Talk:Main Page

From GodWiki
Revision as of 14:19, 29 March 2021 by Zoombie (talk | contribs) (→‎New page or category: Projects: added link to actual Projects page)
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Article policies
  • Opinionated research if possible
  • Neutral point of view when appropriate
  • Humour
  • Verifiability
  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • No personal attacks
  • Do not bite the newcomers
  • Respond in a mature manner
  • Be welcoming
  • Maintain civility at all times

This page has an archive


A Godwiki survey?




Random samples of questions

  • How often do you use the Godwiki.
  • If you don't use the Godwiki tell us why
    • Too hard to use
    • Don't see why I should use it
    • etc.
  • If you don't contribute to it tell us why.
    • Too complicated
    • Not confident in english
    • Don't care
    • etc.
  • What do you like on the Godwiki
  • What don't you like on the Godwiki
  • What you would like to see on Godwiki?
  • What do you think could be improved on the Godwiki?
There's probably others but I'm still working on my first coffee.












Responding in pieces:












  • Some more whitespace around the list items;
  • Some decoration of the list items.










Sandbox Main Talk









To the devs:

New topic on mainpage


So, first response to this is, go ahead!



Color scheme



Color block changes and flex-flow reflow

This post refers to this draft revision.








Content of the page



The emojis



First Feedbacks




That looks looks pretty great!


Feedback on new Main Page













Can we change that yellow to some other colour, please?








Re: the collapsed sections on the lower part.














Booyah! This calls for much celebration!






👍🏼 Yes, that looks much better. Thanks! --Bibliophile (talk) 19:46, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I just took a closer look at the Main Page on my phone. And it seems that the links beneath "Gameplay", "Your Contributions..." and "Godwiki Universe" have shifted slightly more to the right. The rest of the page though is centered perfectly. Can those links be shifted slightly to the left, or would that mess things up?

And I like the new gray lines, so much more better! -- Lakefire Arrow (talk) 06:24, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

shifted slightly more to the right

Technically, it's probably not difficult to change. The issue is that, I don't have that kind of issue so I have no idea what you exactly mean. Could you either provide a screenshot (via imgur or alike) or give details about what web navigator you use on your phone? -- WardPhoenix (talk) 08:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Here's what it looks like on my phone:
And I view Godwiki through the Godville app web browser. I rarely open Godwiki on an outside web browser. Do you think it can be fixed?
Here's another thing that I just noticed. When you click on any of the links like Monsters, Omnibus, etc, this is what it looks like:
Is the emoji meant to be part of the link? If so, then I guess that's not something to fix then. -- Lakefire Arrow (talk) 14:59, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Yikes!. This seems to happen to wider phone screens (> 425px for those who want to know). We can fix the layout of the buttons by reducing the min-width from 8em to 7em. That should stop them from overflowing the screens and give enough gaps/space in between. (Laying out these things as notes in case this messes up the layout and someone needs to clean up after me. Having access to CSS and @media would really make these things easier.)

Is the emoji meant to be part of the link?

Yep. The icons/emojis are part of the link. But we can easily take them out. I think. -- Zoombie (talk) 15:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Making another note that upon checking mobile view via DevTools, 'Editing Manual' and 'Test Templates' continue to overlap. (See screenshots at 320px width (Mobile S) at 375px width (Mobile M)at 425px width (Mobile L).) Note that it may look different on actual phone screens. I'm thinking maybe shortening both to 'Manual' and 'Testing' respectively but it might cause some confusion. Otherwise, we're back to hiding overflows and using ellipsis. Thoughts on this, anyone? For reference, here's what they'll look like with just 'Manual' and 'Testing': -- Zoombie (talk) 15:35, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Yay, everything's fixed! Love the new layout even more now! -- Lakefire Arrow (talk) 15:33, 25 February 2021 (UTC)



Likely yes. Maybe the Creators Manual can be shortened to Edit Manual instead and then switch the Test Templates place with either Guidelines or Rules to avoid clipping issues? --WardPhoenix (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Moving sections



Collapsible diary box for main page

So I tried to make the diary template collapsible by clicking on the header/title. I don't like how we have to push the content downwards and having the collapsible toggle on the title would hopefully lessen the space each section takes up. I'd like to present the results.

!Hero's Diary
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Fusce molestie enim at velit consectetur, sit amet accumsan turpis venenatis. Etiam purus lectus, volutpat vel enim et, faucibus consequat ligula. Sed auctor congue eleifend. Curabitur a laoreet est, at varius tortor. Nam congue metus enim, ut mollis tortor imperdiet vel. Suspendisse vitae auctor lacus, non luctus urna. Integer sit amet metus sit amet tellus tristique varius sit amet id felis. Morbi elementum maximus justo non eleifend. Duis ornare tempor commodo. Sed eu ante congue, dignissim dolor vestibulum, tristique ex. Maecenas quis vestibulum magna. Aliquam eget placerat ligula. Suspendisse sit amet commodo nisl. Vestibulum turpis felis, accumsan faucibus tempor at, auctor at ipsum. Aliquam rutrum volutpat purus, ac sagittis felis fermentum id. Ut pharetra felis a semper ornare.

I don't know how to do templates yet so it's all in HTML and CSS. 😅 Would this be a better way to present content on the Main Page or would it be confusing? -- Zoombie (talk) 13:36, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

It's frankly quite a good job, but I'd say the toggle collapse button is clearly not explicit enough. If I didn't guessed where it was instantly, how the people who never try seriously are not confortable with the wiki are going to guess it?
A proper button with text inside might not look stylish, but UX wise it's probably a better solution. --WardPhoenix (talk) 17:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
Hmm... yes, UX is really tricky. One one hand, people like to explore and shiny smooth interface. On the other hand, people don't like tedious exploration and ugly clunky interface. 🤔 I must admit that I forgot to consider that people who mainly play on mobile might not be familiar with this look for diary entries. (I'm guessing the template was first made when the game is still mainly played on desktop?) I tried mimicking the way the diary looks and feels when collapsing it in the game, hence the minimal arrow beside the 'refresh button'. I'd argue though that the whole title is actually the button and not just the tiny arrow on the side. (The arrow is mainly an indication of whether the contents are collapsed or expanded.) That's a lot of space for clicking/tapping which may be useful for those on mobile. -- Zoombie (talk) 05:43, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Just to be clear I do like your edit of the diary template to make it collapsible elegantly. My worry is user-side. I didn't noticed at first that the whole bar was actually the toggle button and I'm afraid that people don't understand at first sight that the diary template is collapsible or that they close the template and don't understand how they did it and how to reopen it (never overestimate user).
Maybe adding the word Show/Hide in place of the arrow could make it friendlier but anyway, this great idea of yours need some other feedbacks to turn us in the right direction. --WardPhoenix (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes. I understand what you meant. I moved this section here in the hopes of it getting more attention. I'm worried that this template is not very obviously collapsible at first glance as well. I guess I'm just thinking that since current consensus seems to be keeping things expanded, it wouldn't be a problem if it's not noticeable. And I'm thinking that anyone who wants things collapsed will just ask somewhere for that option or just accidentally click the title and find out that collapsing things is already an option. But I'm probably being overly idealistic here. The reverse might also happen. Someone who wants to keep things expanded might accidentally click the title and collapse things. Hmm...🤔 I hope people give feedback on this so we'll know whether we can push through with this or scrap it. -- Zoombie (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I like what you've done Zoombie! That's really nice 😊 I do play the game from the app and use/edit the Wiki mainly on my phone, usually the iOS Safari browser. So this is from a mobile POV. Personally, I would assume the up arrow meant "open" and clicking the bar would collapse it. Or I would just try clicking the bar to see if was collapsible, regardless. To me it makes more sense from a UX perspective that tapping or clicking the title bar would collapse it. I use several productivity apps that use that "tap title" method of opening or collapsing sections, so it seems natural to me. But...I don't know that I'm representative of the average Wiki user. WardPhoenix's suggestion of using "Show/Hide" is more obvious, but it isn't as elegant from a UI/aesthetic perspective. Maybe making the arrow bolder to stand out would work? --Bibliophile (talk) 20:59, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, Bibliophile! I added a few variations in the Sandbox to make it easier to compare how they all look. -- Zoombie (talk) 04:24, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I like the original the best, the minimalist look just appeals to me. If I had to choose one from the other options, it'd be the 2nd option under "different arrows", the others just look clunky to me. But my personal opinion doesn't seem to jive with the majority here, so I'm probably an outlier! ☺ -- Lakefire Arrow (talk) 11:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

I like the third (last) of two arrows version best. My true preference would be the last two arrow version, except with only one arrow. Only the title and an arrow on the right. More simplistic and makes collapsibility obvious without words. The other symbols on the title bar seem unnecessary and frankly confusing if you aren't familiar with how the desktop diary looks. I don't know enough about the template/code to know if there needs to be something on both sides for it to work, though.

TBH, I don't really like much of the original diary template "look" for the Main page, other than the less boxy shape. 😬 Obviously, if having more of the diary look is the consensus, then it's fine with me. I do like Zoombie's suggested modifications, though. I'm not doing any of the coding to make it all work so I can't complain too much. 😊 --Bibliophile (talk) 18:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


No, there doesn't need to be anything on both side for it to work. In fact, the toggles can even be invisible. Added those options if you want to see them. 😊 -- Zoombie (talk) 07:09, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm more worried about how this design will behave with the templated contents. I feel like something is going to go wrong somewhere. There's just something weird about how collapsibles behave in GW that I can't quite put my finger on. 😟 Hopefully, it will get fixed by the update whenever that happens. -- Zoombie (talk) 07:09, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Ask for help

Zoombie has pointed out to me that new users still have a difficult time finding help. I think the issue might be that new users don't really read any of the words on the main page. They land in the wiki for something like their user page, and get lost and confused. Maybe they click a button that brings them to Wikipedia how to edit a page. Maybe they see the guidebook or something similar. But somehow they don't get that they can actually ask for help.

In the tradition of KISS (keep it simple stupid), I propose that we put a giant banner at the top of the main page. It should say something like "there are other users who can guide you and help you, just click here..." or more. --His portliness (talk) 23:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Or a banner that says something like "Ways You Can Contribute! Ask Anything Here!" From my experience: I'll admit that I was confused, intimidated, and very tentative to edit anything back when I first wanted to do anything with the Wiki. I think my first "big" edit was correcting a typo 😂 The Main Page "Help" Section jumps straight into volunteering by writing articles or uploading graphics, which was overwhelming for me. First, I only wanted to start out small by creating my User:Bibliophile page and Talk page. Plus, I was confused as to what in the Wiki was factual about the game versus the more fictional article descriptions. I wanted to help in more of a practical "copywriting/editing" way but wasn't sure what else I could do if I didn't want write a whole article. I know the answers now, but it wasn't obvious at first.
I also overthink things, so despite areas to ask for help, I couldn't decide which section was most appropriate to ask for "general" wiki help 🤦🏻‍♀️ Fortunately, Djonni came to my rescue, taking the initiative of answering questions on my Talk page and in chat. His detailed and friendly explanations helped me understand some of quirks of the GodWiki and other ways to help. Then I "met" all you other users who helped me as well 😊 Just my 2 cents on why asking for help might be a bit confusing for people. --Bibliophile (talk) 15:53, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

The way I see it, most new people come here to either create their own user page or to create a page for their newly formed guild. The guidebook, guidelines and template docs for those are either too intimidating or too technical. I am an outlier here in the sense that I already have some HTML and CSS skills along with a bit of past coding experience to help me understand some of the more technical bits and that I tried to read almost every instructions, talk pages and the user pages of the regular editors who manage the wiki for scraps of technical wiki knowledge before getting my wiki access so I was somewhat prepared when I made my user page and know where to ask for help. Plus, I immediately made a Sandbox (I had to Google how to make a Sandbox and it took a few hours of reading to understand how to get it done.) to tinker with the layout before putting everything in my actual user page. Still, I find myself regularly searching in Google for doing various wiki stuff and slowly learning by reading codes in articles and talk pages especially when it comes to layout stuff. Having no access to the wiki's CSS and MediaWiki having separate mobile and desktop pages is presenting some really maddening layout challenges. I spent a few days to a week just getting the top part of my user page to layout correctly because the built-in spacer in usergod was messing with my layout and I didn't know how substitution worked. So my problems were more advanced and I just ended up ranting about my initial frustration in the wiki and I am getting off-tangent now.

Back to the topic, I think it is also probably more likely for non-native English speakers to make their user page or guild page than create a new article. And there is a certain hesitation among non-native English speakers to speak to other people because they are either too self-conscious of their English skills (How many times have you read or heard "Sorry for my bad English" all over the internet?) or they actually only know really really basic English and have a hard time conveying their ideas. It's not just speaking. It may also be likely that non-native English speakers don't really like reading so much text because they can barely understand anything and eventually miss the part about the Help Request section. (Help Request is currently at the bottom of the Creator's Manual and is very easy to miss. There's also no link to the Help Request page in any of the Guidelines.) The same skimming through text behavior may also be present in those not technically inclined. I'm pretty sure all of us here has experienced having our eyes just glazed over and blanking out while reading some thing we can barely comprehend.

I am merely speculating here and extrapolating from similar experiences and observations outside the wiki because, again, I am an outlier in that I know enough big words to sound eloquent as a non-native English speaker and I play in the forum games to get a feel of the community. I do know at least one person in my friend list (who turned out to be from the same country as me) who was hesitant to come over to the forums because it is dominated by older gods (hence, intimidating) and they aren't sure if their English skills are up to task (It was fine. A few grammar problems here and there but it's understandable and coherent.)

In the end, we can't really answer the question of how to let users know that GW is not a total ghost town and that there are plenty of avenues to ask for help regarding the wiki because we simply lack data about how newcomers experience the wiki, how users use the wiki (be it creating, editing or just reading articles and pages) and how everyone perceives the wiki. The idea of having a survey about GW has been tossed around above and the issues about privacy and participation has been brought up but so far no conclusions has been made. I'd propose an impromptu one on one interview like the one I posted on the guidebook sandbox discussion for data gathering but the problem with it is that it's just too time consuming (It took two days to ask two people around five questions each and that's only because our time difference is two hours or less and they actively play the game everyday.) and befriending everyone and chatting them all up is impossible. It does get people to participate though especially if they're the chatty type because it is more casual than a survey and you can tailor any follow up questions based on how they answered. Maybe this could work on the various Discord servers related to Godville. Idk. I'm not in any Discord servers. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯-- Zoombie (talk) 18:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Banner box - option 1 (using {{Sign}})

Need help?
insert text here

Banner box - option 2 (using HTML + CSS)

insert text here


There is one in the navbox included in every Guideline but anyway, that's not the subject. It may sound harsh or arrogant, but I do think that those complaining about having no idea how to do things on GW doesn't help themselves much. If you don't know, search. If you can't find, ask. That's just basic mindset.
If no one talk or ask answer, how are we supposed to know they needed help? When I started GW, i had no knowledge as well. I am French, so my English is what it can be. And what did I did when I found out GW? I asked and someone help me.
I can understand that the wiki guidelines, and especially the Creators'Manual may be too much wall of text (as the one who rewrote it I can admit it clear enough) and yet they never have been in a better shape in GW history (there were worse back then).
Even though they can clearly be upgraded (hence the current work on the Guidebook). But we have never been more than 5 active deities on the backstage of the GW in the two last years, which obviously slow down the process of upgrading things (and of having feedbacks).
And I am pretty sure the banner wouldn't be still enough somehow. I was the one up for the survey, but again not much feedback from others users back then, so it was left at that.
Sorry if that comes out at too much aggressive ranting, I do want to help people get more into GW and have worked on that since I joined here but I am tired of reading the excuse of struggling from people who never ask for question... --WardPhoenix (talk) 21:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Lol WardPhoenix every time this comes up you have the same rant, and then apologize, no need for the apology. I totally hear you, and agree with what you are saying. People do need to learn to lift a finger to help themselves. However, I think you are not realizing something. Most people don't care for learning coding languages. They just want to enjoy themselves. If they are enjoying something a bunch and THEN need to learn something new, they will probably be up for the challenge. However, if their first introduction to the wiki is a confusing mystery, like it was for me, it doesn't look fun. Don't forget, godville is a game, not a job. They have no vested interest in figuring things out unless they see immediate returns of enjoyment. If we make it stupid simple to START on the wiki, people will come to realize the same enjoyment we do, and then be motivated to continue learning on their own. That was my journey, I havre up a few times, got confused, finally decided to Google things and jump in. Then I screwed up a template, freaked out, and left the wiki for another six months. I don't want others to have that experience.
There is one in the navbox included in every Guideline until very recently, I'm embarrassed to admit, I had no clue what the heck the navboxes were, and I'm not exactly new around here. I never noticed them, and I've I did I thought they wee just done relic from a bad wiki code thing. As Zoombie mentioned, many people don't read, they skim. They aren't bind to notice something they are not even looking for unless it hits them in the face. I used the wiki fit a long time before I discovered that there was a way to get help, simply cuz I never looked. I never looked because I couldn't imagine that such a thing existed, I had no idea there was a community. I was scared of messing up something, and didn't raise there was such a friendly group of "elders" here.
As an aside, I don't think we will get feedback from users until after we put something up. Once we get engagement and get people into the wiki, they will provide feedback about what worked and what didn't. Surveys didn't get engagement in the past, and I doubt that will change for now. --His portliness (talk) 22:23, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Question: How important is this line in the main page: The GodWiki now has 3,287 articles, and Goddesses and Gods are continuing their divine work, enriching Godville's pages with the threads of their ingenious creations.? I feel like it doesn't really add anything to the main page and eats up a lot of space (especially on mobile) that I think we can can use for something else. (Not sure what that something else is yet though.) I've scoured random wikis earlier and while a lot of them have that line with statistics and stuff, there's also a few that doesn't add them and quite frankly, not having that line doesn't diminish or is detrimental to any of those wikis. I do want to point out that we do have this line below: First time here? We recommend reading the Godwiki Guidebook! but it feels lacking. Like, it doesn't really grab attention. Somehow I feel like it doesn't really mesh well with the overall design, like, the icons seem to overpower it. I don't have a solution for this though but that's why I'm presenting it here in case someone else may have an opinion on this. 😃

While I am inclined to agree with the opinion that people who seriously want to contribute to GW will take the time to actively seek out answers or find people who can help them, that still leaves out total newcomers who will have more of a passing curiosity than a burning passion. It's like shopping. These are the shoppers who are curious about this new shop and might poke around a bit. If they can't find anything that interests them or if they can't find anyone who can help them (i.e. not satisfied with the presentation of the shop or the service in the shop), they'll simply move on. Rare are those of us who stick around and really dig around the site. And this site is a maze at the moment. There is a possibility that there may come a time when no one is around on the backstage of the wiki. Which isn't really a good thing because it will affect UX little by little until it snowballs into making the wiki a really annoying site that either someone steps in (whether that be the devs or another set of editors) or everyone simply abandons the site and it becomes more of a museum piece than a living site. (An aside: I'm probably imagining things but wikis seem to be more active when there's a Discord/chat/IRC attached to it.) Just because we experienced certain hardships in the beginning of our foray into the wiki (lol what am I talking about? I've only been here for a month.), doesn't mean that the ones who will be coming after us has to experience and feel the same.

On the flip side, to be honest, if I wasn't studying front end, I wouldn't be this invested in the wiki. I might have poked around a bit, read all the articles, maybe the discussions too, to see if there's something I can do aside from making articles (which is really intimidating for a newcomer who isn't a writer and is not confident enough in their writing skills) but overall, I'll probably just move on because there doesn't seem to be any activities in the wiki that grab my attention and it simply isn't interesting. There's just no momentum in the wiki. (I'm a loner though so I have a predilection with doing things on my own and I'm usually happier on my own.) I'll still probably do stuff like update equipment durability, add new monsters or artifacts, and fix typos from time to time but that would most likely be the extent of my wiki activities. Same as most normal users. (Let's face it, I'm not really someone you can consider a normal user at this point.) It probably takes quite a while for most normal users to gain enough momentum and confidence to start contributing here. So, I guess what I'm trying to say here is that we can't really force people or rush things.

Also, I feel like it is relevant to think about how newcomers land on the wiki. Especially on mobile. I feel like the left-most panel on mobile with all the links to the forums, the newspaper and the wiki may be a bit hidden or rather, that users don't always reach that part of the app. An alternative to reaching GW without going to that left-most panel is via the blue links in the diary which will connect the user to a monster article. Blue links in the diary is rare enough that it retains a certain novelty that is likely to spark curiosity. Same with desktop, the top panel is easy to ignore but the blue links in the diary is very tempting to click. The default mobile wiki skin is crappy though. All the links are at the bottom of the page so it's really easy to ignore and miss. Even to this day, I don't really reach the bottom links on the GW when I'm on mobile.

Re: forging on with new ideas VS waiting for feedback from others. I'm the careful type especially with communities so I really really want to wait for feedback and get a go signal from a majority before going forward but His portliness has a point in that we only seem to get feedback after the fact. I mean, I get it, it is easier to react to something that is already there and actively affecting you than it is with something that is still tentative or worse, in the planning/imaginary stage. At this rate, everything will be left hanging and nothing gets done. However, I still advice caution in every step especially with major changes that affect all, or if not, most users. It's best to cover as much holes in the plan as we can and prepare for every possible scenario that we can before proceeding. I'll take radio silence as a signal that either the plan is good enough or that the decision has been left at my hands and I can do whatever I want. It's likely a "do or die? whut? do not" scenario at that point. -- Zoombie (talk) 11:27, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


Frankly? Not much IMO. It's there because it was always there basically (story of the monkeys and the banana), though it is a redundant with the Welcome just above. I had though about deleting during the facelift process but forgot that thought.

Like, it doesn't really grab attention.

If the bolding is not enough we can always add an emoji or color (though that one should be done with caution).

we only seem to get feedback after the fact. [...] At this rate, everything will be left hanging and nothing gets done.

Sadly enough, yes (hence why I rant that much 😂). Why do you think I just pushed the facelift to Main Page after weeks of silent sandbox ? Risky enough in normal case but if I hadn't done it, facelift would still be in the sandbox. And considering it was globally, from what i read, seen as a positive change, it would have been a shame to left it there.


This is a wiki, first "rule" is basically Be Bold. If someone doesn't like what you did or have a comment or want to changes something, they will just do changes and/or comment on it on talk pages.
By the way if that plan (I kinda forgot where we were going with that talk) is to create a banner for Help:Requests ; instead of creating a new sign we could just use the already placed in main page {{{Godwiki event banner}} that could fit the purpose. --WardPhoenix (talk) 12:03, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


I didn't know this exists. This is probably exactly what we need.


I agree with the caution. We've had backlash with the yellow on the top part earlier. I'm thinking we can replace this part with the banner or incorporate the top part into a banner though we run into the danger of boxing everything again. I believe the facelift was done to get away from the old boxy look of the wiki?
Some interesting wiki banners/top pages I've looked at. Gonna put screenshots too since they may look different on mobile. I'm not saying we copy them but we can definitely learn from them and see what options we have.
  • One Piece Wiki (screenshot) - It's link heavy but the links are all related to how to contribute on the wiki and community links like forums and Discord and the like. (Does Godville have an official Discord server? I'm under the impression that the Discord server everyone talks about is originally from one of the guilds and is not an official one though the devs recognize it.) Their guidebook also have a nice structure where things are separated and tabbed. (I wonder if we can use tabs here.) They also have a link to a list of wiki Admin and Mods which we can probably emulate by pointing to the Volunteers section of the Help:Request page. The mobile version looks bare though due to the default mobile layout of Fandom.
  • The Walking Dead Wiki (screenshot) - Has some nice poster look in their main page banner. The links are not obvious but they're there. Mobile version looks more or less the same as One Piece Wiki.
  • Narutopedia (screenshot) - Nothing special here but "anyone can contribute" links to a Community Portal which I think is one options we can consider here. Again, nothing special on mobile.
  • Dragonball Wiki (screenshot) - Nothing too interesting here. It's similar to the One Piece Wiki. The interesting part of their main page is probably this. Mobile is, again, meh.
  • Minecraft Wiki (screenshot) - It's old school style which we moved away from already but I'm more interested in where "anyone can contribute" links to. It links to a How to Help page that lists out a lot of options. Mobile layout got rid of most of the links and the fancy backgrounds but it's still mostly the same.
  • Terraria Wiki (screenshot1 screenshot2 screenshot3) - Nothing too interesting. It's just very similar to GW in terms of function and layout. They have nice little icons on their links similar to our use of emojis. And they emphasize giving users access to gameplay stuff first before contributions. It also looks like they get more or less the same amount of activity as GW. -- Zoombie (talk) 05:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


Does Godville have an official Discord server?

There is no official (in the way it would be deal by the dev), but there is an active one with hundreds of deities registered : [1].

Some interesting wiki banners/top pages I've looked at.

Frankly, when I look at those, I find our home page quite good. The only one who left me a good impression were the Naruto and Terraria ones in terms of design. IMO, the only main issue with ours is the two redundant line of welcome and statistics.

Then we could discuss if having many links to contribute like we have at the moment is a good solution or not. But if the Godwiki Guidebook become a "How to contribute" Index, then we can easily pass those links in the trap and just having a link to Guidebook and Help:Requests.

But this topic was initially about the Ask for Help, looks like we're getting out of tracks here. The fact the {{Godwiki event banner}} have a border doesn't not seem an issue to me. Initially that one is there for event, so having it bordered help emphasize it, even more now that we removed header border. --WardPhoenix (talk) 21:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

New page or category: Projects

In the interest of making things more neatly organized, I think it might be more accurate to call the Test Template page as "Projects" or "Wiki Projects" and maybe change the category to reflect it too. The reason being, that some of the pages there are not actually templates and, also, so that other non-template and maybe some personal projects can be included here. The name change also has an added benefit of shortening the link in the Main Page. Right now, Test Template is still too long and goes over the bottom border when I'm on my tiny phone. Also, Test Template gives the sense that the things in that page are all template and coding related, which not a lot of people know too much about or care to learn. Obviously, this is not the case since we have the guidebook rewrite (and maybe even future rewrite projects) there.

Another approach might be to create a new page called Projects to list ongoing projects (including templates) and link that to the Main Page instead under the Contributions section and replace the Test Templates link with a link to the Templates category. The Test Template page can be left alone to categorize test templates only and maybe a separate category can be made for sandbox pages too. Events can also be included in the Projects page. I know that wiki events (JanuWiki and SummerWiki) are listed in the Backstage category but that category is mostly for forum-related and guild-related and miscellaneous stuff.

In the Projects page, we can include project descriptions (what it's about, how to help, is a feedback to the project needed, etc.) to give people an idea of what it's about, a list of project contributors (maybe even indicate who is spearheading the project at the moment) to tell people who they can contact in case they want to help with the project but don't know or are not sure how to, and the project status (if it's done, still ongoing, or abandoned and why). It's basically a big to-do list for the whole wiki, not just of coding stuff but also general formatting and information gathering stuff. It can also function as a record of what has been done in the wiki so people know which direction we are trying to go. Just look at how neat this, this, and this are.

This should make general wiki projects easier to find and make personal projects more visible too so that someone who is looking for help in their personal project can get more eyes on it faster and so that abandoned projects can be easily picked up by someone else. Some of the individual contributor projects I've seen were abandoned because their skill level was not enough at the time and someone else ended up picking them up. I know that people have been linking their projects and compiling them in their user pages in the past, adding a note on how other people can help them. (I've been doing this too but my main reason for keeping my projects in my user page is just to keep a record of my stuff, not to actually seek help or feedback.) I know too that there's only a few of us right now doing backstage wiki stuff and we're all kinda doing our own stuff at the moment but this is not just for our benefit. This is also for the benefit of future contributors and other present contributors who might think that templates are beyond their capabilities and can't help and are clueless on how else they can help. This is in line with what Bibliophile said in the Ask for help section above:

The Main Page "Help" Section jumps straight into volunteering by writing articles or uploading graphics, which was overwhelming for me. First, I only wanted to start out small by creating my User:Bibliophile page and Talk page... I wanted to help in more of a practical "copywriting/editing" way but wasn't sure what else I could do if I didn't want write a whole article. I know the answers now, but it wasn't obvious at first. I also overthink things, so despite areas to ask for help, I couldn't decide which section was most appropriate to ask for "general" wiki help.

This should alleviate this kind of problem and give a sense of direction and purpose and indicate that yes, there are actually people working on stuff here not related to coding.

I have selfish reasons for wanting this change too.

  • I keep on forgetting to include my wiki tinkering in the Test Template page, though I'm not exactly looking for help in my stuff. It just helps that people know that they exist.
  • I might add my big list of pages that need fixing there at some point. Any page link to a user page (like personal sandboxes) can't really be edited by anyone else and I'm not interested with it now and hoping someone else might pick it up. And I need the space of the page it's currently housed in.
  • I also kinda need that link to the Templates category page in the Main Page. 😅 I keep on going there a lot for reference when I'm tinkering with stuff and it's not easy to get to that page.
  • I've had to scour through the different user pages of past and present contributors to the backstage wiki stuff (Spode, BlueStapler, Emptysora, FerdNYC, Djonni, WardPhoenix) to get an idea of what has been done, what has been abandoned and why, and what is within my skills. If a Projects page existed and everyone listed their projects with nice little descriptions in it, it would have been easier for me to know all those things and have a sense of direction with what else to do in the wiki.

I made a long post again. 😅 Thanks for reading my wall of text. -- Zoombie Zoombie's page talk with Zoombie 15:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Too long didn't read. (What? I had to do it). Joke aside. I also thought about it but wasn't sure that was a great idea. But if we are two to have that idea it's probably not a bad one 😅.
Surely we could then create a short table of projects in header who would link to section in the same page explaining said project, and another with gave up project. The only problem of that would be the page will need proper maintenance to keep it's interest I guess.
Anyway, good idea, go ahead bla bla bla... I don't have neither proper time neither proper will to work on GW lately but this seems a good improvement to it for future. --WardPhoenix (talk) 16:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Ha! Good one! 🤣 I'll draft something in the Main Sandbox in the next few days so everyone can chime in. I have the codes for the collapsible diary template in my own sandbox and I don't really feel like working on collapsibles until it's fixed anyway. I'm planning to house the Projects page in the Godwiki namespace since it's not related to the game, it's just for wiki development. The Template or Category namespace doesn't feel like the accurate place to house it in. There will be a separate Projects category for the sake of categorizing the projects created. I might also edit {{talkheader}} to include a link to the projects. Since, it's going to be a new thing, just putting Projects in the contributions section of the Main Page won't be enough. There needs to be some short explanatory note about it. Maybe some banner at the top or add it to {{talkheader}}.
About the maintenance of the page, I think it will be fine as long as each project's page is updated by contributors. The main Projects page is just a list anyway so it's more add the project there then forget about it until the project is completed. I'll explain more in the draft. I'll be leaving a lot of notes there anyway for copyeditors I might kidnap tap into helping me. -- Zoombie (talk to me) 06:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi I'm Luculuqueraxa. I'm a complete beginner in coding but I'd like to help in other ways as I think this thing Zoombie is making should be quite helpful in sort of unifying work and making it more efficient.
If there was a categorized list people could refer to for projects that people are currently working on, I think it would encourage new people to sort of jump in and do small things like copyediting or corrections on things that have a concentrated interest, because 1. It would be easier to find out what people might actually want done in real time (instead of wandering through abandoned pages or choosing at random) and 2. It would be easier for people to get feedback immediately on what they've done, so you really feel like you're doing something people are actually looking at instead of screaming into the void.
A particular interest of mine is encouraging people to work on creative writing in the wiki even if they aren't confident in English. This project list would make it a lot easier to get language corrections sooner, hopefully making adding new ideas less intimidating.
The recent image section is also of particular interest to me, I was happy to see my new drawings in the list and was surprised at some of the images added that I hadn't seen yet. I look at the recent changes section from time to time but it can get voluminous and I miss a lot. I mean, I know there's the upload log too but I think it would be quite nice to have a place where you can look at all the recent thumbnails. A lot of humans are pretty visually oriented so I think it would also help draw attention to things people are working on and get people interacting more.
What can Luculuqueraxa do? I'm a copyeditor, a writer, and a drawer (the kind that does drawings). I can sort of grasp basic concepts concerning coding. Within the past few months after I finally wandered into the GW I've become rather invested in it as it has such interesting potential for creative collaboration of all kinds.
So yeah this is basically me describing what a good idea this thing is without really contributing, but if you point me in a direction maybe I can be put to use. --Luculuqueraxa (talk) 16:25, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Thanks for the reply, Luculuqueraxa! Hopefully, things will be clearer when the Projects page is deployed. I'm planning to deploy announce it after April 1st just so I can avoid April's Fool. Wouldn't want people to think it's a joke. 😅

The Wiki News section (New Articles, New User Pages, New Images) will need a bit more work before it can be deployed. It will be best if it has a curator (or curators) who can create nice blurbs for articles and stuff since the auto-generated stuff looks terrible. (Something like this would be nice. It's linked to the homepage that looks like this.) If someone wants to take that on as a project, they are free to do so. At the very least, the list can be auto-generated easily (I can teach people how to modify the code so that it will only show a certain period of time.), which should make things easier as they wouldn't need to sift through Recent changes. -- Zoombie (talk to me) 15:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I really love this idea. Please let me know how I can help implement it! I, too, have been getting a bit burned out of wiki work, I think because it feels like a monumental amount of work with very little input and help. I once did a drop of sleuthing and find that there are around 20,000+ active players on the English godville. Numbers may have changed a bit since then. The projects I work on have always been purely to get more people involved in the wiki. I know I've been out of it the past few weeks, but between this and the guidebook I hope we pick up some new faces. Nice to see you, Luculuqueraxa. Always good to hear new voices! --His portliness (talk) 11:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for dropping by, His portliness! Haven't seen/heard from you for a while. I feel ya when you mentioned being burned out of wiki work. I think everyone of us here is feeling it. We'll need you to help write up the projects page for the Guidebook Facelift so we can have some starting projects to populate the tables (and because that project has actually been going on before this whole Projects page thing). These two sections would be a good start for the project page but we'll need some more instructions I think. I'll get started on deploying the actual Projects page (since I've already received some good feedback both here and via chat) and add my own list of pages that needed fixing to the projects to give everyone an example of what a project page might look like. -- Zoombie (talk to me) 13:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)