Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redwall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Identifying character articles NOT for merging

Ideas? Anyone read the thing and know the major characters, such that would have independent significance outside the work? There may not be any. - CrazyRussian talk/email 20:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copied discussion about this topic from user talk pages

Would we leave Martin the Warrior (Redwall) at his own article or merge him as well? --tjstrf 20:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking Martin, and maybe one or two others (Maybe Matthias, Mattimeo, and Cluny as the main characters and main villian in the early books and movie/tv adaptions) could keep their own articles but still get mentions in the main list. We'll have to be really careful about what we do and don't merge though. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 20:49, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed though, that both Martins are covered in the same article. I think "Martin the second" should be just in the list. If we were leaving everything else as is I would think he should be treated in a seperate article from Martin. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 20:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Other than Martin the Warrior, Matthias, and possibly Cregga Rose-eyes I believe the rest of the characters would be best dealt with by merging into lists. Cluny only appears in one book. Also, as far as reading the thing goes, I think I've read every book up until the second latest one at least twice and personally own nearly all of them. --tjstrf 21:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Structure of the list

How shall we structure Wikipedia:WikiProject Redwall/List of Redwall characters: by book? by species? alphabetically? - CrazyRussian talk/email 21:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, should it be List of Redwall characters or Characters in Redwall? iirc, if you are using the mini-bio format the latter name is preferred. Also note that there's nothing preventing us from listing by all 3, through the creation of secondary lists which link to the relavent subsections of the main article. --tjstrf 21:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Latter is better. Let's build it in WP space though without taking it to mainspace first. Then we'll move it to whatever's more appropriate. - CrazyRussian talk/email 22:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking by book, but all three might be a good idea too. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 00:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Doing the listing by all three criteria would save a bit of trouble for people looking for characters that appeared in multiple books as well. --tjstrf 00:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

(de-indenting) I'm noticing that someone at some point already organized some characters by recurring role. For example, Abbey Leader (Redwall), Birds in Redwall (already a start of a species list), Badger Mother. That's potentially a fourth way to do it. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 14:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Um...

Maybe you guys didn't see this, but a project already exists... - Anon

Sure did, buddy. - CrazyRussian talk/email 05:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
So if you don't mind me asking, what's the point of doing it all here, when the point is to do it there ? - Anon
There y'all can do whatever you want. Here we have rules on what goes in and in what form, and 95% of the Redwall stuff here is deletable. So we started this project to bring order to this particular "walled garden". I have no other interest in the series, and will quit as soon as the task at hand is finished. - CrazyRussian talk/email 05:17, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
So why not delete it here? -Anon
Would you rather? Is your wiki public domain? If the license is free enough, maybe we should. - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Yep, free license. Owned by Wikia. I think articles such as Redwall and Brian Jacques could definitely stay here, but character listings on Wikipedia are unnecessary. -Anon
Yeah, but the Redwall Wiki is an entierly different kettle of fish. This project is to coordinate the treatment of Redwall on Wikipedia. You on a different website can do whatever you want. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 13:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Guys, I totally agree with anon btw. The material over there in GFDL. We can just incorporate them by reference and link them throughout. They can hold the cruft over there, and we can keep just the books, the main characters, and a list of characters without particulars but with links to the RW wiki. I've seen that done with Gundam stuff and 9/11 obituaries. As long as the license is free, the KNOWLEDGE is PRESERVED for GENERATIONS TO COME and for JIMBO'S CHILD IN AFRICA (perish the thought of him reading about fake squirrels, but...) - - - to quote the condom-promoting horse, my job is done here! - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

In response to the anon, I believe the point is to centralize things. The purpose of having Redwall articles here rather is that it be all sorted and encyclopedic. Otherwise we might as well just have a stub that says "Redwall is the titular novel of an 18(?) book series by author Brian Jacques. If you want to read about it in any more detail than this, go to Wikia, these 43 fansites, and your local library" --tjstrf 22:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with articles on the books or Mr. Jacques or anything like that; that's understandable. Articles on the characters here seems a bit wasteful I'd say though. - Anon
I sort of agree that 80+ articles on each individual character here on Wikipedia is a bit silly. That's why this project was created, to merge them and "cut down on the cruft" without sacrifcing knowledge. As for just saying, "go to this other wiki to learn more," there is currently a huge debate on the villiage pump about that whole idea (centering around Lost and Lostpedia, but applicable to this). ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 13:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Is Lostpedia under GFDL? 9/11 wiki and Gundam wiki is good precedent... - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:13, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I have no ideological problem with crosslinking to other wikis, but I do have a problem with this method being used by some deletionists to say "Ok, we're deleting all these well-written and informative articles on fictional concepts because we can just export them to some other place." (In this case, the Redwall articles are not well-written though.) --tjstrf 00:20, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Deletionism is not the problem. The problem is that an encyclopedia cannot cover specialized subject areas in a great level of detail, but a specialized wiki can. Since by definition whatever content we have on it will never rich the level of detail that exists on that wiki, maybe we shouldn't try to replicate. Since we can't copy the content straight from there (b/c it's all cruft) maybe instead we should copy it all out of here. - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, it's not exporting them out Tjstrf. I can guarantee you all the Redwall character articles here exist (I'm going to say 99% chance) at the Redwall Wiki, in all likelihood even more fully expanded. There is no knowledge being sacrified by deleting them here. -Anon, 9:39PM 26 October 2006 (EST)

[edit] Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. Also, I note that yours is a comparatively new project. You may be interested in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide, which has a lot of information regarding project organization from several of the most successful WikiProjects. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 19:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template

I made a template to add to Redwall articles like the other wikiprojects have. I did not include any of the parameters for rating the articles because I really have no clue what I'm doing with templates. Considering that I think a lot of the Redwall articles should ultimately be merged and redirected so that there end up being far fewer articles (and far more redirects) it would be nice to have some sort of parameter on the template to say, "this article should be merged" or "this article can stand alone". Maybe where other wikiprojects have ratings? What do other people think? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs) 15:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I've added the template to everything in Category:Redwall and everything through M in Category:Redwall books, if someone wants to pickup where I left off. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs) 15:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Finished Category:Redwall Books. Other sub-cats need it still. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs) 03:25, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles about fan clubs.

Beginning to add the project template to various articles I noticed that Category:Redwall has several articles about on-line fan websites. Most of the articles about the books themselves are in subcategories, so in essence most of Category:Redwall is fansite articles. Any idea what should be done about these? I'd like to eventually reduce the total number of non-redirect articles so that we don't need subcategories for characters, etc. However, if we re-arrange it so that all or most Redwall articles are just in Category:Redwall it almost seems like it would be silly to have fansites in that category. Perhaps we would then need a subcategory for fansites? Perhaps we need that now? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs) 15:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_Redwall_1704.html"