Difference between revisions of "LGPedia:Lucy's Balcony"

Revision as of 16:25, 17 April 2007

Your friendly LGPedia admins, Brucker, OwenIsCool, and JayHenry enjoy an unseasonably warm May afternoon on Lucy's Balcony. Not pictured: Jonpro.

Welcome to Lucy's Balcony, a place to ask questions or discuss general issues about the LGPedia. This page is intended to be a place where admins and active editors can discuss ongoing issues, ideas and concerns. To start a new thread, click here. Please remember to sign your posts by typing ~~~~ at the end.

For old or inactive conversations, visit Lucy's archive.

Cast and crew template?

Would a cast and crew template be a good idea? We could have picture, name, birthday, role in series, first appearance/credit and a link to the newly organized production credits. I was thinking it should look like Template:Person, but I'm not crazy about the person template. Perhaps a snazzier "person" template and a new Template:Crew? --JayHenry 22:50, 26 February 2007 (CST)

Yep the Person template could use a little TLC, huh? How would the Crew template be different from a Person template? If it's not too different, perhaps adding a couple of fields to the "snazzed up" person template would do the trick. OwenIsCool 00:02, 27 February 2007 (CST)

I whipped up a potential look for a new character template. If people like, I could adapt it to real people too. The preliminary version is here at Template talk:Test. It looks best in Firefox. --JayHenry 17:30, 5 March 2007 (CST)

I put up a first draft of the crew template at Template:Crew. A test run of it is in place on the Mesh Flinders and the Jackson Davis pages. Input, as always, much appreciated. --JayHenry 12:35, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

Looks goo to me!-BRUCKER (Home/Talk/Contribs) 16:04, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

Bottom indexes

We all like bottom indexes, right? At template talk:Bree's religion we have a prototype sitting around for the religion pages. My only concern with the Bree's religion index is that I don't understand what "related videos" means. Do we want to implement a bottom index for other types of pages as well? --JayHenry 23:01, 26 February 2007 (CST)

I ♥ bottom indexes. Last time I tampered with the one for Bree's religion, I took out the "Related videos" thing altogether. I think we should leave it that way unless someone proposes a good way of determining what a "Related video" is and how that would be useful. OwenIsCool 00:02, 27 February 2007 (CST)

In addition to a "thumbs up" on the bottom indexes, I'd like to say that while I think naming related videos is a good idea, it probably should be done in the body of the page. Rather than vaguely saying "Video X had some info on subject Y," which is what the "related video" concept meant to me, the article should outright say, "In video X, Bree said that her parents were always talking about subject Y." --Brucker 10:00, 27 February 2007 (CST)

Agreed. If it's related, then the article should mention it. I can see how we could use it with location pages -- you wouldn't call it related, but you would say the location appears in: Motel Pool, Breakfast In Bed, etc. Let's go ahead and implement the religion bottom index. --JayHenry 11:19, 27 February 2007 (CST)

hehe, thanks for adding the semicolon to my ♥ and nice work putting the template back on the religion-related pages. OwenIsCool 15:10, 27 February 2007 (CST)

In thinking about a bottom index for locations I tried to create a list of all the locations. Does anyone have input on the two proposed lists? --JayHenry 11:37, 2 March 2007 (CST)

Puzzles

I'd like to always include puzzles in the "Recent Developments" column. Good idea? It could be a way to increase visibility like OIC was talking about at Talk:Miss Me? puzzle. --JayHenry 23:11, 26 February 2007 (CST)

Good idea! I second. OwenIsCool 00:02, 27 February 2007 (CST)

i third, i know im not a admin, but i contrbute as much as i can. --TJ Marsh 01:22, 27 February 2007 (CST)

I like the idea, but just a thought: If a new puzzle comes up within the context of the latest video, the puzzle should be listed below the latest video just so the video is at the top of the list. For instance, the latest puzzle is fine, but it we had listed the "semiotics" puzzle, it should have been below Jonas Sucks. Just my opinion. --Brucker 10:03, 27 February 2007 (CST)

OIC also suggested somewhere that we could use Template:Init with puzzles and possibly all events. I'm wondering though -- puzzles don't lend themselves well to dates; they're not really events. Should we create a separate main page template for puzzles?--JayHenry 00:16, 28 February 2007 (CST)

We'd probably be ok just using the date that the puzzle was "posted" (via video, message, wherever it started). And even though the template is called "event", it looked fine when it was used for the puzzle. Maybe we could just add the Init and perhaps link to the forum thread, and keep them optional? If that's complicating things too much, we could just make a separate template. It shouldn't be too difficult since they're similar. I just care about adding Init, and perhaps the forum thread; it doesn't matter so much to me how we get there. OwenIsCool 19:51, 8 March 2007 (CST)

Vloggers

I've been cleaning up wanted pages and noticed a lot of them are the bloggers Bree mentioned on her early videos. Since they were influences on Bree and also used to gain popularity, I think they should have some sort of joint article. I'd like to start it, but not sure if the already existing "Vlog" or perhaps a new "Vlogging influences of lonelygirl15" or some similar name would be a better place for it?

• Phunck! 17:00, 28 February 2007 (CST)

Taken care of, more or less. I should have done that a long time ago. --Brucker 17:51, 28 February 2007 (CST)

Well, first, I think it's a good idea for an article, Phuncknasty. I could help out. Thewinekone and paytotheorderofofof2 had real articles attached, btw. But, more importantly, I think we need to figure out what we're doing with tags. A lot of the wanted pages are tags. We don't really seem to have a clear policy on where tags should direct or even what videos should have tags. Phuncknasty redirected Lonesome and October to LonesomeOctober but since they were tags on a Tachyon video, OIC suggested this might not be a good redirect. But since we don't really have a clear policy, it's causing some confusion and lots of broken pages.--JayHenry 17:59, 28 February 2007 (CST)

I agree that the tags are sometimes confusing. Maybe we should ask Jonpro because it looks to me like he's the tag master. He has "the vision." I think I'll start work on a vloggers article at Vlogging influences of lonelygirl15, and if you guys want to move it, that's totally fine with me. And I also had another good (I think!) idea... how about a page on Jonas's movie references. I saw the four-letter words page and I thought it'd be cool to have a similar list with short entries of all the times Jonas mentions a movie. Who knows, maybe it adds up to something or maybe it will just be a fun list. But for now, I'm going to start doing research for a vlogging article.

• Phunck! 10:05, 1 March 2007 (CST)

Thanks, Phuncknasty. I think the current policy for official LG15 videos is to put them in Category:YouTube tags and redirect them there if it does not have a page or there is no more logical place to redirect. I was thinking that perhaps instead of this each YouTube tag page could contain a list of which videos have that tag. Doing this manually would be a pain, though, and it would have to be updated for each new video. If there was a way to do it with a template or something that would be ideal. If not, I think the current set-up is fine as well.

For other (non-canon) videos, I see no reason for a category containing their tags, but I see the problem with the broken links. I think the obvious way to fix this is to only have a tag link if a page of that name already exists. The video What's in the Box/Bree & Daniel Update - NBR 3 is a good example, as it links to pages like Bree and danielbeast since they already exist, but not "charlie" and "horus" since they don't. If a useful redirect of page could be made of either one of those, then the tag would be changed to link there.

As far as where to redirect them, I think using disambiguation techniques is the best idea. If a word is clearly ambiguous, make a disambig page for it. Otherwise, simply add a disambig line at the top of the page to link to what the user might be looking for. If a template or something could be made to list the videos that contain a certain tag, then users "searching by tag" so to speak could look at that and find the video they're looking for. Sorry about the long post. Hope this helps.--Jonpro 10:27, 1 March 2007 (CST)

As I hinted at above, I don't think the tags on unofficial videos deserve links in general. If there is a page that's pertinent to the tag, then sure, link there. Sometimes, it might not be a link to what the tags says; for instance, the "house" tag on Where Is Jonas? - NBR 6 should probably be linked to Jonas's house if linked at all, instead of to house, where it currently links. On the other hand, the "squrrel" link probably ought to be dropped. That's my view on the matter of fan video tag linking. -BRUCKER (Home/Talk/Contribs) 17:04, 1 March 2007 (CST)

I agree with Brucker on "un-linking" those fanvid tags that don't pertain to any particular article. OwenIsCool 19:53, 8 March 2007 (CST)

Sidebar

I was thinking of changing the sidebar a bit. My proposal is to break out another "community" section:

• lg15 links the same.
• navigation
  • Main Page
  • List of Videos
  • AphidPedia
  • Recent Changes
  • Random page
• Community
  • Welcome
  • Community Portal
  • Lucy's Balcony
  • Help

Any other ideas? Does that seem like a good idea? --JayHenry 17:32, 5 March 2007 (CST)

Maybe Caping lg15? other then, it would look great. --TJ Marsh 18:40, 5 March 2007 (CST)

I'm sorry, what does "Caping lg15" mean? --JayHenry 10:41, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Capitalizing, perhaps?--Jonpro 14:34, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Ah, so it says LG15 links instead? Good idea! I agree! --JayHenry 14:37, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Yeah, all of them should be capitalized, I think. Those options look good to me, Jay. -BRUCKER (Home/Talk/Contribs) 18:04, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Well, it turns out that the small capitalization is hardwired into the MediaWiki software. It can't be fixed from MediaWiki:Sidebar. Perhaps there's another way to do it, but if so, I don't know how and I don't feel like tooling around all night at MediaWiki.org for the answer. --JayHenry 21:42, 6 March 2007 (CST)

New admin -- Jonpro

I'm pleased to announce that Jonpro has been appointed the newest administrator on the LGPedia. Jonpro has been a reliable contributor to the LGPedia since first arriving in November. He's undertaken the massive task of organizing the YouTube tags on all the LG videos, on top of hundreds of edits fixing pages, keeping our style consistent and keeping things categorized. Congrats, Jonpro. --JayHenry 13:56, 8 March 2007 (CST)

Thanks JayHenry, and I hope I can be a help to everyone. I'm new to this admin thing, but I'm sure I'll catch on :) --Jonpro 15:32, 8 March 2007 (CST)

Kongrats man! --TJ Marsh 18:36, 8 March 2007 (CST)

Template:Tag

What do others think? Would a template like this be helpful? I'm not very good with wording and such, so that might need to be improved, but what do people think of the general idea? Basically, it would be put on every YouTube tag page and |disambig would be added for pages that are also disambiguation pages.--Jonpro 20:15, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

I think it's what we should have done when we first made the tags link 5 months ago. I def like it, but won't it take forever to swap out? I feel bad asking anyone to do that. How many tags are there? 400? More? --JayHenry 20:18, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

At least that many. I wouldn't mind pitching in though, and if we can get a few more volunteers, it really won't take that long. Anyone up for some tedious work?--Jonpro 20:37, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

Hmm... I just thought of one other thing, not sure if it matters. But I think these will all become "articles." That raises two issues: 1) anybody using randompage will get a tag about half the time and 2) it will say that we have over 1,000 articles. Unless anyone knows away around that. Just a thought, i don't really see it as a reason not to go ahead with it. --JayHenry 20:50, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, good point. No solution for #1, but I don't think #2 will be a problem. I'm guessing they'll be part of the "articles that aren't really articles" (stubs, redirects, etc). Not sure, but that's my guess.--Jonpro 20:57, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

The party guests

So as of Uncle Dan and Uncle Dan (D-Bone Remix), we have like 10 new characters. Most of these now have their own articles, which consist of one or two sentences saying that they were at the party. This is bad form... perhaps we could have a page called "party guests" and list them there with short descriptions? Then we could just make their character names a redirect to the party guests page. If one of the characters turns out to have a larger role, we can move their info to a separate page. OwenIsCool 16:44, 16 March 2007 (CDT)

I actually think starting off with a picture would be a great help. I'm having trouble putting faces to the character names.--Immortal1 16:56, 16 March 2007 (CDT)

I got a few pictures up on a few of the pages. -BRUCKER (Home/Talk/Contribs) 18:43, 16 March 2007 (CDT)

costs of a site like this

Just wondering how you guys are doing on donations and what it costs to run a site like this?

Traveling around, doing videos about basic or not so basic life situations sounds like a blast!!

Any hints of how to get started?

thanks! 12.27.187.199 19:03, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Tasks

What do people think of having a page to list tasks that need to be done on the LGPedia? For example, right now there are lots of images in Category:Images of fans and spinoffs that could be subcategorized to make them easier to find. While I could just do this myself, if I don't have the time (or don't want to spend the time), are there other people who are just looking for things to do? Sometimes I think it can be a little unclear what needs to be done on the LGPedia, so having a place that lists things might be helpful. People could add things they want done to the list (maybe these should be verified that they actually should be done) and then when the task is complete it can be removed from the list. Any thoughts?--Jonpro 21:41, 11 April 2007 (CDT)

Hey look, we have a Community Portal. What do you know--I kind of forgot about that. It doesn't look like it's being used that much though, or at least it's not being updated very much. Hmmmm.--Jonpro 23:09, 12 April 2007 (CDT)

Okay, I made LGPedia:Tasks. I guess we'll just see if this works or not. I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this.--Jonpro 23:37, 12 April 2007 (CDT)

I like what you did with LGPedia tasks. You're right, a lot of times there are editors at the LGPedia that aren't sure how to contribute. They either don't do much, or they create other random (though perhaps less needed) work. The Community Portal was supposed to help with that, but you're right, it's not used much. Perhaps something that should be added to tasks or community portal is pages that need to be updated frequently, such as character pages. I don't just means in terms of "last appearance" but as to the content of the article. OwenIsCool 23:40, 12 April 2007 (CDT)

Recent vandalism

I've noticed that there have been a number of vandalism edits from various IP addresses that simply remove a large portion of content from a page. Here are some examples: 1 2 3 4 5 6. Anyway, I think everyone gets the idea. Does anyone know what could be the cause of this? It's not like all the vandalism is coming from one IP address so we can't just block it.--Jonpro 00:04, 12 April 2007 (CDT)

Well, really the only way to deal with vandalism is to revert it when it happens and to block offenders. However, I do notice a similarity between all these addresses. They're all anonymous--a WhoIs lookup provides the country, but is unable to process any abuse reports. These addresses are originating from Mexico and Asia, from ISP's that don't release user information. This is just a shot in the dark, but it could all be the same person coming back through proxies. If this is the case, they should get tired of the molasses-slow internet speed that they must be putting up with, and it will all stop when they do. Then again, OIC is not psychic... this is for entertainment purposes only.  ;) OwenIsCool 01:02, 12 April 2007 (CDT)

Performance issues

I've noticed that the use of alot of templates or included page, can have a big effect on the loading of pages. This can really be seen on list of videos page. does anyone know something that can be be done to improve the performance. -misty 15:31, 12 April 2007 (CDT)

Well, I don't think it's templates or transclusion that's causing the problems on List of Lonelygirl15 videos. No matter how it's organized, with templates or not, the page is simply enormous -- more than 7 times bigger than the Main Page. Other than dumping the videxpand template or really reducing the number of images (or shrinking the size of the actual image files?) there's little we can do. --JayHenry 10:31, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Fate of AphidPedia?

Now that OpAphid is no longer, official. should there still be an AphidPedia section or should it be downgraded to Catagory:OpAphid and removed from the left menu? -misty 02:32, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

We can still keep the OpAphid page, I'm sure. We have pages for other non-canon/non-official ARGs. I don't really know the structure of all the OpAphid pages, but we might want to remove the link from the left menu. I'm not really sure on that. The pages definitely need to be updated to indicate that OpAphid is no longer the official ARG if that hasn't been done yet.--Jonpro 21:43, 15 April 2007 (CDT)

Oh, I missed this conversation. I just came here to ask the same question. I don't think we should delete OpAphid from the Wiki, but we should be sure to note that it is no longer official. And I think we should take it off the sidebar, although if anyone has a good reason it should stay I would listen. --JayHenry 11:25, 17 April 2007 (CDT) 11:15, 17 April 2007 (CDT)