User talk:Zero2001

Zero2001, we don't use videos on the wiki. We're an encyclopedia, not a fansource, videos don't add much to articles. It's also poor style to put YouTube videos into articles. They have major copyright issues, so other than being of questionable legality (most videos are fansubs or pirated), they are also unreliably hosted in a way that is likely to leave the wiki with a dead video sometime in the future. The wiki is supposed to be handled in a way that in 5 years or so, we don't need to go back and rewrite half of it because people used 'current' to much, or used unreliable links which ended up dying shortly after they were added. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Oct 26, 2008 @ 10:03 (UTC)
 * Also, could you please fix your signature. Currently it is falsely linking to User:Zero, basically falsely identifying you as another user which would cause most people to try to reply to them, instead of you. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Oct 26, 2008 @ 10:04 (UTC)

Please do not assume agreement if someone does not respond. It is very rude as no-one on the wiki is under the obligation to respond, or more importantly, required to report daily to the wiki.

As for images, please take a look over Project:Image policy. Do understand that fair use tagged images will always be preferred over those without tagging. So if you're trying to replace manga images (many of which are tagged), with anime images, then make sure that you understand fair use tagging and tag your images properly. If you don't do that, then bout 90% of the images you replace manga images with will be undone. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 6, 2008 @ 22:00 (UTC)

NavTemplates
By nav-templates, are you talking about the nav boxes seen at the bottom of pages, like those used on Wikipedia, Naruto?

To be quite honest, I hate those. I find that manually generated lists like those are opposite of organized. They duplicate information, force you to update them when you shouldn't need to, and they're unnecessary. NavBoxes work for Wikipedia because it is a generic Encyclopedia. Because they handle just about every topic those nav boxes help to group relevant pages together. However, that is unnecessary on wiki like this. Here the entire wiki is about the same topic, there is no need to stick things like that at the bottom of pages, rather it's just unnecessary clutter.

IMHO, what makes a wiki organized, is a good category system (we're working on making this even better using SMW), and a good set of general pages (Episodes, Jutsu, Characters, ...) which are linked to from the main page and perhaps sidebar, and point readers to the more useful categorization or list being setup.

Right now I'm waiting on Wikia to install Semantic Forums so I can fix up and roll out a new set of infoboxes for Characters, Jutsus, and perhaps even Episodes. All these infoboxes will be easily editable by anyone, won't clutter up articles like they currently do, and they will nicely inject annotations into articles. Once that is done, things like the lists of who can use what Jutsu, global lists of Ninjutsu, Genjutsu, Kinjutsu, etc... Character lists, and so on. Can all be automatically generated. This means that content only needs to be worked on in one place, and the system will handle all organization of that data. In fact, some real nice queries can even be searched for. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) Dec 14, 2008 @ 09:56 (UTC)

Those nav templates you show me look no different than those on Wikipedia. It's the exact same concept.

You do realize that there are probably already a thousand or so jutsu? Creating a nav box template for Jutsu would be absolutely insane. As for related jutsu, we already have good see also sections on relevant jutsu, there is absolutely no need for a template.

As for show/hide... Take a look at MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css. The Narutopedia inherits Wikia ACG's vast JS, CSS, and Template repository. Show/Hide has existed for quite some time, and I've even improved it over the original from WP. On top of that there are scripts for Modifying portlets (that was from back in Monobook). I created some code for adding a show/hide to the edittools. We have tabview and if we wanted could create tabbed content, not just simple show/hide stuff. On top of that there's the Box css system which makes it possible to use a simple class line to specify just about any possible css style you could need in a template, without verbosely specifying any of the coloring or other formatting junk inside of the template. And then there is the entire repo of synced templates. They are used over all of Wikia acg, some provide compatibility with Wikipedia, and many of them are rewrites which combine the tasks of a half dozen redundant WP templates into a single one with even more features. (ie: WP has Tl, Tlp, Tlx, ... We just have Tlx that does the job of all of them. Same for FS which handles GPL, GFDL, FAL, Artistic-2, ... And CC which handles more CreativeCommons licenses than the redundant variations you can find on WP and Commons). And then there is the iBox system.

We don't need navboxes. Infoboxes are good enough. They provide a good set of information, with SF installed they will be easy to edit, and will annotate the page with enough data that we can create whatever kind of navigation we need.

NavTemplates are an outdated technique for organization which come from Wikipedia. WP is the worst place to look for good organization techniques, because of the concern of performance WP has a lot of unnecessary duplication and redundancy. The categorization is a mess because the model is to simplistic and as a result people start creating non-atomic categories. NavTemplates are just another one of WP's techniques involving content duplication.

Please don't just unfoundedly say that old techniques are far better than an attempt at innovating organization. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) Dec 14, 2008 @ 12:16 (UTC)

Reply
Not as much as at Avatarwiki, I started watching Naruto during the big hiatus between Earth and Fire. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Signature

 * 1) Yes the wiki is not Wikipedia, we do not follow all the same policies and a policy's existence on WP does not imply existence here. However, we do use Wikipedia rationales as aids in creating our own policies, and one of the policies we have taken from Wikipedia is the signature policy. Signatures with images give comments by a user undue prominence and disrupt line hight in talkpages.
 * 2) Wikia has no such rule. Wikia does not employ global rules like that, something like that would be contrary to the fact that Wikia wiki are controlled by the community.
 * 3) Thats a poorly reasoned statement, MediaWiki is what controls valid markup in signatures, it makes no restrictions in them other than length and substing templates. What is actually allowed in a signature is controlled by a wiki's policy. To make your statement true Wikia would have to go and hack core MediaWiki to fit a community's policy.

No other user has been allowed to upload an image for personal use. In fact other users have tried uploading signature images and they have been uniformly deleted. Personal user content has never helped the Narutopedia, afact it's caused quite a bit of trouble for the wiki, so the community has prohibited it. Even my userpage contains nothing but generic freely licensed images from commons and the like. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) Jan 22, 2009 @ 17:31 (UTC)


 * Because those wiki don't have a policy against signature images, the Narutopedia does. Each and every wiki on Wikia comes up with it's own policies. Some adopt some policies, and others adopt other policies. The Narutopedia happens to be one that has had issues with users abusing the wiki with personal stuff far to often, so it's adopted a number of policies against most types of non-wiki-related content. (No personal images; No fan content; Userpages without a point (don't relate the user as an editor) or from non-contributors get deleted; Forums and talkpages are not to be use for asking or starting discussions not related to the wiki; etc...) ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) Jan 22, 2009 @ 17:40 (UTC)

Categories
I'm gonna assume you've spoken to Dantman about adding all those categories to things. Cause...if the past is any indication, he is just gonna delete the lot of them. That being said I have class in about 30 minutes (as of writing this) so I would suggest stopping this now and asking him if you hadn't.--TheUltimate3 15:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thats a similar comment to the Categories made for the different elements. He deleted all of them and instead used that Classification thing. I predict these will all follow a similar fate. Because of that I ask you do not add any more of these categories until everyone is certain. (And F.Y.I this will do nothing with duplications. When people load stuff, they don't bother to look to see if its on the site or not, they just throw it in find the article and if it's already there they just remove the first one and add theirs in.)--TheUltimate3 15:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)