<p>Hey everyone. We've recently had a huge expansion in the quotes section of the Huntik Wiki. This is definitely a good step as we expand an already extensive wiki (particularly considering that we have a smaller number of contributors than many of the larger wikis). </p><p>This step forward, though, brings up some questions regarding how we want to step forward. Obviously, some of what we do will have to be bound by copyright, but we probably would want to include a fair amount of buffer zone. Probably the general feel would be some </p><p>We might could look into some quotes policies on other wikis that do quotes for some ideas. A few issues I can think of that we might want to bring up are: </p>

• How many per episode? (I'd suspect we'd want to be well within the legal confines)
• Length of pages (or if we want to do something in additional to number per episode)
• Length of multi-character dialogue
• Formatting (episode versus character pages)
• What types of quotes to include (important, funny, etc.)
• Whether we'd want some type of form to suggest quotes to add to pages or whether that would be too "formal" for the needs of the wiki

<p>Currently, tha main thing that remains for the current policy updates is to finish up on the Page Layout section. For the most part, I will be busy with research, projects, and finals until the end of the semester, so I will be unable to get this completely finished up until the summer. The good news, however, is that I should have no trouble getting this section finished once I actually have time on my hands during my summer vacation. I will probably be able to get it done within a single day - definitively within the span of a week. </p><p>However, once the policy section is fully live, with all sections accounted for, the next step will be updating the welcome message to incorporate links to the various policy pages. The main reason for doing this is that, well, most users would otherwise be unaware of these policies until they run into a conflict. Adding them to the welcome message would mean that everyone will have been told to consult the Huntik Wiki policies in the least. </p><p>I've already made a preliminary edit on the Template:Welcome page. I am most likely going to tone down some of the greens before the final release as the automated welcome message. Also, please note that the final automated welcome message automatically would code for the first edited page as well as the time, just as the current message. </p><p>In addition to the possible changes in color hues, does anyone have any suggestions before this goes live? I'll leave time for discussion before releasing the update to make sure any and all suggestions can be considered. </p>

<p>The current policy of the Huntik Wiki has been to use the <i>lowest</i> stats for a given Titan across <i>all</i> media appearances. The logic behind this is to get the most accurate approximation of the Titan's strength <i>before</i> bonding and subsequent training. </p><p>The general trend is as follows: Titan card appearances tend to be slightly stronger than their series appearances concerning Titans who were analyzed via Tome. In most cases, when we must default to the cards, it's a single card with the lowest stat set. </p><p>While it will still be the general policy to use the lowest stat set, I wanted to bring a couple special cases before the Wiki contributors: </p>

• Should the lowest-stat policy incorporate both TCG and series information, or should series information outweigh the TCG information?

• Additionally, would anyone find it useful to be able to incorporate multiple stat sets (ordered by power) for those Titans with several cards? Doing so should be a fairly easy change to the {{Infobox Titan}} template.

<center><i>Please also see Talk:Suits</i></center> <p>Some time ago, under the original management, it was suggested that the Suits article be divided up into groups. However, the initial suggestion dates back to April 5, 2009‎, and the project was more or less abandoned. </p> <table class="" style="background-color:transparent; color:inherit; width:100%;"><tr><td style="vertical-align: top; width:50%;">

• DeFoe's Suits
• Grier's Suits

</td><td style="vertical-align: top; width:50%;">

• Rassimov's Suits
• etc. (including the new group, Wilder's Suits)

</td></tr></table><p>Having been going through a fair portion of the series again, this would seem to make more sense, especially as certain spells and Titans seem to be used primarily, if not only, by certain groups. This would also allow a fuller representation of each Suit (many of them appear repeatedly). </p><p>However, unlike the initial suggestion by Jonniboi123, I'm not so sure if a disambiguation page would be the way to go or not. That would mean that potentially hundreds of pages would link to a disambiguation page and that we'd have to make all of those pages re-link to the correct page. </p><p><i>One</i> possible way to work around this would be to make each division of Suits into a subsection of the page, with each member being represented. This could be in the form of a gallery linking to separate pages or in the form of multiple profiles (possibly with the history section being before the roster and detailing the history of the <i>team</i> as opposed to the individuals - as most of it would be quite redundant). If desired, the profile could be similar to the {{profile}} template used for Titan profiles in the series. </p><p>So, a few question for everyone (I'll be following both conversation on the talk page and on the forums): </p>

1. Should we differentiate the Suits (in any format)?
2. Should any differentiation be based on leader or location (both seem to overlap a bit at times)?
3. What do you think would be best <i>comprehensively</i>? (not accounting for looks)
4. What do you think would be best <i>aesthetically</i>, or in appearance?
5. Do you have any other insights or opinions?

<p>Continued from the Admin Blog </p> <hr><p>The Manual of Style can be a very useful reference even to the experienced editor. In a sense, it's a summary of how articles are written on the Huntik Wiki. Not only does following style help to make the pages look professional, it makes it easy to locate similar information on different articles. </p><p>A few things are quite definitely good additions, the {{source}} template being one of the handy new additions. Another thing would be Huntik-specific stuff, such as always capitalizing the words Titan, Seeker, and such. Also a few things about capitalization (Dante's house being correct over Dante's House, etc). Are there any other examples that should be included? </p><p>But the main question, I think, is what do y'all think should be clarified on general article style? Is there anything done in general writing style that seems to be missing? </p>

<p>Continued from the Admin Blog </p> <hr><p>Probably my main question at the moment is whether spell (magic) articles should include a gallery or not, as a general trend. With just a few exceptions, spells are normally represented by a single image, so a fair portion of the "Article Galleries" were just duplicates, and the pages tend to not be much longer than the infobox, if any. </p><p>In addition to that, are there any thoughts as to how the current set-up is done? (A preview of images on the Article Gallery with the rest in the Category Gallery) </p>

<p>Continued from the Admin Blog </p> <hr><p>This will be a bit of a (comparatively) short post from me. (No, it's already 2013, so this can't be what makes the world end lol.) </p><p>Trivia should be about as short and to the point as possible. Probably the main things here would be distinguishing good trivia from trivialities and making sure it doesn't belong elsewhere in the article. For the most part, on Titan pages for example, this includes origin and summoning command(s) with only a few exceptions that I can recall. The next question is how rigid or flexible the content in this section should be. </p>

<p>Continued from the Admin Blog; see also Thread:Image Licensing </p> <hr><p>I've noticed that the Image Policy is again in need of some revamping as the Wiki is getting larger (we've been having a fairly constant 6000 - 8000 viewers per day based on site statistics). Now of course, I don't think we need to be quite as policy-heavy as, say, the TARDIS Wiki or the Runescape Wiki. </p><p>The first thing is that a lot of the content is redundant. Any "should use the default image ____" is obsolete with the upgraded infobox coding. More or less, images seem to fall into the following main categories, more or less mirroring the licensing proposal: </p> <dl><dd>(1) Official / stock art (2) Screenshots (3) Card scans (4) Comic images (5) Merchandise </dd></dl><p>I'll run over the 3 main things and see what y'all think should be done in some of these cases and if anything else needs to be added. </p> <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Dealing_with_copyright">Dealing with copyright</span></h2> <p>Probably the first thing is that the policy page needs to emphasize the need to add image licensing. A while ago, several images lacking licensing templates were removed by a Wikia bot since, technically speaking, we're legally required to include this information. Should this addition go over the different image licenses as well? </p> <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Dimensions">Dimensions</span></h2> <p>First of all, several images, as used by templates, need to have certain dimension ratios. Otherwise, the templates tend to mis-format. </p>

• Titan icons used by the {{profile}} template should be square
• Tall, narrow infobox images make the infobox excessively long
• Short, wide infobox images typically don't show much detail

<p>Most of this would just involve simple cropping or adding blank background, which I could probably get done during a weekend if others agree on this being updated. Of note, this would be more of a practice than anything else as the images would be edited versus being removed. Images other than Infobox images and Icons, as it is, would be unaffected by any changes here. </p> <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Usability_of_files">Usability of files</span></h2> <p>This is one thing that I think should be updated to what's actually done at the Huntik Wiki. While the general idea is to keep files related to Huntik, there's also the question of personal images (for use on user pages and blogs). </p>

• First, should there be a stated limit on personal images? More images in general can make the whole Huntik Wiki load a bit more slowly.
• Should unused personal images be removed after a certain amount of time, after notification?

<p>For screenshots, everything should have at least some use. Much of the images are, currently, on the gallery pages, but they're still typically significant. </p>

• Should the icon screenshots be fully removed as the simplified, black-and-white images are added (save for production errors)?
• Several screens were uploaded before official stock art was available and were just of a single character. Should we keep them or fully replace them with the official art? The main question here is if there's still a use for them. This would mainly be a housekeeping question.

<p>I'm considering looking at updating, and this simplifying, the image licensing choices for the Wiki. Before doing so, I'd like to bounce some ideas around to see what other editors think. </p><p>First, I'll go over what I'd think would be a must - specifically mentioning the copyright holders. This would include Rainbow and Big Bocca , plus Upper Deck for the cards. It's usually best to include all of that information when using images even when "Fair Use" is applied. </p><p>Secondly, I'm considering getting a more cleaned-up selection for licensing during image uploads. I've noted for a while that most of the default options are irrelevant when it comes to Huntik. If this is updated, what schematic should we use? I've got a possibile proposition below (under the current model), but feel free to chime in with other points. </p> <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Current">Current</span></h2>

• Unknown license - this should be deleted as such images will just be removed.
• Own photo - Screenshots, legally, do not fall under here. The closest we have are edited images, many of which are from official sources.
• Wikipedia - This is normally only used for historical figures, but it remains relevant.
• Free licenses - At this point, the licensing template redirects to Fair Use.
• Public domain - No images, except possibly some wikipedia images, falls under the public domain.
• Fair Use - probably 90 - 99% of images on the Huntik Wiki fall under Fair Use.
• Copyright with permission - I'm really not sure when we'd use this instead of Fair Use.

<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Proposition"> Proposition </span></h2>

• Wikipedia - same as above
• Personal Image - images created by the uploader for personal use.
• Fair Use (general) - the current Fair Use licensing, though sourcing all 3 possible copyright holders.
• Edited Image - Fair Use template but mentioning editing by the uploader
• Episode Screenshot - fair use template that cites the copyright holders, refers to image as a screenshot
• Official Art - fair use: cites the copyright holders, refers to image as official art
• TCG Scan - fair use: cites the copyright holders, refers to image as a card scan
• Comics - fair use: cites the copyright holders, refers to image as a comic scan