BIONICLEsector01 talk:Articles for Creation
- 1 BIONICLE Facebook Page
- 2 Addition of Fansite
- 3 BioMedia Project
- 4 Rename The Final Battle Animation to The Rise of Mata Nui.
- 5 Move all fan-created canon stories from "Saga Guides/[title] by [author]" to "[title]"
- 6 Timeline/Okoto
- 7 Dekar-Hydraxon
BIONICLE Facebook Page
Page will be made.
This wiki should probably have some way of referencing the happenings of the Bionicle Facebook page, which often releases images and videos that are either exclusive or are not released on another source until later and hosts events such as contests. Bionicle websites have articles so it should seem logical that the facebook page should as well. Even if a page is not made, there should be some way of referencing events that unfold on the facebook page as well as images, videos, and other content. This could mean a nav template or a category of some form. Post your thoughts.
Addition of Fansite
Given that we have BZPower on here, I feel it only right to put Mask of Destiny on as well, and perhaps even The Toa's Hideout. However, Mask of Destiny actually has a good reason, as it is actually the longest running BIONICLE fansite with a forum on the web.
Add fansite articles
- -- Intelligence4 (talk) 03:04, 9 January 2017 (CET) A thorough documentation of fansites isn't a bad idea IMO.
- Master Inika (Talk) 06:47, 1 February 2017 (CET)
- --WOLKsite (talk) 23:20, 10 June 2017 (CET)
- —Planetperson 19:27, 28 June 2017 (CET)
- ~OnionShark 12:15, 1 July 2017 (CET)
Don't add fansite articles
Don't forget to sign your proposals, y'all. also, can we assume that, unless stated otherwise during the duration of the discussion, a proposal counts as a vote? meaning that if 6 people put their username under the yes section but one of them is the proposal writer, then there are in fact only 5 people who are voting yes. (avoiding the proposer's vote double counting.)Intelligence4 (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2017 (CET)
As it is a fairly extensive collection of Bionicle Generation 1 media, it seems like a page for BioMedia Project might be a worthwhile addition. To be honest, I'm not sure about some of their content, such as full scans of the various G1 comics-I'm not an expert but it seems like a copyright question-but what do y'all think?--Wiriamu (talk) 08:31, 17 December 2016 (CET)
Page will be made.
The only problem with copyright would be the scans of Glatorian Comics 3-7, as those were never published for free online. --OnionShark 21:19, 6 January 2017 (CET)
- I'm pretty sure they were somewhere for free, considering I've read them and didn't have a comic subscription at the time they were published. I don't think it's an issue. Intelligence4 (talk) 03:06, 9 January 2017 (CET)
- Maybe you read scans on brickshelf? Do you think you could find the place where you read them so we can be sure that no copyright issues will come up?
- --OnionShark 23:05, 10 January 2017 (CET)
- The scans could be found on BrickShelf some years ago (I don't know they're still there). I remember for I tried to translate the comic, but the scans were kind of awful ones, nearly unreadable, so I couldn't xd... By the way, they were on Brickshelf. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 23:14, 10 January 2017 (CET)
- Ok, I guess this technically wont get us into trouble. (BTW, GC3-7 are not linked )
- --OnionShark 17:27, 11 January 2017 (CET)
- Eh, the original saga's comics were not released on the BIONICLE.com, but we have links for them. And comics 3-5 were released 8 years ago, the last two were released 7 years ago, I don't think there would be copyright issue, if the BioMedia Project is still active. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 17:34, 11 January 2017 (CET)
No, the original comics were released for free on the website. So, the page got six votes for yes, it will be made, right? --OnionShark 17:40, 11 January 2017 (CET)
- Before we create the page we would need a Sandbox section, to see how it'll look like, I think. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 17:43, 11 January 2017 (CET)
- It's exciting that this project has been voted in, as I have hoped to do something similar for some time, but I would warn that the Lego Company still retains full rights to these comics, and can at any time deem this project unallowed. Here is a link to the Lego Companies info on using copyrighted material, .--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 23:40, 21 June 2017 (CET)
Rename The Final Battle Animation to The Rise of Mata Nui.
Per Advance's official Youtube account, the video is called The Rise of Mata Nui  as seen here. I suggest we change the name accordingly, since it's an official name from the guys that actually made the short film.
Change the name to The Rise of Mata Nui
- --- Creep 17:45, 13 April 2017 (CET)
- Seems pretty cut and dry to me. --Angel Bob (talk) 21:04, 13 April 2017 (CET)
- — Surel—Nuva (Talk) 21:14, 13 April 2017 (CET)
- ~OnionShark 18:36, 14 April 2017 (CET)
- --Master Inika (Talk) 01:43, 7 June 2017 (CET)
- --WOLKsite (talk) 23:19, 10 June 2017 (CET)
- -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2017 (CET)
Leave the name as The Final Battle Animation
Thanks for not simply putting yes/no as the voting section titles haha. whoever nominated this should sign their name to the nomination, because that counts as a vote, and we don't want to be double counting. it needs 6 votes in addition to the nomination. As for the actual issue at hand here, i'm inclined to agree with the nomination, but do we know why we originally called it the final battle animation? was it called that on bioncle.com, or is that simply something we made up? On a more fun note - was that video seriously only produced in 320p??? jeez... Intelligence4 (talk) 17:50, 17 April 2017 (CET)
- Oh right forgot to sign it when I made the nomination. Well I already voted so whatever. Also, remember that back in 2008 videos hardly were 1080p 4k Ultra-HD quality. They weren't the norm as they are now. I'm sure Ghost has a higher resolution and quality video when they made it but they'll probably never release it. --- Creep 03:29, 18 April 2017 (CET)
- According to archive.org it was called "Mistika 2-minute movie" on bionicle.com on 18 January 2009 (even though it's actually almost tree minutes long). There is, however, a video on YouTube titled "BIONICLE The Final Battle Animation" uploaded on 24 November 2008, the exact same day, the video was first released. It says "BIONICLE The Final Battle video, for BS01." in the description box. So... either it was called like that originally - before it was changed for some reason - or the name comes from that YouTube video. Vezon23 (talk) 14:46, 12 June 2017 (CET)
The current title format for fan-written stories (such as Saga Guides/Decadence by Dorek) is a bit strange. They're grouped under Saga Guides, but they're not saga guides, they're short stories. Stories by Greg follow the "[title]" format, so why should it be different for fan-written canon stories? -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 02:44, 4 May 2017 (CET)
Change names to "[title]"
- Intelligence4 (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2017 (CET)
- --Master Inika (Talk) 05:29, 11 June 2017 (CET)
- — Surel—Nuva (Talk) 09:25, 21 June 2017 (CET)
- --WOLKsite (talk) 11:07, 10 July 2017 (CET)
- ~OnionShark 11:20, 10 July 2017 (CET)
- I always thought this was strange. It makes it really unnecessarily complicated to link to them. I understand we want to make them distinct from the "official" short stories, but that information can go at the top of the page, not in the title. --Angel Bob (talk) 04:27, 4 May 2017 (CET)
Given that these are fan created stories, i think we should still note the author - i.e. [title by author] instead of simply [title]. if we removed saga guide from their title, would we also have to remove them from the saga guides' navigation box? if so, where would we put them? i know i only found those stories back in the day through those saga guides links, so i don't think we should make them harder for readers to find.
Another thing to consider, even though they're fan created, they're still official canon, right?
Aaaand one last thing on a bit of a tangent, were the images at the top of those story pages arbitrarily chosen, or were they specifically created for those pages, or what? Intelligence4 (talk) 06:25, 5 May 2017 (CET)
- 1) We could add them to the online story navigation box, all the official serials and short stories are there. 2) They were written for contests in which the winning stories would become canon, so yes. 3) The banners were chosen from pre-existing images, but I'm pretty sure the original versions didn't have them. Does anyone know why they were added? ~OnionShark 10:22, 6 May 2017 (CET)
Also, I noticed that among the Saga Guides are Birth of a Dark Hunter and The Crossing, should we change their titles too? They could go in the guides nav because BoaDH was in the Encyclopedia and TC was in the Glatorian mini books. ~OnionShark 14:18, 6 May 2017 (CET)
Can there be an option added for changing them to "Title by Author"? I feel like we should keep the authors' names even if we drop the cumbersome "Saga Guides," not because they're less canon, but just to acknowledge them as contest winners. --Master Inika (Talk) 01:43, 7 June 2017 (CET)
- done. i think we should leave them in the same navigation place they are now, i.e. in the saga guides navigation box. Intelligence4 (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2017 (CET)
Given that it's got it's own Saga Guide, a timeline page seems appropriate. Granted, a lot of the dating in Bionicle G2...if not all of it...is king of fuzzy, but I think we could get a general outline.--Wiriamu (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2017 (CET)
- Okoto :< -- Dorek Talk 21:22, 30 August 2017 (CET)
- Why not? I think there's more than enough lore there. —Planetperson 07:02, 3 September 2017 (CET)
Don't create Timeline/Okoto
- I just don't think there's just enough info in G2's story to merit a timeline - or a saga guide. Everything we need is covered in the History section of Okoto. --Angel Bob (talk) 05:44, 28 May 2017 (CET)
- I tend to agree with what Bob said. G2 didn't really live very long, thankfully. Intelligence4 (talk) 05:30, 30 May 2017 (CET)
- Thought I wish there was enough G2 lore to justify this, there isn't. --Master Inika (Talk) 01:43, 7 June 2017 (CET)
- There's really not that much story. --WOLKsite (talk) 23:24, 10 June 2017 (CET)
- -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2017 (CET)
- — Surel—Nuva (Talk) 07:21, 3 September 2017 (CET)
Y'all are silly. Dekar's page is a mess when we have to incorporate all of the Hydraxon material, plus it obfuscates searchability when somebody clicks on a link about a Matoran and gets this dude. I know it's a unique situation and all that, which is why it calls for a unique approach. Call it what you want (Hydraxon (Duplicate), whatever) but the information as such is so much better organized when it's on a separate page.
- -- Dorek Talk 21:28, 30 August 2017 (CET)
- I actually agree, though I'd be for renaming the current Dekar page to Dekar-Hydraxon/whatever and fixing it. --Vartemp Talk 18:28, 1 September 2017 (CET)
Don't create Dekar-Hydraxon
- ~ Wolk (talk) 06:22, 31 August 2017 (CET)
- Absolutely not. If we separate Dekar and Dekar-Hydraxon (Dekar/Hydraxon) we should separate Takanuva and Takua in that way. Unnecessary. The merging of the pages was a long debate and a good decision on the AfD. — Surel—Nuva (Talk) 08:00, 31 August 2017 (CET)
- Nah --Angel Bob (talk) 15:19, 31 August 2017 (CET)
- --Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 01:38, 2 September 2017 (CET)
- No, per the reasons in our discussion on the AfD. Intelligence4 (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2017 (CET)
- I agree, it doesn't make much sense to separate Dekar/Hydraxon into two articles if you don't do the same for Takua and Takanuva. I think the way it is now is very sensible. —Planetperson 01:19, 5 September 2017 (CET)
Comments on Dekar-Hydraxon
- It's still the same character. No other being has two pages, and I honestly see no reason for Dekar to have two pages either. ~ Wolk (talk) 06:22, 31 August 2017 (CET)
- Takanuva isn't a comparison, literally the only similarity is the confusion in the renaming. For all intents and purposes, Dekar-Hydraxon is a separate being; he's a completely reworked version of Dekar in the incidental form of a pre-existing entity. Doing this wouldn't mean we'd create a separate page for every individual form, but this is a pretty unique scenario.
- I think it's good the way it is because you get the entire history of the character on his page, however it might be nice to specify the difference of Dekar-Hydraxon on the info box thing (sorry don't know the technical term), that simply says "Hydraxon" by default when you land on the page.--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 01:41, 1 September 2017 (CET)
- Just a stray thought... If the pages stay merged, would it be possible to vary the default infobox tab (Matoran vs. replica) based on whether the user arrived via a link directly to Dekar or a via a redirect from Dekar-Hydraxon? That might help address the searchability concerns. --Volitak Boxor (talk) 21:10, 1 September 2017 (CET)
- Well, the idea may still be valid, if the infobox template can perceive whether the user arrived at the page via Dekar or Dekar#Hydraxon and vary its default tab accordingly. I'm not sure whether the URL is a parameter that can be used for conditionals in the infobox template, but I may try to mess with it. Maybe Morris or Meiko or someone would know more? --Volitak Boxor (talk) 21:25, 1 September 2017 (CET)
Takanuva is different because he had the same personality, and was the same person. he just became a toa, like the toa metru, and renamed himself. the fohrok are also different because those have a very different origin. i think the double infobox idea isn't a bad one, but i like volitak boxor's idea of varying the default infobox tab based on link origin better, if that's possible. Intelligence4 (talk) 23:47, 4 September 2017 (CET)
As for searchability, the Hydraxon page already has a banner at the top with a link to the Dekar page. That seems good enough to me. —Planetperson 01:24, 5 September 2017 (CET)
- The current changes that Surel Nuva made seem very good to me, but it does sort of bother me that the Hydraxon info box title isn't apparently pertaining to Dekar now that it has been changed to Hydraxon's duplicate. Also if we could change the default tab that is displayed depending on which link you arrived from, that does seem better, but again, I do think the way it is now is just fine.--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 01:49, 5 September 2017 (CET)
Vartemp actually brings up a really good point; the page itself should be called Hydraxon (Duplicate) or whatever, instead of Dekar, since that is his most current form and the current name the form is going by. That nails a lot of the frustration I have with searchability; spoilers aside, the fact that you click a link that says "Dekar" and get info on a being called "Hydraxon" bugs me a lot.
Putting a separate infobox further down is also a very curious idea that I didn't know we were capable of =P. It's something wikipedia does on occasion, but it's always been a thing I've avoided personally; that said, it does kinda work here. If that's how the page is with just the name Dekar, I suppose it could be okay. Or we pull a Takanuva, consolidate everything, and change the page name. -- Dorek Talk 02:07, 5 September 2017 (CET)
- why don't we just name the page dekar-hydraxon? that's the most accurate name for him now. Intelligence4 (talk) 02:23, 5 September 2017 (CET)
Re: the infobox changing depending on what link you come from, that's not possible currently, and I'm not immediately sure if it would be possible. It'd be cool though. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 06:38, 5 September 2017 (CET)
- I don't want to see this page split into two pages again, but I'll concede that the name could be changed. Might I actually suggest Dekar/Hydraxon, with a slash rather than a hyphen, like we used to do for Takua/Takanuva? It makes more sense to my eyes. --Angel Bob (talk) 23:29, 10 September 2017 (CET)
Slashes had a bit of a problem in that it's generally how we use subpages (although I don't think it's technically an issue software-wise). I'm open to Hydraxon (Duplicate) but my preference is still Dekar-Hydraxon =P.
That said, we sort of have two paths here; one is keeping the name Dekar outright and having the page structured as is (with two infobox templates) the other is changing the name to Dekar-Hydraxon (OR WHATEVER) and then merging the templates back. The former is unorthodox, but obvious it's an unusual circumstance so I can't say I dislike it. The other is a little more standard, we just need to agree on a name =P. I've started a new conversation on Talk:Dekar, but I'll leave this up so people can see everything until a consensus is reached.