Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki

Welcome to Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki. You may wish to create or login to an account in order to have full editing access to this wiki.


Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki

Okay... can somebody not me tweak this so it has the "MissingPiece" image and the header "You left a piece out!"? The stub notice as it is isn't very eye-catching. --M Sipher 06:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Something's missing!

This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki by expanding it.

Thank for helping me... pull myself together.

This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki by expanding it.

I really just don't think that image works. At all. If you disagree, though, feel free to replace everything before <includeonly> with that code, though. --Suki Brits 07:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Trying with reloaded and tweaked image... --M Sipher 07:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I think a new quote might work better. That quote is associated with another rather well-known scene, one we already ruled out using when discussing an image to use, so it seems incongruous with this image. Possibly I'm just pedantic, though. --Sntint 08:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I think the missing faceplate works better of the two, despite my love for Scrounge. But I think a quote not associated with Kup works better, yes. --ItsWalky 16:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
" never ends!" IS very Primey... hm. I'm sure there's a Prime quote somewhere that works. --M Sipher 16:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Ahah, something from "City of Steel", where bits of Prime are missing and need to be put back together...--M Sipher 18:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki by expanding it.

Hmmmm. If we could come up with a suitable quote... --M Sipher 08:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC) (bumping because this prolly got lost in the metric fuckton of minor edits I did overnight, input desired. A different image?)

I prefer the faceplate-less Prime, because it fits the unfinished nature of stubbed articles. Second picture of what's his face looks obvious, even to a non-comic reader such as myself, that his arm was ripped out, not simply unfinished. But I can understand if people (at first glance) don't notice that Prime is missing his faceplate. --FFN 15:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I dislike faceplateless Prime because I think it carries a connotation that there's only one or two holes to fill in. In the vast majority of cases- stub articles are empty. We'd be better served by City of Steel prime in pieces.
If we're actually requesting pictures-- I think the stub article picture should be a 6x2 BTR brick with BTR Demolishor's head propped against it. "It's in bitty pieces, help put it together."
Besides, i don't think we have a single UT messagebox. -Derik 01:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Minimalism is a lost art

I just ran into the new stub template on Grand Maximus, and I do mean ran into- my eye comes to a crashing halt.

I like the old one. It was simple, to the point and it didn't draw unnecessary attention to itself.

I-- I was goign to explain why, using lots and lots of words, but I really can't force the feeling out into such a straight line, except this; I fucking hate the news stub template, turn it back please. -Derik 17:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

What makes this notice template any different than the others? I would think that drawing attention is a good thing for a stub notice. That way people are more likely to notice the article is crying out for attention. --Steve-o 17:40, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Just be thankful we're not like other wikis who sometimes put the stub right at the top of the page. --FFN 17:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
If by "unnecessary attention" you mean "any attention". I WANT people to notice the stub notice at a casual glance. That's the whole POINT. "HELLO. YES YOU. THIS NEEDS FIXING." And a goofy-looking Prime missing his mouthplate is pretty eye-catching. Hell, I'm of the opinion Stub notices should be at the TOP of the articles rather than lingering at the bottom where people have to scroll down to notice it's there, assuming they do the first part. If we can compress it horizontally and have a way of letting it be on the same "line" as the PicsNeeded or similar templates that go up top, all the better. If anything, it should encourage people to fill in the holes so the box can go away. --M Sipher 17:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm gonna add to this by noting that putting the tag with an eye-catching image up top is INVITING people to participate in this wiki. By up-front saying "we need some help", holy crap, we might GET that help. We might also get vandals and morons, but we get those ANYWAY, so why not lay the groundwork for hopefully getting some GOOD people in on this in the process? I'd rather project an air of "hey folks, come on in and contribute! (Though we're carefully watching what you add.)" --M Sipher 18:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be much better if someone lowered the eye-searing level in Photoshop. --FortMax 18:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


I'm an opponent of the "...". Should we all start typing things like they sound in our head? The ellipsis has its uses, but this is not one of them. (This goes for the whole wiki.) Also, I liked the "missing" or "left a piece out" messages better than the "pull myself together" message, because Prime is 'missing' a piece. Just my thoughts. --Crockalley 15:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

It's a direct quote. We're not going to use punctuation inaccurate to a quote just because you find ellipsis unaesthetic, if that's what you're requesting. -Rotty 16:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I was not aware of it being a direct quote. May I ask from where? --Crockalley 16:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Sub... Stubs?

While browsing Wikipedia today, I noticed that several given WikiProjects have their own specialized stub templates. Now, I'll grant that we're not Wikipedia nor should we be, but it did make me wonder if a few sub-categories of the stubs category wouldn't help us get things done faster by directing users interested in working on certain types of articles to stubs of that article type. I could for example see the following:

I don't think we'd need much more than those three, personally. Any other stubs could get the generic stub template, meaning all four categories would be fairly easy to browse, with the three new ones being treed to being subcategories of the main stub cat. What do you guys think?--RosicrucianTalk 19:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Wookieepedia has much the same thing. It's certainly something to consider. I don't think we'd need to change the image or quote, just the category that gets placed in the article. We should probably also keep the "generic" stub for those handful of things that don't fall under the others, like creators and the odd technology/location articles we have. (Note to self once current project is done... look into really boosting the number of articles on non-character/story "stuff", like Action Master vehicles and weapons with funny powers.) --M Sipher 20:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I've created some initial samples with minor rewordings just to show that they're different. Image and quote are entirely the same.--RosicrucianTalk 20:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
This is a great idea. I was just thinking the other day that we should do this to sort out the laaaarge stubs category a bit. --Steve-o 22:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright, A-E in the stubs are now sorted. Sweet Jesus we have a lot of character stubs. I'm taking a break before I start inserting the word "blast" into everyday conversation. Feel free to pick up where I left off. If not, I'll start in again when I'm feeling masochistic once more.--RosicrucianTalk 01:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

It might be worth our time to look at the list and see which of these AREN'T really stubs, or are just a nugget of info or two away from not being stubs, and quickly correct that. (Needing pics ain't the same thing.) --M Sipher
I considered that as I worked, but ultimately decided not to make those sorts of judgments this go around to make the work go quicker. I'm thinking once they're sorted that kind of decision might be easier to parse.--RosicrucianTalk 01:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

F-J were decidedly less painful, and are now done.--RosicrucianTalk 20:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Letters K-O are now knocked out (har har).--RosicrucianTalk 23:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
There are an ungodly number of characters with S-names. But the sorting is current to S now.--RosicrucianTalk 02:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Alright, I'm done. All the stubs should be sorted now. There's still quite a few that don't fit into these three categories, but there's much less in the main category at least.--RosicrucianTalk 22:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposed change to Stub Template

It is no secret that the current stub template makes the baby Jesus cry. It takes the giant frickin huge Messagebox template, intended for displaying at the top of articles, and smushes it intot he middle of them. And unlike Template:Spoiler, it does not strip the template down to a tiny managable mid-article size- it revels in it's American excess and slaps us in the face with the metaphorical penis of oit's glaring... whatever.

I hate it. I hate it Gregory, so much...

This is Stub now:

Kup piece.gif
You left a piece out!

This article is a stub and is missing information. You can help Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki by expanding it.

This is the Stub of the Future!

Thanks for helping me... pull myself together.
Thanks for helping me... pull myself together.
This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

Note: It has similar proportions to other inline templates!

It is small but tasteful, has about the same visual footprint as the wikipedia-standard stub template. Unlike the current template it is not the visual equivalent of blasting you with a airhorn. And it retains the topquote; sure it only made sense for the mildly-clever top-level message boxes and is obnoxiously self-indulgent for mid-article utilitarian templates... but people seem attached to it!

Let's see what the template looks like without it!

This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

Ooh, sleek! Sure, it highlights how woefully inappropriate the almost-complete wooberless Optimus Prime picture is for a template that's supposed to adorn articles that are often nothing but an empty skeleton... but replacign the picture is tomorrow's worry! Bigger maybe?

This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

"Why my Shoulders hurt?" Needs: Toy section
"Why my Shoulders hurt?"
This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

"Why his Shoulders hurt?"
"Why his Shoulders hurt?"
This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

The file-folder look:

Thanks for helping me... pull myself together.
Thanks for helping me... pull myself together.
This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

My fav:

Something's missing...
Something's missing...
This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

Something's missing... This article needs: UK Appearances
Something's missing...
This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

Responses needed, nay, demanded! Let not the current travesty of a stub template long endure over our fine republic!

Also, the current stub template doesn't display properly on the web browser 70% of the human race users. So that's an issue, arguably. -Derik 20:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind the current stubs, because they do the job of DEMANDING you contribute. Or DIE. --FFN 20:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Uh, yeah. The whole point is to have a nice big sign that says THIS IS INCOMPLETE. The "airhorn" is totally intentional. That's not something you want to have some tiny, meek little thing that's easily overlooked for, plus there's no point to the pictures then because they're too small to see what they ARE. --M Sipher 00:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Contribute-- or we'll rip your face off?
I have never been moved to contribute by this stub tag, ever. The big ones disincentive me, I feel insulted and talked down too. They are assuredly Playskool. -Derik 00:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, it's SUPPOSED to be loud and obnoxious? Silly me, perish the crazy thought that 1-line 20pixel tall stubs are good enough for every other wiki in exist ace. apparently we want airhorns! Those I can provide. -Derik 00:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Complete lack of humorous tone and no gag-captions are also "good enough" for "every other" wiki out there, as are page-opening infoboxes. Clearly, adhering to how "every other" wiki does things is not a priority. The template's whole point is to be big and noticeable and easy to read, which none of those proposed changes are. --M Sipher 01:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Let me at the site CSS file. I can make it do dances, whirl-a-gig, whatever! Hell, let me mod the site Javascript file and I'll have the stub template making noises. Doesn't that sound awesome, and attention-getting?
I think the stub template it too small! Let's make it a whole page tall, and eye-searing pink and yellow like a Japanese porn magazine! And let's embed a flash applet! EYE CATCHING, that's our goal! -Derik 01:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I agree with the stance that the stub notice should be large and eye-catching - obnoxious, if you will.
I'm not particularly endeared to your arguements here, Derik, with the way you're presenting yourself. Should it seem that your arguement is entirely "I don't like it", and that you would rather throw a fit than debate the matter?--Sntint 01:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I find it difficult to debate a point of view I so fundamentally disagree with. Sipher thinks that templates used within the article body should have the huge giant messagebox template designed to go on the top of articles, not the less-obtrusive-but-hardly-invisible version used by the Spoiler template. I think the complete opposite. He says this causes people to want to contribute- presumably in order to get rid of the giant fucking obnoxious boxes shitting all over the article body. I consider them a disincentive.
I acknowledge that it's possible that there are more people that adhere to his view than mine- but I think the degree to which the boxes uglify the articles outweighs any diffuse benefits of making them giant.
Not to mention- this only takes into account the portion of people using this wiki who are potential editors. For the far greater number who will read and never contribute they merely deface the article to no benefit at all.
Sipher calls the <blink> tag vandalism. That seems to fly in the face of his own statement that the templates are supposed to be loud and obnoxious. Or do I misinterpret? -Derik 01:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you misinterpret and hyperexaggerate. As usual. "Big and noticeable" is what I said. You said "loud and obnoxious", which also adequately describes, well, you. The current stub tag incarnation, without your petty "addition", accomplishes being easily noticeable and easy to read just fine. --M Sipher 01:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Then it looks to me like the matter should just be left to a vote. No changes should be made to the template in either favor for at least a few days- long enough to assume a decent number of people have had a chance to look at this issue and chime in. Perhaps longer than usual, considering there is a holiday on the horizon.
The "blink" tag is considered vandalism, I believe, because the impression is that you put it there to *be* a vandal. In context it looked only reactionary and spiteful. You probably meant it to make a point, but such points are often lost when presented like that. There are more civil methods, which generally will better reach your audience. This seems to be something you have trouble with.
In short; quit being such a spaz. --Sntint 01:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Pfft. Injecting reasoned discourse in my soapboxery. Unsporting yo.
(Stupid democracy, I shall assuredly lose. ...maybe if I made my template orange to appeal to Walky...)-Derik 02:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
MissingPiece2.jpg Something's missing...  —  This article is a stub. You can help Teletraan I by expanding it.

I like the bigger ones because they grab your attention more, and I think the smaller ones make the image so small that you can't see what they are, removing all meaning from the catchy header. --ItsWalky 03:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I know this isn't the main point, but either there's something terribly wrong with Derik's monitor or there's soemthing wrong with mine. The small text in your examples is illegible. Could this be influencing your attitude toward the standard-sized headers?

I first noticed this with the storylinks, which I've ruefully learned to live with. those are at least reasonable. Chip 04:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I can read them, but I do think they are a little smaller than I would've expected. On the other hand, I don't think they need to be changed. I don't recall any mention of this prior to now. How old is your monitor? --Sntint 13:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm good with the storylinks' size, because they are, after all, links. One click takes you to a page with the title in great big letters up top. they're something you'd WANT to keep small and unobtrusive, since they are often enough in the middle of paragraphs. --M Sipher 20:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

My thoughts on the points raised:

  1. I strongly disagree with M Sipher that "the whole point" of the template is to be an annoying airhorn. The "whole point" of the template is to state "this article is a stub". Anything else it might do is a matter of subjective preferences.
  2. I accept that at least a handful of editors find the disruption to article presentation to be a motivation, but I do not find it motivating, and I think Derik's statement that most readers are not potential editors is apropos. I made the same points myself several months ago and was basically dismissed. I do not think we should be defacing our own articles in hopes of making ourselves feel guilty. Especially since it obviously isn't very effective, considering the number of stubs we have.
  3. I think Derik made a valid point with the blinking text. It forced Sipher to admit that there is a subjective line to be drawn about how much distraction the template should provide, how hard it is to overlook. The argument "we want people to notice it" is not a complete argument, and is consequently unsound unless elaborated upon.
  4. That said, the current stub template is not, to me, obnoxious, especially when placed at the bottom of the article where it belongs. Placed at the top of an article, I have a problem with it. It's too big for that. We already have disambig templates and continuity notes at the top of every page before the article actually starts, and that is more than enough stuff up there. Incidentally, I feel the same way about the "images needed" template. It's super annoying to see it at the top of so many pages, and should be moved to the bottom (and probably made wider to match the others).
  5. The small font sizes provide problems for me too. On Template talk:Storylink I discovered that my browser -- Opera -- was rendering the storylink text at 9pt while Firefox and MSIE rendered it at 10pt, simply because of differences in the browsers' default text sizes. When Derik increased the storylink text to 80% (instead of 70 or 75, I guess?) it became legible for me. Probably the same sort of thing is happening here.
  6. The shrunk-down pictures for the notebox template are also too small. Any images used with the notebox -- assuming we keep it -- would have to be carefully chosen to be "legible" at that size. The Prime and Scrounge pictures don't fit that bill.
  7. I prefer the Scrounge picture and "something's missing" text to the current Prime and "pull myself together" quote, regardless of what size/style we use.

--Steve-o 05:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

New Image/Text

In an effort to increase the variety of image/quote sources for this wiki... What say we replace G1 Prime here with...

I cannot remain in this unacceptable operational status!

This article is a stub and is missing information. You can help Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki by expanding it.

Unfortunately, right now I'm not in a position to check the episode to get the exact line (YouTube is blocked here). I've got a couple other specialized Stub templates brewing I'll Sandbox up and propose in a bit, but I wanted to get this one out there, since it's about perfect for a generic "this article is missing a LOT" stub. Or maybe use Kup in the normal "stub" template and put Meggy here in as the "charstub" since that's gonna be the more visible one, and Animated is big right now. Actually, I think I like that plan better... --M Sipher 18:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

The exact quote is "I cannot remain in this unacceptable operational status!" --KilMichaelMcC 18:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
There. So. Thoughts? --M Sipher 18:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Hahahah, I love it. Excellent. Come to think of it? There's no reason that this widespread template has to remain the same forever. I could see switching it out once or twice a year as an ongoing thing. -- Repowers 19:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Awesome! --FFN 20:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)