StrategyWiki talk:Community Portal

http://media.strategywiki.org/images/4/49/SW_CP_Banner.png

This page is for discussion of general community issues; if you just want to ask a question to more experienced users of the site, please use the staff lounge. To start a new thread [ click here]. Resolved threads are gradually archived; see the archives box to the right.

A new skin is under development. If you have any suggestions, please add them to the list

Sims 2 partnership
I noticed from this diff http://simpedia.co.uk. They don't seem to have much in the line of walkthrough information which is good for us. However, they are still rather small, so I'm not sure if it's worth it. If we decide against the partnership, the link should be removed since they are essentially competitors. -- Prod (Talk) 20:59, 21 August 2007 (CDT)
 * I'd say no, just remove the link. -- 22:07, 21 August 2007 (CDT)
 * I'll talk with me colleagues. &mdash; Supuhstar * [[Image:Supuhstar(SupuhSmall).gif]]

Community Portal
At the meeting we discussed a redesign of the Community Portal which would be more useful as a collaborative tool. We've already rearranged it a bit, but we had discussed a couple new possibilities. The shoutbox idea is really cool, but until we can implement it, I had mentioned the idea of a projects box. Check out this page and see if you like it. If so we can go ahead and use it until the shoutbox idea can be implemented. All I really did was replace the DPL with projects (they could also use better descriptions, both in the Community Portal and on their respective pages).-- Duke Ruckley  07:51, 26 August 2007 (CDT)
 * That's a very good idea, and much more useful than a list that's on the main page anyway. I say go for it. GarrettTalk 04:35, 31 August 2007 (CDT)

Watching Pages
I was wondering if it is possible to implement an option to "watch guide" where instead of having to select every page in a guide, to select the guide itself and have it include all subpages and talk pages. For example, if I want to watch each EarthBound subpage, I would choose watch all on the EarthBound main page. Think this is possible?-- Duke Ruckley  12:15, 28 August 2007 (CDT)
 * It's totally possible, but not a feature implemented into mediawiki yet. We could write our own script, however...  All we need is a function that returns all the pages of a guide and then opens them using "http://strategywiki.org/w/index.php?title=PAGENAME&action=watch."  That would be messy, but at least it would get 'em all done quickly (mediawiki browser bomb anyone?).  -- 12:29, 28 August 2007 (CDT)
 * In addition to what NMH said, you might want to make sure it's down as a feature suggestion (option to watch subpages of watched pages) on MediaWiki's Bugzilla. -- 13:08, 28 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Will do.-- Duke Ruckley  16:36, 28 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Bug 2308 seems to be what I was looking for. However, it doesn't seem to have gone anywhere.-- Duke  Ruckley Talk 07:09, 11 September 2007 (CDT)

Considering alternatives to Google Adsense
I thought I would throw this discussion wide open to the community. We've talked about it a few times in the staff meetings on IRC, but I'd like some input that any of you have about possible substitutes to Google Adsense. At the moment, it's helpful, but it doesn't quite cut the mustard. With more traffic, that may improve, but it can't be counted upon. There are alternatives out there, but I'm not particularly knowledgeable about many of them. I know that there is an eBay click-through program, and an Amazon click-through program. I also have a direct line to (and have been in contact with) the staff at Advertising.com, but this introduces the subject of visual ads and their placement. I have a feeling that the reception any non-text based visual advertisement is going to be very poor, from both the core community and the outlying community. However, I believe these ads really do stand the chance to create the highest possible stream of revenue from my personal understanding. I would love to be proven wrong, and possibly educated by anyone else if they have personal experience dealing with any of these, or other, possible alternatives. Thanks very much. Procyon (Talk) 13:35, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I'm fine with ads as long as they don't hinder editing, I really wouldn't want popups here. I think we should try the Amaon and Ebay links first but I don't think we'll get much from them really because if you want the walkthrough then you'll most likely have the game.--Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions) 15:15, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Not ebay, since what would they be selling that people reading the guide would want anyway? As for the Amazon ads, I think they are a good idea (and Garrett already has done some experimentation of how they get laid out, which is also a good thing). Perhaps having both Amazon and AdSense might make an extra hundred dollars or so in revenue per month (hopefully). Also, it appears that non BlueCloud skins don't have ads, so implement them there as well. As for the advertising.com flash/picture ads, as long as they're small and sort-of out of the way, I'm fine with it. Or even better, do what Wikia does and display larger and flashier ads when users are not logged in, and hide/shrink the flashy ones and stick with only the AdSense or whatever when they do log in (also encourages people to create accounts, and hopefully also use them -- perhaps make the type of ads that appear change based on how many edits a user makes, and outline it somewhere). I've brought up a couple of other points in the sections below. -- 16:10, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Auction Ads apparently yields up to 400% more than AdSense. Based on the demo the ads seem to be unobtrusive and properly targeted. We could probably make more from Amazon referrals, though. Unfortunately the Amazon ads box doesn't seem to detect products intelligently enough to give reliable links to the game a given page is actually covering, so the links would have to be done manually via a template of some sort (you can see my experiment right here). GarrettTalk 19:21, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I would recommend just sticking with Google AdSense, and perhaps adding an Amazon link; no other advertising services compare with AdSense (I'm a bit suspicious of the one Garrett brought up; I've never heard of it before), and I worry about turning StrategyWiki into a billboard. We're here for the guides, not adverts. -- 11:09, 5 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I've heard of the service Garrett was mentioning. Personally I think if Garrett can easily implement some of them, we should try any and all that we can easily access.  DrBob, I understand your hesitation, but there's a bottom line for SW users: More money = bigger SW, and bigger SW = better experience for the users.  No one is holding a gun to anyone's head and saying you have to buy something (that's what the donate button is for ^_^), but there's money to be made, and we're not making enough of it.  We can even try implementing the idea that Skizzerz has for logged in vs. non-logged in users (and fixing the non-BlueCloud skins to show the ads as well).  There are so many ways now for users to filter out ads that if someone was truly offended by the sight of them, they could correct that for themselves.  Heck, Firefox makes ad filtering almost too easy!  Procyon (Talk) 14:43, 5 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I'm currently in agreement with DrBob.. I don't really want to see any large ads on SW.  One of the reasons I left GameFAQs in the first place was because of all the annoying ads they have added.  As for the idea about logged in vs. not logged in users...  What's going to happen here is that potential contributors and browsers are going to come to the site for the first time and see all these big flashy ads, and then just leave.  I think that you are less likely to draw more contributors, even if you get rid of the ads for logged in users.  New users aren't going to know that offhand.  And its not going to be easy to keep their attention long enough for them to see that by registering they can get rid of those unwanted ads.


 * I think that by taking a very slow approach to adding ads would be better than just all of sudden having them. We should start small with the ads and work on having more people who regularly contribute first.  Once we have a very good amount of people, a bit of a following, we can then add the ads (for non-logged in users).  The right time to implement this is when it is more important to make more money than it is to attract new users.  I hope I'm making sense.-- Duke  Ruckley  18:35, 5 September 2007 (CDT)


 * MobyGames has had text-only product ads for a while now, but they offer logged-in users the ability to turn them off (it's not automatic). If it can be implemented without being incompatible with MediaWiki upgrades this would be a great way to maximise profits from visitors and minimise annoying regular contributors.
 * Even if that's not a viable solution, what we're proposing is nothing compared to the ridiculous level of product placement other gaming sites have—right now GameFAQs' main page has two banner ads, a square ad, and a themed background all imploring me to pre-order Medal of Honor: Airborne. Sometimes these ad themes even have mouse-over sounds/animations and other annoyances. IGN and GameSpy are little better, mixing animated ads with reminders about their tantalising "subscriber extras". GarrettTalk 05:32, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

I can do further experimenting with the Amazon sidebar, but before the concept can be actually implemented echelon will need to set up the referrer ID that the sales will be credited to. GarrettTalk 05:32, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

Thoughts on Template:Helpwanted
Consider this a kind of marketing move.

A lot of visitors see our site and find stubs for the games that they would consider to be popular. As such, they may look at our site with discontent. Instead, we should turn this into a positive reaction: a chance for the visitor to show their appreciation for the game by contributing. By making that emotional connection with the visitor, we may gain a higher percentage of core contributors and maintainers. (Those not limited to a few casual edits.) Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if motivation of this sort leads to more guides being completed.

Note that we shouldn't (and wouldn't want to) overuse this template. If the visitor sees it on every incomplete guide, they may quickly consider the template a standard boilerplate, and hence they may loose that original emotional queue.

If we do choose to implement a template of this sort, I would endeavor to make it even more personalized and tailored to each guide. Perhaps we could insert a few parameters into it, so that on the Halo 2 guide, it stresses that Master Chief would hate to see the guide fail. If that doesn't establish a connection with the visitor, I don't know what will.

Thoughts? echelontalk 01:10, 5 September 2007 (CDT)


 * It's a good start. Wikipedia has varying cleanup/stub/etc templates for articles that need each respective one. It's better than just having stub and cleanup on everything. -- 01:21, 5 September 2007 (CDT)
 * OK. How about implementing this for all guides which are popular for the main consoles (look on the consoles' pages for the list), but aren't at completion stage 4? -- 14:25, 5 September 2007 (CDT)
 * No. I think that this should be used sparingly and that the credential for use is based on active users for the guide.  For example, you might have one or more people working hard on a guide, and then they post this on it knowing they need more help.  If we just say, these "need help" it acts as a stub template notification.  There has to be more than "please do this because it's empty."  -- 15:15, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

Peer Review Project
For a while now I've been wanting to copy Wikipedia's Peer Review system over here. Now that the Featured Article system has been put in place I think it's even more important. So over the next few days I plan on starting the frame work of the system/project but I'm not sure where I should put it. Per the conversation here there does not appear to be consensus. I was planning on putting it at WikiProject Peer Review or Peer Review. For the record Wikipedia has it located at  Peer review . Thoughts? Ideas? Suggestions? -Argash 05:52, 7 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Personally, I don't see the point of this. It adds a needless extra layer of complication on top of processes that we already have in place.  We're not Wikipedia, we have far less need for the level of bureaucracy that they have established.  Procyon (Talk) 09:18, 7 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I agree with Procyon; while I know what you want to achieve, simply copying Wikipedia's practices is not going to be beneficial for StrategyWiki — they're designed to operate on a much larger scale than what we need, and are needlessly bureaucratic, as Proc says. I think the rule we've got at the moment that a featured guide must be completely proofread by people who know what they're doing will suffice for the time being. -- 11:22, 7 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I don't think that an exact copy would be the best way your right. And even still it would certainly not be manditory.  It would be a way for people who've put alot of time into a guide to request another persons opinion on what should be done next.  Simply put it would stream line the asking process and open it up so anyone can help pr a guide. -Argash 16:45, 7 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Just post a new section here in CI, and if someone is interested, they'll look it over. Right now, we just want as much content as possible, and since the sysop-to-active non sysop ratio is ridiculously high, things get cleaned up etc. on a minor scale to begin with. The less bureaucratic processes we have, the better. -- 16:59, 7 September 2007 (CDT)

I think that the point being made, in this case, is that we are still a close and tight-knit community that is very much hands on. There isn't much that goes on that is beyond our attention or goes unnoticed. I think WP's contributors are a much broader spectrum of users, and so much is taking place there, that they need those kinds of magnets to draw certain people's attention to issues that need it. Fortunately, we haven't reached that point, and hopefully we never truly will. Procyon (Talk) 20:22, 7 September 2007 (CDT)
 * For reference. we have started these off at Category:StrategyWiki projects. -- Prod (Talk) 10:06, 9 September 2007 (CDT)

What's happened
In IE6 the bottom of the page has been really messed up, the logos are everywhere and images are in the wrong place, there's also a dark blue bar at the bottom of the page, it's like someone's messed up the skin. I tried a ctrl and f5 but it hasn't helped. Is there anything that can be done (apart from the obvious)?--Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions) 13:02, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Me and DrBob are working on cleaning up some of the CSS/JS on the site (ok, it's mostly DrBob :P). Please note any problems here (or talk to DB on IRC directly) and they will be fixed asap. -- Prod (Talk) 13:21, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
 * My watchlist is not working. O_O is it related to this?--IsaacGS 13:39, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
 * shakes his magic 8-ball* - Yes. Please add to the following list. -- Prod (Talk) 13:50, 9 September 2007 (CDT)


 * Anonymous users couldn't access site
 * Images at bottom mixed around for IE6
 * Can't access Special:Watchlist (blank page)
 * I use Firefox and everything works fine. But when I load up IE6 or IE6 Tab in Firefox, all I get is a blank screen on every stradegywiki page with nothing but one of the various "please donate" messages at the top of the page. -- Takiten 13:53, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Actually, that one should be fixed, try purging your cache (the ie cache). -- Prod (Talk) 13:56, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Just to say,transparency in IE6 is now working but the images are still messed up :)--Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions) 10:36, 10 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I'm probably not going to be able to fix this for a little while, as school's started up again, so I've got no time on my hands (and booting up Windows to test in IE isn't the quickest of tasks). If the only things still messed up are the images at the bottom, I think people can live with it for a while, can't they? -- 16:51, 10 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Just to note, another problem is the completion stage icon is messed up on the main page of a guide, it gets stretched.--Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions)
 * And the transparency doesn't work when you look at the image on media.strategywiki.--Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions) 10:23, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
 * It won't, because the JS which fixes transparency in IE isn't run when you look at images directly (i.e. on media.strategywiki.org). -- 11:03, 13 September 2007 (CDT)

Wikipedia's embedded ogg files
Is it just me, or are these inline/embeded ogg files new to wikipedia? Maybe it's just standing out since I'm a recent Linux-convert, but I don't recall stumbling over these before.

If it's possible to upload these files and they work well in Windows and IE, I would like to seriously consider the possibility of beginning to host gameplay videos on StrategyWiki. Another possibility would be for FLV files. We could easily build our own MediaWiki FLV player extension--I could get right to it, actually. echelontalk 22:40, 10 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I think I just answered my own question . I'll get to work on this in the morning, if you guys approve. echelontalk 22:40, 10 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Does it have to be Flash? That means I can't easily play the files (no Flash on 64-bit Linux), and it's not an open-source technology. How about just embedded ogg files, as long as MW can thumbnail them? (Haven't spent any time researching this, so I'm prepared to be flamed.) -- 01:05, 11 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Open source really shouldn't matter as long as it is easily accessible (and free money-wise) to get. I do agree that we should shy away from file types that do not cater to the entirety of our potential audience however, so we should stick with things that multiple operating systems (such as 64-bit Linux) can support. -- 15:03, 11 September 2007 (CDT)
 * We are aiming for a completely open-source approach (or at least, we were; has anything changed?) similarly to Wikipedia. Ogg/Theora embedded video should be supported on most platforms, as they'll all have an embedded video player of some description, and ogg codecs get everywhere (although vanilla Windows users will probably have to install the codec). I'm open to suggestions for other video container/codec combinations, though. -- 15:38, 11 September 2007 (CDT)
 * That Wikipedia template is a very recent change. Thanks to the long-awaited media back-end rewrite, MediaWiki 1.11a and newer can generate thumbnails from Theora videos on the fly with the same functionality as the image formats. The actual embedding is done via OggHandler, released earlier this month. It uses the Cortado Java applet to embed the video (the player even includes a codec, meaning no separate installation is necessary).
 * Unfortunately the extension only loads the player after you click the button, whereas Flash and DivX solutions have the player fully embedded in a "sleep" state. To play a video using this extension you first have to wait for AJAX to retrieve the player code, and then wait again for the Java runtime to initialise!
 * What I'm worried about is the negative effect on the site's reception. Even in my short time fiddling with the extension I'd far prefer to take the time to open the file in WMP or VLC rather than put up with OggHandler. The extension feels sluggish and outdated, and it will disappoint anyone used to the fluidity of YouTube or GameTrailers; many people will be much less likely to directly watch StrategyWiki's videos in the future, which defeats the very purpose of embedding them! To make matters worse the play button looks just like Windows Media Player 11's&mdash;so much like it that I decided the new media back-end had detected WMP and would use it to seamlessly embed the video. Unfortunately, this idea was smashed the moment Java started loading...
 * Statistically, the percentage of visitors using 64-bit Linux (and any other OSes that can't install Flash) will always very, very small; they can simply download VLC Player or the like and then click through to the FLV to watch it. It would be a simple matter to have the "no Flash" error text provide a link straight to the FLV.
 * Theora is a nice format in and of itself, but I don't think it's a good idea to annoy a sizeable percentage of our target audience just to maintain open source fidelity. If we are going to have videos uploaded here embedding is a must, and to me this nasty AJAX+Java solution doesn't cut it; I am strongly opposed to this extension in its current state, and this means that I'm also strongly opposed to using Theora here unless a better embeddable player can be found. GarrettTalk 03:43, 12 September 2007 (CDT)

ZeldaWiki partnership
Recently, the head guy at ZeldaWiki left a message on echelon's talk page regarding the exchanges of links. Browsing through ZeldaWiki, I've noticed that they've held up their end of our deal by linking to us on the game pages, but we, as of yet, have not really upheld our end (the only place I really found them were two in LttP). After a brief discussion on GoldenChaos's talk page, it was decided to bring it up here, so that's what I'm doing.

Pretty much, this "request" is broken up into two parts, namely, what we should link and how often we should link it. As for what, I think that characters and enemies should definitely be linked to ZeldaWiki, and perhaps items as well. Now, for how often, I'm thinking that the very first mention of the character/enemy/item/whatever on the page should be linked (much like our Bulbapedia partnership). Due to the immense amount of time since the partnership began, I wish to get started on this as soon as possible, so please leave your opinions/views/comments below. -- 17:22, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I think this would be a great collaboration of the month and we should definitely get started right away.-- Duke Ruckley Talk 20:39, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
 * A simple "zw" template, similar to the bp template we have should do for most of the links, and the "For more information..." box on the front page of Zelda guides that was being discussed on echelon's talk page could be dealt with by a "zeldawiki" template, similar to wikipedia. -- 11:52, 14 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I spoke about this on Ech's talk page, but I'll describe what our initial agreement sounded like: I would put "FAQ/Walkthrough on SW" on boss pages and game pages, and SW would implement a system similar to what goes on with SW and Bulbapedia. That was as far as we really got in our discussion - everything else was just chitter-chatter. So, yeah - you hit it right on the dot, Bob. Anything I can do to help get this collaboration going, just let me know! If it's making links and whatnot, I'm happy to help start this project out. --GoldenChaos 09:36, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I've gone ahead and created zw and zeldawiki (I hope you don't mind that I stole your logo for the second template; it can be changed if you want a different one used), which can now be used. zw is basically a wrapper for an interwiki link, and at the moment provides no extra functionality, but using it means we have the option of extending the template in future. -- 10:26, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
 * That's great, Bob! I have a transparent version of the logo, if you want to use that, or a version of the logo that isn't transparent but also doesn't have the extraneous blue background (aka a larger version of the famicon, which I'm not even sure is displaying right now - it's not showing up in my browser for some reason). I'll upload one of the two later. It'll look neater than the current version. --GoldenChaos 20:49, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Excuse me... that's... DrBob. Procyon (Talk) 20:53, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
 * My appologies to dear Doctor. ;) Anyways, I've tried out the nifty template on a small section for the heck of it. I'm not sure how much you guys intent to wikify these articles. I was conservative in what I linked. If it were interwiki style, links would obviously be all over the place. Given the fact that it's a walkthrough, I don't know how much you guys intend to link or if you only intend to link each item/person/etc's reference only on their first entry in the walkthrough. Anyway: ALttP: Eastern Palace - PoI's
 * Actually, he's just Dr, not a doctor :P. I would go with only linking the important items (or when they are first obtained). I would suggest links under the name field on the items pages for each game. I'm a bit worried about sending people to another site in the middle of a guide with minimal backlinkability, but the information is good over there.  What will the purpose of the Zeldawiki be? -- Prod (Talk) 23:43, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
 * The "Dr" often confuses people. ;-) Zeldawiki is to be used on the main pages of Zelda guides, to link to Zelda Wiki's page on the game more clearly. -- 03:48, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I think the current version's OK, but do what you will. :-) -- 03:48, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I agree with Prod in that perhaps only on the items page do we link to ZeldaWiki (but then link to the items page in the guide). Besides, the parts where it's like [[Image:Zelda ALttP item Mushroom.png]]  just looks really weird having a pic before and after the link. As for zeldawiki, We need to work on that logo a bit before actually putting it up (right now it looks plain ugly with the blue-ish box just around the image and the image not being vertically centered). -- 10:02, 16 September 2007 (CDT)
 * The reason I asked about the box version is because their game coverage seems to be minimal on most games. They have far more info relating to characters, items, and backstory. I think we might want to put their info on enemies and character pages as well. -- Prod (Talk) 14:41, 17 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Question about linking outside of StrategyWiki. Is there a way to make the links to ZeldaWiki (and any other partnership site or even any outside link) open in a new window or tab?  That would eliminate the problem with having people stray from our site to another while allowing for more links to the partner sites.-- Duke  Ruckley Talk 20:28, 17 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Well they can just right click on the link and say open new window/tab... You can't open new tabs with HTML but you can open windows by adding target="_blank" inside of an  tag. -- 00:16, 18 September 2007 (CDT)
 * You can also do it via js (I have some js that works on another wiki), but many people don't like new tabs/windows being forced upon them. -- 15:04, 18 September 2007 (CDT)

Slightly O.T., but speaking of Zelda, I revised the way that the entire first game's Overworld was explained, and tried to make it clearer and easier to follow. Procyon (Talk) 15:44, 18 September 2007 (CDT)

Links
Ok so we need to link to them when regarding: Hm. I actually can't think of anything else... This policy is of course superceded by references to strategy. Anyone else have anything? -- 11:49, 20 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Names (Bosses, Characters, Locations)

Anyone have anything to add? -- 03:27, 25 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Not really, but I don't see the point in doing it just yet, seeing as you can't even view 99% of their pages now. Once their server gets fixed, then we can start adding them in. -- 20:11, 25 September 2007 (CDT)
 * My view is that this has to be divided into two "types".

-- Prod (Talk) 23:43, 25 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Non-Zelda games which have Zelda associations
 * If it has characters from the game (SSBB) then add a See also for each character
 * Zelda games
 * On the characters/items/locations pages, link the header names to zeldawiki
 * If for things like locations we don't have a page listing all of them, link the first occurrence in the walkthrough to them.

Tooltip text for Help Link
If you place your mouse over the help link on the side of the page, the tooltip text of "The place to find out about Wikipedia" instead of referencing StrategyWiki. --Cgsguy2 07:46, 20 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Fixed. It's located in MediaWiki:Common.js so you may have to purge your cache (ctrl+f5 on firefox) to get it to work. -- Prod (Talk) 08:02, 20 September 2007 (CDT)

Template Policies
Alright, here's another thing we can debate upon... I'm thinking that we should name all of our game-specific templates to be in the format of Template:Game_Name/Template_Name. Rather than Propylons it would be The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind/Propylons. Additionally, we would then categorise these templates into their own category such as "Category:Game_Name templates."

I also want to ask, are we still using the naming policy where category names start captilized but aren't "titles?" What I mean is, if we do this is the word "templates" in the category going to be capitalized or not? Since most of you would agree that there isn't enough policy information for its own page, don't you think we need a miscellaneus policy page where all the little nuances can be listed? I really need these when thinking about doing stuff like we are now (if we decide now, things in the future are easier to get going). -- 00:32, 24 September 2007 (CDT)
 * That's the way all the MapleStory templates are. I'd like a game-specific category for templates.--IsaacGS 01:07, 24 September 2007 (CDT)
 * They should already have names which include the game name (or an abbreviation of it), and should already be categorised in Category:Guide-specific templates; I don't see any pressing need to create per-game categories for templates, unless that game has a huge number of custom templates. I would like people to still use sentence-case titles. I don't think we should have a "miscellaneous" policy page; it should be possible to integrate all the "little nuances" into the proper pages. -- 01:36, 24 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Well then, where would we list "sentence-case titles?" -- 01:58, 24 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I'd be against this as a policy, because games like The Bizarre Adventures of Woodruff and the Schnibble would have gigantic templates. If we must have a policy, it should go along with what our image policy is, as long as we can easily tell which game it's from (and preferably have a link to the main page of the game) it should be fine. -- Prod (Talk) 20:33, 25 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I am tolerant of game acronyms. If we allow them, it looks like you would support this.  -- 18:27, 27 September 2007 (CDT)

Votes

 * For
 * 18:27, 27 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Against requiring full name, as long as game is easily figured out it's fine (such as ZTP) -- 21:44, 27 September 2007 (CDT)


 * Against
 * I'm against voting.... We go for consensus, not a mere vote. As long as noone come forward with major objections, it's settled. -- Prod (Talk) 22:43, 27 September 2007 (CDT)

Wii Classic Controller buttons
I notice there don't seem to be any button images available for the Wii Classic Controller. These are needed both for Wii games that are Classic Controller-compatible (such as Resident Evil 4, Mortal Kombat: Armageddon, and Super Smash Bros. Brawl), and for Virtual Console games that have individual control schemes (such as Nintendo 64 games). Wanderer 22:14, 5 October 2007 (CDT)
 * Unfortunately, our usual graphic artist is unavailable currently. Anyone up for some artistic endeavors? -- Prod (Talk) 22:20, 5 October 2007 (CDT)

More templating
You may have noticed that I made a complete pig's ear of cleaning up the CN, FN and HN this morning; the job queue's currently up at 46000, and guides will probably look a bit shabby for the next couple of days, but that can't be helped. They all still (just about) work, and the styling for the CN, FN and HN is now all in Common.css. However, that's not the main subject of this thread. I want to get people's opinions on having a new "ToC" template, which would be put on the main page of a guide, and replace the current mess we have:

Table of Contents
It would mean there's less to go wrong when someone messes up a guide, and would potentially allow us to do fancy stuff to the main page ToCs of all guides in the future (although I can't really think of anything which would be useful). This isn't something I think we urgently or desperately need, but it can't hurt. As such, I propose a lazy migration (if we go ahead with it), similarly to how we're transitioning the release dates. -- 05:56, 7 October 2007 (CDT)