Please make the main page different from the one on the other SpecWiki. ~Ravengod 16:14, June 15, 2014 (UTC)

That was a main page for our version of that wiki, and focuses more on personal projects then official publications. --Ibexgod

Bad ideas?Edit

I'm having a problem with the "bad ideas, implausibility, grammar and/or organization" part of the project requirements, and whilst I do think we should have some level of grammar and organization as part of said requirements, "bad ideas and implausibility", I'm sorry to say, shouldn't be a deletable offence, or an offence at all. Whilst this wiki should raise better quality material above the rest, I don't think we should stifel creativity in terms of the projects (hell, some implausible projects will most likely be fun, entertaining, and well written). So, barring absolute trash, I don't think we should stop the creation of "implausible" projects on this wiki.

MagneticHyena (talk) 17:54, June 15, 2014 (UTC)

Well, it works okay for a large wiki, but we are relatively small. However, we could warn people about the implausibility of the project, and as long as they are working on improving it, the project will be kept. If implausible projects are not being improved, they will be deleted. ~Ravengod 18:05, June 15, 2014 (UTC)

Whilst I agree that we need plausible and cohesive projects to start this wiki out on, could we at least take a broad approach to the "implausible" category of projects; after all, we never really know what could happen if this, or that occured, just estimations. So, would it be possible for us to keep an open mind out for slightly "implausible" projects, because outright deleting someone's work, as I said, stifles a lot of creativity, and puts people off contributing to the wiki. MagneticHyena (talk) 18:14, June 15, 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Any implausible projects would have to be deleted. We cannot keep junk in a "implausible" category, It'll clutter the wiki. Since this is wiki, we need to put more "official" projects such as Rix, Afroterra, Sheatheria, the Neocene eg. --JaggerButtermilk (talk) 10:12, June 17, 2014 (UTC)JaggerButtermilk

Ever since I joined wikia, i've always been attracted to the way Alternate History run their wiki; effciently and clean, and as such they're one of the biggest wiki's on the entire network. Now, over there, they do have a implausible category (they call it "Alien Space Bats"), yet still there is no (or at least minimal) clutter, and I really believe that a policy of not deleting "implausible" projects (or pages) should be pursued; it increases the number of pages, draws people in, and expands creativity that people like to see out of a wiki like ours. Now, I'm not saying pages without any content at all (or absolutely miserable set-ups) shouldn't be deleted or at least helped, but in order to grow this wiki, we need to pursue non-deletion strategies (and for the love of god, advertise the wiki on the wikia network). MagneticHyena (talk) 11:03, June 17, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with MHyaena. --Ibexgod

I disagree, cause they don't allow other people to criticize other projects, and improving them. I just said to a page that if Theia doesn't strike Earth humanity and earthly life would most likely cease to exist, then an admin blocked me. That is how obnoxious the administrators are. And there wiki is quite cluttered and have random junk. JaggerButtermilk (talk) 11:04, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

So bringing this back up, we never really came to a conclusion here. But I think this could be a good idea. There's been no counterpoints, other then wiki size, (Jagger simply brought up a grudge with Alt Hist), and it would expland our reach and appeal. Now, this doens't mean except any random junk. For example, an implausible project that really is trying to be plausible. However, something with an unlikely scenario that knows this going in (a "what if" of sorts) here and there from experienced members would be a welcome addition. ~~Myotragus 23:57, November 4, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with this. I assume you might be referencing Frozen in Time… ~Ravengod 23:24, November 5, 2014 (UTC)

No, I simply came to recognize that you can't ignore this side of spec evo after being on the forums for awhile. ~~Myotragus 23:46, November 7, 2014 (UTC)


Could we get a larger version of the logo at the top of the site at the top of the mainpage? ~~Ibexgod

I could do that, but you would need to wait about ten hours… ~Ravengod 01:21, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
That's ok. ~~Ibexgod

Is that what you wanted? MagneticHyena (talk) 05:19, June 18, 2014 (UTC)


Could we have the slider re-done to actually link to stuff? In addition, we should have only original and official art in the slider, no modified stuff. Also, can we move the slider to the top of the page?

New LayoutEdit

I like the projects template (even though you didn't make it), but I think we need a news column. Perhaps I could make an easily modifiable template for that? I do need something to input; right now my only idea is to put a notice about the new namespace (arrives in 2-3 days). ~Ravengod 23:34, July 11, 2014 (UTC)

Could you simply make a news template connected to the "News and Announcements" board? Also, why on earth is the Welcome template flashing colours? It should be a solid green. To keep the wiki clean and consistent looking. ~~Myotragus 00:38, July 12, 2014 (UTC)

Glitchy TemplatesEdit

What on earth happened to the Welcome Template? ~~Myotragus 22:06, July 18, 2014 (UTC)

That was intentional. Although honestly the olive colouring isn't that good. I'll stick with white. ~Ravengod 22:42, July 18, 2014 (UTC)
I personally like how it was before. ~~Myotragus 23:19, July 18, 2014 (UTC)
It can't be too boring, or identical to that of Walking With Wikis. That makes it not original. It's already pretty similar, I don't think it needs to get any more similar than it already is. ~Ravengod 23:32, July 18, 2014 (UTC)
Compromise: We'll make it not like Walking With Wikis while removing the background image. ~Ravengod 00:38, July 20, 2014 (UTC)
The template should logically have the logo, and having in the background is very ugly. So feel free to mess with the general look and organization, but keep it mostly the same. ~~Myotragus 01:20, July 20, 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I'll keep the logo in the foreground. But right now it's pretty much identical to Walking With Wikis, so let me make it somewhat unique. ~Ravengod 04:06, July 20, 2014 (UTC)
Oh, and the other templates on the main page look plain ugly, so we'll definitely need to change them. ~Ravengod 04:09, July 20, 2014 (UTC)
It looks like Wikipedia now. I think we'll keep it at this. ~Ravengod 04:56, July 20, 2014 (UTC)

Welcome TemplateEdit

Okay, so I added an image to the background so it's not distracting. Do you think I should keep it, remove it or expand it so I goes across? (By the way, this is the image on the old wiki which our logo is based off. I made it black and white.) ~Ravengod 16:30, July 20, 2014 (UTC)

Also, when editing main page templates, please add <noinclude>[[Category:MainPage Templates]]</noinclude> instead of just [[Category:MainPage Templates]], as the latter adds that category to the main page. ~Ravengod 17:29, July 20, 2014 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.