Talk:The Bionicle Wiki/Archive III

Welcome to the Main Page disscussion.

Archives:
 * /Archive I
 * /Archive II

Organization
Hey guys, I'm new to these parts. My name's Shawn, and I'm a Wikia Helper checking the place out. You guys have a pretty amazing database built up so far - there's definitely a lot more to it than I originally thought (I'm something of an old-old-schooler, as the only sets I have are some of the original Happy Meal promo kits and the first Onua).

I do have a couple of suggestions simply regarding organization. I've been looking around the books sections and noticed there's not really any kind of set template for them. Some of the book articles are more organized than others - might it help users coming in solely looking for info if there was something more standardized?

I also noticed a lot of uncategorized pages that might have something to do with BIONICLE video games (things like enemies, locations, etc.), but I wasn't sure as I'm not too familiar with them. How do you guys treat video games within the BIONICLE mythology, and would there be a good way to categorize them in their own section? Shawn 19:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Please leave all new messages at the bottom. People will be more likely to read the message. Anyways I'll work on the uncategorized pages. MarioGalaxy2433g5  { talk /contribs/Logs} 19:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Shawn. You brought up two very good points; allow me to be the first to address them (though hopefully not the last, since I would like to hear my fellow admins' opinions on this). =)


 * About the books, we have a Manual of Style, but there is no entry for a book article, which is why there is no set template. Changes will have to be made to the Manual of Style accordingly. As for the actual process of standardizing them we are working on creating a project page where things that need work are posted for anyone to work on; this will be put on there when we get around to making it.


 * I would also agree with you about the video games; in my personal opinion I think it would be wise to have an "Expanded Universe" entry under the Bionicle Knowledge section where we would list video games and other things that don't fit in to the Bionicle canon. Most video game enemies and locations are canon, but the reason they are uncategorized is simply because no one's gotten around to it, LOL. Things like that would also go on the to-do list page. ToaAuserv ? ...BPAdmin 19:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thankfully I am a category nut. MarioGalaxy2433g5  { talk /contribs/Logs} 19:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * My bad on placing the message in the wrong place, MarioGalaxy! But I'm glad you like the suggestions, guys. I did notice this page had a very nice layout, as it also includes a Contents box. And as far as an Expanded Universe goes, the game info would be a perfect launchpad to start from. I did have another question about how the community actually handles the toys themselves; are they not really a concern here? I'm thinking it might be a useful resource for collectors to go into what kind of packaging is used on which sets, and what sets contain for parts. Is that kind of thing doable, or is the focus more towards the story and characters? Shawn 19:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * With regards to the latter, I don't know. If not, we should be under another hub. MarioGalaxy2433g5  { talk /contribs/Logs} 20:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * We focus on the story rather than the actual Bionicle sets, though we do have a sort of iffy "Set Information" section under a lot of the character pages. We do have a "Sets" hub, but it's just a list of all of the Bioncle sets. Perhaps we could have a separate page for each character's set information. It would certainly take a lot of work but it might be worth it. ToaAuserv ? ...BPAdmin 20:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Set Information is fantastic! It would just need to be a standard part of the character pages. Having the Sets articles link back to the character pages is a great idea and would be a good way to keep the article organization tidy. Like MarioGalaxy says, keeping a record of the actual toys is what keeps this a Hobby wiki rather than an Entertainment one. All this is stuff that's just off the top of my head right now, but I'd love to keep a dialogue on it going! Shawn 20:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I think we might want to look at the neighboring Brickapedia for ideas. MarioGalaxy2433g5 { talk /contribs/Logs} 20:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This isn't intended as much as a knock on Brickipedia as much as a testament to how well you guys have been doing so far, but I don't really like their organization at all. They have very few links that can take you directly to useful info and not much information on any random set's article. I think what they HAVE done well is organized the information they do have info boxes under product art. Maybe that'd be a good direction to take? Shawn 21:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, disregard that whole statement. I'm brand new to this community and you all, and the last thing I want is to come off as trying to tell you how the wiki should be run. We can come back to it as an issue later if you guys want to, but right now I'm here to help. Cool? Shawn 22:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Boo! Sorry about not being online today, it was a busy day for me. About set info: a lot of people don't care about how many pieces are in the sets when they're looking for storyline info (which is mainly why we exist), but I don't really see anything wrong with it. And with all this talk about books, we could do with a few templates for each series.


 * BTW: Hello, Multimoog/Shawn, you are a wikia helper, aren't guys supposed to shout out ideas like this? =P -- Panaka lego  00:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * About the pieces, yes they would. If they lost the box, they would want to know if they lost any pieces. MarioGalaxy2433g5  { talk /contribs/Logs} 19:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Why would they come here for it? Most users will just think it's clutter, but I think we should vote on it. -- Panaka lego  02:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

If they lost the box they wouldn't know how many pieces there are. Why would they come here? The answer is, Search Engines. Also if we don't include the information, I'll ask Wikia to move the wiki to a different hub. MarioGalaxy2433g5 { talk /contribs/Logs} 19:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I still say we should vote on it. -- Panaka lego  19:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, we should. Personally I'm in favor of it--it'll give us something other Bionicle reference sites don't have--but we should still vote on it. ToaAuserv ? ...BPAdmin 22:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * A vote's good, and mine (obviously) goes to 'yes'. It seems that having a comprehensive repository of all BIONICLE information would only make this wiki stronger. And following the basic wiki principle, it shouldn't be too much work - if a template is constructed, and everyone listed the pieces for at least one set they own, a lot of info would be filled in quickly and easily. Shawn 22:21, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Then I shall create it and link to it from the site notice, I'll go ahead and link to it here for you guys: Lego Bionicle:Vote For Pieces. -- Panaka lego  00:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, it sounds like: "Vote for pieces! Vote for pieces for class president!" Just thought I'd point that out. -- Panaka lego  02:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * And I just lol'd, so that's a good thing :P Shawn 03:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Books
Wow, I had no idea my piece count suggestion would be taken so well! That's awesome!

I've been thinking a bit about the Books section again as well, and how we could use a template for it. I like this page, as it really just adds a Contents box at the top, and makes the page look a little more orderly. It wouldn't require much of a change to the contents of most book articles otherwise, as the sidebar is already standard. Alternately, we could remove the Contents boxes from those book articles that have them. Thoughts? Shawn ( talk ) 18:48, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I say it's something to consider, but I have no feedback for this. -- Panaka lego  14:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)