Forum:Origin of welcome template

Index → Panopticon → Origin of welcome template

Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.

Where are all the Who fans??? Joker1138^{(The Hub)} File:Daleknew.jpg

Hey, in my defense, I did advertised on my my deviantART account. No affect... Azes13 20:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Its not against you, this site should have a hell of a lot more members, what about that outpost site. Joker1138^{(The Hub)} File:Daleknew.jpg

Where we can summarize what we have done to promote the Wiki so far

• I added a link to the Wiki on my sig. file on Outpost Gallifrey.

• submitted this site to the maintainer of Outpost Gallifrey's Web Guide to DW. the link won't appear right away, though. (incidentally, a Merry Christmas to you all you Tangerineduels at home!)

• a thread on why doesn't DW has its own Wiki came up. I contributed to that thread.

• contacted the creator of the unofficial DW CCG and suggested that he might contribute. got interested in his site because of the high quality of the screencaps he has used for many of the cards.

• contacted the maintainer of Whoniverse.org to suggest that he promote the Wiki. he said no.

• went to some of the WHO-related aritcles on Wikipedia, lightly edited one or two and added links to the relevant entries on the Wiki. made sure that the articles I linked to looked in good shape before I added the links.

• signed up with Doctor Who online. for some mysterious reason I couldn't sign in.

finally, "thought of" contacting some other website owners of exceptional/popular sites as well as likeminded communities, though with the exceptions given above, not really done it.

notably, have not chimed in on the Wikipedia WHO portal where the topic of the Wiki came up. since not a lot has happened here in relative terms they don't seem interested in joining up, which amounts to a self-fufilling prophecy. --***Stardizzy*** 21:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Where we can come up with ideas and strategize

Alright, so we need ideas onto how to make this site more popular and gain more editors, right? Well, when I first joined way back on the 21 October last year, I had a very low opinion of this site, as I thought it was drab, plain and most of it appeared to be misspellings and bad grammar. So perhaps many people are coming to this site, deciding "Oh, it's a mess" and leaving. So we perhaps need to neaten this site up a bit, which also counts as a general comment as well. So basically, pics, colourful infoboxes and de-stubbing articles may just be the way to go. ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 16:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Really? Because when I joined up back on February 21 (when it was logistically more barren), I did so because it was in such bad shape. Azes13 16:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's also partly why I joined, but not everybody thinks that way. Unfortunately. ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 16:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

thank you, Azes13. I got interested again because I saw the insane level of detail on the STAR WARS and STAR TREK sites recently and got inspired by them. --***Stardizzy*** 16:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with Ghelæ here. The site does look a bit shabby compared to the likes of Wookipedia and Memory Alpha. (It was partly for this reason that I was suggesting consistency of picture sizes in the infoboxes was important). Another issue that might be off-putting to people is a lack priorities and direction regarding what needs to be done. For example, it might seem to some that more effort is going in to creating categories than in to the articles that might be placed within them. Sorry if I'm sounding critical but I am playing Devil's advocate here a bit. --Mantrid 16:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

agreeing as far as keeping infobox pictures the same size. had no idea you had said so. except that I have a technical question. what if we only have a very small picture? wouldn't it look very blurry if enlarged? --***Stardizzy*** 17:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, some of the stuff I found on the BBC website was pretty small. I suppose you'd need to make it smaller. Azes13 17:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree about not stretching small images, that would look awful. However, I think more efforts could be made in acquiring appropriate and larger images. The easiest way is by making our own captures from the episodes ourselves (as I have done with the likes of The Dalek Invasion of Earth and The Keys of Marinus etc. If others don't have the software/hardware to get screen captures I'm happy to do it. However, I don't have everything on video/DVD. --Mantrid 17:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

really, truly appreciated. very hard (surprisingly) to find good old series screencaps online. (you can find new series ones with relative ease.) as far as the companions and Doctors, I don't imagine we'd have trouble finding good, large photos of any of them except for possibly Katarina and Sara Kingdom. in Sara Kingdom's case, perhaps a good DVD screencap from one of her two surviving episodes. literally only about a minute of her death scene and two publicity photos exist of Katarina, though. --***Stardizzy*** 17:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree all you've said. I have not found good old series screencaps in abundance online, actually, though you can get new series screencaps easily enough.

the colorful infoboxes seem to have slowly started to creep in (thank you again, Joker), though of course we could use more of them. Wikipedia has a number of WHO-related infoboxes (and some TORCHWOOD and SJA ones) that I found yesterday, even if they only cover television continuity exclusively. I also suggest we change the featured article which has sat there forever and have some new news stories. the latest one concerns an event that happened before "Invasion of the Bane", even. so, maybe something on "Infinite Quest" animated series or the costume auction, as those seem like the biggest WHO news lately.

infoboxes (I will also paste these templates to elsewhere in the forum):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_Doctor_Who_templates

Torchwood template (which I think will need editing, for our purposes):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Torchwood

Sarah Jane Adventures template (ditto, it'll also need tweaking):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TSJA

--***Stardizzy*** 16:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Yep, we need to change the featured article, another thing, and update the wiki. SO - colour, updates, and language. The three main things we should do. Anything else? ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 17:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

language? --***Stardizzy*** 17:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

grammar and speeling. ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 17:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

In fact, how about a page/forum topic for voting new featured articles? I think we need one. ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 17:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Or bring it up on the Main Page's talk page. Azes13 17:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that works too... ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 17:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I think we need to revamp the look of the site, the regeneration of Tardis Wiki if you will. Joker1138^{(The Hub)} File:Daleknew.jpg

Yes, regenerate... in what way? Like how we've discussed? Or more of a total redo? Or a complete/major reskinning of the main page? Or something entirely different? ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 18:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

it does look bland and it could do with a re-skinning. I thought perhaps a background that looked like the hexagons they have in the new TARDIS interior. I thought even more radical, that the site could use a re-naming to Wiki Who, if technically possible. the Wiki currently has such a lengthy name and could use a more catchy one. --***Stardizzy*** 22:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

We need to change the entire image of the site, first off by the main page.

• We could do with a new logo; I am good at creating images so if we can come to some sort of agreement on what it should be.

• Administrators, Who are they? Where are they? We need more.

• The general look of this site is quite bland; we have started with the Infobox’s so we can expand on that

• Adding images to as many articles as possible will make it more interesting, also the creation of galleries is all ways a winner

• Finally and most importantly we have begun the search for new members, all effort must be placed into this task if TARDIS is ever going to grow.

Joker1138^{(The Hub)} File:Daleknew.jpg

Can I ask what's wrong with the present logo and how we might improve on it? --Mantrid 19:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I picture the Seal of Rassilon with writing in a circle around it, if that makes sense. --***Stardizzy*** 22:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, that sounds like a good idea...Azes13 22:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I don’t know, its still good, it depends if it comes under the overall change, Joker1138^{(The Hub)} File:Daleknew.jpg

• As for admins, Azes13 and Mantrid are both sysops who commonly edit this wiki, as is Freethinker1of1, so admins aren't in too short a supply (when you consider that you, Stardizzy, Tangerineduel and I are the other users that most commonly edit the wiki) at the moment.
• Galleries: They're good for quickly finding pics of anything you want, but aren't very encyclopedic. Perhaps if you give them some order (like in a Dalek gallery you can have Original Skaro Daleks, Spaceflight-Era Daleks, Imperial Daleks, Renegade/Skarosian Daleks and Post-Time War Daleks) they may be more useful though.
• Finally, the logo is ok, although I agree that it could be better, although how might be difficult to elaborate on. ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 20:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

good idea to categorize them according to Dalek era. no idea how galleries "work" on a Wiki, by the way. learning by doing. --***Stardizzy*** 22:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• But I like the current logo...
• I've never really found out the purpose of admins, so I'm not entirely sure why we'd need more.
• I'm not sure what else you would need to make the site less bland.
• Yeah, I've been looking for new pictures to add all the time. The galleries might be useful.
• What, not on improving the articles? Azes13 21:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• There, there, Azes, you8 can keep the current logo...
• Admons are for deleting useless articles, banning vandals, protecting vandalised pages when they can't be bothered to block vandals and making more admins. Yeah, I suppose you have a point.
• Perhaps a nice colourful background...
• Yes, I agree with your agreeing with me.
• What's that a comment on? ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 21:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Rock on!
• I was under the impression that everyone could do that. Funny how that works...
• Oh! Yeah, that's a very good idea. I was actually going to bring it up earlier but I was under the impression that it was pre-set for the wikia.
• I agree with you agreeing with me agreeing with you. Or something like that...
• I mean getting new members would be helpful, but it doesn't mean we should neglect the articles. You know, 'cause I got from the comment that Joker1138 didn't want to put any effort into the improvement. Azes13 21:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• The main thing is to improve the articles, I didn’t mention it because I thought it was a given, this whole site is about articles and how detailed they are. Joker1138^{(The Hub)} File:Daleknew.jpg

• Which way should we be improving the articles?

Quantity or quality. I'm more inclined to go with quantity, getting all the inter-referencing linked to something, which might persuade new members to add more detail. As I see it new members may be more inclined to add to articles (even if said articles just have headings and to be added) than actually write whole articles....(I know it's still a large undertaking). The white 'skin' of this site is...bland, but it's also relatively easy on the eye, unusualness is all well and good, but it's also going to need to be user friendly. I don't think the black background ala Memory Alpha would work here (it works for the space shippy Memory Alpha, but Doctor Who is a more than just space shippy stuff)...not that there's anything wrong with space shippy stuff. Tangerineduel 14:21, 31 January (UTC)...is there a way you insert this time and date that I neglected to read about?...