Talk:Main Page

Adding a Gargoyles Page

I think that there should be a Gargoyles page. As in a page describing the show in general, for people with less knowledge of the series. I'd create it, but I wouldn't know how or what to do.  :) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:SamuelB (talk).

It's an interesting point. A good starting point for ideas would be the Wikipedia page for the series, but I don't know how to incorporate the information into GargWiki. What would you call the page (since Gargoyles already refers to the species)? -- Supermorff 07:46, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

I have a couple ideas. We could redirect the current "Gargoyles" link to "Gargoyles (species)" and create "Gargoyles (tv series)" and "Gargoyles (SLG)" or just not redirect the current "Gargoyles" page, which is simpler now that I think about it. Or we could do a " "Gargoyles" " page, like how there is a page called " "Eggs" ." I think those are some feasible ideas. -- SamuelB

I suggest going with Gargoyles (TV series), and leaving the species page where it is for now. -- Supermorff 09:05, 12 May 2007 (CDT)

I'd like to see the GargWiki expand not only to have pages for the series itself and the SLG comic and the Marvel comic, but eventually even into various merchandise like the toys, books, etc. Ultimately I think this site should represent all things gargoyles. I mean, imagine a "Kenner Action Figure" Page that linked to the various figures and stuff. -- Matt

Do you have information about toys and books and things? -- Supermorff 09:05, 12 May 2007 (CDT)

Color scheme of default skin

Hey, glad someone finally set one of these up. Minor quibble about the colors in the default skin......while I like the concept we're going for here, I believe some of the colors are too saturated to be easily-readable as backgrounds. I would suggest going with desaturated versions of the colors, as are used at Ask Greg. Skeejay 10:50, 31 March 2007 (CDT)

I'm not sure what saturated and desaturated are. I will say that I really like the dark color background here and at Ask Greg, it is much easier on the eyes than a light color. Vaevictis Asmadi 13:12, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

Comic Info on Front Page

OK, I know most of you are also on the Station 8 Comment Room and probably saw either the Ask Greg or the responses to it or both. But in case anyone didn't, Greg Weisman mentioned in a recent "Ask Greg" response that the sales of the "Gargoyles" comic have been dropping with each issue and that if the trend continues, SLG will have no choice but to pass on renewing the license. Though the comic may well be SLG's best selling current title, but Disney's licensing fees take a big cut out of the profits. We should still get up through issue #12 of the regular series and issue #6 of "Bad Guys", but after that, the future is uncertain. My suggestion for a very simple thing we could do to help is for every 'Gargoyles" site to at least put some kind of link on the front page for people to buy the comic or the "Clan Building" trade paperback, possibly with a short explanation of how the comic's future is in doubt. I know this is a collaborative site and other people need to agree for this to happen, but I think it's a good idea and very simple way to help. There's a no reason anyone should come to a "Gargoyles" fansite of any kind and not know where they can get the comic. Thoughts? -- Demonskrye 12:09, 17 January 2008 (CST)

Maybe instead of the featured article section we should just have a "Now Available" section showing the one or two most recent releases with links to both the GargWiki pages and a link on how to buy it. I think keeping the comic going has to be our number one priority from here on out. -- Matt 12:24, 17 January 2008 (CST)

Sounds good to me. How about a "Now Available" and a "Coming Soon", since with the delays, I think one of the problems is that people thought there weren't going to be any more issues. Do we know how to make this happen? -- Demonskrye 16:38, 17 January 2008 (CST)

Sounds like something Supermorff would be good at. You around, buddy? -- Matt 18:12, 17 January 2008 (CST)

Guess not. Maybe we could leave a request on his talk page and do something really simple for now, like a couple of text links to the comic's wiki pages and links to a retailer you can buy them from? -- Demonskrye 06:41, 20 January 2008 (CST)

"I aten't dead." So, anyway, that should be pretty simple to arrange. You want it in a box like the Feature so that we can edit it separately? -- Supermorff 14:00, 1 February 2008 (CST)

Yeah, that sounds great. I'm worried about how you are gonna fit both the Feature and the Comic boxes on the front page. I think if only one will fit, we need to go with the comic for now, as it is a major priority, or if one has to go above the other, the Comic box should be on top. Anyway. I really like the idea of two (or four for the spin-off) boxes featuring a Now Available section and a Coming Soon section, of course with the TPB, it's gonna get crazy. I guess just fit what you can fit. -- Matt 19:05, 1 February 2008 (CST)

Let's keep it simple: just one box for now. And since people who know about the recent releases aren't necessarily going to want to see the box every time they come to the site, I also suggest that the New Issues box (or whatever we call it) should go under the Feature box. But we can decide that when it's actually been made. I suppose I should get on that. -- Supermorff 04:52, 2 February 2008 (CST)

Have a look at GargWiki:New. Any suggestions. How many months ahead and back do we want to go? -- Supermorff 05:04, 2 February 2008 (CST)

That is pretty good. Actually, since it is a good deal shorter than the Featured Article section, perhaps it should go on top so that both can be seen when the Main Page is opened. Also, I think the New Releases/Now Available part is fine (we should keep each of those there until BD2, G8 and TPB2 come out), but I think with the Coming Soon part we should refrain from mentioning an exact month. With all the delays, we can't be sure and if people are curious about when exactly it'll be out they can go to the page in question and it tells them as much info as we have on the matter. Oh, and I think the most recently published and the next to be published is good enough, no need to make another Episode Guide and list everything that has been out for the last two years and everything that will come out a year from now. -- Matt 10:22, 2 February 2008 (CST)

I see your point about putting the New box first, what with its size, but it doesn't look very good on the page. The box is mostly empty space, which isn't so bad when it's further down. If there was a picture I'd be okay with it, but any picture we add is just going to clutter up the information, so I don't think that's any kind of solution.

One other thought I've had: we could put them both in the same box, just with a horizontal line between them. Worth trying?

I'll put it on the Main Page as is for now. I'm putting it second, but anyone's welcome to swap them over if they think that would be better. -- Supermorff 04:37, 3 February 2008 (CST)

I understand why you had to put it that way, I suppose, but I really feel it is wasted there. I came on the site and started doing my thing today without even knowing it was on the Main Page until I read your post here and went back and looked. I really feel that, somehow, we need to make the comic info front and center so to speak. What if we organized the box into more of a banner type box? Could we make the box only two lines long (one for Now Available, one for Coming Soon) and put this long, but short box right at the top of the page? Would that work? Would it look decent? Just an idea. -- Matt 09:47, 3 February 2008 (CST)

I don't think the banner would work, but we could put the two of them side-by-side. Probably the would only work if it stretched over the whole screen. Have a look at User:Supermorff/Main, where I've made the width of both boxes dependent on the width of the screen. It's not a perfect solution, but it does make the second box more obvious. What do you think? -- Supermorff 11:40, 3 February 2008 (CST)

I like the side-by-side idea a lot, but on my screen at least, it looks strange. The word "The" from the introductory paragraph is hanging out all by itself between the two boxes and looks bizzare. Is there some code you can use to seperate the boxes from the intro? And/or could you make the boxes the exact smae height? They'd look more organized that way, and I suppose then we could also advertise some of the other recent comics and the DVDs in that space. -- Matt 09:04, 4 February 2008 (CST)

I was trying to separate the boxes form the intro. I actually thought I'd succeeded, cos it doesn't do that on my screen any more, but I guess not. Darn. I don't know about making them the same height. It's possible, and theoretically I know how to do it, but this requires stipulating how tall both should be. But if we're resizing them depending on how wide the screen is, then that could cause some big complications.

Here's an idea: we could put the intro text into the left box. How's about it? -- Supermorff 10:15, 4 February 2008 (CST)

The intro in the left box? How would that work? I guess give it a try on User:Supermorff/Main and we'll see how it turns out. I'm not sure what you mean, but if you think it is worth a try, lets check it out. -- Matt 17:22, 4 February 2008 (CST)

Have a look now. I've made it so that the Feature box is no longer screen-size-dependent, but I'm thinking that maybe it should be that too. -- Supermorff 03:07, 5 February 2008 (CST)

If it was screen-size dependent, wouldn't it be all screwy on some people's screens?

Anyway, it is defintly a big improvement. It seems a little weird having two things in the same box that don't really go together, but I could live with it. I dunno. I still think there is a better solution. What about having three boxes? Just another thought. -- Matt 07:56, 5 February 2008 (CST)

Oh yeah. Duh. Give me a minute and I'll give it a try. -- Supermorff 10:00, 5 February 2008 (CST)

Good thinking. That's all done. -- Supermorff 10:04, 5 February 2008 (CST)

Yeah, thats really good, I think. Maybe the Intro should go above the comic info though. I dunno, I could go either way on that. I think we are in good shape though. Great work! -- Matt 10:08, 5 February 2008 (CST)

Better or worse? Anyway, at this point I'm gonna stop tweaking and let some other people have a look and make suggestions. -- Supermorff 10:20, 5 February 2008 (CST)

Actually, I think you've got it PERFECT at this point. I like it a lot. But yeah, thats my opinion. If we don't hear any nays in the next day or two, I'd say go ahead and instate it. Again, great work. Looks cool. -- Matt 17:53, 5 February 2008 (CST)

Supermorff, I'd say you are probably alright to go with the changes to the main page. There havn't been any complaints. So, lets try it on a trial basis. If people don't like it, we can change it back, but I think it is great. I'll also try to find time to make a new Featured Article, we've had the Eyrie Building for a few months now. -- Matt 09:59, 8 February 2008 (CST)

Cool. -- Supermorff 10:49, 8 February 2008 (CST)

Done. -- Supermorff 11:00, 8 February 2008 (CST)

Other Gargoyles Wiki

So, I was kind of hoping I could get some help editing the "other" Gargoyles wiki. http://gargoyles.wikia.com/wiki/Gargoyles_Wiki There are only about three or four active users, and I feel like if there were more contributors, it could get featured by Wikia, which could hopefully introduce new fans. -- SamuelB 04:24, 18 February 2008 (CST)

Aside from the potential to get featured by Wikia, I'm just not sure I see the need for two "Gargoyles" wikis. Is there anything provided by the other wiki that significantly differentiates it from this one -- Demonskrye 07:53, 18 February 2008 (CST)

There's not really anything different about the two, given that they're both wikis. But, two good wikis have a better chance of attracting more fans. The other wiki has some really nice templates, but those could be easily adapted here. It's mostly just a "the more, the merrier"/better visibility idea. -- SamuelB 21:45, 18 February 2008 (CST)

I've seen the templates on that site, and I've seen similar templates in use on other wikis, and I just don't see the point of them. I certainly don't see any need to implement them here.

As for the two wikis thing, it's my belief that two wikis can't survive alongside each other if they are identical. The Grimorum has its templates, and that's a start, but really the best thing would be to arrange it so that the two wikis could complement each other instead of compete with each other. I have ideas, but since they all require a policy change at Grimorum and not here, I'm hesitant to suggest them for fear of being a hypocrite.

But even though I don't feel I can personally contribute at Grimorum, I wish its current editors the best of luck. -- Supermorff 06:22, 19 February 2008 (CST)

If you'd like, you can suggest those ideas to me, and I'll pass them along. I'd really appreciate any help I can get.  :) Thanks, SamuelB 19:00, 20 February 2008 (CST)

Introduction

Since this is the main page, I'm asking first, but I would really like to rewrite at least the first paragraph of the site introduction and I may well cry if somebody doesn't get to do it. The first sentence in particular is a rather awkward read and sounds as if we're asking anyone who happens across the site to please someday consider using GargWiki as a reference tool. Admittedly, there are plenty of articles that still need work and expansion even if you disregard the fact that the comic is ongoing and we'll hopefully need to add new information to keep the wiki current for some time to come. But I'd hazard a guess that the majority of any info a person could want about the show and the comic is here and I don't think the introduction to the site should read like it's more of a work in progress than any other wiki and that our fondest hope is that people will actually use the wiki for its intended purpose. I think this could definitely be rewritten to better explain the site. Anyone agree or disagree? -- Demonskrye 13:19, 27 May 2008 (CDT)

I think the introduction sounds like that because of the "hopefully." I definitely agree with you that it should be rewritten. D Taina 15:35, 27 May 2008 (CDT)

I took a stab at it. Just a first pass, so comments are very much welcome. -- Demonskrye 08:39, 28 May 2008 (CDT)

I also had a go, but I also heavily restructured the main page. Have a look: User:Supermorff/Main. I moved some of the introduction further down the page (including the comment about CIT information being bold and blue, which might need to go back up again) and emphasized the "welcome to GargWiki, you can help" idea. Plus I got rid of the list of links, which wasn't very pretty and I don't think is really necessary. I've also included links to the five most popular articles, because... well, because I felt like it. That's all. -- Supermorff 10:36, 28 May 2008 (CDT)

Problem with the GargWiki feature

For some reason, when you first enter the site, the GargWiki feature is the Loch Ness Monster. But when you click on the "Main Page" link on the left, it's the Castle Wyvern feature. It's been like that since yesterday. Is it just me? DTaina 09:04, 22 June 2008 (CDT)

I've seen problems along this line several times while working on the Feature pages. I assume that the site just needs time to catch up and that there is some internet wacky weirdness going on (can you tell I know nothing about computers?). Anyway, I think it'll stop in a day or two. My only hope is that there isn't any of these wiki-shenanigans going on when we start the Features on a daily rotation... -- Matt 09:17, 22 June 2008 (CDT)

On the Main Page, go into the edit tab and save (don't change anything). That should fix it. Funnily enough, the problem for me is usually the other way around - I get the old image when I first go on the site, but the new one when I go through an internal link. Oh well. -- Supermorff 11:28, 22 June 2008 (CDT)

Is Comment Room for Promotion Requests Working?

In general, I have no problem with the idea of people using the Station Eight Comment Room to request editing privileges on GargWiki, but I'm starting to wonder if we might want to rethink this policy. Litwolf has been requesting permission to edit since last week and nothing has yet been done about it. Now it could be that all the site admins have somehow gone AWOL at the same time for various reason, in which case I would agree that this is just a one time snafu and the system generally works. But if not, we might want to reconsider using the Comment Room for promotion requests. It is a little strange for us to be dependent on a separate site for something that essential to our operations. Plus we had that blackout just recently when Gorebash accidentally fed the site templates to the lions. Also, the Comment Room has happily been pretty busy as of late and it's possible that a request for editing powers on GargWiki could get lost in the shuffle.

Also, I think the site should have an easily accessible list of admins who people can contact if they have a problem. Maybe in the currently empty Help page? -- Demonskrye 06:37, 28 August 2008 (CDT)

These are all very good suggestions. Litwolf's pleas for access have not gone unheard on my end, and I am an Administrator of the GargWiki, however Greg B has always handled this particular part of the GargWiki, so much so that I really have no idea HOW to provide Litwolf access. I'd gladly do it right now if I knew how. But I do second all of your ideas. --Matt 17:49, 28 August 2008 (CDT)

If that's the case, I think an additional goal may be teaching more admins how to grant editing privileges. Greg B's only been on the Comment Room once this week, so he may be busy, but ideally we should be able to still perform tasks like this if he's not available. -- Demonskrye 19:05, 28 August 2008 (CDT)

If I knew how to do it, I'd grant Litwolf access, but I'm afraid I don't know either. I agree that we should have a contact page or something on this site for aspiring members. DTaina 20:47, 28 August 2008 (CDT)

I've just added editing priveleges for Litwolf. Sorry it took so long, but I've been avoiding both GargWiki and the Comment Room until I get BG #4 (five more days). For those who have the capability but not the know-how, to add priveleges you go to Special:Userrights (accessible through the Special pages button in the menu on the left), type in the name of the user you're looking for, then select "sysop" and save.

I also agree that we need a different system for applications. Perhaps something similar to the Comment Room, but specific to GargWiki? -- Supermorff 10:03, 30 August 2008 (CDT)

Thanks, Supermorff, for the instructions! Now... I have the power!! *couldn't resist* DTaina 13:29, 30 August 2008 (CDT)

Format Issues

Not sure why, but with the recent edits to the Main Page, the entire intro and Lex picture area is all weird. Only a few words are in each line so the main page is extremely long for me. Anyone else having these issues? -- Matt 06:39, 7 March 2012 (PST)

Nothing seems odd on my end of things . . . perhaps its a particular browser you're using? I'm currently on the whatever-recent edition of Google Chrome . . . --Pheon 19:53, 7 March 2012 (PST)

I'm using Firefox and not having any issues. -- Supermorff 00:41, 8 March 2012 (PST)

Title Case or sentence case

In the absence of a Manual of Style, I have some difficulty in understanding what's the accepted convention for titles and headings. It seems that it's title case, because of how articles are named, but I've also encountered examples of headings written in sentence case (some right on the main page). Is there any kind of unwritten but accepted format, or do we just go with the flow? --Thogial 10:24, 27 August 2012 (PDT)

I think it's a case of different people doing different things. I tend to use sentence case. I seem to recall there was a discussion about this years ago, but I can't find it. -- Supermorff 00:24, 28 August 2012 (PDT)

That seems to be the trend for content, but not for titles and headings. Robotic Mosquito is named in title case, but the description in the article uses sentence case. However, Lightning Gun uses title case on both its name and description. There seems to be a bit of inconsistency in this regard. --Thogial 04:31, 28 August 2012 (PDT)

I wrote the "Robotic mosquito" page with sentence case in both (as I tend to) and it was subsequently moved to title case but nobody changed the article intro. The "Lightning Gun" article was created by Greg B with title case in both. -- Supermorff 06:07, 28 August 2012 (PDT)