Archiving discussions from Current Events.

New Forum!

Hi guys! We're going to put the new Forum feature demo on this wiki this morning, yay. First, I need to put the new top navigation feature on, because that will automatically give us a link to the Forum. I just turned it on, and the Forum is coming next. Admins can do more editing on the top nav here: MediaWiki:Wiki-navigation. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 17:53, July 25, 2012 (UTC)

The Forum is here! Come check it out. :) -- Danny @fandom (talk) 17:58, July 25, 2012 (UTC)
Great! Should we redirect Current Events there? —Scott (message me) 18:07, July 25, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah! I think it's time to archive and redirect. Personally, I won't miss this system a bit. :) Awesome conversations, less awesome interface. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 18:13, July 25, 2012 (UTC)

talk pages

For some time now, I've been noticing that we hardly ever use talk pages anymore. We all start discussions and leave the talk box so it's listed as "active" but very few of us go through them. I'm just as guilty, as I often forget they're there until I have one or two in the queue that I've started myself. That's when I think to go through them and either address issues, or clean up old discussions. I know some of you do that too, but there's got to be a sustainable way to keeping talk pages fresh beyond reminding ourselves in a Current Events post like this.

Is there a new and engaging way we can be handling discussions? A system we can implement that's more interactive and less likely to be forgotten? Anyone have any ideas? —Scott (message me) 17:35, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

I check the talk pages all the time, but I don't always have anything to say. I could take the talk box off after a week, but I'm always afraid that somebody won't see it who could have answered a question, so I leave them up longer. So in short, I don't know what we can do that we're not already doing. -- Ken (talk) 04:40, July 10, 2012 (UTC)
If we're still saying we take it off after a week of inactivity, that's definitely too short these days. When I go through a bunch of them, I leave the ones that have activity on them in the last 3 or 4 weeks.
That's not really what I'm talking about though. I'm interested in brainstorming on ideas that will change the way we use talk pages. Right now we've got a menu link and a feed on WikiActivity, but I don't think people know to use those. Communicating with one another about something we'd like to work on together should be a more engaging experience, and I feel like with years past, we're just not connecting as much and it would be great to get everyone interested in using talk pages again. —Scott (message me) 04:45, July 10, 2012 (UTC)

We'll actually be testing the new Forums demo on this wiki starting next week. :) I'm working on it, it's coming! It's based on the Message Wall system, so it's got the same kind of notifications system, and it'll help us keep track of the conversations.

It won't be connected directly to article pages yet -- this will be v2 of the Forums, the connection to article pages will be part of v3 and v4. So -- if all goes well, it's about a week away. :) -- Danny @fandom (talk) 16:01, July 10, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, yay! I knew this was coming, but I just realized it's been about 6 months since I thought we'd have it live. So, I was hoping to jazz things up in the meantime, since its launch time has been indeterminate. But if it's coming next week, that makes me super excited :) —Scott (message me) 16:04, July 10, 2012 (UTC)
Hooray! It's still going to be fairly primitive, but it's going to be a good beta demo. I'm really excited about it. :) -- Danny @fandom (talk) 17:12, July 10, 2012 (UTC)

Frog and Toad film from Henson

Its been announced that The Jim Henson Company is developing an animated feature film based on Frog and Toad; [1] (to be directed by Cory Edwards) Should this get any mention on the wiki, or is this news not relevant for us? -- Gonzofan (talk) 02:39, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'd say no, that is until a) we know it's actually going to go into production, since there have been some announced Henson productions that end up going nowhere after some time (Power of the Dark Crystal, Cory Edwards' Fraggle Rock movie, etc.); and b) if we find any Muppet relevance or cast and crew connections with the project as it progresses. But, at least for now, I don't think we should cover this. -- Jon (talk) 03:44, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
Since it would go with Optioned Properties, if there's any mention to be made of it, that would be where (all the others are provably dead, and we can note the dates on Frog as far as being announced), but otherwise, it's like Jon said (and if it actually is made, it would be the usual one-page deal, unless Frog and Toad are Creatures, maybe). -- Andrew Leal (talk)

Main page display glitch


On the right you can see what the Main Page looks like to me. Something's not right. Powers (talk) 19:58, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

What's your browser and browser version, and operating system? —Scott (message me) 22:51, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, now I'm seeing it, too. But only when I get there via redirection. All browsers. —Scott (message me) 05:33, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I get there via my browser history, which points to Main_Page. Powers (talk) 00:45, July 7, 2012 (UTC)
It's because the page is taking its properties from "Main_Page" rather than the main page itself. The real main page has no right sidebar so it is much wider than usual. Without that extra space the layout doesn't work. Wikia knows about the new behavior, but there's no real reason (on most wikis) to have a deliberate redirect to the main page so mostly the solution has been to remove them where they exist. Admittedly, this doesn't help with your browser history! -- Wendy (talk)@fandom 02:28, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

Related Videos module

Hi guys -- We're trying out a new Related Videos module in the right rail. Wikia is working on figuring out how to encourage more video content on the site, and this is a first-draft experimental feature. We can populate the module with whatever videos we want to feature -- admins can add videos to the list on MediaWiki:RelatedVideosGlobalList. If you have thoughts about the feature, please post them -- the video team wants more feedback! -- Danny @fandom (talk) 18:00, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

What is RelatedVideos:Kissing Muppets ? Is that what happens when you click the "Add a Video" button on a page? —Scott (message me) 19:41, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
I added the video from that page, so I guess. - Oscarfan 19:45, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
Ugh. That needs to change. We don't need two pages (a File:xyz and a RelatedVideos:xyz) for every video on the wiki. —Scott (message me) 19:48, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
That's weird... I know they're planning to take the "Add a video" button off that module. Enrique, if you want to add more videos, just put 'em on MediaWiki:RelatedVideosGlobalList. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 21:02, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I know why that happened -- it's left over from an earlier version of the feature where people could add videos that would be displayed just on an individual page. Yeah, use the MediaWiki page instead. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 21:04, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Sesame video site links

It seems as though all the links we have to the Sesame Street video site are broken. I had just visited "Daddy Helps with the Dishes" on the site, then used the link on our page and it led me to the song. But, clicking the link on "X Marks the Spot!" led me to the same video. I'm guessing that since the template was made, they changed the way their videos are linked, thus change our template. How should we handle changing the links? - Oscarfan 02:49, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

I think I can fix it. The unique code identifiers appear to be the same, just the url string has changed. —Scott (message me) 03:08, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
That's good. Also, they've made a slightly helpful update; they're starting to change the videos to a higher quality format, with a less distracting logo. It'll be good for getting some better screenshots and such. - Oscarfan 10:47, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
I noticed that. Hopefully it means they'll upgrade the rest of their library. —Scott (message me) 15:53, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, what a pain. And I've been encouraging people to add Sesame Street videos, too. I'm glad you noticed and can fix them. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 16:47, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
The links are working again, at least on several pages I've tried them on. - Oscarfan (talk) 22:57, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Muppets doing voices

Please see User:Sandbox/Muppets_doing_voices. (Moved to Talk:Impersonations of other characters) —Scott (message me) 16:57, June 15, 2012 (UTC)

New lightbox

Hooray! We now have the long-awaited lightbox update live on Muppet Wiki. Click on any picture on the site, and you'll see the new hotness. Pictures in the lightbox are much bigger, with a lot less padding. If there's more than one picture on the page (and this is Muppet Wiki, so obviously there is), then you can cycle through all of them in the same lightbox. There's also a link at the top that takes you immediately to the full-size image -- you don't have to do four clicks and three pageloads to get there!

This is still a demo version -- it's only on ten wikis right now -- and there are a few minor bugs that will get fixed in the next version. The most obvious one is that page links have underscores (Miss_Piggy's_Guide_to_Life). The order of pics in the carousel also feels a little wonky. If you see anything else, let me know; I'll pass it on to the folks working on this.

Between you and me, this project got greenlit because Scott and I both complained so much about how bad the Muppets teaser poster looked in the old lightbox. :) Power to the puppets! -- Danny @fandom (talk) 20:30, June 7, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, happy day! I just sent in a ticket about lightboxes last week, actually. This looks amazing! I love the layout, accessibility, easy to get to extra links and info, etc. So very, very nice.
A couple things (because you knew I would have them):
1) The pin button is a great idea, and would be even better if the preference could be saved so you didn't have to click it every time you loaded a new lightbox (like how the wiki automatically saves your preference when you minimize the content links box at the top of pages with more than 3 headers).
2) It doesn't appear to be showing captions right now. I just clicked through the Kissing Muppets pictures and forgot who some of those people were. The caption would be helpful there.
Other than that, it's lovely! —Scott (message me) 20:46, June 7, 2012 (UTC)
As it is now, the framing extras load first, then the picture you want to see, then it takes a few seconds for the framing to go away. This is a frustrating experience as the picture you're trying to enlarge is being obscured for a lot of that time. Would it be possible for the framing to load ONLY when the mouse goes over those areas? —Scott (message me) 21:09, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
I haven't seen the "wait for the frame to fade" as a problem, because the frame fades as soon as you move your mouse outside the lightbox. I just tried it out, and it looks like it's already become a habit for me to mouse outside the frame as soon as I open the lightbox. I'll show your question to Trevor, and see what he thinks. Thanks... -- Danny @fandom (talk) 21:44, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
My habit is different as other websites don't load the framing first. It shows up only when you mouseover. So it's a bit of an annoyance that there's extra wait time here. —Scott (message me) 21:49, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
Scott -- yes the carousel and top info bar are trying to be too helpful at the moment. In the future we'll supress them on the third+ item viewed. There are dozens of rough edges we'll be ironing out and releasing fixes for in July. Please holler if you find more! -- Trevor (Ohmyn0) @fandom 21:50, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
Also -- We're thinking of where the captions should appear in the lightbox. Suggestions? -- Trevor (Ohmyn0) @fandom 21:51, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
Lightbox caption 01
Lightbox caption 02
Thanks, Trevor! Glad to know the dev team is looking at community feedback.
As for captions, I'm thinking the most logical thing to do would be to replicate the caption as it appears in the table on thumbnail. Here are two screenshots to illustrate what I mean. Often I find myself clicking through a lightbox gallery and I forget what the picture is from. Rather than clicking out of it and scanning all over the page, retaining the caption would make browsing easier. Also, the old version of lightbox didn't keep the formatting or links. It would be nice if those could be retained in the new version. —Scott (message me) 22:09, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

[[File:lightbox demonstration|thumb|150px|left]]

Also, here's a video of how long it takes for the framing to go away for me. I'm using Firefox 12, so it's possible the time delay is different for other browsers. The optimal time delay would be to not show it at all unless your mouse goes over the area where the framing would appear. And then have it go away immediately after your mouse moves away. —Scott (message me) 18:45, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
Lightbox video bionic wiki

Bionic Wiki

Lightbox video muppet wiki

Muppet Wiki

Ah, which reminds me about video embeds in the new lightbox. I noticed that they're smaller now. Here's a screenshot of a video embedded on the Bionic Wiki with the old lightbox, and the same video embedded on Muppet Wiki using the new lightbox. —Scott (message me) 18:47, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Awesome mockups! Maybe I can just give them straight to the devs. :) I was thinking of the same placement but we'll need to think about how they interact with the framing and very large images.

About the framing speed -- the video you embedded shows the desired speed. I agree that it gets annoying the second+ image view but we ("Wikia") have a couple of goals we want to accomplish: 1) train people that there is a carousel of other media 2) train people that their mouse movements control the framing. There's also a balance of speed and obnoxious-flashiness that we need to find.

As for the video size -- yes, it's unfortunate the size was made smaller due to the framing. We have no plans on changing it at the moment but it's something that I'm constantly keeping in the back of my mind. ---- Trevor (Ohmyn0) @fandom 19:24, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good. As for the frame timing, I just ask that the dev team compares with the timing used on other websites. I think people come to expect interactive elements on websites to work in a way that's familiar to them. Obscuring pictures for longer than every other website creates an unsatisfactory experience here in my opinion.
Thanks again, and I look forward to the next version! —Scott (message me) 20:10, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Animated GIFs

I've uploaded some animated GIFs recently, and before it goes any further, I thought we should lay down some ground rules for those who may do so moving forward. First, I have some pretty specific reasoning for using animated versus a still shot. I made an animation of Heather Locklear and Beaker kissing because I'd like all the images on that page to be of the actual on-screen kiss. In that particular instance, the kiss takes place off screen and it doesn't make for a very good representation. The animation for Sarah Michelle Gellar is simply because that's the entirety of their interaction. And thirdly, this one of Chip because it's not flashy and illustrates the puppet's eye-blinking mechanism; which is notable as you don't see it often as compared to other characters for whom it would not be necessary. In all cases, the animation doesn't play automatically when the page loads. You have to click the thumbnail and the animation plays in the lightbox popup. I would be very much against having animations that play automatically within our own content (it's bad enough that people viewing the wiki without an ad blocker have to deal with videos that play automatically and the such). So, I don't know frequently we may want to use them, but I think it's a good idea to use some discretion when we do. —Scott (message me) 23:53, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

I think its a nice idea. But yes, we should definitely use discretion with these.--Gonzofan 00:14, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Internationally available video game?

I saw this tweet on the Spanish Muppets twitter page, and what I'm guessing is that it's announcing a new video game. I Googled "Divertion Muppets" and came up with nothing signifigant. I tried the website link on their Twitter page and it looks as though the URL is incorrectly typed or something. Can anyone guess what the tweet means?--The World's Smelliest Onion (The World's Smelliest Message Wall) 20:05, May 24, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not even sure that's a real international Disney page, judging by the bad English grammer they're using. Let me check with Andrew. -- Ken (talk) 03:06, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Watermarked Images

Hey all! I'm bringing this topic back in the hopes of deciding upon a new policy that works for everyone. Previously, we've had a few discussions about the use of watermarked pictures; particularly the Red Book stuff. I see some of it as helpful but a majority of it has been just copy and paste that anyone can do, and the general consensus from past admin discussions has been to not re-post every single pic they have. There's also watermarked ones like [[:File:SSLAroundtheWorldItaly.jpg|this]] and [[:File:SimonSoundmanWalkAroundSSL.jpg|this]] from eBay that really don't look good, and I think should be removed altogether.

It's clear that a limit needs to be set on what and what not to include, and a lot of it, I think, is a matter of how interesting or notable a picture is, especially for the Red Book images. Pictures of memos and scripts aren't visually interesting to include on pages (though we can use them for reference), in comparison to this image Casey added to the Empire State Building page. It's a nice archive photo, and it's better if a caption is given (which I added). So, I think we should have an official policy listed that covers all of those boundaries; keeping watermarked images to a minimum, again depending on if an image is sufficiently interesting and essential to the Wiki in any way. Thoughts? -- Jon (talk) 21:31, May 20, 2012 (UTC)

I'm kind of okay with some of the watermarked Red Book pictures, especially for pages where there isn't another decent picture available. "Hip Hip Parade!" is an example -- the watermarked picture provides a lot more information than the page would have without it. I don't think those make us look bad -- we're Muppet Wiki, and to have some pics with a "Jim Henson" watermark on them makes sense for who we are.
I'm also okay with a watermark that's out of the way, if it's the only pic available. Sometimes I'll find some merchandise pic that has a little "" kind of thing in the lower right corner, and it's either that or nothing.
But those are the only ones that I think are acceptable -- stuff that says "Getty Images" all over it are not okay. The one that you linked to on the Simon Soundman walk-around page -- it breaks my heart, because if it wasn't watermarked, it would be perfect. Where else are you going to find the Simon character as the focus of the picture? But that watermark just doesn't work. Same for the Chicago Tribune pic on Around the World -- at least there we have another pic, and I'll post some screenshots from the TV commercial that's posted there. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 01:29, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
I sort of agree with both of you. Hip Hip Parade!, watermark aside, is similar to cases where we've used a newspaper article for lack of anything else. But it's not a memo or script. I think Jon meant those cases where Redbook images of Jim's memos or scripts and so on were uploaded, sometimes almost randomly. Most have been trimmed now, but as an example, there's stil The Witches. The letter on the Redbook page about the ending was uploaded, when we don't need to host that scan. What we need would be to actually work the *text* of that letter into the article, either quoting or summarizing and otherwise explaining Jim Henson's decision about the ending, and that concern came not from the studio but from Penguin (Dahl's publisher). That's all more interesting to anyone who wants to know than just slapping the document up there. (I'll try to work on it later, but not surprisingly, Witches hasn't been my main priority). The same goes for The Cube, which currently has an awkward image farm look and four Redbook images (only one isn't watermarked, the one of the cast and Jim Henson). The first two, of the documents, really aren't needed at all, even if one has part of a Henson doodle (the link to the relevant Redbook entry isn't even there; there's one, but the pics come from three different entries). The other two, we can caption and maybe better clarify where they come from and move down (since the one of Jim huddles is kind of neat). And there may still be other pages with that kind of thing, script pages, typewritten letters, scrawled memos, etc. which are interesting to us as hardcore fans, sure, but if Redbook is giving them a home, we don't need to re-upload them. Plus they're interesting to us in terms of the *information* they have, so if there's anything new or worth noting on the page in them, then we should write it out. Sort of like how way back we decided not to upload images of canceled checks or payroll letters just because Jim Henson signed them. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 03:16, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
I think a good rule of thumb for us using watermarked images is that we should only use them if there is no other visual representation of the subject available. A good example is this picture on Come Together and The Ed Sullivan Show (where we have no other image of the song); a bad example is [[:file:MB Disdrive MB 046.jpg|this photo]] (where, although a unique pic, we have other Muppet Babies images). I know that the Red Book (and other sites) sometimes have really cool, rare, and unique photos; but simply being "cool" isn't enough. [[:file:COM MirindaBeachJim-Hollander.jpg|This behind the scenes picture]] is neat, but we have other images of Mirinda Craver so I'd rather we just link to the Red Book for it. [[:file:JimmyDeanandRowlf PressImage.jpg|This ''color'' picture of Jimmy Dean and Rowlf]] is unique, however we have plenty of other non-watermarked pictures for our The Jimmy Dean Show article. With few execeptions, I think the only time we should use a watermarked image is when the alternative would be using noimage.png. -- Brad D. (talk) 11:49, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Brad. Only use them if there is no other visual representation of the subject available. —Scott (message me) 14:42, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
That makes sense *and* is a simple, easy to state policy. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 16:09, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
Exactly what I was looking for. It's a reasonable limit to set on these images (though that could mean the image I brought up earlier will be removed). I'll go ahead and add a note to Policies and Guidelines. -- Jon (talk) 20:00, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it's good that we think about this stuff as generally not-optimal. I totally agree with Andrew that it's better for us to write the interesting stories rather than just posting a script page as an image. Happily, the rhythms of working on a wiki support that cycle of improvement -- one person posts the pic, other people add and improve, we end up with an awesome page. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 23:35, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

In this case though, the other thing I wanted to stress is that we should make sure to link to the actual Redbook page in any case where we use images (which was not done in the case of the documents, and the Cube ones, such as here and here, have no info we can add at all, they're just neat for us hardcore geeks to see, but don't add much for our visitors). Actually one of the not-linked Redbook Cube articles (which a different image was mined from) had a different image, a cast list, which *had* some info (revealing actors and characters cut or recast from the final screenplay as filmed), so that's another reason I'd really like us to be sure we link to these Redbook entries properly (especially in some cases, like for Fraggle Rock stuff when I was using it as a source for my own book essay, there were so many by now it took some digging to find the specific ones I needed). So for document mining (ones with which are straight documents, not a newspaper article with a pic), I still think it's better to link to the site or mention it on the talk page (when we're talking outside docs, not stuff we actually have ourselves, and even then we usually talkpage it) than upload an image.
A better use is storyboards (with final camera images pasted over) ron Wilkins Coffee, for two missing commercials for Red Diamond which fits our "no other visual representation" rule and allows for more complete coverage. (Although I'd be fine with summarizing the storyboards as well, those have both info and visually represent the subject, it's not just names; possibly trimming to just one image rather than the whole board, and linking to the Redbook image where the commercial title is, but that's just general Wiki musing and fixing, as Danny said). And in part, watermarks aside, this is a general reminder to us to, whenever possible, cite sources (in cases where the pictures *are* the info, that's just as vital; same thing as we're starting to make better use of official online videos and so on) -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:13, May 22, 2012 (UTC)

Search suggestions

Hi, folks -- just a heads-up about the search suggestions dropdown in the search box. The Search team is working on a bunch of improvements to our search results & experience. Yesterday, they released an improvement to the search suggestions dropdown that ended up breaking -- and they replaced it with a stop-gap version. The current version of the search suggest is not very good -- it's using redirects, but it's not weighting the most-linked-to pages, so the suggestions are pretty wonky.

I showed a bunch of examples to the guy running the Search project, and he agrees that this isn't a good solution... They're going to try to fix it as soon as they can. I just wanted to give you guys a heads-up if you noticed it. :) -- Danny @fandom (talk) 19:30, May 17, 2012 (UTC)

Someone linked me to the Wizard of Oz Muppet Babies episode on YouTube yesterday. I wanted to get to the page on the wiki, and all I knew was the episode title. I did a search for By the Book but it didn't come up until the 9th page of search results. I sent a bug report and got a response from Dopp saying they were working on making it better. —Scott (message me) 21:37, May 17, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah. It's in a funny stage right now -- I know what they're working on, and it'll be great (when it works), but it doesn't work yet. Search is complicated. They're working really hard. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 22:36, May 17, 2012 (UTC)

25,000 page celebration!

Thanks to the Wikia Marketing team, we've got a really nice splash page celebrating our 25,000 pages! Check out Muppet Wiki:Milestones, which links to some of our best pages and categories. Feel free to share this with the people you know, and spread the word about the phenomenal wiki that we've built... and that we're gonna keep on building! 25,000 pages and still counting.... -- Danny @fandom (talk) 20:03, May 10, 2012 (UTC)

Yay! Where will marketing be posting the link? I see one on Facebook already. —Scott (message me) 20:09, May 10, 2012 (UTC)

Video policy

Hi, folks! Scott's been doing some major clean-up of embedded videos today, part of which is due to changes in how Wikia categorizes it. But another problem is dead or duplicated or just poor quality links. We've discussed this way back and have it mentioned on the policy page, but not as fully as we should. It's the second item there and here's what it currently says: "Due to the frequency with which videos are removed from YouTube, we try to keep links to that site at a minimum. Some exceptions include accounts owned by regular contributors who are keeping an eye on their own links or cases where wiki information is being sourced. We also never link to anything that's commercially available. "

So here are some reminders, and also threshing out some ways to perhaps clarify or expand on that, since I know we've had a lot of users join since then.

  • NO commercially available links. Bolded since this still happens. Scott deleted several today which were complete uploads of home videos which are still commercially available, and it's a common trap for new users as well. If the item is commercially available in any way (DVD, Blu-Ray, and now we have to include The iTunes Store and other digital vendors), do not duplicate. The obvious exception is select clips or if the whole item has been made available by the distributor or copyright owner (Lionsgate has done so with at least one or two Fraggle Rock episodes), but that's immediately obvious.
  • Keep an eye on the links. We mention that, but it's often forgotten. YouTube videos can be and are deleted. If it's not your account, try to be aware of what you've embedded and where, especially if you know or suspect it's something that could raise copyright issues. Also, I strongly advise one to look not just at the neat Muppet clip, but at the *account* attached to it. Is it someone who's also uploading a lot of recent TV episodes or obviously pirated stuff or even just music video stuff? When a YouTube account is deleted, everything attached to it is gone, as well as if the user just decides to make it private. Some videos in fact are already that way.
  • Avoid duplication. This is a big one. Somehow we wound up with two Green with Envy trailers, and I see we have a ton of videos uploaded to the international The Muppets (2011) pages. But many of the latter duplicate the OK Go and Forget You music videos, already on those pages, just under different names.
  • Commercials. This one may be a "your mileage will vary" but I'm seeing multiple videos uploaded on Sesame Street Live pages, advertising local tours. When Elmo Grows Up has two right now, and originally had three. Do we even *need* those at all? It seems that commercials *with* Muppets are worth uploading, but we don't need every commercial or promo for a Sesame Live show, toy, or what have you, unless it's the only real documentation we have for a subject.
  • Finally, and this is probably the biggest one after the commercial issue? Videos should *never* replace pictures. A video died on Sunday NFL Countdown and none of us took a screengrab, so the page now lacks illustration. A video is a nice supplement, but make sure a representative screengrab is included as well, for exactly that reason.

I think that covers the main reminders, although I'm not sure yet how to make all of this more concise for the policy page. If anyone has further suggestions or comments on video usage, please join in! -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:38, May 10, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, this is good to talk about, because I think there's a lot that's changing these days with how the entertainment industry is thinking about video distribution. Wikia has a team that's working on making videos on the site better, and some of those people sit next to me, so I've been hearing a lot about videos lately -- not just about Wikia stuff, but generally about how things are changing.
One thing that's changing is people's expectations about where they'll see video content, and it's changing in the direction of: everywhere. Almost every website that has print content also has video content -- The New York Times, NPR, IO9 -- even the Disney Store's Muppet products page. :)
If you're reading an article or a blog post and there's relevant video content, you expect to see it embedded on the page, and not a link sending you somewhere else. (P.S. It's also not a great long-term strategy for a website to send its readers somewhere else to see a video, because then they'll start watching another video and they won't come back.)
But -- the thing that makes this work better for us is that there's suddenly a lot more "official" video out there. Like, a LOT more. Remember back in 2009 when we thought it was a good idea to make a list of the clips on the Sesame Street Video Player? We pretty much stopped updating those pages around the middle of last year, and the Sesame Street YouTube channel adds about 6 new videos a week.
Plus there's the classic episode collections on iTunes... It's still a crazy idea to think that they would release all 4,300 episodes on DVD, but making all 4,300 episodes available through one of the many streaming-video services? That's a lot less crazy than it seemed a couple years ago.
So, let's say we made a policy that we encourage contributors to embed videos that come from official sources (Muppet Studios, Sesame Workshop, Henson Company, for Tonight Show appearances, whatever) -- and we won't allow anything else. If we made that policy back in 2006, it would have been the same thing as saying "No video on the site at all". It's still too early for us to actually do that -- but I think we could be heading in that direction.
There are a lot of big companies that are struggling over the streaming-video market -- Google/YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, Apple/iTunes, Amazon Prime, all the TV networks. It's not clear right now who's going to win, but we're definitely going to see more official, licensed, embeddable video content coming our way soon. Some of it might come with commercials. (I'm hoping that Hulu figures out that it's not okay to show someone a 30-second ad before they watch a 3-minute Sesame Street clip.) But it'll be good quality stuff, legally and morally unambiguous, from sources that won't suddenly disappear.
So I'm okay with us getting more strict about bootleg videos, if we can also be more open to embedding official video. What do you guys think? -- Danny @fandom (talk) 04:01, May 10, 2012 (UTC)
I think that makes perfect sense. I know at one point I would have thought, "Why include a video link to C is for Cookie? It's on tons of DVDs and videos." But it *is* nice to have it at one's fingertips, and since we can do it with an official source and so give hits to Sesame, that's to the good. As you can see, I'm mostly concerned with the non-official stuff, duplications (regardless of the source), and trimming stuff like someone's home camera video of a TV The Muppets ad (I deleted that) and so on. Plus for myself, so much official stuff comes out that I can't keep up, and wouldn't be able to without the Wiki. Though for the record, on disappearing, we did have to clean up quite a bit of official Disney stuff for The Muppets, but that's because it was time-sensitive promotional stuff and they dumped it when they were ready for the next big push (the music videos, trailers, most of the major stuff is up; it was the interviews with the cast, director, and some of the Muppets which has gone, and which sadly included Uncle Deadly). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 04:10, May 10, 2012 (UTC)
Another guideline I'd like to include is to use some naming logic. Try to avoid special characters and name the video something relevant. With the new search feature, videos are coming up under the Multimedia tab, so this will be helpful when searching and managing. —Scott (message me) 01:51, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Our 25,000th article

25,000th article

...was "Poems, Prayers and Promises" :) —Scott (message me) 06:26, May 8, 2012 (UTC)

=) Nice. Great to have that as the 25,000th page, and before May 16th as Ken predicted! Yay team! -- Jon (talk) 06:36, May 8, 2012 (UTC)
What a sweet way to do it! Only a billion more to go! - Oscarfan 10:49, May 8, 2012 (UTC)
Lovely! Hard to believe a couple of that special's beautiful songs weren't covered yet! Happy 25,000th, everyone! — Julian (talk) 11:36, May 8, 2012 (UTC)
Aw, thanks for noticing my note, Jon! And thanks to everybody who helped put us over the top! -- Ken (talk) 16:23, May 8, 2012 (UTC)

Idea for new rumor page

I have an idea for a new rumor page and I really think it should be considered. I think there should be a rumor page called "Is Frank Oz retired?" Or "Does Frank Oz still work with the Muppets?" something like that. Let me explain why I think this is needed. Judging from all of the comments on The Muppets Studio's facebook page (and comments on their Youtube videos) that I have read over the past few years, there are several casual Muppet fans out there who think that Frank Oz is still regularly performing with the Muppets. (For example, there were people who assumed that he performed his characters in the Bohemian Rhapsody video). Most people have no idea that Oz has pretty much retired since 2000. To add to that, because Oz's dislike of "The Muppets" early script was highly publicized, now many people incorrectly assume that is the reason why he didn't perform in the film, when in reality its because he retired years ago, he has moved on to directing. Because of that recent news, Oz's Muppet status is becoming a big misconception. And as a wiki for the Muppets, I feel that we need a page to set the record straight, point blank.

Yes, I know that some of these facts are covered on his page, but I don't think that's enough. Just like we have a page called Does Disney own the Muppets? in addition to the Disney Company page, I really think that we need a similar page to explain that Oz retired 2000, and although he occasionally still performs on Sesame Street, Eric Jacobson is now the principal performer for his characters (excluding Cookie Monster). We could even have a link to it on his page. This is really not a far-fetched idea. After all, Muppet Central has a similar section in their FAQ, and sites like Tough Pigs and The Muppet Mindset have acknowledged that most people still think that Frank Oz regularly performs his characters like Cookie Monster and Miss Piggy. So, before this idea gets shot down, please think about it, I think it would be really beneficial.--Gonzofan 02:47, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

With most of our rumor pages though, we don't just do them based on misconceptions, no matter how popular online and in casual conversation (thus why there's no "What are the names of the two guys in the balcony?" page). We try to see whether this is something that's been perpetuated in the press, in the media, something people have claimed which has made its way into print, and so on (there are probably exceptions if you look hard, but very few). And as for Oz not performing in The Muppets, yeah, chances are he wasn't even asked, but it's not something we need to explore because we don't really have sources. Basically, we'd need some quotes and sources, maybe from interviews with Oz and Eric Jacobson and so on, *not* just "people on forums and in YouTube comments say," and it would need to be something more than just restating what we have on the Frank Oz page (since right now, it strikes me that beefing up the section on his page would be more useful). As a Wiki for the Muppets, yes, we are encyclopedic, but as long as we have the facts on the relevant page, we don't really need to create a page for every mistake. It has to be really notable or commonplace beyond Facebook comments to the point where major media mentions it (i.e. "Is Cookie Monster now the Veggie Monster?") or things that are gray areas or vary according to production ("Are Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy married?"
Also, most of the rumor pages began as sandbox pages, and then were moved once they were clearly developed enough. I'd suggest creating a sandbox page (i.e. User:Sandbox/Frank Oz Rumor or whatever you want to title it). Then everyone can look, weigh in on the talk page, make adjustments, etc. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 03:30, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. I get what you are saying. I guess its only natural that Internet comments are full of misconceptions. I just might try the sandbox thing sometime....Actually, the idea of beefing up Oz's page is a good idea. But we can cross that bridge when any new relevant info comes up.--Gonzofan 04:57, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
Actually there was an interview with Oz before The Muppets came out where he said he was asked to be in the movie, but turned it down because he didn't like the script he read. --Minor muppetz 14:31, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
Here's the interview where he discussed not doing the movie. --Minor muppetz 14:36, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
I think it might be a good page, actually. It's definitely a question that people ask, especially with the different stories circulating last year about why he didn't work on the new movie. I've been a little suspicious about those, because many of them had the tone of "Frank Oz quits the Muppets, and is replaced by an upstart" instead of "Eric Jacobson has been playing these characters for more than ten years, and Oz was approached as a courtesy". The truth lies somewhere between those two points, and it might be interesting to find all the sources, and present the facts that we can document in a clear way.
If Fred's into it, I think it's worthwhile for him to put together a sandbox page. It might turn out to be its own page or a section on Oz's page, but he might as well go for it and we'll see how it feels. :) -- Danny @fandom (talk) 16:45, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, that's why I encouraged him to do so. I was mostly just clarifying regarding the "set the record straight, point blank," especially since as you mention, it's in the middle, and since the initial question, "Does Frank Oz still work with the Muppets/is he retired" is covered on his page. And actually, I avoided most of The Muppets reviews and articles in advance to avoid spoilers, but those (as opposed to Facebook comments) would be worth checking out, since any odd assumptions or false stories there count. I just wanted to make sure it wasn't a "People in comments said" page. :) Right now it's sounding like "Why wasn't Frank Oz involved in The Muppets" would be a more likely title (thanks, Michael, for the link, by the way). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 16:52, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
I'm actually still unfamiliar with the sandbox pages, how do I make one :) ?--Gonzofan 17:16, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
[[User:Sandbox/Why wasn't Frank Oz involved in The Muppets]] or whatever you want to use (since we'd be moving/renaming later, you can keep it simple, like "Frank Oz Status" and we could settle on the title when it's ready). Then just write your page. The "User:Sandbox" keeps it from being tracked as a regular article so we don't have to be concerned about our "work in progress" being shown before it's ready. That's basically the reason for sandboxes, to experiment and try something. If you need any help, ask here or on another admin's page (I'll be leaving for work in a couple of hours). Go forth boldly! -- Andrew Leal (talk) 17:24, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

Alright, its a work in progress, I need a couple more sources, but I like how this is sounding; User:Sandbox/Why doesn't Frank Oz perform with the Muppets anymore?.--Gonzofan 00:32, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

I like it too! The last two sentences are a little too POV though (as to what leaders were led to believe, but it is looking good (I like the way you tracked the transition away, such as having others fill in and Oz loop, while he was still considered the main performer). There's some quotes somewhere from David Rudman about how the recast performers felt about it (I think Rudman said something about maintaining the characters' integrity until Oz returned), which might work there if I can find it (and wouldn't on Oz' own page). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:04, April 27, 2012 (UTC)
Ok, so I've made a lot more tweaks, added a couple more sources, and I changed the sentence to non-POV. I'm open to feedback.--Gonzofan 07:33, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

Second Classic Sesame Vol.

The second volume of "Sesame Street Classics" came out on iTunes today! We have no guides for all but one episode, and even that one has segments missing from Noggin. - Oscarfan 15:33, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

Yay, that's fantastic! The dream of a comprehensive set is one step closer. :) -- Danny @fandom (talk) 16:35, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
=D Awesome! Amazing that we don't have that many episodes yet! -- Jon (talk) 16:55, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
Yay, I just bought the set! Hopefully I can make a guide or two. Anyone else getting them? I wouldn't want to start on a guide if someone's already working on it. —Scott (message me) 18:35, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
I don't have much iTunes monies, so I can only afford to get about 7 of 'em. I've already bought Episode 3240 (guided as you can see) and Episode 3171. I don't intend to get 3137 and 3174, as we guides for them (3174 is a repeat of #2951, which we have guided) and it would just be updating screenshots (a daunting task IMO) and filling in gaps, which isn't worth the money. So, you could just go ahead and work on anyone of those. I don't really want to touch the season 5 ones; sure, they'll be interesting and full of rare stuff, but the search for inserts is harder. The 90's ones are easier to find, 'cause the segment use is more recent. - Oscarfan 19:09, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
I bought the set. I'd like to call dibs on Episode 0597 (with Sherlock Hemlock) and Episode 1957 (with the "get out the vote" plot, it sounds up my alley regarding Muppets and politics), if nobody beats me to those, since it could take me awhile (but I have two extra days off from work next week, so it would be a fun project then). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 19:37, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
I know that episode 1957 features this scene (it appears in the preview for the episode). It'll be interesting to see if the whole episode is about voting (most of these "titles" represent just one scene) or if it's just one scene. --Minor muppetz 20:00, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
No, it's the whole street storyline. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 20:11, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

I put a table on the iTunes Store talk page, which has the info from the conversation so far.

I bought the set, too... but I'm on a Mac, and I forget how to take screencaps from iTunes stuff. Just doing a regular screenshot doesn't work (ctrl-command-4). With DVDs, I can use VLC, but that doesn't seem to work with these iTunes files. Any suggestions? -- Danny @fandom (talk) 21:10, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

Like the table ;). On my PC, I can open the videos with Quicktime. I wouldn't let me use the "Copy" feature for stills (it would instead come out as a gray square). Can you open it with Quicktime? I'm sure you can screenshot it that way. Also, isn't the screenshot feature on Macs command-shift-4? - Oscarfan 22:37, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
Sad danny

Danny is sad.

Darn it, Quicktime doesn't work either! Here's my sad screenshot. (And yeah, I meant command-shift.) Anybody know what else I should try? VLC has always been my friend before. I'm going to look up how to get VLC to play nice with m4v files. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 00:33, April 25, 2012 (UTC)
I can't take stills directly from the files, either. They just come up as a gray box for me. I assume it's because they have some sort of copy protection on them. So instead, I have to use the Print Screen button on my keyboard and manually paste them into Paint. —Scott (message me) 00:50, April 25, 2012 (UTC)
That's how I've been doing it (except pasting them into Microsoft Picture Manager, to touch up the color and such). - Oscarfan 00:57, April 25, 2012 (UTC)
Bob vs phone

Yay! I found out that Snagit lets you take pics from iTunes. So the episode 1899 guide is in progress, featuring the exciting battle royale: Bob vs Phone. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 06:35, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

Page questions

I have a couple of questions to ask here, as these concern different pages:

  1. A new contributor created pages for Rex and Fly, the sheepdogs from Babe. Now, I don't find these particular pages to be necessary since (as the main article indicates) only 10% of their shots were animatronics, but because we already have a page for Ferdinand the Duck, does that mean we need pages for other characters in the movie?
  2. I'd like to consider merging Green Heap and Purple Heap to just Heaps (similar to how the Wayne and Wanda page's set up), since the two don't have any real character distinction.

So, what do you guys think? -- Jon (talk) 14:43, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't be opposed to that. - Oscarfan 15:33, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
As far as other Babe characters, the main reason Ferdinand has a page is a) far more of his shots used the puppet for practical reasons (and it's harder to cheat lip movements too) and b) I'd identified his lead puppeteer. I'm glad that the breakdown is on the page. For Fly and Rex, since they both have far more animal running shots than speaking, I don't think that discounts their having pages, but either a picture of a confirmed Creature Shop shot or a performer ID would be needed first (plus, Babe himself doesn't even have a page yet). So I'd say delete and park (and inform the user, who wrote those in good faith but perhaps not really aware of our guidelines or our main focus). As far as merging heaps, ditto on that. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 16:16, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I just found puppeteer info, so hold off on the Babe characters (outside of basic category clean-up and so on). I'll see what I can do with them this weekend or sooner. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 16:37, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
Great, figured I'd check on both of those first before jumping and deleting. I'll try to help fix the Fly and Rex pages, but right now, I'm going to go ahead and heap the heaps. -- Jon (talk) 16:55, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

Quality Articles

It's been almost 2 years since we last awarded quality status to an article here. Now I'm sure we have some new quality work here on the wiki that should be highlighted, recognized and showcased as an example of Muppet Wiki at its best. We've all somewhat neglected nominating and voting on new quality articles. I think we should start nominating and voting again! If not, perhaps we should just abandon the whole concept (it's weird to have a "quality articles" category that only really highlights the wiki's best from 2007-2009). -- Brad D. (talk) 14:34, April 10, 2012 (UTC)

I agree, but I think it's been hard to get people looking at those areas again, and voting, and evaluating everything in scrutiny. A couple of times, I used the pop-up bubble notification system to let everyone know that something wiki-related was going on (it wasn't for quality article voting I don't think, but I can't remember what it was for either). But it was clumsy to use and hard to determine how effective it was. My hope is that inter-wiki communication is going to be revolutionized at some point in the next couple of months, and we can all get back to talking to each again in an effective way. —Scott (message me) 15:55, April 10, 2012 (UTC)

The Muppets Visual Effects article

I found this great, very informative article on about the visual effects for The Muppets; Going Places No Muppet Has Gone Before I'm thinking that there are some quotes from it that can be used on the wiki. There are also a couple of photos that show the "before and after" of the helicopter shot of Hollywood Boulevard.--Gonzofan 18:15, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

That interview is fantastic, thank you for posting about it! I parked the info and pics on Talk:Janet Muswell Hamilton so we can pull out all the interesting quotes. -- Danny @fandom (talk) 21:24, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Danny, and guess what, I found a very cool web page from the Shade VFX website (an additional FX company listed in the credits) that has some info (and a video demo) of post production work that they did to two of the interior car shots in the film; The Muppets – The Great Muppet Removal. Not sure how useful this is for the wiki, but still pretty interesting!--Gonzofan 06:48, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, that is super cool! You're right, we ought to do something with that... I'll take some screenshots of the Shade VFX and LOOK Effects videos, and then we can illustrate those pages with examples of the shots they worked on. Awesome! -- Danny @fandom (talk) 19:01, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Parody Trailer category?

I have a feeling they'll use the parody trailer gag again, so I'd like to suggest creating a category for them. Here are some points I'd like to say on this before someone else does, so they can say if they agree with them or not:

  • Points that argue in favor of the creation of such a category:
    • They might use that gag again.
    • We've already got several parodys on the wiki, the category could be useful as it is.
    • Fans could run through a long list of parody trailers to refresh their memories about which ones were parodied.
  • Points that argue against the creation of such a category:
    • Do we really need it?
    • Wouldn't using the parody trailer gag again be far too predictable, and eventually boring?
    • Even if they did use the parody trick again, would a category be needed? Unless they used the gag a very large number of times (which is unlikely), we could just create a list of films they used parody trailers for.
    • A new film is a long way off, why now? Why not later?

I do think we could use some sort of page for the parody trailers, so rather than a category discussion, this is more leaning in the direction of "category or list?". What do you think?--The World's Smelliest Onion (The World's Smelliest Talk Page) 20:35, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

I'm actually not sure we need separate pages for everything in the current Trailers category. In my opinion, we could put the five Muppets trailers on one page -- "The Muppets (2011) Trailers". We've got a "see also" at the bottom of each of those five pages linking to the other ones -- why not just have all five together? -- Danny @fandom (talk) 22:28, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Does this article have any potential?

So, I found the following article from D23 about The Muppets costume designers and puppet making crew; D23′s Inside the Muppets’ Workshop. Is there any place for it (or any of the quotes) here on the Wiki?-Gonzofan 06:59, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Great find! I think maybe it could be linked on the Puppet Heap page, however it appears that the Muppets have more than one place for regular maintenance, with their appearances on both the East and West coast, so it may not be as relevant there. If not, we probably could put quotes on the The Muppets (2011) page. -- Jon (talk) 09:19, March 22, 2012 (UTC)
Alright, I also found another D23 article has might have some potential. Its got some quotes from Brian Henson; Muppets Join the Hollywood “Wocka Wocka” of Fame.-Gonzofan 18:53, March 22, 2012 (UTC)
Cool. I actually decided to link the former article on the Stephen Rotondaro page. Thanks for finding them! -- Jon (talk) 03:08, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

Image Farm Galleries

I thought now would be a good time to bring this issue up. I've been noticing a bit of disgruntlement towards the growing transparent image galleries on character pages like Big Bird, Grover, and even the Miss Piggy page. While I'm not completely against having these galleries here, I'll agree that, besides being sort of a go-to place for fun poser images, they don't really add anything to these pages. I'm not sure if there's an easier solution to this problem, but if it's really becoming too much, I'd suggest making a spare Sandbox page for all of them. That and we should probably set a limit to the amount of these images we want on the character pages (I'd probably say about 1 to 3). -- Jon (talk) 14:56, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

I agree, they don't add anything to the article. I would go further to say that they cheapen them. I have a hard loathing for the white background images that I brought up somewhere in the last year, but I can't find the conversation now (and it's not in the Current Events archive). From that discussion, we decided that we'd allow for one white background image on the sidebar, and the rest would go in a gallery. As more of those types of images have become available, it's gotten out of hand. Clearly people want to keep collecting them, and if they insist, I suggest moving them all to a page that functions similar to Henson and Muppets pictures where folks can dump them all. —Scott (message me) 19:45, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
I also don't really see the point of many of the galleries on the character pages. I can remember back at the start of the wiki where it was pointed out that the wiki should not be turned into a image farm, and when looking at many of the main character pages those pages have turn into just that. I agree with Scott, if contributors want to collect those images put them on separate gallery pages Henrik (talk) 21:33, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
I agree also. I really do like these images, and they're nice for illustrating articles and such, but the character galleries at the bottom of character pages have gotten out of hand. I like the idea of a gallery page in the spirit of Henson and Muppets pictures and Behind the scenes photos, sorted by character. — Julian (talk) 22:27, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
Nate and I had discussed this as well, and I kept meaning to bring this up myself, so I'm glad we're discussing it. Frankly I'd like to dump many of them especially when they look identical or are just recropped or alternate versions. Some pages like Elmo even recycle images from other pages in the galleries. I think a good rule of thumb is whether the gallery would be captioned or serves a purpose. Obvious when we merged "Through the Years" pages for Gobo Fraggle or gallery-ize illustrated versions of a Muppet or concept sketches, or other unusual pics worth including on the main character page but not enough text yet (or a side by side comparison is warranted, as with our many users of gallery note headers), that's not the problem. It's Big Bird with tons of bland pics, or even poor Miss Piggy, which has a bunch of carefully selected pics, an intelligent *themed* gallery for "Miss Piggy's Fame" (to emphasize a point)... then a dumping ground at bottom. The autograph image is a maybe but has a home anyway on Muppet Autographs. Pairs of Piggies in the same outfit and similar pose, just maybe eyeglasses down or arms up in one versus another... major clean-up is needed, and even in a stand alone gallery (and frankly I'd rather not move to that unless we have enough pics really worth saving or a notable breakout case; a ton of these are actually just copied from and dumped here each time they add a new one), duplicates and overly similar pics which don't add anything should be deleted, in my opinion. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 02:13, March 18, 2012 (UTC)
Just as a side question, can somebody explain the dislike of the white background images? I understand not wanting a bunch of pictures that aren't really doing anything, but I personally never saw much difference between a regular picture and a white one. -- Ken (talk) 03:36, March 18, 2012 (UTC)
I don't understand the aforementioned loathing either. Quite the opposite actually, I believe you can have fun with them. — Julian (talk) 03:57, March 18, 2012 (UTC)
As someone who likes to play in Photoshop, I love them. But real photos and quality screenshots are more constructive for the purposes of illustrating an article.
So yeah, I love the idea of the page. I'll start on that tomorrow unless someone beats me to it. —Scott (message me) 07:56, March 18, 2012 (UTC)
Character images with a blank background. —Scott (message me) 20:05, March 18, 2012 (UTC)

I added a note on this topic to Muppet Wiki:Policies and Guidelines (feel free to expand or revise), just to avoid confusion. There are still some pics leftover that apply to the page (on the Kermit and Pepe pages for example), but not all of them need to be removed, since (like Scott, Andrew, and Julian have said) it really depends on how interesting a picture is and how well it helps illustrate an article. -- Jon (talk) 22:37, March 18, 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Kermit's page looks okay right now. I think we could do without the extra blue hoodie Pepe pic though, especially since we have him in that outfit a couple times on the page already. Thanks for adding the bit to the policy page. —Scott (message me) 23:05, March 18, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, nice. I'm glad we're keeping those pics; it's a nice resource for anyone looking for pics. With that in mind -- maybe we could split that into two pages called "Muppet character pictures" and "Sesame Street character pictures"? We might get some new traffic from Google search / G. Image search -- people are always looking for pictures, and we could hook some of them into exploring the site. :) -- Danny @fandom (talk) 05:31, March 19, 2012 (UTC)
I like that idea. We have additional sections now, but I think if we split the page into two, perhaps the Fraggle Rock and Bear sections could go on the Muppets page, and all the Sesame co-production sections would go on the Sesame Street page. I was considering having a page name like that too, rather than something too bland and descriptive like "Transparent character images." (Incidentally, I added an additional note on the policies page about image farms in general, which really has been a big problem over the past couple of years.) -- Jon (talk) 02:16, March 20, 2012 (UTC)
The page occasionally takes too long to load on my browser anyway, so it might be more convenient to split it into two pages, that is if anybody else is having similar trouble. -- Jon (talk) 05:26, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

Message Wall upgrade

Hi guys -- We just released a new upgrade for the Message Wall. The "mini-Rich Text Editor" adds some new buttons to the entry fields -- we've now got Bold, Italics, Links, Add photo and Add video. The Add photo button is the one that makes me extra happy; it's a lot easier to add pictures in messages now!

The new buttons appear for everybody using the Wikia skin, whether you've got visual editor turned on or off in your preferences. (If you've got the visual editor turned on, you also have the ability when you're writing to switch between visual editor & source.) It doesn't appear for folks using Monobook.

So, yay. There are a couple of little bugs; the only obvious one is that it's including photo captions in the text snippet in the Wiki Activity feed. Let me know if you see any other bugs, so we can get them fixed! I hope you guys like this upgrade; there are some more cool things coming over the next couple months. :) -- Danny @fandom (talk) 17:41, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

New Category?

Does the category "Songs Statler and Waldorf Helped Sing" sound like a good idea? -- User:Abbzworld

I don't think so... We have some pages for songs sung by a particular character, like Cookie Monster songs. This would definitely make a better page than a category. Thanks for asking! -- Danny @fandom (talk) 17:08, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

Talk Page Problem

I stated a Muppet Show videography sandbox page, and I wanted to start a discussion in the talk page, but whenever I click on talk, it just goes straight to my user page. Other talk pages show when I click on them, so anybody have any idea what's going on? --Minor muppetz 17:37, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

The problem seems to occur because it's a sandbox page. But I don't know if it's a glitch in the system, or supposed to happen that way. — Julian (talk) 22:20, March 9, 2012 (UTC)
Well, what I was going to ask was, should all info from Best of the Muppet Show redirect there, or should that continue to be a seperate paage? I'm sure Monster Laughs with Vincent Price should redirect there. --Minor muppetz 21:13, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

Possible Purge Problem Fix

One common and very annoying problem on Wikia is that replaced images simply refuse to update from time to time. I just followed Community Central's Grunny's instructions to add a Purge/Refresh button to my green "Edit" button at the top of every page and, given the option proves useful, I would like to propose to make it a wiki-wide feature. Once we write the JavaScript code into our Common.js, we all enjoy the option. What does everybody think? — Julian (talk) 12:11, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

It's a nice one, isn't it? But I think it is better to keep it as a personal option. It gets confusing for visitors if the edit button menu is different only on this wiki for them, and most users aren't going to need the refresh much. -- Wendy (talk)@fandom 03:17, March 14, 2012 (UTC)
Alright. :) But I strongly encourage folks that do a lot of the image work on this wiki (and who have to deal with the purge problem on a regular basis) to get the button! — Julian (talk) 22:27, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

Home Page

Am I the only one who thinks the home page is a little too crowded? It takes much longer to load than any of the other pages on the Wiki... Could it be the Youtube video? -- Joe (talk) 10:39, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

I always notice a slight "delay" in loading on pages with the big sliders of images; but the main page does not seem unduly slow to me. Having the slider and the video does make it a bit top-heavy visually but I'm ok with it. -- Wendy (talk)@fandom 01:44, February 25, 2012 (UTC)
Ok then, I guess there's not much need for me to be on the Home Page anyway but I also did notice that there is a particular script on the page that suddenly starts eating all my RAM. I'm running Safari on OS X - has anyone else come across this? -- Joe (talk) 08:02, February 25, 2012 (UTC)



Search bug.

There are a couple Wiki bugs I'm seeing that I'd like to note here. First, every time I edit a page with sections, an extra line is automatically added under each section. Second, if I want to find say "Count It Higher", when I type it in the search bar, I get that and all of it's redirect pages. It's pretty annoying, and what's worse is that it's happening on every web browser I use. Is anyone else having these problems? -- Jon (talk) 00:42, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

It's happening for me too. -- Brad D. (talk) 00:47, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
Hey Jon. I think the search thing is intended behavior -- those redirects all "exist" and are real pages you can edit. Also I think they really should be in the search suggestions index, because often they include alternate titles that people might be looking for and would miss if they weren't. The other editing problem sounds a bit like a bug, although I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Could you please send it to Special:Contact/bugs, with a link to an edit diff where it happened?? Or at least show me a page where it happened here so I can understand it better. Do you edit in source mode? -- Wendy (talk)@fandom 01:51, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
I'm also having a problem here, too. I'm trying to upload a picture to the Mr. Johnson page, but the upload log seemed to be very slow. What's wrong with it? -- Max (talk) 04:13, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, that's happening with me too. Not sure what that's about. Anyway, yes, I edit in source mode, and every time I do, an extra space appears under almost every section (I've tried this with a few pages and the only time it doesn't is when it's a gallery section). Here's one example. As for the search problem, I didn't know whether or not the redirects showing was intentional, but I kind of find it distracting if I want to get to an exact page. -- Jon (talk) 00:42, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
If redirects showing up in search suggest is what's supposed to happen, that's a recent change in behaviour. They were never meant to. —Scott (message me) 16:57, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
I asked and the search index is a recent change and you are not the only ones who don't like it; it's a nuisance here but a real problem on some wikis. So it may get changed back. I passed along your guys' complaints. Although I still think it makes a certain amount of sense.
The edit thing... that's odd. I just tried and I couldn't recreate it. Also, it doesn't affect the page display in any way that I can see on my screen. If you re-edit a page which has the added lines does it add more? Or is it a one-time thing? Also, do you start in source mode (have it set in your preferences), or switch to it from the visual editor? And what browser do you use? If you want to send this to Special:Contact I can answer there if you don't want to post all this stuff here. -- Wendy (talk)@fandom 01:42, February 25, 2012 (UTC)
The suggest bug is also happening in edit mode when you start a link with two brackets and begin to type--all the redirects are showing up. Very confusing. —Scott (message me) 04:41, February 25, 2012 (UTC)
The spacing bug isn't gone yet, and it's still evidently happening with other users. It is a weird bug, though. It does only occur when I switch from "visual" to "source" (when I edit without fixing, it adds another every time I edit that page), and even then, some pages and sections are unaffected (it doesn't affect talk pages like this for example, as well as most gallery and list sections). I may have to record a video since that seems to be the best way to visually explain this. Otherwise, I'd just be repeating what I've said before. -- Jon (talk) 17:50, February 27, 2012 (UTC)
I've reported the spacing bug. I couldn't get it to insert more than 2 lines, nor did it seem to affect the page display, so it's more by way of annoyance I think. You don't need to make a video.
The issue with the search/link suggest should be fixed with the next release, on Wednesday. -- Wendy (talk)@fandom 18:35, February 27, 2012 (UTC)
Alright. Thanks for checkin' that out, Wendy! -- Jon (talk) 19:10, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

Weak Character Pages

This has kinda been bugging me for a while and it should have been addressed sooner. I found nearly a dozen or so character pages (Big Bo Peep, Bertha (sheep), Duffy, etc.) that go against our policy on notability, in that their descriptions are simply copied and pasted from other pages with only a few minor additions (like, in the case of Anything Muppets, their type). Plus, most of them have no performer listed. Really, if there's nothing more that can be said to support these pages, I feel we can do without them for now.

So, after giving it a considerable amount of thought, my suggestion is that some of these pages should be deleted or redirected to a linked episode/sketch page. Only few of them I think can be kept and revised (Maxine the Cow and Gus Hopper, for example, are notable since they're semi-recurring AMs; the latter page needs to be merged with Cricket anyway). I'll voluntarily start cleaning up. Thoughts? -- Jon (talk) 05:28, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I've already started; if there are any other pages that you feel should be deleted, please leave a message on my wall or just note them here. -- Jon (talk) 00:41, February 20, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I hadn't had a chance to reply sooner. Yeah, this has come up before here and there but it's another one of those things we've never fully handled. Something like Duffy for the record should have any relevant info moved to the Alfred Duck page. Considering Little Bo Peep is a recurring character of sorts, an argument could have been made for Big Bo, but not as written, and there's a bunch of AMs from the one-shot "School in the Afternoon" segment which should be merged (since they all have maybe one sentence a piece and no real personality).
Our rule has often been, mind, that named characters *do* have more rights than unnamed ones, but not if they repeat info. And a lot of it boils down to "Is the page fun or unusual?" Walter (vampire) is extremely minor, but the picture and details make him interesting. I reverted your redirect on Mary-Biff, rewriting slightly instead, since Biff having a baby daughter (and she's adorable too) is neat and not something most of us would find buried on an episode page (and she has just as much right to a page as, say, Bert's nephew Brad). For something like Marty (Anything Muppet), the main problem is we have no real details since we only have a non-English sketch, but the picture is interesting. I'd say merge it onto Episode 0310, with a pic of Grover and rewording the description ("An Anything Muppet in a loud suit named Marty teaches Grover about subtracting...") That sort of thing. Other than that, I agree with the general point. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 04:12, February 20, 2012 (UTC)
That's fine. I can understand keeping Mary-Biff, since she's a sibling of a recurring character (which you made a similar statement on Talk:Harvey's friend) and the nose resemblance to her uncle is a cute quality to note. There isn't as much to Marty, so we can delete that and probably go back to it later once we have an English video to go by. I'll merge and redirect all the "School in the Afternoon" characters next. While on the subject, I'd consider the same be done for pages on the Next Generation members, since that's also essentially repeated info that can be said on the main page. All around, good suggestions Andrew. -- Jon (talk) 07:34, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

Search Problem

There seems to be a problem searching things on the wiki. For example, if I type in Angus McGonagle in the search box, the Angus McGonagle page shows up as it is supposed to. But if I type Angus, which isn't the exact name of any page, no search results show up, when there should be search results such as Angus McGonagle, Angus Barnett, Angus MacGregor, and Terry Angus. Unless you search the exact name of an article, no search results show up. --Muppetfan 13:56, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

Interwiki shortcut

Following a Special:Contact request, DaNASCAT has now enabled an interwiki shortcut for this wiki. It's now possible to link to any article on this wiki by just typing the following:
[[muppet:article name]]

This means that in any search bar anywhere on Wikia, you can type muppet:kermit and get to Kermit. For those who link to Muppet Wiki articles elsewhere on Wikia (like me) it means that you can do it with far, far fewer key strokes.

For instance, I've recently had occasion to link to Jim Henson's Creature Shop over at w:c:tardis. Prior to this shortcut, I had to type
[[w:c:Jim Henson's Creature Shop|Jim Henson's Creature Shop]]
Now, I can just pipe switch it with
[[muppet:Jim Henson's Creature Shop|]]

Note, however, that this shortcut method doesn't work in chat. For some reason, in that particular environment, you have to still type w:c:starwars:Yoda rather than starwars:Yoda. -- CzechOut 17:21, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, that's very cool! Can the w:c: be left out for any wiki now, or is it just a select list? —Scott (message me) 17:23, January 20, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in responding; I don't get over here too often. No, it's only a select list. The default condition of any wiki is that it's not enabled, and you have to go the full w:c:name: route.
I can't tell you which have shortcuts, but it tends to be the wikis that have been around since (near) the beginning — as in, back in the WikiCities days. I'm guessing Wikia don't advertise this feature too much because they don't want there to be "turf battles" over similarly-themed wikis. There might be a ton of people who would argue, for instance, that they are the "true" starwars wiki, and therefore deserving of the starwars: prefix. The move to allow forks of entire wikis a few years back probably stopped the wider implementation of this feature. All I can tell you is that you just have to try certain wikinames to see if they work, and that the feature mostly does not work. Witness: [[jamesbond:Sean Connery]], [[indianajones:Harrison Ford]], [[icarly:iCarly]], [[simpsons:Homer Simpson]], [[phineasandferb:Ferb]]. These are all the "main" wikis for their fandom, but they don't have it goin' on.
And in general I don't really think they should all work. Most people don't make interwiki links enough for it to matter. And most wikis aren't actually big enough to make interwiki-ing a reflexive action. I think a minimium of 20,000 articles is kinda required before it becomes worthwhile. (That's not Wikia policy, that's just the level I personally think should be set.) It would be beneficial to tardis for us to be able to make quick links to jamesbond, but jamesbond is so woefully inadequate that it's better for our readers just to be linked to Wikipedia. Muppet, though — like starwars and memoryalpha — has been around for long enough that it makes sense to shunt users to you rather than wikipedia. A good example is Mark Gatiss. It'd actually be interesting to our readers — to whom Mark Gatiss is well-known — to hear about his relationship to Muppets. And your article offers that perspective, just as starwars and memoryalpha through a different light onto people like Jeremy Bulloch and Jane Espenson.
Point is that I was able to demonstrate a reason to have the muppet shortcut link thanks to our Muppet related crew and actor categories, and because it's quite obvious w:c:hitchhikers, w:c:starwars and other wikis had a natural need for an abbreviated link to this wiki. Unless people can demonstrate a clear need for the easier linkage, I don't think we ought to be bothering Staff to create them. -- CzechOut 20:27, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
Well, it's nice to have an easier way to interlink to Muppet Wiki anyway. I created a lot of them on other wikis years ago. It will be nice to use the shorter version moving forward. —Scott (message me) 20:34, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
Hrmmm. Turns out it's not quite working like I thought. I assumed it was fixed just because it was working from w:c:tardis. But it's not working anywhere else. [[Muppet:kermit]] doesn't work at w:c:starwars. I've sent a message back to DaNASCAT explaining that it's not working in the wider Wikia. Hopefully, it'll get fully fixed up within the next 48 hours. I'll drop back by as I get news. czechout   from tardis  20:42: Wed 25 Jan 2012 
Okay, that's very weird. [[muppet:muppet]] isn't working from here either. It should, in the same way that tardis:tardis works at w:c:tardis and starwars:Star Wars works at w:c:starwars. I'll add that to the bug report. Sorry again for being slightly premature here, but this'll get cleared up shortly. czechout   from tardis  20:51: Wed 25 Jan 2012 
Well, I have to report some bad news. It turns out that I've had a spot of miscommunication with DaNASCAT. He logically assumed that I was just talking about enabling something on tardis, while I thought I had clearly asked for global enablement. Turns out that it's easy for an individual wiki to have a shortcut link to another wiki, but that it's no longer possible to get the global links. This inability is linked to the relatively recent explosion of the number of wikis on Wikia. So, as things stand now, you'll have to use [[w:c:muppet]] everywhere except for tardis. So while this is extremely helpful to us at tardis, it's not generally helpful to you guys. Sorry for prematurely announcing something that wasn't that big a deal. czechout   from tardis  23:33: Thu 26 Jan 2012 

FYI: The Muppets in Germany

For all the editors out there that would like to dive into Kermit & Piggy's brief German tour, here are a couple of videos that have potential to be gutted for quotes and such: Talk: Die Muppets. — Julian (talk) 13:54, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

Wall bug again

Just a note for the record (sent relevant e-mails), the wall bug is back, as discussed Special:Community#Wall_issues here, preventing me from using any and all wall pages, including my own. I'm going to try a complete reboot, but nothing else has worked. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 20:08, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

And again, it went away after a complete restart. Not sure what keeps causing this though. If anyone else encounters anything like it (i.e. the "Post" button suddenly disappearing, leaving no way to publish text), let us know. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 20:27, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Restore a page?

Can someone please restore Hollywood's Pretty Women? It's in the official Disney encyclopedia, as written by the official Disney archivist, who would have access to primary records like the script, PR pieces, graphics for the signage, whatever. -- Zanimum 19:34, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

See Hollywood's Pretty Woman. That's the actual show name (the one you point out was deleted years ago because Dean created it with no text at all, just categories). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 20:03, January 5, 2012 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+