Wookieepedia:Mofferences

All Wookieepedians are invited to attend the occasional Wookieepedia mofference. Kindly don't be scared away by the name; we like to have all opinions at the meetings.

Next meeting
The next Mofference will take place August 24th, 2008 at 0:00 UTC. Please check the infobox on the right to see when this is in your timezone, and remember that daylight savings time may be in effect in your area.
 * North America&mdash; 8PM Eastern Daylight Time.

How to join the meeting
IRC: irc.freenode.net #wookieepedia

For a list of clients, see IRC. Wikia provides web access to our IRC channel at irc.wikia.com/starwars.

(Hint: You only get 16 characters in your IRC nickname.)

Agenda

 * 1) At our next Mofference, I would like to discuss the Wookieepedia Knowledge Bank. The first time something like this was brought up:, it was shot down as a terrible idea. Not a month later this came about. I was against it from the start, and I'm still against it now, but the community was in favor of it, so I've kept my mouth shut and even used it once or twice in an effort to "give it a chance." Well, it's been more than a year, and, to me, our rate of return on this has been simply awful. The vast majority of questions asked are by users who only exist to ask questions, not contribute to Wookieepedia, which is what we had hoped, IIRC. If most of the questions weren't either wild fan theories, such as the classic "Who kills Jacen Solo?"  or "Star Wars republic commando 2", , or even , wherein an individual asks a question that could be found on DC-15A blaster rifle and related pages, then I wouldn't make a big deal out of it. Nor would I do so if there wasn't such rampant speculation on that whole domain. But, ladies and gentlemen, there is. We are an encyclopedia, no? Our articles should speak for themselves, and while in theory it would be nice to answer everyone's question individually, the fact of the matter is that it's a distraction and the majority of the questions asked are not of the type the KB was meant to encourage. Instead, they're open-ended, often poorly spelled, and occasionally even spell Wookieepedia without two e's. They're a distraction from our true purpose-which is to write articles, not answer questions. It's an additional headache for the admins to monitor. Often, new users/anons answer other new users/anons, and I know that some of those answers aren't accurate or factually based. Compared to our actual articles, the reliability is by-and-large atrocious. At least we maintain a pretense of citing sources in our articles. So, I propose we either eliminate the Knowledge Bank entirely, which is my preference, or impose a stricter set of rules to prevent it turning into a clandestine discussion board-which, for all intents and purposes-it is.  Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.svg|20px]] ( Talk page ) 21:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) *Counterpoint: Without an outlet for these sorts of questions, they wind up in the Senate Hall or on article talk pages.  I'd rather keep them all in a landfill rather than have the trash fill the streets. jSarek 11:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) **Counter-counterpoint: And yet, somehow we survived before. I'd rather have us put the trash on trucks and ship it elsewhere than have it here, if I can play on your metaphor. By which I mean that it's a better idea IMO to redirect them somewhere else like TF.N, delete their SH posts, than foster this&mdash;at the risk of sounding cliche&mdash;"un-encyclopediac". At the very least, we need to establish some tougher rules on the KB that would allow administrators to delete "discussion board" topics. Last I checked, that was supposed to be a Q&A, not a "Well, based on the upward-twirling overhand parry-feint-lunge combo that Darth Kruhl executes, he must be a Vaapad user," type board. Because that's what it is, and I don't see how it helps the site. I'd rather we change the MediaWiki code from "talk" to "article talk" and throw Talkheader everywhere than put up with the KB. On the topic of deleting the bad threads, at present I don't feel comfortable stretching the bounds of admin autonomy without a consistent set of guidelines to back it up. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.svg|20px]] ( Talk page ) 05:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) ***What should also be taken into consideration is this post by Admirable Ackbar regarding enforcement within the KB. Master Aban Fiolli  {Alpheridies University ComNet} 22:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) ****I have a feeling a lot of the problems people have with the KB can be solved in two simple ways: 1- those people can choose to ignore KB, and 2- the page intro and rules section could perhaps be tweaked a bit to prevent some of KB's more persistent annoyances. For example, an edict that posts made by those who obviously didn't bother to read the article will be summarily deleted, rather than responded to as seems to be the SOP now.  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 16:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) *****Another part of the problem is that on one side, we have people who don't mind the idea of the KB, but don't seem to have the time or desire to moderate it effectively. On another side, we have people who interpret the listed rules in such a way that 2/3rds of the questions are deleted.  On yet another side, we have those who wouldn't read or understand the rules no matter what they were (and they're the ones with the most questions, since they haven't carefully read any primary or secondary sources either.)  I think if we do decide to delete the KB, we should make sure to archive the existing threads, and maybe replace it with some sort of FAQ supplement. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 13:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) *Actually, I have another idea. We could scrap KB, and instead have volunteers that don't mind spending some of their time helping to answer questions (however pointless the questions are) sign on to a list. If anyone needs some info that they genuinely can't find, they can contact the people on the list on their talk pages for help. Of course, stricter regulation should also be put on the type of questions asked (eg. no fan specualtion). This way, those who need answers can get them, those who like helping people can still do so, and those who hate KB no longer have to tolerate its presence. Soresumakashi 09:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 8) **That being said, I (personally) believe that questions in the KB have been improving as of late. We're still getting questions that could have been easily have been answered if the person had actually bothered to look up relevant articles, but we used to get a lot more. The other thing we could do is tell them to ask in the IRC more often. Strong cases for fan speculation could also go there. Most of the time it's pretty idle, and I like a good discussion/debate thing.Soresumakashi 09:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 9) ***I agree with Soresumakashi's second point but not the first. I've always seen KB partly as a surrogate for IRC for those folks who don't know how to use IRC. The list idea, however, sounds more cumbersome to manage than KB and would certainly be less user-friendly. People know where KB is now, so if anything is going to change, it probably shouldn't be the location.  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 11:53, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 10) I'd like to throw around the idea of an easy-access policy updates system for regular users, much like the one Greyman created for the admin e-mail list. Perhaps a link somewhere prominent, and some sort of advertisement on certain parts of the site. Our current system for this is rather insufficient, and I've seen more than one instance of users coming back from protracted absences finding it difficult to get up to speed. Graestan ( Talk ) 02:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 11) *Do you mean something with Policy and consensus updates? Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.svg|20px]] ( Talk page ) 00:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 12) **I'm extremely familiar with that page (being one of a select few admins who bother to update it), but was hoping either to have it linked more prominently or to have something a bit more common-user-friendly created. Graestan ( Talk ) 00:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 13) I'd also like to discuss the fate of the userbox proposal page. It seems most of the recent nominations have been failures, mainly on the grounds of "too specific" and so forth. If someone wants a userbox, they can quite easily make their own, and more experienced users are frequently available and willing (I am, at least) to help those who aren't so technically inclined (although it really isn't very technical) create them. At the risk of being considered a hater (although I really am one), I'd like to see if we can't either eliminate this page or convert it into some sort of custom userbox tutorial page. Graestan ( Talk ) 23:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 14) *As an addendum to that, what about deleting the current "official" userboxes that serve no purpose? The only aspect which makes an official userbox more useful than a custom one is the category, and in some cases that can come in handy (e.g. "Wookieepedians who have promoted an article to Good Article status" or "Wookieepedians who will attend Celebration V" or something to that effect), but for most, like "Wookieepedians who support the Galactic Empire," a category is completely pointless. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 11:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 15) **I support the categories as long as they relate to those that are like those userboxes aforementioned. The so-called "supporting" userboxes are in-universe and not really meant for categorization. --  Riffsyphon  1024 05:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 16) Preemptive The Clone Wars damage control. T-canon's a'comin', and it ain't gonna be pretty. A lot of old stuff is going to get poopooed upon, and we need to figure out how to deal with it. Some ideas include TCW-specific variations of Twoconflicting or Talesstart to flag existing material which no longer fits. -- Ozzel 03:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 17) *I thought this thing was July, not August. That will be too late. We'll take care of this elsewhere. -- Ozzel 22:00, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 18) **This still should be brought up, in my opinion. The Mofference is a great place to discuss this further or to tweak the policy as needed.
 * 19) I would also like to suggest a slight change to the main page which I think would help first-time or non-regular visitors to our site. First, I think the addition of a "recently featured" addendum to the FA display would be a nice since our articles will be on a one-day rotation in the future. This is preemptive since I'm not certain we will have a Mofference between now and then. Also, before I see all the bottles of blue milk fly at me: I know we are not Wikipedia and this is not to emulate {that site} . I think this is a good navigational tool since the FAs will be flying by, so to speak. Next, the right column should be tweaked since the new advertisements are bumping it down.  Master Aban Fiolli  {Alpheridies University ComNet} 22:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 20) Changes to the square advertisements that are on the right column. This may be irrelevant and may not be useful to bring up at a Mofference, but we have wikia janitors in our ranks and getting the opinions from frequent users might be nice. Honestly, I don't like the ads, but that isn't our call. My gripe that I want to mention is when the square ads are placed in the upper-right area of the article, forcing the infobox downward. We work hard for spacing of images and text to accommodate the infobox without the ads messing this up even more. I think we could at least talk about it. If I'm not clear about the issue, let me know.  Master Aban Fiolli  {Alpheridies University ComNet} 22:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 21) *I fear trying to discuss the Wikia ads in any way, shape, or form at a Mofference may be an exercise in futility at best, frustration at likeliest, and bloodshed at worst.  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 22:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 22) *Gonk is correct in that this would be a pointless Mofference topic (Janitors have quit over the ads because they're powerless over them, so there's really nobody who can help), but I'm concerned that there are infoboxes with square ads now. I thought I had coded them to be immune, and if they're showing up again I need to... adjust some things. Please make a list of offending pages and put it on my talk page. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 03:57, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 23) **Fair enough, gentlemen. I was not certain if this was even relevant or not. Culator: The ads I was referring to were not appearing in the templates, but were displacing the templates further down the page and messing with the formatting of articles, such as crimping images, the "[edit]" buttons, etc. I have not seen too much of this lately, but I will let you know if I see them again.  Master Aban Fiolli  {Alpheridies University ComNet} 17:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 24) I'd like to consider relaxing the "Personality and traits" rule in FA noms so as to allow for exceptions on subjects who don't really have personalities, like Aris-Del Wari, Atha Prime, or Imperial Ace. We would treat it more like the "Powers and abilities" section in that objectors could still insist that an article have one if enough information exists (and on most, it will, so it's not like people could avoid P&Ts if they just didn't feel like doing them), but it wouldn't be required if the information isn't there. - Lord Hydronium 00:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 25) *I'm not really sure how this would work&mdash;everyone would have different ideas on when a P&T is necessary. Anyway, if an article has enough material to be FA-length, then the character will have a personality of some sort, even if it's only a few lines long. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 12:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Attendance

 * 1) Should be able to make August 23. --  Riffsyphon  1024 09:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) *EDIT: May be more difficult to say now, so placing myself at 50%. --  Riffsyphon  1024 18:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) I'd say there's a 40% chance I won't be able to make it. But I'm putting my money on the other 60%.  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 11:34, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) *EDIT: Make that 50-50.  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 11:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Most likely. Toprawa and Ralltiir 13:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) Kicking ass and taking usernames. Graestan ( Talk ) 01:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) I should be able to make it. --Jedimca0(Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 22:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 8) I will be there... hopefully Kyp 03:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 9) Ozzel 03:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 10) With 1337 n1nj4 sk1llz to steal Chack's Yellow Moffship.-- Goodwood [[Image:Redstarbird.svg|20px]] ( Alliance Intelligence ) 03:51, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 11) Hopefully.  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 22:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 12) The Yellow Moffship is mine! -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 13) Should be able to make it - it's my last free Saturday of summer, so I might have plans. I'll try to make it, though. Grand Moff Tranner [[Image:Imperial Department of Military Research.svg|20px]] (Comlink) 00:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 14) It's gametime!  Ifindyourlackoffaithdisturbing  ( Oya Manda! ) 01:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 15) I feel dwarfed by all you admins and stuff, but I should be able to make it (if I remember). I'm on KB quite a lot, so I can relate to all the advantages and shortfalls. Soresumakashi 09:19, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Apologies

 * 1) Busy. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 13:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Ditto. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 11:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

 * Can I come? :p  Ifindyourlackoffaithdisturbing  ( Oya Manda! ) 00:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. Don't bring your kids. Graestan ( Talk ) 00:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Woo!  Ifindyourlackoffaithdisturbing  ( Oya Manda! ) 01:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Meeting transcripts

 * January 7, 2006
 * January 16, 2006
 * February 2, 2006
 * February 28, 2006
 * 1) April 16, 2006
 * May 14, 2006
 * 1) August 19, 2006
 * 2) November 10, 2006 (Text) (PDF)
 * 3) December 8, 2006 (Text) (PDF)
 * 4) February 23, 2007 (Text) (PDF)
 * 5) June 2, 2007 (Text)
 * 6) September 9, 2007 (Text) (PDF)
 * 7) January 5, 2008 (Text)