Site organization
We are in desperate need of some organizational guidelines as far as how the site will be laid out and how pages and images should be categorized. Post your ideas here. The goal should be to have a system that makes it easy for readers to find what they're looking for, makes sense to editors and is scalable for future games and media as they come out. - Derple (talk) 18:53, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I've made a plan to organize the pages with categorization and subpaging. Essentially, I'd like the breakdown to be category-driven, meaning you can always find what you're looking for by going to the appropriate category, and we would make links to the upper levels available on the main page and on the game front pages.
First, all pages should be associated either with a specific game or an "Extras" category. The only things that should be Extra are non-game related pages like something about the movie, or pages having to do with multiple games like the Game differrences page (hopefully with a corrected title) or an overarching plot page. This would remove the need for "list" pages, such as List of Hitman Weapons, which could be found at Category:Weapons.
Each page under a game, such as missions of the game, weapons of the game, etc. would be subpages of the front game page, i.e. Hitman: Blood Money/Death of a Showman. Each of the subpages would then be categorized by the type of page they are under the game, i.e. Hitman: Blood Money missions. That category in turn would be categorized by its parent, i.e. Missions, and then you could find the Death of a Showman page by either navigating through the Hitman: Blood Money page, or by drilling down from the Missions category.
Here is a list of the main categories I think we should have:
- Games
- Missions
- Characters
- Weapons
- Cheats
- Secrets
- Plot or Plot summaries
For images:
- Game name images
- Weapon images
- Character images
- Maps
- Screenshots
- Artwork
- Cover art
That's what I have so far, so leave some comments, suggestions, changes, additions or what have you. I'll leave this discussion open for a while to see if I get any responses before starting to implement it. Once everything is outlined to everyone's satisfaction, we can talk about our navigation system (which I also have some ideas for). - Derple (talk) 20:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- We have four of the main categories you listed. This seems like a good plan. Y462 (T • C • E ) 20:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I believe we should implement policies for cleanup, merge, delete, etc. This would make things easier to tag and organize. We should also make templates for them. I plan to have the following templates. Whenever the templates are created, they will be striked. Templates may be added to this list in the futurer. Any suggestions for the creation of templates are welcome. Also, a page should be written explaining what templates are and their usage.
The list is as follows:
Template:DeleteTemplate:Speedy deleteTemplate:MergeTemplate:StubTemplate:CleanupTemplate:Section cleanupTemplate:Speculation
Policy should also be written for the usage of the templates. Y462 (T • C • E ) 04:53, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think we can simplify these by using the cleanup template for section cleanup and speculation. Also, there's really no difference between Delete and Speedy delete, since if it was speedy delete an admin would just delete it instead of tagging it, and if it's a non-admin using the template, an admin would still have to review it to make sure it was the correct tag. So I think the only template we're missing is Cleanup. - Derple (talk) 23:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- The speculation template would be for articles that aren't necessarily needing a cleanup, but for articles with unverified claims such as Mark I. The section cleanup template would be for a section in an article that needs cleanup, but the article itself is fine. A speedy delete template would be for spam pages that are clearly spam, not requiring any discussion for deletion. Y462 (T • C • E ) 01:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, I understand the function of the templates, I just don't think they're necessary. I'm suggesting using Cleanup when something needs cleaning up, be it a section or speculation. Speedy delete is totally unnecessary, because it won't get a page deleted any faster than a regular Delete template would. This isn't Wikipedia with multiple edits every second; the less bureaucracy and red tape we have the better. - Derple (talk) 06:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Now that I think about it, the speedy delete template wouldn't really be necessary in a Wiki with only a small amount of editors. For the section cleanup, I think we can just put "This page/section is in need of cleanup!" or something similar to that. We have all of those templates other than section cleanup at my main Wiki, so that's why I suggested them. Y462 (T • C • E ) 01:45, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, I understand the function of the templates, I just don't think they're necessary. I'm suggesting using Cleanup when something needs cleaning up, be it a section or speculation. Speedy delete is totally unnecessary, because it won't get a page deleted any faster than a regular Delete template would. This isn't Wikipedia with multiple edits every second; the less bureaucracy and red tape we have the better. - Derple (talk) 06:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- The speculation template would be for articles that aren't necessarily needing a cleanup, but for articles with unverified claims such as Mark I. The section cleanup template would be for a section in an article that needs cleanup, but the article itself is fine. A speedy delete template would be for spam pages that are clearly spam, not requiring any discussion for deletion. Y462 (T • C • E ) 01:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Choosing some admin
My adoption request was declined, so it's up to us to choose an admin or two. If you want to nominate someone (including yourself), add a section below. Make sure you look at these users' contributions and talk pages when making a decision. Thanks. - Derple (talk) 09:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- Shouldn't we also nominate a bureaucrat? Y462 (T • C • E ) 15:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, we should have someone who can give/take away sysop and rollbacker powers so we don't have to go through this process again. This nomination might as well be to become bureacrats. From there the bureaucrats can handle RfAs. Also, I don't think reasoning for support/oppose/undecided is necessary on the nominations unless there's something you think other users should take into consideration. - Derple (talk) 19:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- How long should we keep the nominations open? Y462 (T • C • E ) 20:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Well, we need to give everyone a chance to nominate and support or oppose whomever they choose. It really doesn't seem like there's all that much activity though, which is why we have to go through this in the first place. If no one has responded at all in a week, I'll ask a staff member to give our nominations a look. If we get some people coming around though, we'll just have to play it by ear. We just want to make sure anyone who wants to gets a chance to give their input. - Derple (talk) 00:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- How long should we keep the nominations open? Y462 (T • C • E ) 20:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, we should have someone who can give/take away sysop and rollbacker powers so we don't have to go through this process again. This nomination might as well be to become bureacrats. From there the bureaucrats can handle RfAs. Also, I don't think reasoning for support/oppose/undecided is necessary on the nominations unless there's something you think other users should take into consideration. - Derple (talk) 19:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Should we now close the nominations? Y462 (T • C • E ) 23:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- I've left a message on Catherine Munro's talk page, but so far no response. If we don't hear anything in a while, I'll try making an addendum to my adoption request. - Derple (talk) 06:24, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Nominations
The following users are nominated for bureaucratship on the wiki. You must be a registered Wikia member to vote.
Derple
I'm an admin on another wiki, so I'm familiar with the process and I'm reasonably good the technical aspects (templates, extensions, css, js, etc.). I want access to the MediaWiki namespace to add some stuff for us, like collapsible navs, welcome messages and a more Hitman-centric set of CSS classes. I also have some duplicate/unused images and pages that need deleting. - Derple (talk) 09:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- Support
- Derple (talk) 09:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- Should we provide resoning for the support/oppose? Y462 (T • C • E ) 15:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose
- Undecided
Y462
I have been editing Hitman Wiki since June of 2008. Numerous times have there been spam pages/images that needed deletion but couldn't be deleted as there are no admuinistrators on this wiki. I have experience at SmashWiki, if that maters much. Though I do not edit this place everyday, I constantly check for vandalism.Y462 (T • C • E ) 15:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Support
- Oppose
- Undecided
Become an Admin
I really want to be an Admin. I will do my best and I find it very important that I am one you can trust. To become an Admin on this wiki would be fantastic and a perfect thing for me. I am a big fan of Hitman and know very much about it. I guess that`s all the important skills a good Admin must have.
Thanks — Previously unsigned comment left by Paasl (talk • contrib)
- Becoming an administrator has more to do with understanding wiki procedure and policies. You have the skills to become a good contributor, but having the power to delete pages, rollback edits, hide history summaries and lock pages doesn't have anything to do with knowing a lot about Hitman. Like I said on your talk page, once you get a good understanding of how the wiki works and the guidelines for editing, I think you'll be ready. Until then, we can't really ask you to perform a function you don't yet know how to do. Good luck! - Derple (talk) 17:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)