The Sims Wiki talk:Community Portal

The Sims: Medieval
Are we gonna cover this game? Is it part of 'The Sims' series? http://www.simprograms.com/the-sims-medieval-first-screens-and-preview-by-tsr/ Duskey ( talk ) 15:19, July 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * The link is bad; here's one that works (currently): http://www.thesimsresource.com/news/view-post/post/18586/The%20Sims%3A%20Medieval#comments


 * As for your question, if the game is confirmed by EA, then yes for the time being. We should have a page for it up to and until it's proven that the game isn't in line with other titles in The Sims series. So, my feeling is that we should create a page for it (once it's confirmed), and resolve the issue of whether or not it belongs here, at a later date after the game is released. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 21:24, July 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think our The Sims game rumors page is the only working link now :p I agree with LIR above. We should report on it when it is announced and after that we can decide whether it belongs here or not. Who knows, someone else might make an independant wiki about it. Duskey ( talk ) 02:50, July 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * Discussion is resolved; game is officially announced; will hold off on final decision until after release. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 19:02, August 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * A game magazine revealed some 'professions' or 'positions' that Sims can be in in Medieval. There's Doctor, Blacksmith, Wizard etc. How do we handle that if people start adding these pages? In my opinion, anything about the Medieval Doctor, doesn't belong on the same careers page as the Doctor or Medicine. It should be 'Doctor (medieval)'. Duskey ( talk ) 14:31, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

Families with one member
I'm beginning to see some family pages with one family member. Wolfe household & Curry family to name a few. Perhaps it's time for a policy or guideline stating that these pages aren't neccesary npr do they hold any information that cannot be added to the one Sim in the family. What do others think? To me they're just articles with no info on them, wasting space. Duskey ( talk ) 02:52, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

I think we should keep them anyway. I don't think it matters if its one person. They're still a family. Jason   Talk To Me!   02:56, July 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * There's nothing on the family pages that can't be included in the sim's page, unless that sim is the only person left living in their family (and the other members are visible on the family tree). I say delete the pages. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 02:58, July 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's exactly my point, Jason. If it's just one person there is nothing you can add to that page which you couldn't add to the Sim page. If these pages weren't family pages they'd get merged or deleted due to lack of content. Duskey ( talk ) 10:29, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * redirect. --a_morris (talk) 23:54, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Alright, I did it to the Steel family -> Christopher Steel. I made sure to move the info on the family page to the Sim page and also moved player stories. I also remember to delete the family picture (which wouldn't add anything to the Sim page and was of poor quality). Do you agree that this is the right way to do it? Duskey ( talk ) 16:17, August 2, 2010 (UTC)

Achievements
Achievements are a new feature on Wikia. What are your thoughts on adding them to The Sims Wiki? (The blog post) --a_morris (talk) 21:18, August 6, 2010 (UTC) I say it will be a great addition to this wiki because i feel it will make users edit more to achieve the Achievements.--(Danny)Monster2821 (talk)(random page) 21:23, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm less than enthusiastic. I think we would have to seriously look at the program and how we can customize it for this wiki before we implement it. I don't think we should adopt something if its primary emphasis is on increasing edit count, but if it encourages activity within a community setting, rather than just having more edits than the next person, I'll probably support it. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 21:25, August 6, 2010 (UTC)

also,another wiki already has the Achievements put in,and the wiki is doing great.--(Danny)Monster2821 (talk)(random page) 21:29, August 6, 2010 (UTC) http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Leaderboard here's a link to the leaderboard.--(Danny)Monster2821 (talk)(random page) 21:32, August 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * So, it involves a point system? Would there be a way to disable the points and just have it give out badges? I'm not sure a points system is the best idea... -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 21:36, August 6, 2010 (UTC)

yes,it involves a point system,and the only thing to disable is the achievments system on your account.-- Danny (Monster2821) (talk)(random page) 21:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I guess I don't mind it as much if we choose not to place an undue amount of emphasis on edit count. For example, I don't think points should be awarded for having a certain number of edits (except maybe giving out points for a person making their first edit). I think there are a lot of other things that may warrant awarding points - creating and participating in contests, writing and commenting on blogs, participating in community discussion on portal talk pages or talk pages for articles, Sorting and categorizing articles, creating new categories or templates, or doing work on projects. In short, I don't think we need to award points to reinforce the thought that edit count is important. However, I do see this as having some possible positive benefit if implemented well. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 21:46, August 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm against it since I believe it will promote micro-edits and a lot of 'spam' in the form of 'Cool post bro!' comments. The many micro-edits will flood the history page of an article. Duskey ( talk ) 17:38, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Fun fact of the day, the wiki linked to (Call of Duty) has removed the achievements and even enforced 'punishments' for people who were abusing it I've read the comments on the main page about achievements and the opinions are quite mixed. Those declaring themselves admins were generally against it though. At least from what I could gather. Duskey ( talk ) 14:55, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Newsletter
Seeing as how TheDataMonster is... well, not really around, I'd like to test the waters for a newsletter of sorts. Basically I think of it as an article where editors can add tiny bits of information about the Wiki, stuff which doesn't deserve it's own posting. When it has accumulated enough news or some time has passed without a news update, it will be posted in a blog article to the front page. That's basically it. We can include stuff like winners, nominations and new user created contests, maybe interesting blog posts if we find any. Those are just fluff pieces at the end. The body of the newsletter would be new pages on the wiki, new layout of pages or new templates/userboxes and so forth. Again, just wanna get a feeling about what the community would think of this. Duskey ( talk ) 20:45, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Added stuff to The Sims Wiki:Newsletter. Duskey ( talk ) 14:45, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

I'm scrapping the Newsletter idea again. We can use the blog posts and our social sites. I'm working on re-doing the main page so we'll have a twitter feed displayed there. -- Duskey talk 04:09, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Copyright candidate for speedy deletion
Just because I don't think anyone's checking that page. Duskey ( talk ) 19:45, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

By that I mean I posted something on the talk page there and wouldn't mind a commenti :p Duskey ( talk ) 18:36, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, I added it now :) Duskey ( talk ) 17:42, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Community lot type categorization
Where do we put categories like Category:Bookstores and Category:Market shops? Do we put them in Category:Community lots or Category:Types of lots or both? Duskey ( talk ) 14:57, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Mandatory new wikia skin incoming
& Duskey ( talk ) 16:35, August 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * It doesn't seem like there's any way around this. Apparently this isn't the first time Wikia has transitioned, so I guess this was bound to happen sooner or later. The best we can do is to create or keep a style that is uniquely TSW while still adhering to Wikia's requirements. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 16:40, August 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * For me, one of the primary issues is readability and usability. Reducing the amount of space available for content will affect that, especially here, where infoboxes are the norm. IMO, the extra bells and whistles Wikia wants to add will also affect that. Another issue is that a wiki such as this isn't just a community of regular editors and readers, but is also a resource for a larger community, many of whom may have little or no knowledge of or interest in Wikia. Someone who finds an article through a web search may not care how many photos are on the wiki, much less want to wait while a slideshow of all photos loads. Dharden (talk) 15:58, August 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Personally, I think it should just stay the same as it is now. I can already forsee the negative impact the new skin will have and even though this may sound crazy, I have a feeling that users with slower internet connections and lower end computers will have difficulty loading up the Wiki. It's happened with websites before. GEORGIEGIBBONS 11:40, August 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, we can all agree that we do not like this idea very much, but as LIR put it earlier: We just have to make the transition as smooth as possible when it comes. That means customizing the new skin when it comes out, before they remove Monaco. Duskey ( talk ) 20:31, August 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Bad news for the few low resolution people with us: W:Forum:Wikia’s new look - User questions. 1000px article space + menu = Screen width overflow. Duskey ( talk ) 08:04, August 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Created Project Skin. Duskey ( talk ) 21:11, August 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * The project contain links to all the important Wikia pages on this new skin and the discussion and questions should be taken there. Duskey ( talk ) 13:00, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

The Sims Wiki Battles
We are already in the midst of creating a Sims Wiki Battles feature. These battles will work like the battles at the Final Fantasy Wiki and the Kingdom Hearts Wiki. Users can vote for or nominate a fight between two things in The Sims series. These things can be Sims, Objects, Life states, anything like that. After a fight is chosen, users can then vote for which of the two things they want to win. After the fights time is up, the thing with the most votes wins, and a new fight is chosen from the nominations. We have already created the Battle layout and are considering the Sims Wiki page it will be on. Please feel free to tell us what you think about this new feature. Thank you. --Random Ranaun 22:18, August 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've added my take on how to implement this. I made a template Simbattle and you can see it in action with three examples here: The Sims Wiki:Sandbox/SimBattle. Duskey ( talk ) 03:45, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Affiliation with non-Sims sites
Sparked by a message left on AM's talk page, I wanted to start a discussion whether we should allow affiliation with non-Sims sites/wikis. The pro would be more traffic I suppose, but if we do allow it, where does it stop? Do we need a link to every wiki here on wikia? Duskey ( talk ) 06:19, August 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't want too much traffic here and there, but this wiki should help sponser some run-down wikis that need urgent help, such as the Spyro wiki and Bandipedia. I am the admin at the former wiki, and I am really asking for more help, y'know! Uxie   Lover  1994 06:30, August 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't really agree with non-sim affiliation. This is a wiki site for information about the game, it's simply not relevant to link to other sites or other wikis that aren't in any way related to the Sims genre. I know we want to build a community, but it really doesn't make sense to start linking to every other wiki. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 14:09, August 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with LIR for the same reasons. Duskey ( talk ) 05:28, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

Disney wiki request
I reponse to Sundogs' forum post here on the Wiki, I requested more information and this was the message I recieved on my Community Central talk page:

Basically saying that:# I like to be affiliate with you, This is what I tried to ask in the forums at the Sims wiki. Please understand that these listed things are direct and to the point, and at the time of the posting; all the requested needs to cover in meeting. Thanks. Sundogs American Law Wiki • Apple Wiki 12:42, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) note that we are more commercial use; i.e. like the Disney's Online World Wiki site (their wiki site). I want it to be both Disney's' Online Worlds Wiki and your Sims Wiki combined.
 * 2) Willing to make the Sims Wiki admins be admins to our site until we have our own admins.
 * 3) Use templates from your wiki,
 * 4) note that I like all your templates and I would like to use them at the wiki site that I am at.
 * 5) Reword our text to match yours or better sounding from your wiki,
 * 6) note I don't want our articles sounding or looking or sounding like the Wikipedia's pages or anyone else in that matter.

I know as much as you do at this time. This seems related to the "non-sims affiliation" discussion. What are your thoughts and questions? Duskey ( talk ) 13:43, August 23, 2010 (UTC)

He has added some clarification to his request on the Community Central forum. Duskey ( talk ) 05:28, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

Since there's been no indication that this is something the editors of The Sims Wiki are interesting in, I'm declining the request. -- Duskey talk 04:10, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Spyro Wiki
So this means you are not going to help? We need the help ASAP, and it would be great. I disagree with linking to every wiki, but the Spyro wiki is in need of urgent help! Please don't leave it to only ZACH, Aura and I! We need more help. Uxie  Lover  1994 08:19, August 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * I believe many of us are here because we have a passion for The Sims games, I believe this to be true of most wiki's; you contribute because you have an interest in the subject. The question of whether we're willing to link to your wiki as an affiliate is still being discussed here. In the meantime I suggest you check out Advice:Building a Community at help.wikia. There's other good articles there on how to attract visitors (and subsequently editors) to your wiki. Duskey ( talk ) 10:38, August 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * I guess you are right. We are very upset with you guys due to your refusal to say something about us that could help us. Uxie   Lover  1994 07:03, August 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * Since there's been no indication that this is something the editors of The Sims Wiki are interesting in, I'm declining the request. -- Duskey talk 04:10, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Affiliation with other EA/Maxis titles
Since we're affiliated with SimCity and MySims. How about Spore or other similar titles or are restricting it so it needs a "Sims" in the title? -- Duskey talk 12:05, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Cars & Vehicles
How should we list and categorize cars & vehicles? With FLS incoming we'll need to sort it out. Duskey ( talk ) 16:23, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Once FLS hits I have half a mind to make an extra menu item in the main menu, pointing to the page and associated pages. Duskey ( talk ) 19:05, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Child userbox
Template:User child. Isn't it a bit iffy we have a child userbox when you're legally not allowed to edit here unless you're 13, which would make you a teenager. Duskey ( talk ) 16:41, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I have noticed that Wikipedia have no objections to children editing there. Seeing as some of our policies are similar to those of Wikipedia (such as assume good faith), I think the template creator had taken the rule from WP. GEORGIEGIBBONS (talk) 17:17, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Regardless, Wikia ToS require that users are at least 13 years of age, so the child userbox really isn't needed. Even if a user were under age 13, adding the child userbox to their page would be as foolish as listing their actual age, since doing that would show that they were clearly in violation of the ToS and they would be subject to a cross-wiki block until they reach 13. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 17:30, August 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * I removed the userbox, category and deleted it from the user pages and reminded those users about the Wikia Terms of Use. -- Duskey talk 03:20, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Any artists among us?
Do we have any artists among us who are semi-good at making wallpapers? I "borrowed" a wallpaper from The Sims Supply and inserted a greyscale logo in the table (it needs to brighter, I know), but this is what the portal COULD look like. However, I'm not very keen on ripping off The Sims Supply so if anyone can create a similar wallpaper that'd be awesome. There are some requirements however.
 * Needs to be at least 1680px width (Article space with Monaco skin at 1920x1080 resolution)
 * If it's a 1920x1080 wallpaper we'll just resize it and then we also have a TSW desktop image :D
 * Needs to fade out to white at the bottom, or it's gonna look funky.
 * Light colors are preferred, nothing pitch black.
 * Should contain the TSW logo (File:Wiki.png) if you put in the middle it'll be hidden by the table, that's a good thing.
 * Must be FLS and/or LN themed.
 * No video caps, they look horrible. Promo images and renders only.

If you wanna do something similar to The Sims Supply's picture, I believe they're using a toned down neighborhood picture and then some promotional images from the game. See also their current LN background for inspiration.

I'd you're interested it could be nice to do this for all future releases and maybe the non-game portals too. Duskey ( talk ) 17:03, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Miniboxes
I wanted to make templates to mark articles who had a portal, userbox and/or a shortcut associated, but I can't quite decide between the big or the small ones. Any thoughts? Duskey ( talk ) 17:43, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

I like the minibox better myself. It has been updated and I'm requesting comments. Template:Minibox Example. -- Duskey talk 09:35, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Marking Wikia as a bot
Would anyone object to marking User:Wikia as a bot so the "Welcoming new user" and "Generating talk page" or whatever it says, so itdoesn't show up in recent changes by default (you can show it by clicking "show bots")? If you're worried about missing new users you can also see them in the log. Duskey ( talk ) 20:03, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Advanced player story link
I've added an "advanced" player story link to Template:Sim and Template:Simbio-end. The link is down below. If there is no subpage in the current articles named "Player stories" it created a link which, when clicked, takes you to a new page with the text  already added to the edit section. Try it below:



Before I add it to neighborhood and other infoboxes, I wanted people's opinion on this (and hopefully discover any bugs) and I also wanted to know if it should be added to any more bio infoboxes. I checked most of them, but apart from "sim" they all seemed to rely on "simbio-end" for the playerstories.  Duskey ( talk ) 20:17, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I inserted it into family-end, pet and neighborhood as well. -- Duskey talk 10:09, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Featured content cleanup
Or featured content archive isn't too good. There's loose template and categories floating around from when the wiki was created. Before attempting to make some sense of it, I would like your opinion on a new template to show an article has been featured. It's being tested on the Riley Harlow article. Lemme know what you think. Duskey ( talk ) 23:52, September 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've made some headway in clearing it all up. The Sims Wiki:Featured Content will be the main page. I created Template:Featured content navbox to navigate through it all more easily. I added a new template I made Template:Feat art, to previously featured articles. It automatically includes era, which in return includes the category. I intend to do the same for media and contests soon'ish. I also intend to add the nav template to the voting pages.


 * I ran into a problem though. The old featured system had some undated articles which are new at the bottom of The Sims Wiki:Featured Article/Past Articles. If anyone can figure out how to get the month they were featured, that'd be awesome. -- Duskey talk 12:41, September 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've finished marking the past featured media with Template:Feat med and I also redirected all the redundant The Sims Wiki:Featured Article etc. pages to The Sims Wiki:Featured Content (which has also been updated. Furthermore, I included the navigation template on all associated pages now. -- Duskey talk 14:48, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Where/what are these screenshots from?
We're nearing completion in cleaning up Special:UnusedFiles, but I need some help in identifying a few images:

-- Duskey talk 08:25, September 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think these are just generic screenshots from The Sims (console) and The Sims 3. Anyone could have just uploaded them as part of some kind of story. If these images are orphaned, I suggest deleting as these could just be player-captured images. GEORGIEGIBBONS (talk) 18:56, September 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing out it was TS1 on console, I added the screens to that article. I disagree with deleting them since the remaining shots can be used in a lot article. If someone can identify the lots we can put them in the appropriate article. That article might even be missing an image. -- Duskey talk 05:03, September 8, 2010 (UTC)

Era template on all pages?
Now that Era no longer overlaps with the sitenotice and moves down with the rest of the article, I'd like to discuss the implementation of the Era template on all pages. I know other wikis use this method to quickly give users and overview of which games the article is about. We need to keep in mind that this is a huge undertaking as we have 5,500+ articles at the time of writing. I also think it's important that the icons are small. The game icons for example are huge at the moment and quickly clutter up the space. I suggest the icons are no larger than the padlocks (32px width I think) and that The Sims 1 logo be reduced to their first letter or something similar. What are your ideas? Would it be a helpful addition to our wiki? -- Duskey talk 06:26, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Spoiler Alerts
I see that a new spoiler system (Spoiler-header and Spoiler) is being introduced to the Wiki. However, I have to question the use of these templates.

Let us look at the example of Lostpedia, the Lost television series wiki. They have a spoiler policy, but it only governs the release of information before that information becomes available to the general public; for example, exposing the plot of an unreleased episode (the series has ended, but you know what I mean). However, they have no policy prohibiting presentation of information, even info that would be a spoiler to a person reading it before watching an episode, after the information is publicly-available. That means that articles on that wiki can reveal very detailed information, including information that might ruin the experience for people who choose to read an article before watching the episode(s).

What does Lostpedia do about this? Nothing. They do not give spoiler warnings on any articles that feature released content, because of one key concept - Users who visit Lostpedia are aware, or should be aware, that there is information present that may act as a spoiler. Wikipedia functions off a similar procedure; they provide any information you may want to find, even about books, movies, television shows, etc. even if that information may ruin the entertainment experience for a person who chooses to spoil it for themselves. It's understood that the information must be provided, and that readers themselves should be cautious to avoid spoiling the ending, if they haven't experienced it yet.

Therefore, I would encourage not using a spoiler system. It should be well understood that visiting articles on this site has a very real chance of presenting information that a player has not yet had; this is the very nature of a wiki that acts as a repository of information about a series, including its plot. At the very very most, I would favor a system similar to the Harry Potter wiki, where a general spoiler notice is permanently kept in the site notice, so that new users are aware of spoilers prevalent throughout the wiki, and experienced users can just ignore it.

Thoughts? -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 20:37, September 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah yes, I was thinking about asking the same question myself. The Spoiler-header template was already present (under the name 'Spoiler'), but only used on very few pages. The hide/show table was actually also used on some pages, just not in template form, so there's no been no change really apart from it being templated now and used across most articles containing storyline spoilers. I'm not sure I agree with a general spoiler disclaimer and no hide/show tables since people could be playing The Sims 3, looking up Bella Goth and finding spoilers about a console version game. It's true that in the future there may be hundreds of spoilers regarding all these Sims stories and spin-offs. I'm quite indifferent I believe, but I do think we need either a policy and disclaimer about spoilers or the current system of collapsible tables. I'm open to any other suggestions as well. -- Duskey talk 09:31, September 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * My opinion is that the very best idea would be to make it readily known that many of our articles contain spoilers, and that articles that contain spoilers won't warn readers. Make it known, perhaps, that articles detailing gameplay and not the characters themselves (such as articles about the games and expansions, modes of play, neighborhoods, etc) will not contain information that readily spoils the outcome, but that Sim pages and family pages may contain such information. I'd make all this available in an easily-accessible location, possibly the main page (but I understand logistically that may be a challenge) or else, as I said before, as a site notice (which all users could dismiss once they've read it). But I think the idea of adding spoiler warnings to any page that has some relevance to the plot is really extreme. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 18:47, September 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it's time to replace the "no fanon" permanent notice to a spoiler alert. It's clearly not working any way since people are not aware that a) What "fanon" and "player stories" are until their page is deleted, and b) that creating personal articles in the main namespace is against our policy, until their page is deleted. -- Duskey talk 11:54, September 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Speaking purely from my personal opinion, I really don't understand the point of a spoiler alert here at all. The plot of these games is very superficial and simplistic at best, not nearly the same level accomplished by most books, television series or movies. Personally, I don't think we need any sort of spoiler alert, because I really don't think there's much in the game that can be "spoiled." Like I said, this is purely my opinion, so I'm fine with a general spoiler warning. Like I've said, though, I think adding or leaving spoiler warnings on all relevant pages is excessive.


 * Also, Duskey... we know how many people ignore (most likely by accident) the notice notifying them of the fanon policy, but do we know how many visitors to this wiki actually acknowledge it and don't post fanon here? I'm not sure if that question makes any sense, so imagine a hypothetical situation where 10 people come onto TSW and all want to post fanon. Now imagine that 8 of those 10 people read the notice and realize that we don't allow fanon; they leave. But, those two that didn't notice the notice, or else those who don't understand what 'fanon' is, post it anyway. So, in this hypothetical situation, if we were to remove the notice, those 8 who didn't post fanon would not be warned not to post it, and would therefore post it.... granted, this is all hypothetical, based on made-up figures. I don't know of any way to determine how many people acknowledge the notice and how many don't. Perhaps the best idea is to include basic rules, including the no-fanon policy and spoiler warning, in that notice... maybe an increase in size would make it more noticeable? -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 14:14, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

Placement of certain templates in articles
I've noticed a lot of inconsistency in the locations of templates placed in articles. What I am referring to are templates such as merge, delete, split, stub, and others. The main thing I've noticed is that on some articles, those templates are placed quite prominently at the top of the article or at the head of a relevant section. On other articles, I've noticed them placed near the bottom, making them less noticeable.

What I propose is this: a Wiki-accepted standard that certain templates (which include merge, delete and Speedydelete, split, and possibly others) be placed at the top of the article or, if the template only applies to a particular section, that it be placed at the top of the relevant section. Additionally, I propose that we adopt a standard that the stub family of templates always get placed at the very bottom of an article (unless it is the expand template, which is used on individual sections only), so that all stubs will be visible in the same place and all will group together. The style I am proposing is intended to mimic the style used on Wikipedia.

Discussion is appreciated. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 22:53, September 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. -- Duskey talk 11:54, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

Custom external link icons
Would people be up for adding customized external link icons? Eg. as seen in the preview on the right. All links starting with  will have a little Google icon next to them, similar to the standard "blue arrow out of a box" icon. I just wanted to check if it something people wouldn't mind being added.

Personally I think it's a wonderful feature, I've often felt that the external links needed a bit of an upgrade as we often link to some specific sites, such as Google translate, Wikia Community Central and Wikipedia (and other Wikimedia) sites. If people think it is a good idea, I imagine we'll add icons for the sites I mentioned just now:
 * Google translate
 * Wikia Community Central
 * Wikimedia (Wikipedia and Commons in particular)

You can check Help:Changing the style of interwiki links which showed me how to do it. Any thoughts? -- Duskey talk 12:38, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Sims 2 castaway NDS items
"Hey Duskey. Can you please bring up a subject to the community? It is about this page. As you can see, it includes hundreds of red links that need to be deleted. I'm quite sure this can't be a one man job. I don't know where to bring this up, so could you do it for me? Thanks, JEA13 [ iTalk  ] 14:17, September 13, 2010 (UTC)"

I think it's worth a discussion. Should we keep the redlinks in the hope of creating multiple articles, which I assume can't be very large, or delete the links? Any thoughts are welcome. -- Duskey talk 22:44, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * If creating pages really was desirable, would it be possible to lump multiple items together into one page by type, then either edit the links to all direct to those condensed pages, or else set up redirects to link to the condensed pages... I lean more towards re-linking them, if we decide to take that route at all. I'm not an expert on console games, though, so I don't know if pages on all of those are even really necessary. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 22:47, September 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * I do not personally think there is an issue over here at all. We can't just go on and create hundreds of articles about a recipe found in just one game. All redlinks should be removed, and existing articles about recipes and ingredients be deleted. - JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 12:27, September 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * I know there'a already a List of recipes from The Sims 2 Castaway (Nintendo DS), why not create a List of ingredients from The Sims 2 Castaway (Nintendo DS)? Some of the articles have info from The Sims 3 as well (eg. Watermelon), though this is quite redundant as that info is already available in Gardening (The Sims 3). -- Duskey talk 12:33, September 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think that would applicable. We can't include Sims 3 info in a Sims 2 Castaway for DS article. And responding to my own hypothetical question "why not delete Gardening (The Sims 3) as well then", well, there's certainly a difference between Castaway and the Sims 3, which is the most recent, most played and still "under construction" Sims game.
 * Actually, I think you misunderstood my above quote. My initial intention was to keep the article itself, but remove all ingredient/recipe links on the page, red or blue. And delete the pages on the blue links as well, since they are of the same importance as the red ones which would never be created. I never said anything about deleting the page itself. A lot of effort has been put up in building it.- JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 12:42, September 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think we're completely misunderstanding each other. I recommend that we keep the article "List of recipes from The Sims 2 Castaway (Nintendo DS)" and create a new one called "List of ingredients from The Sims 2 Castaway (Nintendo DS)" which would be a long list of the items, with a section for each item. After that, we can delete the single pages if there's not enough content on them. -- Duskey talk 14:51, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Pages for Hidden Traits
It occurrs to me, as we now have a page for Rocker, that there may not be a consensus for or against the creation of pages for hidden traits. I think there are two outcomes to this; 1) these trait pages will continue to be deleted or to redirect to Trait, or 2) new pages will be created for the dozen or so hidden traits that currently do not have pages. Let's resolve this finally, so we don't continue to flip-flop. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 03:22, September 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm against it since I do not think hidden traits are used enough or have enough info for their own article. I also do not agree with listing the hidden traits mummy and simbot in the trait list since they're nothing like the other hidden traits (ie, if you have a mummy or a simbot, you're quite aware that they are in fact a mummy or a simbot). -- Duskey talk 12:22, September 14, 2010 (UTC)