Wowpedia talk:Server project

The idea
To standarize the look and content of server pages.

Why?
Server pages are currently very different, and some of them contain a lot of code which average wiki-skilled people may not understand. With this we could give them very simple ways of editing, as most/all of the code will be kept in different templates.

We need help
Since the server pages are among the most edited pages on the whole wiki, we want people who regularly contribute on those pages to help with this. Please, give us your ideas and feedback. Nothing is determined! Your opinion could be what determines the look of every server page!

Arenateam table
I'm not sure whether this exists, but I figure some people would like to show their arenateams as well as their guilds and progression. Thoughts? -- 21:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Autosortable tables?
Should/could someone with some JS-skills make the progression table (and the arena one if we make it) sort itself. I'm thinking it could look at the cleared-dates and calculate it. Or would it cause too much load? -- 21:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Progress

 * Server Infobox: Complete (but open for improvment), see Infobox server.
 * Standard raiding progress table: More or less complete.
 * Standard guild list: More or less complete.
 * Standard crafting table: being worked on.

Talk pages
{|
 * valign="top" width="70%" padding-right="15px" |
 * valign="top" width="70%" padding-right="15px" |

General discussion
unless this is MAJORLY improved I am totally against this. I always cheer when I see a "custom made" Server page on WoWwiki, where people actually had some effort to create something unique. And then this is ridiculously huge and also absolutely ugly.  Armagon  (User_talk:Armagon Special:Contributions/Armagon)  16:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed I don't think they need to be the same. Unique server articles give some personality to that server. While my servers article has a lot of code, I went to lengths to ensure it was easily editable. -- 17:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I found gryphons page very good and easy to edit and incoporate as you can see at our server page, however if you change it to this current version i would feel its backtracking from how it is now!    S  eraph  / / / t c 19:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

First of all, you can't judge this by how it looks now. It's just a draft, and the result will be very different. Secondly, the main priority is getting the amount of code sticking up in peoples faces down, while keeping the amount of good information stable, or even higher. And while you say that your server page is well made Gryphon, that does not mean all the other pages are. We are trying to make some kind of compromise. Thirdly, I don't really believe that the different server layouts show any "server personality", other than the personality of the one person who made the layout. -- 18:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Take a look at Server:Frostmane_US. I posted a thread in our realm forums pointing to the enchant list with a short tutorial on how to update the wiki.  It was stickied and the server is actually is using it.  The server seems to like and keeps it up to date.  I mainly just keep the progression table up to date because I coded that version.  I think a server template is in order, but forcing everyone to use it would be a bit much.-- 01:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I have to say I disagree with the progression template; that's just gonna' lag people's machines to hell (both from image loading and from table loading). A lightweight template such as the one currently in use at most progression pages (Server:Shadowmoon US/Progression) would be much preferable to having so many images on one page. --Sky (t · c · w) 04:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * WTF you smokin? lol. It is two images and a typical table, in fact the same resources as your example, two images and a table. -- 16:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The good stuff man. Want some? You're apparently smoking better =(, as I count the inclusion of 1 image... times 7-8 per row, that's 5-6kb's for just the images per row. Plus the tabling for each row. In conclusion, that's more than said example's providing per row. --Sky (t · c · w) 16:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You don't download the image more than once. -- 17:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll say, the guild list looks pretty. However, I also believe there's no need for the links in the progression table, as there are links in the guild table... The infobox template shouldn't have the automatic links, but as said before in another place, should have the ability to include bullets or listing of some sort, something like Infobox patch (patchbox?). --Sky (t · c · w) 05:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not a fan of the guild list or the progression list. I dont see many people writing pages for their guilds that haven't already, and the rest of the info seems pretty extraneous to me. As for the progression table, I'm pretty proud of the one I made for my server Server:Kel'Thuzad_US.  Sortable table that goes by boss order.  I think its also important that the alliance and horde progress tables aren't seperate either, to give people a better idea of overall server progress.  My $0.02  --Syzgyn 02:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, I think it's because of the red links being there that my server has four or five guilds with articles on it. =] --Sky (t · c · w) 04:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I really like your sortable progress table. -- Niightblade 03:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I personally like the way that this project is shaping up! There is still plenty of room for customization where it counts, in the general information section, but it also gives a complete view of the what the server is like. The progression list is a nice clean design, and while I agree that it is a little image heavy I can't think of any better way to go about it and have it look as professional. I agree with Syzgyn that the alliance and horde progress tables shouldn't be separated; no matter how well ordered the table is by faction it will always look like whichever is placed at the bottom hasn't progressed as far as those in the bottom of the top section. If we're going to keep the factions separated it might work better as a side by side format instead of stacked. The problem there would be having twice as many images loading as before which could really slow down the page for users on slower connections. Shanoaravendare 14:30, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Servers will make progression lists one way or another and having them on a wiki is the most elegant solution. Mine is alphabetical so there is never any need to sort.  And the perception that guilds on the bottom suck is irrelavant, on Frostmane_US all the Sunwell class guilds are in the latter half of the alphabet.  The I've been pushing for the same success the crafting list got but new progression threads keep popping up once the old one is full of spam.-- 00:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It's a nice idea for a starting point, but changing the looks of now-custom-made server templated is a no-go. If this shapes up to be nice and slick I'll be one of the first to convert my server page to this, but totally against a bot-request general change or so. That's the point, I think there's no justification to purge the work of anyone who put some effort in his/her server page. *thinking about ideas for this atm*  Armagon  (User_talk:Armagon Special:Contributions/Armagon)  16:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've been maintaining the Server:Darrowmere US page. It's for a (very) small pop server, and as such a lot of the info on this template isn't going to be useful for us. The progression list, for example, is probably not something I'd want to incorporate, as we tend toward casual raiding and don't have a server Illidan kill yet. Our warcraftrealms.com census info sample size tends to be too small for a reliable count (and is not something we'd want to brag about anyway) so I don't link to it from the server wiki page. And nobody maintains guild or rare profession lists (we all know each other)...I could go on, but I'm betting you get the idea. It's not to say that that the template is bad, or looks bad, but I assume that this is meant more for a large- to medium-pop server page than it is the page for small realms like Darrowmere, where a lot of it would simply be overkill, or worse red links.--Scrotch 03:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I for one like it. The big green ticks in the progression table do hurt my eyes though :) --Niightblade 01:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps include server transfer status? -- Niightblade 03:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I think that the ideia of creating templates is good, but don't agree with forcing every server page to change! Show that it is available for those that want to change to it. There are many server pages that have a lot of work hours, pages that are organized, with a structure and organization. It is probably better, to do several templates, from this project and from other server pages, and make a list of possible templates for use. These templates would be approved by the community, reconized as meeting standards for WikiServerTemplates. This way there is a lot to choose from, the community keeps creating new stuff, ppl get incentivated to follow the rules and be recognized. My 5 cents! : 09:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm.. I should say this is a pretty interesting template. However, I think it's important to leave more space for more server-specific information. I play on a Roleplaying Server, and as I see it, this template concentrates only on aspects such as Raiding and PvP. They are important, of course, but there should be space for something more. My server Steamwheedle Cartel (EU) has it's own Roleplayer's wiki page, so there is no real need to use the Wowwiki page for the same purpose, but I think it warrants a much more visible position than a practically invisible link at the side. --Richeron (talk) 18:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * P.S - I read that part of the idea behind the project is to make the coding easier. However, I find the code of the project page extremely complicated. --Richeron (talk) 18:55, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You can't judge this by how it looks now. It's just a draft . 17:00, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I know. Still, if there isn't enough input, it won't improve, will it? --Richeron (talk) 01:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here: http://www.warcraftrealms.com/census.php?serverid=19

Perhaps an info update?--RhasBloodbear (talk) 12:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC) Also, do you think Sam Deathwalker should be mentioned in the honorable mentions? http://www.fohguild.org/forums/retard-rickshaw/35500-deathwalker-plans-26-boxing-wow-58.html-- RhasBloodbear (talk) 15:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Server firsts
If you like the "PVE Hall of Fame" or list of "Server Firsts" (whatever you want to call it), I can make it into a template. 9:18 AM, 28 Jul 2009 (EDT)


 * valign="top" width="30%" |

(Good) Points
Summary of discussion, please be carefull when touching, supposed to be short and consise.
 * a "custom made" Server page on WoWwiki, where people actually had some effort to create something unique, is a good thing.
 * Unique server articles give some personality to that server. Some server are easily editable.
 * some servers already have good layouts and changing it might be backtracking!
 * the main priority is getting the amount of code sticking up in peoples faces down, while keeping the amount of good information stable, or even higher.
 * while some server pages are well made, that does not mean all the other pages are. We are trying to make some kind of compromise.
 * some might say the different server layouts don't show any "server personality", other than the personality of the one person who made the layout.


 * using the official forums to "teach" the servers denizens is a good thing!
 * a server template is in order, but forcing everyone to use it could be a bit much.
 * A lightweight template such as the one currently in use at most progression pages (Server:Shadowmoon US/Progression) could be much preferable to having so many images on one page.
 * You don't download the image more than once.


 * there's no need for the links in the progression table, as there are links in the guild table...
 * The infobox template shouldn't have the automatic links, but as said before in another place, should have the ability to include bullets or listing of some sort, something like Infobox patch (patchbox?).
 * Sortable table that goes by boss order?
 * its also important that the alliance and horde progress tables aren't seperate either, to give people a better idea of overall server progress.
 * plenty of room for customization where it counts, in the general information section, but it also gives a complete view of the what the server is like.
 * The progression list is a nice clean design, though a little image heavy.
 * Servers will make progression lists one way or another and having them on a wiki is the most elegant solution.
 * Some are alphabetical so there is never any need to sort. And the perception that guilds on the bottom suck is irrelavant, on Frostmane_US all the Sunwell class guilds are in the latter half of the alphabet.


 * there's no justification to purge the work of anyone who put some effort in his/her server page.
 * on some small pop servers, such a lot of the info on this template isn't going to be useful.
 * The big green ticks in the progression table do hurt some eyes though.
 * Perhaps include server transfer status?
 * the idiea of creating templates is good, but don't force every server page to change!
 * Show that it is available for those that want to change to it. There are many server pages that have a lot of work hours, pages that are organized, with a structure and organization.


 * It could be better to do several templates. These templates would be approved by the community, reconized as meeting standards for WikiServerTemplates. This way there is a lot to choose from, the community keeps creating new stuff, ppl get incentivated to follow the rules and be recognized.
 * }