LGPedia talk:Community Portal

Administrator Avalibility

Even though this wiki has been online for less than a day, we've already recieved vandalism! It's not that big of a deal, but they created a Silly page and have edited the community portal with no real content. I realize it's not that big of a deal, but normal members cannot delete pages.

That brought up the thought of administrator avalibility. The people who manage this are probably the creators or some of their trusted friends. They're probably all very busy with not only real life stuff, but with the actual making of the blogs.

I don't want to sound like I'm trying to tell you how to run your wiki. I just want to make sure that an administrator will be around regularly and that we have a way to contact them if we need to.

Alright, I was wrong. =D I'm glad to see the administrators are active here! --Andy 17:37, 1 October 2006 (PDT)

Episode page style

Now that all the transcripts are entered for the existing episodes, I would like to point out that the style of the episode pages are different from page to page depending on who entered the transcripts and/or notes. It seems to me that there should be a standardized style, and while I'd be happy to go through all the transcripts that others have entered and make them conform to my own style, it ought to be brought to discussion instead.

Obviously, all episode pages should have the informational sidebar, the transcript section and the navigation box below, but what of other things? How much and what sort of information should be in the summary above the transcript? Should there be a single section for all info about the video that is not part of the transcript, or a number of sections such as "information", "clues", "recurring themes", etc.? Is there info that should be included in a standard format that is not yet, such as which characters appear in the video?

For an example of a similar wiki with very developed style and standardized sections, see the HRWiki. Certainly this wiki doesn't call for anything so elaborate, but it's an interesting model. --Brucker 12:35, 10 October 2006 (PDT)

Ha, so funny that you mentioned the HRWiki. I've been an occasional editor there myself for a year or two, and it's the best fan-wiki I know of. With time (and a few committed editors other than you and I) we could get there. I think each video should have a brief one or two sentence summary before the transcript. For example, Video 49 is the 49th video. In this video, Bree and Daniel reconcile and make-out in Bree's room. As there are very few characters and locations, the summary can mention them. Then the transcripts. Beneath the transcripts I'd suggest simply a bulleted "significant details" section. I think this would be simple and sufficient as very few videos will have a great number of such details. I think a screen shot of each vid at the top of the info box would be a nice touch.--JayHenry 13:10, 10 October 2006 (PDT)

And, as I've said elsewhere, I think the pages all need to link to YouTube at least at the bottom of the article. I think it's really against the spirit of a wiki not to. Also, as I think about it more, I think you could have "recurring themes" and "significant details" be two separate sections on each video. Recurring themes should all have their own page, right?--JayHenry 13:17, 10 October 2006 (PDT)

Too many links?

I think there are too many links on several articles. I didn't think this would be controversial. Someone brings up the following:

I strongly disagree with the assertion that we should control the number of links. Most of the links presents add depth to the page and sources for people like myself doing research. Yes it would be nice to have the time to draw out the relevance of each individual article but there is not always time for that. Many of the articles originate from discussions following the release of videos. The titles alone on some draw relevant connections to the LG story. If there is duplication thats one thing........but just to delete references for the sake of someones personal preference is a waste of time and resouces.

My objection is not primarily to the quantity of links, but to their quality. The Aleister Crowley page links to duplicate articles, out-of-date Geocities pages, and articles of people that vaguely knew Crowley. For somebody trying to do research, it wastes a huge amount of their time filtering through low-quality information. It makes the LGPedia look amateurish. Remember, this is an LGPedia. It's not a search engine for the occult. It's not a repository for random garbage. If we don't even have time to determine if an article is relevant, we should get rid of it -- if we don't have time to read the outrageous number of links then how can we expect casual users reading the page for information to have time!--JayHenry 13:44, 20 October 2006 (PDT)

I just ran though all the links on the Aleister Crowley page and they all work and seem to contain legitimate information. I know I have posted some of these based on my own research and others because they were discussed by other users after the posting of certain videos. Until we know more about the plot and Bree's religion its hard to tell what is relevant to LG15 and what is not. I therefore think we have better thing to do with our time than worry about how many external links we have. Clues can be found just about anywhere and its not prudent to rule out a source just because its on a more amateur web site. - modelmotion