Paws of Destiny now streaming!

Filter Posts Reset

Categories

Sort By

  • All
  • Following
This post is locked.
• 2/7/2016

Reddit ??

Hey I was wondering if you guys were planning on making a subreddit of some sort? I use reddit alot and it would be awesome to have a place where people could like, post fanarts and stuff? Idk, just, wondering.
0 1
This post is locked.
• 2/6/2016

Real World Locations

So I'm thinking it might be prudent to include real-world locations featured in the series, like China and Japan-thoughts?
1 1
This post is locked.
• 1/6/2016

Love

There should be a poll on who po should be with.
0 2
This post is locked.
• 1/2/2016

Timeline

Could us make a universe's timeline of the Kung Fu Panda franchise? This could be useful for place correctly each of the six main movies, the shorts, and the synopsis of Kung Fu Panda: Legends of Awesomeness.
0 4
This post is locked.
• 8/28/2014

Article Comments?

I've been hesitating to post about this, but it's now gotten to the point where I'm seriously taking it into consideration. For reasons that I'll explain below, I think it may be time to ditch the old talk page system and enable article commenting on this wiki.

My own reasoning
Long version
When I first came onto this wiki, I wanted to organize it in a way that was mainly productive for users, paying no attention to how "technical" things got. This is because my starting wiki was based on a children's fantasy book series--which, even though it's also a subject primarily targeted towards children, it attracted the kind of people who (obviously) are the least likely to say, "Eh, reading takes too much time. I'll just watch the movie!" So, coming from this kind of environment, I simply assumed people would be okay with this technical nature because of it being a wiki website: people expect to see and use a site consisting of a bunch of codes. There's nothing else to it, right?
That way of thinking has changed a lot for me in recent years as Wikia, websites, technology in general, and even people in general have all become more visually oriented and accustomed to eliminating steps and bringing instantaneous results. Seeing all this happen made me realize two things:

I never took into consideration the differences between who would be frequent readers and who would be frequent users;
Both technology and people have changed, and to have one be successful with the other, you need to simplify as much as possible with visuals and easy-to-use tools.
This is why in recent months I've been trying to find ways to get more people involved without getting too "technical". As a result, we've had more socializing activities going on around here. In light of continuing this, I think it may be beneficial to enable article commenting rather than our slightly more productive, but less used talk pages.

tl;dr version
The hard truth of it is: Kung Fu Panda's primary audience is young, movie-going people with shorter attention spans than book-reading people. And in the best interest of the wiki becoming both easier to use and more popular with its subject's primary audience, I think this may be an important step to take.

The pros & cons (currently)
Here's how I see article commenting affecting our wiki:


Pros
Simply and honestly, they're easier to use. Talk pages require more steps in posting a message, and also have a specific style guide that needed to be followed in order to read a conversation easily. Article commenting eliminates these extra steps.
They're more visually oriented versus a wall of weirdly indented text on talk pages.
Because of its easy use and visual presence, it may provide more activity and feedback from the wiki's users.

Cons
Its easy use makes it more susceptible in attracting non-feedback messages (e.g. "i love this character!!"), which may require more article patrolling.
This could potentially be a pro if we want to have something to do. I see it as an opportunity to maybe organize a group of people to regularly patrol comments...
I'm not too sure on this, but I would think having a bunch of comments on the page would increase the article's byte size, which would be counterproductive to the goal from this thread.
For discussion
There's my longer-than-anticipated tidbit. Didn't think I'd ever argue so much for this feature, but hopefully my thoughts made sense.
Other thoughts? Opinions? Should I maybe try to move this to a community vote?
0 8
• 8/26/2014

Branch Out Larger Articles?

Yet another of my brainstormed ideas, though actually I think a user suggested this to me a while back. Haven't thought about it much until recently...
I've noticed a lot of wikis (though not all that seem to need it) like to separate some of the sections in their longer, "larger" articles into sub-pages in this format: "[article name]/[section name]". So for example, if we took Po's page and separated the Biography section from it, the new sub-page would be titled "Po/Biography".

Benefit
Supposedly this kind of organizing helps the page to load better by decreasing the article's byte size. This list of long articles shows the large articles we currently have, as well as their byte sizes. If I remember right from something I read, I think anything past 30 KB (30,000 bytes) should try to be shortened because they'll not do as well on older computers. Therefore, this would be a good method for shortening articles.

Setback?
However, what I wonder the most about (other than the amount of work it will take) is how readers will treat this separation of info. If we implemented this, there could be two kinds of readers:

Those that click somewhere to view the information they're looking for, but find out they have to take an extra step and go somewhere else to view it, and then click away from the site/page;
Those that click somewhere to view the information they're looking for, see that it's been moved somewhere else, and then click on the provided link with the hope that there will be plenty of the info they were looking for.
The latter is, in my view, the ideal reader for any kind of website; the former, however, is the reality. When searching up information, most people want to have that information right there in front of them as soon as they've done the one, single, required step to obtain it. Sad to say, but taking an extra step is not ideal for most people, and the odds of them taking that extra step are quite low.
Therefore, by separating section information from the main article, it could decrease the odds of people viewing the article--or in a worst-case scenario, the entire wiki.

For discussion
I'm not that sure of my opinion on this, which is why I'm posting about it. What do you think about branching out long articles? Will it actually help the wiki? Would it be worth the time to move stuff around?
EDIT: Right off the bat as I finished typing this: An alternative would be to have a "condensed" version on the main article, and then have the longer one on the sub-page. It would be more work, but if the concern is about how readers will treat the article information, then this may be more helpful than just moving all the content to another location.
0 2
• 8/26/2014

Application Process for Becoming Wiki Staff?

Another of my brainstormed ideas.
A lot of wikis seem to have some kind of application process for their users to request being wiki staff. Though we're not in great need of staff right now, I think having one could be useful for the future. It gives each user a fair opportunity to show their eligibility for doing special tasks around this wiki, which I think a lot of Wikia users appreciate. Plus, we'll definitely need the extra help once we do become more active, and it'll be easier to have a line of applicants ready than just "analyzing" everyone (which is kind of why I've been doing so far).
Obviously there will need to be a specific list of qualifications for each category: admin, rollback, and chatmod. In the past, all I've done is look at how active the user is, how they edit, and how they get along with other users (both on- and off-wiki). We could use similar information for making qualifications in each category, and maybe add more if needed.
Thoughts? Ideas?... Yea? Nay? Meh?
0 4
This post is locked.
• 8/25/2014

Social Media Expansion?

Another one of my brainstormed suggestions. This is something I've wanted input from the community on for a while now...
We keep our editors informed of wiki stuff and recent franchise news outside of the wiki through our social media profiles. And from the stats I receive from each profile, they're very useful and quite effective! Social media is the ideal way nowadays to get word out about something, and with the wiki currently lacking in activity, we'll need all the help we can get.
Currently the wiki uses Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and YouTube, but I've been wondering if maybe we should expand outside of those?

Expansion ideas
While brainstorming, I've been trying to think about what platforms are popular, used by a decent amount of people, and (more importantly) which ones might have a KFP following in them. These are my top three suggestions:

Tumblr - If there is any consideration on expanding our social media, this is at the top of the priority list. I've noticed that a LOT of KFP fans like to hang around Tumblr, which is why this would be the best choice set up camp there. A plus is that DreamWorks has a Tumblr, which could be very useful for the future content-wise when KFP3 kicks into gear.
Instagram - This choice seems to be a little easier to use compared to Tumblr, though I'm not 100% sure about its KFP following. I noticed DreamWorks has an Instagram profile, as well as a few of their artists that are working on KFP3, which I think are good enough reasons to maybe set one up.
Pinterest - This is the lowest of the three, though not really completely out of consideration. I have no idea if there are KFP pinners out there, but it's a social media site centered around pictures, which we'll definitely have a lot of.
(Any others? Post about them in the comments.)
Let me know your thoughts about these in the comments, as well as any other social media platform ideas. KFP fans seem to be everywhere, but we want to get somewhere that will be most effective for grabbing KFP fans' attention.

Managers
Also, something worth mentioning here: If we do end up expanding into other social media platforms, then I'll need some help with managing them. I'm well off (so far) with managing Facebook, Twitter and Google+ by myself, but I may need some help with YouTube and any other profiles we add for the wiki.
More details will come later once we've decided if we'll actually expand our social media, but if anyone is interested, feel free to make mention of it. We'll work out all the details at a later date. :)
1 10
• 8/25/2014

Wiki Projects

I recently brainstormed a handful of suggestions for the wiki, and I think this is a good place to start...
I've noticed lately that there isn't a whole lot going on around here; aside from the occasional additions/fixes to a few articles, the wiki is kind of dead at the moment. This could be for a wide variety of reasons (busy lives, off-season for the franchise, etc.), but I think one of the big ones is that no one really knows what to do around here. The way we currently have wiki tasks set up is unclear, especially for newer editors.
So, what I think might help is if we organize some kind of system with wiki projects.

The (broad) scope
Rather than just throwing out random suggestions for improving the wiki (like lists of articles that need "improving"), we can have entire pages or threads with more specific tasks that can behave as a checklist. This kind of system would help us keep track of prioritized tasks, and when they do or don't get done.
Along with having organized tasks, we can also get people more involved. If someone wanted to focus on just one or two particular projects, we could gather those people together as a team to tackle a specific list of tasks. But this will be an eventual goal, of course, because we're not that plentiful on editors currently. For now we could just have an open task list for each project.

For discussion
I'm not sure of all the rest of the details yet, which is one of the purposes of posting it here in the Forums. I'll post mine as they come, but here are a few things we should work out:

What kind of projects we should have
How we should organize the projects (On a separate namespace page? Here in the Forums?)
What you personally would want to be involved with
Thoughts? Ideas?
0 4
This post is locked.
• 2/7/2014

create a fun and games board

justa place where you can play chat games or trivia people on threads.
0 5
This post is locked.
• 7/8/2013

Getting rid of the ship blogs

(Continuing from mine and Vapor's discussion on getting rid of the shipping blogs. Anyone is free to contribute to this if they want.)


VaporMist said:
It's not just that it's annoying, it's how it's been more of a hindrance to the wiki than anything, way more than stuff like the badge system was. The cons far outweigh the pros, and I don't see how moving it to the forums would really change anything.


Well, the badge thing (I think) was a different matter, especially because it was (and still is) flawed. But anyway, this discussion isn't about the badges...
I should've posted about this weeks ago, but here's why I'm trying to be supportive of (or trying to revise, rather) the socializing activities on this wiki - shipping discussions included:
I've been conflicted about social activities on here since I first came to the wiki. ("How does this help our articles?", "This is a wiki, not a forum or fan club," and all that stuff.) Particularly just before "30 Days" was about to start, I wasn't sure whether the event's discussion activities should take place on the forums or the blogs. Then that led to me thinking about how we keep our social activities organized, and how the blogs weren't really helping with it. So I decided to seek some advice from some other editors on Wikia, and around that time this staff blog was posted. I left this comment, and two users (one being the staff member who posted the blog) gave some pretty good feedback.
In sum, this is what they said:

Community socializing can help bring in new editors who maybe don't want/don't know how to edit articles.
It helps new editors to connect with other users and feel more comfortable with editing. (This is why they think it wouldn't be a drawback or hindrance to the wiki, which is one of my biggest concerns.)
Because our topic is more directed towards younger people, socializing is a definite draw-in for new editors.
It can help make the wiki more successful by having not only an encyclopedic resource, but also a fan discussion area. (This is something I think will be important later, particularly when KFP3 starts to kick into high-gear in the media.)
Forums are better to host social activities than blogs because (1) they only show up once in the Activity list; (2) there's less of a chance to have repeated topics (if we organize it right); and (3) it allows you to mix up conversations: wiki-related and subject-related.
I'm not saying that these two users know 100% everything to managing wiki socializing (although the staff member definitely has more experience than I do), but I do think we should at least give their suggestions a try. And if we see that it's not working out here, then we can always change it up later.
So more specific to the shipping discussions, it's for sure one of the more popular subjects in the fandom. I wish it wasn't, but it is. If we're going to give the social stuff a try, we need to have at least one thread or board with ships.
0 13
This post is locked.
A FANDOM User
• 2/18/2013

Creating A Page For Shippings

I believe there should be a page for shipping on this, cause i totally ship Tigress and Po. I have all the information needed to make this page already. The shipping name for them is Tipo. (Like typo.) Anyways, if you are interested in doing this, you can email me at Yuuka777@yahoo.com
0 4