Talk:Warrior Cats Wiki

Useful Links

 * Warriors Wiki Goals(Talk)

Advertising

 * Friends of the Warriors Wiki

Click the images, the URL to use for linking to the image (which should then be linked to this site) are available in the image summary.

Color Overhaul
I'm working my way through changes and updates to the Main Page. It's including image updates and the like, so it might take awhile. I'm taking a break now, but the rest will come today. Still a ways to go, plus the Cat Characters Template and Book Template will be overhauled to match the Main Page. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 16:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The Book template is not only updated now, but it's been tweaked to match the much more attractive character template, AND has acquired some conditional variables (things that only show up if we have information for them). I've also opened discussions on the Cat Character Template about some possible changes to be implemented for those. I'm really interested in improving template-ing for the site and putting together multiple more specific versions that would be highly beneficial to making things look better than ever before. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 12:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles For Deletion
All votes MUST be signed to count, and include a statement of YAY (delete) or NAY (do not delete).Voting will close in 1 week following opening, or when it is felt that the majority of active contributers have cast votes and a 24 hour final call has been given.

Share tongues (CLOSED)

 * YAY Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 02:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC) This page has no potential to be anything other than a stub.
 * NAY. This article can eventually be a more detailed version of whatever we put on General Clan Information. If it is deleted, however, then I want us to have the option of recreating it if more information is given on it in new publications. Hobbes15 ( Tiger Headquarters ) 15:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Unlike Wikipedia, should enough information show up, re-creation is always an option (We're a small community). I seriously don't feel that a simple phrase that means "have a conversation and groom one another while doing so" will ever amount to a proper article. It's why I pulled it for deletion possibility. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 15:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * YAY It should move to the General Clan Information page. Aurorastar 22:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Dosen't even have to be moved, it's already there ;) Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 02:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Results
2 votes of YAY, 1 vote of NAY. Share tounges will be eliminated.
 * Hobbes - Should you feel that you've put together a solid article for it, that's worry of inclusion, just print it to you Namespace, and we can move it if everyone agrees (Just create a header here 'Articles for Un-deletion' and post a link to it, and we'll vote again). Or... Suggest a better process if you feel there's one out there. This is the first time where we might have an un-delete, so the process will have to develop with us the way our Delete policies did.

Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 14:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Twolegs

 * YAY Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 00:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC) No potential for every reaching a true level of quality or usefulness that can't be fulfilled by other pages.
 * YAY NAY Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 00:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * STRONG NAY. I don't even see how we can think of deleting this&mdash; Twolegs play such a major role in the novels (e.g. the destruction of the old forest) that I don't think this should even be nominated. Hobbes15 ( Tiger Headquarters ) 15:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Humans have had an impact on the forest, but they've got no feature-able characters, no significan't personality as a group, and frankly... I didn't see much possibility for useful expansion. *shrugs* The vote will tell in the end. *wink* It's why we have a process that lets everyone speak. Polar opposite opinions can be held about the same article by two people. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 15:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Can I change my vote?  Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 19:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. Strikethrough your original vote, and put your changed vote in under it. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 14:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Very Weak NAY/Unsure I see the point on both sides. This article can be very difficult - if possible at all - to get up to the kind of quality we need of it, but Hobbes has a point in saying that Twolegs play an integral part in the series, particularly TNP. Kistu, you mentioned other pages that the information that would be on the Twolegs page can also be on with as good as, if not a better effect. Could you please specify? Thanks! Gorse 23:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The twolegs doings are covered all over the site already, on the pages about the books and characters. There aren't really any twolegs that are actual characters. The books treat them as a sort of bogey-beast, beyond touch. If anything, I'd say include them on a predators page, but much like the prey animals, I don't think they really warrant a page of their own. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 23:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Nay I see Fox's point but twolegs deserve an artcile of their own BECAUSE they are mentioned in almost all the books.
 * Oops. Forgot to sign... Aurorastar 23:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * But, despite mention in every book, we don't have a seperate article for mice. and we certainly don't need them. I think this approch applies to Twolegs, who are mentioned about as frequently as mice (less, I'd say). Do they really warrant an article of their own? Can we acctually create a QUALITY article about them? I still don't think so. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 02:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Policies for Approval
Since it's really time that the WWiki begin to document the policies everyone is going to be sharing. As part of the process, running approvals on our policies and creating a consistent voice for our policies will be an important step in the process.

PROCESS
 * 1) Draft of policy is posted for discussion.
 * 2) Discussion remains open for 1 week, or 24 hours after discussion dies down, whichever comes first.
 * 3) Edits are preformed in accordance with discussion.
 * 4) Repeat 2 & 3 as frequently as needed until there is little to no significant discussion.
 * 5) Policy should be edited into a final draft.
 * 6) A Yay or Nay vote is held on the final draft.
 * 7) If the policy is passed, it becomes official, if the policy is not, further actions (such as repeating this process or completely re-drafting or dropping the policy idea) can be taken.

Unreleased Books (Discuss)
This policy originally developed in response to the requirement that pages be protected from trolling vandals who felt that phrases like "I hope this book is as good as the one before it" were meaningful inclusions to the page. I don't know if anyone has anything they think should be changed/added/subtracted, but that's what this process is for. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 14:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Help:Book Covers (Discuss)
Before I start, this one will be moved to the Policy Namespace as soon as we are ready for the final voting phase. This was originally put into place to make the cover galleries look nice since all the covers end up approximately the same size. Naming conventions make it easier to get file names without having to look them up. So, it's time to discuss and make it official in the eyes of the whole community. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 14:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Categories for RP Characters
CoSC Character's Category

I had already planned this sort of category for established RP games in the Role Play Phenomenon section before there were people to question me and offer alternate points of view, and until someone brought this one up I didn't consider that their would be any distention as to the suitability of the Wiki for storing information relating to the Fanon Characters created on games that have been around long enough to prove they have staying power. So.. I figured it was appropriate to open a discussion if the idea before doing any further implementation on the idea.
 * YEA I thought about it and the banner does say "and surrounding internet phenomenon".  Eu 01:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Vote hasn't exactly been called yet, Eu. The topic has hit the floor for discussion and people to get thoughts and feelings out. Sometimes discussion and the ideas of others can acctually change opinions, so it is an important step in the process. Particularly when you have a fairly small community that can take the time to really discuss things. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 12:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Oops... sorry. Got a little carried away.Eu 21:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

VOTING (OPEN)
Vote YAY (Permit established RPs to post fanon characters) or NAY (Do not permit established RPs to post fanon characters) and sign with ~.


 * YAY Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 13:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC) Clearly marked Fanon characters could be an asset to this Wiki. The online community is a huge part of the fandom as a whole, and deserves respect and a place here.
 * YAY Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 14:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC) Now I can vote.

I'm not sure that I want to do this... Because the contributer who had the concerns hasn't spoken at all so far on this, but... 48 hours and this vote will be closed. I'll give ET a poke on their Userpage to get their attention. Don't want them to miss the vote/discussion on their own issue. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 12:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * YAY It would make the RP articles better in my opinion. Aurorastar 22:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Feature Article Frequency
Since we have no set rules for this, we should really establish a time-frame for our feature articles.

THE CHOICES
 * Weekly - You favor a feature period of one week.

:Weekly ~
 * Bi-weekly - You favor a feature period of two weeks.

:Bi-weekly ~
 * Monthly - You favor a feature period of four weeks, or one month.

:Monthly ~
 * Other - Specify another timeframe.

:Other SPECIFY-HERE ~

VOTING (OPEN)

 * Monthly Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 23:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Weekly Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 18:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC) I feel that having the same article for a month would get... kinda old after a while.  A week seems like a better choice, seeing as it is not too short, and not too long.
 * Bi-Weekly seems like a good time-frame for us, seeing as we don't have many articles approaching FA quality. However, I think the intros should be beefed up Wikipedia style so that they're a quick summary of the cat. Otherwise, we'd have a rather large Main Page. And I support changing this to a more frequent time period once we get more FA output. Hobbes15 ( Tiger Headquarters ) 00:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem with that is it would raise the position of the spoiler tag, leaving NOTHING above it. I suggest bringing it up on the project for further discussion. Good lord... I hope this dosen't turn into another 'no consensus' vote... Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 01:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Monthly Just given the fact that we have so few articles that are at the full quality we'd want for FA status, I think it's best if we do it much less frequently for now. We don't want people to be rushing to slap together barely passable articles just so we can have a new one up for the Featured Article. Once we start finishing more articles, then it might be a good idea to re-vote for a more frequent change. However, for right now, I believe monthly is the best choice. Gorse 23:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Monthly Months go by faster than you think... Aurorastar 22:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler Warning Tag Colors
After a long discussion on Startspoiler Talk, the time has come for a vote.

THE CHOICES

VOTING CODES
 * Use the codes here to vote for your choices.Any personal comments should go AFTER the voting code.

VOTE (OPEN)

 * Bluey-Purply Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 18:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC) Will compliment the new scheme without clashing.
 * Dark Greens Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 18:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Dark Greens. Hobbes15 ( Tiger Headquarters ) 00:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Bluey-Purply Gorse 01:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC) I honestly think Really Minty is the most visually appealing, but it just doesn't mesh with the color scheme as well. You have to consider the color scheme, which is one of the reason I don't like Dark Greens. WWiki just seems to be working with pastel-ey colors, and Dark Greens... Really sort of jars the consistency, not to mention it really doesn't visually appeal.
 * I personally love really Minty but when the same way for the same reasons ;) Thinking about recruiting the really-minty set for the redo of the Unreleased Books tag. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 17:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Bluey-Purply I think it catches the eyes better than Dark Green. Aurorastar 22:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Voting System : Basic
In an effort to clean up the voting system and make it a bit prettier (Eu calls just saying "yay" and "nay" barbaric for some reason, personally, I'd consider it spartan...), I've developed a some templates to make it quick and easy.
 * Template:Vote-basic - The instructions
 * Template:voteyay - to vote Yay
 * Template:votenay - to vote Nay
 * Template:dontvote - to abstain

Consider this both the test run AND the voting for implementation. Should it pass, it will be used on all NEW yay/nay votes we offer. It will NOT be implemented for votes in process.

VOTE (OPEN)
Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 22:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC) Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 22:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC) The only reason I consider it, to quote Kitsufox, "barbaric", is because we have better ways to do it, such as this way. Give me one good reason YAY and NAY are any better.
 * Eu... This is LITERALLY the same exact thing... But with graphics instead. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 22:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's the "same exact thing", but which is more visually appealing?  Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 22:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The only reason I agreed to do it was becuase it will lead to more consistent vote delivery, and more consistent voting instructions. Considering the Talk Pages are for community members and contributers, Improving the looks of them isn't exactly high on the list of things that I worry about the aesthetic of (I save that for the Main Namespace). Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 12:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, it's funny to watch Eu and Fox slightly argue over a plus sign. :) Aurorastar 22:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Glad to ammuse you.;) But you have to admit, I have a point.  Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 22:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep. You do. Still funny though. Aurorastar 23:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow, glad to have someone on my side. Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 23:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's a minor concern, Eu. It looks visually more appealing, but it was something that I could really have made better use of my time than doing. *shrugs* As for you getting "someone" on your side... I disagree and agree as I see fit. I don't pretend things are acceptable just to be non-confrontational, and in the same vein, I accept and openly agree with those things I agree with. You should take the fact that I /did/ this suggestion as a good sign, that I didn't argue against it. And be thankful, at least I always explain the reasons for my dissent with ideas pitched by others (or my reasons for supporting that idea). I don't just say "no, I don't like that" and leave it there. Guys, for read-ability, remember to add the number of colons the person before you used, plus one. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 02:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Feature Article Suggestions
Just creating a place to take suggestions for feature articles. Please start all suggestions of what the feature article should be here, as a sub-topic under this headline.

Articles that get a majority of YAY votes will be featured. Articles are reqruired to have received a minimum of three votes. Articles that have all YAY votes calling for Gold Qualification will receive that qualification (any single active user not granting it will result in no Gold Qualification being earned).

Tigerstar
Tigerstar seems to be a very complete article, having included information from every book he's appeared in. What do you think? Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 13:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

VOTING (OPEN)
Vote YAY or NAY and sign with ~. Please modify your Yay votes to include a Q if you feel this article's vote-in should qualify it for Gold Grade once it's voted to Silver.


 * YAY Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 14:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC) It's nicely written, but worse than Tawnypelt (and if she can't qualify for Gold, then he shouldn't yet, either) as far as layout goes. It needs to be tweaked something fierce. I'll bump this one up my check list for Project Characters, I can tell the concerns are outdated (that stub tag definitely is).
 * YAY Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 14:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC) In case of a tie, my vote can be dropped as nominator.
 * YAY, due to the fact that I can't be too picky ;). Hobbes15 ( Tiger Headquarters ) 22:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

BloodClan
I feel this is a complete article... at least in my opinion it is. What do you think? Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 01:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Voting (OPEN)
Vote YAY or NAY and sign with ~. Please modify your Yay votes to include a Q if you feel this article's vote-in should qualify it for Gold Grade once it's voted to Silver.


 * YAY-Q  Eulalia459678 ( Salamandastron ) 01:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Also, why is it "Q" that we add on a vote to make it silver-grade? Have I missed something?
 * It's "Qualification" for Gold, not a promotion to silver grade. As an article that isn't approved to silver by it's primary project CANNOT acctually become gold status. But they can earn their qualification for it prior to being voted silver. Silver nominations are handled at the project level, not the Main page level. Additionally, please DO NOT use the voting system until it's approved. Considering you didn't post voting rules & instructions for this, I don't even want to call this vote officially open. Without rules, no one but people "in the know" can vote. (Don't worry, I'm posting a set of instructions) And frankly that's just bad form. I nowiki'ed your graphical vote and replaced it with a text one. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 02:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * NAY Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 02:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Needs style work and formating. I'm not even willing to call it a solid bronze, yet. I personally don't want to feature something less than silver quality.

News Submissions
Enter in your suggestions and submissions for news items here in the case that you know something the Sysops have missed and feel should be included. Credit will be given as it is due. Feel free to write the news piece up as you would like it to be in the Newsbox. Kitsufox 18:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)