Talk: Main Page/Archive3

Back to page |
< Talk:Main Page

This page is an archive of the discussion of an article. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's current talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.

Archived talk: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Main Page layout, again

  • The "Did You Know..." feature box is excellent, but does not balance well against the two short boxes on the right. Do the small boxes really help on the front page? They're mostly for internal community work, from where I see it. If we drop those, we can extend the "did you know" box along the full bottom to create greater balance with the Main Page Force. --SparqMan 15:22, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Let them be. The elongated "Did you know" box looks somewhat ugly. For the sake of balance, we can create another box - for example, for some quicklinks to the help section. - Sikon [Talk] 17:22, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)

MAJOR ISSUE/QUESTION WITH SOME OF THE PAGES:

I have an issue with some of the pages, or more to the point how Star Wars Wiki is organizing them, in a lot of the “Talk” pages people are disputing facts found on Starwars.com, how can ANYONE dispute facts from THE ONLY OFFICAL STAR WARS WEBSITE?

Examples of this include: 1. The Merging of Anakin and Vader, 2. Yavin 4 to the point that someone wrote the following: a. “Well, the Databank goes with Yavin 4. Do we care? I'm not sure that I do in this case, because I think it's heavily outnumbered.” 15:56, 10 May 2005 (UTC) I removed the name of that person so not to point fingers at anyone There are more but the issue is if Lucas (the guy that created Star Wars) has anything listed that is different then here his listing is correct and this pages is wrong, also some “fans” that are known to be wrong should be blocked from adding or editing this site (like Supershadow)sithlord123

  • Issue 1 is a suggestion, rather than policy -- note that Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader are still separate articles, even if we have combined Palpatine and Darth Sidious. Issue 2 is a simple question of spelling, and not worth getting upset over. Also note that Lucas doesn't write the text in the Databank himself, so information there is not privleged that much over an official novel, comic book, or RPG sourcebook. As for Supershadowisms, the users of this wiki tend to be vigiliant about such things. — Silly Dan 12:46, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up the issues I had, I thought GL tells the Starwars.com people what to write since it has all the Hyperspace information and stuff you can not find anyplace else. As for Supershadow it just erks me that someone like him can make claims like he does and nobody is stopping him (it's more an erk at Lucas Films not at this site) Speaking of LF has anyone from LF ever wrote to you(the sites owner)? if so I hope they like this site is a great source of Star Wars Information and should be "OKed" by the powers that be, keep up the good work :-)

  • Oh, I'm not the owner of this site, or even an admin. I'm just some guy. I have no idea what opinion Lucasfilm et. al. have of this website, if it's even on their radar. All I know is it's highly unlikely to get any sort of official OK, since it is, after all, just a fansite. A good one, but a fansite all the same. — Silly Dan 13:33, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Orphaned page

What is it?

  • A page no other pages link to. — Silly Dan 22:14, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • A page to which no other page links. --SparqMan 06:53, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Clone Wars game

Hey, we have a problem - someone deleted the Star Wars: The Clone Wars entry. Kuralyov 03:52, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • It looks like the namespace change was just implemented, and as a result all articles with a title in the format "Star Wars:TitleX" were automatically moved to "Wookieepedia:TitleX". Articles such as Star Wars: The Clone Wars will have to be moved back manually. I've already moved the article in question. – Aidje talk 04:05, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Size of Wiki

We seem to have caught up with Memory Alpha, and are now ahead of it in number of articles. :)

  • Us: 14542
  • Them: 14527
    • Nice, but I don't think we should become complacent though: we still have a lot of work to put in. Congratulations to you guys who do the bulk of the work here. You put me to shame, lol. :P --beeurd 01:36, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
      • They're just barely ahead right now. They could catch up at any time. --24.247.124.158 00:38, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)
        • Now we sit at above 15000. Have they any chance now? I think not. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:44, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)
          • Being both a Star Wars/Wookiepedia and Star Trek/Memory Alpha user, I think this rivaly is a bit stupid. CptKenobi 16:05, 19 Nov 2005 (UTC)
            • Yeah, the whole Star Trek versus Star Wars think is kinda silly, IMO. But, people are passionate about what they love, I suppose. :) WhiteBoy 07:58, 20 Nov 2005 (UTC)

216.227.97.192

It's not that i don't appreciate what he is doing, but i think it should stop when he begins to delete my counter arguements on a talk page. This has to be sorted out as this edit war i'm having with him is very annoying and he must be stopped! Jasca Ducato 19:45, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Pointless pages

I request that someone should go through Special:shortpages and try to delete, or cleanup some of the pages not making sense or contain pointless information. --24.247.124.158 20:51, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • The trouble is that the vast majority of those are planet stubs, which say little more than "X was a planet in the Y system" because that is all we know about them. I do get your point though. --beeurd 20:59, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)

What I mean is that I saw an article like: "An arc trooper". And one page with no content, or something a little like: "They're laser cannons. There's probably four of them". --24.247.124.158 21:03, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • That's the beauty of wiki. If something needs work, you can do that work yourself. I've already expanded the article quad laser cannon, which you gave as one of your examples. – Aidje talk 22:56, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • And now I took that "An arc trooper" article and converted it from inaccuracy into accuracy. Booyah. --SparqMan 03:01, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Editing, editing, editing, and so on.

Things that could be added to the Main Page

A link to the sandbox? A link to the requests page? — Silly Dan 00:28, 18 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • I was gonna say we don't need anything added, but then I realised I'd forgotten we had a requests page, so yes we could add a link to that, although I'm not entirely sure where. --beeurd 01:23, 18 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • We could fit them all in there in a small box like a header or footer. -- Riffsyphon1024 21:55, 18 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • I just got the Galactic Phrase and Travel Guide book of Star Wars, so maybey we could use a "Phrase of the Week" section. (any language)--Wattamb2001 23:10, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Good ideaPadme829 00:19, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)Padme829

"The films"

The new look of "the films" is terrible. I'm not a fan. --SparqMan 05:04, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • I agree. The whole main page is a bit awkward now. QuentinGeorge 05:15, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Well, I made the change to give the section (what I consider) a more organized look to it. I was planning to make the films text more centered than it is, but I'm no expert on programming, so I'm leaving that up to someone with the knowhow. Adamwankenobi 06:39, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)
    • I disagree that it gives it a more "organised" look. In fact, I think it looks awful, and much worse than the italicised titles. QuentinGeorge 11:00, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)
      • Well, I don't. Adamwankenobi 11:25, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)
      • First of all, it should definitely be italicized, they are film titles after all; secondly, there shouldn't be a period at the end; and thirdly "The Star Wars Saga" sounds a lot better than "The films." MarcK 11:28, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)
        • I made the distinction of "the films" from the expanded universe. After all, the entire story, films and Eu combined is the saga. Adamwankenobi 11:44, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)
          • Actually "The Saga" specifically refers to Episodes I to VI. That's why when Episode III came out, the slogan said "The Saga is Now Complete". It's hardly complete if there's another decade of books and comics that comprise it coming out. QuentinGeorge 12:00, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)

A Saga, by definition, is a long narrative. The films and the EU fit that desription quite well. Adamwankenobi 05:46, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • Irrelevant. In a SW context, "The Saga" refers specifically to the movies. QuentinGeorge 07:59, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

So have you two resolved your dispute? If so, can the page be unprotected and the subtitle "Objective categories" be changed to "Real world categories"? — Silly Dan 22:18, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • I will unlock it. Please leave it as Saga and with full film names. Thanks. WhiteBoy 22:57, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought this edit war was over. I didn't realize they were separate issues - "the saga" and the full titles versus the abbreviated ones. Page is locked until the title issue is resolved. WhiteBoy 16:19, 21 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • OK, no more discussion, so I assume it will stay as is if I can unlock it now. I don't like locking the main page. WhiteBoy 03:31, 28 Oct 2005 (UTC)

DVD changes

Where is the DVD changes page?--Wattamb2001 23:13, 21 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Scores

Should a page be added mentioning John William's music score for the entire saga? Jasca Ducato 20:28, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • Sure, someone should write about the soundtracks -- track listings, release history, etc. — Silly Dan 20:34, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)
    • I can get a list of all the scores (including those from the originals before the special editions) But other than that i cant tell you much. We need someone who has a lot of knowledge of the music. Jasca Ducato 12:06, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Archive

I think this page needs to be archived, it's 36KB for god sake! Jasca Ducato 20:28, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Is there any way to, um, get rid of the google ads? Adamwankenobi 05:33, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • Assuming you want to pay for the wiki yourself, otherwise no. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:42, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • I have an adblocker extention for Firefox, and it works for me. StarNeptune 05:51, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, what I meant was, can't the administartors here organize, like wikipedia did, a money drive? Adamwankenobi 01:35, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I'm not to keen on the ads... But hey, it's free! --beeurd 02:35, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)
        • Recently some of the ads have been coming up red...odd. MarcK 02:37, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)
          • Just leave them i say, its not like they're getting in the way is it. Jasca Ducato 14:19, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)
            • My major complaint is that they push the article together too much. I wish there was a way to reduce this.Adamwankenobi 14:46, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Essential Chronology Endnotes

Did anyone see this article on the official site? http://www.starwars.com/eu/lit/ref/f20051025/index.html Could be of interest to us, haven't read it myself yet. --beeurd 13:32, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • A few confirmations concerning timeline and continuity issues, but no substance in the way of new information, other than a bit of name-dropping - Kwenn

Question

Could somebody tell me how to create a vertical line? Like the kind you need when doing infoboxes.

  • You mean one of these: | ? For most keyboards, it's shift-backslash, the key between enter and backspace. They're called pipes-LtNOWIS 16:09, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Thank you!
    • beat me to it, but I was gonna say the backslash key between left-Shift and Z. lol. British keyboard layout I suppose. lol --beeurd 22:06, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Similar Question

Ok, now how do you make a horizontal line, like through words and stuff?

Episode I: The Phantom Menace vs. I: The Phantom Menace vs. The Phantom Menace

Before this blows up into another edit war, let's just hash it out on the talk page. Personally, I think list all of the films as Episode I: The Phantom Menace looks better, despite the repetition of the word "Episode". At the window widths most people browse at, just putting the roman numeral and the title results in too much blank space in the "Star Wars Saga" box. However, I don't feel strongly enough about this to change it back. — Silly Dan 14:29, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

That's the primary reason I removed "episode" from the box. It is repetititive and seems (at least to me) to clutter up the main page. Adamwankenobi 14:43, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Regardless of clutter, those are the names of the films. And without the word "Episode", the roman numerals have no context. As Silly Dan said, any clutter caused by the repetition is far more enjoyable than the awkward space leftover without them. --SparqMan 15:59, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Definitely keep the episode. Kuralyov 16:09, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep the episode. --Vermilion 16:30, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep the episode. The word "Episode" is actually part of the title of the movie, so keep it in. StarNeptune 16:51, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • If this is a vote, count one more for keeping "Episode." —Darth Culator (talk) 18:09, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep "Episode". Too much blank space without it, and nobody calls the movies "I: The Phantom Menace" anyway. --Azizlight 21:50, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep "Episode." MarcK 02:35, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, if you keep "episode," then we must put in "Star Wars" before it , since that is also technically part of the title. Adamwankenobi 02:37, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
      • You have a point there. However, I think that putting them all in the form Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace would make the "Star Wars Saga" box too full, just as writing only The Phantom Menace would leave too much blank space. I: The Phantom Menace is rarely if ever used, but Episode I: The Phantom Menace often is. — Silly Dan 02:50, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
      • What's important is context. The numerals have no meaning with the word "episode" to show what they're counting. Is it "Song I"? Is it "Goat IV?" Further, one could argue that while "Star Wars" is a part of the titles, it is the name over the overarching saga, and after appearing above the film names ("Star Wars Saga"), it would be repetitious to include them again. --SparqMan 03:41, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep it just like it is now. WhiteBoy 15:55, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep it in its current form. All my views on this have already been voiced by other people, so I won't repeat my reasoning. --beeurd 03:25, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand - those links should be the films' full titles - e.g. Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace. jSarek 22:25, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - Note that the full titles, Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace, will make each film take up 2 lines on 800x600 screens, and this will look very ugly. --Azizlight 21:14, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Audio File

What format are the downloadable audio files in?

  • .ogg I believe; should work on Winamp. MarcK 02:37, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Non-Star Wars films

You may find this stupid, but I think it's cool to make one article about non-SW films which have links to the Star Wars Universe. Movies like Beverly Hills Ninja, Armageddon and several South Park episodes. ----Inmobilus 17:51, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)

That would be best compiled as a list. Adamwankenobi 11:08, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Feature box

I can't seem to get the content of the Featured Article box to align to the top. Whenever I set that as an attribute, it makes the whole page go crazy. Can any one else get it? --SparqMan 00:36, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

A Star Wars quote box?

Not a bad idea, considering the amount of good quotes that come out of Star Wars. --AronoBashkar 12:45, 3 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • We have some already. See the bottom of Boba Fett, Kreia, for example. More will come. QuentinGeorge 04:42, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • What I mean is, a quote box that shows random quotes, on the main page. Sorry for the confusion. --AronoBashkar 16:21, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

SWG Wiki

Can someone please tell me where the people at the star wars galaxies wiki get their funding at so that they don't have to have google ads? Adamwankenobi 17:35, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • If you really dislike them, you can use a variety of Firefox extensions to block them or switch your skin in preferences (most of them also block the ads). --SparqMan 18:14, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • People are already talking like everyone has Firefox... a pity, honestly. - Sikon [Talk] 05:17, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
      • Why is that a pity? Everyone should have Firefox. I've been using Firefox regularly since 0.9.1 back in June 04. I've gotten so I can't imagine using anything else voluntarily. —Darth Culator (talk) 05:45, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
        • I just got it a month ago. I can cram slightly more text on a page now than with IE anyway. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:13, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Comprehensive chronology

What do you think, would a comprehensive chronology be useful, listing major events only? I am thinking of one article only with events such as the beginning of the Hyperspace Wars and the end, the outbreak of the Clone Wars, the Rebellion etc. Events such as the death of Borsk Fey'lya or Anakin becomes a Jedi Knight may not be listed here. I would start this article as The Comprehensive Chronology of Major Events in Star Wars. TopAce 16:45, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Maybe Nathan Butler would let you copy and paste his timeline into a page. Adamwankenobi 17:12, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • I would not use the source of anyone else. Plagiarism is not my way. I would kindly use as many sources as possible, but copy and paste a whole thing is not my style. TopAce 18:22, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Uh guys. This already exists, its called Timeline of galactic history. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:15, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Suggestion against SuperShadow

If the admins published their Instant messenger availabilities (ICQ, Yahoo, MSN or AIM), it would help. If he shows up again and any of the Admins are logged in, we can notify them and he can be banned quickly. - TopAce 21:28, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • Slight problem. I live in Australia, so I was in bed fast asleep when this all happened. We might need a new mod, one who's active during the day. QuentinGeorge 21:32, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • I just can't beleive he makes it so obvious he's gonna troll by ALWAYS using similar usernames.
  • My AIM name is on my user page. Feel free to IM me any time, but please let me know that you're from SWW. --SparqMan 00:59, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Same here. Just contact me as I usually get on between 8 and midnight central time. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:54, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)

View count

What happened with the Main Page view count? It suddenly dropped from ~80,000 to ~600. - Sikon [Talk] 05:02, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • I think that's the result of the real main page somehow getting stuck as [Redacted by administration] during the recent vandalism spree. jSarek 05:05, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • MediaWiki allows to move the Main Page?! - Sikon [Talk] 05:10, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Someone might want to check out the Popular pages list... it shows "[Redacted by administration]" as the #1 most poular page.141.154.152.244 05:30, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • We should probably ask Angela to look into fixing that for us. --SparqMan 05:40, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)

SW Timeline

  • Why isn't there a complete Star Wars Timeline on this site?
    • There is - Timeline of galactic history. jSarek 11:37, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
      • Oh, cool, I never noticed that either, thanks jSarek! --Azizlight 12:10, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
      • NO I ment a book and comic timeline.
        • Hmm, I know what you mean, I have one here. It is slightly oput of date though. --beeurd 15:47, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
      • NO this one is beter [1]
  • It's gonna be very difficult, but this user is right - Wookieepedia should have its own timeline. --Azizlight 10:29, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

New wiki

I just created a Wiki called Holonet. It is in-Universe Wiki. (Like you live in the SW galixy)--Wattamb3000 02:14, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • And this means for us what? -- Riffsyphon1024 02:26, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Um,well,it is SW and just offering you to join the new Wiki.--Wattamb3000 02:31, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • What the sith are you talking about? Give us a link or something. --Azizlight 02:35, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • You do realize that your wiki will be of no use to us as this wiki already contains thousands of articles and has far exceeded most wikis on the internet, including Memory Alpha. Just saying. -- Riffsyphon1024 02:37, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)

No...It is something that the wiki is in the universe. Example: News Section:Chanceller Palpatine declares the Empire for more see here.Example ends--Wattamb3000 02:44, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • Sounds... odd. If you've created the Wiki like you say you have, then please post a link here so we can actually see it. 8--Azizlight 02:49, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • It is not made yet. It said it will be made in 1 week because I created it today!--Wattamb3000 02:50, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
      • I think I understand. Its like the Holonet website except updated to continue after Clone Wars. There are several things that you have to make note of. Like the Empire would obviously be in control of it and would throw in a bunch of propaganda. Redemption 02:51, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
        • Finally, someone gets it!(You may be user of the week if you join! Im nice.)--Wattamb3000 02:53, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
          • So perhaps a more accurate description would be an IU Star Wars version of WikiNews? Good luck with your venture. --SparqMan 05:25, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
          • So it's like a background info wiki, to add on to things?? Sounds pretty cool. Padme829 18:22, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)Padme829
          • To be clear, this would be totally fan-created content, right? Like fan fiction set in the Star Wars universe, as opposed to official Star Wars content. Is that correct? WhiteBoy 20:23, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • From what i can tell, it sounds like it's meant to be canon information presented as a news program, such as HoloNetNews.com. Might be interesting, but also kind of useless. --Azizlight 23:34, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • Agreed. What point is there to make? -- Riffsyphon1024 06:51, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)

This was requested as a new Wikicity, but I don't want to support something which could fork the community here. Unless Wookieepedians explicitly reject this Star Wars News content here, I don't think it should be a new wiki. Angela 10:07, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Featured Page Picture

  • Anyone know what happened here? It looks ok on the template itself.... QuentinGeorge 21:31, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

eliminate white space

Does anyone know how to eliminate the excessive white space at the top of the main page? Adamwankenobi 21:55, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • Can someone please eliminate the excessive white space at the top of the main page? I attempted to myself, but ended up messing up the formatting. Adamwankenobi 09:49, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Question Desk

Is there a chance we could add something like Wikipedia's Reference desk to Wookiepedia? Some times I'd like to ask questions about SW stuff. CptKenobi 20:33, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Messed

Some one messed with the Coleman Kcaj artical. i fixed the picture but i cant ge the name thing to work. (unsigned comment by Dylankidwell)

Great Wikicity!

Wookieepedia is the best Wikicity I've seen. Great information about Star Wars and excellent photos. I hope this Star Wars wiki expands and becomes the greatest wikicity! --Darth Monkey 01:28, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • We have our moments. -- SFH 01:31, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Oh yes, we're very great, but if they don't do as we wish, we'll become angry and use our magic. --SparqMan 05:51, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Positions?

Should we add the position thing to the Jedi like they did on Wikipedia?--Dil 00:21, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • No, I think not, it looks rather stupid, especially since every Jedi master began as a youngling and worked his way up to master.--Eion 04:51, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Disable Editing the Main Page

  • When I went on the site at about 12:20 pm, a major vandalism attack took place. Someone deleted the main page, and in the history he put "stop sucking up the George Lucas you *******s! To prevent that from happening again, I suggest we disable editing the main page for some time.--Bly1993
    • The vandal has been blocked. I don't think page protection is neccesary. -LtNOWIS 18:14, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Most of the content on there is templates anyhow. If we could complete the shift to templates, it might solve the problem. --SparqMan 18:53, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Yeah, permanently locking a page should not be considered an option. WhiteBoy 02:36, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • I said for some time, not permanantlely.--Bly1993
    • I think it shouldn't be blocked. My opinion=no page must be blocked. Let's just throw the vandals out of here. --Master Starkeiller 13:10, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Unfortunately, we only have five active admins, tree of which are active at the same time. That presents are great deal of time for vandals to violate the main page and others. So, either we need more admins or protect the main page. -- SFH 19:32, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree with SFH. Over the last 20 minutes or so, there have been numerous defacings of the main page (among others) that SFH, Silly Dan, Darth Culator and myself had to revert several times due to an anon rampage. StarNeptune 19:43, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • I note that MemoryAlpha (which is a fairer comparison to our enterprise than Wikipedia would be) has their main page mostly templatized, and protected from editing. If we made it entirely a collection of templates, and protected it, experienced non-admin users could continue to edit the main page as much as they wanted, but many vandals would just mess with the article pages. — Silly Dan 20:18, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Then we would have to protect the templates, however only admins could work on them still locked. All the more reason to have more admins. Btw, admins can simply hit Rollback whereas it takes much longer to manually revert. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:26, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • I don't think there's much point to protecting the templates. In fact, I would strongly oppose protecting Template:DidYouKnow in particular. I think protecting the main page, on the other hand, would cut down on vandalism. Most vandals are probably not going to view the source and look up the templates that they would need to edit to deface the main page, especially the automated link-spammers. They would either go away, or deface individual articles so first-time casual users wouldn't notice unless they looked up that particular article. — Silly Dan 18:57, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • Then we should stick with that premise. -- Riffsyphon1024 19:07, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • It's not just the templates! it's everything! Vandals usually blank the Main Page, preventing people from access parts of the Wiki. Others try to put links to useless sites. It's not just the templates. -- SFH 18:21, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Okay, for everyone who votes against disabling editing the main page, take a good look at the history and see how many reverts had to take place.Bly1993 00:50, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree with Riffsyphon1024, we need more admins, and then we should restrict the main page only to them. DarthMaul431 00:58, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Original Characters?

  • Forgive me if this has been discussed, but I would like to know if I could create an article for my own, well-thought-out Jedi character that I costume as. I am sure that it fits in with established continuity. RDMio 21:28, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • No, we're keeping this for canonical material only. Try the fanon Star Wars wikicity. — Silly Dan 02:32, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Argghh, my eyes! It hurts to go there. -- Riffsyphon1024 21:22, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • Which is why I would encourage those fanfic authors and such who can write coherent sentences, like RDMio above, to head over there and add useful content. 8) — Silly Dan 22:28, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
          • I have a suggestion. What if we were to create a page on here devoted specifically to those who wish to write their own fan fiction? It could be a part of the community portal, and would be of interest to some in the same way the trivia section of the community portal is now. We could note specifically that it is not canonical information, but instead non-canonical stories by fans. Anyone? Anyone? Adamwankenobi 00:20, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
            • I think such pages, if they are allowed at all, should be limited to subpages of the creators' user pages. jSarek 00:58, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
            • That kind of thing is the whole point of the SWFanon wiki. People who want to post fanon should go there. Just because Wookieepedia is better than the SWFanon Wikicity in every way is not an excuse for people to put their fanon here rather than where it belongs. —Darth Culator (talk) 03:29, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

This Site Deserves a Better URL

it should be starwarswiki.org or wookieepedia.org or something of the sort. —Unsigned comment by 209.131.247.53 (talk • contribs)

  • WhiteBoy owns the domain wookieepedia.com. Unfortunately, Angela refuses to associate a domain with the wiki unless it is owned by Wikia. - Sikon [Talk] 06:53, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • I thought that the owners of domain names were free to route them wherever they want. "Wookieepedia.com" sending people here wouldn't require any alteration of the site itself. CooperTFN 07:16, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Then WhiteBoy should sell the domain name to Wikia so that we can change the domain name. :P Adamwankenobi 13:51, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • But would you want to pay for access to the site? -- Riffsyphon1024 04:54, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)
          • Pay? What? CooperTFN 07:33, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)
            • Well, I've got 20,000 Republic credits. Will they do? ;) Adamwankenobi 13:40, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)
              • [Force Persuade] We only accept local currency. - Sikon [Talk] 14:12, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Did You Know Box

Someone Messed up the Did You know Box again. Themelle444 17:54, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Text

Am I on drugs, or did all the text here just get smaller? CooperTFN 00:35, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • Press Ctrl while rolling your middle mouse button towards you. I tend to do that alot as well. :P --Imp 01:01, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, I'll be...thanks! CooperTFN 18:41, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)