So while doing some tweaks to the Star Wars navboxes, I realized the way we handle characters on them currently is kind of strange. Before the new Star Wars navboxes we just tossed everything into one "Characters" section, which, in hindsight, wasn't a very good idea as it makes no distinction between, well, anything. While the Playable Characters/Allies/Enemies setup on the Star Wars navboxes works better, it still lends itself to a bit of confusion as some NPCs don't really have a place in it. Using Cad Bane as an example, he's not a traditional enemy since you never actually fight him, but he's also definitely not an ally as his sole purpose in the play set is to hinder your progress. Basically what I'm thinking is to rename the Allies section to something more appropriate to contain any non-playable, non-enemy character, though I don't really know what a good name would be. Just wondering if you had any ideas or further thoughts on this.
Ah, I see what you mean. Thought about it awhile this morning, and the only thing I could come up with was "antagonist", as I'd seen the term used elsewhere on the wiki. Still scratching my head over it though. I ran it past my wife as she's more into literature, fan fiction (reading/writing), etc.; she said she'd think about it and get back to me.
That could work, though I'm not sure how much use we'd get out of a section purely for antagonists. Now that I think about it, "Allies" can get a little bit iffy as well sometimes, so maybe it would be better to just have everything in one section, but again, naming complicates that. "Non-Playable Characters" obviously can't work because of the Enemies section, which could be solved by moving them into a section just for NPCs, but I'm not too keen on doing that at the moment.
Well, effectively any character that's non-playable is a Non-Playable Character, eh? ;-) Going back to the Cad Bane example, his article is currently under that category only, and not "Enemies". Checking for "antagonist" synonyms at thesaurus.com yields possibilities such as: adversary, opponent, rival, etc. Following the link for "enemy" also suggests things like: "criminal", "detractor", etc. Of the ones I've seen, "opponent" seems the most... "palatable"? o_O What is this, a cooking show? X-D
I'm not questioning your knowledge considering I've been inactive for quite some time now, but do you happen to have a link to a message wall conversation or something where this was decided? I just want to make sure these edits are warranted, even if you are correct.
Had a similar discussion with a Gamepedia staff admin where I've been Wiki Guardian for the past 2 years since before the Fandom/Gamepedia "merge" or whatever it is/was. Based on the amount of content on each site, my recommendation was to archive DIW@Gamepedia - which has been completed (the entire site is now effectively view only).
Note that there is also a larger effort going on by Fandom with regard to the number of wikis, duplication of content/effort, etc. To that effect, I've been linking articles here to their corresponding franchise categories here, and subsequently linking those franchise categories to the corresponding Fandom community where applicable. For example:
After reading through the thread you linked, I didn't find any mention of galleries. While I agree that what characters look like in other media isn't explicitly relevant to information related to the game, I believe that in a game such as Disney Infinity, where characters from Disney's wide variety of franchises are grouped in one world, images of each character from the media they originate from aren't a bad thing to have. The media sections of some galleries were/are bloated and filled with borderline irrelevant images though.
I do agree that intricate details, such as the runtime of Mary Poppins, are irrelevant to Disney Infinity. Moving forward, amending the franchise template is definitely necessary if the pointless details are going to go unused. I was merely trying to fill out the template on the Snow White page as I didn't realize you had removed those details; I'm sorry about that
There wasn't "any mention of galleries" in particular, as it isn't taking an I.T. approach of spending 2-3 months writing a detailed design document and "discussing it in committee" before making any changes whatsoever (although it wouldn't surprise me to find that Fandom did exactly that with regard to the UCP - but that's actually appropriate in that context). It's a generalized approach for the entire DIW@Fandom site as it relates to the DI product that I've been having discussions with Dragonian King as it evolves.
Re: "images of each character from the media they originate from", that may be true in a context where DIW was effectively the sole, exclusive source of all related content. However, DIW is only one of a (possibly excessively) large number of Fandom communities related to Disney and (possibly, quite literally) all of its various franchises. In that context, from an overall organizational perspective, it's a cleaner approach to focus DIW on content and media directly related to the game, and simply provide a link to the corresponding Fandom community where the corresponding media, backstory, etc. can be found. The convenient thing about how Fandom itself is organized is that anyone interested in updating the details for same can participate in any such wiki using the same account. Some of the galleries, separate from the Media sections, appear to have suffered from "me too" syndrome (Syndrome pun intended) of screenshots being added without regard to how well they represent their topic - but that's a review for another day.
Re: the Franchise template, I have been replacing all such templates over time with newer ones in order to avoid potential conflicts. As you might imagine, given the sheer number of franchises represented within DI in particular (and over 3,000 articles on DIW in general), having to make small incremental changes to an existing template and then verifying every single article for impacts can be both time consuming and error prone. Rather, the approach with templates has been to combine useful elements of similar templates from both DIW@Fandom and DIW@Gamepedia into a new template, and then implement the new template on articles as they're reviewed/revised (note that Fandom is taking a similar approach with the UCP). The direction of the Franchise template in particular is that it will eventually be removed. The franchise articles are being replaced with temporary redirects to their corresponding categories, as hand-coded article lists are redundant with said categories, and in many cases the franchise article has been directly lifted (read as: plagiarized) from the corresponding Fandom community page. Instead, the updated franchise category pages are being linked to the corresponding Fandom community page. I reviewed and discussed with Dragonian King as to which Fandom communities should (currently) be referenced as "the" source for the corresponding WDC "divisions". If Fandom decides otherwise as they implement the UCP and merge, archive, etc. other communities, it would be a simple matter to redirect those links to the appropriate Fandom community.
Hi, just popping in here as I've been the one discussing the changes going on here with UNSC Jon. Personally I think that over time, we've ended up covering way too much of the content that the games are inspired by, and it's much easier to focus on the games and let the other wikis handle that information. That's not to say we shouldn't briefly explain where everything comes from if necessary of course, but we don't need to dive into the movie in its entirety.
As far as franchises go, like UNSC Jon said we're working on phasing those out and replacing them with the franchise categories which already exist. Explaining the plot of an entire movie (or every piece of media ever released, like the Toy Story page used to do) is unnecessary to explain where characters and objects that made it into the game come from. From there, that just leaves a list of everything from that franchise in the game, except that's already currently handled by the categories anyway, making it redundant entirely.
Just an FYI, somewhere along the line we somehow got separate "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" and "The Force Awakens" categories. I've gone ahead and moved everything into "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" and deleted "The Force Awakens".
I decided to go ahead and start merging some of the smaller articles regarding scrapped content to the List of Scrapped Content article and I saw that you added trivia about Aurora being planned to be voiced by Elle Fanning and being scrapped when 2.0 development started. Out of curiosity, do you have a source for this? I'm also assuming this means Aurora was initially intended to be playable?
Eh... thanks, but I can't take credit for that. :-)
Looking at comparisons on the article's History, it appears that the way this version of MediaWiki displays diffs will effectively indicate changes of where something appears ("vertically") in an article by a removal on the left side and an addition on the right. It makes it look like the editor on the right added something if you don't catch the correspoding segment on the left side.
Otherwise, when I see something like that without a source, I try to remember to put in a Cite tag until it can be reviewed and either "confirmed or denied". In this particular case, I don't recall hearing about that. I didn't start playing DI myself until after the release of the Apple TV version, when I was considering what I wanted my "gaming platform" to be going forward. After trying it on PS3 and Xbox 360, I ended up on Xbox One.
Anyway, it looks like that information was added last April by someone with barely any edits. It seems more like speculation made based on the limited information we have. I also find it pretty suspicious that there would be a "confirmed" voice actor for a character who, as far as we know, never made it past the concept art stages, and even more bizarre that it would apparently be her Maleficent actress despite the movie not coming out until the next year. I'll remove it for now unless we can find a source.
Greetings, humble new Disney Infinity Wikian, and welcome to Disney Infinity Wiki! Thank you for your edit to the Thread:58666|Greetings from DIW on Gamepedia! page.
It is recommended that before you start editing any further, please familiarize yourself with the wiki's policies. Also, you can make blog posts about stuff you want to say related to the wiki. Additionally, there is also chat here.
You can find this wiki on Facebook here. If you are on Facebook, please be sure to like our page to help you stay up-to-date on the latest Disney Infinity news.
One more thing: This is an automatically-generated message left for you since you've made your first edit here. There is no need to reply whatsoever.
If you have any questions, please leave a message on my message wall. Thank you for joining the Disney Infinity Wiki!