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)

Join Request

 * Can I join? Tot tal lyt awnypelt99 SCHOOLS OUT, FOR THE SUMMA'!

Of course, I'll add you in. -- Sandy star 13:39, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Content Drive
Now that this project has a fair few members, I think that perhaps it is time for a new content drive. I was going to suggest the Warriors Books article which is pretty much the hub of the project in terms of the books and still needs a lot of information filling in, but does anyone else have any other suggestions, or articles they'd rather work on? (This can be cliffnotes, a main book page etc). -- Sandy star 16:38, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Well, there's actually a catagory called Warriors Books. It has mainly Coming Soon after Long Shadows. For Long Shadows, Sunset, Fading Echoes, The Fourth Apprentice, Bluestar's Prophecy, and I think Firestar's Quest are Coming Soon. I agree with you Sandy. We should use this as a content drive. ☼Totallytawnypelt99 ☼ Time to celebrate Greenleaf! 17:07, June 25, 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 ;)