Warriors Wiki talk:World

Red Text on timeline
So I was on the Timeline page and I was wondering why exactly the big bold red text is up there saying the page is undergoing editing. The reasons I got on chat didn't really make sense to me. One was that it's constantly being edited as the books come out, but so are half the character articles. Why put it on only here? And another was that it's to scare off the n00bs who'd majorly mess up the code, and if that's the case, couldn't there be a cleaner way to do it? Like small italics, or some of that hidden text on the page (which I think it might actually already have) or even just locking the page to anons? The big red text just makes it look messy, unfinished, and slightly n0by in my honest opinion. So is there any chance of it being changed? It's been here for over a year (at least as long as I've been here) and I've always hated it. 02:28, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, I think we should delete it. There is already a "comment" in there saying: Do NOT edit the timeline unless you know what you are doing!. Sounds clear to me. I'll go and delete the red bold text if no one else has any objections. I also think locking the page to anons is a good idea. (Both timelines) 02:56, 09, 03, 2012

Okay, let's take this from the perspective of a new user. Honestly, I did not read the notes at the top of the page, nor did I really take notice of any warning. Like always, we assume good faith in the edits made though, I feel like the red text is an eye popper. Let's take Brightheart for example. There is a note saying that we should not change the eye color as it's the only one we have a cite for. Anons and new users alike still try to change the eye color whether they are just trying to provoke us, or they really didn't read the note, and by assuming good faith, we can take it as they didn't read the note. I don't know, I would honestly rather find way to switch it rather than delete it all together. Locking the page is unnecessary, the history of the page shows only 10 edits undone. I would not put a protection on the page due to assumptions of edit wars when the past shows none of that. 05:10, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

Atelda's point is good. Unless we add notes in the article everywhere, how can we fix it? Any ideas? 01:22, 11, 03, 2012

I think that the red text should be deleted. When I joined the wiki, I once wanted to edit the page (trying to add something to the events), and I was scared to edit it. I don't want others to feel that way. This is a wiki, we need to assume good faith, and the text symbolizes to new users that they cannot edit the article. At least, that's what I thought a long time ago. And plus, if somebody does make a bad-faith edit (or simply, a mistake), then we can revert it. That's what we've got rollbackers for, and even, any other user. 18:40, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Good point Stoney. If a new user has something they want to add to the timeline (factual), there shouldn't be any grudges against them. Everyone here was once a new user, and if you look at some of the great contributers on this wiki, it's hard to imagine that they were once one of us. Anons are different, they might have been contributing here for ages, but until they make an account, they are still considered an anonymous user. No one has the right to be threatened by a bold, big, red text on timeline pages. 01:19, 17, 03, 2012

I mean...honestly. It says that the article is undergoing editing. There are plenty of other articles that need to be worked on (all, actually, just some more than others), and those articles don't need the big red text saying that the article is undergoing editing. So, there's no actual good point for having it there, at least that's my opinion. =/

Also, if the text is there to warn n00bs of editing it, we're pretty much assuming bad-faith when it even isn't needed. So, we're assuming that any n00b (that we haven't seen edit, so we can't assume anything right away) will mess up coding. Calling someone "N00b" and "newbie" means that that person is new, not a person who doesn't know things. I'm pretty sure that it should be removed, y'know, just incase it's scaring off a newer user (New users can be helpful? Who says they can't be?), and that's not the way it should work in a wiki. 02:30, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

I suggest that we could take the text off for a while, maybe a fortnight-3 weeks (if no major problems occur), and see how it goes. If we need to keep revert edits by anons and new users, or any user in general, then we can put the text back up. Otherwise, we can just leave it as it is. Opinions? 06:21, 23, 03, 2012

I don't necessarily believe that we're scaring off new users nor do I believe that we are we assuming bad faith by having it there. The text doesn't say not to edit, but instead is meant to be a precaution to those who do wish to edit it. And by precaution, it's just informing the user of the amount of coding within the article itself. I do agree, however, that the text may be a bit much. I'm all in favor of replacing it. It's overall not a real target for vandal activity. 01:59, March 24, 2012 (UTC)

April FA
Gee, it's the 9th already! Time to decide a FA. Some past suggestions were Whispering Cave, LeopardClan and Deputy. Atelda and I discussed Clan Terminology as a possibility, but we're very open to new suggestions. 04:32, 09, 03, 2012

I'd like Deputy, but how about General Clan Information? I think it could be used as the April FA, but seeing that it needs a few references, I don't think it would qualify for gold, unless, of course, somebody works on it in the meantime. 03:18, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

General Clan Information is a possibility, (We'll come to who thinks it should qualify in the voting, this is after all just a FA) Anyone can work on it if you like. 07:47, 14, 03, 2012

I added a few cite tags to General Clan Information's article, just so if anyone wants to work on it, and knows what references to find. I'll try working on it myself. 01:35, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

So any other opinions? 05:59, 19, 03, 2012

I've already given my suggestion, however, I want to deter the making an article the Featured article when it has it's references missing. I don't mind expansion to an article but without references, I could say something completely wrong and then just put a cite tag. If an article becomes an FA, we should know that all the information is true and cited. 12:53, March 19, 2012 (UTC)

Very true Atelda. I have to agree with you, FA's should be complete. If someone works on General Clan Information in the next month, it could be a possibility to think about it being featured. 09:08, 20, 03, 2012


 * Oh yeah, I like LeopardClan, but it could use some more references, otherwise Clan Terminology. 00:44, 21, 03, 2012

I also like LeopardClan. 22:48, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

I like LeopardClan as well. 22:26, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

LeopardClan, as well as references and citations, needs a description section as stated in the guidelines. It's debatable about having a territory section for LeopardClan too. Just saying. 22:39, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

Alright, the vote has to go up this week. So far LeopardClan has 2 likings, Deputy 1, Clan Terminology 2. However, LeopardClan is incomplete, so Clan Terminology is in the running so far. (Hope I counted right) Any other opinions? 03:00, 26, 03, 2012

SkyClan - Silver Nomination
It's been quite a while since I've nominated something in this project. Anyways, comments? 21:38, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

Can ya add more references to the description. This looks great. 21:40, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, just add more references in total. Awesome job on the history. 23:58, 17, 03, 2012

Rejoin
May I rejoin the project? I know I was removed due to inactivity but I would like to rejoin. 16:51, March 18, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, welcome back! You can check on the guidelines to see if anything's changed since you left. Just remember to be active. ;) 05:25, 19, 03, 2012

A template for Nursery
I made a template for a project :O. Jokes aside, I created this template for the Nursery page. The purpose was just to simplify the coding and I think I achieved it. I'm also pretty sure it works, I tried it out here. The explanation of the implementation is also there. If the community agrees, this can be made into an official template, and used on the page.

Kind regards, 09:21, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

That looks really good Lightning. It makes it much easier to use/edit, expecially with users who haven't got much experience with WikiCode. If possible, could you make it stand out more where the new Queen starts, if you know what I mean. Otherwise, thank you for your hard work! 06:16, 23, 03, 2012

Thanks, and I think I can make the border thicker, but the code as it is is an exact copy of the code on the Nursery page, so I'll prefer keeping it that way. I'll make an official template and add it in, then.. 20:13, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea for the page. It'd be organized and easy to edit. 12:29, March 25, 2012 (UTC)

Rejoin
Hello. I'd like to rejoin the project. 22:45, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back, please refresh upon the guidelines. 23:17, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Ducksplash- Request To Join
May I Join? DuckSplash Talk  03:33, March 24, 2012 (UTC)

Of course, please read the guidelines. Welcome to the project. 04:05, March 24, 2012 (UTC)

Windover Road vs. Thunderpath
Should we consider a merge? Windover Road is incomplete, and all its information is covered in Thunderpath. It says on the former's talk page that a merge should be considered, so where do you all stand on this? 20:40, March 25, 2012 (UTC)

I think that it should be merged. Thunderpath should probably get a section called "Windover Road" but I don't think a whole page for Windover Road is necessary.

I am agreeing to this as well. It doesn't have much detail to it, and it would make a good little addition to the Thunderpath page =3 00:10, March 26, 2012 (UTC)

Mmhmm. I gotta gree to this as well. Everything's been stated above. ^^ 00:12, March 26, 2012 (UTC)

I'm agreeing here. However, there it is stated already on the Thunderpath page under In the Forest about Windover Road, so I'm not quite sure about adding a new section called "Windover Road". 03:11, 26, 03, 2012