Archive of Current events.
Something I've Found
I recently found some scans from a 1993 article on The Jim Henson Company here. There is quite a bit of good information on the company and Jim Henson's kids there, but if any of this info gets sourced on the appropriate pages, should we link to this when citing the article? --Minor muppetz 21:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- We could, although it would also be okay just to do a regular magazine citation. That's a great article, with lots of good quotes -- I'm sure you'll find lots of good wiki material there! -- Danny (talk) 23:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, everybody -- Wikia is in the process of launching the new Monaco skin. It was launched this weekend on a bunch of the least active wikis, so they could test everything out. Tomorrow, it's going to be launched on three popular wikis -- Muppet Wiki, Marvel Database and DC Database.
I'm really excited about having people use the new skin -- I've been involved in the design, and I think it's going to be great. We're going to be able to customize things much more, and it should be easier for new people to use the site.
- Okay, the new skin is up as the default, and everybody should be seeing it now. Let me know what you think! -- Danny (talk) 02:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, Danny! I don't know if it's me, but I noticed that when you put your mouse over "Today on Muppet Wiki" and "Best of Muppet Wiki" on the left side, the boxes that come up are bleeding into the text on the main page. But the other choices are fine. Other than that, looks good so far! -- Ken (talk) 02:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've been having trouble with this new skin. When I got on Muppet Wiki on America Online, the new skin appeared, but all that would load was some of the stuff on top (like the "wikia' logo, my user name, and a few other things) and none of the clickable things would take me anywhere. I got on internet explorer and there don't seem to be any problems. --Minor muppetz 03:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I kinda like the new layout. It's great with the addition of the menus in the left side. I can see that "Community" leads to a empty page, what about if it would direct the user to Muppet Wiki:Community Portal, Muppet Wiki (website), or Category:Muppet Wiki. Also what about adding the user stats to the submenu under "Community", since some people care a lot about stats. Henrik (talk) 14:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad folks generally feel positive about it. We're still tweaking some things that I think will be good.
Ken -- I'm not sure what you mean about bleeding into the text... They all overlap with the text when you mouse over them. Can you say more about that?
Michael -- I'll let the tech folks know about the America Online bug.
- It's taking some getting used to, but I kinda like it so far. However, when I first logged on, my windows totally crashed, so i'm not sure what that's all about. It seems to be plugging along fine right now. Anyone else have issues with that, or is my computer cursed? -- Nate (talk) 18:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm still having broadband troubles (getting 0kbps most of the time, and often taking more than 6 minutes for *any* page to load). But when it does work reasonably well, the Wiki loads faster, and I've had no trouble editing. I've had to get used to the ads on top and the blue bar, which push the articles down, and it was harder to find the "Article" and "Discussion" tabs at first to navigate between the two, but in general, it's an improvement over Monobook and *especially* that lousy Quartz, and I like the new sidebar, which allowes for easy browsing for new visitors as well as old hands. So on the whole, I'd say it works. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 20:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Two more questions from me too. My one critique (otherwise I love the new skin), there is a gap between the left hand column (which has the search box, etc) and the actual article itself. Anyway to bring them closer together? (Does that even make sense). I'm also having major problems with the wiki crashing my internet explorer still. It totally locks it up. Any ideas as to what would be causing this with the new skin? -- Nate (talk) 16:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- "What links here" -- Thanks for pointing that one out. I just asked the tech folks; they know why it's happening and they'll fix it.
- Upload multiple files -- I didn't realize that was ever in the sidebar. When did you see it?
- Gap between the sidebar and the article page -- It's a design thing. We can't change it, although we can choose to have a different color back there.
- You know, with this redesign, I can't see where to click to get to the talk pages. Is the "talk" button (if that's what you call it) still on the pages somewhere, possibly hidden? --Minor muppetz 22:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- I Looked, and still can't find them. I don't know it it's just my computer, but the sidebars are all blank.
- Just about all keyboards have it, Michael. Look above the section with Insert/Home/Delete, etc, it's usually close to the scroll lock. It actually says "Print Scrn," often above "SysRq." Look closely. And look closely at the sidebar again. And don't forget, if you're having trouble, you can walys just switch back to Monobook, the old skin, by changing the "my preferences" tab, on the upper right in the top gray bar (next to where you see your name, profile, etc., under the blue "More" tab). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 04:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- The site no longer looks like Wikipedia. (Frankly, I'd consider any differentiation from Wikipedia to be a good thing.)
- On-site navigation is implemented on the left panel: Convenient, and a clever way to demonstrate to visitors what Muppet Wiki has to offer.
- The vast majority of site links and controls have been reorganized and scooted around. (I'm sure I'll get used to the new site and navigation conventions, however.)
- The page layout is now narrower, and feels a bit confining as a consequence. (I suppose I'll eventually get used to this too, though...)
- Unless it's my imagination, pages render slower with Monaco than they did before. The left navigation panel is the last element to render on-screen, in any case.
Oh well. I'll still give it an A- for effort, though. --Andrew T. 05:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- An A- is pretty good. You'll definitely get used to the reorganization part.
- I'm surprised that you say that the page is narrower -- there's actually more content area space on Monaco, compared to Monobook. Here's screenshots of the Kermit the Frog page, using both skins:
- Look for the phrase "Piggy tricked Kermit into marrying her," at the bottom of the fourth paragraph. On Monobook, that paragraph ends just below the second picture. On Monaco, it's about four lines higher. The left sidebar on Monaco takes up less space than the left + right sidebars did on Monobook, so we've got more space for content on Monaco than before.
- You're right about the navigation panel -- one of the things that we're seeing is that having too many items in the navigation menus is slowing the site down. I've trimmed the menu down, and I think it's loading a lot faster now. If folks are still feeling like it's slow, we can trim it more. -- Danny (talk) 17:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- I seem to see it differently depending on what computer and internet service I use. On my computer, only the top things are seen on america online, and my internet explorer has blanks in the side boxes (and on most pages I have to scroll to the side to see everything), but on my laptop, I can see stuff in the boxes. Weird. --Minor muppetz 19:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
"What links here" works again... That bug has been fixed.
Michael, I'll have to ask about the America Online and Internet Explorer problems. There are various tweaks that have to be made as people try out the skin in different browsers. -- Danny (talk) 20:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- I stand corrected: The page isn't any narrower now than it used to be after all; it just gives that psychological illusion. Shows what I get for posting after midnight. --Andrew T. 21:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ha, that's funny. It totally makes sense -- I've heard it from another person too. I think what happens is that people forget that the right sidebar exists -- they've ignored it for so long that they just blank it out. So all you notice is that the left sidebar is bigger. :) -- Danny (talk) 22:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Overall I like the new skin – it’s a big improvement over Quartz. However a few pieces of feedback, critiques, and observations...
- 1) I noticed that the content starts a lot lower on the page with this new skin. Which is why things may seem narrower and more tight. With monobook the distance between the top of the window to the top of actual article content is 119 pixels (on my browser anyway). On Quartz it is 230 from the top of the window to the top of the content. And on Monaco it is now 280 pixels! I can't even see the first item on "Today on Muppet Wiki" without having to scroll now. And more than 50% of the main page picture is cut off by the bottom of my screen. As a visual first impression of the main page, I'm not wowed by our wiki as I have to scroll to see any actual content. The extra 161-pixles that Monobook provides allowed me to see the entire main page picture and all 3 "Today on Muppet Wiki" items. And the extra 50-pixels that Quartz had lets me see the entire first item in "Today on Muppet Wiki" (and just a little of the second). I have 50-pixels of dead whitespace between the google ads at the top and the blue bar at the top of the article (and there is a 15-pixel buffer above it) - which really pushes things down. It would be nice if the stuff across the top was compacted more so when a page loads you see more of the article and less of all that header stuff. I find myself having to scroll on any page with a picture now. Whereas before (even with Quartz) there were so many short articles with just a picture (and a performer box) that I could see all the way down to the categories bar without having to scroll.
- 2) It loads a lot slower...for me at least...and it comes in in stages. Before the entire page would load in under 2 seconds. Now it takes 2 seconds to load an empty shell of the page, another 4-5 seconds for the content of the article to appear and then another 4-5 seconds to load the sidebar. I've gone from under 2 seconds to about 10-12 seconds – and in internet time that’s forever!
- 3) I don't know if this has to do with the new skin or not, but before in the search bar it would have a drop-down with articles matching what I was typing. So if was searching for Kevin Clash and started typing Kevin it would list Kevin Bishop, Kevin Bradshaw, Kevin Clash… and as I continued to Type Kevin C it would then list Kevin Carlson, Kevin Clash, Kevin Clash Cameos… and whatnot. I liked it. The search doesn’t do that anymore. Is this because of the new skin, or something else? Because it doesn’t do it anymore, even when I switch skins.
- 4) The color of a visited links changes to purple. However the white-texted links become close to impossible to see against the blue bar background when they turn purple. I almost didn't find the "My Preferences" at the bottom of the "More" dropdown because of it, and the "edit this page" and "history" links are almost invisible to me on pages where I've recently edited or viewed the history. I don’t know, it's not a big deal, but I find it a little annoying and ugly.
- 5) I just noticed that some pages are saying "Log in to edit" instead of "Edit this page", however I am logged in. Is this some kind of glitch?
- I'm getting a really weird error with the sidebar right now. Take a look:
- Brad, how long did that error last? It's working fine for me right now.
Okay, responding to Brad's earlier comments:
1. There's a tradeoff involved with these skin changes. The ad has to go somewhere. On Monaco, it's at the top, which pushes the page down -- but it also frees up the entire right side, so we only need one sidebar instead of two. That means that on the top screen, Monobook has slightly more content area. When you scroll down, Monaco has considerably more content area. So on very short pages, it looks like there's less room -- but for long pages, there's more room. Check out the Kermit comparison above to see that Monaco gives us more space for content.
3. Yeah, I think search suggest isn't turned on right now... I'm not sure what's up with that. I've heard people talk about it, but I haven't listened closely enough to know the status. I know it's not going away forever.
4 and 5. I think these are both browser issues. I saw purple links too, but they fixed it on Firefox a few days ago. Let me know what browser you're using, and I'll talk to the tech folks. -- Danny (talk) 07:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ken reported earlier that he noticed the line under a heading goes through the picture next to it. After using the computer at my work that the same thing happened to me. Apparently it's something with Internet Explore 6, since it don't happen when using Firefox or IE 7. Henrik (talk) 20:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Jim Henson Legacy bibliography
I just found a page that folks here might find helpful: the Jim Henson Legacy's Bibliography page. There's a long "Periodicals" section listing dozens of magazine and newspaper articles -- maybe somebody with access to a good library would enjoy tracking these down for quotes and info. -- Danny (talk) 17:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Linking the Muppets
This is a minor issue, but something that's niggled at me for awhile. I think we've had a tendency to overlink to The Muppets. The article itself is pretty slim, just discussing the origin of the name and the corporate ownership; it's not a detailed species/pattern article like Anything Muppets, Fraggles, Doozers, or Whatnots. So it makes sense to link when discussing it in those kinds of contexts ("Jim Henson created the Muppets; "The Muppets are currently owned by...") or when discussing variety shows and other guest appearances where the collective term was used ("The Muppets appeared on Dick Cavett's"), or when dealing with relevant Muppet Mentions, and so on. But I don't think we need to link the phrase every time it occurs, and frankly, it's at the point where the blue link is annoying me. I'm thinking of sentences like this: "A crowd of background Muppets mill near the theater," "A Muppet dog appears," "Fozzie joins the other Muppets on the bus," and so on. I'd like to just take it out in all situations like that. What do others think? -- Andrew Leal (talk) 22:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- If nothing else, we should keep the links on anything that might be deemed a basic, common topic. Anything that is likely to be read "drive-by visitors", people who find a particular page on Google, but don't stick around too long after that. Much of the traffic to the site is to these very basic, common knowledge topics, and so if we don't make it easy for them to click around, they're unlikely to stick around too long. -- Zanimum 19:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I confess, I don't know what you're talking about, Nick. It's easy for people to click around, and being more conservative in our linking in this instance isn't going to drive anyone away. I still don't see a reason to link to it every time the word "Muppet" occurs (saving it for occasions where it's relevant and useful to link to the article, as I mentioned above). This is a Muppet Wiki, so the phrase occurs a lot. I've reached a point where I've tried replacing the term with "characters" in articles where that's all it's used for (see "Night Life" or "Rowlf's Poetry Corner"), since I find the blue link randomly inserted in a sentence where the phrase is just there as an adjective or in sentences like "Kermit, Fozzie, and the other Muppets go to a party" to be immensely distracting. Typing in "Muppets" automatically redirects there, making it easy for anyone to find the page, so I'm not buying your argument in the least. Oh, and "The Muppets" isn't anywhere in that list you linked to, so clearly the abundance of links isn't increasing clicks to that page. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 19:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I think an important consideration is whether that's an informative click or not. The article on The Muppets is pretty short, and it's all about the word itself -- who uses it, and how it's used.
- So to use the "Night Life" article as an example, the sentence is: "Night Life is performed by Dr. Teeth and The Electric Mayhem on top of the Happiness Hotel bus as the Muppets travel to the Dubonnet Club in The Great Muppet Caper."
- In that instance, I'm not sure that a reader clicking on the word "Muppets" would expect to see a discussion of how the word is used. The word in that sentence refers to the specific group of characters traveling to the Dubonnet Club -- Kermit, Piggy, etc. Personally, I don't think that's an informative click. -- Danny (talk) 20:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I wonder if there could be a way to add more to the article that isn't just about the word "Muppets" without being reduntant compared to other articles (like The Muppet Show, Muppets vs Creatures, maybe Jim Henson, The Jim Henson Company, and The Walt Disney Company, etc.). --Minor muppetz 02:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah. There's probably a way to make it slightly more interesting, but again, we're a Muppet Wiki, so the Wiki as a whole defines and discusses the Muppets as characters, franchise, and so on. The Wikipedia article lists some major characters and history and so on, but we have Category:Muppet Characters, Category:Muppet Movies, and so on, so we don't really need an additional list, and even then, I don't think it would justify linking to it for sentences like those discussed, i.e. "The other Muppets join Kermit on a cruise" and so on. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 02:55, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Here's a possible guideline for how to link to the Muppets, using examples where it's currently being linked.
It's appropriate to link from sentences that talk about "the Muppets" as a whole, or sentences that use "the Muppets" to refer to both Sesame Street and Muppet Show characters.
- Muppet Wiki: "Muppet Wiki is a collaborative encyclopedia for everything related to Jim Henson and the Muppets."
- Jim Henson: "Jim Henson was the creator of the Muppets."
- Lily Tomlin: "Tomlin has appeared with the Muppets frequently."
- Deck the Halls: "The Muppets have sung "Deck the Halls" many times."
We shouldn't use it when we're referring to an individual Muppet or a small group of Muppets.
- Uncle Deadly: "One by one, the Muppets tell Kermit that they have seen a phantom."
- Dr. Bunsen Honeydew: "In Muppets From Space, Bunsen invents a number of devices for the Muppets to use when they rescue Gonzo."
- Something For Everyone: "Something For Everyone" is a song performed by Kermit the Frog, Marlo Thomas and the Muppets."
We shouldn't use it when "Muppet" is used as an adjective.
- Sherlock Hemlock: "Sherlock Hemlock is a Muppet spoof of Sherlock Holmes."
- Muppet keys: "A series of four Muppet keys was released in 2007."
- Vicki: "She greatly admires Kermit's leadership skills and the Muppet legacy."
- That all makes sense to me. In cases where Muppet is used as an adjective in describing the work of crew members, "So and so worked on several Muppet projects," I'm fine with it, though I don't think we need to necessarily link it if we find a page where it isn't. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 17:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- What about cases where a track listing on an album page mentions "The Muppets" as the singers of songs? --Minor muppetz 01:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi folks... I'm testing out the Monaco skin that's hopefully going to launch on Wikia soon. So if you see some pages in Recent changes that say "Monaco" in them, that's what I'm playing with. They don't affect anything right now. -- Danny (talk) 23:09, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- Does this mean image files will be randomly replaced with Grace Kelly photos? -- Andrew Leal (talk) 23:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Accent marks and non-English characters
Andrew and MuzikJunky were talking on MuzikJunky's talk page about using Japanese characters and accent marks, and I think it's worth bringing that to the whole group to discuss. We've developed a system that's more or less consistent, but we've never actually written it down in one place.
Here's some examples of how we use non-English characters on the wiki:
- Sesamstrasse -- There was some discussion of this when the wiki first started, because it can also be written as Sesamstraße. Partly, there was some confusion about whether Sesamstraße is still in current use in Germany. We decided to go with referring to the show as Sesamstrasse, because it's easier for searching and linking. The article begins: "Sesamstrasse (Sesamstraße in German)..."
- For other international shows, we've used titles with accents -- Barrio Sésamo, Susam Sokağı, and Świat Elmo -- when the accent is over a character that's used in English. We do the same for characters and actors, including Uli Von Bödefeld, Geir Børresen and Minik Kuş. We alphabetize these names as if they were non-accented -- Świat Elmo is alphabetized under S. To make searching and linking easier, we make the non-accent translation a redirect -- so Plaza Sesamo leads to Plaza Sésamo.
- For non-Roman characters, we use the Roman spelling -- so the Chinese and Israeli Sesame Street are referred to on the wiki as Zhima Jie and Rechov Sumsum. The beginning of each article includes the actual spelling as "Zhima Jie (芝麻街 in Chinese)". (One odd exception is Glædelig Jul, Elmer -- do we consider æ to be more like the ö in Bödefeld, or more like the ß in Sesamstraße?)
The general rule is that we use non-English characters when it's an accent over an English character, but not when it involves unfamiliar characters like Sesamstraße or 芝麻街. This is an English-language wiki, so we're using translations when the alternative would be difficult for English speakers to read or navigate. Technically, it would be more accurate to call it רחוב סומסום instead of Rechov Sumsum -- but if we're going for strict accuracy, then every proper noun on that page would be in Hebrew. At a certain point, you have to translate.
For proper nouns that use non-English characters, we give the correct spelling in parentheses when we know it -- as with Sesame Street (Japan) or Kippi Ben Kippod. We don't have these for some articles, but that's just because nobody's added it yet.
On MuzikJunky's talk page, he and Andrew were talking about putting accents on Japanese words like Yôko and Tôkyô. I like the way that Wikipedia handles it -- names are written without the accents for article titles and text, but the accents are noted at the top of the article. The Yoko Ono article starts with "Yoko Ono Lennon (小野 洋子 Ono Yōko)", and Tokyo says "Tokyo (東京, Tōkyō)". In all other uses, the words are written without accents.
Using that standard, our article on Yoko Haruta would not use the accents for the title, and the article would begin: "Yoko Haruta (春田洋子, Haruta Yôko)". We don't have an article about Tokyo, so we would use the common English spelling.
- Æ is a standard vowel in the Danish and Norewgian language and is therefor considered as a uniqe letter and it have it's own place in the alphabet. (Sweden uses Ä instead of Æ). The same goes for the other Nordic letters, they are also vowels Å and Ø/Ö and have their own place in the alphabets. The difference on these compared to the German Ö or ß is that the nordic letters are not dependent on the grammar thats used in a certain sentence. It is possible to replace the letters. Å with Aa and Æ/Ä with AE, this preserve the unique sound the letters have in the Nordic languages. Ø/Ö is commonly replaced with O. However the letter loses its unique sound this way. For instance the letter Ø and Ö also spells "island" while O don't spell anything. Henrik (talk) 20:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- I’m all for accents and macrons. I used circumflex accents instead of macrons to denote Japanese long vowels (like IMDb does) because I can’t access the latter without searching for the character(s) extensively. And I was the one who added the Hebrew for Kippi Ben Kippod and the Japanese for Sesame Street Japan. Peace. —MuzikJunky 03:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- As Danny said, this is an English-language wiki. As such I tend to believe we should use the standard English alphabet that people can find on their keyboards either directly for the article title, or in a redirect. People searching for information should be able to find it without using special characters or having to know the accent system and/or alphabet of every language and romanization thereof which has a Sesame Street. It's simply not practical to expect an average person of any linguistic background to know that.
- However, I think it is somewhat arbitrary to say that accents on normal characters will be used, but unusual (ie non-English) characters like ß won't. I have to pull up the same character chart to find accented English or Greek characters so I don't think it's actually any harder even to create the page. Assuming there are no technical (web address) issues, I think it would be good to use both accents and non-English characters in titles, and create keyboard friendly redirects for both.
- For the specific Japanese case, I think Andrew's argument that the actors themselves aren't using the circumflex accents on their own webpages carries quite a bit of weight in suggesting to me that whatever proper Japanese romanization rules might require, the more casual language typically used online doesn't need those accents. I see no reason why we need to be more formal than the native speakers of a given language; that feels like overcompensation. -- Wendy (talk) 03:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- There's a non-arbitrary reason to allow Ö or é in an article title and not ß. As an English speaker, when I read "Geir Børresen" or "Plaza Sésamo", I have a way to sound it out in my head. The "Geir Børresen" in my head doesn't sound exactly like the way a Norwegian person would say it, but at least I can read it and move on. But if I see "Sesamstraße", I'm stumped. -- Danny (talk) 18:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Personally I think that it would be a shame to leave out the Nordic letters, but then again maybe its because I'm Danish...I can see the point in having a redirect page with the replacements for the Nordic letters. But as a Dane I would not like to see the Nordic pages changed. However I agree in not using ß in articles. The reason behind this is that the title card of Sesamstrase don't use the ß and as I mentioned before its use is dependent on how a sentence is build in German. So since it's a English languaged wiki the grammer rules can not really be compared. About replacing "Ø" it could work with "O" , but keep this in mind, making this change would bascially mess up the words. Imagine how it would be like to read English words were "I" was replaced with "T", a different letter and a different sound. Henrik (talk) 21:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Don't worry, Henrik... I don't think anybody's suggesting that we take the Nordic characters out. (Unless I'm misreading something.) We're just looking at the way that we're currently using non-English characters, and figuring out how to apply those guidelines to some new cases. As far as I know, we're not planning to change anything on the Danish/Norwegian pages. -- Danny (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Then, for Japanese, if it isn’t too much trouble, only the initial boldface romanization with the original Japanese should use macrons or circumflex accents. Other occurrences in the main text and the article titles can be written without them. Peace. —MuzikJunky 21:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- For Japanese, I still prefer Danny's suggestion, ala "Yoko Ono Lennon (小野 洋子 Ono Yōko)." It makes more sense when the subject's themselves aren't using any macrons in their websites or publications. But just using the macrons once would be the next best thing, so I'd be okay with that depending on overall consensus on Danny's initial proposition. Also, with articles like Japan, I think all macrons and the Japanese text can be removed. The info is widely available elsewhere, and I don't like the idea of including such text for any and all instances of a Japanese or Hebrew person or place, just for shows, actors, or characters relevant to Muppet Wiki's mission and where the info isn't as easily accessible. --Andrew Leal (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
I changed Yoko Haruta to fit the Wikipedia model; I think it works great this way. I'm okay with the Japanese characters for Japan, as long as we're only giving the characters for the subject of the article, and not for other Japanese words that occur in the text. -- Danny (talk) 22:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- In Japan, where they never use romanized Japanese for their native people’s names, Ozawa’s name is always written in its native characters. Peace. —MuzikJunky 06:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
I can't view them, as they're restricted to US viewers only, but Carsey Werner has posted two clips from the "Cliff's Nightmare" episode, on their official Cosby Show YouTube thread. Links are available in the intro to The Cosby Show article. -- Zanimum 17:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Would anyone have a problem if we did a gallery article featuring the various Muppet autographs? There are already two great examples (Example 1, Example 2) I found in a quick search, plus I added one more (My addition)(which can be deleted as I just found it at the fan club page). I just thought it might be a fun little page, but didn't know if since one hadn't been done already if it was frowned upon for any reason. -- Nate (talk) 21:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- I think that's a great idea. I don't know what category it would be in -- maybe one of the Lists categories? -- Danny (talk) 18:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- Would Muppet performers and Sesame Street cast be okay too, or would that be a separate page? I have a hologram image of the street from season 35, signed by Roscoe Orman and Kevin Clash (plus Elmo). What were the first two signatures from? I have Beany Bunny, Kermit, and Piggy's signatures from Disney, but Pops was never there. Was it the Muppet Magazine? -- Zanimum 17:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Muppets No-Nonsense Show
- I've never heard of it. It may exist, but I've noticed that vandals have become particularly voracious of late, going to extreme lengths in order to filter mis-information onto the web where it won't be contested. IMDb is just such a place. —Scott (talk) 18:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Barney was a cast member of Sesame Street for about a year, a bit back, so I know it's quacked often. -- Zanimum 19:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- On the other hand, a search for the phrase brings up 2 or 3 other user-submitted entries in foreign languages, listed as a 1975 production. It's possible that this is the translated title of The Muppet Show: Sex and Violence, which I don't think was distributed overseas before The Muppet Show: Season One. These are all just guesses based on what's available out there in Internetland. On a related note, I have seen WP users trying to "correct" or remove the Sex and Violence entry from various articles, noting something about being sexually explicit. —Scott (talk) 19:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Just seeing that now, re: Sex and Violence on Wikipedia. That is a possibility, that it's a translation. -- Zanimum 19:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Ӝ and Guillermo added embedded videos to a couple articles today, which I've taken out for now. My feeling on them is the same as our policy on linking to YouTube in the first place: that it's impossible to keep track of what's going to be removed this week and what's still going to be live. Embedding them adds two more downsides. 1) It's impossible to keep track of which pages on the wiki are using the embed code, and 2) when YouTube deletes the video, not only do we have a screesnhot that doesn't wholly represent what we're trying to display, but it's also broken. I would propose that we don't embed videos on the wiki at all, and only link to them under the strictest adherence that we apparently use for adding them now. —Scott (talk) 22:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- I agree with you completely. I've never liked over reliance on YouTube links anyway, and as noted, embedding adds more problems. Plus, in general, embedded videos is something that has come to be associated with blogs and MySpace and other personal sites, which is fine. However, on a Wiki which tries to be reasonably encyclopedic and not just a collection of diverting entries and cool videos, I think they make the articles look ugly and are just as unnecessary as commercial links to buy DVDs or toys. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 22:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well, Scott was telling me that Google search results for the Wiki's articles were lower than Wikipedia's, and that we could raise them with the help of the videos I posted on YouTube. If we embed them here, then the Wiki would show up in the list of sites which the video links to. What's bad about that? --MuppetVJ 23:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- I appreciate the idea, Guillermo, and I can't speak for Scott, but I don't know that it's worth it just to increase Google search results. If anything, Google search results bring *more* attention to YouTube videos and thus to us, and thus increasing the possibility of a video being flagged for removal for whatever reason or the user being targeted; I know you've been safe so far, G., but you're one of the exceptions, and it has enormous potential to get messy for all concerned. If the goal is just to help Google ranking, we'd actually be better off embedding videos and linking to the relevant articles on a single page, where one could keep an eye on them. It still strikes me as risky, unnecessary, and problematic, especially as it encourages other users to embed videos, which with something like MADtv, are tangential at best and even more likely to be pulled for copyright infringements. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 23:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- What about videos of talk show or otherwise improvised appearances? Can there be limited acceptance of these elsewise not commercially available video files? (I don't know of any video that qualifies, but say Cookie Monster greeting Ann Curry on her birthday, on The Today Show.) -- Zanimum 18:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The main page hasn't quite caught up with the statistics, but as of now, Muppet Wiki has just broken the barrier, reaching 16,001 articles, a little late for New Year's Day but still a nice way to bring in 2008. Congratulations, everyone! It may seem like we've blanketed the field, and a lot of it has been covered, but there's still plenty of minor Muppets to be added, merchandise which hasn't been documented, celebrities to be celebrated, plus tons of references to be discovered, amongst many other things (plus plenty of expansion and refining on existing articles). So here's to a fun and productive year as we head towards 17,000. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 08:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to mention that the first 2 CD's from Koch Records are now listed as coming out on March 4th. They will be reissues of Platinum All-Time Favorites and Elmopalooza! I can't confirm the tracks yet, but I'm hoping they're at least the same as, or maybe even longer than, the originals! More details as I (and the other record hounds) find them! -- Ken (talk) 05:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Sesame Street Rose Parade float
Happy New Year, everybody! Did anybody happen to tape the Rose Parade? The float from NAMM (I think it stands for the National Association of Music Merchandisers, an association of musical instrument retailers) had a Sesame Street-themed float, and Bob was on it! I didn't see any working Muppets on it, but there were some characters made out of flowers, like Elmo and some others. I hadn't heard about it, and it was over so fast, I didn't have time to write about it this morning. I'm going to dig some more tomorrow, but I just wanted to mention it in case anybody taped it. Thanks! -- Ken (talk) 06:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- btw, a while back, I added a bunch of info on this float, based on what obvious from the Flickr photos of it, and this claim that Bob was on the float. -- Zanimum 18:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)