Start a petition to put this on the Main Page as an Easter Egg, and c) If that doesn't work, post a link to a revision with this on it to Venusy, and ask him to please post this on his [[User:Venusy/April Fool's Jokes and Other Baleeted Nonsense|thingy-ma-bobber's]] page. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 00:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:We don't have "petitions" on the wiki. If someone comes up with an idea, we discuss it and see if we can form a consensus. It's much more productive this way.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 00:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::I agree &mdash; reformatting those votes into comments would probably be better. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 00:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::Fine. I '''agree''' with this idea. [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 00:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::I firmly disagree with the idea. This encyclopedia does not need a "joke" main page for any reason at all; ideas like this might be more well received at HRFWiki or possibly even the Forum, as a recommendation. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 01:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::I think it's a clever idea (props to Super Martyo Brother and others who worked on this). To pull it off, though, I think it's got to be more than funny &mdash; it's got to be ''laugh-out-loud hilarious''. I'm just not sure if we're going to be able to refine it to that point (at least, I know ''I'm'' not funny enough to make it that good). So, I like the idea, but I currently disagree with pursuing it further. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 01:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::Here's my two cents: we are a knowledge base first, not a playground. While we have some fun, it's all directed in a way that supports our main mission: to faithfully record TBC's creation. If you want to be creative yourselves, the Fanstuff Wiki is an excellent place for that. I don't see an appropriate purpose in having a goofy main page as an option in a knowledge-base wiki. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 01:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::I am '''neutral'''. I think it would be cool to have this maybe as a subpage, but for now, no secret links on the main page. Also, yes, this wiki is a knowledge base and not a playground, and anyone who wants to create stuff like this should either go to the fanstuff wiki or do it in the sandbox, have it on a subpage, etc... You guys who are sugesting that we take this to the fanstuff wiki, It would be mecca-hard to do (at least while still keeping the links). --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 04:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::P.S. Trey, if I get a picture of Homsar carved into an actual watermelon, will it have achieved laugh-your-head-off status?
+
-
:::::::WHAT?! You were the first name on the petition, back before they removed it. [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 04:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::Links on the fanstuff are not that hard.  Just append '''HRWiki:''' to each link and voilà! Problem is of course all links will be light blue.  But that's something a little <code><nowiki><span></nowiki></code> magic can't fix!  Heck, even a nice little template can be used to make it easy to make the links look just as they would here! --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 04:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::Since the petition got deleted i forgot to post that I '''agree'''
+
-
::::::::::Okay, it is now officially on the [[HRFWiki:Homsar Shunner Wiki Main Page|fanstuff wiki]]. Now quit buggin' me. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 02:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== Automatic links for new users ==
+
-
 
+
-
:''This discussion is continued from [[HRWiki:Da Basement/Archive 6#Welcome Messages|here]].''
+
-
Welcoming of users [[HRWiki talk:User space#Welcomed users subpages|has been brought up again]], and I'd like to revisit the idea of automatic links to our standards, policies, and help pages on the user talk page of new users. This would ''not'' be intended to take the place of a personal welcome from a wiki member. The so-called welcome that most users get now is just a list of links anyway, and these links are posted immediately upon registration, so why don't we go ahead and completely automate the process. Then, after a brief amount of time has passed (so that it doesn't look automatic), or after a few edits by the user, an established user can extend a real, personal welcome. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 16:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:I think this is a great idea! I don't like the way welcoming happens right now. Sure, some of the welcoming templates are cute, but it's still pretty impersonal from the point of view of the new user. I think it would be nice if the welcoming templates/system had personalization based on the ''new user'' rather than based on the ''welcomer'', if that makes any sense -- instead of spending a lot of time creating a template that fits your personality, think of a friendly comment about the user's first edits or their username. {{User:Homestar Coder/sig}} 17:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:I '''support''' this idea &mdash; up till yesterday, I opposed it on the grounds that it would be less personal to have an automatic welcome. However, as Dot com and H*C have pointed out above, it is actually ''more'' personal because it encourages a "real" welcome based on a new user's edits or userpage info. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 18:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:Me likey, me likey! [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 18:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:I don't do a whole lot of welcoming... In fact, I only did it once, to make sure my friend got a good welcome (i.e. something less distracting, and more useful). But then, that's why I think my point's valid. I like this idea as well. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 18:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:It's a good idea, but how would it be implemented? {{User:ACupOfCoffee/sig}} 18:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::Implementation, in my opinion, should be fully automated and added, with scripting, to a user's talk once he or she is auto-confirmed and has not been blocked. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 18:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::A few things:
+
-
:::#I do want to reiterate something from Abdi's previous post in the original post that struck me as really important: ''But I feel strongly that as long as initial contact can be human, and can be '''perceptibly''' human, that's preferable.'' (Emphasis added.) We must still keep in mind that this must be perceived as more or just as human as the status quo.  Otherwise we'll lose a little something of our hospitality. 
+
-
:::#It's likely that welcoming committee participation will drop once this is implemented.  That is, more people will rely on the auto-welcoming system, no matter what.
+
-
:::#Keep in mind that even with our current system, where templated messages are quickly removed/ignored, oftentimes the new users will still go to the people who welcomed them for questions/advice.  It's this ''first contact'' that can prove to be a lasting one. If it's electronic that might lose a little something.  Might as well just plop it in their page right away as a "talk default" or send them an email with that information. Then a real person can leave a human message.
+
-
:::I have personally kept away from joining the welcoming committee because I didn't want to subscribe myself to a "welcoming quota" or template. But the information provided does serve a purpose.  Instead I prefer to drop an informal "hello" here and there to certain editors. But that's just my style.  Yes the current system is broken, and the autowelcome is a good idea but whose consequences we must evaluate.  I think instead of providing a technical solution, we should ''also'' provide a "procedural" solution by changing the way the welcoming comittee does its work. (Be it via training or whatever). --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 19:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
To address your points:
+
-
# There will still be human contact. The welcoming templates as they stand barely qualify as human contact, because it simply involves heading to a new user's page and typing <nowiki>{{substr:welcome}}</nowiki> or whatever. A personalized greeting from a user that doesn't rely on a template qualifies as more constructive human content, IMO. Let the machine provide the links, let the human provide specific help/comments.
+
-
# I really don't think welcoming committee participation will drop. People are constantly itching for things to do on the wiki, and changing the requirements to providing a personal comment rather than a template would probably not decrease participation at all. If someone drops out because they're too lazy to write a comment instead of just dropping a template, then that's fine by me.
+
-
# I've actually been concerned in the past that our welcoming templates are a little too...overwhelming, maybe? I know if I were new to the wiki, did an edit, and immediately had a user provide me with Help and Standards links (even in a friendly manner), I would wonder what I did wrong. If they are provided by a machine (and the message is labelled as automatic), then the user still gets the useful links without feeling that they're being corrected, and the welcoming user can provide an actual positive or relevent comment, like "Grood jorb!" {{User:Homestar Coder/sig}} 19:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:Ms. Coder, I find your arguments very sound and convincing. :) With the consensus seeming to reach that this is a good idea, I then have <s>two</s> three more issues to raise:
+
-
:#What kind of content should this auto-template contain?
+
-
:#At what specific period should it be posted? (Immediately during account creation? After first edit? After first 3 Mainspace edits? After the first 5 Mainspace edit, 1 user edit, 3 user talk edits, and a root canal?)
+
-
:#What of the old welcoming committee? What welcoming instructions should be posted? "Scrap all your welcome templates.  Make sure you only post original messages on welcomed users page.  Here's a list of suggested topics of discussion:"
+
-
:This should probably stem 3 separate discussions in the Welcoming committee talk page (I think) if the plan is put forth in motion. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 19:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::Yeah, it should be three separate discussions, but since I'm lazy, I'll reply to it all at once! ;)
+
-
::#The welcoming committee page has a sample template which could form the basis for an automated template. It should definately have some indication that it's automated, so the user doesn't wonder who gave them the message.
+
-
::#That is really tricky, but my initial reaction is in favor of "after first edit." They should be given the helpful links before they do too much editing. Doing it upon account creation might also be okay...
+
-
::#I don't think you need to scrap welcome templates. Maybe scrap part of the text inside them -- replace the stuff the automated template provides with a "{{{1}}}", and use the {{{1}}} to post a personalized message, for instance. I'm not sure about "only post original messages," that seems a little totalitarian maybe, but suggested topics of discussion would be a great idea. {{User:Homestar Coder/sig}} 20:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::<ol start="2"><li>It would probably need to be to be immediately upon account creation. It depends on some system event to trigger it, and the one that would involve the least amount of hassle logistically would be the new-user function. Isn't that the purpose of the automatic links, anyway? To be there right away for the new user to read? &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 20:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)</li></ol>
+
-
::::<ol start="2"><li>Yeah! That makes the most sense, I'm all for that. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 20:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)</li></ol>
+
-
:::::Agreed. {{User:Homestar Coder/sig}} 20:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::Yup. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 22:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
Some thoughts. First, let's not think of this as "auto-welcoming" - it is NOT welcoming, as that's something a person does. This is the providing of essential links to a new user. I'm all for that. Second, I'm all in favor of welcomes being less scripted and more personal. Currently, a welcome is the mindless substing of a template on a page, and that's hardly a welcome at all. So I think I '''support''' this. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:Right, this isn't welcoming (I've tried to get away from the term autowelcome). To move forward, we need content for [[MediaWiki:Newuserlinks]] ([[MediaWiki talk:Newuserlinks|Talk]]) and [[MediaWiki:Newuserlinkssummary]] ([[MediaWiki talk:Newuserlinkssummary|Talk]]) &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 02:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::Just a little Devil's advocate here...What's wrong with the old system.  I for one enjoy welcoming new users in [[User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/welcome|my own way]].  What is the problem that needs fixing? Why go through the effort of making an automated process?  Are there users that are not getting welcome.  Are people unhappy with the welcome that they get?  What does automation offer that current system does not?  I don't think it is a good thing to do just because we have the capability to do it.  I think an examination of our object is critical here.  What do want out of this that we don't have right now.  {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 02:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::Let's see, I hope I can respond adequately:
+
-
:::*By forcing the "auto-help-links" we take away the "thumb-twitching" response of some editors to "beat others" to welcoming and increase their "welcome count" which apparently results in just slapping an Air Force sticker ... er slapping a welcome template in a talk page.  So people ''do'' get welcomed, but the impression is that this is still too impersonal.
+
-
:::*With the "auto-help-links" welcomers can only now type in a real welcome message, and we can make it absolutely clear that we want it to be a welcome message hopefully aimed more at characteristics of the new user (of which we admittedly known nothing about then) than the welcomer (though portraying the welcomer's personality would be a good thing).
+
-
:::*(We also have less of a chance of running into minor misunderstandings between welcomers and welcomed users that have occurred in the past.)
+
-
:::--[[User:Stux|Stux]] 03:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::IRF, you'll still be able to welcome in exactly the same way  you're welcoming now, except that the "helpful links" stuff will be taken care of by the automated system (so you can take it out of your template) and we'll be encouraging users to leave personal notes when they welcome rather than just <nowiki>{{substr:welcome}}</nowiki>, which it looks like you already do, so you're good to go. Basically, we want to 1. Make sure all users get the helpful links; 2. By automating the boring/generic part of the welcome, encouraging more personally helpful tips and comments in the welcome; 3. Reduce competition for how many people you have welcomed. {{User:Homestar Coder/sig}} 14:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::I think someone's been programming in C a little too long ;).  You mean <code><nowiki>{{subst:welcome}}</nowiki></code> right Homestar Coder? :) And yes, hopefully the welcoming competition would die down.  Heck, we can even encourage people so that new users can be welcomed by more than one user!  As it stands, generally one person leaves a welcome template, and that's it. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 15:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::I code in Java, so I'm not sure where that substr came from. Insanity perhaps ;) And yeah, now that welcoming won't require a huge template with lots of links, we could certainly have new users welcomed by more than one user. That would be another improvement. {{User:Homestar Coder/sig}} 15:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
I think this is ready to go live. What do you think? [[MediaWiki:Newuserlinks]] ([[MediaWiki talk:Newuserlinks|Talk]]); [[MediaWiki:Newuserlinkssummary]] ([[MediaWiki talk:Newuserlinkssummary|Talk]]) &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 00:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:I like it. At first, I was unsure about automatic welcomes, but now I'm convinced. Nice jorb on the text, Dot com.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 02:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::Ah, but remember, this isn't a welcome. The bot will provide links and guidance, but we still require people to actually make each new member feel welcome. That's not any less imposrtant - in fact, it's as important as ever. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::Ah, yes. That's actually why I'm convinced now. It'll just take me a while to not call it a an automatic welcome ;-){{User:Loafing/sig}} 02:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
As a freshly welcomed user, I feel that I might (at least theoretically) provide some insight in this respect.  My initial welcome was nice, but I unintentionally baleeted my welcomer’s welcome template and was mistaken as a possible vandal.  After all was said and done, the users that defended me and generally chatted me up made me feel comfortable and at home.  [[trey56]] and [[loafing]] were especially nice to me, and I found that the userpages of these and other megahuge users helped me see what the whole community was about.  The links were moderately helpful at best.  So until next week, you keep welcoming me, and I’ll keep deleting your templates.  I mean, thanking you. {{User:TheDude/sig}} 03:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
All right, this is enabled. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 05:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
=== New Welcome format ===
+
-
So now that we have the auto-information-link tool up and running, is being [[Special:Log/newusers|welcomed]] any more?  I peeked at a few random users in that list that have created the accounts for more than a day, and even though most have no contributions, no one has tried to break the ice (even if these were sock-puppets-to-be) by leaving a little note.  It's all automatic now.  Most of those with blue links in their user pages have been welcomed (by sysops mostly) but some with red link pages and even those with {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Floppy_Disk_Container&diff=prev&oldid=456204 creative}} {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Kintu-li&diff=456323&oldid=456160 edits}} have been somewhat ignored.  So what will the new procedure be? Ignore new registrations until they make edits? Should we leave notes even if the accounts may seem dormant?  Also, the [[HRWiki:Welcoming committee]] page has not been updated with the new information. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 20:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:I was actually hoping someone would take the initiative of the last sentence; I believe the Welcoming Committee should be completely redone. The information should be rewritten, the member list should be cleared, and serious users should re-sign up to participate. I'd also appreciate it if we could keep only users who are doing, (or wholeheartedly attempting to do) what they signed up for on the list. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 21:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== About this wiki page ==
+
-
 
+
-
After posting {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=User_talk%3AKintu-li&diff=456323&oldid=456160 this note}} I realized that there really is no page explicitly describing the ''scope'' of this project.  That is, although there is lots of [[Help:Contents|technical information]] available, I couldn't find anything that described what ''kind'' of information this wiki is gathering and outlining what the substance of those edits should be.  As it stands it's more of a trial-and-revert thing. Which isn't bad, but it would be nice to have something "official" to point to people. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 20:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:You mean like a mission statement or something like that? --{{User:Jangles5150/sig}} 20:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::An official mission statement would be useful to quote. I like the idea. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 21:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::I wasn't exactly thinking of a mission statement, just a description of the kind of information that his wiki keeps but that sounds almost exactly like a mission statement.  Well sorta.  A mission statement would be good, but along with it should be a list of sorts of the kind of information that we look for (i.e. H*R related; only TBC stuff is official "canon"; we keep the tone and everything factual; only link to non-H*R stuff when it's directly referenced; etc.) Not just an explanation of what we do (hence [[HRWiki:About]]) but of what kind of information to expect in the KB and, more importantly, what kind of information are editors expected to contribute. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 17:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::This sounds like info that should, at very least, be on [[HRWiki:Standards]]... {{User:Trey56/sig}} 17:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::I forgot to mention that it should be prominent information in whatever page it goes it, and yes [[HRW:ST]] is a good place to put them. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 17:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== An idea! ==
+
-
 
+
-
I think that we hould have some little feature then enables regular, non-sysop users to block people. That way, if Willy on Wheels, or the NSMC vandal comes back, we don't just have thirty-some people doing all the blocking, and we can stop the attack in progress faster. --{{User:Jangles5150/sig}} 20:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
P.S. I know I'm not a sysop!
+
-
 
+
-
:That feature would be so heavily abused that the risks would outweigh the benefits one-hundred-fold. On that note, we currently have a virtual twenty-four-seven watch on the wiki and haven't had a rampant, un-halted vandalism for months and months now. You should feel safe with the current state of the wiki; if not, perhaps provide a more realistic solution. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 21:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::Just a suggestion. Also, we can't really predict vandalism. It's like they say "There's always a calm before a storm". What if, these months of non-vandilism are leading up to some big thing, say the return of NSMC? --{{User:Jangles5150/sig}} 21:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::I think what he's saying is that with the current system vandalism (even repeat vandalism) is still stopped relatively quickly. [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 21:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::Ok. Thanks for pointing that out. We really have a 24-hour watch on the HRWiki? That's amazing. --{{User:Jangles5150/sig}} 21:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::Who's NSMC? {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}}
+
-
 
+
-
:::::Well, yeah, and i think we even have it better than some other wikis. The recent changes IRC channel really helps. I can (and usually do) review edits mere seconds after they're made. [[User:DeFender1031|DeFender1031]] 21:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::Homestar-winner: See [[HRWiki:A History#NSMC]]. {{User:Has Matt?/sig}} 21:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::::Dot com laid out the time zones at one point... anyway, with all of our respective uptimes, there's probably a 90 in 100 chance that there's at least one sysop able to be contacted during any given minute. Loafing's in New Zealand, Elcool's in Israel, etc. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 21:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::::Yes, and given that Phlip, Elcool and I have no life, we've got the non-US part of the globe pretty much covered =3{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::::::Any sysops in New England? {{User:Sam the Man/sig}}
+
-
 
+
-
::::::Do we have any East Coast sysops at all? I'm on the East Side, but I'm not a sysop. --{{User:Jangles5150/sig}} 21:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::::::[[User:Rogue Leader|Rogue Leader]] lives in Pennsylvania. {{User:Has Matt?/sig}} 21:40, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::And so do I. And everyone knows I keep odd hours. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 21:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::::::No, but our time online greatly exceeds the limits of our one-hour time zones. For example, I'm pretty much available from 7:00-7:30, 9:10-10:45, and 2:00-10:00. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 21:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
Look, guys, this conversation is pointless. We do not have a problem with vandals, because the wiki is tightly secured in place, and we have enough people to look after it. End of discussion.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
Sam the Man: [[User:Homestar Coder|Homestar Coder]] lives in Massachusetts. {{User:ACupOfCoffee/sig}} 23:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:New Hampshire now, but pretty close. :) {{User:Homestar Coder/sig}} 15:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:Also Tom in NY. &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 00:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::Er, not New England, but same time xone, so cool. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 01:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::NY is close enough to New England. Closer than Pennsylvania, right? If I really want to save myself, I'll say that my reply was piggybacking on Jangles' question as well as Sam's. So I will. Also, you missed a spell. :) &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 01:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::Sam the Man: I live in [[Wikipedia:New England (Australia)|New England]]... --{{User:Phlip/sig}} 01:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== More interestinger templates ==
+
-
 
+
-
On the star wars wiki they use a cool (and fitting) quote for each of their templates. I was thinking that if we could come up with a good one for all of ours that we could do something like that to make them more interesting than just having an image that fits... Basically the way it works is, have a fitting quote along with a picture of the character who said it or something fitting to the quote, and then the description of the template. Our [[:Template:rename|page move template]] already does something similar talking about the commando name. So for example:
+
-
*[[:Template:rename]] You stay here and think of a better wikimmando name.
+
-
*[[:Template:cleanup]] Was ''your'' head attached to ''your'' body when you wrote this page?
+
-
*[[:Template:featuredarticle]] This is what I live for!
+
-
*[[:Template:delete]] And now, if you'd please turn in your hymnals, and join me in singing number 119, a-deleted.
+
-
 
+
-
here's an example of a completed template as i'm suggesting, a parody of [[:Template:uncensored]] just so you all have a clearer picture:
+
-
{| style="border: 1px solid #C0C090; background-color: #F8EABA; margin-bottom: 3px; width: auto; border-spacing: 3px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"
+
-
|-
+
-
|[[Image:Warning.png|48px|Offensive content]]
+
-
|[[Image:qod 18 - gunhaver.PNG|56px]]
+
-
|'''''Easy there, Cheat Cuss-mando, you just made an inappropriate peer-to-teen choice behavior!'''''<br />'''Warning''': Language that may be considered offensive by some readers follows.<br /><small>To view a censored version of this page, see [[{{{1}}}]].</small>
+
|}
|}
 +
{{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 20:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 +
:The main page is still outdated, and not much is being done about it. I think this notice would be a good way to inform users of the update, and get more peoples' opinions. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 05:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 +
::One somewhat related thing I'd like to point out: the new page design includes twitter updates, however tweets have not been regularly updated since around october. I think that activating the new design (in whatever form it may have) requires a concerted effort to regularly update these tweets. (And I, personally, do not have the time to help out with said task.) --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 13:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 +
:::It doesn't need to be updated regularly just yet, but when it replaces the main page, I'll make sure it stays updated. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 20:05, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 +
::::Anyone else have an opinion on this? This is a good way to get more users into the discussion and finally get a consensus on possibly the most important wiki decision of recent times. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 19:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 +
:::::It has been over three years since the update was suggested, and I think it's at least as important as changing the logo, which had a notice above the recent changes. There is so much empty space and outdated information on the current main page, and the [[HRWiki:Main page redesign|new one]] is much more informative and aesthetically pleasing in my opinion, and yet nothing is being done about it. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 21:35, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
-
I apologize that my quotes aren't the greatest and i'm sure there are people who could do a lot better. Please don't allow my lack of creativity affect your perception of this idea. (Also, if anyone has any other ideas for captions, these or others, please post them here to help with the idea.) {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:07, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
+
== @StrongBadActual Bot ==
-
:I like the general idea here, although I'm not sure how far we should go. We certainly shouldn't force it, and we should still maintain our professionalism. Specifically, the rename template already has the "bad commando name" part; I don't think it needs anything else. Cleanup: to whom is that message addressed? Featuredarticle: I think it's fine the way it is (I don't recognize that quote). Delete: I also think it's fine the way it is. Uncensored: I like the "Cheat Cuss-mando" part a lot, but am less enthusiastic about the "peer-to-teen choice" part. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::You're responding to the quotes themselves rather than the idea as a whole. Here are two links to the star wars wiki to illustrate better what I mean:
+
I was thinking, since we have a [[User:XMLbot|bot]] that automatically checks homestarrunner.com's XML files and updates the [[XML Sources]] page, is it possible to do the same thing for [[@StrongBadActual]]? They're usually out of date, and it takes a while to update. After a certain interval of time, the bot could check for new Tweets or replies, and edit the page accordingly. The text, date, ID, and reply username (if applicable) would automatically be added, and fun facts and other information can be added manually. [[twitter:StrongBadActual/status/973217646765277186|Can it work?]] {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 23:44, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
-
::*[[Wookieepedia:Nonexistantpage]]
+
:That's not a bad idea, but unless you want to code it yourself and turn it over to the wiki, I wouldn't look for it anytime soon. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:34, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
-
::*[[Wookieepedia:Template:Cleanup]]
+
::It certainly would be nice not having to visit Twitter to see Homestar Runner Twitter-exclusive updates.  I don't understand coding, but the general idea is to have a bot scanning the @StrongBadActual Twitter feed for updates, read them, and then update the HRWiki with the relevant data in the correct format. Sounds like a tall order. But given the kind of site Twitter is, I'd wonder if such a The Tweetbot would either be shut down by or lucratively financed by Twitter if discovered. You think some type of [[more armies|B4KDØR H4XXØR]] has already written some type of [[Edgar]]ware that can do that sort of thing? [[Special:Contributions/68.37.43.131|68.37.43.131]] 04:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
-
::Okay? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
+
:::I mean, twitter does have APIs for exactly this sort of thing, and I've seen other bots for automatically posting tweets to facebook or discord, so twitter actually wants people to do this sort of thing, and there's no B4KDØR H4XXØR even required. The issue here is that the admins probably don't have the time to actually do it, what with the whole "they don't get paid for any of this and that would be majorly time consuming" thing... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 11:34, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
-
::::You need to read my replies more closely. The first thing I said was, "I like the general idea here," and my first two sentences were about the idea as a whole. I then went on to discuss the specific suggestions, intending to imply that most of our templates are fine the way they are, but that one or two here and there could be improved. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 22:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
+
::::I know this is an old discussion, and I don't really spend any time on Twitter at all or know how to use a Twitter bot, but the wiki's Twitter archive pages still aren't being updated regularly. I'm just thinking of suggesting that if someone does create a Homestar Runner Wiki twitter updater bot, could we call it the [[Fat Bluebird]], or some variation thereof? (Gave me a chuckle, anyway). -- [[Special:Contributions/68.37.43.131|68.37.43.131]] 00:19, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
-
:::::I got that part, but what I'm saying is not to apply this to a few templates here and there but to have this as the theme for our templates. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 22:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
+
That's a clever name, and it fits with other bot names, like [[User:The Cheatbot|The Cheatbot]]. I like it. And since I know nothing about bots, I'll try to help as much as I can by creating a detailed description to guide the bot-makers.<br>
-
::::::I don't think we need to try to make ''every'' template have a quote. If a quote or an image lends itself to a particular template, then sure, by all means, use the quote or the image, but we shouldn't go out of our way to force it. After all, too much of a good thing is an awesome thing, but too much of an awesome thing is... umm... [[cartoon|really, really dumb and bad]]. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:55, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
+
<div style="overflow-y:scroll;height:300px;border:1px solid black">
-
:::::::I guess that's true, but can we make it a project or something so that people can add to it? I'd bet that if enough people look at it they could get a weally ''{cut closer}'' weally ''{cut even closer}'' a-good one on each page. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
+
'''Things to detect:'''
-
:::I like it, as long as we don't have bold quotes:
+
*Tweet ID
-
 
+
*Number of images
-
{| style="border: 1px solid #C0C090; background-color: #F8EABA; margin-bottom: 3px; width: auto; border-spacing: 3px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"
+
*Tweet text
 +
*If there is a video
 +
*Whether the Tweet is a reply
 +
**Which username the reply was to
 +
*Whether the Tweet has a link (in a clickable box, not just a URL)
 +
**The URL of the link
 +
*Whether it is a Retweet
 +
**Which username Tweeted it originally
 +
'''Things to do:'''<br>
 +
''<nowiki>{{{Triple brackets}}}</nowiki> represent variables.''
 +
{| class="wikitable" width="50%"
 +
! If... || Then...
 +
|-
 +
|There is a Tweet
 +
|Add this to the top of the table:<pre>
 +
{{post
 +
|id={{{POST ID}}}
 +
|date={{{DATE}}}
 +
}}</pre>
 +
|-
 +
|There is text
 +
|Add <tt><nowiki>|text={{{TEXT}}}</nowiki></tt>.
 +
|-
 +
|There is an image or video
 +
|Add <tt><nowiki>|pic=Nophoto.PNG</nowiki></tt>.
|-
|-
-
|[[Image:Warning.png|48px|Offensive content]]
+
|There are multiple images
-
|Easy there, Cheat Cuss-mando! Language that may be considered offensive by some readers follows.<br /><small>To view a censored version of this page, see [[{{{1}}}]].</small>
+
|More lines, increasing the number (<tt>pic2</tt>, <tt>pic3</tt>) each time.
 +
|-
 +
|It is a reply
 +
|Add <tt><nowiki>|reply=[[twitter:{{{USERNAME}}}|@{{{USERNAME}}}]]</nowiki></tt>.
 +
|-
 +
|There is a link with a box
 +
|Add <tt><nowiki>|link=[{{{URL}}}]</nowiki></tt>.
 +
|-
 +
|It is a Retweet
 +
|Add <tt><nowiki>|retweet=[[twitter:{{{USERNAME}}}|@{{{USERNAME}}}]]</nowiki></tt> in place of "text".
|}
|}
-
:::The bold quote at the top of your template makes it look a little crowded, IMO (but that may be because it's a little lengthy). The templates need to be eye-catching, but not overstuffed. As long as we lose the bold quote, I think it's a neat idea. {{User:FireBird/sig}} 21:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
+
'''Examples:'''<br>
-
 
+
[[twitter:StrongBadActual/status/1078803198125723648|This Tweet]] would be added by the bot as:
-
::::I like this one tons better. &mdash;[[User:BazookaJoe|BazookaJoe]] 00:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
+
<pre>
-
 
+
{{post
-
== Standardization of links to toons ==
+
|id=1078803198125723648
-
 
+
|pic=Nophoto.PNG
-
While my comment applies to all toons, it is aimed towards emails.
+
|text=Today in obvious news: Videlectrix is suing Boardelectrix for causing Stinkoman Level 10 to be delayed. Naturally, they made a trailer to announce the delay.
-
 
+
|date=28 Dec 2018
-
Okay, so, whenever I usually edit, I'll always find some strange way everything is linked. For example, on some pages, they'll only have a link to a toon in the Appearances section, but on others, they'll link ton the toon once in the body and then in the Appearances. See examples:
+
}}
-
 
+
</pre>
-
<small>appearances only</small>
+
-
<blockquote>The '''Thnikkaman''' is the [[Alter Egos|alter ego]] of [[Bubs]], wearing a pair of flashy sunglasses and a piece of paper taped to his chest with "tH" written on it. None of the other characters seem to know that the Thnikkaman is Bubs;''''' in cliffhangers, '''''[[Coach Z]] attempts to reveal the Thnikkaman's identity, only to be thwarted by his own bad hand-eye coordination (though he later accuses himself of being the Thnikkaman). This is odd, since he takes off his glasses in the [[Strong Bad Email|email]]''''' monument, '''''clearly showing his true identity. His powers of distraction are amazing, as shown in monument, when he prevented [[Strong Bad]] from completing a monument of himself, as well as [[Homestar Runner]] from finally putting on some [[Homestar Runner's Pants|pants]].
+
-
 
+
-
The Thnikkaman is also obliquely referenced in '''''virus, '''''when Bubs walks across the screen with his mouth replaced by a "broken JPEG" reading "TH".
+
-
 
+
-
<div style="font-size:150%; padding:0.5em 0">Complete Filmography</div>
+
-
 
+
-
*'''Debut:'''  Email [[monument]]
+
-
*Email [[virus]] (reference)
+
-
*[[FAQ]] (cover drawing)
+
-
*[[Marzipan's Answering Machine Version 12.2]]
+
-
*Email [[cliffhangers]]</blockquote>
+
-
 
+
-
<small>appearances and body</small>
+
-
<blockquote>The '''Thnikkaman''' is the [[Alter Egos|alter ego]] of [[Bubs]], wearing a pair of flashy sunglasses and a piece of paper taped to his chest with "tH" written on it. None of the other characters seem to know that the Thnikkaman is Bubs;''''' in [[cliffhangers]], '''''[[Coach Z]] attempts to reveal the Thnikkaman's identity, only to be thwarted by his own bad hand-eye coordination (though he later accuses himself of being the Thnikkaman). This is odd, since he takes off his glasses in the [[Strong Bad Email|email]]''''' [[monument]], '''''clearly showing his true identity. His powers of distraction are amazing, as shown in monument, when he prevented [[Strong Bad]] from completing a monument of himself, as well as [[Homestar Runner]] from finally putting on some [[Homestar Runner's Pants|pants]].
+
-
 
+
-
The Thnikkaman is also obliquely referenced in '''''[[virus]], '''''when Bubs walks across the screen with his mouth replaced by a "broken JPEG" reading "TH".
+
-
 
+
-
<div style="font-size:150%; padding:0.5em 0">Complete Filmography</div>
+
-
 
+
-
*'''Debut:'''  Email [[monument]]
+
-
*Email [[virus]] (reference)
+
-
*[[FAQ]] (cover drawing)
+
-
*[[Marzipan's Answering Machine Version 12.2]]
+
-
*Email [[cliffhangers]]</blockquote>
+
-
 
+
-
To be honest, I think we need a standard set. So, here are our two options: We A) go with the first example and link only in Appearances or B) Link once in the body, and then link in Appearances. I vote '''B'''. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 14:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:I think that we usually provide links in both places ('''B'''), mainly because convenience to the reader is more important than ensuring that no article is linked to twice from the same page. Also, see [[HRWiki talk:Standards#Linking titles of toons only once|this discussion]]. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 15:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
::Heh heh... whoops, sorry. I didn't know there was a topic like that already out there. Well, thanks for the answer, and sorry for the redundant redundancy. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 03:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
:::No problem; just bringing it up for reference :) {{User:Trey56/sig}} 04:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
== Guitar Tabs? ==
+
-
 
+
-
Someone posted a guitar tab for [[Trogdor (song)|Trogdor]]. Should we extend this into a semi-project to put guitar tabs on all the songs on [[Strong Bad Sings]] with guitar/bass parts? If so, I call I get to tab [[Moving Very Slowly]]! --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 20:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:I don't think this is a very worthwhile project. But then, I'm not a guitar enthusiast. &mdash; {{User:Lapper/sig}} 21:52, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
[[twitter:StrongBadActual/status/1089171328089948160|This reply]] would be added by the bot as:
-
::Well, Lapper, we ARE supposed to document Homestar Runner. Why not do guitar tabs? Just don't go crazy and do the SBLOUNSKCHED! theme song. Also, I don't think you can call doing something, Martyo. If you want to do it, just do it. Dibs are for [[Wikipedia:Riding shotgun|cars]] and [http://dibs.dreyers.com/ ice cream], not wikis. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 22:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
<pre>
-
:::Well, Bluebry, the only reason I called it is because if we decide to do this (which we haven't yet) a bunch of transcribers are going to want to tab out songs (and some non-transcribers might do some googling to find tabs) and I don't want to miss out on a song I know how to play. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 22:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
{{post
 +
|id=1089171328089948160
 +
|text=Aw man! You coulda at least linked to my official YT page for that email that has decent sound and less ripped-from-the-web jankiness.
 +
|reply=[[twitter:AndrewDMth|@AndrewDMth]]
 +
|link=[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90X5NJleYJQ&feature=youtu.be]
 +
|date=26 Jan 2019
 +
}}
 +
</pre>
 +
</div>
 +
Hope it helps! {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 05:01, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
-
::::If people want to do tabs, I think it's a great idea! That's good information that a lot of people might be interested in. That said, I tend to think it would be better to keep the tabs on a separate page, in general. I can see some of them getting kind of long, and the average person just trying to read about a given song shouldn't have to scroll through screens of guitar tabs. So, I propose that they be kept on a separate page and linked to. This way, they're easily accessible to the people who want to see them, but unobtrusive to those who don't. {{User:Trey56/sig}} 22:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
== Links for new subdomains ==
-
Okay, I moved the guitar tab for Trogdor to [[Trogdor (song)/Tablature]] and linked to it in a "See Also" section of [[Trogdor (song)]] Before we move forward, is this what we want to do, or should we do it differently? --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 22:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
As of July 2018 there are two new subdomains of [[homestarrunner.com]]: {{p|l=http://new.homestarrunner.com new.homestarrunner.com}} and {{p|l=http://trogdorboardgame.homestarrunner.com trogdorboardgame.homestarrunner.com}}. It would be good to have interwiki links (<code><nowiki>[[new:|]]</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>[[trogdorboardgame:|]]</nowiki></code>) for both for ease of linkage. {{User:Lira/sig}} 06:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
-
:I agree, having tabs would be awesome. I'd like to play [[different town]], for example. What should the naming scheme be? [[Trogdor (song)/Tablature]] is somewhat ugly. What about [[Trogdor Tablatures]], just like we do for the visuals?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 22:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::Or [[Tablature: Trogdor]]. 'S perfect! Also, should we link in a see also? What about in the Detailed information area? {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 22:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::Having a separate namespace might be a ''little'' extreme, but I kinda like it. I'ma wait and see what others think. As for linkage, Detailed Info seems like a better way to go. That way, people don't have to search the page for a link. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 22:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::Maybe possibly maybe. Also, should we include download links for things like [http://www.power-tab.net/ Power Tab]? Or will men in black fedoras grab us for copyright violation? {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 22:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::Power Tab's certainly got MY approval. Most of the tabs I transcribe ARE in Power Tab. I don't see how someone could sue us for linking to their product :P. So, yeah. Power Tab = Awesome. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 22:55, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::Also, where it says Bass, I think you should actually put the bass tablature on there. I'm sure it'll help newbies and be more professional looking to all. :-) SMILEYS ARE GREAT! {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 23:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::I was just wonderin, if we will have all these tabs for songs, don't we need a page with a list of all the songs that have been tabed and link to the tabliture? If we do, i will start work on it immediately.--{{User:Kanjiro/sig}} 23:28, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::We do. Trey made a category.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 23:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::Oh man, i wanted to do it.--{{User:Kanjiro/sig}} 23:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
+

Current revision as of 21:35, 1 January 2020

This is the administrative message board. For the basement featured in Homestar Runner toons, see Basement of the Brothers Strong.
Where all the cool guys hang out
Shortcut:
HRW:DB

Welcome to Da Basement! This is a messageboard for coordinating and discussing administrative tasks on the Homestar Runner Wiki. Although it is aimed mostly at sysops, any user is welcome to leave a message or join the discussion here.

If you have a question regarding how to become a sysop, please read through the FAQ beforehand.

Current | Archive 1 (1-10) | Archive 2 (11-20)
Archive 3 (21-30) | Archive 4 (31-40) | Archive 5 (41-50)
Archive 6 (51-60) | Archive 7 (Logo discussion) | Archive 8 (61-82)
Archive 9 (83-102)

Contents


[edit] Weekly Fanstuff and Sketchbook linking

Hi guys, after adding notes to the Annual Checklist based on some edits OptimisticFool had to make, I realized there must be a better way to do this. Since Weekly Fanstuff 2008 and Sketchbook 2008 already exist and now redirect to their current counterparts (which should from now one with the checklist in place), and since we have anchor redirects, I think the best course of action would be that any new Weekly Fanstuff and Sketchbook links be constructed as [[Weekly Fanstuff 2008#anchor name here]] instead of [[Weekly Fanstuff#anchor name here]] (and similarly for the Sketchbook). This would save us the trouble of having to scour for these links at the end of the year, yet they'd still work correctly this year. If we decide to follow this idea, how to we make this note prominent so that editors are aware of them when making such links? --Stux 09:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Occasionally, I do make such links when adding or fixing an anchor, or other similar edits. You make a good point, yes. This should probably be done. Nothing wrong with a little future-proofing. Or redirects, for that matter. That's why we have them. --DorianGray 10:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I've switched the links in that page as discussed above. Following this section I'm guessing we think it's desirable. Comments? --Stux 16:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Maybe it's trivial, but I think from WF and SK, the "What Links Here" list is a mess and these are the types of changes that would clean it up. It's a slow day at the wiki, so I think I'm going to get busy on it. (Was going to see the new Indiana Jones movie, but there was a long line, so I gave up and now need something to do.) OptimisticFool 19:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Our formatting of the pages has been quite inconsistent over the years, so I created a couple of formatting templates and added them to all the pages. — It's dot com 21:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Two more for the history books

Hey guys, I just ran into these two pages: HRWiki:Block log and HRWiki:Upload log which like HRWiki:Protection log and HRWiki:Deletion log should belong in Category:HRWiki History, but currently do not. They are all protected so I bring these up here. --Stux 15:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Checklist Sign up Sheet

While the Weeklies Checklist has been kept up beautifully. Other checklists like Strong Bad Email, which has become quite complex, (and Podstar Runner is new) seem to be falling into some level of disregard. The most visible and common tasks have been taken care of, but the more tedious ones (like updating {{StrongBadEmailInfo}}) may not be taken care of right away. To that end I would like to propose a Weekly Checklist Sign up Sheet whose purpose is solely to track whether or not one or more users verified that each item in the checklist (except for Strong Bad Email Statistics) was updated. This doesn't mean that the user has to update the list. The signature only means that all the items have been "checked off". This would ensure that at least one pair of eyes went methodically through the list making sure no stone was left unturned. Currently, we have no way of knowing if a person actually went through the checklist, or was just trying to remember some steps from memory. I know some people may think is might be too much, but given how complex some of these lists can be, it is soon becoming a necessity. I welcome your opinions. --Stux 17:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I have something in the works to help with the Strong Bad Email checklist. — It's dot com 20:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup Committee

I have an idea. You probably guessed it from the heading, but I'm starting to feel the need for a committee dedicated to cleaning up the wiki. The various cleanup projects, namely HRWiki:Article Cleanup, which deals with featured articles, have fallen into relative obscurity or the hands of only a few users. The cleanup committee would be similar in concept to the validation committee, but would focus on spelling, grammatical errors, and correct page format. It would also strive to boost the level of clarity and compellingness of our articles. It would also be more organized and hopefully encourage more users to participate in making our fair HRWiki a better and more fun place to be. Does this sound like a good concept at least? -Brightstar Shiner 22:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I think that it is the responsibility of every active user to cleanup the wiki, therefore having such a committee would be like having a userbox saying "this user edits hrwiki"... — Defender1031*Talk 23:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Please don't shoot me down right away. I know every user is supposed to cleanup the wiki, but the majority don't really pay attention to articles that aren't the newest sbemail or character or what-have-you. What I'm suggesting is a much larger version of Article Cleanup, one that spanned the whole wiki and concentrated on spiffing up what we already have to make it even better. -Brightstar Shiner 23:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User space edits

Since most userspace edits are nothing more than updating personal info or adding userboxes, is it possible to make a setting that gives users the option to not see them in recent changes? Just a thought. --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 00:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Since the first thing anyone else would say (I know I would) would be "What'd stop vandals from using that option while vandalising other people's user pages?", let me postulate this: Supposing the option only appeared for the user whose page was being edited? This is at least theoretically possible, I'm sure. --DorianGray 00:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
BUT WUT IF THEY SAY NASTY THINGS ABOUT YOU AND YOU TOTALLY MISS THEMS? No, but seriously, what would stop those same users from posting inappropriate material on their own userpage? Bluebry 00:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I think that the original request was for the user looking at Recent Changes to not see the edits to User-space.... not for the user making the edits to opt-out of their edits showing up there. That said, one can choose "User" from the dropdown, hit the invert checkbox, and bookmark that page. (Or, even change the "Recent Changes" link to it with a custom user javascript).  Green Helmet 01:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Update main page

A while back, someone suggested we update the main page to include links to the multi-lingual welcome pages, but the idea, although it did get a lot of noise made about it, ultimately failed. Since we have had the same style of main page for three and half years now, does anyone else think it might be a good idea to redesign the main page just for the sake of having a new main page? --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 01:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Um, anyone home? --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 04:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I have said many times that I think this is a good idea, and have even designed several test pages. Right now, however, I've just got too much on my plate to do anything about it. Feel free to try your hand at it, though. — It's dot com 05:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR Violation

See Math Kickers edit history.

Yeah, we don't really have 3RR here. Besides, it's been three reverts, not the four that would be required for a 3RR vio at Wikipedia. Heimstern Läufer 14:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Fatal Error"

Trying to see a previous vandal edit to Coach Z's article, I'm getting this:

**He has occasionally [[Blubb-O's Commercial|attempted to be sent to prison]], since he would be guaranteed "three square meals a day".
**He has occasionally [[Blubb-O's Commercial|attempted to be sent to prison]], since he would be guaranteed "three square meals a day".
**He [[secret recipes|can't afford "money cost]]" ice cream.
**He [[secret recipes|can't afford "money cost]]" ice cream.

Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 33554432 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 35 bytes) in /home/hrwiki/public_html/includes/DifferenceEngine.php(1211) : assert code on line 1

I don't exactly get the message, but I think it's trying to ask one of the Administrators to do something ("assert code on line 1"?). I also see the comment "<!--LINE 278-->" in the code source. --71.157.173.166 03:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

It was a vandalized state of the page that was fixed shortly after. I don't actually know what's in there, but something in the code broke the page good. — Defender1031*Talk 03:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
It was just some dumb ASCII art. Nothing to worry about. I took out the link. — It's dot com 04:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Idea for Page

I'm sorry if this is the wrong place to post this, but I had no idea where else to go.
(Maybe this is something that needs to be stated a little clearer?)
I think there ought to be a page about 'Phonebooks' on the HRwiki because of its many mentions:
Eg. in the sbemails 'your funeral' and 'the movies'

I would have made it myself, but I was afraid of messing it up and infuriating fellow users.
Anyone down with the idea? --lustmyeyes <3 05:17, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

It has to have at least 3 references to be a running gag, so no. MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 05:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion category needing attention

To my fellow sysops: We really need to get on cleaning out the deletion category. Things have been sitting in there for months with no discussion. I've done some, but I really would like a little help. Furthermore, as I'm going out of town in a few hours, I may not be able to do much for a bit. If a bunch of us do it, it'll go a lot faster. Heimstern Läufer 09:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I did as best i could with DorianGray's help for actual deletions given my inability to delete. I managed to clear off Category:Pages for Discussion and about a third of Category:Articles for Discussion. The rest of them are either lacking consensus and need more opinions, or else are SBCG4AP-related and outside my ability to really judge or even understand consensus. Hope i helped. — Defender1031*Talk 10:15, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] General Toons Checklist

I think that we should have a Generic Toons Checklist similar to the one seen in Talk:Strong Bad Email (albeit shorter). The reason I'm saying this is that little steps such as updating HRWiki:Subtitles/Data have been neglected in the past. While there's no guarantee that the checklist itself won't be neglected, at least we can give some structure to the updates and have a place where we can see a list and make sure we haven't missed anything. Its location would be crucial, and I think Talk:Main Page would be the best place to put it in and it's the place with the most visibility. (The checklist can explicitly point to the correct instuctions when updating Strong Bad Email or Weeklies as well.) What do you guys think? --Stux 13:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm for the idea, though I don't necessarily think it should be on the main page talk. HRWiki:Standards, perhaps? — It's dot com 02:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Cool! I could have a section there for the checklist (along with links to other checklists from that page, or maybe even group them there so they're at a centralized location? -- I was thinking turning the most prominent ones into their own templates so they could be pasted in both their original and new locations). I would still like to see something in the main talk page linking to HRWiki:Standards so that people know it's there; perhaps by amending the {{Main Page Talk}} header? I'll start on making the checklist and go from there. --Stux 20:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] HRWiki store

The interwiki link needs changing for HRstore:. It is now homestarrunnerstore.com. Thanks! The Goblin!! 13:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thanks! For my own records: http://homestarrunner.stores.yahoo.net/http://www.homestarrunnerstore.com/ (We should note that somewhere in an article.) Hmm. The old Yahoo! icon doesn't seem appropriate anymore for the link. What should we use? (Interestingly, on pages where they forget to declare a favicon, it defaults to the Yahoo! one.) — It's dot com 15:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Maybe it could be the sign from Bubs' Concession Stand? Nah, it'd be a little redundant because of {{u|cs}}. Maybe mash the H*R and Yahoo! favicons together? Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 23:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Discuss before creating a new page

I'm not sure how it would work, or even whether it's a good idea, but I'd like to float the suggestion that—at least until the current lull is over—no new articles be created without discussion first. (This would apply only to our secondary and tertiary articles—the ones we make to chronicle objects and themes—not toons.) It seems that during the lean times we tend to actively look for articles that can be created, ones that we might not otherwise create. Sometimes this is a good thing; more often, however, it is not. — It's dot com 21:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I actually rather like the idea, but there's no real easy way to implement this beyond what we're already doing. Still, we really *are* just scraping for new content... and it's beginning to boil down to random wiki searches for three instances of something that isn't otherwise noteworthy. I... actually may get it for this, but I'm beginning to wonder if the "three appearances" guideline shouldn't be changed somewhat. Three appearances of something in a webtoon that's been running at a rather constant pace for more than a decade really doesn't seem particularly significant anymore, especially given the incredible periods of time between them (one in 2001, one in 2002, and a very vague offhand mention in 2009 that may or may not even be related?). Maybe expand it to five? I don't know. But we're just creating pages for anything and everything these days, not really caring whether it's interesting or particularly relevant; there're many people on the "for" side of these pages whose argument is solely that they're within the technical guidelines. Not an especially compelling reason, really... but I'm getting off topic. I'd like to hear about your idea some more. -YKHi. I'm Ayjo! 01:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
The problem is that often articles aren't known if they'll be worth having until they develop some content, true, there are cases where you can tell just by the name that, say, "times homestar has said the word 'then'" won't make a good article. I therefore propose a 3 step process. First, a page in the HRWiki namespace where ideas for articles can be discussed. If it's agreed upfront to be a good idea, the article can skip the intermediate steps and be made immediately in the main namespace. The second step for an iffy article that needs time to develop, is to be made as a subpage of the new article discussions page, out of the way of the main namespace, until it is either approved or rejected. The third step is, obviously, if it is approved, it's moved into the main namespace, and if it's rejected, it ends up in deleto city. If we implement this, it might even be a good idea to disable page creation in the main namespace for regular users, and have the "you cannot create pages" message include a link to the new article discussion page, at least at first, so that people get the message. — Defender1031*Talk 10:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
While I think this is a good idea for the purposes of running gags and inside jokes, I don't want to sit around and wait for one of my tablature pages to clear committee. If we implement this somehow, I don't think we should turn off page creation for normal users (unless someone wants to promote me to temporary sysop, but that seems impractical, and also, I would ideally not be the only one working on tabs). --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 08:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry about it. This idea seems to have died from lack of support, and even I wasn't super gung-ho on it to begin with. — It's dot com 18:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to revive this discussion. I support the discussion of pages, not as a mandatory requirement for all articles, but as an optional thing. I have a whole bunch of pages I'd like to create, but I'm not sure whether they're good enough. I can't really start a discussion, because there's no centralized place to do that. A simple [[HRWiki:Article Discussions]] page or something of the sort would be good. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 23:01, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion categories

We need to clean out Category:Articles for Discussion, Category:Pages for Discussion, and Category:Pages for Speedy Deletion. Some pages have been in those categories for nearly a whole year. Can we please clean them out? Walupeachy 07:14, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It's kind of hard to clean out the former, since consensus needs to be reached, and I'm sure that a sysop will get around to the latter eventually. --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 07:19, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
RickyTommy, we keep telling you not to police the wiki because you're overdoing it. Please stop telling people what they should do. I mean it. Loafing 07:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I didn't tell anyone what they should do. I was just pointing out those categories and the lack of attention they're getting. Walupeachy 07:31, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I must have misunderstood "We need to clean out..." as saying that we need to clean out these categories. Loafing 07:54, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, maybe I was a bit rude when I said that, but I'm unable to clean out those categories myself, as some of the articles probably have consensus to delete. PS. Should we make a page like Wikipedia's Articles for Deletion page, and give pages a limited time (like a week, just like at Wikipedia) to be discussed? Never mind, with the lack of users using this Wiki at present, such a page wouldn't work that good. Anyway, should we start cleaning out those categories? Walupeachy 06:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
And this topic just dies down. I really don't want those articles to stay like that forever. Again, can we please clean the categories out? Walupeachy 07:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I agree that the category should be cleaned out. It's been eight years! Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 17:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Almost nine years! Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 19:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

[edit] Autosummary for replies?

Could we have an automatic summary for replies on talk pages? Who knows how many countless hours everyone has spent typing "reply" and variations thereof. Considering that that's more of a custom than a standard, I guess it might be a little unnecessary, but if it would be easy to do I'll be your best friend. Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 18:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. In Dot com's case, he usually puts a general summary of what he said in the description. I usually try to do it too. Really I don't think it's necessary to have it and it would be more of a nuisance than a convenience to have it done automagically. MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 19:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the system could reasonably be expected to distinguish between bona-fide replies and other kinds of edits. Even in the most clear-cut case (text is added at the end of a section on a new line; no text is changed or removed; the text begins with one more colon than the previous line and ends with a four tildes for a signature), I still don't think I'd want the system making assumptions. Given how easy it is to navigate to the summary field, type "reply", and submit the form (without even using the mouse), the "countless hours" argument rings hollow for me. Sorry. — It's dot com 21:16, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd also point out that the system DOES automatically put the name of the section in. If you don't make an edit summary, as I'm purposely leaving one out of this particular edit, it's generally assumed anyway to be a reply. I mean, come on, you probably saw this edit and thought it was a reply, right? Right? — Defender1031*Talk 23:11, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Licensing drop-down list

Could a sysop or admin kindly populate MediaWiki:Licenses with the image copyright tags that have been created over the past few years? It would aid in choosing the right license when uploading. Please and thanks, Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 22:07, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

[edit] MediaWiki system messages

I had a few concerns for the sysops regarding some of the MediaWiki system messages. Please delete/modify or just comment on the following:

Message
  • Default
  • Current
Concern Decision / remark
MediaWiki:Anononlyblock
  • anon. only
  • anonnies only
"anonnies"? "Hey, anonny, why don't you go... brush up on your knowledge of the Homestar Runner body of work or something and not attribute it to yourself!"
MediaWiki:Autoredircomment
  • Redirected page to $1
  • redirect to $1
present tense? lowercase? also, why not just default? preference
MediaWiki:Autosumm-blank
  • Blanked the page
  • blanked the page
lowercase? why not just default?
MediaWiki:Autosumm-replace
  • Replaced content with '$1'
  • replaced the page with '$1'
lowercase?
MediaWiki:Clearyourcache
  • Note - After saving, you may have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes. Mozilla / Firefox / Safari: hold Shift while clicking Reload, or press either Ctrl-F5 or Ctrl-R (Command-R on a Macintosh); Konqueror: click Reload or press F5; Opera: clear the cache in Tools → Preferences; Internet Explorer: hold Ctrl while clicking Refresh, or press Ctrl-F5.
  • {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Special:Preferences|'''See [[Help:User Preferences]] for help deciphering the options.''' <nowiki>}}</nowiki> Note: After saving, you may have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes. *Mozilla / Firefox: hold down Shift while clicking Reload, or press Ctrl-Shift-R (Cmd-Shift-R on Apple Mac) *Safari: press Cmd-Option-E *IE: hold Ctrl while clicking Refresh, or press Ctrl-F5 *Konqueror: simply click the Reload button, or press F5 *Opera users may need to completely clear their cache in Tools→Preferences.
I recommend we delete MediaWiki:Clearyourcache and move "See Help:User Preferences for help deciphering the options." onto MediaWiki:Preferences-summary. The entire preferences page was reworked beginning with the next version. This will need to be reviewed once we upgrade (whenever that is).
MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage
  • Template:disambig
  • HRWiki:Links_to_disambiguating_pages
supposed to designate which template(s) are used to mark disambiguation pages. non-default setting breaks the functionality of Special:Disambiguations. also, HRWiki:Links to disambiguating pages is possibly pointless. This was set in the earliest days of the wiki and should be reviewed and probably removed.
MediaWiki:History-title
  • Revision history of "$1"
  • Revision history of $1
removal of quotes, just different for seemingly no reason - why not just default? preference; likely inspired by the same change at Wikipedia
MediaWiki:Mailmypassword
  • E-mail new password
  • Email new password
"Email" generally should be spelled "E-mail" nevermind, but still why not just keep the default? "Never mind" should be two words.
Never_mind, then ;-) -- I guess I figured out why we have non-default on this, anyway -- probably for consistency with the H*R spelling, which is usually (always?) non-hyphenated. LobStoR 20:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
MediaWiki:Movenologintext
  • You must be a registered user and logged in to move a page.
  • You must be a registered user and logged in to move a page, or this page may be protected from page moves.
This message is not even displayed for protected page move attempts. (in that case, it displays MediaWiki:Protectedpagetext, which is defaulted to "This page has been locked to prevent editing.") This change was probably correct back when it was implemented but after various upgrades is now out of date. It should be reviewed and probably removed.
MediaWiki:Right-edit
  • Edit pages
  • Edit this page
Incorrect grammar for the list at Special:ListGroupRights

edit: also feeds MediaWiki:Permissionserrorstext-withaction "You do not have permission to $2, for the following reasons:"

We need to see where else this is used. Obviously it was changed for some reason, but the change could be out of date and may need to be removed. If it's still current, then the amount of sense made on the group rights page (grammar is not a problem per se) is potentially a secondary concern, not a primary one
I think it's $2 in MediaWiki:Permissionserrorstext-withaction -- "You do not have permission to $2, for the following reasons:" LobStoR 20:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Please check these out, and leave comments regarding any decisions on any of these. Thanks, LobStoR 18:43, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I replied to your, ahem, concerns. Thanks, Chaps, for not burdening us with more pressing matters, like toons, so we can take care of stuff like this. — It's dot com 19:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, really helps us... err... refine our wiki :-) LobStoR 19:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
I set the table row color by status -- green=pending, grey=no action. LobStoR 20:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Use of id in templates

As work was being done on sightings pages, I noticed that {{sightingslanguagewarning}} makes use of the id attribute for its box. Its value, which references another template that has the same thing, is "inprogress". The id attribute is, in part, the replacement for the name attribute, which creates an anchor: a "link" to a specific part of the page.

Two ids can never be the same on a page, as stated in this sentence from section C.8 of the XHTML 1.0 specification:

The values of these attributes must be unique within the document, valid, and any references to these fragment identifiers (both internal and external) must be updated should the values be changed during conversion.

If a value for id is used more than once, it will invalidate the page, as demonstrated in this link (here's the code). Three errors are from multiple occurrences of the same id value. The remaining five demonstrate that there is a format to be followed, and an invalid format throw an error. In this example, headings that start with a number or special character generate invalid id values (see C.8). This is something MediaWiki does and it's practically out of our control. Note that headings with the same name are handled by MediaWiki to an extent.

Looking through MediaWiki:Common.css and MediaWiki:Monobook.css, the only selection by id that's of concern is #navbox. However, those style rules are also applied to the class navbox, and I believe that most if not all navigation templates get their styles from using the class attribute.

Lastly, if this rant seems familiar, I did go on about the use of this attribute on table rows a year and so ago.

In summary, I wish to recommend that users be cautious as to add id attributes to templates, or anything that may be used more than once on a page, and, likewise, using this attribute to apply styles. In addition, I wish to recommend that users who see an id attribute causing a ruckus resolve it in some manner or remove it. Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 21:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Dropdown Menu Support

Will the HRWiki be compatible with dropdown menus sometime? Purple Wrench has a great idea for a restyling of the @StrongBadActual page, but a dropdown menu that would allow him to compact all the transcripts would benefit the page greatly. - Catjaz63 03:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

To generalize, having any sort of hide/show functionality for a section of text would help. In addition, the page (both as it appears now and if my redesign is used instead) will appear broken unless the issues regarding automatic resizing of gifs are sorted out. I am aware that both of these tasks are not trivial, but they would be necessary for a page that has the potential to grow very quickly and be populated with gifs. -- ■■   PURPLE  WRENCH   ■■ 12:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Sometime? Yes! Soon? Well... no promises, but I do intend to get back into active development for this site, and creating a better user experience for this day and age is tops on my list. — It's dot com 22:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
If you just configured the server to resize twitter sillysoolnds.gif correctly, I thank you for doing so. There are a few more gifs I uploaded in August for @StrongBadActual that don't resize yet (this and this). -- ■■   PURPLE  WRENCH   ■■ 12:27, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Looks like they're both working now too. Thanks! -- ■■   PURPLE  WRENCH   ■■ 19:39, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Personal info of real persons

I did a little digging and couldn't find anything on this subject (if anyone knows where we've talked about it before, please link to it here). Lately there's been an uptick of personal information on articles about real people that seems a little... over the line. I can't say for sure because to my knowledge we've never actually defined a line (other than limiting certain information about minors). So what should the line be? Obviously anything mentioned directly on the official site is fair game, but thus far we haven't limited ourselves to that. We include information from interviews and the like. That said, just because a scrap of data can be found on an obscure website somewhere doesn't automatically mean it should be here. This is a bit unfocused, so I think I'll stop talking and open the floor for others' thoughts and concerns. — It's dot com 17:03, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

There's all sorts of information about practically everyone in the world which really ought to be private information, which most people would probably prefer if it would remain private information, but which, because of the age we live is, is now easily accessible to anyone on the internet. I think that the natural cutoff point here is probably that anything which has been deliberately publicized in relation to The Family Chaps's creative endeavors is fine, but that out of respect to their privacy, information from any other source which is not directly linked to their public lives as writers/producers should be off-limits. Practically, that would mean that we should avoid making use of things like phonebook databases, people search services, background check engines, etc. On the other hand, any information from the toons, DVD commentaries, interviews, press releases, Strong Bad's social network accounts, TBC's other projects, and even databases like IMDB which are specifically geared toward the video entertainment industry ought to be fair game. I think it's only common decency to say that we don't publish any information that TBC themselves haven't already indicated is intended to be in the public eye. — Defender1031*Talk 17:43, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Please excuse my brevity, but I wholly agree with Defender's definition of "the line". Just because information can be found doesn't mean it should all be published. In addition to that, I believe that a new Policy page be created to specifically explain what the line is and why we've drawn it. --Stux 13:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I agree with DeFender and Stux. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 18:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

[edit] AFJAOBN

I think that HRWiki:April Fools' Jokes and Other Baleeted Nonsense has run its course. The wiki hasn't done a proper gag in years, and every single "prank" done by users is lame. No offense, but changing your sig and your user page has been done. I get the strong feeling some people come back once a year just so that they can do something that gets posted on that page. I'd really like to lock it, and unless somebody can make an extremely good case for why it needs to stay open, I plan do to so. — It's dot com 02:16, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, I think some people enjoy it and it isn't harming anyone or anything soooo... I feel like that's a pretty good reason? TheThin
02:18, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
For about five years running you did exactly what I was talking about. The harm is that it's disruption not to be clever or funny but for its own sake. — It's dot com 02:32, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Much as it pains me to do so, I have to agree with Dot com. It was total loads of fun back in the wiki's heyday when we had a lot of active users who would do April Fools' stuff, and then would continue to interact with each other in ways relating to their joke. Now that the wiki is pretty much dead save for a handful of people, that isn't really how it happens anymore. We're basically left with a few edited userpages that no one would even be looking at were it not for the edits being made to them, along with some other disruptive behaviors such as adding nonsense that no one cares about to talk pages that no one has looked at in years. At this point, it's all just become stale. Sadly, there's not enough of a userbase for it not to be stale. We had a good run, but until and unless TBC start updating weekly again and we get a huge influx of users which causes the wiki to return to its former glory, we need to put Apro Foo Day out to pasture. — Defender1031*Talk 11:33, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
I'm here in support of DC's and DeFender's position. These days some users just simply want to one-up the previous year's or another user's randomness. I'm fine with just keeping this page locked for historical purposes. --Stux 12:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Oppose. This particular April Fools' Day has had more participants than any of the previous four years - without coinciding with a H*R update, no less. Walupeachy 13:02, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
To be clear, I'm not suggesting a wholesale ban on users changing their sigs or whatever they've been doing; I just don't think we should keep a record of it anymore. (If we ever do a wiki-wide prank again, that can still be noted.) — It's dot com 14:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
The April Fools’ Day page has brought so many people joy.
And by “so many”, I mean those few it did not annoy.
And if it’s locked forever, never to be changed again,
Then April’s reemergence of those old users will end.
No more rare appearances of people lost to time,
Like wind caressing crystals in forgotten caves and mines.
The truth is if the page gets its abilities revoked,
That marks the end of The_thing’s twelve year streak of stupid jokes.
And yes I know that certain men would love to see me sad,
I purposely have vexed you for a decade, is that bad?
So, if you must, protect the page and ruin all those dreams
Left gazing into voids of empty memories unseen.
TheThin
17:38, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Did you even read my comment above? We have no current plans to stop people from doing the stupid stuff they do on April 1. The only difference is we're not going to record what they do in a centralized place. If that's a dealbreaker—in other words, if someone is doing something only so they can be listed on that page—then they're doing it for the wrong reasons. That's precisely what locking the page aims to curb. — It's dot com 19:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Personally I liked having all of the stuff in one place, so a user could look through all of them at once on any given day of the year. That said, I definitely see both sides of the issue here. If the page is locked... okay, it's still there for posterity. Then I'd just take the list of stuff I did and stick it on a page in my own userspace, and in that case I'd recommend other users do the same. -- ■■   PURPLE  WRENCH   ■■ 23:50, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
You're free to list your own stuff, I guess, but we're not going to move a centralized list to the user space. — It's dot com 23:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

[edit] The Deleteheads Download Blockquote

I made a blockquote-type thing for the page The Deleteheads Download, but I can't add it because I can't edit MediaWiki:Common.css. Can a sysop add this? Feel free to make any changes!

 .DeleteheadsDownload<!--you can change the title to whatever you want--> {
    background: url(/images/c/c8/DeleteheadsDownloadBackground.png) repeat-y;
    padding: .5em 1em 1em;
    width: 600px
 }

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 00:27, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Done. I went with just .deleteheads and made some small adjustments to the padding and width. — It's dot com 00:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

[edit] Oldest Downloads Menu Mirror

Dear Sysops:
I CoachZiscool1978 request that you create a mirror for the Oldest Downloads Menu. It may take as much time as it needs but, I have overwhelming support... (by overwhelming I mean one Gfdgsgxgzgdrc.) Still! I hope you do it for me, in your eyes, I'm a wiki user, In my family's eyes, I'm a son, or grandson, or even nephew but in my heart I'm a Homestar Runner fan and I'm a historical preserver...
Anxiously awaiting a reply: CoachZiscool1978

I've changed it to a local mirror. -- Tom 01:28, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

[edit] Long-term inactivty

Wikipedia (and if I'm not mistaken, every other Wiki in existence) has recently taken to desysopping admins who have not edited in a long time. Any chance we could do the same thing? Walupeachy 10:05, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

And the reason to do this would be...? --Happy??? BirthJay? (Quarantine) 10:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
I slightly agree. After all, what's the point of an administrator who hasn't edited in a decade? By my calculations, about 1/5 admins haven't edited in eight or more years. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 20:10, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Here's a full list of admins' most recent edits:
  • 2019 x5
  • 2018 x2
  • 2017
  • 2016 x2
  • 2015
  • 2014 x2
  • 2013 x2
  • 2011 x3
  • 2010
  • 2009 x2
  • 2008 x2
  • 2006 x2
  • 2005
We have five active admins (those who have edited this year), eight inactive admins (those who have edited since 2014), and thirteen admins with practically no chance of ever editing again (those who haven't edited since 2014). That means exactly half of the admins haven't edited since April Fool 2014. Seven of them haven't even edited this decade. And the decade is practically over! Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 19:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Speaking of inactive sysops, there should probably be a few more sysops to replace the old ones. The last time someone was promoted was in 2007, and that user hasn't edited in over eight years. There are a lot of helpful active users nowadays who could do a lot of good with admin priv-a-le-ges... I guess. The wiki might run more smoothly and effectively when there aren't a select few people doing all the important stuff. Things might get done faster this way. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 02:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
What things do you think are not getting done? -174.62.238.201 13:07, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
I think that things like deleting pages, blocking vandals, discussions (like the ones on this very page), getting approval for important decisions (like this one), and so forth — even smaller, less important things, like changing the CSS for holidays or updating the featured content — might be done more quickly with more people involved. Also, the wiki runs on an outdated and unsupported version of MediaWiki from ten years ago, which is a bit dangerous for our security, and more active sysops might help fix that. In short, I think more help would be helpful. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 22:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Of the things you listed, the only thing that really even applies to sysops is blocking vandals, which is generally a matter of luck as to whether there will be an active sysop when vandalism happens. True more sysops meaans more likelihood of there being one on when a vandal hits, but we don't get all that much vandalism and it's usually taken care of relatively quickly. As for the rest, let me explain why they don't apply to sysops:
  • Deleting pages - Most of the undeleted pages are due to lack of consensus on deletion discussions rather than lack of sysops to perform the deletions.
  • Discussions - Anyone on the wiki can participate in discussions. You don't need to be a sysop to do that. Again, this is more a matter of a lack of general inactivity than it is lack of sysops. Having more sysops is not going to encourage more activity.
  • Getting approval for important decisions (like this one) - Only site admins can approve new sysops. Anything else that needs approval is done by consensus, not by sysop authority. There may be actions that only a sysop can take to make something happen once consensus has been reached, but as with deletion, it's a matter of having enough activity to get consensus.
  • And so forth - And so forth.
  • Changing the CSS for holidays or updating the featured content - I believe that there are elements of both of these that can only be done by a site admin rather than a sysop, and at least the former tends to be done on a pretty reasonable timeframe.
  • The wiki runs on an outdated and unsupported version of MediaWiki - This one is definitely something that can only be done by a site admin. I'm certain they are aware of it and have plans to deal with it.
In short, I doubt there's much need for more sysops, and the issues you raise mostly have more to do with general inactivity anyway. One last thing I'd point out is that the wiki's general sysop nomination policy is "don't call us, we'll call you", that suggestions to add more sysops have historically been met with suspicion and resentment from regular users, and that generally only the site admin team decides whether and when more sysops are necessary. — Defender1031*Talk 23:51, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh, okay. That makes sense. Nevermind then! Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 02:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

[edit] Outdated Chat Clients

Moved from HRWiki talk:FAQ

I know for sure that there's still plenty of buzz going around about Homestar and the gang (Especially with the new sbemail released), but my concern is that not a whole lot of people use IRC anymore, I propose that the Admins make an Official Homestar Runner Wiki Discord Server. This way we can do get together and make editing and sharing thoughts a lot easier (If this already exists, Great! Let's try to make it more known) — DonPianta (Talk | contribs) 19:43, 17 August 2017 (left unsigned)

I agree. IRC Channels are horribly outdated and this would be a great improvement for Wiki discussion. - Catjaz63 22:31, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
I agree as well. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 02:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Now that the topic has been brought up again by an anonny, I still think this is a good idea. I've been on the IRC channel a few times, and it is very inactive. Plus, you can only see messages posted when you are online, whereas with Discord, you can view all messages, making discussions more convenient. This way, you don't have to be online 24/7, and if you exit, you can go back and read messages you've missed. Discord is less outdated and more useful in nearly every way. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 18:51, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Also, this is an especially good idea considering how inactive the forum has been. Discord is a good alternative way to discuss toons and updates, and is practically guaranteed to be more active than the forum, considering how many people use Discord. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 23:37, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Guess what else is inactive? The Wiki. And as I've said numerous times, there's no point in making a significant change to a Wiki that has lost most of its userbase. Walupeachy 02:16, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
You use that as your excuse for everything. Yes, the wiki is less active than it used to be. So what? Why should that keep us from making changes to improve it, and maybe even make it more active? And who's to say this wiki won't become more active over the years? We may not have that many users right now, but the users we do have would surely appreciate a more convenient way to communicate. Inactivity shouldn't stop us from making a better wiki. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 06:25, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
How is making a discord channel a “significant change to the wiki” even? -174.62.238.201 15:49, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Um, what is this... "Discord" you speak of? Is a... food? Shoehorned referencing aside, I know I'm only an anonymous contributor that only shows up for small things. I have to admit I haven't logged on to a forum for ten years (ugly memories) and have no social media accounts (I believe they are places of evil that consume their user's brains). So I'm a a lot behind the times and I prefer it that way. So I guess having a dedicated chatroom doesn't really apply to me that much. Guess I'll probably go back to expressing myself in edit summaries and hope I'm understood. 68.37.43.131 13:16, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Right now, we have three users in favor, and one opposed. Anyone else? I see many reasons to do it, and no reasons not to. I think it'll make everything more convenient, and the wiki more active. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 19:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

[edit] Main Page Redesign Notice

In just over a week, it will be the two year anniversary of the suggestion to redesign the Main Page. The discussion hasn't been very active, and hardly anyone is contributing, despite the fact that this could be one of the largest, most important wiki edits in years. I suggest putting a header over the Main Page, recent changes, or even the entire wiki. After all, we did it when we were redesigning the logo. Something like this, perhaps:

The Homestar Runner Wiki is considering redesigning the Main Page.
Your input in the discussion would be greatly appreciated.

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 20:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

The main page is still outdated, and not much is being done about it. I think this notice would be a good way to inform users of the update, and get more peoples' opinions. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 05:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
One somewhat related thing I'd like to point out: the new page design includes twitter updates, however tweets have not been regularly updated since around october. I think that activating the new design (in whatever form it may have) requires a concerted effort to regularly update these tweets. (And I, personally, do not have the time to help out with said task.) --Stux 13:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
It doesn't need to be updated regularly just yet, but when it replaces the main page, I'll make sure it stays updated. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 20:05, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Anyone else have an opinion on this? This is a good way to get more users into the discussion and finally get a consensus on possibly the most important wiki decision of recent times. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 19:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
It has been over three years since the update was suggested, and I think it's at least as important as changing the logo, which had a notice above the recent changes. There is so much empty space and outdated information on the current main page, and the new one is much more informative and aesthetically pleasing in my opinion, and yet nothing is being done about it. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 21:35, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

[edit] @StrongBadActual Bot

I was thinking, since we have a bot that automatically checks homestarrunner.com's XML files and updates the XML Sources page, is it possible to do the same thing for @StrongBadActual? They're usually out of date, and it takes a while to update. After a certain interval of time, the bot could check for new Tweets or replies, and edit the page accordingly. The text, date, ID, and reply username (if applicable) would automatically be added, and fun facts and other information can be added manually. Can it work? Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 23:44, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea, but unless you want to code it yourself and turn it over to the wiki, I wouldn't look for it anytime soon. — It's dot com 23:34, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
It certainly would be nice not having to visit Twitter to see Homestar Runner Twitter-exclusive updates. I don't understand coding, but the general idea is to have a bot scanning the @StrongBadActual Twitter feed for updates, read them, and then update the HRWiki with the relevant data in the correct format. Sounds like a tall order. But given the kind of site Twitter is, I'd wonder if such a The Tweetbot would either be shut down by or lucratively financed by Twitter if discovered. You think some type of B4KDØR H4XXØR has already written some type of Edgarware that can do that sort of thing? 68.37.43.131 04:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
I mean, twitter does have APIs for exactly this sort of thing, and I've seen other bots for automatically posting tweets to facebook or discord, so twitter actually wants people to do this sort of thing, and there's no B4KDØR H4XXØR even required. The issue here is that the admins probably don't have the time to actually do it, what with the whole "they don't get paid for any of this and that would be majorly time consuming" thing... — Defender1031*Talk 11:34, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
I know this is an old discussion, and I don't really spend any time on Twitter at all or know how to use a Twitter bot, but the wiki's Twitter archive pages still aren't being updated regularly. I'm just thinking of suggesting that if someone does create a Homestar Runner Wiki twitter updater bot, could we call it the Fat Bluebird, or some variation thereof? (Gave me a chuckle, anyway). -- 68.37.43.131 00:19, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

That's a clever name, and it fits with other bot names, like The Cheatbot. I like it. And since I know nothing about bots, I'll try to help as much as I can by creating a detailed description to guide the bot-makers.

Things to detect:

  • Tweet ID
  • Number of images
  • Tweet text
  • If there is a video
  • Whether the Tweet is a reply
    • Which username the reply was to
  • Whether the Tweet has a link (in a clickable box, not just a URL)
    • The URL of the link
  • Whether it is a Retweet
    • Which username Tweeted it originally

Things to do:
{{{Triple brackets}}} represent variables.

If... Then...
There is a Tweet Add this to the top of the table:
{{post
|id={{{POST ID}}}
|date={{{DATE}}}
}}
There is text Add |text={{{TEXT}}}.
There is an image or video Add |pic=Nophoto.PNG.
There are multiple images More lines, increasing the number (pic2, pic3) each time.
It is a reply Add |reply=[[twitter:{{{USERNAME}}}|@{{{USERNAME}}}]].
There is a link with a box Add |link=[{{{URL}}}].
It is a Retweet Add |retweet=[[twitter:{{{USERNAME}}}|@{{{USERNAME}}}]] in place of "text".

Examples:
This Tweet would be added by the bot as:

{{post
|id=1078803198125723648
|pic=Nophoto.PNG
|text=Today in obvious news: Videlectrix is suing Boardelectrix for causing Stinkoman Level 10 to be delayed. Naturally, they made a trailer to announce the delay.
|date=28 Dec 2018
}}

This reply would be added by the bot as:

{{post
|id=1089171328089948160
|text=Aw man! You coulda at least linked to my official YT page for that email that has decent sound and less ripped-from-the-web jankiness.
|reply=[[twitter:AndrewDMth|@AndrewDMth]]
|link=[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90X5NJleYJQ&feature=youtu.be]
|date=26 Jan 2019
}}

Hope it helps! Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 05:01, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

[edit] Links for new subdomains

As of July 2018 there are two new subdomains of homestarrunner.com: new.homestarrunner.com and trogdorboardgame.homestarrunner.com. It would be good to have interwiki links ([[new:|]], [[trogdorboardgame:|]]) for both for ease of linkage. Lira (talk) 06:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Personal tools