I posted this to the Wiki help desk, but it's not really getting any traction:
"I'm curious, in this page that defines the dating system, it says that the year 0 AG "began in winter." So, does this mean it's assumed both hemispheres of the Avatar World are somehow in the same season at the same time? Because usually when the north is in winter, the south is in summer, & vice versa."
Basically, I'm trying to understand how the dates referenced on the Wiki articles work, especially in respect to seasons.
Frankly, no idea. The dating system was basically invented by the editors on the wiki based on a few guidelines provided to us in the show, so some liberties were taken I assume.
I would also suggest asking Water Spout, since he has invested more time than me in hashing out timeline related issues (I'm specifically thinking about the things related to the Fire Nation history), so he may know more about it.
Sorry to bump in here, but is it a possibility we didn't invent the dating system? I only ask because of the aforementioned Winter thing, and the existence of edits referring to an "official series timeline" (which of course I haven't found), as well as some (removed) official timeline work referring to the dates system with BG/AG on nick.com.
Or if you were suggesting that we'd change our layout to resemble the Spanish one, then we're not going to do that. The Spanish main page resembles an old version of our main page. We've upgraded since, so I see no point on going back.
Hey Lostris, is there any reason Books was moved to Books disambiguation? I assumed it was fine as is since the pages for Comics, Games and Episodes are disambiguation pages as is, but is there something different about books? Thanks.
I figured when I made the move "all disambiguation pages have that (disambiguation) suffix", but come to think of it now, that's just because the pagename without the suffix just already exists. I'll move it back.
Could you provide me with a link to the category of the fanon you want deleted? And do you wish to have all related pages deleted as well? (And don't fret it, deleting is quite easily done by bot. It's the restoring of those pages that is more time consuming.)
Sure. I don't know if this is what you mean but here are the links to the fanons I'd like deleated. The last one is a link to my followed pages. I have some one shots on there that I'd like removed too.
When you have the time, could you run Botris to rename the template Actor infobox to Staff infobox per this forum.
Secondly, the forum on whether or not to have a wiki DISCORD seems to be slightly in favour, but I cannot see a clear consensus on exactly what to implement. Do you think it would be reasonable given this to open it to a vote with 3 options based on the 3 levels of integration I suggested in my response?
Running AWB on bot-modus, pywiki is apparently having issues.
As for that forum, I'm all in favor of just closing it down, since we shouldn't be having the same discussion over and over again, especially not when nothing changed since the last community consensus and the instigator of the forum isn't even active.
By my reckoning, the balance in the forum was 7 for / 1 neutral / 3 against. Admittedly not everyone that was for the server was clear on exactly what they wanted to see implemented, but that seemed too high to me to just close, and the reason I suggested moving to a vote was to make it clearer what people's views were.
But if you decide to close that forum, I won't argue it. I use DISCORD almost never so I'm honestly not bothered either way.
I just thought that if I added a higher quality of the image (unresized version), other artists could download and use it as a better reference since it has clearer details, if they don't have any other sources.
Sometimes a HQ version of the image is available in the upload history of the image. If one were to click on that "old version", they'd see the larger image. We don't use the bigger image on our pages, however, as the larger size takes longer to load and brings nothing extra to the page.
Lady Lostris wrote: Sometimes a HQ version of the image is available in the upload history of the image. If one were to click on that "old version", they'd see the larger image. We don't use the bigger image on our pages, however, as the larger size takes longer to load and brings nothing extra to the page.
Oh ok, thanks for telling me :D I was worried coz I thought that there wasn't an hq version available.
I will review the image again then with the footage of the show. It looked altered, but if you say that you didn't, then I'm willing to believe it merely looked as such due to the poor quality of the screenshot. If that is indeed the case, I will restore the image and offer you my sincere apologies for the wrongful deletion.
I wanted to propose the article tea as a possible candidate for nomination to B-Class. I think the article does a great job of detailing the subject, the various forms that are featured, and the locations that serve it. I went through the article to expand upon some of the details and added references where appropriate, and I think it is now at a high enough quality to be promoted.
I will add it to the B-class nomination page and give it a decent look once I have the time for it, hopefully this weekend. As usual, if I haven't come back to this in a reasonable time, feel free to remind me :-)