Talk:Guilds/Conworlders

Welcoming seems something anyone can do...or more like Yunzhong can do...Serprex 23:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't mind welcoming new contributors. I actually had an idea of setting up a generic welcome template to put on each new user's main page (Before they edit) that'll help guide them around Novelas. I was also toying with the idea of 'badges', something like medals that are given to users who are members of specific guilds, or who contribute in specific areas. --Ex Machina 04:31, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

You mean like this?

Yunzhong  Hou  5000+ edits 18:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

It's done with  ~ . Yunzhong  Hou  5000+ edits 18:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's pretty much what I was talking about. Here, I'm going to move this to Template talk:welcome. --Ex Machina 19:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Creation Policy
I agree with the new policy. Due to the few users this site has as it stands, it would do us well to take the time to assist in the development of Conworlds already existing. I've been watching Furscape as it's being put together, and I have to admit, it has piqued my interest. I've also got some more plans brewing for Aethyrbridge. But since the idea of a wiki is to collaborate, I'm going to start spending more time helping to form the other conworlds on the site.

One question: Should we keep to the "Top" conworlds in focusing development, or should we try to bring the lesser ones more up to speed?

--Ex Machina 23:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

That is up to you,though N has become quite inactive to my sadness.And Furscape was the straw that broke the camel's back,as I believe I have also talken to you about not having a stable conworld.User:Serprex 23:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The New Creation Policy, should be more clearly defined. As it stands, I can only Guess that it means not to make more Conworlds, but the text used to describe it isn't clear enough for me to understand it. --from  Modred . (speak to) 01:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Or is the description located elsewhere? --from  Modred . (speak to) 01:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Merging Conworlds
I should like to see the Neverending Wiki and Lorica merge, much as I have already merged Lorica and Quest. We could also add WorldWiki, Odoi, and the Mysterious Unknown to that, to create the "Old World" (fantasy).

Entries from Basilicus constitute the "Real World"--realism.

Aethyrbridge could become a particular node within Furscape. Add to that Starcraft Alternate, Super Soldier, and Wikiverse, and we have the "New World"--science fiction.

Thus we would have three conworlds. Each of these could have its own portal. How does that sound?

Yunzhong  Hou  5000+ edits 23:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll answer for my projects as best I can; I always like the idea of merging stories together. But Odoi and Mysterious Unknown are modern day. So they couldn't merge with Neverending (though, Odoi's still in the works so it might change drastically (but probably not that drastically). Supersoldier could probably fit in with Aethyrbridge (see Supersoldier/Game and Aethyrbridge/Datajack (though it doesn't say that it's possible there, it seems like it should be possible to create a game which feels real in which you play from the perspective of the character) But Supersoldier is Interactive Fiction, I didn't think it was a conworld? --from  Modred . (speak to) 00:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm really rather against merging Aethyrbridge, since it appears to be soft sci-fi, whereas Furscape is hardcore realism (which is why I'm a tad leery about alien races in the first place, but if they're done right...). Bl a st  01,03,07 0549 (UTC)

Conworld Exclusion Bad
Excluding conworlds isn't something we should be pursuing. How's this? Instead of preventing new ones from coming in, we could let them come in, then combine them with existing conworlds as a different "facet" (see above). Yunzhong  Hou  5000+ edits 00:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with you. I think that letting people make their own conworlds whenever they want would give them a facet to go to, if people have to just continually keep working on one project, I usually will choose to not work on any project instead (eventually. I can't stay with one project continually, eventually I will have to go on to something else for a while. Otherwise I would get stuck just making up the same sort of stuff over, and over, and over...). I believe letting people make up conworlds would attract more people to help on the bigger conworlds. --from  Modred . (speak to) 08:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Lorica and the Neverending Wiki
As for that, I would like to change the articles in the Neverending Wiki so that they are categorized under Lorica and have the Lorica templates, which are more orderly. This would effectively change the name of the Neverending Wiki (a misnomer--it has an end, basically as much progress we've made to it, and it's not a wiki--it's part of one) to Lorica--easier to say by far. Or we could give it a different name... Another issue is page syntax, what with Lorica articles not having any syntax, Quest having Quest/, and the Neverending Wiki articles having Entities/, Atlas/, etc. Maybe it's time we order things... Yunzhong  Hou  5000+ edits 00:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Merging could be hard,but ya...that'd work.I like N/,but if you feel like taking on the task of converting and turning it all to L/ go ahead.Also,lets keep N stuff more laid back.Lorica seems to binding.User:Serprex 00:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by "Lorica seems to binding"? Yunzhong  Hou  5000+ edits 00:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems to have more stricter rules.And the names aren't easy to remember.Which is why I dislike the bush grass move.User:Serprex 01:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

This post might be viewed as rude, I didn't mean to be rude, I am trying to provide a critical viewpoint (by critical I mean "judge with severity"). What's the point of mixing the two? Lorica looks like it's empty. I think (if anything), Lorica could be combined into Neverending, but there's no reason to move Neverending. All Lorica has is the list of species, (as far as I can see). I vote no on moving Neverending into Lorica, but would be fine with doing the opposite (changing Lorica to fit into Neverending, not the other way around). I don't see how Fantasy benefits from having an order like Modern Day Science. It gives it a completely different feel. --from Modred . (speak to) 01:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Case in point.QED.(Modred,why are you so afraid of being rude?Sheesh,you're fear of being rude revolts me...)

Okay, so then should I move all the bestiary pages to more common names then? As for which one goes into which, it doesn't matter all that much, as I'm effectively changing the name of the Neverending Wiki to Lorica. By the end the two will be called the same thing and will be merged. And it's precisely because Lorica is more organized and strict that I'm shifting N.E.W. into it, and not the other way around--I'm modifying the N.E.W. pages as I go along. Yunzhong  Hou  5000+ edits 02:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I agree that Lorica is more organized and stuff... But that doesn't help a Fantasy Beastiary (in my opinion).

Okay... here's what I want: a Beastiary page where it's ordered via a method similar to the way the current one is (regardless of whether there are other Beastiary pages listing things by Evolution or Family or whatnot). Those pages to me (and probably newcomers) are confusing. So: keeping the current beastiary order and naming convention alive in some form will make me happy. --from  Modred . (speak to) 02:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, hopefully I'll get around to establishing a user-friendly system for the bestiary. Yunzhong  Hou  5000+ edits 02:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Ya,I've never like Lorica...User:Serprex 02:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)