Difference between revisions of "Infosphere:Conference Table/Old format"

From The Infosphere, the Futurama Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(So many responses (and a little spring cleaning)!!!)
(Redirects, part deux)
Line 106: Line 106:
 
:Goph here; I was one of the original proponents of the "no redirects" rule, but I've learned two things since then that have caused me to concider reevaluating my position; it no longer seems so clear-cut. In particurlar, when developing slick, professional infoboxes, things like redirects of 1ACV02 to [[The Series Has Landed]] can be quite useful - combined with parser functions, valid links could be generated dynamically much more easily. Just suggesting maybe we reopen this as an actual discussion of the pros/cons, and put aside the vote for a bit? [[User:Gopher|Gopher]] 11:14, 19 April 2007 (PDT)
 
:Goph here; I was one of the original proponents of the "no redirects" rule, but I've learned two things since then that have caused me to concider reevaluating my position; it no longer seems so clear-cut. In particurlar, when developing slick, professional infoboxes, things like redirects of 1ACV02 to [[The Series Has Landed]] can be quite useful - combined with parser functions, valid links could be generated dynamically much more easily. Just suggesting maybe we reopen this as an actual discussion of the pros/cons, and put aside the vote for a bit? [[User:Gopher|Gopher]] 11:14, 19 April 2007 (PDT)
 
I'm starting to think redirects are okay, but they should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Production numbers are a given. Professionals and convicts: Pros for redirects: easier for users to find what they need; Cons: Using search spits out forty redirects. I hate that about Wikipedia. Just gimme the damn article. It's probably OCD or something on my part, but when it says "Redirected from..." under the article title, I click on "Article" to remove it. I'm probably nuts for hating redirects, but I do. --[[User:Buddy13|Buddy]] 11:38, 19 April 2007 (PDT)
 
I'm starting to think redirects are okay, but they should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Production numbers are a given. Professionals and convicts: Pros for redirects: easier for users to find what they need; Cons: Using search spits out forty redirects. I hate that about Wikipedia. Just gimme the damn article. It's probably OCD or something on my part, but when it says "Redirected from..." under the article title, I click on "Article" to remove it. I'm probably nuts for hating redirects, but I do. --[[User:Buddy13|Buddy]] 11:38, 19 April 2007 (PDT)
 +
:Added a list to allow others to contribute pros/cons, and populated it with all the pros/cons I can think of, including a few which are probably a bit of a stretch. I can think of a lot of pros, though most are minor, but only a few negatives, just off the top of my head. [[User:Gopher|Gopher]] 12:37, 19 April 2007 (PDT)
 +
 +
===Pros===
 +
* Easier searching for common articles with unexpected names ([[Bender Bending Rodriguez]], for example)
 +
* Easier linking to common articles (simply <nowiki>[[Bender]] instead of [[Bender Bending Rodriguez|Bender]]</nowiki>)
 +
* New contributors with good intentions will not be put off
 +
* More friendly with pretty links and external links
 +
* More search-engine friendly
 +
:This might be the clincher for me; we're still doing terribly in the google search results for most topics last time I checked, but I'm no expert on SEO [[User:Gopher|Gopher]] 12:37, 19 April 2007 (PDT)
 +
===Cons===
 +
* Rubs buddy the wrong way
 +
:I think you're alone on the "Redirected from..." pet peeve, buddy, I don't even notice them myself, but we'll see what others say.
 +
* Obfuscates search results
 +
:You mentioned this, buddy, but I'm not sure what you mean. Could you give an example search and it's fuzzy results? Heavy use of redirects and disambiguation pages are a necessary evil on Wikipedia because it's scope is so broad, but it wouldn't be so bad here, I don't think. And note that regardless of our position on redirects, I think we should avoid disambig pages if at all possible.  I can't think of a case where they would be necessary in the Futurama universe. [[User:Gopher|Gopher]] 12:37, 19 April 2007 (PDT)
 +
* Increased load on the server
 +
:Not certain on this, but it's something someone told me on another small, private wiki. Anyone confirm/deny (with facts, not just speculation)?

Revision as of 19:37, 19 April 2007

Good morning, people.

The Conference Table is for discussion of the Infosphere, and proposals for new ideas. For information about upcoming changes to the Infosphere, see Current events.

PE Building Floorplan

I'm asking for help. I have a few key episodes that I know of, but I'd like you guys to take any screenshots you can find (even low quality ones) and mail them to me (check my userpage for the email link). I'd like pictures of known areas of the PE building, covering as much of the floorplan as possible. Like in some scenes, you can see the TV area through the door in the conference room area (and that's pretty consistent, since on the outside, the TV area window is near where the conference table spot should be). Stuff like that. I'm going to start working on a map, and I'm hoping to be as accurate as possible. Areas that are difficult to locate should also be sent, and you can let me know where you think the area is. I'll color-code the map so speculative areas and canon areas are distinguishable. Thanks for the help. Buddy13 FW16.png 14:19, 12 August 2006 (PDT)

Still no screenshots. I've got a few myself, and I'll start sketching out the floorplan. I'll be doing it in SVG, so I can post the work in progress and making changes will be easy. Any comments or such on where you think things are would be helpful. Buddy 21:56, 24 December 2006 (PST)
Still waiting. I will eventually get around to it myself. Like when I have internet at home, which will probably be around the same time the show comes back with new episodes. But if you guys aren't interested in seeing an extrapolation of the floorplan, then okay... --Buddy 11:38, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

ABSG Quota

I was listening to one of the commentaries (forgot which one) and John DiMaggio responded to a character's use of the word "Ass" by saying there had to be a quota for "Ass" and "Bastard". So I had a crazy idea to actually watch the show and count every occurrence, but I also remembered that in other commentaries, they'd said this show has the highest gasp-per-episode rating, and highest slaps as well. So I added them as well. So I started a tally of the number of "Ass", "Bastard", Slaps, and Gasps, and started making a chart. I know it's dumb, but it's fun. You can visibly see the slap count jump when Mom shows up. Anyway, I'm a few episodes into Season 2, and I thought I'd see what people thought of the idea. Here's what I have so far. The first spike is the first Mom episode (A Fishful of Dollars). I can't tell you which colour lines are what right now, but the coloured backgrounds are obviously the seasons. I've yet to add labels to any of it, but I will (in the appropriate Futurama font). Buddy13 FW16.png 11:14, 30 November 2006 (PST)
ABSG.png

Heh heh, that's actually kind of cool. I expect the most "ass"es is going to be War is the H-Word - Quolnok 17:04, 30 November 2006 (PST)
"I can say ass again! Ass, ass, ass!"

Still working on it. Buddy 21:56, 24 December 2006 (PST)

Okay, I now have a computer. I can watch DVD's and edit the SVG file at the same time, which may make this easier. I'm not guarantee'ing anything, because work and homework eat up a lot of time, but I do have next weekend off, so I may get some more of this done. Probably not the whole thing, as I can't watch two and a half seasons of Futurama in a single weekend (maybe if I was really determined), but I'll get a large chunk of it done. I'm not sure if anyone's interested anymore, but I'll finish it anyway. I'm eager to see the numbers for seasons 3 and 4, when I think they'll be the most consistently high... --Buddy 19:14, 19 February 2007 (PST)

I've updated it. I'm still going slow. I've added two more episodes, and added a key/legend to it, as well as labeling the first season (can't remember why I didn't label the others...). I also made it larger (click to see the full size). Anyway, I'm not sure if I'll add a count to the left side (1 through 10) or label each dot as an individual episode. Labeling them would make it easier for other people to check/confirm the numbers, though... Input?

Man, I suck. --Buddy 11:38, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Lists

I think that some categories (such as planets, locations, Farnsworth inventions, non-Farnsworth technology, products, alien species, ships, animals, robots... ) must have an article with a list, as episodes or comics categories. The information in each item must be (at most) a very brief description, an image, and references to episodes. If an item has a bigger description or it is relevant, then it must have its own article linked from the corresponding list item (but preserving the brief description in the list). So, we avoid a possible large amount of short articles. What do you think? Bender22 02:44, 9 December 2006 (PST)

Yeah, you're probably right. (except for robots, those are still in the minor charaters page) - Quolnok 03:04, 9 December 2006 (PST)
Personally, I'd love for everything to have an article of its own. But I think we should start with conglomerate pages, like the minor characters page. As more info is written, sections can be removed to their own pages. I know this won't work for things where very little is known, like Shawn, since an entire article is a bit much just to say "This is Leela's boyfriend that we never see." Anyway... *runs off* —Buddy 21:56, 24 December 2006 (PST)

Main Images

For most of the episodes and articles, the main image (usually the one at the upper right) is named the same as the article, with a .jpg at the end. Should we adopt this as a standard and make sure that all articles follow it? It would make finding images easier, for one thing. And article editors would automatically know the name of the image that goes there... Vote please:


Votes to accept: Votes to decline:

Electricbolttalk FW16.png
Gravemind FW16.png

Looks like this passed, I guess we'll need to start searching through articles and replacing them. The easiest way is to just use {{PAGENAME}}.jpg on the templates, and maybe even on the already-created articles. --Buddy 11:38, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Detailed Cast

Just an idea. How about a detailed cast list for every episode, as in type what characters that the voice actors play in the episode. Since this is a large scale idea, it will probably be declined but it's an idea nevertheless. --The preceding unsigned comment was made by 172.201.33.229

This actually might be a good idea, but could clutter up the ep articles, and adding another article per episode could be a bit much... Ideas on how to work this would be great. --Buddy 12:51, 11 January 2007 (PST)
Perhaps a detailed list per season with subsections for easch episode? - Quolnok 18:41, 17 February 2007 (PST)

I think it should be redesigned, and you? I could try to make a new one, doesanybody have the background Image with the Infosphere? - [email protected]

Personally, I like the current logo, however there may be other designs that are better, more modern and sound more green. Feel free to have a go at making a new one. - Quolnok 15:48, 28 January 2007 (PST)
I snipped the Infosphere out of this image, the light-ray background was created in photoshop (radial gradient, noise-type, bluish-cyan and black) and it's far from perfect. The text is, in order, Dungeon font, Futurama Title Bold font, Futurama Title font, the latter two with Photoshop effects on them to emulate those seen in the show. If you wanna make a new one, go ahead, and we'll vote on new versions here. → Buddy13 FW16.png 11:47, 29 January 2007 (PST)

I'm still open to a redesign, but maybe it'll wait until an upgrade is achieved. --Buddy 11:38, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Other Languages

What do you think of other Languages, do you want them here, and is it possible to put them in? I'd like to start translating some Sites starting with the Characters and or Episode List, so what do you think? [email protected]

I think Infosphere in another language would be good but its Buddy's decision what language were you thinking of starting with [email protected] - Humorbot 0.4 Planet Express Logo.png
Since I'm german, i'd like to start with the German language :)
I think Buddy might be more open to a variant in a language he or another sysop knows, due to the need to keep standards reasonably high. I certainly can't do much for a non-english wiki, unless we write it in a programming language, which we shouldn't. - Quolnok 15:31, 29 January 2007 (PST)

Another language would be great, but I don't have the capability to support multiple languages on the same server like Wikipedia does (at least, I think that's what they're doing)... Alternative solutions would be welcome. Was Futurama dubbed into German? The only languages I know of are Spanish and (Canadian) French. Though I know one of the discs has a special feature and it has about five or six languages on it, so who knows. Pick a random article (or one you really like) and translate it into German. Save it at "Article Name (German)" as a sort of test. Just one article for now. Till then, I'll have to think about it. Mull it over. Let it stew. You know. --Buddy 16:20, 29 January 2007 (PST)

300!

We've reached over 300 articles - Humorbot 0.4 05:32, 24 February 2007 (PST) It's like that movie... What's the one? Oh yeah, War Games. --Buddy 13:18, 23 March 2007 (PDT)

Monobook.css and "pretty URLs"

CSS: I have a proposal for a CSS change (along with a screenshot) on my userpage. Suggestions at its talk page are welcome.

Pretty URLs: I have noticed how this wiki lacks the pretty URLs, if it runs on an apache machine, it would be fairly easy to make it happen. I have done this with tonnes of Wikis of my own.

--Svip 07:36, 8 March 2007 (PST)

A universal template for all appearance articles (e.g. characters/items)

I am proposing an universal template for all articles which describe something that appears in an episode (or more) or in a comic (or more). Its purpose is to keep (and easily update) a general style for all articles. Currently it is all "hardcoded" into each article. A bad option if you ask me. And if you get the parse extension for MediaWiki, you can have if statements and thus if something is unrelated to something (e.g. you don't want "voiced by" on for an item). --Svip 14:16, 9 March 2007 (PST)

Also, I would propose calling the template "infobox", so it is universal right there. Or perhaps "appearance infobox" if you wish. --Svip 14:17, 9 March 2007 (PST)
And of course special templates for comic and episode articles. --Svip 14:48, 9 March 2007 (PST)
Might be good. Always worth a test. - Quolnok 18:12, 17 March 2007 (PDT)
Oh right, I created this (Template:Character_infobox) as an example for how a character infobox could look like. --Svip 04:00, 18 March 2007 (PDT)
Whoops! I scanned but somehow missed this before starting the new infobox section below yesterday. I'm also a big supporter of installing the parser functions extension, if you haven't already (haven't actually checked). The #if function in particular is essential for doing nice-looking, flexible, general-purpose infoboxes. Gopher 08:46, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Navigating season five

Because season five is to be released in a slightly odd manner, groups of four episodes making up four movies, I've done a new batch of Nav templates. These point to both episodes and movie articles. My proposed nav for the DVD movies has two versions on that page, I think the second is the better one, however it does require ten variables to be passed to it, which may result in some confusion for article creators. It's variable numbers will be changed to a more logical order before use. Also because the movie navs may point back at either an episode or a movie I just left the labels as "Next" and "Previous". - Quolnok 18:12, 17 March 2007 (PDT)

Also when the tittles are confirmed we can probably just hard code the movie names to the Devil's Hands nav template (also for 6ACV01 nav, if applicable) - Quolnok 18:18, 17 March 2007 (PDT)
Well they certainly look good I think I prefer the 2nd DVD nav template it would be easier, in my opinion, to use. - Humorbot 0.4 03:18, 18 March 2007 (PDT)
Agreed. Number 2 looks good. It's going to be a long time before they have commentaries, though. ;) --Buddy 13:03, 23 March 2007 (PDT)

Video Clips in Opening Sequence?

By now, I assume you are all familiar with the short clips seen in each episode's opening sequence. Yet, no episode articles describes where these clips are from, cause according to Wikipedia they are from somewhere. Perhaps we should include those? --SvipTalk 17:00, 13 April 2007 (PDT)

Yeah, go ahead and add them to whatever area you think is best. Wikipedia probably is the best source, but the commentaries also sometimes mention where they're from... --Buddy 08:10, 14 April 2007 (PDT)
Hm, but at the same time I felt we should add a better template for our articles, similar to the template I created for characters: Template:Character infobox. So I kinda need your opinion on such templates. --SvipTalk 04:27, 15 April 2007 (PDT)

Thumbnail Size

Am I the only one who thinks our default thumbnail size is way too small? [Gopher]: Gopher 16:46, 18 April 2007 (PDT)

The default size is probably configurable, but you can also adjust your personal thumb size in your preferences section. Mine is set to 180px, which I assume is the default, since I don't remember changing my setting. --Buddy 11:38, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Infoboxes?

How would everyone feel about introducing infoboxes for the standard article types, to supplement the existing article seed templates? Consitent formatting is only half the battle, our articles tend to be a bit unprofessional-looking compared to other immitation-worthy wikis (wikipedia, Starbase Alpha). Using Jurassic Bark as a guinea pig, I've set up a simple infobox and moved some of the common information to it. If people like the idea, we'll tweak the infobox a bit first and when everyone's happy, I'll start building the formal infobox templates. [Gopher]: Gopher 16:46, 18 April 2007 (PDT)

I think I looks good and we could use the character infoboxes Svip has created too - Humorbot 0.4 08:10, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Redirects, part deux

Goph here; I was one of the original proponents of the "no redirects" rule, but I've learned two things since then that have caused me to concider reevaluating my position; it no longer seems so clear-cut. In particurlar, when developing slick, professional infoboxes, things like redirects of 1ACV02 to The Series Has Landed can be quite useful - combined with parser functions, valid links could be generated dynamically much more easily. Just suggesting maybe we reopen this as an actual discussion of the pros/cons, and put aside the vote for a bit? Gopher 11:14, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

I'm starting to think redirects are okay, but they should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Production numbers are a given. Professionals and convicts: Pros for redirects: easier for users to find what they need; Cons: Using search spits out forty redirects. I hate that about Wikipedia. Just gimme the damn article. It's probably OCD or something on my part, but when it says "Redirected from..." under the article title, I click on "Article" to remove it. I'm probably nuts for hating redirects, but I do. --Buddy 11:38, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Added a list to allow others to contribute pros/cons, and populated it with all the pros/cons I can think of, including a few which are probably a bit of a stretch. I can think of a lot of pros, though most are minor, but only a few negatives, just off the top of my head. Gopher 12:37, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Pros

  • Easier searching for common articles with unexpected names (Bender Bending Rodriguez, for example)
  • Easier linking to common articles (simply [[Bender]] instead of [[Bender Bending Rodriguez|Bender]])
  • New contributors with good intentions will not be put off
  • More friendly with pretty links and external links
  • More search-engine friendly
This might be the clincher for me; we're still doing terribly in the google search results for most topics last time I checked, but I'm no expert on SEO Gopher 12:37, 19 April 2007 (PDT)

Cons

  • Rubs buddy the wrong way
I think you're alone on the "Redirected from..." pet peeve, buddy, I don't even notice them myself, but we'll see what others say.
  • Obfuscates search results
You mentioned this, buddy, but I'm not sure what you mean. Could you give an example search and it's fuzzy results? Heavy use of redirects and disambiguation pages are a necessary evil on Wikipedia because it's scope is so broad, but it wouldn't be so bad here, I don't think. And note that regardless of our position on redirects, I think we should avoid disambig pages if at all possible. I can't think of a case where they would be necessary in the Futurama universe. Gopher 12:37, 19 April 2007 (PDT)
  • Increased load on the server
Not certain on this, but it's something someone told me on another small, private wiki. Anyone confirm/deny (with facts, not just speculation)?