Club Penguin Wiki:January 2015 Council Topics

The community seems to agree on suspending the wiki council as it hasn't been efficient over the last two years. There are four remaining topics that were on the agenda which are now transferred to a vote here. There is also a discussion section at the end where we are taking about the possibility of modifying the traditional voting system. Thank you for your participation in this vote.--LordMaster96 23:24, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Please review the topics on this page before voting.

Duolingo (-11)

Against (11)

1. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 00:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
2. Perapin
   00:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
3. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
4. Juca (discussão/talk) 01:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
5. --LordMaster96 07:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
6. --Nando144 17:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
7. --Gatuti789 Talk Page 20:54, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
8. --Proud to be Estonian! Snowstormer ^{Talk • Contributions} 15:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
9. --Penstubal ^{(Talk) (Edits)} 15:54, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
10. --$harkbate ^{Talk Page} 23:48, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
11. --TurtleShroom (talk) {{subst:template:TSSIGNATURE}} 18:39, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
    
12. Lipe (discussão/talk). 20:09, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• Isn't this a language learning app? How does this impact the wiki? Atum 23:43, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
• My opinion from before still stands. "Personally, I think relying on people who most likely have never even heard of Club Penguin and are only learning the language they're trying to translate from isn't a very good idea. Plus, like CK said, copyright issues and typos could cause an even bigger mess." --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 00:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• We don't rely on other people's translations when we don't know the language ourselves.
  Perapin
  00:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• I appreciate the thought and understand where it's coming from, but overall I don't think this would be very helpful to us. Read my comments on the council page. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• Writing articles requires Club Penguin knowledge, so I don't think this is a good idea. --Juca (discussão/talk) 01:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• First off we don't have a CPW in another language besides PT. Secondly, if we were to simply translate articles using Duolingo it's certainly doesn't help sustain a community, on top of all the work that we'd have to do. Best to start from scratch. --LordMaster96 07:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

RocketSnail Games subwiki (+1)

For (7)

1. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
2. A subwiki would be cool. We already cover a lot of non-CP content because of the relation with Rocketsnail, so this would be nice to have. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 15:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
3. --File:Estonia.gif My name is Pingu. Quackerpingu. ^{<-- This signature doesn't have any errors with encoding.} 17:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
4. --Gatuti789 Talk Page 20:54, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
5. --Proud to be Estonian! Snowstormer ^{Talk • Contributions} 15:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
6. --Penstubal ^{(Talk) (Edits)} 15:56, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
7. --Dave33333 all hail To the epic king. 20:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Against (6)

1. Perapin
   00:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
2. This wiki is called the Club Penguin Wiki for a reason. I think that our article on Rocketsnail Games is sufficient enough to explain its relevancy to Club Penguin. An entire subwiki is unnecessary. Just because something is related, that doesn't mean it needs an entire a subwiki. By the same logic, we should create a Disney subwiki too, since Disney does own Club Penguin. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 05:29, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
3. --$harkbate ^{Talk Page} 23:48, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
4. --LordMaster96 01:38, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
5. While I do agree that the CPW needs to greatly expand its RSnail articles, that does not neccessitate a new database, given that there are about seven or eight RSnail games in existence. --TurtleShroom (talk) {{subst:template:TSSIGNATURE}} 18:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
6. --Nando144 21:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

• Juca (discussão/talk) 01:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• This is a Club Penguin Wiki.
  Perapin
  00:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• Yes it is, but as I said originally, CP was highly involved with RocketSnail Games from 2000-2005 (at the very least). Please read my original section for this on the council page. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• Unnecessary, I don't think we need a RocketSnail Wiki on CPWN. --Juca (discussão/talk) 01:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• It wouldn't be a full wiki, it'd just be a subwiki of the CPW, like Ideas, and possibly formatted like this with a custom logo and such (if possible). Also, I know it's not really necessary, but it'd be nice to have a few extra articles for readers, plus it'd be the only active database (area) for RS Games, as the wikia version is inactive. Also, although I originally thought of a full wiki, a subwiki would certainly work better because it wouldn't have a ton of pages (enough to make a normal wiki), but I still think it'd have enough to be valuable to us for readers and the network alike. CK 06:38, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• I thought it would be a full wiki. I have nothing against a namespace for it. --Juca (discussão/talk) 13:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• Only notable articles about Rocketsnail Games should be included on the Club Penguin Wiki.
  Perapin
  20:34, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• I think the craze for this idea only started cause of Mech Mice or whatever game the CP creators are up to now. I know this game got some CP players on social media talking. RocketSnail games pre-2005 wasn't really much and anything after doesn't really tie into CP. --LordMaster96 01:38, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Mobile theme (+9)

For (12)

1. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
2. Juca (discussão/talk) 01:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
3. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 03:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
4. --Atum 03:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
5. --LordMaster96 07:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
6. --Gatuti789 Talk Page 20:54, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
7. --Proud to be Estonian! Snowstormer ^{Talk • Contributions} 15:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
8. --Penstubal ^{(Talk) (Edits)} 15:54, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
9. --$harkbate ^{Talk Page} 23:48, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
10. --Lisured (会話) 01:42, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
11. Lipe (discussão/talk). 20:09, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
12. -Wonderweez ^{(Talk · Contribs)} 19:05, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Against (3)

1. Perapin
   00:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
2. BS. The proper Wiki themes are good enough for computer phones. We do not, nor should we ever need, a mobile phone item. --TurtleShroom (talk) {{subst:template:TSSIGNATURE}} 18:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
3. I would just make an Android version of the wiki. --Dave33333 all hail To the epic king. 20:08, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

How does this make any sense? --$harkbate ^{Talk Page} 23:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• Mobile devices are meant for emergencies, not reading the Club Penguin Wiki. It is not a priority.
  Perapin
  00:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Emergencies such as calling a doctor to fix your brain. --Penstubal ^{(Talk) (Edits)} 15:52, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  • What decade are you living in? --$harkbate ^{Talk Page} 00:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Have you seen phones lately? --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 15:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Yes. There are far too many people looking down on their phones these days that it seems like they're not "living" or that they are completely ignoring "offline" society. Even if we do proceed to get a mobile theme, I want to make sure it's appropriately designed for mobile use.
      Perapin
      20:34, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      • MobileFrontend is a good extension, since it's already used by Wikipedia and Wikia. Nobody is forcing you to use a phone to access the Wiki, but there are a lot of people who use phones to browse the Internet. --Juca (discussão/talk) 20:55, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
      • That isn't the definition of "meant for emergencies". {{SUBST:Starsiggy}} 07:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
• It's not a priority, but it certainly wouldn't hurt anything. So, if it's possible to do this, I don't see a good reason not to. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• There is an extension which is already used by Wikipedia and Wikia that would make browing CPWN much easier. Why not? ---Juca (discussão/talk) 01:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• A mobile theme for the wiki is a very good choice if we wish to keep up-to-date and streamlined. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 03:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• I've thought of this before, and I think it would be a great idea. An app for iOS and Android would be terrific, but even a simpler m.clubpenguinwiki.info that one could access through an internet app (Chrome, Safari, etc.) would help out a lot. I'm on my phone a lot more than my laptop, so if I ever want to swing by, I could do so without all the clutter. Atum 03:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• It would be nice to have if we have the resources. I can say I've tried viewed pages/edited the wiki from my phone several times in the past. --LordMaster96 07:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• Hm, now that I think about it, would this only be done for the CPW? Or could it also be implemented network-wide (or at least both CPWs)? Because if it's easy to set up, I don't think anyone on the network would object to having their site available in mobile. CK 00:40, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
• The right way to do things IMHO would be a skin with responsive design --Refractor (talk) 21:26, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not trying to sound dumb, but I don't think any of us know what that means. CK 00:06, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
    • A responsive theme is a theme that works in any screen size (both desktop and mobile). --Juca (discussão/talk) 01:23, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
      • The important part is showing the right UI elements and layout as needed as the viewport grows and shrinks. --Refractor (talk) 12:02, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
• Probably we should use MobileFrontend, if there's an option (and an easy option), why should we not be lazy and use that. Finding a responsive skin otherwise could be pretty difficult, plus a lot of skins are just plain ugly. --Proud to be Estonian! Snowstormer ^{Talk • Contributions} 15:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
  • +1 for responsive theme, MobileFrontend is nice but not a real solution--Lisured (会話) 01:42, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
• If this is passed we will need to have further discussions as to how the mobile skin should look and how to implement it from a technical standpoint. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 23:58, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Wall of Fame for the CPWN (+13)

This vote will be open to users from all wikis on the CPWN, given that they meet the voting requirements of any one wiki here.

For (15)

1. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 00:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
2. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
3. Juca (discussão/talk) 01:57, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
4. -- TheBroMaster ^{Talk to me!} 03:25, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
5. --LordMaster96 07:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
6. I don't have a specific reason for doing so, but hey, positiveness. {{SUBST:Starsiggy}} 09:44, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
7. Eh, why not. -- Yoshi11 13:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
8. --File:Estonia.gif My name is Pingu. Quackerpingu. ^{<-- This signature doesn't have any errors with encoding.} 17:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
9. Sounds neat. --Ami H. Parkea (Just kidding, it's Fooly! And here's a talk page.) 01:06, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
10. --Nando144 17:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
11. --Gatuti789 Talk Page 20:54, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
12. --Proud to be Estonian! Snowstormer ^{Talk • Contributions} 15:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
13. --Penstubal ^{(Talk) (Edits)} 15:54, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
14. Phineas5501File:Phineas5501Puffles.png (Discussão/Talk) 16:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
15. Lipe (discussão/talk). 20:09, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Against (2)

1. Perapin
   00:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
2. I swear, proposals like this are why I want a coup d'etat. This is just dumb. Why in glob's name are we asking for duplicity? --TurtleShroom (talk) {{subst:template:TSSIGNATURE}} 18:42, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
   
   

Comments

• This is a good idea. Some people don't deserve to be on this specific wiki's Wall of Fame while still making great contributions to the network itself, like Zone. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 00:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• No. Wall of Fame slowly damages the modesty of the users on the wiki. The last thing I want to see on the wiki is egotistical users.
  Perapin
  00:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• Perapin, we already have a WoF on here and fanon, and I'd think PT has one as well. So, most users to go on this wall would probably be on one of those already. Also, for new users to get on this, it would take a lot of hard work and determination, so I don't think you have to worry about users' modesty. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• Just so you know, we don't have a Wall of Fame on PT Wiki. --Juca (discussão/talk) 01:57, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• I've liked this idea for years, so I certainly won't vote against. If this passes, we should set it up in the CPWN: section of the wiki (or recreate the network hub? :D), and make a nominations page also, similar to our WoF. However, I think CPWN: pages have a weird restriction to them, so that might have to be removed so that people can be nominated. CK 00:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• Good idea. It's a way to reward the ones who work hard helping Club Penguin Wiki Network. --Juca (discussão/talk) 01:57, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• Maybe, maybe not. I see quite a few people from this wiki's Wall of Fame going right on to that one, too. I can go either way for this though. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 03:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• In a way, you're right HP. Although, that might be because most of the CPWN's major contributors are from this wiki. As I said on the other page, "It wouldn't be used for important contributors of just one site (unless they made very notable contributions), it would be used for people that improved the network (after the network was founded), made notable efforts on numerous wikis, or improved certain wikis tremendously (before the move). Along with pretty much all of the current staff, examples I can think of include TurtleShroom (CPW contribs 2007-2009, Fanon 2009?-present), Zone (For his $150 contribution to the network- remove him from the CPW WoF), Tigernose (tremendous CPW reforms, along with former staff), LM96 (Great staff and admin work), and possibly individual wiki people such as Chill57181 (for his major contributions to shops, as well as the CPW), CPM (for founding Archives and leading it for nearly two years, in addition to CPW and Shops contributions), Explorer and/or Swiss Ninja (Fanon work), and any notable PT editors (possibly Penblooe and/or Lipe)." I still stick to my guns on this, but others I just thought of could be Happyface (wasn't he a webmaster here at some point? He was also supposedly like the founder of shops after MariotheMovie left) and Bro (for fanon and shops work). Of course everyone to go on would have to be approved network-wide, but those are just my ideas for people. So yes, it would mostly be filled with primary CPW users, but most wouldn't be for the exact same reason as they are here. CK 06:33, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• Agreed with above. --LordMaster96 07:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• All in for the idea, but perhaps implement it under another name. There have been a few generous/hard-working people who are deserving to be recognized, like Zone, Tux and Sea to name a few. But of course, don't expect many users to be on this. --LordMaster96 07:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• Although my comment doesn't pertain to this vote, I think that maybe nominations should have to be approved by a staff member and/or wiki b-crat, because bcrats (and to a lesser extent in general, staff, although on here the staff pretty much knows everyone) usually know who's changed a wiki for the better or made significant contributions. Although, maybe the bcrat portion would only apply if the person was going to be primarily nominated for contributions to one wiki. Also, just to clarify, this would contain people who made "a great cultural, historic, technical, or other contribution to the entire network, or very notable contributions to a single wiki, in the past, present, or future". I know a lot of people wouldn't be on here, but I think that users should at least be on here if they changed the face of a certain wiki (i.e. TN for CPW even if he hadn't become staff, or Explorer for Fanon as he is basically a legend for his years of leading and contributing). I hope that might clarify it a little bit. To be honest, we should have a whole page to discuss everything about this, once it is passed. CK 08:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

New voting format

In addition to the four votes above Cp kid suggested on perhaps using the old council page as a vote page so that we do not have to create a vote page for every single topic like we did in the past. This would be similar to the Shops Council, where a topic is posted and the wiki has two weeks to discuss and vote on the matter. However, we would only use this for minor topics so that minor issues don't clutter up the wiki's project namespace. Any major votes would still have their own page along with a sitenotice message. Please discuss your preference below, and feel free to suggest any new ideas.

Discussion

• This is a great idea that would make the process of improving Club Penguin Wiki much faster. --Juca (discussão/talk) 01:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• This is definitely preferred over the council. For a time, it worked great - but for things to get done more efficiently, it seems we need to change the format: and the proposed system looks like the way to go. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 03:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
• Fine, as long as we can preserve the Bureaucrat Veto is some way. If a majority of current Bureaucrats vote no (currently, with there only being 2, both would have to vote no), the topic is vetoed. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)}