KHWiki:Traverse Town

W             W  EEEEEE    L         CCCCC    O         M       M       EEEEEE
 W     W     W   E         L        CC      O   O      M M     M M      E
  W   W W   W    EEEEE     L       CC      O     O    M   M   M   M     EEEEE
   W W   W W     E         L        CC      O   O    M     M M     M    E
    W     W      EEEEEE    LLLLLLL   CCCCC    O     M       M       M   EEEEEE

Welcome to the Kingdom Hearts Community Portal. This is where the community, small as it currently is, can come to discuss the wiki.

To reply to a section, click the "edit" button on the right side. To begin a new section, click the "+" button on top of the page, or click here. Remember to sign all comments with ~~~~.

Revival

Hey guys, I'm Scottch and I've invited all editors here to address some stuff for reviving this wiki. Please chime in however you like. I'll break it into headings. Scottch 09:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Expansion

I'm getting together a list of ideas on a user subpage for expansion of the wiki; mostly it's ideas for articles, but there are some other things as well. You can look at it at User:Scottch/Revive, and feel free to edit the page to add something you think the wiki should have an article on. If everyone is ok with the general idea of the list (and of course we can always add/remove stuff later), I'll move it to a page that's not in my userspace. To create an article, just click a red link and start typing the content. Articles don't have to be perfect right away. Scottch 09:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Images

A bunch of images are going to get deleted. Remember that images of copyrighted characters, like the organization members and whatnot, can't just be used on a whim. They have to be fair use, which if my impressions are right, basically means this:

1. Source info.
2. Only one picture per idea or concept; three different similar pictures of a character wouldn't be ok.
3. Doesn't limit the copyright holder from making money off of it (you usually won't have to worry about this with pictures).

I think promotional photos, like the pictures found on Wikipedia's Organization XIII article are okay because they're used to promote the game.

A number of images lack sourcing info of any kind and are excessive in use - being used for decoration, rather than informative. Unfortunately, Wikia doesn't really allow this :-( I've tagged several for deletion and they'll probably get deleted soon by a staff member, but if you think one that was deleted was really fair use, don't panic; I saved all the pictures on my hard drive in case that happened. Scottch 09:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• Update, they're deleted. I'll save them temporarily in case someone disagrees. Scottch 05:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Titles

I'm wondering about titles for the Organization members; should the page titles be just the name, or the full name and "title" they carry? Here's screenshots of both possibilites for the Axel article:

File:Org XIII Title II.PNG

What does everyone think? Scottch 09:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

JUST THE NAMES IN THE TITLES PLEASE! whats in the name goes into the URL, URLs should be kept short

Captain Obvious saves teh Day again!! - unsigned anonymous comment

• I was originally advocating the full title, but I'm starting to think you're right. Those would be long titles. Of course, Axel's is the longest, os it's not really representative of the length (I just used it becausae it's the only article on the XIII we've got right now), but still, short names might be better. Scottch 19:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Administrators

I have no idea who is going to even be here for editing, but eventually, if we have any growth at all, especially in membership, we're going to get vandals and spammers. Staff members can help out (Look at Special:Listusers/staff and go talk to them on their Central Wikia talk page) if you see any of that happening in recent changes. They can also be reached in IRC on the irc.freenode.net network, in #wikia (to join, type "/server irc.freenode.net" and then "/join #wikia").

It may get to the point where it is no longer convenient to rely on staff members for vandal/spam cleanup, so eventually we'll have to find a way to come to a consensus and appoint ourselves an admin (I'm guessing we discuss it amongst ourselves and then inform a staff member who would make that person a sysop). Any ideas on how we can do this are welcome, as I've got none. Scottch 09:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• Well, I can help on spam and vandalism... I'm cleaning the Heartless page as I speak... Making them into articles and whatnot.--Dreyfus 05:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, looks like two good admin candidates here, unless there are any objections I will set Scottch and Dreyfus as admins when I return from my week being Christmassy -- sannse (talk) 10:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I volunteer also, I guess. I've been a large editor of Kingdom Hearts articles at Wikipedia, as seen here. Interrobang 06:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

The last thing I want to do is sow early hostilities, but I'm not sure we need more than two, and it seems like you're already editing very aggressively. It's not something I would want in an admin of a very small wiki, but then again, I'm only one voice. Scottch 08:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

=/ Interrobang 08:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

If we're still going to show suspicion for admin volunteers, I wouldn't be confident in Dreyfus, with his apparent knack for speculation and bizarre contributions. Things like Template:Maleficent2, Category:Magic Heartless, or [1], all of which have no place in actual canon, don't exactly make me brim with respect for Dreyfus. I'd prefer he learned to separate his own ideas from what the games actually say before becoming a judge. Interrobang 13:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

More on this in a bit, but I just want to point out that admins are not content judges. As I understand, they are around to assist new people, prevent disruption, and facilitate collaborative editing. Dreyfus has been more than responsive to concerns I've brought up in the past. Perhaps you'd have similar luck if you brought your article concerns to him. Scottch 13:27, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd still prefer it if admins didn't violate basic content policy. Otherwise sets a bad example, as admins are supposed to be the models for users to aspire to. Even if they're theoretically only supposed to do what you say, they're realistically more than that. Interrobang 13:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thing is, he's made far more helpful edits than poor ones, and has been pretty open about things like that. No one has to be perfect; none of the three of us are, by far. As far as "content policy" goes, we only really have a loose aim here, nothing concrete. You keep trying to drag policy, practice and standards from Wikipedia to here, and it just doesn't work that way. You should take a look at wikia:Forum:Building_a_community at the first heading, it's what I've been trying to convey tonight. Scottch 13:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll add a few thoughts here if I may :)

It's sensible for an admin to have enough knowledge of the subject of a wiki to tell what is vandalism and what isn't, but it's certainly true that an admins role should not be to decide what route the community takes in terms of content. Whether non-canon information is included is a matter for the community to decide. And so are questions of what related material should be included. It's important to remember that this isn't Wikipedia, and you could go in all sorts of directions away from the "neutral-point-of-view encyclopaedia". For example, you could allow comment and opinion in a way that Wikipedia can't. That's what makes Wikia different from Wikipedia.

But all this is questions for the community. An admins role is to help keep the site tidy, maintained, and running smoothly. I think Scottch makes a very good point above actually, one of the best skills an admin can have is in communication. Someone willing to talk, and to listen, and to encourage the rest of the community to do the same, will really have an advantage in being a good admin.

Let me know when you are ready for me to push the admin buttons -- sannse (talk) 15:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Scottch most definitely should be an administrator, that's for sure. I guess it isn't quite my place on the subject, but I do nominate him if I can, unless he already is one.

On other terms, I would like to remind you all that I am just a kid! I can't determine one thing from another! I try my best, but seriously! Hurtful comments don't help at all. They just make me feel bad and degrade any work I do. And think about other video game Wikis, like the Super Mario Wiki. How many times have you seen 100% fact? You can never have 100% fact directly from a video game, or else almost all articles will be short, and the result will be the exact same articles as Wikipedia. The Heartless, for example. With many small 100% fact articles on each Heartless, the tons and tons of articles produced by each individual one would make tons of stubs, resulting in a simple list of all Heartless and no benefit. But this isn't exactly the right place to be discussing this, is it?

Anyway, in terms of an administrator, I don't want to appreciate or depreciate the generous nomination for myself (though I have had experience in administrating thingimabober wikistuff). I would like to point out that a friendly (but efficient) administrator, be it myself, Scottch, or anybody out there, would be much more beneficial than a stingy one. I won't say any names on that part. That was just a word from me, no offense meant to anybody. And sorry if I've been any bother, I just want to help the community and this fine, fine Wikia which I'm guessing had just gotten off its feet. So sorry if I've been any trouble; I'll see what I can do to make things better.

Such is the trouble with us poor ADDers, eh?--Dreyfus 20:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

All's good Dreyfus, and your contributions are certainly appreciated :)

How's this for a solution?... I'm male Scottch admin and bureaucrat, then in a month or so, he can look again at the situation and see who else should be added as admin. I certainly think you should have more than one eventually, several is better for continuity, but one is a start and will mean that you don't need to ask staff when you want to add more. -- sannse (talk) 09:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd hoped someone else would reply first, but maybe they'll see mine in my contribs or recent changes and offer their opinion. That seems like a good solution to me, but for obvious reasons others should voice whether or not they're ok with it. Specifically, no one's said anything about my adminship except Dreyfus, and while I'm thankful for your confidence, if anyone has any objections to this, they'd be best heard now rather than later. Don't worry, I won't take it personally :-) Scottch 11:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I take lack of "noooooo..." to be full agreemnet ;) So I've set Scottch as admin and bureaucrat. Thanks for taking this on Scottch, and let me know if you need any help -- sannse (talk) 09:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Editing Help

For editing help, see Kingdom Hearts Wiki:Help. Scottch 09:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

This Page

Community Portals are places to bring up issues to everyone on the wiki, so if you have something that you'd like everyone's attention or need help or whatever, you can edit here. To reply to any section, just click the "edit" button in the right margin or the edit button at the top of the page to edit the entire page. I've added a "__NEWSECTIONLINK__" bit to the top of the page; as long as that's there, you can start a new heading by clicking the "+" button on top of the page, so please don't remove the "__NEWSECTIONLINK__".

One more thing: it's a good idea to sign comments you make with 4 tildaes: ~~~~. This will put your username as a link to your userpage and also put a date and timestamp on it. This can help us keep track of who says what. Scottch 09:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

{{SITENAME}} change

I've asked if the SITENAME (which appears when you type {{SITENAME}} and is the heading for all project namespace pages) can be changed from "Kingdom Hearts Wiki" to "Kingdom Hearts", since it's shorter and more manageable, and more standard to other Wikia wikis. However, I told them I'd see if anyone has any objections. So, anyone? Scottch 04:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Never mind, someone brought up a couple things that make it a bad idea. Scottch 04:50, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Huge thanks

Huge thanks to everyone who is helping expand the wiki! It's coming along great. Scottch 00:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

IRC

I've set up an IRC channel for us at freenode (irc.freenode.net). There's the main Wikia channel at #wikia, but now we have #khwiki. If we oculd get together here and there, it'd be great! Scottch 10:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Images in context?

Hey, what do any editors think about the images being in context of the game? I think it might be better to have them from the game wherever possible, rather than just from a Disney movie, but we can't have it both ways due to fair use rules. So, can I get some opinions? Scottch 11:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Oh another thing, can people who uploaded images have actual links to the websites where they got them? Without a source, it's not really fair use. I hate to be a nag, but it's important that the wiki remains free content. Scottch 12:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Stuff to delete

• Template:maleficent2 - Speculation that overestimates the actual unity of those villains. (Pete: "Hey, wanna some Heartless?" Villain: "LOL SURE") Some weren't even in contact with Pete.
• Category:Fantasia - We shouldn't do categories based on indivdual movies, especially one who contributed little.
• Category:Pure Heartless and Category:Artificial Heartless - Not canon names; replaced with Category:Pureblood Heartless and Category:Emblem Heartless.

Discuss at your leisure. Interrobang 14:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll divide them into subheaders if that's ok, so it doens't get too confusing. Scottch 14:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

{{maleficent2}}

• I'm a little torn - several of these were cohorts of Maleficent's, although "council" is probably inaccurate. At the very least it should be moved, but a compendium of KH2 Disney bosses would be of benefit. Scottch 14:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Template:Disney. Could use a better name. Interrobang 14:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
    • To avoid cluttering, maybe both {{maleficent}} and {{maleficent2}} should just be redirected to that. The template could always be moved... maybe {{disneyvillains}}? Scottch 14:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Bleh, works for me. I just overcategorize stuff. Council on the second one? That was my bad. Heh... I guess it pays to double check. I just played Kingdom Hearts over again, and Clayton doesn't work with the first template. The rest on the first template, though, are completely accurate.

Category:Fantasia

• I say delete, not enough material for an article. Scottch 14:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Pure Heartless

• Is there a source for this deletion? If so I'm cool with it. Scottch 14:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
  • [2] Interrobang 14:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Artificial Heartless

• Same as above. Scottch 14:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Overategorization

I'm concerned over articles becoming massively overcategorized. Characters don't have to be categorized by every location they appear in. Most of the Organization has nothing to do with Hollow Bastion - at best, you've got Saix for his role in the war of 1000 Heartless, but even that is a stretch. And not every enemy needs to be in the Olympic Coliseum category just because they appear in a tournament - if that happens, every enemy will be there, and the category will be almost useless. There has to be more than just a passing association. Am I the only one who feels this way? Scottch 15:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

You mean, like the majority of "See also"s? Not that I'm doing the categories in retaliation for that, mind. I do it because it's a nice "this character has appeared in this world" checklist and perhaps because you clearly stated "For now, let's get as many as possible, and we can prune later." Interrobang 15:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

See alsos can have relations established by category or comment - the relationship is closer than that of these categories. See also sections also invite improvement, while categories on their own don't - the two are not really comparable. It devalues categories to make them simple correlations - X and Y were involved/intertwined in some Z fashion once in the game, so it gets categorized that way? When I think "Radiant Garden" I think "1000 Heartless, the big mace ball heartless, Merlin, Leon, Sephiroth". I certainly don't think "Xaldin". He did nothing but laugh facelessly. Scottch 15:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I strongly agree with Scottch, a character should only be in a world's category if that character only is in that world.--Painocus