Talk:JanuWiki 2019/Archive

From GodWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The original proposal and discussion from Talk:Main Page:

A humble proposal

I think the GodWiki's (just about) ready for an event around creating content and bringing new, inexperienced, dormant or aspiring content creators from the general player population across the threshold. I talk about the general concept, getting involved, what needs to happen first, but to cut to the actual plan, start here.

This edit by GodTerezka , nominating Special:WantedPages for the Feature Article, got me thinking.

A huge amount of effort (and thousands and thousands of Talk bytes) has gone into renovating and improving the GodWiki recently, after a long period of neglect as various major early contributors and editors became inactive over the years. A portion of the player base has definitely noticed this reinvigoration, and it might be my imagination but I feel like overall engagement with the wiki has been slowly creeping upwards.

As we know, the majority of active users are still doing one of two things: contributing to their own (guild/god/hero) pages, and contributing to the Omnibus & List pages. But non-trivial contributions to creative content on the GodWiki is less common, even among those of us who use the wiki on a regular or semi-regular basis.

So, here's my humble proposal for discussion and consideration: A GodWiki New Years Resolution β€” a January Content Drive.

I think the time is ripe for a little fanfare, relaunching a refreshed GodWiki to the player community at large. But first:

  1. There need to be enough people who think this is a good idea that it has enough momentum to carry it through the month (and doesn't rely on any one person too much, as real life always takes precedence);
  2. We need to agree that the GodWiki's ready to have a spotlight shone on it, which I think will need us to reach some milestones; and
  3. We need to agree on what we'd actually do! :)

If it went ahead, I would think of a content drive for January as an experiment, to see if doing this kind of thing regularly might work.

1. Enough people involved. By "involved", I mean in helping me to think through, preparing for (see next), and carrying an event across the month of January: shaking the pompoms and posting updates in the forums, keeping track of created content on a dedicated page (see below), just little things like that. The metric for this would be if folks are participating in this talk topic, to make suggestions, express interest or concerns, what have you (in other words, if you'd like this to happen, say so!). If this idea gets no love, I'll archive it myself and we can carry on with business as usual. I don't expect the sort of thing I have in mind would be very demanding of anyone's time, but if it's being driven by just one person and that person disappears unexpectedly for half of the month (if, say, for example, that hypothetical person were juggling two new jobs, settling into a new home, what have you), well, that would be a failed experiment.

2. Is the GodWiki ready: There are a few projects that are being tinkered with that would need to be in at least a final draft stage (with stable parameters and behaviour), otherwise we'll end up giving new editors a confusing, unstable experience, whereas I'm hoping to give people who're inexperienced contributors to the Wiki a great experience. Here's a non-canonical collection of what I've thought of as preconditions to aim for, in descending order of importance in my mind:

3. Yeah, yeah, what's the actual idea, Djonni? God you write a lot of bullsh... words sometimes: My first thought, though I'm certainly open to other ideas, would be to structure a content drive around a content theme. As I mentioned above, if it went well there's no reason that later content drives couldn't happen for different themes.

Some ideas for a theme for a January content drive:

  • Every heroine and hero's favourite theme: Beer! β€” Votes from: Djonni (talk)
  • Seasonally relevant: Winter β€” Votes from:
  • Insert additional ideas here

(Please feel free to expand the list or cast a vote above by adding your name. Pro-tip: Three tildes (~~~) will automatically insert your name.)

I imagine we would put together a wiki page for the event where we list wanted content within the scope of the theme, articles not yet created, stubs, and pictures needed. When someone creates or contributes content for the theme, we (or they themselves) can update the list giving the author recognition (more visible and permanent than the page's history or the recent changes list).

Here's a content survey of the proposed theme:


Probably everything in Navbox taverns:

Loosely related

I imagine a few ways to keep the content drive going through the month.

1. The forums. Announcement of the content drive and, assuming there's any response, regular updates on what's going on. This would probably be restricted to Wiki Questions Thread. I'm happy to take lead on the forum launch, but I'm equally happy for someone else to if you're keen.

2. A tracking page. Designed and probably maintained by a handful of us. Text about the content drive, establishing expectations, emphasising wiki values (Be Bold, be respectful, write to your best ability β€” I don't want to exclude people for whom English isn't a first language, etc), pointers to how to get started (see guidelines and manuals Todo, above), and a table tracking progress. Perhaps use {{diaryquest}} for some dressing.

I imagine a table that might look a bit like this (up for discussion, of course):

January Content Drive (as at ~~~~~)
Type Article Created By
Monster Beer Golem
Monster Beerburglar GodDjonni (U β€’ C β€’ T)  ⚜️ The Forsakens Lament 

Other columns ("Additional edits by", etc) may become relevant as the month proceeds, but no need to overcomplicate it to begin with.

3. Stimulate some friendly inter-guild rivalry. I think there are some guilds that would be pretty enthusiastic about waving their banner on this! And so I think a guild leagues table would be fun. This might need some points system, perhaps loosely emulating the Pantheon of Adventure, details to be worked out. Something like this at the top of the page might be enough to get a few guild councils talking, and a few guild leaders rabble-rousing.

Guild Leagues (as at ~~~~~)
Guild Points Emblem
⚜️ Guild 1  100 [[File: Emblem from guild wiki page|5em|link=Guild wiki page]]
⚜️ Guild 2  80 [[File: Emblem from guild wiki page|2em|link=Guild wiki page]]
... 2em

4. Partial hijack of the Main Page. I thought that a hijacking of {{Mainpageintro}} for the month would help too, for those who come to the GodWiki but don't frequent the forums and don't read Talk pages.

Anyway, this is more than enough words for now. If you like the general idea, and would like to see it go ahead in any form, let us know here. Here, I'll make it easy β€” copy this: πŸ‘ -- ~~~~, click this, and paste it at the very bottom of the page!

Side Job

As suggested by GodSourceRunner  here, there may be a side job to reward editors for quality edit[s] to improve articles written by others in the content drive.

  • This would probably require allocating articles to editors, to avoid collisions and give fair chance to those not always online/checking
  • What constitutes a quality edit is the sole discretion of the judge, GodSourceRunner , but guidelines will be clear
    • Preserve authors intent, respect authorial voice
    • Spelling, grammar, punctuation
      • Do we need an official style guide?
    • Technical edits (just fixing templates, categories, whitespace/layout, etc) are separate to these edits
    • Edit summaries are required
  • Contributing editors, participating editors, whatever we call them, would volunteer and nominate themselves
  • An author may request a review of their article, or an article may be chosen (by whom? SourceRunner, myself?) for review
    • Perhaps a {{Sign}} or two might be needed...

Perhaps other Side Jobs might stimulate some creativity (as well as some guild points and bragging rights). Some possibilities:

  • Create one full new article with image in each of the Monster, Artifact, and Tavern groups
  • Write an article that makes reference to 3 other content drive pages that you have either created or improved


  • I didn't get through nearly all of this yet, because it is very long, but also part of the reason is that I'm on my phone and it kind of sucks to read there. In the spirit of drawing people in and making things accessible, please reformat:
    • That box next to the intro, because 50% of the width of a phone screen is tiny and ugly
Tick.png Done, hopefully, ironically I'm also on my phone right now so can't properly check desktop πŸ˜‡ --Djonni (talk) 00:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • The tables, which end up with columns too narrow to read.
Started, will look again in the morning --Djonni (talk) 00:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
I will sit down and read this later when I'm at my computer, but a lot of people only access the wiki via the phone app. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 00:04, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Navbox and other technical details

A draft navbox for content drive pages, intentionally eye-catching:

🍺 JanuWiki 2019 🍺
🍺 En-Lager-ing the GodWiki 🍺
βœ” Complete article β€’ βœ’οΈ Stub β€’ πŸ“· Picture required
Monsters Ale-chemist 🍻 Boozerker 🍻 Barbeerian 🍻 Beer Cub 🍻 Beer Golem 🍻 Beer Hunter βœ” 🍻 Beer Mugger 🍻 Beerburglar 🍻 Beerkat βœ’οΈπŸ“· 🍻 Beerserker 🍻 Beerwolf βœ’οΈπŸ“· 🍻 Boartender βœ’οΈπŸ“·
Artifacts Bar tab βœ” 🍻 Beer-battered beer 🍻 Beer-scented soap βœ’οΈπŸ“· 🍻 Bottle of beer from a wall 🍻 Bottle of domesticated beer 🍻 Bottle of holy ale 🍻 Dungeon brew 🍻 Exclamation pint 🍻 Fairy ale 🍻 Flask of witch's brewski 🍻 β€œFree beer” ticket 🍻 Instant beer tablet 🍻 Pint of no return 🍻 Portable beer cooler 🍻 Pot of strange brew 🍻 Strange brew 🍻 Vanishing pint 🍻 β€œWish you were beer” postcard
Equipment Bartenderizer βœ” 🍻 Beer goggles
Quests Deliver some sour gnomish beer to the dark elves 🍻 Find out how to turn a golden brick into a pint of beer 🍻 Sing all of β€œ99 bottles of beer on the wall!” 🍻 Sit in a tavern and write fake diary entries 🍻 Brew a storm in a teacup
Skills Beer belly βœ’οΈπŸ“·
Taverns All Inn β€’ The Battle Toad β€’ Boatmurdered βœ” β€’ Caravanserai β€’ The Den of Iniquity β€’ The Drunken Clam βœ” β€’ Dunquestin β€’ The Glass Cannon β€’ Khaki-colored Dragon βœ” β€’ The Mended Drum β€’ Molotov's Cocktail Bar βœ” β€’ Progress Bar β€’ The Rumor Mill β€’ The Rusty Goblin βœ” β€’ Shepherd’s Stuff β€’ Space Bar β€’ The Sword & Sandal β€’ The Whinery

-- Djonni (talk) 07:35, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

A draft navbox for content drive pages, intentionally eye-catching

Well it's certainly eye-catching, I'll have to give you that. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 21:39, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
P.S> Are eyes supposed to bleed when caught? Asking for a friend. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 21:40, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
In all seriousness, though, due to the extremely high number of red links, specifically, I'm really not sure "yellow-tan-ish" is the best background color for the list cells. That's kinda hard for me to read, I can't imagine how it looks to someone with color-impaired vision. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 21:43, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Message received! You make a good point about vision impaired users. Reprised the draft to tone down everything but the title area — still, I think, attention-getting without being so... exsanguinary. -- Djonni (talk) 17:44, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
Woohoo! Oh, contrast, how I've missed you! -- FeRDNYC (talk) 18:23, 15 December 2018 (UTC)


Draft hatnotes for works in progress or under review:

75px-WrenchTF2.pngJanuWiki Article Under Construction

This article is the target of the creative efforts of {{{author}}} as part of the JanuWiki 2019 Content Drive. If you have a [[technical edit]] to make, please write a clear edit summary (beginning with "Technical edit:"), or speak to a [[contributing editor]].

Last edit: 212 days ago by FeRDNYC. See history.
Stub sign.pngJanuWiki Article Under Review

This article by {{{author}}} in being reviewed by {{{editor|editors}}} as part of the JanuWiki 2019 Content Drive. If you have a [[technical edit]] to make, please write a clear edit summary (beginning with "Technical edit:"), or speak to a [[contributing editor]].

Last edit: 212 days ago by FeRDNYC. See history.

Perhaps another for completed articles whose points have been counted towards totals, so authors can easily see that they've been credited for the work. This type of this might be a nice image for that (or for some other use in the event), though the file at that link is not free for reuse (so can easily make something similar). -- Djonni (talk) 12:56, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Main page banner

With the infobox rollout well underway and the preview versions no longer needed, I've repurposed User:FeRDNYC/Sandbox with a copy of the Main Page content plus an added event banner. Feel free to take a look, and if you have any specific content you'd like me to fill in, let me know. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 03:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Hey that looks great! :) Love the big 🍺 floats! Might adapt that in hatnotes! :)
Taking a look on mobile, what are your thoughts on having it above the Welcome to the GodWiki panel? On most mobile screens it won't be visible in the first screenful, and I think if I didn't know it was there I'd scroll right past it without looking. But having it right at the top might be a bit too obnoxious...? -- Djonni (talk) 06:42, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Eek! Thanks for prompting me to look at it on a mobile device β€” when developing I tested it using Chrome's responsive testing features to simulate a mobile browser, which has its limitations. One is that, while the width is representative, depending on the mode the height won't necessarily be, so it's hard to judge that stuff. I'll play with it a bit, see how it looks on the desktop interface if it's moved above the gray box. A third option is moving it inside the gray box, perhaps directly under the welcome sentence. (Another-other option is shrinking the welcome sentence, which I did a bit with the page redesign but it really is rather excessively large. Like, a third of the screen on my phone.)
But there's a bigger issue with the current design that I only caught when I looked at it on my phone: I intentionally designed the heading of the box and the emoji to be able to overlap each other, since it saved a bunch of space, let the heading format wider so it didn't wrap like crazy, and in my testing it all looked great. But on my phone, the combination of a completely different font and the much darker emoji Samsung uses turned out to be... poor. EXTREMELY poor.
So, I'll have to solve that, too. I may just apply some transparency to the emoji so they're less pronounced β€” either that, or put a semi-transparent background behind the text, one that'll be invisible against the box background but help the text stand out if it ends up overlapping the beer mugs. I'll figure something out. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 18:36, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Going ahead

Following some great discussion about this on the forum, I've started the JanuWiki 2019 page with some draft layout and content! -- Djonni (talk) 07:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)


  • As far as new infoboxes (I saw something go by about that), I can have those ready in, as you say, "final draft" form within 3-5 days at the outside. (Also add {{town}} to the list, because there's no point in a redesign without our most consistently used infobox.)
Regarding the main page, though, rather than changing the intro box, I'd suggest adding an additional banner above the featured/intro boxes, something that'll obviously stand out as different and changed. I honestly don't think most wiki visitors would even notice if the intro box changed. I can put structure together for that with only a day or two notice, if the content is relatively straightforward.
That's all I caught in a quick skim, like I said more later. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 00:13, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
So, I've had some positive responses, mostly through direct messages. I'm not sure if that bodes well enough to go ahead, but I'm going to continue the preparation just in case. I mean, what if it's a big flop and we create a better GodWiki for nothing?
Since there was no commentary or suggestions about the theme, I'm narrowing down on Beer. I think it offers a nice variety of article types, and is such a strong theme throughout Godville that, hopefully, everyone has an opportunity to contribute. With the theme including so many different kinds of monster, artifacts, even taverns, I don't think a creator needs to be a beer drinker (or a drinker at all) to find inspiration there. (If you don't think it offers you a chance to contribute, speak now or forever hold your peace.)
I've expanded the beer list above with a handful of extra items I'd missed, and pared off the list of winter items for the sake of focus. I'm going to work on guideline articles and concept for the tracking page. (If anyone has ideas or suggestions for either, they're welcome.)

I've trimmed the text above just a bit. Any comments on this plan are still welcome below. -- Djonni (talk) 07:35, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Responses take 2

πŸ‘ -- SourceRunner (talk) 02:40, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

New article templates

So, GodFeRDNYC  has started drafting a template that could be used for new articles at User:FeRDNYC/Template Sandbox.

If I understand right, the intention is that a new article could be created with just {{subst:New artifact article}} (or similar) copy-pasted in, and the creator will then have a pre-fabbed skeleton that they can put flesh on. There's a bit of a tightrope to walk, of course, between giving people something to work with and making people feel like they need to stick to a formula, but that aside I'm really excited by this idea!

Talk about the specifics of the template is best done at User talk:FeRDNYC/Template Sandbox, but since it's relevant to the experience of new users for JanuWiki, and very relevant to the text used on the JanuWiki 2019 in the getting started section, I wanted a talk topic in it here as well. -- Djonni (talk) 15:15, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Help resources

Along the lines of recent conversations about points of contact, the page currently lists one principle as "Do your best and ask for help". The earlier "Be Bold" entry even links to wikipedia, but "ask for help" is just left to hang there. I think that should come with some strong guidance as to how.

Whether it's a pointer to Help:Requests, a pointer to this talk page, or whatever... doesn't matter, just something. (And probably only one something, since too many options can be worse than none at all, and it'll be easier on everyone to keep things centralized at wherever place they end up.) -- FeRDNYC (talk) 15:28, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I think Help:Requests will be the best possible clearinghouse for all such "I need help" stuff. That opening part of the page is one of many I've not had a chance to flesh out yet... πŸ˜… -- Djonni (talk) 19:26, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Main Page banner

So take a look at User:FeRDNYC/Sandbox now. I had to wrestle endlessly with it to get it looking right on mobile, and ended up having to dump the "large emoji behind the text" idea since nothing I tried worked out readable in mobile browsers. But the placement coupled with the reduced size of the intro text (which I feel is overdue anyway) gets it visible without scrolling on my phone, and personally I'm comfortable with putting it there. I need to reduce the second-line gray box text a little more simply because it's too close to the first-line size now and they compete more than they should, but other than that it feels ready. Just needs whatever content should go inside.

(Not that there's any rush, still over a week left before the start. Though we could place the banner a few days early, basically as soon as the event page is complete. Which I guess is still in flux mostly because it (needs? might need?) page-creation links / preload content somewhere? As you can tell I'm completely 100% up on the details of this plan!) -- FeRDNYC (talk) 09:09, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

I think making the banner live a few days early is a great idea :) I've been thinking about content a bit.
Banner idea
  • JanuWiki 2019 content drive starts January 1!
  • We're getting creative around the theme of Beer!
  • Join the fun, see what's happening, and let the creative juices flow!
If we want to get cute with it, a countdown timer something like this:
which can double as a countdown to the end of JanuWiki too. 😊 -- Djonni (talk) 07:54, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Mmm, "creative" two bullet points in a row feels repetitive, I'd re-word one of those two, and tone down all the exclamation points. Other than that I think it's great. Countdown seems like a cool idea, too. Preliminarily implemented (with days + hours) at User:FeRDNYC/Sandbox.
  • Come January 1, 2019 the timer will automatically switch to "Ends in:" with a green countdown after it instead of the current red one.
  • The timer will display things like "2 days 1 hours", "1 days 1 hours", and "0 days 1 hours"... and I am personally fine with that. (Especially since the last one will only be visible for 1 hour.)
I have to decide what to do with the production version of this, now. I guess I'll put it in a generically-named template {{Godwiki event banner}}, so it can be reused/repurposed instead of being stuck undeletable long after the event's over. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 22:32, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Tick.png Done The banner now lives in that template, and can be updated there. My Sandbox page merely transcludes it into its copy of the Main Page content.
P.S: The countdown will format alongside the bullet list on the desktop (with enough width), below the list on mobile/narrow. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 22:40, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
It's probably worth writing a formatting template that handles plural-vs-singular, and even omission for the 0 case. (So {{something|N|day}} might output "2 days " for N > 1, "1 day " for N = 1, and "" for N = 0.) But it's not important enough to be an urgent need, and that template feels worth taking the time to design correctly instead of just rushing in and slapping it together haphazardly. Questions of exactly how to properly handle spaces, commas, and pluralization all make it deceptively complex to design correctly. The Other Wiki might have something we can borrow that's already been (over)designed to account for all that. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 14:52, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
To continue the caching conversation from the forum, I just realised that the Main Page is re-cached frequently, whenever the random picture changes. So it's worth us trying the banner in situ there before making any decisions about how the countdown timer is working :) -- Djonni (talk) 15:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
I've made changes to adjust the hour, day, and year by 2 hours to meet UTC+2 (at least I think I've got it correct), and to switch between singular and plural for "day/s" and "hour/s"... Pending my logic and implementation being correct (ahem), I feel like this could go live on the Main Page any time :) -- Djonni (talk) 16:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Collapsible table captions

Because of the way they collapse, collapsible tables with captions kind of suck (MediaWiki's fault) β€” just try collapsing one with a multi-word caption (especially) to see what I mean. (But it sucks even on the one-word captions.) It can be made tolerable, by adding a style="min-width:20em;" (or so) on the table, since the caption will collapse to that width if it's set β€” just have to be careful to keep it under people's mobile screen width, so typically 30em or even better 25em max. That being said, all of the collapsible tables (the lists of "target" articles) here are pretty short, enough that the value of making them individually collapsible is debatable... just dropping the mw-collapsible wouldn't be all that bad either, IMHO. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 15:16, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

In a recent edit (lost track) I took the suggestion and removed the mw-collapsibles. If you spot others that I missed, delete 'em :) -- Djonni (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Some quick docs feedback

Some thoughts, purely IMHO for your consideration and to do with as you see fit.

  • JanuWiki 2019 is already getting sort of terrifyingly long, and may scare people off. It's worth considering whether that needs to all be on the same page, or which of it needs to be there at all. (That TOC is especially intimidating. Altho mobile users don't see it, which is a double-edged sword.)
  • By the same token, JanuWiki 2019#Technical Stuff's links section is verbose enough to lose people, and probably needs more tabular examples rather than in-prose examples. They're tricky to follow.
  • Please don't even cover <strike>...</strike> in the formatting discussion. Anyone who doesn't already know how to do it doesn't need to.
  • The FAQ answers could also be way more brief. One sentence is a perfectly acceptable length for an answer to a question, if it can be answered in one sentence. And, like, there's no point in overexplaining things like The only requirement to join in on JanuWiki is a heroine or hero of at least level 15, which is when you gain access to the GodWiki. β€” it is not relevant or important to the content drive. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 23:00, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Noted, and agreed. I've been writing stuff in small chunks and it's easy to lose track of how small chunks snowball. Will do some machete-ing and cut it to size. :) -- Djonni (talk) 16:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

That TOC is especially intimidating. Altho mobile users don't see it, which is a double-edged sword.

I've been thinking. At one point you found a CSS class that would appear only on mobile (or was it the other way around...?). In short, is there a CSS class that find be used to manually make a highly simplified TOC four mobile views? πŸ€” It's certainly not vital, but you're right about that double-edged sword, and perhaps one of those edges could be bluntened... -- Djonni (talk) 09:16, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
That's a good question, I'd have to check whether that's still possible with the death of the default mobile skin. (And I will, shortly.) Though, another option would just be to set the page up __NOTOC__, and use the manual TOC for all skins β€” that way, people wouldn't be seeing different TOCs depending which of the various skins they're using. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 04:35, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Mmm, nope, I was afraid of that. The default mobile skin is now Vector, same as the desktop skin. It just uses some media queries to format things differently on narrow screens. But there are no longer any classes present on mobile but not desktop, or vice versa. (Except when using the WPTouch skin, my "switch back to mobile skin" trick still works there since it's the only skin that's different from the other views.) So, my suggestion about using the manual TOC for all skins/views would be the only option, probably. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 05:21, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Event hatnotes

I've been contemplating these (ref Talk:Main Page#Navbox and other technical details), and I think it's the right way to manage JanuWiki content pages. I'd like to get them up so that we can start incorporating them into magic links.

User:FeRDNYC was clever to put {{Godwiki event banner}} into a generic name that can be reused for future events. I think it's wise to do the same for the event Hatnotes. So: {{Event construction}}, {{Event review}}? Is there a better name to use for these? -- Djonni (talk) 17:02, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Decision made: {{Godwiki event construction}} and {{Godwiki event review}} created and hopefully ready to use. Will write a brief explanation and instructions on the page tomorrow! -- Djonni (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Hey, speaking of, I just thought to take a look at those on mobile, and they might need some adjustment. The large image/emoji end up being kind of overpowering there. (Same problem I ran into with the main page event banner.) If you want I can rebuild them as flexboxes, so the graphics and the text block will stay separate from each other instead of all wrapping together. (Most likely it'd go left-graphic, textbox, right-emoji, stacked vertically under the heading.) They'd still be a bit long vertically, tho. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 04:56, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Mmm, you're right, the {{God}} template and the right-float emoji also lead the top area text to be sparse and broken up. Trying them as flexboxes might work, the text can be trimmed if they're too long. We can also just reduce the emoji size, like you did on the banner. -- Djonni (talk) 17:08, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, given that it's using {{Sign}} which isn't trivially flexbox-able, I'd suggest shrinking the left-hand image a little (even using |imgwidth= if need be), and making the emoji small and part of the title. Then the text can fill the width. I'd also set the width to 100%, since for mobile it'll need all the space. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 00:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
I made some edits to {{Godwiki event review}}, see what you think (or feel free to revert). Naturally, on my phone the title is still juuuuust too-wide enough that the emoji ends up wrapping onto a second title line all by itself. You can never win with web-formatting. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 09:28, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
(And I'd meant to offer: If you want me to make those same changes to {{Godwiki event construction}}, or to update both with any edits, let me know.) -- FeRDNYC (talk) 12:13, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜ Yes please! Your mobile width is sightly less than mine, which I think makes it a better test for these. The changes look good β€” if you think the title text could be trimmed (or shrunk) such that layout is better for a narrower width, go ahead.

I also realised that for reasons unknown I actually hadn't used {{god}} in ... review}}, which would have been confusing as I kept insisting that was the justification for {{subst:ing the revision author πŸ˜… Fixed that, and added |plain=yes to reduce ugliness. -- Djonni (talk) 12:27, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I just updated {{Godwiki event construction}} to match {{Godwiki event review}} in terms of sizing / image placement / etc β€” with the shorter titles you set, both juuust make it without wrapping on my phone, so that's cool. (The "Last edit" line still wraps depending on the length of the username β€” yours no, mine yes β€” but that's not so bad.) So I think they're good now.
The size/length seems fine on mobile, "construction" is about half the screen height in Chrome (meaning the page canvas, not counting browser headers and etc.); "review" is just over 1/3. I think that's reasonable. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 14:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
One thing that did occur to me, reading {{Godwiki event construction}} β€” it kind of switches from hatnote to instructions like halfway through, which is a bit unusual. IOW, the first sentence is a notice for people reading the article, to let them know what's going on... and then the next sentence/two are instructions for the editor of the article, instead of the readers. ...I don't really have any thoughts on that, I just wanted to point it out since it struck me when reading it with my "wiki reader" hat on. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Side job quest boxes

In case it's useful (just because I noticed some Side Jobs in the JanuWiki material), {{Diaryquest}} now finally has that Side Job mode I've been procrastinating on for months. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 20:02, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I saw the edits, was going to take a closer look if it's ready to use! (Judging from the edit comment I figured it was somewhere from readyish to ready enough.) It'll... probably come in handy? Haven't seen that far ahead yet, heh... I'll make sure User:SourceRunner knows it's there too! -- Djonni (talk) 20:55, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I think it's now 100% functional, that "come back to this" edit-comment is a code issue (I just copy-pasted a whole block of code into two different {{#if:}} blocks, because getting the conditionals right was too hard for right then), nothing to do with functionality. I mentioned it at Talk:Side Job too, so if anything is not ready with it, hopefully someone will point it out. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 21:48, 30 December 2018 (UTC)


Re: the current version of the {{Monster}} preload, which reads:

| image = <!-- An image filename (e.g. Example_picture_name.jpg). If the filename doesn't exist, this gives you a link to upload it. -->
| class = <!-- Monster's class. E.g., Humanoid, Troll, Giant mecha -->
| description = <!-- Brief description of the monster -->
| habitat = <!-- E.g., Subterranean swamps, Cookie jars, Behind waterfalls -->
| latin = <!-- Optional Latin-style species name. E.g., Exterreri exsomnum -->
| boss = <!-- Optional, 'yes' if this is a boss-monster -->
  | boss-type = <!-- Type can be: above, 1ab, 2ab, 3ab, tb, dig, quest, or dungeon. Look at Template:Monster for more info. -->

"Instructional" comments might be better than "documentation" comments. I'd say lose all the "Optional"s, for starters.

  • The |image= info is pretty good
  • But with |boss= and |pet= I'd go with Insert 'yes' if the article is about a (boss|tamable) monster.
  • With "|boss-type=", maybe Insert one of: above, dig, quest, 1ab, 2ab, 3ab - see Template:Monster for details. (They don't need to know the alternate/other options.)
  • I don't know if "description" really needs a redundant comment at all. Maybe literally just Briefly.
  • Ditto "Class", "Habitat"... they'll figure it out, or leave it blank if they don't.

-- FeRDNYC (talk) 20:28, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

If we want to stress that fields are optional, the intro block-comment can always make a blanket mention that leaving any infobox field blank is OK. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 20:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Please, be bold! :) I'm not precious about owning all this, I'm more than happy for another set of eyes/fingers/neurons to improve my efforts. -- Djonni (talk) 20:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
OK, cool thanks. It was more a matter of not wanting to trample on your fingers as you're actively still writing (and also because you are still writing additional preload subpages)... I'll make a pass over all of them in a couplethree hours, look for opportunities to harmonize/consolidate. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 21:42, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
BOLD like a brand new magic marker. I made some pretty sweeping changes to JanuWiki 2019/Monster preload, still deciding myself what I think of them. So, in return, Be Savage β€” and once we decide we're closing in on what we want it to be, I'll edit the Equipment and Artifact preloads to fit the same basic mold. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 03:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
To see how it went, I simulated your expansion of monster into artifact. The text is definitely clearer, my concern is that it's too much reading now... I'm worried that "THIS is a QUICK start?? Forget it!" could be the first reaction.
I've run out of time for now, but we should try some fresh eyes and cut it down as much as possible, I think. Probably useful to point people back to the text on JanuWiki 2019 as much as possible. -- Djonni (talk) 10:43, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
I completely agree, and I'm almost tempted to say there should be two versions of each preload: The "beginner" version with copious inline comments, and an "advanced"/"normal" version with **JUST** the boilerplate content and NO comments. Because there's just no way for one preload [per type] to be all things to all people. But how to choose? Upon which side of that divide is it better to err? These are the questions which only the audience for these could answer, but almost by definition... aren't really able to answer, either. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 15:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Death to boldface-type "headings"

I already changed this yesterday in the Monster preload template, to avoid encouraging even more of it, but it's undeniably TRUE that this is currently a very common pattern scattered throughout our existing article content:

* Stuff
* More stuff

* Crap
* Additional crap

To the point where I'd sponsor a special attaheroine just for the heroine who went through our existing articles and fixed that trash so that headings were headings:

* Stuff
* More stuff

* Crap
* Additional crap

(Those particular sections/headings being only one example of a type, there are many other variations.) Because tedium like this is the kind of stuf that inspires Wikipedians to breed bot accounts. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 15:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

The dark deed you requested is done for Monsters M-Z. Wanamingo (talk) 09:01, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
I saw your edits going through, Wanamingo, well done! I've one additional request, as you work: in articles such as Satan Claus, where we have a big section of content and then ==Attributes== becomes the first heading in the article, if there is any further heading (such as ==Pet Taming== there, for example) we end up with a weirdly-placed Table of Contents generated automatically just above the first heading. (The wiki will helpfully create a TOC if there are >3 headings of any level in the article, and since it has no understanding of the content, the most obvious place for this is immediately above the first heading.)
I'll leave it to your judgement how to solve this on a per-article basis, depending which is the most sensible. Here are the three main approaches I'd consider:
  1. Force the wiki not to generate a TOC with the magic word __NOTOC__ at the top of the page (where future editors will see it immediately).
  2. Add a new heading near the top, after a short introductory sentence/paragraph. Something like ==History==, ==Features==, or whatever makes sense contextually in the article.
  3. If you think the page should have a TOC, and that there's no sensible way to insert a heading near the top, you could change the location of the generated table of contents by putting a different magic word __TOC__ on a line in the place where a TOC would make sense (usually near to, but not at, the top of the article).
I'm sure there are other ways to approach it, but those three seem the ones most likely to make sense (in my mind, at least).
Once again, great work. πŸ‘ -- Djonni (talk) 11:52, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

in articles such as Satan Claus, where we have a big section of content and then ==Attributes== becomes the first heading in the article, if there is any further heading (such as ==Pet Taming== there, for example) we end up with a weirdly-placed Table of Contents generated automatically just above the first heading.

I'll be honest... I don't see the problem there, myself. At least, not looking at the Satan Claus example. The TOC is only "weirdly placed" if you feel it needs to be at the top of the article, which I personally don't. It's placed where the sectioned content begins, which is the natural place to index the sections. Putting it higher (farther from the section headings) would be the weird thing. And adding headings so that everything is in sections (thus pushing the TOC to the very top of the article) looks even worse IMHO, at least in articles where there's also an infobox. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 00:49, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
And, yes β€” very awesome, Wanamingo! You have my gratitude. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 00:50, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Monsters E-L are also done. These edits were made with the TOC in mind. You're welcome! -- Wanamingo (talk) 06:44, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Monsters A-D are done.
In summary, all boldface-type headings for currently existing Monster pages have been changed to be actual headings.
Once again, with feeling: /watch?v=9FgwKpemKmo
Please feel free to archive this section of the talk page. Have a good weekend! -- Wanamingo (talk) 07:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜ Brilliant Wanamingo! 430-ish fiddly little repetitive edits... I hope you used some regex/search-and-replace trickery for semi-automation! We salute you, sir!

I won't archive this just yet, for two reasons: firstly, so people can see how you've contributed (because this kind of housekeeping and weeding is just as important to the health and usability of the wiki as great content is). But also so that people can see a concrete example of wiki culture at its best and most functional: discursive, consensus-driven direction (FeRDNYC bringing up the issue, and then he and I articulating differing ideas about tables of contents, above), combined with being bold — you, Wanamingo, going ahead and just gettin' it done, having obviously taken the opinions here into account and doing what you saw needed doing with your own judgement.

One of the things that has been so great to see as a side-effect of JanuWiki is how many people are clicking their way around the wiki, finding pages and articles that they're enjoying, and just going ahead and doing stuff. Flagging stubs, adding infoboxes, editing typos, improving accuracy, looking for (and finding, or asking for) features they want and need in the tools they're using. I couldn't be happier with how JanuWiki has gone so far, and it's only day 5! -- Djonni (talk) 07:52, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

My inattention, and thanks :)

Just wanted to drop a little message here saying thanks to everyone who's tidied up my mistakes here (you know who you are, thank you) and for everyone keeping the balls bouncing while I've been a bit distracted and inattentive the last few days. :)

Some folks have asked me by PM if they should allow me to do updates to things like Help:Requests assignments or JanuWiki 2019#Progress updates -- absolutely not! :) The only thing I'd suggest is best not to update your own scores (but you all have been following that instinctively anyways), but please don't hesitate to keep things up-to-date and accurate (especially when someone I do an inaccurate update! πŸ˜…)

Thanks again to everyone who's participating in JanuWiki, whether you're writing, finding/creating pictures, a volunteer editor, fixing and updating the wider wiki and its content, or even if all you're doing is reading and grinning along with the fun, the response to JanuWiki has been so, so much better than I had hoped, and wildly better than I had feared. :)

Oh, another thing I should mention/apologise for, I haven't been keeping any commentary or updates up over at Wiki Questions Thread... since day 1. Perhaps it's not completely necessary (especially after the super positive dev blog mention! THANK YOU, GodGodville !) but if anyone wanted to put a little summary over there for those who dwell only in the deepest darkest forum threads, every little JanuWiki teaser has brought more activity and vibrancy to the wiki. :)

Now, it's after midnight where I am and I have to be up really early for travel, so... G'night! -- Djonni (talk) 23:15, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Some folks have asked me by PM if they should allow me to do updates to things like Help:Requests assignments or JanuWiki 2019#Progress updates

...Meaning, they've asked whether they should not do those things, and instead leave them to you? (Just making sure I, and everyone else, understood correctly.) -- FeRDNYC (talk) 02:34, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Yep, that's what I meant. To rephrase, I have been asked if I want to take the sole responsibility for those things, and the answer is "certainly not" :) -- Djonni (talk) 04:45, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Thumbs up pig.gif -- FeRDNYC (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

We, uh... we actually need more JanuWiki items 😲

Well it's day 5 of JanuWiki and, uh... we're almost out of monsters.

Honestly, I did not anticipate that.

So, I need help! JanuWiki needs to expand, and I need advice on how we do that.

  • We can scour the monsters list for drink-related monsters not yet included. This would probably add a small handful, get us through another few days at this pace (!). Off the top of my head, things like Drinkerbell... uh... actually that might be it?
  • As was pointed out by one of our creators, User:Terezka, bear is just one letter away from beer. So we could include the contents of Template:Navbox ursidae, which connects all the bear-related articles. At a glance that would add 14 red-linked monsters to our JanuWiki stable, almost tripling the Monsters roster.
    • Actually, we could re-frame JanuWiki as "Lagers and Tigers and Bears, oh my!" There are I think at least 8 more monsters to be found amongst lions and tigers, and about twenty more that are cats (Looks like we need a cats navbox!). I haven't done a survey to see what's red, blue or stubbed in those yet.
  • Or, there's Beer and Loathing in Godvegas (though let's workshop that name πŸ˜…): there's plenty of monsters with words like "Enemy", "Villain", "Anti-", etc. that could be included, and still a lot of stubs among the new towns introduced since April.

Those are just a couple of initial ideas that I've thought of, it'll be another couple of coffees before I'm running at full speed. Thoughts and suggestions welcome! :) -- Djonni (talk) 08:39, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Be Bold! Why not a bit of everything? As for names:
  • Beer and Liquor in Last Resort - To make it fully event & Godville related.
  • "Lions and Tigers and Bears, oh my!" - The original has the bonus of them all being brands of beer.
I'll have a look through the categories for anything we can add as well. -- S624 (talk) 11:12, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
I really like the "Lagers and Tigers and Bears, oh my!" idea. I'd also be happy to look into making the cat navbox, if that would help. It would be a bigger one, from just looking into the list of monsters I could find at least 20 monsters that would fit. Quite a lot of them would be red links, I think.
Also, dogs and wolves might deserve their own navbox, which would again be a bigger one. Terezka (talk) 11:55, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Equipment A to G went through & possible candidates: Ancient cork, Cocktail umbrella, Cup of woe & Goblet of fire. -- S624 (talk) 13:00, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Equipment H to Z went through & possible candidates: Liver warmer, Milk moustache, Oktobervest, Old barrel & Tropical punch. -- S624 (talk) 15:36, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜ The best place to work off for picking article subjects, in terms of impact to the wiki, is Special:WantedPages. Top-to-bottom. That'll eliminate the most redlinks. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 19:20, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Hah... so, I posted this just this morning, added two monsters (that probably should have been included from the start), and we're already back down to one monster left. Monsters are crazy popular.
GodS624 , good finds on those equipment items, that was a super-thin section. Can you throw them up on JanuWiki 2019 and Template:Navbox JanuWiki 2019 for us? Split equipment and taverns into separate tables if you want.
A quick glance at the top of Special:WantedPages gives us the boss-monsters followed by the existing JanuWiki content (cause, y'know, lotsa red links). Then down the page of the top 100 comes other things in navboxes, which includes the bears and, as I type this, the cats navbox is going up on all pages cattish (great work GodTerezka !). So, I think I might call an audible on this now:
Lagers and Tigers and Bears, Oh My!
  • Lagers: Beer related items, already covered.
  • Tigers: All things cat-like
  • Bears: All things bear-like
  • Oh My!: Boss-monsters!
Priority 1: Getting the redlinked monsters from Template:Navbox ursidae, Template:Navbox cats, and Template:Navbox bosses up on JanuWiki 2019, as well as into Template:Navbox JanuWiki 2019
Priority 2: Sorting through stubs/pictures needed on same
Priority 3: Tracking down artifacts, equipment, etc related to cats, bears, or bosses
Priority 4: Finding the stubs and emblems needed amongst Template:Navbox towns (Let's put towns on the list, why not?)
I'm gonna try to get no. 1 done straight away, before I fall asleep... -- Djonni (talk) 19:44, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, got as far as adding a table of redlink cats to JanuWiki 2019#Pick a subject..., which is a lot of juicy red links for people to chew on for a while. Bears and bosses can come soon.
Haven't updated the navbox but, y'know, it's bedtime, so. G'night! -- Djonni (talk) 20:02, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Equipment: Can you throw them up on JanuWiki 2019 and Template:Navbox JanuWiki 2019 for us? - Tick.png Done & Tick.png Done -- S624 (talk) 20:06, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Priority 3: ... equipment, etc related to cats, bears, or bosses - 9 equipment items found (felidae/ursidae): Awkward paws, Bear arms, Cardboard box, Eye of the liger, Eyepatch of the tiger, Flea collar, Latex catsuit, Lion's mane & Nekomimi. Currently in dungeon so not able to add to JanuWiki 2019 and Template:Navbox JanuWiki 2019 right now. -- S624 (talk) 20:39, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Doing.png Doing... Tick.png Done I've finally finished fucking around with my GIF upload, so I'll take care of it. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 20:57, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
I also subgrouped the Monsters section of Template:Navbox JanuWiki 2019, added all of the "Tigers", and moved Bear Minimum to "Bears". -- FeRDNYC (talk) 21:36, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
For clarification GodFeRDNYC , it's Eye of the Liger in the equipment & omnibus list but added as Eye of the Tiger. Will edit this back unless you want to do it. -- S624 (talk) 21:43, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Fixed.png Fixed, but in the future please be bold and just fix mistakes you spot. No reason to keep them around waiting to communicate their existence to other parties. Thanks. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 21:57, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜ I also added all of the remaining redlinks from {{Navbox bosses}} to the event navbox, as the "Oh My!" monsters subgroup. (That would be: Exoskeletor πŸ‹οΈ Gastronaut πŸ‹οΈ Godbuster πŸ‹οΈ Grimelord πŸ‹οΈ Scaretaker πŸ‹οΈ Thug-of-war πŸ‹οΈ Wraptor). Adding those to JanuWiki 2019 now. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 22:04, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

I’ve been adding some monsters to the β€œLagers” section. To make the β€œcreate” links (whomever created those preloads, you are a wizard and I could kiss you) I have been carefully copying the relevant one-word or two-word link style from another monster and substituting the new monster name in the obvious spots. It seems to be working OK when I test the preload link, but... is there anything else I should be doing? β€” SourceRunner (talk) 01:51, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
You did exactly the right thing, SourceRunner, great work. You even used {{urlencode:...}} for names with spaces πŸ‘
The Navbox looks great, the JanuWiki page seems healthy. There's currently an article assigned for review to every editor, and more marked for review waiting, and about 10ish under construction. Lots of content coming down the pipe!
Now, strategic question: with so many red links now, should we hold off on adding the bears and keep them up our sleeve, or give everyone all the choices now? -- Djonni (talk) 09:06, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
I'd say throw them on now. If we need even more, there are 26 red links & a few stubs in {{Navbox dogs}}. -- S624 (talk) 18:34, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the check/confirmation, Djonni.
I’m partially inclined to agree with S624 about adding the bears now, but I’m partially thinking that we should wait a week to tease people. Sort of an β€œAchievemnt Unlocked: You gain Bears” situation. β€” SourceRunner (talk) 19:46, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜Leaving the bears question open for now, looking at stubs amongst the boss-monsters makes me feel like there's just too many stubs there to sanely feature them all (that navbox is already having trouble buckling its belt after a meal). Open to suggestions as to how we encourage people to go hunting for stubs to expand themselves, like User:WardPhoenix did with Adminotaur? -- Djonni (talk) 12:19, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Two Three more points:
  1. Yes, obviously, the navbox takes off its pants to eat dinner. Doesn't everybody do that?
  2. On the topic of engorged navboxes, at the end of JanuWiki I entend to pull from the navbox anything that remains undone, so that it's just featuring things that were completed during the month. That bloated behemoth can't stay afloat like that for longer than it absolutely needs to.
  3. Yes, bloated behemoths wear pants and belts.
--Djonni (talk) 12:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
And float! -- FeRDNYC (talk) 08:21, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Quick start links

Once an article has been claimed & created, should we remove the quick start links as redundant? -- S624 (talk) 10:06, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

I've thought about the same thing myself, but the checklist for completing an article is already pretty long and I didn't want to add to it!
I think the answer is "Sure, why not?" :) It could be replaced with an {{m|done}}, or something like that. If you'd like to be bold and do that, it seems like a good idea to me. In the event that an article is un-claimed like Red Bull, we can replace the link with the text changed to Edit "Article name". -- Djonni (talk) 12:15, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Will do later today. -- S624 (talk) 12:36, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Tick.png Done (or Doing.png Doing... for those still in construction mode. -- S624 (talk) 21:43, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, one of the things I specifically tested for, when we were setting those up, was the question of what would happen when a preload link is used for an article that does exist. Happily, MediaWiki simply ignores the preload information completely, so the link basically becomes a standard Edit link. Which means that there's no great urgency to removing them, as they can't hurt anything by sticking around. That being said, there's also no longer any reason to keep them around, so I think it makes total sense to update the tables accordingly. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 08:27, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion regarding "Pick a subject" section

This section is essential for Januwiki obviously, but with time, a lot of entries are being done and the first thing we see in that section is a list of Done subject. And the overall list is fairly long already, especially on a mobile screen.

Since the reviewers kept the progress updated constantly, we have a redundant redundancy of done work (even more with the help request page). So maybe we could clean the already done work from the list, leaving only the not done (and maybe doing) entry on it?

On a side note the progress list is also growing big, but will be more problematic to reduce of course. WardPhoenix (talk) 01:01, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Event extended by 2 hours

I just updated the countdown clock in the Main Page JanuWiki template with a closing "thank you" message that'll activate when February starts, in preparation for the coming close of the month/event. In the process I reverted the code back to using UTC (the timezone-correction logic never quite worked right on the borders of days/months), so as a consequence the event is extended by an entire 2 hours until midnight UTC (instead of Russian UTC+2 time)! Enjoy! 🀩 -- FeRDNYC (talk) 04:50, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Marking unstarted entries in event navbox...

I'm about to commit an edit to {{Navbox JanuWiki 2019}} that has the potential to ruffle some feathers, so I wanted to give an explanation of my reasoning in the hopes that it might help avert any bad impressions.

There are several articles that were created with the event preload content, but never progressed past that point, so that they still exist as nothing but boilerplate content. Because I feel it's vital to keep track of those entries so that they can be cleaned up, I'm going to mark them all in the event template with a "no entry" sign (β›”), because it's literally true and therefore amuses me.

I understand that there are all sorts of reasons why these articles are in their current state. Cham Almighty, in particular, explained on the forum thread that she's been pulled away by family obligations, and will be returning shortly to catch up on outstanding wiki commitments. That is completely understandable β€” we all have lives.

This is not meant as an attack on anyone, or even any kind of judgement. It's simply as an indication of the current state of these articles, which are β€” regardless of the reasons why β€” in an untenable state. Hopefully that will be sorted out soon, and the flags can be replaced with happy βœ” marks.

If anyone feels this explanation is insufficient, or simply disagrees with my actions, I've confined this change to this edit so that they can easily be reverted. I would wholeheartedly support such an action. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 14:48, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Makes complete sense to me, and I whole-heartedly approve of your chosen symbol. It's provoking laughter, on this end. --SourceRunner (talk) 21:20, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Unfinished drafts

The question was posed:

There is no way I will be finished with the gnomish beer page by Feb. 10. The "quoted chapter" is just going to be too big. Added what I have to this point to show progress. While I plan to continue working on it, there's just not enough time between now and deadline.

I'll put the gnomish beer quest back on pause and focus on finishing edits. What template should I use to denote "work in progress" outside of JanuWiki?
β€” User:SourceRunner

We do have a {{Construction}} template, but personally I hate "Under Construction" messages. (The entire web is always under construction!) It doesn't really convey the status of these articles, which is that they're still in a draft (or, in some cases, even unstarted) state.
This is an issue I think neither Djonni nor I saw coming, so the event process wasn't well-structured to account for it. Sorry about that. Something to address in the post-mortem.
I have some ideas for future events (mostly centered around creating the initial draft articles elsewhere, possibly in User: space, and only moving them to their intended titles once they're ready for review), but that doesn't help with the draft articles that have already been created in the main article space. It looks like there will be several that fit that description, so I'll do a little research into the options and try to come up with something.
Part of me is thinking the best thing might be to just replace whatever's there now (boilerplate, unfinished draft, etc.) with minimal one-sentence stub content ("[The] blank is a blanktype in [[Godville (game)|Godville]].") and an infobox where applicable. That can serve indefinitely as the page for the subject, to be expanded by either the event author, or anyone else in the community. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 02:30, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
The more I think about it, the more I think that is the best plan. Articles aren't meant to be kept in "draft" state on the wiki. (That was our mistake with the event process, in retrospect β€” setting it up so that articles were being drafted in-place.) Content should go live as it's readied for consumption. Not to say that every article has to be perfect before it's published, polish and expansion can still happen incrementally after it's published. (That's what I meant about the entire web being under construction.) But the way the event was set up, the first version of an article published was the "boilerplate" framework, and that shouldn't happen.
So, I think my plan is to go through the few remaining pages still marked "under construction" for the event, and take off everything that isn't article-ready content.
  • For the ones that contain nothing but the new-article boilerplate (e.g. Inncreeper), I'll just delete it all, and I'll leave the article as basically just:

The '''Inncreeper''' is a [[monsters|monster]] in [[Godville (game)|Godville]].

  • For the ones that do contain incomplete content (e.g. Caravanserai), I'll add the same sort of one-sentence opening, and leave the rest of the unfinished content below wrapped in HTML comments so it's not visible on the page.
This is one of those be bold, "it can easily be undone" type situations, so there'd be no real harm in just going ahead with that plan. But still since there's most of a day left before the official deadline for authors, I figured I'd lay it out here and see if anyone has any thoughts or ideas. In the absence of any, I'll just go ahead with that plan after Feb 10 ends. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 04:28, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
IMO, one of the main point of the construction template was more about saying "Someone is working on it right now". That way we don't have people fighting to write different articles for the same page at the same time. Maybe the term "under construction" is not the best one, but I think it would be nice to keep a template with a "I'm working on that article, please do not disturb too much" like announcement.
But for sure, if despite the template, we have no sign of writing from the author after a while, we.should be bold and delete the under construction sign (maybe after a warning ?) so other people can claim the article for writing. But again, just my opinion. WardPhoenix (talk) 01:16, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
I’m going through all of the β€œUnfinished” ones that have a significant amount of text and adjusting them into a β€œFinished” state. The ones like Inncreeper I obviously can’t do anything about, so I like the FeRDNYC β€œStub” marking idea, but the Caravanserai and The Rumor Mill I am flogging into shape.
As for my own gnomeish beer quest article, I have to side with User:WardPhoenix thereβ€” I would prefer a marking that says I am actively working on it, and please don’t someone else go messing with it yet. Is that too selfish? β€”SourceRunner (talk) 03:26, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
...Honestly? IMHO, yes. (Hey, you asked.) But not in a way that it's bad or that you shouldn't feel a sense of ownership over your unfinished content. I'm simply arguing that it's misplaced selfishness.
It would seems to me that the sense of ownership you feel is towards your (still-developing) content, not "the contents of the wiki's article" on some specific quest, no? That's understandable and good, and it's exactly why everyone's interests are served by not having people's unfinished draft content live on the wiki. That was kind of my point/goal, in removing (or hiding) the "draft" content β€” I don't want to open those drafts up to meddling from other people, and at the same time I also don't want to leave the articles in the state they're in. I believe it's possible to achieve both goals at the same time.
My suggestion would be, create User:SourceRunner/Draft, move the current contents of Deliver some sour gnomish beer to the dark elves there (replacing it with just an ustarted-article stub), and work on it at your leisure. When it's done, update the mainspace article. Nobody is able to edit that page but you, which is what makes it perfect for creative explorations. (You could call the draft page User:SourceRunner/Deliver some sour gnomish beer to the dark elves or whatever you liked, but remember that we can't delete pages even from our user space so whatever you create you'll be stuck with forever. I'm definitely regretting User:FeRDNYC/List of Monsters and User:FeRDNYC/Template Monster a lot more than User:FeRDNYC/Sandbox.) -- FeRDNYC (talk) 05:14, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I did ask, because I wanted to know. (Did you think that was a "please coddle me" question? πŸ˜† Funny.) Thank you for answering candidly and with explanation. I understand what you are saying, and will abide by it, since this is certainly more your realm than mine. (Though, you misread me a little-- I do not care or feel possessive about the content that I generate. If I did, I would have thrown a hissy fit long ago when people did things like modify the companion cube article into something about knitting, and I certainly would never have gotten anywhere in Ideabox because ER would have offended me horribly. What I feel possessive about is the opportunity to get the complete ideas into the public domain before somebody else starts shaping or changing them, so that we can have a full partnership in the article without running over each other. In ideaboxing, it's the highest rudeness to grab someone's idea as he or she is working through it in the Forum, Guild Council, or PM and start tearing it apart, until that person verbally relinquishes it and requests input; here on GodWiki, one of the first things I make a point of doing is to check the history to see if anyone else might still possibly be working on an article, so I don't interfere with an incomplete idea. Without the knowledge that someone is working on the article, I could blithely wander in and edit or add content in such a way that that person's hard work no longer fits. It's... distressing to contemplate.)
Uncertain about trying to make myself new pages. I think I'll just work in my Talk page, if I want to see how it looks beforehand. Thank you for the recommendation on how to handle it, though, FeRDNYC! --SourceRunner (talk) 14:38, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

  • All "Writing Help" editing is complete, and the three remaining articles that were still in boilerplate have been converted to (slightly embellished) stubs. --SourceRunner (talk) 11:56, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Before after-action discussion, final announcement and "official" wrapping of the event shouldn't be prepared ? --WardPhoenix (talk) 13:57, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Since Djonni is currently absent, and he was doing much of the announcing, and has responsibility for a few of the side jobs, I was hoping that we could make decisions together about the announcement and awards in the after-action discussion. But we could have a pre-after-action discussion first, to deal with that, if you would like. Sure. :) --SourceRunner (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Sorry if i wasn't clear enough (thanks my french for that) but your "I was hoping that we could make decisions together about the announcement and awards in the after-action discussion" was exactly what i wanted to say by "prepared" xD. The easy part is the ranking announcement, and maybe we should also announce that atleast 62 articles have been written/expanded and reviewed during JanuWiki2019 (yep, i counted). Then comes the side jobs, since Djonni is absent, should we form a jury for the winners of the "Don't stop me now" one ? (Since for Mace of Amnesia side job, they are fewer candidate than maximum reward, i guess there is no issue.)--WardPhoenix (talk) 19:11, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Oh! I see, WardPhoenix. I apologize, I misread where the emphasis was in your initial note and so misunderstood.
If it’s OK with everyone, I’d like to supply the prize charges, if Djonni isn’t back in time. Everyone is in my friends list already, so it would be pretty easy to do.
Thank you for keeping count of the new and expanded articles! That should make people really happy to know. And your thoughts on a jury for the β€œDon’t stop me now” side job are good. I think it would be fair to ask that the authors of the articles that are being considered not be on the jury, though. What do you think? β€”SourceRunner (talk) 02:17, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
I think there are two types of discussion outstanding: the "wrap-up" of outstanding matters for this event, and what I've been describing as the "post-mortem" of, "What did we learn, what worked and what didn't, what lessons can we apply to future events?" As far as that second discussion, I would agree with what WardPhoenix said (or, if that wasn't the intent, I'll say it now) β€” it should probably wait until we've sorted out the current event, first.
And on that topic, a jury to judge the Mace of Amnesia side-job sounds like a fine idea, though I think if someone were willing to judge for Djonni in absentia that'd be fine too. Restricting the authors of candidate articles seems like an obvious move, but I have to ask... if we do that, who's left? A quick survey of the candidates tells me that restriction would eliminate: S624, WardPhoenix, Holy Spirit of Hell, Beausoleil, Cham Almighty, and Kastren. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 05:01, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
It’s great that we have so many excellent writers, isn’t it? I guess that list leaves FeRDNYC, Terezka, and SourceRunner. It would be a tribunal, after the grand old tradition. X) β€”SourceRunner (talk) 05:19, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

No objections, Your Highness. x) -- WardPhoenix (talk) 11:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

"Highness," huh? What happened to "imperial majesty"? X)
All kidding aside, if you guys would prefer, I could do the judging on my own. People are busy, and I understand that. But of that's the way it needs to happen, does anyone have any comments about the judging criteria I proposed below? --SourceRunner (talk) 12:21, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
It's more that I just don't really feel able to make subjective judgements about article quality, in the way that side job apparently requires. The way I look at it, every contribution is the best contribution! πŸ˜‡
So unless people want a bunch of "You're All Winners!" participation trophies, I say SourceRunner judges. (Since she volunteered, and all. #sucker!) -- FeRDNYC (talk) 16:28, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Roger that, FeRDNYC doesn't want to be the bad guy likes to get along with and appreciate everybody. 😜 We all love you, too, Ferdio.
Kidding aside, again, I get it. Happy to be a #sucker in this case. My plan is to work through the articles by Feb. 18 and post my choices in the section below. Anyone can then challenge my choices on the 19th, and I will write up an announcement in the forum on the 20th. --SourceRunner (talk) 04:32, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Erm... help?
Neither of my devices is willing to give me the hyperlinks for various articles and GodWiki pages. This is a problem, because I need them in order to complete my write-up of JanuWiki 2019 accomplishments and results. Can anyone help me? Please? I need the plaintext links for:
Thank you, in advance, for any help you can give me. --SourceRunner (talk) 04:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Added links, not sure if it was what you needed, but there you go xD --WardPhoenix (talk) 12:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, WardPhoenix, that was EXACTLY what I needed. --SourceRunner (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
In case this ever comes up again in the future, here's one way you can do that. (Which is way too nerdy, and who's going to actually remember this when they need it?) The fullurl magic word will translate an article title into a URL anywhere on the wiki. (Including Special:ExpandTemplates, if you don't want to save an edit.) Use it like so:
{{fullurl:Beer Cub}} β†’
{{fullurl:User:SourceRunner}} β†’
{{fullurl:β€œFree beer” ticket}} β†’
-- FeRDNYC (talk) 04:39, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
And I'm just now noticing that it's returning http URLs instead of https. Lame. But, as long as you change that, it works. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 04:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Since it definitely will come up again for me, I’ll remember that! β€”SourceRunner (talk) 05:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Aha! And even more usefully, I just tested and it does work with safesubst: to insert the generated URL into the page. Which means you can then edit it in-place (to change HTTP to HTTPS), instead of having to copy-and-paste. IOW:
  1. Insert {{safesubst:fullurl:article title}} into an article
  2. Save the edit
  3. The article source now contains article title where the safesubst:fullurl: used to be, so it can be edited into an HTTPS URL.
I'll let the devs know that fullurl: is returning HTTP URLs, since I can point them at the exact configuration variable they'd need to change to fix that. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 00:35, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Not completely understanding what you’re saying, but I’ll play around with both until the lighbulb goes on, and use safesubst: for serious. Thanks for taking up the HTTPS format issue with the devs. Hoping they are OK with changing that one, because it makes the most sense to generate the links that way. β€”SourceRunner (talk) 03:44, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜ Sorry, that was probably a poor explanation. Though I can take comfort in the fact that it's probably not as bad as Wikipedia's explanation, which sucks. (And THAT sucks, because it means there's really no good explanation I can link to.) Unfortunately the best way to understand {{subst:}}/{{safesubst:}} is to experiment with (existing) code that uses them. At least, that's when it clicked for me.

The high-level explanation is that they're used to alter how wiki elements (template calls, magic words, etc.) are handled in the source code of a page, without affecting the rendered version (the one shown to readers).

Normally when you place a template call (or whatever) on a page, the output of that template is displayed to the reader, but the page's source code still contains just "{{template name|parameters...}}". Each time the page is rendered, the template code is re-executed, and its output placed into the rendered page. Any edits to a template's code are therefore reflected on all calling pages the next time they're rendered.

What {{subst:}}/{{safesubst:}} do is, they change that process so that the next time the template is executed, the output of the template (or whatever) is placed into the source code of the page, instead. The template code is only executed once, and its results become part of the source code of the calling page. Any edits to the template won't affect the calling page, because it no longer contains the template call β€” it was executed once and thrown away.

That becomes important when working with template-or-whatevers like {{fullurl:}} because normally, you can't edit their output. All you'll see in the page source code is e.g. {{fullurl:Main Page}}, because the output is only shown on the rendered page. But by using {{safesubst:fullurl:Main Page}} instead, the text "" (the output of {{fullurl:Main Page}}) is placed into the page source code, meaning that output text can then be edited.

Aaaaanyway, getting back to the point... the HTTP URLs will actually work, because they're automatically redirected to the HTTPS server. The admins themselves made the decision (long ago) that GodWiki is an HTTPS everywhere site that doesn't support insecure access. But that decision is exactly the reason why I can't imagine they'd have any objection to fixing the misconfiguration, since they'd presumably prefer that all GodWiki links be HTTPS URLs. They've fixed other secure-configuration issues I've brought to their attention in the past. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 07:29, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Huzzah! As you can already see in my {{fullurl:}} examples above, fullurl: is fixed and now producing HTTPS URLs. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 01:42, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Whoo!!! Well done, FeRDNYC, and thank you devs!! --SourceRunner (talk) 12:58, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

β€œDon’t Stop Me Now” Articles to Consider

'Side job candidate articles:

I'm not sure what Djonni meant by "best" in his description of the side job. But maybe these would be good criteria:

  • Extent of use of the gender templates-- For instance, if the templates were used seven times and distributed throughout the relevant parts of the article, that is better than the template being used twice in one paragraph and nowhere else.
  • Creativity of use of the gender templates-- For instance, if two characters of different genders were needed, incrementing the template to the opposite choice is good; if the author paired the use of the gender template with the use of the "a or b" template to further texture the article, that is good.
  • Integration of the gender templates-- Just checking that the article sounds right and works well no matter which gender the template chooses on a given day.

What do you guys think? --SourceRunner (talk) 14:13, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

The only thing I'd maybe add is some consideration of the overall article quality β€” IOW, not just how well the templates are used in the article, but how well the article that uses them turned out. Because ultimately, that's the goal for those templates: not to be used cleverly, but to (ideally) be used invisibly, so the reader doesn't even know they're there. And in being so used, to facilitate the creation of good content, made slightly better via their ability to remove gender bias without compromising readability or structure. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 16:38, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Good point. OK, that will be the fourth category.
* Cat. 1 will be scored with points as ((Number of instances of template)/(Number of paragraphs where template could appear))*10.
* Cat. 2 will be scored subjectively with points on a scale of 1 (very) to 10 (astoundingly) creative use of the templates.
* Cat. 3 will be scored subjectively with points by paragraph (smooth=1; rough=0)
* Cat. 4 will be scored subjectively with points on a scale of 1 (high) to 10 (perfect) quality of the entire article.
I'll post each score for each category here as I go through each article, so that everyone can see the process transparently. --SourceRunner (talk) 04:32, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
DSMN Side Job Points
Article Cat. 1 Cat. 2 Cat. 3 Cat. 4 Total
Beer-scented soap (6/6)10=10 10 4 10 34
Bottle of beer from a wall (6/4)10=15 7 3 10 35
Ale-chemist (3/4)10=7.5 5 4 10 26.5
Beerburglar (13/8)10=16.25 9 8 10 43.25
Beer Mugger (2/3)10=6.666 5 3 10 24.666
Tea Rex (18/13)10=13.846 5 13 10 41.846
Can of ambrosia (4/4)10=10 5 4 10 29
Vanishing pint (6/6)10=10 7 5 10 32
Instant beer tablet (3/3)10=10 7 3 10 30
β€œFree beer” ticket (5/3)10=16.666 7 3 10 36.666
Bureau-cat (8/4)10=20 7 2 10 39

Absent any challenges, on points the best five articles are:

Does anyone have any challenges or want an explanation of why a particular score in any category? --SourceRunner (talk) 04:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

I set the results table sortable, so people could look at how everything ranked by category. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 17:33, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Seems to me that the clear winner stands out. (Beerburglar took the stop spot despite second-place Tea Rex earning a ton of points in category 3 through sheer length.) And all of the articles scored well, so everyone should be proud regardless. Congratulations to the winners / winning articles! -- FeRDNYC (talk) 17:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for making the table sortable, and for reviewing the results, FeRDNYC. I agree, length proved to be an asset in category 3, and definitely worked in Tea Rex's favor, but it was also possible that any of the category 3 values could have been a "0" if the author didn't take the time to go through every paragraph to make sure that the templates were smoothly integrated with the surrounding narrative. It was the "invisibleness" factor.
Very well done to everyone! That was amazing work! --SourceRunner (talk) 04:48, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

So unless people want a bunch of "You're All Winners!" participation trophies, I say SourceRunner judges. (Since she volunteered, and all. #sucker!)
β€” User:FeRDNYC

Roger that, FeRDNYC doesn't want to be the bad guy likes to get along with and appreciate everybody. 😜 We all love you, too, Ferdio.
β€” User:SourceRunner

πŸ€” Mocks me, then awards 10/10 across the board in the subjective quality category. #JustSayin 😁 -- FeRDNYC (talk) 00:43, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
🏳️ Guilty as charged. What could I do with a shot across the bow like β€œ#sucker”? β€”SourceRunner (talk) 03:24, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Draft JanuWiki 2019 Final Report

Formatted for the Forum (check the "Edit" window for proper spacing):

 Wow, what a wild ride! The "JanuWiki": *Content Drive for* "GodWiki": was... well, GlaDOS said it best:

bq. I'm making a note, here: HUGE SUCCESS.

*Want it by the numbers?*
* No. of New or Expanded Articles: *62*
* No. of People Involved: *17* (and a few more behind the scenes)
* No. of Articles given Pictures: *58*
* No. of Individual Edits: *1000+*
* Value Added: β™Ύ

bq. *Pantheon of Wikidness*

In the 11th hour of *JanuWiki,* the 2019 Pantheon of Wikidness became:
# *The Forsaken's Lament:* 108 Points
# *Guide to the Galaxy:* 58 Points
# *Knights who say Ni:* 50 Points
# *Lords of the Pit:* 44 Points
# *E.I.S. Eternal:* 40 Points
# *Nautilus:* 32 Points
# *Psycho-Pass:* 16 Points
# *Harbingers of Primordial Dusk:* 8 Points
# *The Ideaboxers Union:* 4 Points
# *7 Deadly Sins:* 4 Points
# *Skeatseria Lodge:* 2 Points

Did you know that some of those guilds are one-person guilds? Way to go!
Well done, *The Forsaken's Lament,* on earning those 108 points! That's a _lot_ of content! 

~(Don't see your guild in the Pantheon of Wikidness? Want a shot at the glory? Watch this space for future *GodWiki Content Drive* events, because the pantheon will be back!)~

bq. *Side Job Results*

"But who won the side jobs? Who gets the charges?" Take a look:

*Editors' Side Job*
*Djonni,* *S624,* and *Cham Almighty* all completed a quality edit on over 5 articles (and in every case far more), earning themselves 22 charges each. Let's give them a round of applause.

*The Mace of Amnesia _In Memoriam_ Side Job*
These are prizes given for the best use of a female main character in an article. Winning four charges each are:
* "Beer Cub,": by *Terezka--* Introducing readers to the adventurous, energetic, and occasionally sarcastic cryptonaturalist Lady Dianne de la Fossey, author of "Grizzlies in the Mist" and many other of the scientific papers cited throughout the GodWiki.
* "Progress Bar,": by *Terezka--* Giving us a proprietress every bit as colorful as the bar and brewery she runs, going by the name of Lara Craftbeer. Her concoctions make use of artisanal ingredients gathered from across Godville, and are _definitely_ what your heroes and heroines are purchasing with all of their hard-earned gold.
* "Drinkerella,": by *Shanimal--* In a world populated by male monsters, this female monster stands a malevolent head above the rest. When she isn't falling down drunk, of course.
* "Godbuster,": by *WardPhoenix--* Publishing the diary of Elayne Kirschen, this article gives us an intimate look into the rise and demise of one of Godville's most dynamic dungeon bosses. And she didn't even need high heels.

*The _Don't Stop Me Now_ Side Job*
This side job awards use of a brand new feature of GodWiki, which provides templates to randomize the genders in a given article. Tired of reading about the hero doing his thing? Come back tomorrow, and you'll find the heroine doing her thing. Gods and goddesses also swap places, and some adjectives change to up to ten different times. Imagine...
There were eleven candidate articles for this side job, and it was hard to choose the five best, because every article was truly excellent. Earning 4 charges each:
# "Beerburglar": by *Holy Spirit of Hell.*
# "Tea Rex": by *Cham Almighty*
# "Bureau-Cat": by *Kastren*
# "'Free beer' ticket": by *S624*
# "Bottle of beer from a wall": by *S624*

bq. Thank you, everyone who contributed to JanuWiki, everyone who kept it going from behind the scenes, everyone who read the GodWiki. You made JanuWiki a success. 

What do you guys think? --SourceRunner (talk) 21:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Seems fine by me, to not say perfect. Tried to find something missing but couldn't. Well done! --WardPhoenix (talk) 22:08, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Looks good to me! Any objections if I make some formatting tweaks? Well, actually, I'll just place my version below (in a collapsed container) and you can use what you like of my suggested changes, or none at all. (Oh, except do be sure to remove the space after the first colon in "GodWiki":
Wow, what a wild ride! 

The "JanuWiki": *Content Drive for* "GodWiki": was... well, GlaDOS said it best:

bq. I'm making a note, here: HUGE SUCCESS.

+*Want it by the numbers?*+
* New or Expanded Articles: *62*
* People Involved: *17* (and a few more behind the scenes)
* Articles given Pictures: *58*
* Individual Edits: *1000+*
* Value Added: β™Ύ

+*Pantheon of Wikidness*+

In the 11th hour of *JanuWiki,* the 2019 Pantheon of Wikidness became:
# *The Forsaken's Lament:* 108 Points
# *Guide to the Galaxy:* 58 Points
# *Knights who say Ni:* 50 Points
# *Lords of the Pit:* 44 Points
# *E.I.S. Eternal:* 40 Points
# *Nautilus:* 32 Points
# *Psycho-Pass:* 16 Points
# *Harbingers of Primordial Dusk:* 8 Points
# *The Ideaboxers Union:* 4 Points
# *7 Deadly Sins:* 4 Points
# *Skeatseria Lodge:* 2 Points

Did you know that some of those guilds are one-person guilds? Way to go!
Well done, *The Forsaken's Lament,* on earning those 108 points! That's a _lot_ of content! 

~(Don't see your guild in the Pantheon of Wikidness? Want a shot at the glory? Watch this space for future *GodWiki Content Drive* events, because the pantheon will be back!)~

+*Side Job Results*+

"But who won the side jobs? Who gets the charges?" Take a look:

* +*Editors' Side Job*+
*Djonni,* *S624,* and *Cham Almighty* all completed a quality edit on over 5 articles (and in every case far more), earning themselves 22 charges each. Let's give them a round of applause.

* +*The Mace of Amnesia _In Memoriam_ Side Job*+
These are prizes given for the best use of a female main character in an article. Winning four charges each are:
** "Beer Cub,": by *Terezka--* Introducing readers to the adventurous, energetic, and occasionally sarcastic cryptonaturalist Lady Dianne de la Fossey, author of "Grizzlies in the Mist" and many other of the scientific papers cited throughout the GodWiki.
** "Progress Bar,": by *Terezka--* Giving us a proprietress every bit as colorful as the bar and brewery she runs, going by the name of Lara Craftbeer. Her concoctions make use of artisanal ingredients gathered from across Godville, and are _definitely_ what your heroes and heroines are purchasing with all of their hard-earned gold.
** "Drinkerella,": by *Shanimal--* In a world populated by male monsters, this female monster stands a malevolent head above the rest. When she isn't falling down drunk, of course.
** "Godbuster,": by *WardPhoenix--* Publishing the diary of Elayne Kirschen, this article gives us an intimate look into the rise and demise of one of Godville's most dynamic dungeon bosses. And she didn't even need high heels.

* +*The _Don't Stop Me Now_ Side Job*+
This side job awards use of a brand new feature of GodWiki, which provides templates to randomize the genders in a given article. Tired of reading about the hero doing his thing? Come back tomorrow, and you'll find the heroine doing her thing. Gods and goddesses also swap places, and some adjectives change to up to ten different times. Imagine...
There were eleven candidate articles for this side job, and it was hard to choose the five best, because every article was truly excellent. Earning 4 charges each:
*# "Beerburglar": by *Holy Spirit of Hell.*
*# "Tea Rex": by *Cham Almighty*
*# "Bureau-Cat": by *Kastren*
*# "'Free beer' ticket": by *S624*
*# "Bottle of beer from a wall": by *S624*

bq. Thank you, everyone who contributed to JanuWiki, everyone who kept it going from behind the scenes, everyone who read the GodWiki. You made JanuWiki a success.
Great writeup, thanks! -- FeRDNYC (talk) 02:48, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Excellent adjustments. I'll use that format and post now, then get the charges awarded.
Thank you, FeRDNYC and WardPhoenix! --SourceRunner (talk) 03:46, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Awesome! ...This info should probably go atop the JanuWiki 2019 page as well, huh? (Or at least, whatever parts of the concise summary wrap-up aren't already there.) If you'd be so kind as to add a new section to the top of that page and post a wrap-up, I'll update {{Godwiki event banner}} with the promised announcement, and a link directly there. Then I figure it can sit in that form for one last week or two before it comes down. Sound like a plan? -- FeRDNYC (talk) 04:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Sounds good! Will do, but please check that it turns out as you want. (As usual, I suppose. :D) --SourceRunner (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Aack! I almost missed this. I think we need to be a little less quick to archive still-active discussions, having your conversation suddenly get pushed to the /Archive page when you're in the middle of having it is a bit disconcerting. Anyway, I'll update the banner now, thanks! -- FeRDNYC (talk) 17:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
And then I forgot anyway. Oh well, it's (finally) there now. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 00:19, 21 February 2019 (UTC)