LGPedia:Lucy's Balcony

From LGPedia
Revision as of 01:17, 31 March 2009 by Kevin (Talk | contribs) (Creating Attention-grabbers page)

Jump to: navigation, search
If you cannot access this page for whatever reason, please use LGPedia:Emma's Hideout
Crystal clear irc protocol.png
This talk page contains one or more discussions that have not yet been resolved. Feel free to add your own comment to these discussion(s) or remove this template once the discussion(s) have been resolved. The discussion(s) are Final Community Content Suggestion .
A couple of LGPedia admins (Jonpro & Phoenician) take a breather to admire the view from Lucy's Balcony.
Zoey, one of your LGPedia admins, frolics with the doves on Lucy's Balcony.

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.

Character Pages Discussion

Okay, so there's been some talk as to the condition of the character pages we have here on the Pedia. Just bring everyone up to speed, here's what's been said so far:

Zoey, I've been pondering this for some time and thought I may as well ask you about it. Why is it that we do an entire "story so far" on every main character page? Wouldn't it be easier to just highlight the big stuff under "background" and pay more attention to keeping up the The Story So Far.... I mean, it just seems like our character pages are going to be so huge that no one will read the entire thing when we could be using the really good parts of each character background to make a really awesome page for our story so far, plus it would be less work for each character page and more people would actually edit our story so far page instead of it being left for months without any work done to it. I hope that all makes sense as now I'm looking at it and seems quite long, anyway, it's not that big of deal, just thought I'd throw that out there. Nancypants 19:20, 19 February 2008 (CST)
I think you have a completely valid point. I've actually been pondering implimenting something to that effect for a long time. The only thing is, I couldn't figure out how to do up the characters' pages so that this would work. Do you have any ideas... maybe a mockup of a page idea so I (and others) can kind of get a better idea of what exactly you have in mind? I'd love to see it! --Zoey 14:55, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
OK, this is proving harder than I had thought it would be. It's difficult to decide what to do with it. Maybe we should start a discussion or something to get other people's input because I really do think it would be better to have the character pages be shorter, but I don't know where to start! By the way I'm not going to be able to do quite as much editing as I have been because people at work are getting suspicious. :( Nancypants 19:07, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

So yeah -- thoughts, people? --Pheon 11:38, 11 March 2008 (CDT)

Well, first I think we should get rid of any sections that are covered in other places (ie: Daniels relationship section and Jonas's fan activity section) and just put links to them at the bottom with the theory links. EDIT: I have made a fake Daniel page here so if anyone has ideas please feel free to mess around and change things, it's just my sandbox. Nancypants 20:36, 13 March 2008 (CDT)

Now that I've had time to look over the proposed page, I must say, I like it! - Shiori 12:54, 12 April 2008 (CDT)
I rather like the page too! I think it needs to be fleshed out in some parts (don't ask me where! if I could put my finger on it, I'd totally tell you! lol)... I just feel like it's a bit bare... but really... it's SO on the right track! --Zoey 11:03, 21 April 2008 (CDT)
NOTE: Since Nancy seems to have taken a hike, I'm considering taking this up again. I think we're in desperate need for this kind of thing on some pages, especially as characters span series. If anyone has anything further to suggest on this, please do. - Shiori 08:14, 16 March 2009 (CDT)


This probably isn't a good move, but I'd like to request a consideration of me being moved to admin. There are SO many changes that I'd like to see made to this wiki but I personally can't do anything as a regular editor. You can review my edits, etc. Just please think about it and get back to me here, anyone who could make that change. (Also, I was formerly SilverBULLETx3 as well.) Kevin 09:54, 16 January 2009 (CST)

"Current shows, former shows"

Over on the sidebar, it has "Current shows: LG15: The Resistance", and "Former shows: lonelygirl15, KateModern." This obviously does not apply anymore. What it should say is:

K, thanks! Kevin 15:28, 12 February 2009 (CST)

Actually, it should be:

--FH14 16:45, 12 February 2009 (EST)

New Layouts (sort of)

I'm creating this section to discuss all of the layouts on the Pedia, minus the Portals and main pages. Most layouts need some SERIOUS updating; they look like a rainbow threw up on them, and don't match anything. Shiori 08:03, 16 March 2009 (CDT)

Character pages

I designed a new layout for the character pages. The only main differences are the edited Characterbox template to match the portal pages better (and unify font sizes and colors), and the abolition of those stupid stars on the page's subheaders. I'm open to suggestions, although I am rather fond of the way I set up the Characterbox template. Shiori 08:03, 16 March 2009 (CDT)

I like them a lot. Though the images for the Supporting Characters seem really small to me... --FH14 14:42 16 March 2009
I enlarged the images a bit; I can't make them too much bigger, since the main characters are supposed to have larger images, but it does look slightly better now. - Shiori 13:45, 16 March 2009 (CDT)
Looks good to me. --FH14 14:50, 16 March 2009 (EST)

Now that we can do stuff logged in again, I'm going to wait for some more comments on this. If I don't hear any major complaints, and can't find any pages that would be severely harmed by the newly updated version of the template, I'll put it up some time next week. Shiori 13:51, 30 March 2009 (CDT)

Creating Attention-grabbers page

Per the original discussion here, Zoey acknowledged the fact that the Use of Sex page is rather long and unnecessary. In response, I half-heartedly suggested that the best way to alter the page would be to create a page listing ALL of the attention-grabbers the Cs have ever used in the various series. The more I'm thinking about it, the more I think this was a good idea. Basically, I'm thinking of combining these pages into one: Use of sex in lonelygirl15, The thumbnail trick, Gunplay, Four-letter words, and a reference to Strange tags. (Jonas in a Bathtub should probably get added in to the sex information, too.) Some other pages could be added into this page, but I figured I'd open it up to everyone before I do anything. Shiori 08:33, 16 March 2009 (CDT)

I like the idea. Go for it and I'll help in whatever ways I'm needed.   •Kevin•   20:17, 30 March 2009 (CDT)

Final Community Content Suggestion

With the death of the previous two discussions on this subject, I bet everyone thought it would be left at that. However, I think we can all agree with Zoey's original opinion that something needs to be done to clean up existing content to get it to Pedia standards, as well as giving new series a guiding hand in how to cover their stuff on here.

So, I came up with some general guidelines, which are only slightly different than we had before, and yet vastly superior in ease of use and understanding.

Community Video Series

All series will be permitted one page. In order to have a page on the Pedia, the following information should be available: start date, URL where the series can be watched (only necessary for still-available series), and a short summary. These elements may be expanded upon, but generally these would be wanted for a page. A one-liner page will be subject to deletion if it offers no good information about the series and cannot be expanded.

The series can have one of THREE classifications:

  • Basic coverage - the default for all series. Series with this coverage are not allowed to have secondary pages for characters information, videos, or puzzles. (The sections other than video list are allowed, but must be on one page. There will be limitations on how much depth these can go into. Including a video list on a page will require an individual, or a group, to come forward as the official updater(s) of the page - for this coverage level only.)
  • Partially-full coverage (characters/videos/puzzles) - Series with this classification are allowed secondary pages for character information OR videos OR puzzles. (Two coverage categories are allowed, but all three is the same as full coverage.)
  • Full coverage - Series with this classification are allowed to expand freely as their content maintainers deem necessary.
Automatic Re-classification:
  1. Series can be automatically re-classified if an element of the series is featured by the Creators. Only the element that was featured will be elevated, so, for instance, if a video is featured, the series will only be granted full coverage for the video section. (If only one video is featured, we may want to limit the transcribing to only that video; I haven't decided on this yet.) Featured content will get its own category.
  2. Re-classification can also be automatic if an element of the series is shown as canon, as was the case with Paul & Andrea. Only parts shown as canon will be re-classified, although two or more sections being deemed canon will escalate to full coverage. (Paul & Andrea showed the videos and characters to be canon, so they would get full-coverage.) Canon content will be categorized as such.
NOTE: In order to take advantage of automatic re-classification, a user must link to, or reference where the series was featured/canonized. If a link or reference is not provided, a discussion is the only way to get the series re-classified.

Singular Videos

All videos will be listed on a single page with a one-line description and a link to the video. If the video is featured or deemed canon, it will be allowed a page for its transcription and will categorized accordingly. Many of the same guidelines that would apply to series would apply to the individual videos, such as a minimum content requirement.

General Notes

  • All UGC content will receive a box on their talk pages, describing what category they are (with a link to the descriptions of each), and the justification for it.
  • Content can be escalated beyond what happens automatically, but a consensus is required to do so. There will be a discussion page for all UGC content for this purpose, and once a decision is reached, an archive of the discussion will be posted on the talk pages.
  • A "starter template" will be created for both series pages and video pages, so we'll be able to unify the look of pages easier. I've created a preliminary idea of what the series template would look like here.
  • Also pertinent to this discussion would be whether we want to officially rename the UGC category to something more acceptable, such as "Community Videos" and "Community Series" (with Series being a sub-category of Videos, and both remaining a sub-category of Fan Stuff)
  • Another idea is whether we want to in some way differentiate series that relate to LG15, or go off in their own direction. I was thinking categorization may work, although even listing them in separate sections on the same listing could work, as well.


Feel free to expand on these. They're just a preliminary drawing up, after seeing where people disagreed in the last discussions and trying to resolve those issues while still striving for better content coverage. - Shiori 13:18, 30 March 2009 (CDT)

It's certainly thorough. I agree that something needs to be done, and the guidelines that have just been proposed are the most fair that have been... well, proposed. The major problem I'd like to address is something that Shiroi touched on in the guidelines, and that is incomplete pages. The purpose of this is not for content creators to get their work featured only for no one to update and maintain the area. Also, series's that deviate completely from the LG15 canon have no place on the LGPedia (a la Sofia's Diary and Forevergrace) except for special circumstances (a la With the Angels). --FH1415:15 30 March 2009 (EST)
One key factor is that anyone who wishes to mess with older series should invest the time to thoroughly research and view the entire series before moving stuff around. If you have not done that then you are not an authority on the subject and might do serious damage to LGPedia as an archive of valuable information in what you might think is an attempt to simply clean things up.--modelmotion 14:06, 30 March 2009 (CDT)
mm has a serious point, as I didn't realize how involved HSA was until I got down into it. The real problem is some of the series are no longer available for whatever reason, and we're lacking contributors with knowledge on the subject. That's pretty much why I felt the need to make that long post on LG15 Today.
And, FH14, that was in my original proposal, but I didn't want to throw it out there without admin support, since that was never thoroughly discussed in the previous proposals. Shiori 14:31, 30 March 2009 (CDT)
FH14 said "Also, series's that deviate completely from the LG15 canon" - That has just never been the way LGPedia or LG15.com has been run. It was always open to user generated content and none other then Miles Beckett encouraged us to create out own series. The TOS also has an entire section on what are called "indies" that have no relationship to the LG15 story. Fan creations have always been welcomed on LGPedia and to change that policy would not only violate the original intent but it would also destroy LGPedia. If you actually want to build up a user base you need to work with fans as contributers and creators in their own right. I think you have lost enough users by implementing very poor decisions. Do you really want to continue with that trend to oblivion?--modelmotion 15:56, 30 March 2009 (CDT)
I'm afraid you misinterpreted what I said. Community Series that are considered "indie", such as the Coalition and Maddison Atkins, do not fall under the category of "deviating completely from the LG15 canon" There are elements, whether it be a strong connection to the community or a shared universe with a series that is heavily associated with LG15. There are some series, however, that have next to no relation to LG15 and shouldn't be covered, an example being Sofia's Diary, whose only connection is that it is another show hosted on Bebo. --FH14 17:42, 30 March 2009 (EST)
I don't see any problem with having a page for shows such With the Angels or 3rd Triad since these are done by members of the community and contain actors that have been in lg15. As long as it is no more than a page with some information about it and who is in it for the purpose of establishing it isn't some show added to the pedia like Sofia's Diary without any connection. --KindredPhantom 16:48, 30 March 2009 (CDT)
Just going to add my thoughts here as a regular LGPedia editor - I agree with most of Shiori's aforementioned guidelines. I'm kind of confused on a few things, however. First, which series would get the "partially-full" coverage, and what factors are we going to take into consideration while deciding which two of the three categories it receives? Also, with the partially-full coverage, does it get individual pages for its videos, or just a list of videos page? My own thoughts on that are that only the fully covered series should have character pages, video pages, puzzle pages, etc - that would include Redearth88, Maddison Atkins, and possibly LonelyJew15 since Jenni Powell is working on it, and she used to work for EQAL. And then everything else would either go into a single page or "partially-full" coverage, which I'm still not entirely sure about. Could someone digress about that? Also, shows like "With the Angels" and "3rd Triad" could receive a single page - where shows like "Sofia's Diary" and "OzGirl" would not even be covered on the Pedia.   •Kevin•   18:03, 30 March 2009 (CDT)

News Page/New Discussion Areas

I know, I'm just full of suggestions lately. ;P This I've been sitting on for a while, but I didn't want to mention it until our login ability was back. This comes in two forms:

  1. Ren wants to create a news aggregator that could link all things new in the LG15 Universe, which includes the Pedia. However, he needs a singular page with some sort of tag signaling news headlines and whatnot to use. This would obviously get us more coverage everywhere, so it'd be a benefit to all. I'm thinking we'd want to cover major discussions and updates, such as redesigns. We wouldn't want to cover new videos (at least not using the tag Ren will use to pull out news items), as he will be pulling feeds directly from LG15.com. Any suggestions on how this would work, what to include, etc. would be much appreciated.
  2. Lucy's Balcony is a great place to list major suggestions, but other suggestions for updates really have no home other than on their articles' talk pages. I'm thinking we may want to create pages to list ALL discussions on proposed merges, deletions, what have you. Note: I am aware we have existing categories for these, but this would place the entire discussion for each in one area. It would be easier to look at a page listing all expansion/merge/etc. ideas in one place than trying to convince everyone to look at the teeny-tiny sidebar in Recent changes. We could obviously link to these pages from both there and here.

I'm not even sure if we'd want to do this, since it would be a major change in how we're programmed to do business on the Pedia, but it is something to ponder. - Shiori 13:27, 30 March 2009 (CDT)

I love the first idea very much! Perhaps it could work as a supplement to the Main Page that is placed above the series' links. (Or perhaps a preview of a said page on the Main Page that links to a full page with all the said info.) The second idea is definitely something to consider, through it all depends on how that could be executed. --FH14
The idea sounds interesting but whilst reading through the legal terms for lg15.com:
Section 4, D:

"You agree not to use or launch any automated system, including without limitation, "robots," "spiders," or "offline readers," that accesses the Website in a manner that sends more request messages to the lonelygirl15 servers in a given period of time than a human can reasonably produce in the same period by using a conventional on-line web browser."

Does this prevent this idea from being implemented since it will pull information from Eqal servers? --KindredPhantom 16:41, 30 March 2009 (CDT)
That's quite interesting, KP - thanks for finding that. I'm not sure what that means for Ren's aggregator idea. About your other suggestion, Shiori, I agree that these things need to be on other places besides Recent changes, but how and where would we implement this?   •Kevin•   18:05, 30 March 2009 (CDT)