Wikia

SpongeBob SquarePants

Ideas for ESB, Part 6

  • AMK152
    AMK152 closed this thread because:
    done
    16:49, July 13, 2014

    All prior ideas and their status are listed here: ESB:Suggestions.

    Keep the suggestions coming in this thread.

      Loading editor
    • 1) Adding a "viewers" section to the episode's infobox and adding it to the "List of episodes."

      2) Unconfirmed and unsourced names (such as Harold Reginald)

      3) Since we are having a discussion about Chat Moderator appointments, might as well have a discussion about Rollback appointments.

        Loading editor
      • 1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.

      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-Nicko756-20140704044328 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

        Loading editor
    • A list of what should be quoted, italicized, or neither. The list can be seen here: http://www.apvschicago.com/2011/04/titles-quote-marks-italics-underlining.html.

        Loading editor
    • I'm neutral with this idea, but we could add a "SpoilerAlert." Read about it here: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/SpoilerAlert.

        Loading editor
    • The wiki could use a "display clock," which adds the UTC time to pages: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/DisplayClock.

        Loading editor
    • 1) Although not needed, a "voice output" could be added to the wiki, which adds page read-outs: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Voice_Output.

      2) I strongly encourage the idea for "quizzes," as we can have SpongeBob trivia quzzies: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Quiz.

      3) The "BackToTopArrow" might come in handy: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/BackToTopArrow.

        Loading editor
    • Lol... I already have all those scripts in my global.js. So when you said that we should add them, I was like, "We already have them" 

      Then I realized that the wiki doesn't have them, just me. But from personal experience, those are good scripts to import. 

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      1) Although not needed, a "voice output" could be added to the wiki, which adds page read-outs: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Voice_Output.

      2) I strongly encourage the idea for "quizzes," as we can have SpongeBob trivia quzzies: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Quiz.

      3) The "BackToTopArrow" might come in handy: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/BackToTopArrow.

      I don't like the idea of having quizzes on the wiki. For one thing, where would we put them? Also, I prefer doing trivia the traditional way, in chat.

        Loading editor
    • Muchacha wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      1) Although not needed, a "voice output" could be added to the wiki, which adds page read-outs: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Voice_Output.

      2) I strongly encourage the idea for "quizzes," as we can have SpongeBob trivia quzzies: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Quiz.

      3) The "BackToTopArrow" might come in handy: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/BackToTopArrow.

      I don't like the idea of having quizzes on the wiki. For one thing, where would we put them? Also, I prefer doing trivia the traditional way, in chat.

      We could have it in a page called "ESB:Quiz." Also, the quizzes could be used for other purposes like a "How well do you know me" quiz on someone's user page.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-120d-20140704205133 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

      I would like to point out that I haven't really been doing this since I created that template. Also, as I have said before, JosephHawk broke the rules by protecting the page because you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      Muchacha wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      1) Although not needed, a "voice output" could be added to the wiki, which adds page read-outs: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Voice_Output.

      2) I strongly encourage the idea for "quizzes," as we can have SpongeBob trivia quzzies: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Quiz.

      3) The "BackToTopArrow" might come in handy: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/BackToTopArrow.

      I don't like the idea of having quizzes on the wiki. For one thing, where would we put them? Also, I prefer doing trivia the traditional way, in chat.
      We could have it in a page called "ESB:Quiz." Also, the quizzes could be used for other purposes like a "How well do you know me" quiz on someone's user page.

      I agree with Muchacha. Also, your user page quiz idea is kind of bad because some people don't want to give out personal information. That is what it sounds like you want people to do.

        Loading editor
    • Why did we stop using the "Female" and "Male" categories? 

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      Muchacha wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      1) Although not needed, a "voice output" could be added to the wiki, which adds page read-outs: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Voice_Output.

      2) I strongly encourage the idea for "quizzes," as we can have SpongeBob trivia quzzies: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/Quiz.

      3) The "BackToTopArrow" might come in handy: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/BackToTopArrow.

      I don't like the idea of having quizzes on the wiki. For one thing, where would we put them? Also, I prefer doing trivia the traditional way, in chat.
      We could have it in a page called "ESB:Quiz." Also, the quizzes could be used for other purposes like a "How well do you know me" quiz on someone's user page.
      I agree with Muchacha. Also, your user page quiz idea is kind of bad because some people don't want to give out personal information. That is what it sounds like you want people to do.

      My point is that the quizzes can be used for other purposes as well.

        Loading editor
    • We need to decide what should be the general image size for infoboxes. 120d does not like changing the original image size, thus creating some long and blurry images. One example can be seen on the "Harold" page.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      We need to decide what should be the general image size for infoboxes. One user, 120d, does not like changing the original image size, thus creating some long and blurry images. One example can be seen on the "Harold" page.

      First of all, you can use my username, you don't need to say "one user, 120d,". Everyone knows who I am.

      Second of all, this shouldn't be an issue that the community needs to fix. This is an issue that people need to fix by replacing the image with a better quality image. You don't need to have a discussion about it.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-Nicko756-20140706052215 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

      I would like to point out that I haven't really been doing this since I created that template. Also, as I have said before, JosephHawk broke the rules by protecting the page because you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone.

      120d just undid my edits. AMK152 clearly said, "Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided," yet 120d continues to do this. This is why a discussion has to be make.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-120d-20140706052450 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

      I would like to point out that I haven't really been doing this since I created that template. Also, as I have said before, JosephHawk broke the rules by protecting the page because you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone.
      120d just undid my edits. AMK152 clearly said, "Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided," yet 120d continues to do this. This is why a discussion has to be make.

      Did you not read the paragraph on the last Ideas for ESB? Just because he says it doesn't make it a rule. Also, "basically already a rule" is not a rule. Also, Stop tattletaling. It is really pissing me off.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-Nicko756-20140706052810 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

      I would like to point out that I haven't really been doing this since I created that template. Also, as I have said before, JosephHawk broke the rules by protecting the page because you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone.
      120d just undid my edits. AMK152 clearly said, "Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided," yet 120d continues to do this. This is why a discussion has to be make.

      Did you not read the paragraph on the last Ideas for ESB? Just because he says it doesn't make it a rule. Also, "basically already a rule" is not a rule. Also, Stop tattletaling. It is really pissing me off.

      I'm sorry for tattletaling. Since we have a disagreement, a discussion should be made. That's all I'm trying to say.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:


      Nicko756 wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-120d-20140706053352 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

      I would like to point out that I haven't really been doing this since I created that template. Also, as I have said before, JosephHawk broke the rules by protecting the page because you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone.
      120d just undid my edits. AMK152 clearly said, "Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided," yet 120d continues to do this. This is why a discussion has to be make.
      Did you not read the paragraph on the last Ideas for ESB? Just because he says it doesn't make it a rule. Also, "basically already a rule" is not a rule. Also, Stop tattletaling. It is really pissing me off.
      I'm sorry for tattletaling. Since we have a disagreement, a discussion should be made. That's all I'm trying to say.

      A discussion for what exactly? The names of the characters?

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:


      Nicko756 wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-Nicko756-20140706053541 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

      I would like to point out that I haven't really been doing this since I created that template. Also, as I have said before, JosephHawk broke the rules by protecting the page because you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone.
      120d just undid my edits. AMK152 clearly said, "Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided," yet 120d continues to do this. This is why a discussion has to be make.
      Did you not read the paragraph on the last Ideas for ESB? Just because he says it doesn't make it a rule. Also, "basically already a rule" is not a rule. Also, Stop tattletaling. It is really pissing me off.
      I'm sorry for tattletaling. Since we have a disagreement, a discussion should be made. That's all I'm trying to say.

      A discussion for what exactly? The names of the characters?

      A discussion for unconfirmed and unsourced names or nicknames.

        Loading editor
    • Okay. I think the biggest problem with naming background characters is the fact that for some unknown reason, everyone think that the 1 fish is the same fish. For example, if there are 5 fishes that look like Nat in a scene, everyone thinks that there are 5 Nats in a scene. It would kinda be like if an alien found family of humans and said there are 5 Freds and 2 Lisas in that family, even if they didn't have the same skin color.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote: Okay. I think the biggest problem with naming background characters is the fact that for some unknown reason, everyone think that the 1 fish is the same fish. For example, if there are 5 fishes that look like Nat in a scene, everyone thinks that there are 5 Nats in a scene. It would kinda be like if an alien found family of humans and said there are 5 Freds and 2 Lisas in that family, even if they didn't have the same skin color.

      Part of the reason is to full up audience scenes. It would be very difficult to have every single character in an audience look different.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote: Okay. I think the biggest problem with naming background characters is the fact that for some unknown reason, everyone think that the 1 fish is the same fish. For example, if there are 5 fishes that look like Nat in a scene, everyone thinks that there are 5 Nats in a scene. It would kinda be like if an alien found family of humans and said there are 5 Freds and 2 Lisas in that family, even if they didn't have the same skin color.

      Part of the reason is to full up audience scenes. It would be very difficult to have every single character in an audience look different.

      How is this a response to my statement? What I was saying is that I hate how people think that every fish is the same and you came back with that it is to fill up audience scenes and it would be hard to make every character different. That doesn't make sense. I think it might be time for you to turn off the wiki for the night.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote: Okay. I think the biggest problem with naming background characters is the fact that for some unknown reason, everyone think that the 1 fish is the same fish. For example, if there are 5 fishes that look like Nat in a scene, everyone thinks that there are 5 Nats in a scene. It would kinda be like if an alien found family of humans and said there are 5 Freds and 2 Lisas in that family, even if they didn't have the same skin color.

      Part of the reason is to full up audience scenes. It would be very difficult to have every single character in an audience look different.

      How is this a response to my statement? What I was saying is that I hate how people think that every fish is the same and you came back with that it is to fill up audience scenes and it would be hard to make every character different. That doesn't make sense. I think it might be time for you to turn off the wiki for the night.

      I'm saying they use the same character models in audience scenes. For example, one scene might have five Nat models. They are the same character and are just used to fill the scene. That's what I meant. Also, please stop arguing with every statement I say. It is like you hate all of my ideas.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote: Okay. I think the biggest problem with naming background characters is the fact that for some unknown reason, everyone think that the 1 fish is the same fish. For example, if there are 5 fishes that look like Nat in a scene, everyone thinks that there are 5 Nats in a scene. It would kinda be like if an alien found family of humans and said there are 5 Freds and 2 Lisas in that family, even if they didn't have the same skin color.

      Part of the reason is to full up audience scenes. It would be very difficult to have every single character in an audience look different.
      How is this a response to my statement? What I was saying is that I hate how people think that every fish is the same and you came back with that it is to fill up audience scenes and it would be hard to make every character different. That doesn't make sense. I think it might be time for you to turn off the wiki for the night.
      I'm saying they use the same character models in audience scenes. For example, one scene might have five Nat models. They are the same character and are just used to fill the scene. That's what I meant.

      Also, please stop arguing with every statement I say. It is like you hate all of my ideas.

      I do not hate all of your ideas. Also, that is still not a valid response for hating that people do something. That is like me saying I hate people who hate cake and you explaining how cake is made.

        Loading editor
    • I understand you, Nicko! :D 

      120d, I'll explain what he's trying to say to you later.

        Loading editor
      • 1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided. We have a discussion regarding character names right now.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      • 4) Regarding "A list of what should be quoted, italicized, or neither," add to this page: ESB:Grammar Guide.
      • 5) Spoiler Alert - we already have these templates.
      • 6) Display clock - for what purposes?
      • 7) Voice output - this is worth discussing.
      • 8) Trivia quizzes - this is worth discussing.
      • 9) BackToTopArrow - this is worth discussing.
      • 10) Image size for info boxes - this was already discussed and such large images might enlarge the info boxes.


      • "you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone." - 120d
      • - A page is supposed to be protected if there is an edit war.
      • "Why did we stop using the "Female" and "Male" categories?" - 120d
      • - They do not serve a useful purpose.
      • "I think it might be time for you to turn off the wiki for the night." - 120d
      • - Please be nice.
        Loading editor
    • I didn't just protect the page because I disagreed. It was unsourced info, and AMK granted me permission. And 120d, stop bringing up past debates we've had, they were settled. 

        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided. We have a discussion regarding character names right now.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      • 4) Regarding "A list of what should be quoted, italicized, or neither," add to this page: ESB:Grammar Guide.
      • 5) Spoiler Alert - we already have these templates.
      • 6) Display clock - for what purposes?
      • 7) Voice output - this is worth discussing.
      • 8) Trivia quizzes - this is worth discussing.
      • 9) BackToTopArrow - this is worth discussing.
      • 10) Image size for info boxes - this was already discussed and such large images might enlarge the info boxes.


      • "you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone." - 120d
      • - A page is supposed to be protected if there is an edit war.
      • "Why did we stop using the "Female" and "Male" categories?" - 120d
      • - They do not serve a useful purpose.
      • "I think it might be time for you to turn off the wiki for the night." - 120d
      • - Please be nice.

      2. Again "Basically a rule" is not a rule. You have to give an actual rule (and you cannot create one without a community discussion)

      10. I am not quite sure what this means.

      Other 1. But that breaks the rule. Also, can you give me a link to where it says that you have to protect a page for an edit war.

      Other 2. Yes they do. The categories can be used for if people want to know all of the characters who are female or male that we have on the wiki.

      Other 3. I was just saying that it's doesn't make sense and it was late, so I suggested maybe going to bed.

        Loading editor
    • We are having a meeting at the moment, 120d. You can join us here if you want

        Loading editor
    • Okay.

        Loading editor
    • I have a idea, here are the ideas:

      Signed up/in users are (Krusty Krab Employee's)

      Unsigned up/in users are (Visitor/Citizen of Bikini Bottom)

      No ideas left, just those ideas. If you like them, Thanks!

        Loading editor
    • Carkle100 wrote:
      I have a idea, here are the ideas:

      Signed up/in users are (Krusty Krab Employee's)

      Unsigned up/in users are (Visitor/Citizen of Bikini Bottom)

      No ideas left, just those ideas. If you like them, Thanks!

      I don't think it is possible to change the login. It is hardcoded globally. Also this would make things confusing, especially to new users. The Wiki should remain user friendly especially if we want people to stay and contribute!

        Loading editor
    • A pictorial list of characters with brief info of the characters when hovered over and a link to the article. Something similar to this can be seen here: http://spongebobia.com/.
      Also, this is the type of pictorial list I am talking about, except this one only has the link to the article: http://www.sbmania.net/characters.php.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      A pictorial list of characters with brief info of the characters when hovered over and a link to the article. Something similar to this can be seen here: http://spongebobia.com/.
      Also, this is the type of pictorial list I am talking about, except this one only has the link to the article: http://www.sbmania.net/characters.php.

      First, if you want something like the SpongeBuddy Mania, we already have it. It is called the character category.

      Second, if you want something like spongebobia.com, we have something similar called the "List of characters/background"

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      A pictorial list of characters with brief info of the characters when hovered over and a link to the article. Something similar to this can be seen here: http://spongebobia.com/.
      Also, this is the type of pictorial list I am talking about, except this one only has the link to the article: http://www.sbmania.net/characters.php.
      First, if you want something like the SpongeBuddy Mania, we already have it. It is called the character category.

      Second, if you want something like spongebobia.com, we have something similar called the "List of characters/background"

      We are having a discussion about it: ESB:Discussions/Character hover design.

        Loading editor
    • I don't know if I understand all that.

        Loading editor
    • I still think we should have the "Episodes That Focus on (Main Character)" catergories.

        Loading editor
    • Good Idea!

        Loading editor
    • Turtledrawer12 wrote:
      I still think we should have the "Episodes That Focus on (Main Character)" catergories.

      Perhaps a page/category about it will do?

        Loading editor
    • But, aren't those useless categories?

        Loading editor
    • Young Rem 14 wrote: I don't know if I understand all that.

      What don't you understand?
      The discussion for the character hover design is here: ESB:Discussions/Character hover design.

        Loading editor
    • Young Rem 14 wrote:
      But, aren't those useless categories?


      Perhaps you're right, We'll leave that to the admin of the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-Brony Sponge Penguin + Sonic-20140707205736 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

      I would like to point out that I haven't really been doing this since I created that template. Also, as I have said before, JosephHawk broke the rules by protecting the page because you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone.
      120d just undid my edits. AMK152 clearly said, "Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided," yet 120d continues to do this. This is why a discussion has to be make.

      I watched EVERY EPISODE of SpongeBob, and it never said anything about any minor characters' last names, so I agree. Not lying!

        Loading editor
    • I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions.

        Loading editor
    • New suggestions for this round:

      The following from my last post on this thread:

      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      Responses:

      • AMK152: 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided. We have a discussion regarding character names right now.
      • 120d: "2. Again "Basically a rule" is not a rule. You have to give an actual rule (and you cannot create one without a community discussion)"
      • AMK152: Regarding unsourced names, there already was a rule, regarding speculation. However, we now have a discussion to clarify this for character names.

      • AMK152: 10) Image size for info boxes - this was already discussed and such large images might enlarge the info boxes.
      • 120d: "10. I am not quite sure what this means."
      • AMK152: Setting image sizes for infoboxes was already discussed in the past. This cannot be done because it would cause infoboxes to be wider for certain pages.

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
        Loading editor
    • Redirects:

      AMK152 and I say it is good to directly link articles like this: [[SpongeBob SquarePants (character)|SpongeBob]].

      120d and Spongebob456 say it is better just to leave a redirect like this [[SpongeBob]] as it is a waste of bytes.

      We need to settle this once and for all.

        Loading editor
    •   Loading editor
    • Turtledrawer12 wrote: I still think we should have the "Episodes That Focus on (Main Character)" catergories.

      I mean we make it for every episode. Like, Money Talks will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Mr. Krabs". Someone's in the Kitchen with Sandy will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Plankton". Whelk Attack will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Patrick" and "Episodes that focus on SpongeBob". It's a really good idea.

        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects

      Why did you create the discussion already? 

        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      New suggestions for this round:

      The following from my last post on this thread:

      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      Responses:

      • AMK152: 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided. We have a discussion regarding character names right now.
      • 120d: "2. Again "Basically a rule" is not a rule. You have to give an actual rule (and you cannot create one without a community discussion)"
      • AMK152: Regarding unsourced names, there already was a rule, regarding speculation. However, we now have a discussion to clarify this for character names.

      • AMK152: 10) Image size for info boxes - this was already discussed and such large images might enlarge the info boxes.
      • 120d: "10. I am not quite sure what this means."
      • AMK152: Setting image sizes for infoboxes was already discussed in the past. This cannot be done because it would cause infoboxes to be wider for certain pages.

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?

      For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason.

        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects

      This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit.

        Loading editor
    • Carkle100 wrote:
      I have a idea, here are the ideas:

      Signed up/in users are (Krusty Krab Employee's)

      Unsigned up/in users are (Visitor/Citizen of Bikini Bottom)

      No ideas left, just those ideas. If you like them, Thanks!

      Has the same problem as my Employee of the Month idea, too confusing.

        Loading editor
    • We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category.
      http://spongebob.wikia.com/wiki/Category%3AImages

        Loading editor
    • 120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using {{Galleryheading|Episodes}}.

      Episodes
        Loading editor
    • Turtledrawer12 wrote:

      Turtledrawer12 wrote: I still think we should have the "Episodes That Focus on (Main Character)" catergories.

      I mean we make it for every episode. Like, Money Talks will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Mr. Krabs". Someone's in the Kitchen with Sandy will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Plankton". Whelk Attack will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Patrick" and "Episodes that focus on SpongeBob". It's a really good idea.

      Hear me out plz!

        Loading editor
    • Turtledrawer12 wrote:

      Turtledrawer12 wrote:


      Turtledrawer12 wrote: I still think we should have the "Episodes That Focus on (Main Character)" catergories.

      I mean we make it for every episode. Like, Money Talks will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Mr. Krabs". Someone's in the Kitchen with Sandy will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Plankton". Whelk Attack will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Patrick" and "Episodes that focus on SpongeBob". It's a really good idea.
      Hear me out plz!

      It is not a good idea because if we did this, there would be arguments about what episodes focus on whom. 

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Turtledrawer12 wrote:

      Turtledrawer12 wrote:



      Turtledrawer12 wrote: I still think we should have the "Episodes That Focus on (Main Character)" catergories.

      I mean we make it for every episode. Like, Money Talks will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Mr. Krabs". Someone's in the Kitchen with Sandy will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Plankton". Whelk Attack will have the catergory "Episodes that focus on Patrick" and "Episodes that focus on SpongeBob". It's a really good idea.
      Hear me out plz!
      It is not a good idea because if we did this, there would be arguments about what episodes focus on whom. 

      You may be right, It does sound awkward. We should not include this idea.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      *1) Viewers in lists is pending implementation.
      • 2) Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided.
      • 3) We don't have any issues with rollback appointments.
      120d keeps reverting edits for the unsourced names, as he created a template for it. Not everyone agreed to this. There was an edit war on the "Fred" page about Fred's full name being "Fredrick." JosephHawk had to protect the page because he didn't agree with 120d's edit.


      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them (by SBSP)
      The Customers of the Krusty Krab and Why I Love Them

      General Discussion/@comment-AMK152-20140704043032/@comment-CalzoneManiac-20140709120904 has parts of his or her name that needs to be confirmed by a SpongeBob SquarePants staff member. Please do not change the name or remove this template until this officially happens.

      I would like to point out that I haven't really been doing this since I created that template. Also, as I have said before, JosephHawk broke the rules by protecting the page because you are not supposed to protect a page just because you disagrree with someone.
      120d just undid my edits. AMK152 clearly said, "Unsourced names are unsourced, it's basically already a rule; they should be tagged or removed until a source is provided," yet 120d continues to do this. This is why a discussion has to be make.

      Did you not read the paragraph on the last Ideas for ESB? Just because he says it doesn't make it a rule. Also, "basically already a rule" is not a rule. Also, Stop tattletaling. It is really p***ing me off.

      No profanity 120d.

        Loading editor
    • The p-word doesn't usually count as a swear word.

        Loading editor
    • There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.

        Loading editor
    • Adding an "OTab" for objects:
      Template:OTab
      Template:OTab-once.

        Loading editor
    • The following from my last post on this thread:

      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"

      AMK152 #12 - Shubie/appearances

        Loading editor
    • That would be unnecessary since this is to be implemented: Monroe Timmy/appearances

        Loading editor
    • More usertags, like a bureaucrat tag, rollback tag, or a inactive tag. http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/UserTags.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      More usertags, like a bureaucrat tag, rollback tag, or a inactive tag. http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/UserTags.

      We would need to customize that then, not just import that script. Otherwise, it will add the AUTOCONFIRMED USER tag. (which isn't needed, and quite annoying :P) 

        Loading editor
    • JosephHawk wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      More usertags, like a bureaucrat tag, rollback tag, or a inactive tag. http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/UserTags.
      We would need to customize that then, not just import that script. Otherwise, it will add the AUTOCONFIRMED USER tag. (which isn't needed, and quite annoying :P) 

      Okay.

        Loading editor
    • We also need to see which tags we want. Do we want the NEW USER tag? Do we want the AUTOCONFIRMED USER tag? etc...

        Loading editor
    • JosephHawk wrote:
      We also need to see which tags we want. Do we want the NEW USER tag? Do we want the AUTOCONFIRMED USER tag? etc...

      I think we need BUREAUCRAT, ROLLBACK, INACTIVE, AUTOCONFIRMED USER and NEW USER.

        Loading editor
    • Why do we need AUTOCONFIRMED USER? 

        Loading editor
    • JosephHawk wrote:
      Why do we need AUTOCONFIRMED USER? 

      Replace AUTOCONFIRMED USER with simply USER.

        Loading editor
    • Wait, that's a little ridiculous. It is quite obvious they're a user, so why do they need a tag? Also, an AUTOCONFIRMED USER is different from a USER.

      In addition, users like AMK152, would have the ADMIN, BUREACRAT, ROLLBACK, CHAT MODERATOR, AUTOCONFIRMED USER tags. That is too much in my opinion. 

        Loading editor
    • JosephHawk wrote:
      Wait, that's a little ridiculous. It is quite obvious they're a user, so why do they need a tag? Also, an AUTOCONFIRMED USER is different from a USER.

      In addition, users like AMK152, would have the ADMIN, BUREACRAT, ROLLBACK, CHAT MODERATOR, AUTOCONFIRMED USER tags. That is too much in my opinion. 

      Okay, we won't use the AUTOCONFIRMED nor the NEW USER tags. Also, AMK152 would only have the ADMIN and BUREACRAT tags. The ROLLBACK and CHAT MODERATOR tags would only be give if the user has those privilages and is not an admin.

        Loading editor
    • Rollback and Chat. Mod rights are included in admin powers, so he will receive those tags regardless.

        Loading editor
    • But the BUREACRATIC and ROLLBACK tags would be a good addition.

        Loading editor
    • I wonder should he do something like episodes having a navigation template season wise.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      Adding an "OTab" for objects:
      Template:OTab
      Template:OTab-once.

      I don't think that this is a good idea. Not every page should have a tab.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      Adding an "OTab" for objects:
      Template:OTab
      Template:OTab-once.
      I don't think that this is a good idea. Not every page should have a tab.

      Agreed. Some objects only appear one time and for a breif second so there is no need for a gallery.

      Take this page for example.

        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"

      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

        Loading editor
    • ZeoSpark wrote:
      I wonder should he do something like episodes having a navigation template season wise.

      Are you talking about something like this?: http://fairlyoddparents.wikia.com/wiki/Template%3AS9I

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      ZeoSpark wrote:
      I wonder should he do something like episodes having a navigation template season wise.
      Are you talking about something like this?: http://fairlyoddparents.wikia.com/wiki/Template%3AS9I

      Yep! Something exactly like that.

        Loading editor
    • Auron~Guardian wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      Adding an "OTab" for objects:
      Template:OTab
      Template:OTab-once.
      I don't think that this is a good idea. Not every page should have a tab.
      Agreed. Some objects only appear one time and for a breif second so there is no need for a gallery.

      Take this page for example.

      I did say to use this for all objects. This would be used for recurring objects like the Jellyfish Net

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      Auron~Guardian wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      Adding an "OTab" for objects:
      Template:OTab
      Template:OTab-once.
      I don't think that this is a good idea. Not every page should have a tab.
      Agreed. Some objects only appear one time and for a breif second so there is no need for a gallery.

      Take this page for example.

      I did say to use this for all objects. This would be used for recurring objects like the Jellyfish Net

      I think you mean "I didn't". I still think that it is a bad idea. Not all pages need to have a tab.

        Loading editor
    • I agree with 120d. Not all pages need a tab.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      Auron~Guardian wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      Adding an "OTab" for objects:
      Template:OTab
      Template:OTab-once.
      I don't think that this is a good idea. Not every page should have a tab.
      Agreed. Some objects only appear one time and for a breif second so there is no need for a gallery.

      Take this page for example.

      I did say to use this for all objects. This would be used for recurring objects like the Jellyfish Net
      I think you mean "I didn't". I still think that it is a bad idea. Not all pages need to have a tab.

      I didn't say ALL the pages. Some object articles have many images of the object, like the Jellyfish Net mentioned above, and that is why the gallery part of the "OTab" would come in handy. Also, objects that appear many times throughout the series, like the Krabby Patty (food would also use this tab), would need a page dedicated to the episodes in which it appears in, as it has appeared countless times. That would be when the "appearances" part of the tab would be need. Again, not all objects would use this, just recurring objects.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

      For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

      For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place.

      Well, with the look of the discussion, it seems that it is about 50/50 for both sides. Why was this even made? As I said before, redirects were made so that you don't have to write out the full name and waste bytes. Why are you so against redirects?

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      Auron~Guardian wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      Adding an "OTab" for objects:
      Template:OTab
      Template:OTab-once.
      I don't think that this is a good idea. Not every page should have a tab.
      Agreed. Some objects only appear one time and for a breif second so there is no need for a gallery.

      Take this page for example.

      I did say to use this for all objects. This would be used for recurring objects like the Jellyfish Net
      I think you mean "I didn't". I still think that it is a bad idea. Not all pages need to have a tab.
      I didn't say ALL the pages. Some object articles have many images of the object, like the Jellyfish Net mentioned above, and that is why the gallery part of the "OTab" would come in handy. Also, objects that appear many times throughout the series, like the Krabby Patty (food would also use this tab), would need a page dedicated to the episodes in which it appears in, as it has appeared countless times. That would be when the "appearances" part of the tab would be need. Again, not all objects would use this, just recurring objects.

      I never said that you said "all pages". I am just saying that not every page needs a tab on it. We don't need an object tab.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

      For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place.
      Well, with the look of the discussion, it seems that it is about 50/50 for both sides. Why was this even made? As I said before, redirects were made so that you don't have to write out the full name and waste bytes. Why are you so against redirects?

      It is not only me. AMK152 and Muchacha also support directly linking articles.

      The pros of directly linking articles are listed in the discussion:

      Pros to linking to direct link
      *Avoids double redirects in case an article is moved
      *Avoids red links if a redirect is deleted
      *The "WhatLinksHere" feature can better generate direct links, instead of redirects
      *Hovering over a link shows the URL to the redirect rather than the actual page

      There are less pros to redirects:

      Pros to linking to redirect
      *Shorter and easier/faster to type
      *Less invisible text in the code
      *Less bytes

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

      For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place.
      Well, with the look of the discussion, it seems that it is about 50/50 for both sides. Why was this even made? As I said before, redirects were made so that you don't have to write out the full name and waste bytes. Why are you so against redirects?
      It is not only me. AMK152 and Muchacha also support directly linking articles.

      That doesn't answer my question at all.

        Loading editor
    • I edited my earlier message.

        Loading editor
    • Now that we have a lot of different types of Support, Neutral, and Oppose things, I think that we should use the system below:

      Extremely Strong Support = 3

      Strong Support = 2

      Support = 1

      Weak Support = .5

      Neutral/Neutral towards Support/Neutral towards oppose = 0

      Weak Oppose = -.5

      Oppose = -1

      Strong Oppose = -2

      Extremely Strong Oppose = -3

      An example of this is: the Redirect Discussion

      Link directly to article: 6.5

      Link to redirects: 12

        Loading editor
    • The following from my last post on this thread:

      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)
      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 15) More usertags
      • 16) Season navigation templates

      Responses:


      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."
      • 120d: "For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it."
      • Nicko756: "For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place."
      • AMK152: "120d: You are basically saying that we should just use redirects instead of direct links, thus a discussion is needed."
        • Regarding direct links, it's better to discuss these in the actual discussion.

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"
      • Nicko756: "AMK152 #12 - Shubie/appearances"
      • AMK152: "That would be unnecessary since this is to be implemented: Monroe Timmy/appearances"
      • 120d: "The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages."

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"

      • ZeoSpark: "I wonder should he do something like episodes having a navigation template season wise."
      • 120d: "Are you talking about something like this?: http://fairlyoddparents.wikia.com/wiki/Template%3AS9I"
      • ZeoSpark: "Yep! Something exactly like that."
      • AMK152: "I don't know. We already have links to all the episodes in the infoboxes."

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

      For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place.
      Well, with the look of the discussion, it seems that it is about 50/50 for both sides. Why was this even made? As I said before, redirects were made so that you don't have to write out the full name and waste bytes. Why are you so against redirects?
      It is not only me. AMK152 and Muchacha also support directly linking articles.

      The pros of directly linking articles are listed in the discussion:

      Pros to linking to direct link
      *Avoids double redirects in case an article is moved
      *Avoids red links if a redirect is deleted
      *The "WhatLinksHere" feature can better generate direct links, instead of redirects
      *Hovering over a link shows the URL to the redirect rather than the actual page

      There are less pros to redirects:

      Pros to linking to redirect
      *Shorter and easier/faster to type
      *Less invisible text in the code
      *Less bytes

      First, again, this doesn't really answer why YOU are against redirects

      Second, for the first part, the first, third, and fourth reasons are bad because they are basically things that are not important. It doesn't matter if we don't see the actual page or if a double redirect is involved or even that the What links here page is completely for one page because it goes to that page anyway.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Now that we have a lot of different types of Support, Neutral, and Oppose things, I think that we should use the system below:

      Extremely Strong Support = 3

      Strong Support = 2

      Support = 1

      Weak Support = .5

      Neutral/Neutral towards Support/Neutral towards oppose = 0

      Weak Oppose = -.5

      Oppose = -1

      Strong Oppose = -2

      Extremely Strong Oppose = -3

      An example of this is: the Redirect Discussion

      Link directly to article: 6.5

      Link to redirects: 12

      What about "Not Yet"?

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Now that we have a lot of different types of Support, Neutral, and Oppose things, I think that we should use the system below:

      Extremely Strong Support = 3

      Strong Support = 2

      Support = 1

      Weak Support = .5

      Neutral/Neutral towards Support/Neutral towards oppose = 0

      Weak Oppose = -.5

      Oppose = -1

      Strong Oppose = -2

      Extremely Strong Oppose = -3

      An example of this is: the Redirect Discussion

      Link directly to article: 6.5

      Link to redirects: 12

      What about "Not Yet"?

      I knew I forgot one. It is "NA".

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

      For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place.
      Well, with the look of the discussion, it seems that it is about 50/50 for both sides. Why was this even made? As I said before, redirects were made so that you don't have to write out the full name and waste bytes. Why are you so against redirects?
      It is not only me. AMK152 and Muchacha also support directly linking articles.

      The pros of directly linking articles are listed in the discussion:

      Pros to linking to direct link
      *Avoids double redirects in case an article is moved
      *Avoids red links if a redirect is deleted
      *The "WhatLinksHere" feature can better generate direct links, instead of redirects
      *Hovering over a link shows the URL to the redirect rather than the actual page

      There are less pros to redirects:

      Pros to linking to redirect
      *Shorter and easier/faster to type
      *Less invisible text in the code
      *Less bytes

      First, again, this doesn't really answer why YOU are against redirects

      Second, for the first part, the first, third, and fourth reasons are bad because they are basically things that are not important. It doesn't matter if we don't see the actual page or if a double redirect is involved or even that the What links here page is completely for one page because it goes to that page anyway.

      I am against redirects because of the second reason; it avoids red-links if a redirect is deleted. Also, this should be talked about in the discussion, not here.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

      For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place.
      Well, with the look of the discussion, it seems that it is about 50/50 for both sides. Why was this even made? As I said before, redirects were made so that you don't have to write out the full name and waste bytes. Why are you so against redirects?
      It is not only me. AMK152 and Muchacha also support directly linking articles.

      The pros of directly linking articles are listed in the discussion:

      Pros to linking to direct link
      *Avoids double redirects in case an article is moved
      *Avoids red links if a redirect is deleted
      *The "WhatLinksHere" feature can better generate direct links, instead of redirects
      *Hovering over a link shows the URL to the redirect rather than the actual page

      There are less pros to redirects:

      Pros to linking to redirect
      *Shorter and easier/faster to type
      *Less invisible text in the code
      *Less bytes

      First, again, this doesn't really answer why YOU are against redirects

      Second, for the first part, the first, third, and fourth reasons are bad because they are basically things that are not important. It doesn't matter if we don't see the actual page or if a double redirect is involved or even that the What links here page is completely for one page because it goes to that page anyway.

      I am against redirects because of the second reason; it avoids red-links if a redirect is deleted. Also, this should be talked about in the discussion, not here.

      If a redirect is deleted, it can be replaced with the new redirect.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      The following from my last post on this thread:
      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) ""There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab

      Responses:

      • 120d: "I think that there should be a rule about people having to say why they chose their option in discussions."
      • AMK152: Could you be more specific?
      • 120d: "For the last part of this, what I mean is that people shouldn't just support something without giving a reason."

      • AMK152: "Here we go: ESB:Discussions/Linking to redirects"
      • 120d: "This isn't and shouldn't be something that is an issue. My opinion is direct links are okay as long as you don't change the existing redirect. If someone wants to use a redirect than they should be able to replace the existing direct link without someone reverting that edit."
      • AMK152: "It's either one way or the other. It would be counterproductive and a waste of time if people kept changing it back and forth."

      • Nicko756: "We need a way to automatically have all images go in the "images" category."
      • AMK152: "We have this: Special:ListFiles, and it's also better to give each image specific categories. We actually could put all images in an "All images" category, and I can run my bot for this."

      • Nicko756: "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • AMK152: "What do you mean? Which articles?"

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"
      For the part about the redirects, I am not saying that they should be back and forth, what I am saying is that if someone who wants redirects sees a full link, they should be able to change it and if someone sees a redirect and they want a full link, they shouldn't change it.

      The part about the episode headings, this has probably already been answered, but I will too. He wants to use the headings on appearance pages.

      For the part about the redirects, some people want to do the exact opposite of what you said. Some people see a redirect and change it into a full link. This is why the discussion was made in the first place.
      Well, with the look of the discussion, it seems that it is about 50/50 for both sides. Why was this even made? As I said before, redirects were made so that you don't have to write out the full name and waste bytes. Why are you so against redirects?
      It is not only me. AMK152 and Muchacha also support directly linking articles.

      The pros of directly linking articles are listed in the discussion:

      Pros to linking to direct link
      *Avoids double redirects in case an article is moved
      *Avoids red links if a redirect is deleted
      *The "WhatLinksHere" feature can better generate direct links, instead of redirects
      *Hovering over a link shows the URL to the redirect rather than the actual page

      There are less pros to redirects:

      Pros to linking to redirect
      *Shorter and easier/faster to type
      *Less invisible text in the code
      *Less bytes

      First, again, this doesn't really answer why YOU are against redirects

      Second, for the first part, the first, third, and fourth reasons are bad because they are basically things that are not important. It doesn't matter if we don't see the actual page or if a double redirect is involved or even that the What links here page is completely for one page because it goes to that page anyway.

      I am against redirects because of the second reason; it avoids red-links if a redirect is deleted. Also, this should be talked about in the discussion, not here.
      If a redirect is deleted, it can be replaced with the new redirect.

      Please discuss this on the discussion page. Thank you.

        Loading editor
    • I have another idea. I think that we should allow iTunes to be added to the "Release Section". It will be something like "This episode was released on iTunes on [Insert Date Here]".

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      I have another idea. I think that we should allow iTunes to be added to the "Release Section". It will be something like "This episode was released on iTunes on [Insert Date Here]".

      I like the idea. I think we should also give the iTunes link.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      I have another idea. I think that we should allow iTunes to be added to the "Release Section". It will be something like "This episode was released on iTunes on [Insert Date Here]".
      I like the idea. I think we should also give the iTunes link.

      Okay.

        Loading editor
    • JosephHawk
      JosephHawk removed this reply because:
      No discussion needed just yet
      03:01, July 10, 2014
      This reply has been removed
        Loading editor
    • The following from my last post on this thread:

      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)
      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab
      • 15) More usertags
      • 16) Season navigation templates

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 17) Change rating system to go along with the additional "Strong Support," "Weak Support," etc.
      • 18) Add iTunes release date and link to "release" section.

      Responses:


      • Regarding direct links, it's better to discuss these in the actual discussion.

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies."
      • AMK152: "Could you give more details on this idea?"

      • ZeoSpark: "I wonder should he do something like episodes having a navigation template season wise."
      • 120d: "Are you talking about something like this?: http://fairlyoddparents.wikia.com/wiki/Template%3AS9I"
      • ZeoSpark: "Yep! Something exactly like that."
      • AMK152: "I don't know. We already have links to all the episodes in the infoboxes."

        Loading editor
    • I mean simply move the specials that I had for example for my suggestion, to the movie section because those specials have the length of a movie. Another suggestion is to have an option to choose from a variety of backgrounds/Skins for this site like the skin selector for SpongeBuddy Mania:http://www.sbmania.net/index.php   My final suggestion is to add links to the music.

        Loading editor
      • 1. The long specials are still episodes, as they do have production numbers.
      • 2. We do have background contests for different backgrounds.
      • 3. Anyone can change between Monobook and Wikia skin in their preferences, and use css to modify such.
      • 4. What links to music? iTunes?
        Loading editor
    • The links for Youtube. You can find most of the music from Spongebob on Youtube. My probably final suggestion is to have more polls because they have been the same for a while and to have movie and special quizes and maybe episode quizes.

        Loading editor
    • On skin switching, there is a script we can import that adds Oasis and Monobook buttons to the bottom of the page. It is one of the scripts here.

        Loading editor
    • I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.

        Loading editor
    • TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.

      Should it be here in the wiki?

        Loading editor
    • Rorosilky5 wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.
      Should it be here in the wiki?

      Already is.

        Loading editor
    • Adventuretimesbiggestfan2000 wrote:

      Rorosilky5 wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.
      Should it be here in the wiki?

      Already is.

      Which one, the tournament or the news feed? Or both?

        Loading editor
    • TrevorOntario719 wrote:

      Adventuretimesbiggestfan2000 wrote:

      Rorosilky5 wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.
      Should it be here in the wiki?
      Already is.
      Which one, the tournament or the news feed? Or both?

      I would like to have more detail on what this topic changing tournament idea is.

        Loading editor
    • A custom cursor. Maybe like a spatula or SpongeBob's hand. The It's a SpongeBob Wiki uses this feature: http://itsaspongebobchristmas.wikia.com/wiki/It%27s_a_SpongeBob_Christmas!_Wiki. This is a page that shows you how to do this: http://custom.wikia.com/wiki/Custom_cursor.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      A custom cursor. Maybe like a spatula or SpongeBob's hand. The It's a SpongeBob Wiki uses this feature: http://itsaspongebobchristmas.wikia.com/wiki/It%27s_a_SpongeBob_Christmas!_Wiki.

      This is a page that shows you how to do this: http://custom.wikia.com/wiki/Custom_cursor.

      Please no. I HATE custom cursors if we did this there would NEED to be an off button.

      Some people like myself find them annoying and are unable to navigate with them.

        Loading editor
    • no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! custom cursors are just the worse.  :P

        Loading editor
    • Auron~Guardian wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:
      A custom cursor. Maybe like a spatula or SpongeBob's hand. The It's a SpongeBob Wiki uses this feature: http://itsaspongebobchristmas.wikia.com/wiki/It%27s_a_SpongeBob_Christmas!_Wiki.

      This is a page that shows you how to do this: http://custom.wikia.com/wiki/Custom_cursor.

      Please no. I HATE custom cursors if we did this there would NEED to be an off button.

      Some people like myself find them annoying and are unable to navigate with them.

      The custom cursor could just have a minor change, like a different color. Like this: http://plantsvszombies.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page.

        Loading editor
    • ReferencePopups: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/ReferencePopups

      "This is a reimplementation of Wikipedia's reference popup gadget; a feature which allows you to hover over a citation and view the contents of the reference in a floating box."

      The advantage of having this is that you do not need to scroll to the bottom of the page to see the references.

        Loading editor
    • There isn't a reason to change our cursor. I don't even think there would be a better color besides black that would fit ESB. 

      As for reference popups, I'll look deeper into it, see which wikis have it, what they think of it, and if we should have it. 

        Loading editor
    • JosephHawk wrote:
      There isn't a reason to change our cursor.

      Agreed.

        Loading editor
    • The following from my last post on this thread:

      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)
      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab
      • 15) More usertags
      • 16) Season navigation templates
      • 17) Change rating system to go along with the additional "Strong Support," "Weak Support," etc.
      • 18) Add iTunes release date and link to "release" section.

      The following since my last post on this thread:

      • 19) Custom cursors (this idea seems unpopular)
      • 20) ReferencePopups


      Responses:


      • Regarding direct links, it's better to discuss these in the actual discussion.

      • ZeoSpark: "I wonder should he do something like episodes having a navigation template season wise."
      • 120d: "Are you talking about something like this?: http://fairlyoddparents.wikia.com/wiki/Template%3AS9I"
      • ZeoSpark: "Yep! Something exactly like that."
      • AMK152: "I don't know. We already have links to all the episodes in the infoboxes."

      • TheAmazingPokedude: "My final suggestion is to add links to the music."
      • AMK152: "4. What links to music? iTunes?"
      • TheAmazingPokedude: "The links for Youtube. You can find most of the music from Spongebob on Youtube."
      • AMK152: "There is no need for a suggestion on this one. Some videos are linked to YouTube, all people need to do is add them."

      • TrevorOntario917: "I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette."
      • Rorosilky5: "Should it be here in the wiki?"
      • Adventuretimesbiggestfan2000: "Already is."
      • TrevorOntario917: "Which one, the tournament or the news feed? Or both?"
      • 120d: "I would like to have more detail on what this topic changing tournament idea is."
      • AMK152: "What does this even mean?"
        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:

      Adventuretimesbiggestfan2000 wrote:


      Rorosilky5 wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.
      Should it be here in the wiki?
      Already is.
      Which one, the tournament or the news feed? Or both?
      I would like to have more detail on what this topic changing tournament idea is.

      So every year we will some type of tournament in a similar fashion of this one like this . The topic of the tournament will change every year so if in 2014 it's worst episode of SpongeBob the next year it will be something else like best year of SpongeBob.

        Loading editor
    • I think we should move to part 7, the ideas for 6 are overflowing.

        Loading editor
    • I agree...

      How many parts ARE there?

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:
      Now that we have a lot of different types of Support, Neutral, and Oppose things, I think that we should use the system below:

      Extremely Strong Support = 3

      Strong Support = 2

      Support = 1

      Weak Support = .5

      Neutral/Neutral towards Support/Neutral towards oppose = 0

      Weak Oppose = -.5

      Oppose = -1

      Strong Oppose = -2

      Extremely Strong Oppose = -3

      An example of this is: the Redirect Discussion

      Link directly to article: 6.5

      Link to redirects: 12

      I think Neutral towards Support should be .25 and Neutral towards Oppose should be -.25.

        Loading editor
    • TrevorOntario719 wrote: I think we should move to part 7, the ideas for 6 are overflowing.

      Part 7 will begin after Sunday's meeting.

        Loading editor
    • TrevorOntario719 wrote:

      120d wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:

      Adventuretimesbiggestfan2000 wrote:


      Rorosilky5 wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.
      Should it be here in the wiki?
      Already is.
      Which one, the tournament or the news feed? Or both?
      I would like to have more detail on what this topic changing tournament idea is.

      So every year we will some type of tournament in a similar fashion of this one like this . The topic of the tournament will change every year so if in 2014 it's worst episode of SpongeBob the next year it will be something else like best year of SpongeBob.

      Okay, now I understand what you mean. It is a very interesting idea, and something that could be implemented on SpongeBobia.com and have a wider scope.

        Loading editor
    • TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:

      Adventuretimesbiggestfan2000 wrote:


      Rorosilky5 wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.
      Should it be here in the wiki?
      Already is.
      Which one, the tournament or the news feed? Or both?
      I would like to have more detail on what this topic changing tournament idea is.
      So every year we will some type of tournament in a similar fashion of this one like this . The topic of the tournament will change every year so if in 2014 it's worst episode of SpongeBob the next year it will be something else like best year of SpongeBob.

      I don't really think that this is a good idea, especially since it doesn't really make sense and too many people are opinionate on favorites or least favorites.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      Auron~Guardian wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:
      A custom cursor. Maybe like a spatula or SpongeBob's hand. The It's a SpongeBob Wiki uses this feature: http://itsaspongebobchristmas.wikia.com/wiki/It%27s_a_SpongeBob_Christmas!_Wiki.

      This is a page that shows you how to do this: http://custom.wikia.com/wiki/Custom_cursor.

      Please no. I HATE custom cursors if we did this there would NEED to be an off button.

      Some people like myself find them annoying and are unable to navigate with them.

      The custom cursor could just have a minor change, like a different color. Like this: http://plantsvszombies.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page.

      Custom cursors are annoying and they are stupid. The normal one is fine. It is as I say "If it isn't broken, don't fix it".

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:
      ReferencePopups: http://dev.wikia.com/wiki/ReferencePopups

      "This is a reimplementation of Wikipedia's reference popup gadget; a feature which allows you to hover over a citation and view the contents of the reference in a floating box."

      The advantage of having this is that you do not need to scroll to the bottom of the page to see the references.

      I don't think that this is a good idea because they can be annoying. Also, you can just press the number to go to the bottom of the page to see the reference.

        Loading editor
    • I don't know if it exists, but if we do not have it, I think we should have a page or a thread that has all of the meeting dates on it.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote: I don't know if it exists, but if we do not have it, I think we should have a page or a thread that has all of the meeting dates on it.

      It has not been updated, but it is here: http://spongebobia.wikia.com/wiki/SpongeBobia:Meetings.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote: I don't know if it exists, but if we do not have it, I think we should have a page or a thread that has all of the meeting dates on it.

      It has not been updated, but it is here: http://spongebobia.wikia.com/wiki/SpongeBobia:Meetings.

      It should be updated.

        Loading editor
    • 120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote: I don't know if it exists, but if we do not have it, I think we should have a page or a thread that has all of the meeting dates on it.

      It has not been updated, but it is here: http://spongebobia.wikia.com/wiki/SpongeBobia:Meetings.

      It should be updated.

      AMK152 is the one who updates that list. He should update it.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote:

      Nicko756 wrote:

      120d wrote: I don't know if it exists, but if we do not have it, I think we should have a page or a thread that has all of the meeting dates on it.

      It has not been updated, but it is here: http://spongebobia.wikia.com/wiki/SpongeBobia:Meetings.
      It should be updated.
      AMK152 is the one who updates that list.

      Okay.

        Loading editor
    • TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:

      Adventuretimesbiggestfan2000 wrote:


      Rorosilky5 wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.
      Should it be here in the wiki?
      Already is.
      Which one, the tournament or the news feed? Or both?
      I would like to have more detail on what this topic changing tournament idea is.
      So every year we will some type of tournament in a similar fashion of this one like this . The topic of the tournament will change every year so if in 2014 it's worst episode of SpongeBob the next year it will be something else like best year of SpongeBob.

      U just HAD to mention Sonic News Network.

        Loading editor
    • I think the sides of the background need to be redone. Having half of SpongeBob on both sides near the top looks pretty dull. The following are background suggestions for the sides. If the backgrounds are too big, they can be split on both sides, just like SpongeBob in the current background.
      Background Suggestion 1 Background Suggestion 2 Background Suggestion 3 Background Suggestion 4 Background Suggestion 5 Background Suggestion 6 Background Suggestion 7

        Loading editor
    • @Nicko756

      That's why we have seasonal background contests. You could submit them next time a contest is held. 

      As for the sides, none of these would work. The image must have Side bars and be able to be split in half to allow for the winning backgrounds.

      Although , This one split in half might work 

      Background Suggestion 3

      but we would need a disscussion first.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756
      Nicko756 removed this reply because:
      Mistake
      21:51, July 11, 2014
      This reply has been removed

      Auron~Guardian wrote: @Nicko756

      That's why we have seasonal background contests. You could submit them next time a contest is held. 

      As for the sides, none of these would work. The image must have Side bars and be able to be split in half to allow for the winning backgrounds.

      Although , This one split in half might work 
      Background Suggestion 3

      The one with the bubble can be split in half.

        Loading editor
    • Auron~Guardian wrote: @Nicko756

      That's why we have seasonal background contests. You could submit them next time a contest is held. 

      As for the sides, none of these would work. The image must have Side bars and be able to be split in half to allow for the winning backgrounds.

      Although , This one split in half might work 

      Background Suggestion 3

      but we would need a disscussion first.

      1) I already know about the contests. These are only for the sides.
      2) I will try to reupload bigger images for the others, so they can be split in half.

        Loading editor
    • Nicko756 wrote:

      Auron~Guardian wrote: @Nicko756

      That's why we have seasonal background contests. You could submit them next time a contest is held. 

      As for the sides, none of these would work. The image must have Side bars and be able to be split in half to allow for the winning backgrounds.

      Although , This one split in half might work 

      Background Suggestion 3

      but we would need a disscussion first.

      1) I already know about the contests. These are only for the sides.
      2) I will try to reupload bigger images for the others, so they can be split in half.

      I uploaded VERY big versions of the first and second suggestions (2,843 × 3,771 and 1,200 × 1,585) (again for the SIDES of the background and half of the image on both sides). I am only showing 600px of the images:
      Background Suggestion 1
      Background Suggestion 2
      Here are some new suggustions for the SIDES of the background displayed in 600px (again, the images have to be split in half):
      Background Suggestion 8
      Background Suggestion 9

        Loading editor
    • They look great, but there really is nothing wrong with the current one.

        Loading editor
    • Muchacha wrote:
      They look great, but there really is nothing wrong with the current one.

      Agreed.

        Loading editor
    • Muchacha wrote: They look great, but there really is nothing wrong with the current one.

      Although the ones we have now on the sides are fine, they look plain. The ones I suggested would look nicer and more visually appealing on the sides.

        Loading editor
    • Brony Sponge Penguin + Sonic wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      120d wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:

      Adventuretimesbiggestfan2000 wrote:



      Rorosilky5 wrote:
      TrevorOntario719 wrote:
      I want to an annual topic changing tournament on this wiki and a news feed for the Bikini Bottom Gazette.
      Should it be here in the wiki?
      Already is.
      Which one, the tournament or the news feed? Or both?
      I would like to have more detail on what this topic changing tournament idea is.
      So every year we will some type of tournament in a similar fashion of this one like this . The topic of the tournament will change every year so if in 2014 it's worst episode of SpongeBob the next year it will be something else like best year of SpongeBob.
      U just HAD to mention Sonic News Network.

      Because why not?

        Loading editor
    • This idea came from Brony Sponge Penguin + Sonic, and he posted it on my Message Wall. 

      In colaboration with the wiki, me, and himself, he thought of a Best Episode Contest.

      Awards going to the episodes with:

      Best Moral In An Episode

      Best Joke In An Episode

      Funniest Episode

      Grossest Episode

      Best Episode Ever

      And the winner gets "Golden SpongeBob•"

      •not sure how Golden SpongeBob would work.

      You can give me, and him other ideas for this idea.

        Loading editor
    • Tanhamman wrote: This idea came from Brony Sponge Penguin + Sonic, and he posted it on my Message Wall. 

      In colaboration with the wiki, me, and himself, he thought of a Best Episode Contest.

      Awards going to the episodes with:

      Best Moral In An Episode

      Best Joke In An Episode

      Funniest Episode

      Grossest Episode

      Best Episode Ever

      And the winner gets "Golden SpongeBob•"

      •not sure how Golden SpongeBob would work.

      You can give me, and him other ideas for this idea.

      I think there should be a page where we can vote and narrow each category to the top five choices for each category. This would become the "nominations" page. Then we vote from the nomination page and a winner from each category will be determined.

      Also, we need a name for this contest.

        Loading editor
    • Tanhamman wrote: This idea came from Brony Sponge Penguin + Sonic, and he posted it on my Message Wall. 

      In colaboration with the wiki, me, and himself, he thought of a Best Episode Contest.

      Awards going to the episodes with:

      Best Moral In An Episode

      Best Joke In An Episode

      Funniest Episode

      Grossest Episode

      Best Episode Ever

      And the winner gets "Golden SpongeBob•"

      •not sure how Golden SpongeBob would work.

      You can give me, and him other ideas for this idea.

      Best innuendo? Worst ending? Slowest moving episodes?

        Loading editor
    • Ideas from Part 6:

      • 1) Viewership in lists (pending implementation)
      • 2) Rollback requests (no issues with this)
      • 3) Display clock (uncertain purpose?)
      • 4) Voice output
      • 5) Trivia quizzes
      • 6) BackToTopArrow
      • 7) Changing terminology for signed in/not signed in users (this would be confusing to some people)
      • 8) Character hover designs (proposal is up)
      • 9) "Episodes that focus on <character>" categories (this would be too complicated, and it's purpose/usefulness is unclear)
      • 10) Require people having to say why they chose their option in discussions (needs clarification)
      • 11) All images in one category
      • 12) "120d's idea is to put episode galleryheadings in the articles with episode appearances using
        Episodes
        ."
      • 13) "There should be a new Movie section. Instead of the main movies(The Spongebob Squarepants Movie and 2)you should add the specials (Atlantis Squarepantis, Truth or Square) because they are basically movies.""
      • 14) Template:OTab
      • 15) More usertags
      • 16) Season navigation templates
      • 17) Change rating system to go along with the additional "Strong Support," "Weak Support," etc.
      • 18) Add iTunes release date and link to "release" section.
      • 19) Custom cursors (this idea seems unpopular)
      • 20) ReferencePopups
      • 21) "Tournaments" on certain topics (best episode, etc.)
      • 22) Change sides of entire site

      Thanks everyone for your suggestions, I am going to close this thread.

        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message

Wikia Spotlight

Random Wiki