Battlestar Wiki:Chiefs' noticeboard

This page is one of Battlestar Wiki's many projects. This page serves to coordinate discussion on a particular aspect of this Wiki. The formal recommendations of a project may be treated as policies.

Chiefs' noticeboard
Daily Visit
Think Tank Task List New Pages Ideas under vote
Quick Links
Main Page Edit
Important Tags
{{warn-0}} - {{warn-6}} {{adminlist}}

This noticeboard is a location to discuss and coordinate administrative tasks for the Battlestar Wiki.

It is our hope that this place can serve as a location for administrators to coordinate their efforts on the maintenance tasks of the Wiki (it's not ALL fun and games), as well as a spot for our contributors to be able to bring things to the attention of the admins if something needs to be done. Need a protected page edited? An article or picture deleted? Admins will watchlist this page so that your request won't get lost in the shuffle.

Ask a new question or begin a new discussion by clicking here.

Current Administrators

Senior Chiefs

Senior chiefs are, in Wikipedia's terminology, bureaucrats who have the ability to make other users into chiefs. They also have the ability to check user and other advance functions not under the purview of the chiefs. Currently senior chiefs are:

• Joe Beaudoin
• Shane
• Spencerian

Chiefs

Chiefs are administrators who have access to move, delete and restore pages as well as blocking malicious users. The current chiefs are:

• Active
  • Catrope
  • Gougef
  • JubalHarshaw (Primary Wiki Frakr! Contact)
  • Mercifull
  • Peter Farago
  • Serenity
  • Steelviper
• Inactive
  • CalculatinAvatar
  • Day
  • Talos

See list of all chiefs on Battlestar Wiki

Javascript Reported Vandals

No recent reports.

Spoiler Policy

It looks like this needs to be updated for the Caprica series being green-lighted. Should all Caprica articles be considered spoilers? Shane (talk) 00:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Typically, what we have here is minor plot information... not really a spoiler. Spoilers should really be identified on a case-by-case basis, at least for now. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 01:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

"He That Believeth In Me"

I'm done with the "He That Believeth In Me" stuff for now... I've locked all the major articles, so we shouldn't have major performance issues, and worked on some major updates. Except now I'm tired, and I want to get some shut eye, so fill in the blanks guys. (Obviously, the last 15 minutes of the show -- basically the last two acts -- are verboten. Not that it'll matter much in 8 hours, but let's cover our butts till then.) The man with the mushy brain bids you good night (and early morning). -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 08:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Humor in Battlestar Galactica

Seeing since we have articles as Philosophy in Battlestar Galactica or Sexuality in Battlestar Galactica, I was wondering if such an article would be worthy of survival. Although I'm sure there's a matter of interpretation concerning various jokes, sight gags, etc., and it would be harder to pin down, I still think it's possibly to create a nonbias article on Humor from either three series (and spin-off material). Thoughts?--DrWho42 14:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd be interested in seeing such a thing, particularly for the new series, since the series doesn't afford itself too much in the way of humor. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 15:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Concur. There's something to be gleaned with such an article, although one may have to be careful in sourcing the jokes to specific references, homages and the like. In fact, while doing this article you might want to consider how it impacts the lesser viewed References in the Re-imagined Series, as there are jokes there that are also homages but many items that may or may not necessarily be funny. Thus, overlap. --Spencerian 16:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I actually think there is plenty of funny or also lightweight stuff in the show, even if it's just a line or two in a scene. So listing all of them could make for a somewhat lengthy article. -- Serenity 16:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Stream == Aired? == Non-spolier?

Just a quick thought, maybe not, but should the first airing of this stream count as the episode being seen or should being "aired" be the TV broadcast version only? in terms of marking pages. I just throw this little kink in our system now. :) Shane (talk) 17:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I think we should just define a spoiler as content that is not yet aired on TV, just to keep our sanities intact. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 17:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Quiznos Expense Account

Baltar: You know, I feel God too... and those-- God, they're nice. But you know, uhm, Joe got an expense account with Quiznos. Now that's feeling God, you know, the one true God.

For those of you that opened up a Quiznos' expense account for the, uhm, Battlestar Wiki, I'd like to thank you! You've definitely made my day! (And, yes, I'll post the contents of the wonderful card that users 96, 351, and 541 came up with!) Thank you! :D -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 21:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Hangar Bay

What ever happened to the Hangar Bay? All links there redirect to the English wiki and http://hb.battlestarwiki.org/ redirects to the main portal. --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 15:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I deleted the sub-domain.. surpriselly, we still have files over there. Wonder if we should bring it back to life. Shane (talk) 15:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, bring it back, because we can work on some skin ideas over there. (The Colonial Paper thing, alternate color schemes, as well as a cleaner "print preview" version.) I'd recommend that you nuke whatever's there now and start clean. For instance, the MW software on the HB probably dates back to MW 1.5 or 1.7. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 18:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Status

So it seems to me that the Wiki's been working like a champ. Never crashed, apparently. It seems to be somewhat slow at times, but far better than the "Razor" airing, I thought. Anyway, what do you guys think about things? -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 18:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It crashed for about 1 mintue because of a server fault, but it came right back. And it wasn't from the wiki. It was from me. :D Slow... yes. Online.. yes. editable... yes. Shane (talk) 19:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, well, then we only have to worry about Shane now... Great. j/k -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 19:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Aside from the slowness, there were a few instances of unresponsiveness. That is, it didn't load at all. But that was some hours after the episode aired. All in all, not bad, though I didn't see how it fared directly during the airing.-- Serenity 19:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

That I can say... I was editing without any problems. I think the double airing really spread out the load of the server. Shane (talk) 20:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Dang it, I warned him on Friday not to crash the server! :) In seriousness, the wiki's been doing great! --Spencerian 23:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that bit of unresponsiveness too, which is saying enough about its timing (it was 4 AM here when HTBIM aired, and I didn't notice anything weird until like 4 PM). What I'm interested in most right now is the effectiveness of the BW:AIRLOCKs; do we have any data on how many people viewed locked articles or tried to click edit links on them? --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 10:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I prefer the articles being locked for another reason. It's less work to write an article properly from the ground up, than going through a badly written one or a mismatch of various points and correcting that. Be that turning disjointed pieces into a coherent text, fixing typos and grammar, or just adhering to our style guidelines. I know that doesn't sound very nice and goes somewhat against the principles of a wiki, in that everyone can make edits, but it's also a good thing when an article has one voice and seems like it was written by one person. -- Serenity 11:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

It was definitely a matter of survival in the past. While me might try to phase in unlocking some of the pertinent articles, we should do it slowly, in phases, in the coming weeks. The last one to go should be the episode guide. I'd be tickled to have the option of having it unlocked during airing, but not at the cost of crashing the server. Perhaps we should brainstorm some strategies of how we can harness the flood of input without everything being so disjointed. Maybe hold off on having the summary written by everybody, but allow different people to get their observations in (in separate areas) in a way that avoids edit conflicts. Then, after the episode is aired people can assemble the summary. --Steelviper 11:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, something like that could work. Notes and Analysis are easier to copy-edit (and I guess everyone knows how necessary that is) than the summary and probably also more important to have directly after everyone saw the episode. -- Serenity 11:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the episode guide should be airlocked so someone can write a proper summary (same for battle articles), but I think articles like Jeanne could afford to be editable. --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 11:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Color Scheme

Ok, now that the survey is about over -- we've had more than 1,000 respondents, by the way -- the main bulk of the complaints have been leveled against the default color scheme. Frankly, I can see where they would complain. As much as I may personally like the color scheme we presently have, it does have its draw backs. Among them:

• The text is too small. Our median age group is 30-40. We need to have bigger font size. Basically, the smallest font size we should have is 10-11pt. Not 8pt felgercarb.
• The color needs to be changed. Basically, we need a light background with dark text look.
• The scheme does not work in high-lit environments. For instance, I took my laptop outside and had to switch to the white bsgmonobook theme. Just wasn't usable any other way.
• Further, we need something that is auto adjusting... Basically, a skin that has auto width for larger resolutions and widescreen formatted screens.
• Personally, I do also have problems reading it for long periods of time... Black on white (or dark color on a light color) is default for a reason, after all.

So, with that in mind, I personally feel that we need to retire the current skin as our default. This isn't to say that it should be deleted, as we should keep it around as a skin option to others that like it, but the respondents have made several good points that should be brought up.

Now all I'm suggesting here is a color pallet change. The format we're using right now is fine. Just the colors need to change.

And I know that Shane's probably not happy about me saying these things, but the people have spoken and I can't really disagree with them on this. :-| So, do any of you have thoughts, questions, or concerns? I'm looking for feedback here. :D -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 06:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't understand the complaints about the font size until I switched to the new widescreen skin. Monobook's size is bigger and just about right. What I also noticed is the fontsize itself. What's annoying is that it's practically impossible to distinguish quotation marks and apostrophes in the editing window. However, I like the color scheme, but some more variety doesn't hurt. -- Serenity 09:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It wouldn't be impossible to do a "fluid" skin" I have to really change the skin file format so the header can be adjusted correctly -- which is what I been avoiding to have to do -- and then it can be the default skin (not my fixed width). :) . With colors though I like the blog colors as the light skin. We could even bring up the default text size from 8pt to 10 or 11. Any higher it look like big font. I'll take a look at the results to see what I can do also. Shane (talk) 12:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Forum slowness

The Battlestar Forum is displaying some very weird (and most of all, slow). I can view the main page and the forums all right, but threads load extremely slowly. The wiki, however, is not slow. Very weird... --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 20:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

No kidding. I am talking with the CIO of Woopra to solve the problem. If not, I will disable it from loading. Shane (talk) 22:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Expelled

At the very best, advertising Ben Stein's film "Expelled" is insulting and tasteless. Do we have to run this ad? --Peter Farago 18:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Galactica 1980 definition:  vulgarism equivalent to "shit" (see: felgercarb); Dillon uses this when discovering that his laser pistol wasn't set to stun (1980: "Galactica Discovers Earth, Part II")

Original Series definition: expletive, similar to "crap" (see: felgercarb)