Talk:Main Page

Sponsored links

From DramaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

DramaWiki Templates

Hrm which one do you think is better.

template 1:

TV Drama
Actor Actress Singer
Director Script Writer


or

template 2:

TV Drama Actor Actress Singer Director Script Writer


or plain vanilla:

Actor | Actress | Singer | Producer | Director | Writer | OST


I think plain vanilla looks best.
How about adding a 'drama a-z' to the end of the list? --egx


Hmm, I like template2 or the vanilla because this way the mainpage gets more "compact".
And regarding the 'drama a-z'... from what I've understood you can only create a TOC of a category on the category page itself. That's why you cannot put the TOCs on the main page. Our old indexes were manually created ones. But with the help of the categories the wiki will generate now all the lists for us. Much easier, IMHO.   --MoerkJ✎ me a msg 11:26, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)


I think it should be possible to write a function to get the 'a-z' part created by a script too. --egx


This better? --Ruroshin 18:13, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Actor | Actress | Singer | Producer | Director | Writer | OST


Hmm, very confusing all this. But it seems to work somehow. Just two little things:

  1. I couldn't remove the border. (perhaps defined via class="toccolours plainlinks" ???)
  2. without the {{NAMESPACE}} tags the CountryTable3template works even on the talkpages. I just changed it for letter "N" because I don't know why it is needed.   --MoerkJ me a msg 19:11, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)


I like the border heh but yeah to get rid o it you remove the class. Yeah the NAMESPACE probably isn't needed because no namespace defined. I just copied it from wikipedia and modified it to work for categories outside the category page. --Ruroshin 19:21, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Script Writer

Something a bit unrelated to the discussion going here... Apparently, scriptwriter or screenwriter are correct and script writer (notice the space) is not. Which one would you prefer?

scriptwriter - n : someone who writes scripts for plays or movies or broadcast dramas
seems good to me, lets go with that --Ruroshin 08:44, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

hmm, I'd prefer just "Writer" because there are different kind of writing, e.g. story writing, screen writing, etc. These things are completely different procedures and can be done by different people. The screen writing is more a technical process which involves the provision of instructions for the actors and film crew. I'm not really sure but I think that in many cases the screen writing is done by other persons and the credits are more story writing related. But of course some writers do everything (story and screen writing). Just look at IMDb.com for examples. They give very detailed credits for who did which writing (original novel, adaptation for screen, story writing, additional writing etc.). So I think we should just stick to "Writer" when unsure. The original websites of the studios I visited don't give more specific info either. The same for Director/Producer. The often the sites credit "Producer" and not "Director". A director can be hired by a producer and the work can differ again. But in most cases I believe the producers also do the directing in TV productions. I use the credits as they are given on the original pages. Producer and Writer are more general terms, IMHO. Just my 2 cents. --MoerkJ 12:55, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Why not indian/pakistani drama's

Indian drama series are very colourful and usually feature the latest fashion trends and advertise some as well. They are like normal series where the script is decided per episode.. There's like a new wave in the indian drama scene .. of social dramas .. by Ekta Kapoor

Pakistani dramas are quite well known as they are adaptations of novels, epic like stories and dramas written by contemporary writers. Some of them have the element of standup comedy.

Get your own Wiki. Why invade in someone else's Wiki? Because DramaWiki generates a ton more hits everyday than other sites? Groink 18:58, 2 Oct 2006 (EDT)
What makes you think hes trying to invade this wiki? is this not a wiki for "asian" dramas? last time I checked India was in Asia. might as well change it to "Welcome to DramaWiki the free EAST Asian drama database", or even "Welcome to DramaWiki the free Oriental Asian drama database" Sunhay 19:58, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
Might as well place a "Hi! I don't read FAQs!!!!" banner on your back, because that's what you've just told us here. If you read the FAQ, it DOES IN FACT say that this wiki is AN EASTERN ASIAN drama wiki. Moron. Groink 01:38, 7 Jul 2008 (CEST)

I THINK IT MUST BE CHANGED INTO "EAST ASIAN" DRAMAWIKI"

Your only focusing into east asian dramas. It's not the whole asia thou. There are more popular dramas in asia like FILIPINO DRAMAS, INDIAN, MALAYSIANS, INDONESIANS... I agree he have to get his own wiki.. It wont work..

I am an Indonesian and frankly, I agree with the above statement. If you focus on East Asian Drama, you should said East Asian Dramawiki, not Asian Dramawiki. Asia is larger than East Asia, you know.
Second things, you put Singaporean Drama to this wiki. Yeah, I know lot of Singaporean speak Mandarin and Hokkien. However, it is still a south-east asian countries which also consist of non-eastern language speaker. When one day they had dramas which is not in eastern language (like Tamil, Hindi, or Malay), will you consider them to be included in your wiki?
This site also put Agnes Monica as Taiwanese Actress categories instead of Indonesian actress. C'mon!!! What would you feel if someone from Hollywood said Bruce Lee was an american actor? What would you feel if someone from America said Chow Yun Fat is an American actor? What if one day, Agnes Monica play in Hongkong Drama? Would you put her as Hongkong Actress, also?
In the past, Cynthia Rothrock starred in many HK movies. Would you say she was a HK actress? Have you understood the problem I saw? Kunderemp 04:39, 26 May 2007 (CDT)
I've just look at Michelle Yeoh entry on wikipedia and it was said she was 'Hongkong based' actress. Kunderemp 04:47, 26 May 2007 (CDT)

I can't help but laugh at this. First, it isn't called "______ DramaWiki" - it is called "DramaWiki." Second, you do not know the history of D-Addicts, the parent web site that sponsors DramaWiki. From Day 1, the focus on D-Addicts has always been: Chinese, Taiwanese, Singaporean, Korean and Japanese. D-Addicts relects this, and therefore DramaWiki reflects this. If you people are so animate about promoting other Asian TV dramas, go start your own web site!!!!!! It is like me running a Windows web site with Linux and Macintosh people trying to force me to support them as well. Every web site has a right to draw the line when it comes to content. Respect this rather than arguing about it. Groink 05:06, 26 May 2007 (CDT)

WHY NOT INCLUDE FILIPINO DRAMA?

They have the best drama in asia. Award winning actors (INTERNATIONALLY) and award winning soap operas (INTERNATIONALLY) Stories are interesting and can relate into everyones life. Teleseryes and fantaseryes are now spreading thru asia and latin americas. And Pangako Sa'yo got the highest rating in southeast asia.

This wiki is exclusively for East Asian dramas, you can notice that there are no South East Asian dramas in here. Hopefully, some one can create a South East Asian drama wiki, and that would include not only Filipino dramas, but also Malaysian, Indonesian, etc. Marienella

Navigation Bar, Searches + Forums

Wasn't sure where to put all this, so the talk page of the homepage seems the most appropriate. First off, hi all! I just joined to post one synop (though I'm sure I'll find more to add as time goes on), however I did have some suggestions for the site.

  • Put the wiki search above the Google search on the navigation bar. I, like I'm sure others, tried using the Google search to find things on the wiki only to find this wouldn't work (as well); and scrolling down to type in the wiki search is just inconveniant (did I mention I can't spell without a spellcheck?) and having it below all the ads and other things, away from the important links hides it.
  • Put a "Wiki" section to the forums for wiki related inquiries, announcements, and random other wiki related talks. I first went to the forum to see if there was a place for this kind of post, but found there was none (or if there was I didn't see it...).

Anyways, those are my two suggestions for the wiki. Cya around! KawasakiNinja 11:14, 13 Jul 2007 (CDT)

1. We prefer people to use Google over the Wiki search. This is to save on CPU usage on the server. Google bots through DramaWiki on a regular basis, so searches are very complete. 2. You can find the forum link for DramaWiki under Current events on the left column of any DramaWiki page. Groink 13:33, 13 Jul 2007 (CDT)
1. Makes sense I guess. Never hosted a site/wiki before, so don't know exactly all the numbers around that. How much extra usage is taken up by using the wiki search vs. linking to it through google? Or even using the google search, does that use up the server the wiki's on? Just curious.
2. The link is above, not under. But I was refering to having a section of the Forum for talking about wiki stuff. Unless you're all fine with having discussions like this going on the main page talk, then I guess there's no real need. But it might make it easier for people to use the forum when discussing things about the wiki, making any announcements the admins might want to make, or just general wiki related questions. Again though, not sure how much general talk you get for the wiki. KawasakiNinja 11:45, 14 Jul 2007 (CDT)
By under "Current events" he doesn't mean literally under it. If you click current events, it'll take you to the page with the link to the DramaWiki discussion on d-addicts. --Pineapple 13:29, 14 Jul 2007 (CDT)
Ah, cool. I was thinking a full section instead of just one thread (makes it a little easier to organize) but still good that it's there. :) KawasakiNinja 11:15, 15 Jul 2007 (CDT)

Create Redirects

I was wondering if there was a policy on redirects for alternate titles of a series, or seasons of a series. I just added a redirect from "Kikujiro to Saki 3" to the main article at "Kikujiro to Saki 2007." I can think of other examples ("Jikou Keisatsu 2" or "Kaette Kita Jikou Keisatsu" should redirect to "Jikou Keisatsu"), but I'm wondering why this hasn't been done already. -- Quashlo 11:51, 15 Jul 2007 (CDT)

Romanization

After seeing the whole thing with the splitting of separate sentence particles, I have some general questions/suggestions about Romanization. For example, I would have Romanized the title for Benkyo Shiteitai! as Benkyo Shite Itai!, separating the -te form of the verb from the iru/itai/etc. Another similar example of this is Aishiteiru to Ittekure (Aishite Iru to Itte Kure for me). Other questionable (at least for me) Romanizations include Uchi ni Oideyo (should be Uchi ni Oide yo). And with respect to wapuro vs. non-wapuro, if we are not allowing names of dramas and actors/actresses to be in wapuro, I think it would be a good idea to at least have a wapuro entry that redirects to the main entry. For actors and actresses, many times I have to "guess" how they Romanize things... If we always have a wapuro entry, then if you know at least a little bit of Japanese, you will always be able to get to the entry. So just a few suggestions... I'm interested in hearing what others feel. -- Quashlo 21:28, 26 Jul 2007 (CDT)

I agree with most of the points. The redirects using wapuro romaji, however is something I disagree on. Although it does in theory help in searching, there are two points that have me go against this idea.
  1. Each re-direct article adds onto the MySQL database. The database is already lagging as-is. We shouldn't be using redirects except for situations where there are mistakes. IMHO, once no article within DramaWiki uses a redirect, it should be removed.
  2. If you read through the various magazines, CDs, DVDs, catalogs and such, the large majority of them use romaji without the macrons. YesAsia doesn't use wapuro, and neither does CD Japan. Even TV networks like NHK as well as professional subtitle systems like TV Japan use our system. Wapuro was never meant to be a standard, and Wikipedia touches on this fact. Wapuro, historically, was a poor way of compensating for typewriters that couldn't generate the macrons. Therefore, DramaWiki considers wapuro to be a mistake. We should be changing how Internet visitors romanize the artists' names, rather than creating band-aids for those who are still stuck on wapuro. Groink 21:39, 26 Jul 2007 (CDT)

External Links

How about if linking Chinese Wikipedia and Korean Wikipedia under the external links as well. --uladelz 21:55, 1 Sep 2007 (CDT)

Only the admins are allowed to edit the main page. We'll have to wait for one of them to do so. Groink 22:36, 1 Sep 2007 (CDT)

Featured Article

i have suggestion, why don't we put some Featured Article about artiste or drama in main page that change every week/2 weeks/ month thx you

Adding categories to articles

Please do not - I REPEAT DO NOT add categories to any part of an article EXCEPT for the bottom of the article. I see some people repeatedly adding category wikilinks to TV network names in the details section. This is NOT wanted, and is not part of DramaWiki style. Placing in categories for the same data TWICE adds to the processing of the server, and is also non-productive as it adds NOTHING to the articles. I want this to come to a stop IMMEDIATELY!!!! Groink 17:35, 5 Jan 2008 (CST)

Changing photos on a regular basis

I'm getting sick and tired of this! For some artists, the photo changes almost every week. Popular targets apprear to be MatsuJun, Kimutaku and a few others. I'm not going to put up with this photo warring between fandorks. Uploading may be a right for all of you. But practice that right more efficiently. Just because some Johnny has a new hairdoo every week does not mean we need to keep changing his photo to keep up with his trendiness. We're not some trendy magazine tracking the latest looks. We're a drama and artist database! Keep these points in mind. Groink 23:04, 24 Mar 2008 (CDT)

Redirects

Redirects can only be helpful. Why do some people feel like wasting their time nominating helpful redirects for deletion? --Pmsyyz 22:18, 3 Apr 2008 (CDT)

Helpful for what???? There's NOTHING on DramaWiki that links to that page. N-o-t-h-i-n-g! As I said in an article's talk page, it is the responsibility of the editors to correct the wikilinks in their user pages. Groink 23:50, 3 Apr 2008 (CDT)
Ever hear of a Google search? People don't always know the proper romanization or spelling. Redirects of alternate spellings can only help users find this site. --Pmsyyz 13:32, 4 Apr 2008 (CDT)
We are not going to be responsible for people misspelling drama titles. You're basically talking about producing tens of thousands of redirects to cover every wrong spelling of a show. No, we're NOT going to deal with that here. IMDB does not do it. Wikipedia doesn't condone this practice either. Even a simple dictionary sitting on your shelf does not allow for misspellings. If there are a bunch of people out there asking "Have you watched Tai-yo-ooh???", it isn't DramaWiki's responsibility to allow them to continue this error. Groink 15:17, 4 Apr 2008 (CDT)

Like Pmsyyz already said, it seems some editors don't understand the purpose of redirects. Redirects are not articles but a way to link a user to the proper article and should kept whenever it makes sense and improves the accessibility of DramaWiki. This way weblinks that (still) point to the redirect guide the visitor to the right place. And also, if a user enters the redirect (or a big part of it) in the wiki search he/she will find the actual article much easier. And finally nobody can accidently create a duplicate article by using the name of the redirect (e.g. an AKA title).
There exist several reasons for deleting certain redirects. But deleting a redirect only because it has no incoming link inside DramaWiki is not an acceptable reason for deletion. Redirects which technically serve no purpose may be candidates for deletion (e.g. redirects that differ only in case from the article). --MoerkJ talk 23:32, 11 Aug 2008 (CEST)

I see the logic in keeping certain types of redirects, such as very common shortcut names like "Hana Kimi" or "GTO". But for incorrect namespaces, such as clearly mis-named namespace, or namespaces with the incorrect romanization doesn't serve any useful purpose other than to further spread the error throughout the search engines. When Google scans an article, it remembers all text in that article. So even if a redirect for "GTO" did not exist on DramaWiki, Google would still find the article because GTO is contained in "Great Teacher Onizuka". It is therefore more useful if we add all AKAs and such in the articles themselves, rather than relying on a whole slew of redirects for just one article. BTW, Wikipedia has a similar policy in that it does not encourage the use of redirects for namespaces that break their policies, such as incorrect capitalizations, improper trademark naming conventions, and so forth. Groink 23:42, 11 Aug 2008 (CEST)
I only partly agree. Often, redirects have only a technical purpose and don't need to be 'correct' or 'generally useful'. Bad redirects, like misspelled and bad romanized article names, as a result from renaming an article may be a good target for deletion only if the article is new and probably hasn't been spidered yet by search engines. Older redirects however should be kept. Because if there is nothing referencing the 'bad redirect' it will become difficult to find and as a consequence search engines will not keep the link. That's why it is unlikely to spread any further like you said. If not even Google references the redirect anymore then it could be deleted. One problem however is that tagging a 'bad redirect' with {{delete}} will automatically turn it back into an article and search engines might index the link again as soon as it is referenced on Special:Recentchanges and/or in Category:Pages for deletion. Collecting links to bad redirects on some kind of project page won't help either. (Maybe listing them just as plain text is a good idea.) On a technical side note, tagging a redirect for deletion additionally eats about 10 times the database space as the redirect itself used before and deleting it won't free any space until the archive table of of the database is purged. Only a sysop can do this. The best is to avoid touching the redirects and simply leave them because there is nothing to gain.
Note to all: Feel free to tag certain redirects for deletion. But please, keep the redirect link and don't replace it with the {{delete}} template, because it is very confusing for admins. Also keep in mind that there might be times where no admin will be available to delete stuff and some backlog may build up. --MoerkJ talk 03:17, 12 Aug 2008 (CEST)
Okay, here's an idea... Keep the re-direct page, but change the re-direct namespace to a static page. In the static page, contain something indicating that this is a bad link, i.e. something similar to a HTTP 403 error. My whole premise here is that readers have told me time and time again is that DramaWiki has become number-one in the community, and the naming conventions for dramas used here becomes the standard throughout the drama community. Many people who are referred to DramaWiki from a search engine do not realize that they were re-directed to a namespace with a different spelling/name, and they'll then continue to use the mis-spelled drama or artist name in their own blogs and such. If they receive an error page, then maybe this will help them seek the correct spelling. Groink 05:09, 12 Aug 2008 (CEST)
Strange idea, but I get your point. Perhaps you rather want to redirect visitors to the mainpage or to the searchbox. Although it completely contradicts the intention of the redirect concept. When the visiors don't notice that they were redirected then it is most likely not our fault. Neither can we prevent or correct any wrong links to DramaWiki that exist somewhere. I think presenting an empty page or to tell a clueless internet user that s/he clicked on an outdated link is a very poor service.
Well, keep tagging the misspelled redirects. To make it easier for the sysops to distinguish between regular articles and broken redirects that just look like articles I'll create separate maintenance sections. More details will follow soon on DramaWiki:Deletion policy. --MoerkJ talk 00:39, 14 Aug 2008 (CEST)

Evaluating possible large-scale additions to articles

For some editors, please put on your thinking cap before making edits that span a large number of articles. As the style guide explains, one should use view a variety of articles to get a grasp not only of what's allowed, but also notice what you did not see. If you view maybe 20 articles and notice that not one of them has a certain piece of information you're considering adding, then that should tell you immediately that although the style guide does not mention specifically the information you want to add, more like it is not allowed.

After evaluating the pages you feel the information is important enough to consider a possible large-scale edit effort, please post the request here so that we can discuss it before you go forward with the edits. Otherwise, someone like me will spend the next 30 minutes rv'ing the dozens of articles. Groink 09:20, 17 Mar 2009 (UTC)

Welcome template

With registration being open again and new users being unfamiliar with DramaWiki's editing methods, I was thinking we could possibly implement a welcome template. I've been adding a welcome message of sorts to some new users talk pages. However, if we could make a template with a general welcome message which would direct new users to the style guide and all of the region-specific format guides it would be a big help to everyone. I know Wikipedia has such a template and I figure with all the new editors, it wouldn't be a such a bad idea to possibly implement this ourselves. --Pinkpineapple 03:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll support your idea! I'm wondering now... with the new MediaWiki software, will Ruroshin folks allow us to run bots? One bot could automatically send the newbie welcome message once his account is created. Groink 04:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
The new account confirmation extension handles this already and posts a welcome message with all necessary info on the new user's talkpage (see User talk:Testuser2).
Regarding the bot issue... We were always open for bots, but so far, noone has suggested or implemented one. Usually bots are limited to very simple tasks. So you have to implement a bot for each task you want to automate. Also the creation process is a bit complex. Although you can re-use or modify existing bots you (and we) still have to test them first on a separate test environment before we can approve them. You may need to install a local clone of DramaWiki for development and testing. I can provide you with the database dumps if you're interested. If you have any ideas then we could discuss it further on a separate bot-specific page. The bot page on Wikipedia is a good information resource for starters. --MoerkJ 04:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Unable to access

Hi, need a help here. I tried to access dramawiki from my laptop using mozilla and internet explorer, but the window sayss unable to load the page....but on my tab using mozilla, it perfectly works....i can access dramawiki through my tab but difficult to edit because no real keyboard. So, any idea whats the problem here and how do i fix so that i can access dramawiki from my laptop back? --Natokajun (talk) 16:42, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, hard to tell... sounds like some misconfiguration on your laptop. Check the guide I posted in the forum. If it doesn't help then feel free to send me a screenshot of this "unable to load the page" message. You can find the personal contact links on my userpage. --MoerkJ talk 05:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

vector theme

Mainly just a curious question: Is there a reason the the vector theme is not the default theme for the wiki? (since Wikipedia uses it as default)

Yes, there is a reason: Lazyness. ;-) DramaWiki uses a modified Monobook skin. We've switched from MW1.15 to MW1.20 only a few weeks ago and the Vector skin was added in MW1.16. I simply haven't had the time yet to test it and to make the necessary changes to the new skin files and style sheets. The Vector skin will come sooner or later. --MoerkJ talk 23:10, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Any timeline as to when this will happen? :) -- Waf (talk) 21:38, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Advertisements


Personal tools
MaxMind