Legion Wiki talk:Community Portal

The status quo

Okay, probably best to start with "where things stand right now":

1. All pages/revisions from 2008-2010 that anyone reading this can't restore should be considered "Lost for good"
2. The images uploaded in that time exist on the server, but the out-of-date database doesn't know they're there.
3. The temporary database files are incompatible with the old database files, for the cherry on top. NC's trying to make them fit, but I don't think there was much there anyway.

Summation: over - Reboot (SoM) talk page 23:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Is it possible to copy over pages from the old database to a newer version of MediaWiki, basically create everything again in a new database? If possible, would images be recognized by the new arrangement, and is it worth the effort? I'm resigned to the fact that we will have to recreate everything from the last couple of years. I think I have quite a bit of the research, just will take take to remember what was there and then rebuild it. My current questions are:

1. What can we do to insure against anything like this happening again? I know that I will be saving copies of large important pages that I work on, but we can't save backup copies of every page we work on.
2. How much of a pain is it to make backup copies of the database on the regular basis? If this were a company, I would suggest we store backups with Iron Mountain, but I don't think that's a path we will be going down. However, we could burn a copy to DVD and send to a couple of people or upload a copy of the file to a commonly accessible location. I'd be willing to pick up the tab for any incidental costs in doing this, as long as they don't get out of hand.
3. How do we handle the image files that exist but are not recognized? Should we re-upload or is there a way that we can get them recognized again by changing the wiki code or pointing the main settings file to a different folder?

Gopher 01:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

1 and 2 are really for NC to answer.

On 3, image uploads aren't enabled yet - but once they are, there's no way to fully automate it since the image descriptions (i.e., the pages associated with the files) are lost and will need to be retyped like any other lost page - the server can't tell that this is a cartoon screencap, nor what episode its' from, nor what characters appear in it. Given the URLs to the images, we could tell the server to download the files from itself, but otherwise it's all manual. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 02:18, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Wiki logo - I would prefer the new Wikipedia style logo to the old Time Trapper one. Any chance we could point to that instead?

Also, one nice point about restart to a degree is that all of the spammers we have banned in the past will no longer be part of our user list. Given that we don't have a huge number of people beating a path to actually edit the site, should we consider granting edit rights by permission only? We could add a page that explains the reasons why and link it from the main page. Just a thought.

Gopher 02:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Here's the deal - The original Legion Wiki was Scott's idea and he did all of the set up using his "Legion Clubhouse" website/server/domain etc. all separate to "Legion World." Legion World was set up and "owned" by me but with plenty of other people including Scott who have been given access to contribute to and maintain. Until this past weekend, I didn't have access to either the Wiki's server or database to either back up or maintain. So, whatever issues that existed before have no bearing on what happens from now on. I have no intentions of abandoning the Wiki or letting it slip off the web.

With that said -

1. I back up Legion World as regularly as I can and have had to restore a topic or two in the past for various reasons...sometimes several days of posts wound up missing, but there's only so often you can back things up. I do suggest and encourage copying any significant work to your local computer. I have Word doc files of stuff I've worked on and created on Legion World, even though I also backup the actual MB files.

2. Our host has phpMyAdmin which allows you to download/upload a database as a .sql file. It's a relatively fast and easy process, which I plan to do at least once a week from here on out. With that file (now using the established format), I can always upload and restore any catastrophes that may occur.

3. This is more about that fact that the database we have is from 2008ish, but the images & folders that Scott saved were from 2010. The database isn't going to recognize them as it's not as up-to-date as the files. There's nothing we can do about it. The more updated database wasn't preserved and we do not have access to it to upload, unfortunately. You can see what images we have in the folders here - http://www.legionwiki.com/wiki/images/

Image uploads are re-enabled. Sorry. Apparently that's the default setting and to "fix" stuff I needed to have the wiki rebuild it's Settings file.

Part of the issue this weekend was simply because there are various ways to set up a wiki and Scott and I had differed on some of the variables. This same reason is why I can't simply add in the wiki database we started the last few weeks into the wiki database that Scott had created years ago and has now been set up here. The naming conventions are different.

Another quirk was that I had given Scott the sub-folder location info on where this all is within LegionWorld.NET's file structure and forgot to mention that this was actually LegionWorld.COM. So, he was setting us up as a sub-folder in the .NET rather than it's own entity. I was able to figure it all out with Scott's help and here we are. I'm more than willing to help with what I can, please let me know if there's an MediaWiki feature we're missing (we're currently using the latest, even newer than I started version 1.15.4).

Nightcrawler 03:13, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the logo - Scott mentioned what Gerard said at Legion World about it -

"It may or may not qualify as okay legally - I'm not sure - but I prefer the Trapper logo, TBH. The only thing I would change is to move the LW a bit so it looks less tacked on (probably to the left of Legion Wiki rather than the right) - otherwise, it's a very good logo as-is."

I'll let you guys decide about limiting permissions. I've restored the features Gerard asked for previously.

--Nightcrawler 03:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Operational questions

I tried moving the Yildiray Cinar page to Yıldıray Çınar and received an error message. No luck trying to create a link for the correct spelling, which was what I originally tried. Looks like there is no issue with using these characters in the body of a page, but having a page containing expanded character sets is currently not allowed. We didn't have an issue doing this in the old version. A setting perhaps? Gopher 03:45, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Looking at the error message, I suspect it may have triggered an anti-phishing* filter on the server against mixing latin & non-latin characters... - Reboot (SoM) talk page 15:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

[*That should be an interwiki link to [1]. Obviously, the interwiki tables need a tuneup]

Interestingly, I copied the text for his name from the title of a Wikipedia page. If they can do it, we should be able to also. Gopher 01:16, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Logo

Splitting this and the following section from the above for ease of reply... - Reboot (SoM) talk page 22:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Wiki logo - I would prefer the new Wikipedia style logo to the old Time Trapper one. Any chance we could point to that instead? - Gopher 02:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the logo - Scott mentioned what Gerard said at Legion World about it -

"It may or may not qualify as okay legally - I'm not sure - but I prefer the Trapper logo, TBH. The only thing I would change is to move the LW a bit so it looks less tacked on (probably to the left of Legion Wiki rather than the right) - otherwise, it's a very good logo as-is."

--Nightcrawler 03:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

*goes back to look at the context of that* [Four years ago?! How time flies...]

Ah, the "legally" bit was because LL originally had a direct copy of the Wikipedia logo with Interlac letters - a definite no-no - wasn't it?

Right now, this is tied up for me a lot with the skin, and whether we want to stick with the default Wikipedia-style skin in total, or customise it to some extent (as I'd like to). I don't much like the red/yellow "Legion Wiki" any more, and although I still like the Trapper picture itself, if we're part of a LegionWorld "family" with the .com and .net, then having a Legion World-based logo would make sense, although I'd rather not have a Wikipedia-font "LegionWiki" below it. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 22:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

My main issue with the Trapper image is that while, yes, the Trapper is part of Legion lore, he's not the Legion. I feel like the image should be of founders or the HQ or a Legion cruiser or something other than one villain, albeit an example of a Legion villain who has lasted (literally) through several reboots. Couldn't we have a picture of a Legion flight ring or a time bubble or some Legionnaires flying or something more positive than a creepy looking villain? Gopher 01:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Skin

Skin Test

See right for a test skin I did a while back. Any thoughts? - Reboot (SoM) talk page 17:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I like it. Want me to set it up? --Nightcrawler 04:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

If CG's happy with it as well, then I can do most of it myself by pasting into MediaWiki:Monobook.css. The only bit that needs to be done which I can't is change the logo URL in LocalSettings.php from http://www.legionworld.com/wiki/images/Legionwikilogo.gif to http://legionwiki.com/wiki/images/a/ab/LegionWikiLogo.png if you're both happy with that (Note that I've altered the skin test image to reflect the potential logo change and a few smaller bits. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 23:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I think it looks great. Much more distinctive than our old generic skin. It's got my vote! Gopher 02:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

And now that its up and running, looks even better. Great job on the logo, by the way - I like the incorporation of the old Legionnaires logo. Gopher 12:17, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Permissions

Also, one nice point about restart to a degree is that all of the spammers we have banned in the past will no longer be part of our user list. Given that we don't have a huge number of people beating a path to actually edit the site, should we consider granting edit rights by permission only? We could add a page that explains the reasons why and link it from the main page. Just a thought. - Gopher 02:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll let you guys decide about limiting permissions. I've restored the features Gerard asked for previously.--Nightcrawler 03:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

My basic thought is "We need more contributors" - especially with the damage done by the partial db loss - and anything that discourages genuine contributors Is Bad (...and if anyone's got any ideas to get additional people working here, speak up...). OTOH, I can see CG's point, but I think revoking edit rights explicit permission is a step too far, especially since NC's installed a CAPTCHA for registration.

Looking at Special:ListGroupRights, I think one possible balance might be to move the ability to create & move pages and upload files (createpage, move and upload respectively) to the Autoconfirmed group (what are the current limits on that? It's "must have been a member for X days *and* have made Y edits" as I recall, but I don't know what the defaults on X and Y are. They wouldn't need to be that high - something like 1 day and 3 edits would weed out 99% of spammers if that's all we're aiming at). Restricting editing in general to invite-only would only make sense to me with a far larger, active, existing base.

Incidentally, on spammers/vandals, there appears to be no-one with either the checkuser (check IP addresses) or lock database (which came up in the dying days of the "old" wiki) permission as far as I can see. Do you have those, NC? - Reboot (SoM) talk page 22:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

All points well taken. My intent is to stop spammers, not discourage contributors. I think an X days Y edits rule would do the trick. If I am a spammer and wait two days and then spam three edits, will that give me the ability to create a page? Do edits need to be approved to grant the rights? Gopher 01:14, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I think it may be possible (there's a "patrolled" flag which I have, frankly, never bothered with), but it's spambots which are the problem, not human spammers, and if they can't create a "BUY WOW GOLD" page, they'll probably give up and go away rather than waiting. If human vandals were a repeated problem, I'd look at things a bit differently. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 15:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

"Do you have those, NC?" - I'm not sure I understand. Can you dumb that down for me? --Nightcrawler 04:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, didn't realise checkuser was an extension: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CheckUser

The rest, see here: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CheckUser (lockdb doesn't matter much, as I say, it just came up in the last days of the "old" wiki, and I just wondered if anyone had it to lock the wiki through the interface).

And while I'm asking - "upload from URL" is meant to be available to administrators per Special:ListGroupRights, but it isn't on the upload page. Do you know what's wrong? - Reboot (SoM) talk page 23:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Move files

I was just getting used to being able to move image files and now I believe the functionality is turned off. However, I also received a weird error just before when uploading an image, which said the file didn't upload but it actually had. Have we intentionally turned off move files? Gopher 12:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I just looked at the error message and it wasn't about the upload. Here's what it said:

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

(SQL query hidden)

from within function "efUpdateCheckUserData". Database returned error "1146: Table 'legionwo_wikidb.cu_changes' doesn't exist (localhost)".

Looks like it might be an error checking our permissions? Gopher 12:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I got that too repeatedly when making the skin-related changes - in each case, when I refreshed/resubmitted, it worked fine second time around. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 14:36, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

And just now when I posted that. Interestingly, it seems to have saved the first time even with the error... - Reboot (SoM) talk page 14:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Regardless of the error messages, I am not able to move image files. I uploaded a file with a typo, and now can't move it to the correct name. Gopher 22:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I moved File:LSHv5-49Solicita.jpg to File:LSHv5-49Solicit.jpg - the problem was that, while the *file* uploaded, an associated *page* wasn't created for some reason (another error?). I had to create the page before I could move it.

[And yes, it threw an error message while moving ("File "%1" already exists", IIRC). At first I thought it hadn't moved, and the move still isn't showing up in recent changes, but it clearly has.] - Reboot (SoM) talk page 00:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I added the checkuser extension and the logo last night. It sounds like checkuser is the issue? However, there are multiple ways to add an extension in LocalSettings apparently. So, I've added it not in the way the page discribed it, but in the way the other features were added. Let me know if the issue still exists. --Nightcrawler 02:59, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, I'm just removing it. I'll research the problem later. --Nightcrawler 03:03, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Other extensions

1. Speaking of extensions, something I would really like to try out is an extension that will allow random images or images to rotate through a set list. In particular, I would like for character pages to be able to display one of several images upon loading the page, so that the character could be shown with different costumes or from different periods or by different artists. I think this would also add a freshness to the pages, since you would never be quite sure which image would display when you loaded the page. Ideally you would have several images all with the same dimensions, so that each one fits within the same spot on the page. There is an extension described here that does what I'm envisioning , although there may be others that accomplish the same thing. Could we give this a shot?
2. And while I'm still on the subject, how about an extension that would allow us to embed video files, either by linking to a YouTube file or embedding an uploaded video file? A list of such extensions can be found here. It would be nice to have a few representative Legion clips, such as from the Legion animated series or Smallvile teasers with Rokk, Imra and Garth.

--Gopher 03:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll look at adding them. My only concern about YouTube or Warner Bros property is that they may constitute a violation if we add any full works. I've added videos at Legion World, but they aren't whole episodes or even parts that add up to whole episodes to keep DC and it's parent company happy. So, teasers may be fine. --Nightcrawler 04:33, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

RandomSelection and this video embedder have been added. You'll have to upload the video for it to show. --Nightcrawler 05:51, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Test - <wikiflv logo="true" position="right">Seasontwoopener.flv|Seasontwoopener.gif‎</wikiflv>

Very cool! Thanks! We can definitely keep the clips to just pieces of episodes. The series openers are definitely something I had in mind, but I was thinking it might be nice to have a short piece for each entry in the Legion Broadcast History. We will need to add some guidelines for what is appropriate for upload and monitor what gets uploaded to make sure everyone complies with those rules. Trying to remember where we have guidelines like that for images.... Can't wait to try out RandomSelection too! -- Gopher 11:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

New category for Supergirl/Green Lantern/Booster Gold covers

We hashed through this a while ago, but I can't remember how we handled it. There are enough Supergirl covers now that they should really have their own category. However, if we use the typical method, "Supergirl v5 covers", "Supergirl v3 covers", etc., there are not really enough of the earlier volumes to justify their own category.

I think I had proposed a general Supergirl covers category, and I know we discussed several possibilities. Do you remember what we ended up doing? The same issue exists for Green Lantern and Booster Gold. I listed a category "Booster Gold covers" on one cover image, but have not created the category yet. Gopher 11:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't remember exactly what we did, but I think that was bound up in the structure of the wiki by era, which you said to me in an e-mail that you weren't happy with now (I've posted some thoughts below on that. Right now, I'd just bung any volume with fewer than five wiki-relevant covers in "Category:Supergirl covers" (etc), and break out any with five or more to "Category:Supergirl v# covers" (etc).

There's also the Adventure Comics thing. I see from the LPH that they ARE dropping the v2 numbering, which I didn't think they'd do so soon, but which changes my thoughts on the subject. NOW, I'd be fine with moving all the covers to the v1 numbering as long as there's a redirect (in this version of MediaWiki, you can move and redirect files just as you would with any other page) from "Adventure-v2-XX.jpg", avoiding the need to move all the earlier covers to "Adventure-v1-XXX.jpg". - Reboot (SoM) talk page 15:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, reverting to the v1 numbering for Adventure does simplify things and avoid a lot of work. So just to be sure I'm on the same page, here's how I understand how it will pan out:

• Images for Adventure will be named as AdventureXXX.jpg, retaining the continued numbering with 504 and up
• Images for the first twelve issues of the new series will also be named this way, but I will first create them as Adventure-v2-XX.jpg and then move to AdventureXXX.jpg (I'm loving the move functionality for files!)
• Individual issue pages will follow this same pattern, with a v2 page redirecting to a page with the original numbering
• Other than the redirected images and pages for the twelve v2 issues, there will be no v1/v2 labeling for either Adventure images or pages
• The indicia listing inside the comics is "Adventure Comics #1/Adventure Comics #504 (Variant Cover)". I'm planning to keep this same description as it displays in the LPH, but the page link itself will be to Adventure Comics 504.

Let me know if you'd like to see a different execution for any of the points above. I've already uploaded a few of the v2 images, so I'll be redirecting those in the next day or two. Gopher 11:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You got what I meant :) - Reboot (SoM) talk page 19:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Structure

I've been giving some thought to the structural thoughts you [CG] e-mailed me during the downtime, and doing some searching around. What if we adopted a "continuity family" model like the Transformers Wiki, which seems to be the sort of thing you were aiming at.

In that model, we'd have four major continuity families (the exact names are up for debate, of course, but this gives the gist):

• Preboot (=Pre-Crisis, Post-Crisis, Glorithverse, Lightning Saga (aka Post-IC/Earth-0), Adult Legion and some small "imaginary story"-type "microcontinuities")
• Postboot (=Post-Zero Hour, Post-IC/Earth-247, Universe Ablaze-verse, Dead Earth futures, One Million, the future Thom goes to and becomes Danny Blaine, and probably a few other shards)
• Threeboot (=Post-IC/Earth-Prime and possibly some microcontinuities)
• Cartoons (LSH cartoon and DCAU)

There'd also be a few other leftover Elseworlds that don't fit into any of those - Superboy's Legion springs to mind, as does the Arthurian Legionnaires Annual - but they can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis; and a few anomalies (mostly from the present day) that don't quite work as any of these, but that would be the major structure.

If we went this road, there'd be one Preboot page for all the relevant characters, and an infobox for each of the major sections (covering their status in that version of continuity). Something along these lines (which is intended as a basic template, not a definitive page-structure).

There would be a need to maintain a separate structure to some extent, but a page like Timeline/Glorithverse, which deals with the revised continuity, could move to Timeline/Preboot/Glorithverse. Categories-by-era could mostly move to [[Category: * (Preboot)]] and the like. Also, there would be anomalies as I mentioned earlier, like Mon-El/Valor (Glorithverse Valor would actually sit far more comfortably in some ways on a page with Reboot M'Onel than with Preboot Mon-El).

Still, thoughts? - Reboot (SoM) talk page 15:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

This is very much in line with what I have been thinking, and your example page even moreso. Particularly with the Preboot family, while changes occurred because of a Crisis (or whatever), 90% of a given character's timeline remains the same. It makes sense that these be seen as a continuity, with changes noted as you describe in your example page. I also think that DC agrees with your basic groupings, as Legion of Three Worlds attests. Admittedly, there are a range of one-off stories that don't fit in anywhere, but I'm sure we can find somewhere to group those together. Smallvile comes to mind as another one that doesn't fit anywhere else.

One great advantage of this structure is that we are less likely to need to keep adding more and more differentiations as time goes only. New twists will probably fit into an existing time-line somewhere. I also think it will be more easily grasped by newbies. Assuming we follow this path, might I suggest we map this out a bit more fully to try to shake out any potential issues before we start building pages? It sounds as though you have already thought about a lot of the necessary angles, but it might be useful to list as many of the pieces as we can up-front to help anticipate and avoid issues. Also, we don't need to make this transition immediately. We can take a little time to figure out how we want to name the families, etc.

Gopher 02:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Original art from interior pages

In the past we have not uploaded many images of black and white artwork from interior comic pages, although we do have a fair smattering of cover artwork. This is probably because not many people have access to originals, so the available images ate few. However, I just bought a page of Cinar art from LSHv6 #1, and it has increased my interest in that area. I met a collector online who owns more than 100 pages of Legion interior art, representing a wide variety of artists. He says he knows four other collectors who each own over 1,000. It would be very cool to start a comprehensive gallery of interior art pages, and if even one of this guys friends participated, we could have a pretty decent gallery.

Here are my questions, if anyone knows the answers. Are there any legal issues with posting so many interior pages? Is it any different from posting B&W cover art? Does the fact that the owners of the originals donated the images make any difference? Do you think it is likely that DC would take notice and disapprove? Assuming no legal issues, is it something you would be interested in adding to the wiki? At present, I don't know if anyone other than the initial guy I talked to are willing to participate, but what are your thoughts on this topic in general? Over time, we could assemble quite a bit of the Legion's interior art in one place, something that does not exist anywhere for any series, as far as I know.

Gopher 08:43, 11 June 2010 (UTC)