![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Hello. I'm a member of the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing articles using these criteria, and we are are asking for your help. As you are most aware of the issues surrounding your focus area, we are wondering if you could provide us with a list of the articles that fall within the scope of your WikiProject, and that are either featured, A-class, B-class, or Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Do you have any recommendations? If you do, please post your suggestions at the listing of all active Arts WikiProjects, and if you have any questions, ask me in the Work Via WikiProjects talk page or directly in my talk page. Thanks a lot! — Mir l e n 13:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Following up from this, list articles under these headings and then we can decide which to submit to Wikipedia 1.0. We should probably submit about 7 in total. This list can also act as a list of things that need to be improved to help them get into WP:1.0. Criteria can be found here.
A while ago here we decided to split these two pages. I just saw that someone put them back toghther. There was never any dsicusion here or on the talk pages. Since they are two diffrent pieces of technology they should be on sperate pages. Or, perhaps we could have 1 page called Staff Weapon Varriants which lists and descibes all staff weapons like the ones on the hatak, and the al-kesh. The way we have it now doesn't work. Tobyk777 18:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, After working hard on DNA Resequencer (Stargate) I think it is as good as it can be. It had a peer review which didn't give any evidence to the contrary. I think we should nominate it on FAC. What do you guys think? Tobyk777 18:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Forget it the voting was so terrible that it will never pass. Espeicaly since the objections are unfixable. Tobyk777 18:58, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I just did a massive upgrade of the article. I want to know what you guys think now. Tobyk777 03:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Some, most notably Jacob Carter and Genii have mismatched colors. It should be red for Tau'ri, and then a special color for non-Tau'ri humans, right? So it should be changed to...
Good idea? LD 21:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi I just tagged Ancient stargate for cleanup because I feel that the organization is terrible. In order to keep this thread in one place, please respond here and here on the talk page. Tobyk777 23:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi a little while back, I added links to stargate pages from portal stargate. It was my understanding that portals are supposed to be navigational tools. Our portal now has almost nothing useful except for a tiny catagory box. After I made what I think was a major upagrde to the portal. It was reverted. You can see the "upgraded version" here. I think this version does what a portal is supposed to do, help navigation. I think that our current portal, doesn't. Who agrees with me that the extra links should be added to the bottom? Tobyk777 23:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Great work everyone. This is a great acomplishemnt for this project. Congardulations to everyone who helped. Thanks Tobyk777 20:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
This looks like a polci violation Tobyk. At least, you should understand that FAC isnt vote-based. nothing is vote based. just getting a load of "support" votes wont get us on the front page. i also agree that Stargate (device) is more likely by a significant margin to get FA. DNA Resequencer, im sorry to say, is just not going to make it due to its improminence. but however: checkout the main Stargate Wikiproject page. --
Alfakim --
talk 14:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Would someone try and find a good pic for him? Thanks. American Patriot 1776 01:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
also in rpely to above.
you can get pics for this project here: www.stargatecaps.com -- Alfakim -- talk 14:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
theres a trend going on to say "In the episode "Blah blha"" if its SG-1, and say "In the episode "Blah blah" (Atlantis)" if its atlantis. however the two shows are pretty much sisters so i see no reason to presuppose a citation refers to an sg-1 episode. in general i think all episode citations should say which show they're from.
the best way of doing this is to scrap text like "In the episode "episode" this and that happened", and instead say "this and that happened ("episode")". that way you can use the {{ sgcite}} template which will automatically generate an appropriate episode citation, eg:
{{sgcite|Need|1|show=all}}
- gives - (
1:
Need)
{{sgcite|Rising|A|show=all}}
- gives - (
A:
Rising)
-- Alfakim -- talk 13:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Has anyone considered forming a stargate wiki along the lines of Memory Alpha or wookiepedia to allow for greater detail about the stargate universe without the need to worry about whether things are important in the real world? There seems to be a lot of material in stargate articles that's fan-produced analysis, or fictional technical detail, and thus not really wikipedia appropriate, but perhaps it could find a safer home somewhere else? Night Gyr 02:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Just to make it clear so that no one wastes time setting one up:
Stargate-SG-1-Solutions Wiki already exists. --
Alfakim --
talk 14:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed that on our article, Stargate SG-1, under plot summary it gives a summary of seasons 1-3, then 5-9. where is 4? Did no one ever write it? Also, I should sugest that these season summaries be copied into List of Stargate SG-1 episodes, under each season before the episodes. Tobyk777 04:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
In 4, Apophis dies, Heruur dies, and the Zatarc plotline is uncovered. Tobyk777 01:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Looking at a number of the pages in WikiProject Stargate, all of the ones I have seen are underreferenced, if referenced at all. The few articles that do appear adequately referenced turn out, upon further inspection, to cite other Wikipedia articles, which is against Wikipedia policy. (See WP:Verify and Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Why_sources_should_be_cited, which specifically states that we cannot cite ourselves.) Do not be offended - I am sure the information is accurate, and the articles are in general well written aside from this. However, external references are needed to verify them. I can try to help, but there's a lot to do, and it seems to me that, for now, perhaps all of these articles should be marked with the following template:
This article needs additional citations for
verification. (March 2008) |
Armedblowfish 00:27, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
This is not correct. The citations are not to other wikipedia articles!!! They are to the episodes themselves!!! They link to the wiki articles on the episodes as a bonus. The episodes themselves are the primary sources off which our project is based. Since we cannot link to DVD /TV show footage, we link to summaries of the DVD footage.
Tobyk777 01:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
1. Stargate SG-1 episode: Children of the Gods | See Transcript
Is this satisfactory? Tobyk777 03:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I won't get involved with what further steps you want to take to address this issue. If you want a further review it should be from someone independent. For clarification, though, my view when I reviewed the article and gave it GA status was that the references were to actual episodes, and that these are legitimate sources which are publicly available for verification. In my view at least, references don't have to be to things that take the form of text. I still think the references were okay, though a bonus might have been adding a new References section to tell us where we can get the DVDs (i.e who has marketed them, what year, etc.) that contain these episodes, while making clear somehow that all citations are to the versions found on those DVDs. The existing References section could then be retitled "Notes". If you could add links to published scripts that would be a further bonus, as long as they were the actual scripts, not draft scripts or something.
This issue must surely affect a lot of articles for which the main sources are the actual movies, episodes of TV programs, or issues of comics, etc. E.g., many articles refer to events in movies that are based on simply looking at the movie - which is the main reference. Other references are needed only to support claims about points of interpretation. E.g. if I wrote in the Brokeback Mountain article that certain events take place which we can all see for ourselves, I can use the movie itself as my reference. But if there is a controversy of interpretation, for example the controversy about whether or not it is implied that Jack Twist is murdered, I would have to say:
The same would apply on an issue of the movie's meaning, or its actual or intended emotional impact, or whatever.
This is only the view of one editor. I don't know if there is even any consensus for or against it within the Wikipedia community. I'll see if I can get a better sense of this and report back if anything comes of my efforts. :)
I do agree with Armedblowfish that the article should be self-contained. Whatever it references should be referenced directly, not by way of other Wikipedia articles. Metamagician3000 11:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
As a result of these points, I suggest we get going and start putting references into the episode articles. -- Alfakim -- talk 14:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, the sites I've been linking to, to add transcripts to episode articles, are Stargatefan, StargateWiki, GateWorld, and Moon-catching. Of those, Stargatefan and GateWorld only have their own transcript for a minority of the Stargate SG-1 episodes. StargateWiki has transcripts for almost all of them, though is missing a few in Season 6. I have yet to find a broadcasted episode that Moon-catching doesn't have.
Anyways, the question is which one to link to from non episode articles referencing the episodes. I think it should be either StargateWiki or Moon-catching, as they are the most inclusive. StargateWiki looks more professional (though it should be noted that none of these are official transcripts - I doubt the producer releases transcripts, so these are fan-transcribed). However, StargateWiki was, to my great annoyance, recently down for a number of days (due to a MySQL problem). Moon-catching was down shortly after StargateWiki came back up, but came back up the same evening. So the question is (given a choice) which one should we link to from other articles when referencing the episodes?
For the record, I do not beleive referencing more than one transcript in an episode article is excessive.
Armedblowfish 03:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
| [linkurl Transcript]
behind the </ref>
tag. --
Alfakim --
talk 15:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)</ref>
tag? Well, StargateWiki is at least not part of Wikipedia, or even the Wikimedia Foundation. And in this case, it is (almost) a primary source, so it's sort of like linking to
Wikisource (
which is allowed).
Armedblowfish 18:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)There is currently a half-implemented scheme we should work to fully implement. It is that all episodes articles are categorised under
Category:Stargate SG-1 episodes and
Category:Stargate Atlantis episodes, by their season number. So for most of the episodes, the categorisation looks like: [[Category:Stargate SG-1 episodes|8th Season: New Order]]
. This forces the category to order the articles by their season, effectively turning the category page into a comprehensive listing (see the page).
This can easily be extended so that the category lists each episode by its genuine order. Simply use this categorisation:
[[Category:Stargate Atlantis episodes|2.03: Episode title]]
where 203 is the exact episode number. This will cause that episode, in the category, to come under the heading "2" and be ordered by the number "03".
This is the best scheme for the job, and works rather neatly. I think we should implement it despite one problem: season 10. Because wiki only uses the first character, season 10 episodes (e.g. 1011, ep 11) will come under season 1, as episode "011" (i.e. listed before even the season 1 episodes). I think we should go ahead anyway. They'll still be ordered by season, but there'll just be a missing heading "10". There's no better way of doing it. -- Alfakim -- talk 08:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
[[Category:Stargate SG-1 episodes|1.01: Children of the Gods]]
I restarted and refreshed the Stargate Wikistory. Join in it should be fun.
-- Alfakim -- talk 09:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#Naming convention. Episode articles are named in different ways for different shows and I think they should all follow the same standard. I guess we would need to rename Stargate articles because the other standard is more widely used. -- Ton e 21:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
As I was adding trascripts to articles refing episodes, I realized, that we didn't have a soruce for Atlantis transcripts. So, I found one: [1]. Now we can inprove our refing of both shows. Tobyk777 02:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Having a look, I think we should merge all the Asgard characters articles into Asgard characters in Stargate. The only exception would be Thor, or maybe even not. I have a strong mergist tendency these days... Can I proceed? -- Ton e 12:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
That's the idea. Those articles are just not long enough. We did the same some time ago with Wraith characters in Stargate Atlantis. It is just a question if we should merge all of them or leave links to longer articles. -- Ton e 15:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Merged for now. I think it should stay this way or eventually have Thor as a separate one but not the others. Maybe some time later. -- Ton e 16:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
A section of the article says it comes from scifi.com, and it does. I do not believe this qualifies as fair use. Therefore, the article should be deleted and rewritten. Armedblowfish 14:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Hello. I'm a member of the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing articles using these criteria, and we are are asking for your help. As you are most aware of the issues surrounding your focus area, we are wondering if you could provide us with a list of the articles that fall within the scope of your WikiProject, and that are either featured, A-class, B-class, or Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Do you have any recommendations? If you do, please post your suggestions at the listing of all active Arts WikiProjects, and if you have any questions, ask me in the Work Via WikiProjects talk page or directly in my talk page. Thanks a lot! — Mir l e n 13:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Following up from this, list articles under these headings and then we can decide which to submit to Wikipedia 1.0. We should probably submit about 7 in total. This list can also act as a list of things that need to be improved to help them get into WP:1.0. Criteria can be found here.
A while ago here we decided to split these two pages. I just saw that someone put them back toghther. There was never any dsicusion here or on the talk pages. Since they are two diffrent pieces of technology they should be on sperate pages. Or, perhaps we could have 1 page called Staff Weapon Varriants which lists and descibes all staff weapons like the ones on the hatak, and the al-kesh. The way we have it now doesn't work. Tobyk777 18:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, After working hard on DNA Resequencer (Stargate) I think it is as good as it can be. It had a peer review which didn't give any evidence to the contrary. I think we should nominate it on FAC. What do you guys think? Tobyk777 18:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Forget it the voting was so terrible that it will never pass. Espeicaly since the objections are unfixable. Tobyk777 18:58, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I just did a massive upgrade of the article. I want to know what you guys think now. Tobyk777 03:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Some, most notably Jacob Carter and Genii have mismatched colors. It should be red for Tau'ri, and then a special color for non-Tau'ri humans, right? So it should be changed to...
Good idea? LD 21:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi I just tagged Ancient stargate for cleanup because I feel that the organization is terrible. In order to keep this thread in one place, please respond here and here on the talk page. Tobyk777 23:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi a little while back, I added links to stargate pages from portal stargate. It was my understanding that portals are supposed to be navigational tools. Our portal now has almost nothing useful except for a tiny catagory box. After I made what I think was a major upagrde to the portal. It was reverted. You can see the "upgraded version" here. I think this version does what a portal is supposed to do, help navigation. I think that our current portal, doesn't. Who agrees with me that the extra links should be added to the bottom? Tobyk777 23:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Great work everyone. This is a great acomplishemnt for this project. Congardulations to everyone who helped. Thanks Tobyk777 20:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
This looks like a polci violation Tobyk. At least, you should understand that FAC isnt vote-based. nothing is vote based. just getting a load of "support" votes wont get us on the front page. i also agree that Stargate (device) is more likely by a significant margin to get FA. DNA Resequencer, im sorry to say, is just not going to make it due to its improminence. but however: checkout the main Stargate Wikiproject page. --
Alfakim --
talk 14:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Would someone try and find a good pic for him? Thanks. American Patriot 1776 01:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
also in rpely to above.
you can get pics for this project here: www.stargatecaps.com -- Alfakim -- talk 14:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
theres a trend going on to say "In the episode "Blah blha"" if its SG-1, and say "In the episode "Blah blah" (Atlantis)" if its atlantis. however the two shows are pretty much sisters so i see no reason to presuppose a citation refers to an sg-1 episode. in general i think all episode citations should say which show they're from.
the best way of doing this is to scrap text like "In the episode "episode" this and that happened", and instead say "this and that happened ("episode")". that way you can use the {{ sgcite}} template which will automatically generate an appropriate episode citation, eg:
{{sgcite|Need|1|show=all}}
- gives - (
1:
Need)
{{sgcite|Rising|A|show=all}}
- gives - (
A:
Rising)
-- Alfakim -- talk 13:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Has anyone considered forming a stargate wiki along the lines of Memory Alpha or wookiepedia to allow for greater detail about the stargate universe without the need to worry about whether things are important in the real world? There seems to be a lot of material in stargate articles that's fan-produced analysis, or fictional technical detail, and thus not really wikipedia appropriate, but perhaps it could find a safer home somewhere else? Night Gyr 02:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Just to make it clear so that no one wastes time setting one up:
Stargate-SG-1-Solutions Wiki already exists. --
Alfakim --
talk 14:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed that on our article, Stargate SG-1, under plot summary it gives a summary of seasons 1-3, then 5-9. where is 4? Did no one ever write it? Also, I should sugest that these season summaries be copied into List of Stargate SG-1 episodes, under each season before the episodes. Tobyk777 04:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
In 4, Apophis dies, Heruur dies, and the Zatarc plotline is uncovered. Tobyk777 01:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Looking at a number of the pages in WikiProject Stargate, all of the ones I have seen are underreferenced, if referenced at all. The few articles that do appear adequately referenced turn out, upon further inspection, to cite other Wikipedia articles, which is against Wikipedia policy. (See WP:Verify and Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Why_sources_should_be_cited, which specifically states that we cannot cite ourselves.) Do not be offended - I am sure the information is accurate, and the articles are in general well written aside from this. However, external references are needed to verify them. I can try to help, but there's a lot to do, and it seems to me that, for now, perhaps all of these articles should be marked with the following template:
This article needs additional citations for
verification. (March 2008) |
Armedblowfish 00:27, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
This is not correct. The citations are not to other wikipedia articles!!! They are to the episodes themselves!!! They link to the wiki articles on the episodes as a bonus. The episodes themselves are the primary sources off which our project is based. Since we cannot link to DVD /TV show footage, we link to summaries of the DVD footage.
Tobyk777 01:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
1. Stargate SG-1 episode: Children of the Gods | See Transcript
Is this satisfactory? Tobyk777 03:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I won't get involved with what further steps you want to take to address this issue. If you want a further review it should be from someone independent. For clarification, though, my view when I reviewed the article and gave it GA status was that the references were to actual episodes, and that these are legitimate sources which are publicly available for verification. In my view at least, references don't have to be to things that take the form of text. I still think the references were okay, though a bonus might have been adding a new References section to tell us where we can get the DVDs (i.e who has marketed them, what year, etc.) that contain these episodes, while making clear somehow that all citations are to the versions found on those DVDs. The existing References section could then be retitled "Notes". If you could add links to published scripts that would be a further bonus, as long as they were the actual scripts, not draft scripts or something.
This issue must surely affect a lot of articles for which the main sources are the actual movies, episodes of TV programs, or issues of comics, etc. E.g., many articles refer to events in movies that are based on simply looking at the movie - which is the main reference. Other references are needed only to support claims about points of interpretation. E.g. if I wrote in the Brokeback Mountain article that certain events take place which we can all see for ourselves, I can use the movie itself as my reference. But if there is a controversy of interpretation, for example the controversy about whether or not it is implied that Jack Twist is murdered, I would have to say:
The same would apply on an issue of the movie's meaning, or its actual or intended emotional impact, or whatever.
This is only the view of one editor. I don't know if there is even any consensus for or against it within the Wikipedia community. I'll see if I can get a better sense of this and report back if anything comes of my efforts. :)
I do agree with Armedblowfish that the article should be self-contained. Whatever it references should be referenced directly, not by way of other Wikipedia articles. Metamagician3000 11:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
As a result of these points, I suggest we get going and start putting references into the episode articles. -- Alfakim -- talk 14:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, the sites I've been linking to, to add transcripts to episode articles, are Stargatefan, StargateWiki, GateWorld, and Moon-catching. Of those, Stargatefan and GateWorld only have their own transcript for a minority of the Stargate SG-1 episodes. StargateWiki has transcripts for almost all of them, though is missing a few in Season 6. I have yet to find a broadcasted episode that Moon-catching doesn't have.
Anyways, the question is which one to link to from non episode articles referencing the episodes. I think it should be either StargateWiki or Moon-catching, as they are the most inclusive. StargateWiki looks more professional (though it should be noted that none of these are official transcripts - I doubt the producer releases transcripts, so these are fan-transcribed). However, StargateWiki was, to my great annoyance, recently down for a number of days (due to a MySQL problem). Moon-catching was down shortly after StargateWiki came back up, but came back up the same evening. So the question is (given a choice) which one should we link to from other articles when referencing the episodes?
For the record, I do not beleive referencing more than one transcript in an episode article is excessive.
Armedblowfish 03:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
| [linkurl Transcript]
behind the </ref>
tag. --
Alfakim --
talk 15:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)</ref>
tag? Well, StargateWiki is at least not part of Wikipedia, or even the Wikimedia Foundation. And in this case, it is (almost) a primary source, so it's sort of like linking to
Wikisource (
which is allowed).
Armedblowfish 18:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)There is currently a half-implemented scheme we should work to fully implement. It is that all episodes articles are categorised under
Category:Stargate SG-1 episodes and
Category:Stargate Atlantis episodes, by their season number. So for most of the episodes, the categorisation looks like: [[Category:Stargate SG-1 episodes|8th Season: New Order]]
. This forces the category to order the articles by their season, effectively turning the category page into a comprehensive listing (see the page).
This can easily be extended so that the category lists each episode by its genuine order. Simply use this categorisation:
[[Category:Stargate Atlantis episodes|2.03: Episode title]]
where 203 is the exact episode number. This will cause that episode, in the category, to come under the heading "2" and be ordered by the number "03".
This is the best scheme for the job, and works rather neatly. I think we should implement it despite one problem: season 10. Because wiki only uses the first character, season 10 episodes (e.g. 1011, ep 11) will come under season 1, as episode "011" (i.e. listed before even the season 1 episodes). I think we should go ahead anyway. They'll still be ordered by season, but there'll just be a missing heading "10". There's no better way of doing it. -- Alfakim -- talk 08:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
[[Category:Stargate SG-1 episodes|1.01: Children of the Gods]]
I restarted and refreshed the Stargate Wikistory. Join in it should be fun.
-- Alfakim -- talk 09:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#Naming convention. Episode articles are named in different ways for different shows and I think they should all follow the same standard. I guess we would need to rename Stargate articles because the other standard is more widely used. -- Ton e 21:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
As I was adding trascripts to articles refing episodes, I realized, that we didn't have a soruce for Atlantis transcripts. So, I found one: [1]. Now we can inprove our refing of both shows. Tobyk777 02:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Having a look, I think we should merge all the Asgard characters articles into Asgard characters in Stargate. The only exception would be Thor, or maybe even not. I have a strong mergist tendency these days... Can I proceed? -- Ton e 12:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
That's the idea. Those articles are just not long enough. We did the same some time ago with Wraith characters in Stargate Atlantis. It is just a question if we should merge all of them or leave links to longer articles. -- Ton e 15:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Merged for now. I think it should stay this way or eventually have Thor as a separate one but not the others. Maybe some time later. -- Ton e 16:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
A section of the article says it comes from scifi.com, and it does. I do not believe this qualifies as fair use. Therefore, the article should be deleted and rewritten. Armedblowfish 14:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)