Warriors Wiki talk:Books

Dates on book timeline....
One same release appears on two different days for the Into the Wild paperback. In 2003, there's March 27. In 2004, there's January 9. Can we fix this? -- Quailflight 10:56, June 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, if you go here there is a browse inside first edition paperback. It says copyright Avon first edition 2004, so I think we can assume the paperback was a 2004 release. The hardback must have been 2003 as that is when the original copyright for the story itself is for, also seen on that page. -- Sandy star 10:00, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

On this topic, there has to be a better way of laying out that timeline than having a half-empty and unprofessional looking page for each year... perhaps one page for the whole timeline? similar to the Events Timeline? What do people think on this? -- Sandy star 10:04, June 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * We should first decide what should we add to the timelines. We can add other things than books - it has a great potential. For instance, meetings with authors, fan meetings, milestones in the Warriors phenomenon (e.g. first RP group created, first fanfic published, major websites started up) etc. We can also list releases of foreign translations. If we have enough material, we can keep separate pages for years. Helixtalk 10:45, June 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * I was thinking of that we merge all the years together or something. Just turn the timelines into one big article. Skip months, and Instead of Leaving every space blank, We go something like this:
 * Year (In 2nd heading).


 * Month Day: What happened. Quailflight  19:01, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I forgot to say it would cut down on article size. Quailflight  19:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I forgot to say it would cut down on article size. Quailflight  19:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Can I get some feedback on my proposal? Thanks :) Helixtalk 17:27, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Lol, sorry, I ignore this page too much. I think that's a good idea, Helix, it would really allow the site more depth in terms of the other aspects of the fandom, which were originally intended to have documentation here as well but it got lost in the shuffle as the leadership kept switching I think. We could easily add events such as Erin Hunter tour dates, and the stuff you mentioned like the first RP site would be pretty cool if we could find that info somewhere :) insane  brick'd 23:39, June 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the comment! Other things we might add: when did a book surpass a certain number of sales, when did a book get on the top (or at a certain position) of a bestseller list etc. Helixtalk 11:56, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Those all sound like worthy additions to the page/s to me. The question now is how do we want to lay out the page/s? Should it be one page for all years? or one page per year? And how do we want this laid out? Is it best how it is now, or would a more professional style work better, such as some kind of table or template? -- Sandy star 16:24, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

For now, let's keep one page by year; I think there are many items to add (if we added everything we could think of and they still look empty, we can contract them then). About the layout, it is an "one-dimensional" list of items, so a table is not really needed, although I would like to hear your ideas on the table layout. Helixtalk 19:36, June 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, the table idea was more for if all years were being put on one page - which I agree we can leave as it is for now, at least until we know how much information we'll be able to add - so that it could be something like: Event and Date etc etc. But, it's not necessary with the current layout as it is. I would like to make a request that as we add information we need to check the existing data also, beause, as Quail pointed out, some is incorrect. I also think we need to reference these events where possible. -- Sandy star 22:40, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay....I can research the correct day for the release of the Into the Wild paperback. It'll take a while (due to ballet theater and tech week for a show) but will be done. Quailflight  08:11, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

I'll try and have a look at this at the weekend, depending on how much time I have and what I've already said I'll do XD -- Sandy star 22:41, June 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * I edited the 2005 article, adding more releases, and referencing them; tell me if you like it. Helixtalk 20:32, June 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow Helix! That was a great idea! Adding foreign versions would really expand it. Quailflight  09:10, June 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, as you can see I didn't get to it, sorry. Helix, I do like it personally; I think it is much improved =) -- Sandy star 13:39, June 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you all like it. :) Should I continue with the other years, is it OK this way? I feel I might have gone a bit overboard with all those "library binding" versions and such, besides I'm not even convinced the dates are correct (amazon makes mistakes too). In any case, I will work on it this week.  Helix talk 04:33, June 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * No, adding the different versions is fine; I think it adds to the article. It looks fine to me... can this be archived or is there more to say on it? -- Sandy star 14:22, July 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * We should keep it here until all pages are sorted out, so the progress can be reported, unless you wish to archive it for technical reasons, but that's only my opinion.  Helix talk 16:52, July 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's fine. It shall stay. -- Sandy star 21:15, July 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm done with 2003 and 2004; however it's going slower as I expected (mainly because of my limited free time), so I don't know when will all be completed (of course, it will be, eventually). :) Therefore, this can be archived if you wish.  Helix talk 18:35, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Featured Article
Hmm, I mentioned this to Insane briefly a month or so ago; the idea of having a featured article for the other projects besides PC (and excluding PCA for obvious reasons). I was thinking that perhaps we could brainstorm (or mind-map, whichever is more politically correct these days) some ideas concerning this: whether we all like the idea (or if it's me having yet more rubbish ideas XD - feel free to tell me so if you don't like them), what kind of article we'd like to feature - whether this would be a whole book article or sub-articles, ie. cliffnotes, how long we'd like to feature for/how often we'd choose a new article etc. So, plenty of comments, suggestions, ideas are very much welcome here, and sorry for my second large discussion idea at once =) -- Sandy star 16:38, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

I fully support this proposal, actually I have had in mind a similar idea for a long time (I plan to suggest a World article to be a featured one, but first I would like to improve it to an adequate level - will see to it after I return home). All detailed pages should have a chance to be featured, regardless of Project - I understand that in the past we had to focus on PC as it has the most complete articles, but as the other Projects move forward, they can be included as well (and even non-Project articles, like those about authors).

Therefore, Sandy, yours is a perfectly logical and valid suggestion (i.e. giving non-PC articles a chance to be featured and possibly Gold graded), and you know that, so please don't say things like "more rubbish by me" and "sorry for bringing it up", as reading such things cause me pain. :'( And you don't want that, do you? <3

Regarding which article to feature for Books, I'd suggest whole book "packs", i.e. main + cliffnotes + alleg + covers + any other page relating to that book (if there will be such things in the future). For now, I would suggest one of the Field Guides, like Secrets, Cats or Code, because the Cliffnotes of those books are not only good summaries, but also act as excellent reference materials for the whole wiki.

Books (and other project) pages should be featured like any other article (e.g. PC), on the main page in the Feature box. We should have a dedicated page for Feature proposals (or do it via the Community Portal); of course, PC will still be the most popular because of the number and level of articles, but this way all Projects could have a chance. Regarding the Feature box, it should be made a little more prominent - on most wikis, Featured Articles occupy the most important position on the main page, instead of a small box in a corner, and... oops sorry. I'm taking things over again with my ideas. :( I hope I made no one mad - just tell me if I approach things again from the wrong side, and please don't be too angry with me. :)

Kind regards, 91.206.206.28 14:52, June 26, 2010 (UTC) - note: this is Helix not logged in, but I guess you all already figured it out by now ;)

Not much to say that hasn't already been said; I completely support. I think we should feature one book and then have a short summary (like those on Warriors Books) and also links to its related pages (gallery, allegiances, etc.) We might run out of books eventually but we could re-cycle them if necessary. (This all goes for World articles as well) insane  brick'd 21:40, June 26, 2010 (UTC)

This sounds like a neat idea. Regarding having the whole pack featured, possibly the heading could have the full category; i.e: Into the Wild. That way it provides links to all things having to do with the featured book article without us having to manually add them in the summary. Both the cliffnotes and the book article should probably be silver grade if we want to feature them. I don't know about the galleries; you can't really grade a gallery, because all there is are book cover images. I'd say we could feature the article for a month, same as the others; perhaps we could go two/three months with character articles and then one with books? Since there are less book articles than characters. --Bram ble 22:06, June 26, 2010 (UTC)

Helix: shhhh (and you know what I mean by that; I'm not going to change so there's no point; that's just how I am). I'm glad this isn't an awful idea after all =) So, so far we've got the following:
 * featuring a whole 'pack' as such
 * cliffnotes and allegiances must be silver
 * feature for one month
 * alternate with the other projects perhaps on a ratio of one:three, books:characters (that gives us more time to get them up to date considering we are a much smaller work force). If PW has articles to feature then I would suggest it becomes 1:1:2, PB:PW:PC (but that is something to take up over at PW.
 * include a short summary and links

I would suggest that the gallery articles never become silver independently of the book pack (unlike allegiances and cliffnotes, which can), and for gold, the whole pack must have been featured and achieves gold as a whole, when that occassion arises. Is there anything else to add to this?

Ooh, almost forgot: where would be the best place to conduct nominations? I was thinking on this talk page, but if we are to switch between different project feature articles then we need to come up with some kind of 'rota' as such to decide which order the projects wish to go in. -- Sandy star 11:08, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I was actually thinking that we could have three featured articles each month: one for each project. This would give a little more variety for people visiting the main page and also benefit each project in letting them feature more, and overall make it simpler. It would be difficult to rearrage the page to make room for two more feature boxes but there are ways to either make one of the articles display randomly each time you go to the front page, or have some sort of link to switch between them, I think. Other than that I agree with everything that you said. insane brick'd 11:46, June 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm... I like that idea also Insane. Perhaps we could consider having two feature articles per month: one for PC, and the other to alternate between PB and PW (again, this would need to be discussed over there as to whether they are ready to feature articles - if not then we could just change it less often for a while).


 * As for which article to start with... well to me it makes sense to start with one of the 'packs' that already have silver grade cliffnotes to cut down on the work we'd need to do before it can be featured, but I don't really mind. Also: There's no way this will be ready for July... I chose a bad moment I guess, so either it is very late and we keep it throughout August, or we wait until August to feature the first Books article (if we decide to go with Insane's idea of keeping it separate from PC). Wow, I need to stop rambling lol. -- Sandy star 16:35, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Sandy, I won't change either, so bear with me. :) Anyway, seemingly every cat agrees that it is not a rubbish idea after all. Regarding the feature method, both proposals have their merits: In conclusion, I'm fine with both ideas ("sequence", "parallel", or a combination thereof). What really matters is that either way, the Projects will get more exposure, the site will get more variety, and the contributors will have more challenges and goals. Kind regards,  Helix talk 18:11, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Bramble's idea about featuring a single article gives us the opportunity to be flexible, alternating between Projects as necessary, taking in account what they have to offer and avoiding to put pressure on any of them
 * Insane's idea about multiple featuring gives the opportunity for more articles in a shorter time; my concern is that the smaller Projects might not be up to the challenge yet, as Sandy pointed out, but we can work on that

Well, in my opinion World has one article that is silver right now, but two more are going through nominations, and I think they could be featured with minimal work. And if my words haven't shown this, I support the idea. Lightning talk 06:04, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

I also support this idea. ♥Ice shine★  14:24, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so it seems we are all in agreement on this, and Insane I know has been playing around with the layout for the main page. I propose to start a new section for nominating our first article as this is getting long and potentially hard to follow, but shall we nominate with the view to featuring it for the rest of July (starting whenever the vote finishes) or shall we look to August, giving insane (and/or Bramble) a chance to sort out the front page, and us a chance to put more work in on the article? -- Sandy star 14:27, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

August, I'd say. Let's not rush things; rather prepare for it thoroughly - I guess you have enough to do now, with the tweak week organization and all. :) Nice to hear btw that the main page is about to get a facelift (I never dared to propose it, even before the four of us had our little talk) ;) - Insane if you need any assistance with layout coding, I'd be glad to help out. Kind regards,  Helix talk 16:56, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Mmkay I made a little draft of how I think we should do it (assuming we have one FA from each project at a time.) here. The way the tabs look can be fiddled around with.... but isn't it cool? I just discovered that little code yesterday :D insane  brick'd 17:26, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

lol Insane, it is cool. I think we should use that ♥Ice  shine★  14:36, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I agree that we should use the epic tab box, and I kinda hijacked it with seeing how images turned out in it (it may be an idea to use an image where applicable with all this extra space). One point though: is there any way to change the tab heading sizes to make them more... even? (I know, perfectionistic tendencies...sorry) -- Sandy star 16:58, July 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sandy, everything is possible, you know. Changes in appearance, functionality, selecting a tab randomly each time etc. Actually, I wanted to propose a small tweak myself (mostly because of the change of the appearance between active-inactive tab state), but my overwhelm-inhibitor kicked in. ;) Nevertheless, if you / the staff / the contributors have any idea for it, I will be honored to help out, if needed.  Helix talk 18:42, July 7, 2010 (UTC)