From the Kingdom Hearts Wiki, the Kingdom Hearts encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm picking up from where we left off at the Mensa, and since the suggestions for remodelling the MOS have been closed, I will put up our current stances right here for everyone to see. So these are the issues :
Media Usage
Videos
- People have been uploading videos to KHW, when in actual fact, they can just embed the vids by using the <youtube></youtube> code found on Help:Beginner's Userpage. And some of these videos end up being deleted. We have to make this code clearer to the rest.
- The 4-vid rule might have to be switched to a 6-vid rule or even an 8-vid rule, in light of the new releases of Days, BBS and Coded.
- Video walkthroughs in the case of the Days Missions should be allowed, and possibly the Gummi Missions, since it'll usually only involve one video. Otherwise, videos are only allowed in boss battles, or battles exclusive to the Final Mixes, or the song pages.
Images
- Images without white BGs should be placed inside a thumbnail and a caption must be added, if it doesn't fall in the Gallery section. The same goes for images that have been cleaned and cropped (as in the instance of Vanitas' Keyblade).
- In case we have to address this issue, the maximum number for a normal Gallery section (not including the character/enemy list) is 12. Or we might reduce this to 8. But more than anything, it's the relevance of the images that counts, not the number.
Content
Naming
- All Heartless or Nobodies or goodness knows what which have been given new names in new releases should not have their names changed. The Watcher is still the Surveillance Robot.
Layout of Boss pages
- I'm talking about Battle Quotes. I believe that we should limit them to 10, and battle quotes should not appear on the character pages. Raise your discrepancies now if you wish the battle quotes to appear for main characters.
- Grunts and cries do not need to be put up.
Number of navigation templates
- The number is not an issue, though I think it should be that all navi templates (except one-line ones like the Princesses of Heart) must be collapsible.
- The respective navigation templates should be explained in the MOS, as some users do not know where to put them. Same goes for infoboxes and whatever relevant templates.
See Also issue
- The stance now is that See Also pages should be removed unless there are pages which need to be brought to the player's attention. This, too, is highly unlikely, because for Heartless like Pot Spider, which need to be linked to Pot Centipede and Pot Scorpion, their names can be found in the Heartless Directory (correct me if I'm wrong).
- The only things which fall into the See Also page shall be things which are closely related to that particular character, or element, or whatever.
Spoiler warnings
Trivia
- Our stance has always been that trivia is limited to only seven, though if there are eight trivia bits, we don't mind. If there are nine, we start yelling.
- The same trivia point shouldn't be on EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE, if such a case happens.
- Again, as the MOS says, we must try to bring in related bits into the storyline somewhere. As far as trivia is concerned, it shouldn't be redundant or pointless.
Categorisation
- Categorisation shall be enforced, and a Category Tree Help page shall be constructed to guide users on categorising articles and, particularly, images.
Wikilinking
- The MOS has said that we only link to an article once, but I believe that we should now link at least once per section, if the article is long. Say, if you're in Sora's page but you want to link to Axel, one link won't be enough because the page is obviously bloody long. :P
- For shorter articles, the one-link-per-page rule will apply.
User conduct
Warning Templates
- Warning templates should be used by everyone, especially if the user putting the templates to use is trusted. However, reasonable steps must have been taken to warn the vandal before actually whipping out the warning.
- An Assume Good Faith page shall be constructed.
I believe that I've addressed all issues in the Mensa, and I need your final feedback because this coming weekend, I shall proceed to remodel the MOS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Helping others always comes before asking others for help. • TroisNyxÉtienne — 03:15, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feedback
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JFHavoc Talk to Me! — I once took an IQ test and got a score of over 9000. You're all morons. — 05:13, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It all looks good to me. *thumbs up* :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It looks just fine to me. I think it covers all the bases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Randomnessity Looks like you're already prepared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LapisScarab - You accept darkness, yet choose to live in the light. So why is it that you loathe us who teeter on the edge of nothing? We who were turned away by both light and dark - never given a choice? TALK - That may be... however, what other choice might we have had?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most triumphant. This should make things clearer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DoorToNothing — I dreamed last night... I got on the boat to Heaven! And by some chance, I had brought my dice along! — 05:46, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I disagree with allowing the trivia policy to only be enforced once the quantity of trivia bits on a single article reaches nine, and yet our policy is to allow seven. This is in no way different than if our policy was to allow eight trivia bits. When I see an article with eight trivia bits, I immediately add Template:Trivia to the top of the article, or fix the issue myself. It should be noted in the Manual of Style that all trivia is "evil", as BebopKate described it, and should be removed, if it is redundant or repeated content, or merged into the article if possible. Trivia is not exactly "evil", but its inclusion in an article should be prevented if at all possible.
Second, I disagree with wiki-linking not being limited to only a single instance. The only exception to this rule is when a world/place article is linked to, and a section-specific link is used to link to a specific area of that world. Plus, this makes judging whether an article is short or "bloody long" difficult; there are no mediums, just two extremes.
For example, see Larxene. A few days ago, I completely revised this article, removing all double-links in the article. I also removed the entire "Trivia" section by removal or merging. In my opinion, it looks great the way it is, and should be used as an example as to why the policy on wiki-linking should stay as it is.
Other than that, everything looks fine from my skim-over. On the topic of making a category tree, do you mean make a visual category tree in the form of a site image? If so, I would be happy to construct one, if I could be provided the tree in text before-hand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LapisScarab - You accept darkness, yet choose to live in the light. So why is it that you loathe us who teeter on the edge of nothing? We who were turned away by both light and dark - never given a choice? TALK - That may be... however, what other choice might we have had?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that we should emphasize that trivia should be merged with the article/removed whenever possible/necessary (though "evil" seems a bit harsh). I have to say though that I'm for TNE's linking policy. It's more convenient.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@DTN : I'm not sure how an image would look, and I must go through the category tree thrice over, at least - so that I may get a clear guide. We all need to ! ^_^
As for trivia, if someone feels that it's article worthy, I think the first mention it should be given is in the talk page, at least. If it's worth mentioning it, and we get consensus from everyone, then and only then shall we put it into the article. Then again, it must be something that won't end up causing conflict.
As for wikilinking, in the instance where if it were not for the one-link-per-page, it would be an orphan page, then we have to proceed with more than one. But we'll wait for more feedback on this issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm as good as new! All my functions have been restored! • TroisNyxÉtienne — 06:27, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My bad ^_^' Okay, I'll see where I can find the category tree. Please hold on.
EDIT 06:36, February 8, 2010 (UTC) : Nope, the Category Tree page doesn't show anything. I think we have to start from the root category, KHW, and work our way down. I'll handle the first bit, at least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm as good as new! All my functions have been restored! • TroisNyxÉtienne — 06:34, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LevL Fear my mighty instruments! — 14:23, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with DTN about the wikilinking. I don't think we need multiple links to the same article, and how long/short is a long/short article? Other than that, it looks fine to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See the Special Pages : the longest pages and the shortest pages are listed.
Imagine, thus, if all the links were to be concentrated on the introductory section, and the same articles/elements are repeated over and over again. Wouldn't that call for wikifying ? I'm just curious, but I know that till this day we haven't come across such a case.
@LevL : Note that most of what KHW puts into effect will be put into effect on KHFR...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Helping others always comes before asking others for help. • TroisNyxÉtienne — 14:30, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LevL Fear my mighty instruments! — 14:53, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to know more about a character, an enemy, a term or something else in the article, you would probably click on the first occurence of the word in the article, and not on, for example, the eighth one. Things usually don't get more interesting than they were 5 seconds ago. That's why I think one link suffices.
About the short and the long pages, I know about that page you linked to, but where do we draw the line between short and long pages?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Point taken.
Good question by the way... :P We can't help but make some pages long, as in the case of the main characters, where all the story has to be spoilerific. What worries me now are the short pages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm as good as new! All my functions have been restored! • TroisNyxÉtienne — 15:01, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
KrytenKoro - "I'm the doctor, I'm the patient. Don't forget that - it's important! If you love me like I love me, everybody will be sorry." TALK -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I disagree with the "see also" reasoning. The exact purpose of the "see also" is to point readers towards other pages which are highly relevant to the article at hand - a directory template or category, while useful, are simply to wide to work like this. "See Also" is especially useful for pointing towards "same design" enemies/items or "same theme/world" weapons, where a directory or category would be too arbitrary or impossible to name fairly.
However, the See Also sections need much higher policing - they should not focus on anything related to the article, but on things that are "different forms of the same basic thing", like I've done with Fire Ring, or Tailbunker.
For videos: I think we should only have one video per separate boss battle. So, no "Part 1" and Part 2". Also, they should be organized in the manner they are arranged on the page, and titled "Boss (#) (game acronym)" (The (#) being replaced with which ever iteration of the boss fight it is, so for Larxene, "Larxene 1 (KH:CoM)", etc.
I've also noticed that the ogg files we have can make the browser's crash - this might be just mine, though.
I think galleries should include art or sprites of the article subject, when they are different from the presented image, and when they cannot be placed in the infobox (like the Soul Eater for KH1). So, we could have the different forms of Sora, but we don't need an official art or GBA version of each Heartless. Screenshots should be incorporated into the narrative instead.
I think trivia should only include stuff like "this is the only one" (but not if it includes any exceptions - so, no "This is the only one, if you exclude x") OR stuff like the Roxas AirWalk shoes. Anything that is relevant to character design or narrative should be incorporated into the main article.
I think the categorization needs to be such that 1) The same article is not placed into both a category and its parent category, 2) Categories are nested wherever possible (so Heartless includes only the two subcategories), and 3) An article for a group is not placed into a category unless all of it fits - so, Organization XIII would not be placed in "Characters who use Flowers", for example. Similarly, "List of Keyblade wielders" would not go in "Original characters" or "Disney characters", because of Mickey. The game-based character categories should be inclusive, though, not exclusive.
I agree with DTN on the one-linking - only the first instance. However, because of the tabbed nature of our infoboxes, I don't think they should count, since they are not always visible, and I think section-specific links, like "Traverse Town#First District" should count as links to "First District", rather than to "Traverse Town".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category Tree (Someone please continue from where I left off ?)
I am exhausted. Can someone please continue for me ? Thank you. ^_^
What all this means :
- Red text means that there's something wrong with the placement of that category.
- Black text means that the category is empty.
- Yellow text, or whatever colour I'll be using other than red and black, means that the categories can be merged into a bigger category. Say, for instance, the ones in yellow can be merged into "Articles in need of maintenance", just so that they'll at least know where to head to.
Comments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
KrytenKoro - "Hey, I want to settle down. And as soon as I find the right small group of girls, the seven or eight women who are right for me, my wandering days are over, buddy." TALK -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The TCG categories should be deleted, since the card infobox system uses the subcategories here. The image categories should be similarly renamed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|