Template talk:Blog

From LGPedia
Jump to: navigation, search

As a database designer, the Blog3 template always struck me as having very poor design in the one fact that it was limited in the number of cast members that could be displayed. In my mind, the number of cast members that could be listed should not be limited, and should not have to be coded in such an odd manner anyway. So now, instead of character1, actor1, character2, actor2, etc., one simply uses Template:VidChar. The plus side of this that may not be so obvious is that in editing things like our new categorizations of various filmographies for the actors, instead of having to edit six or seven lines of code, we only edit one, and it cascades to all video pages for all cast memebers. --Brucker 12:09, 21 February 2007 (CST)

Even though the old template had that awkward reverse numbering, I think it's otherwise more intuitive than using this nested template. I guess I would have a mild preference for retaining the Blog3 template and if there are ever 8 characters in a video (which strikes me as fairly unlikely) we could just add another slot when the moment arises, which I think would be less work than getting used to this new template within a template system. --JayHenry 21:36, 21 February 2007 (CST)
What if the template were simplified, so that rather than
character = Bree
actor     = Jessica Lee Rose

we could use a simplified format of

{{VidChar|Bree|Jessica Lee Rose}}

would that be better? It just seems so much more efficient to me. --Brucker 12:32, 22 February 2007 (CST)

I know this discussion is old, but I kind of do like Brucker's second suggestion here better. It would make each character only take up one line of code instead of three or four. The template could probably be modified so that either would work while we make the transition. Thoughts?--Jonpro 11:02, 24 April 2007 (CDT)

YouTube tags

Would there be a way to make all of the YouTube tags link to their respective pages without having to add square brackets around each one. It's a small thing, but if it's not that hard to do, it would save some time.--Jonpro 14:49, 21 February 2007 (CST)

Not only do I not know of a good way to do that, but I'm not 100% sure it's a good idea, since some pages have unique formatting issues, such as Thanksgiving, which has a tag pointing to itself. --Brucker 19:00, 21 February 2007 (CST)

General question about blog templates

It occurred to me that most if not all videos have a discussion thread in the forum. It might be nice to add a link to that thread from the info box. --Brucker 12:56, 22 February 2007 (CST)

Yeah, doesn't the Op template have that already? It's a nice feature and I'm guessing it wouldn't be that hard to include it here also. But what the heck do I know? Where did you and Jay learn all this templature stuff? I'm so behind. =( OwenIsCool 14:08, 22 February 2007 (CST)
Believe it or not, I learned it here; I'm a fast learner. --Brucker 15:10, 23 February 2007 (CST)


I tried this template out for the first time today when I started the page for Cracked The File. I tried using the fields for "PreviousC" and "NextC" and it looks like they're backwards. When I put Men Are From Mars as "PreviousC" is came up as "Directly after" (and vice-versa when I tried putting it as "NextC"). I'd fix it, but since you can't really tell if it works until you save, I don't want to start making lots of edits trying to figure it out.
Another thing is that when I use the "PreviousC" and "NextC", the plain "Previous" and "Next" items come up on the article even though there's nothing filled in for them. I feel obligated to use the old plain "Previous" because if I use "PreviousC" they'll both come up, whereas if I use "Previous", at least "PreviousC" disappears. I know what I just said might sound kind of weird... if I need to clarify anything, let me know.
OwenIsCool 20:04, 24 February 2007 (CST)

Ecch, it's not malfunctioning, the wording is confusing, I didn't realize it. "Directly after" as in "This video is directly after the video listed." Can I get a suggestion for better wording? As for "Previous" and "Next", those are set to be there always. If the previous video chronologically is also the previous in the series, then you shouldn't use "PreviousC". It's really supposed to be only for canon videos that are not part of the series, such as early Gemma and Jonas videos, and perhaps OpAphid/Tachyon ones, although the status of those is far from clear to me. --Brucker 02:55, 25 February 2007 (CST)
Ohh, you're right. I remember having this discussion before when we were talking about how to merge the OpAphid videos (I think). Maybe we should switch them? We're conditioned to think that the video labeled "Previous" is a video prior to the one whose article were reading, so when we (ok, maybe just me) look at the video labeled "Directly after" we (I) think its directly after the one the article is about. I think what I'm trying to say is that "previous", "next", "previous by", "next by" all describe the vid that they are linking to, whereas "directly before/after" is describing the video of the current page, not the one it links to.
I'm sorry that I'm bringing this up just now, because like I said, I do remember talking about this before, it's just that it never struck me. I guess I just didn't realize it confused me until I went and tried to make one for Cracked The File. It'd be helpful if others commented here on what works and doesn't work for them (Hear that, everybody?). After all, it could just be silly me.
OwenIsCool 11:30, 25 February 2007 (CST)
I don't think it's just you, I don't like it either. Perhaps "Directly follows"? --Brucker 12:18, 26 February 2007 (CST)
I think just switching them would work, but "Directly follows" is a good option. I wish more people would share their opinion though, I'd like to know what the general feeling is. I'd like to be able to use that field to incorporate the OpAphid and Tachyon vids so people know where they fit in chronologically. OwenIsCool 17:08, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
I think switching them would be a good idea, especially since those fields are only being used in a few videos right now. "PreviousC" would just mean the previous video chronologically and "NextC" would mean the next video chronologically. That way "previous" always means before and "next" always means after. And these fields would only be necessary if they were different than "Previous" or "Next".--Jonpro 17:13, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
I have no particular preference as I prefer to navigate from the List of Lonelygirl15 videos. --JayHenry 10:14, 30 March 2007 (CDT)


Given the fact that we now have to deal with this mind-boggling cr-- ...err...this wonderful new presentation technique by The Creators, I vote for adding a Status: field between Description and YouTube Tags. If it defaults to "Public", all 160+ previous videos are automagically fine, and the status of future videos can easily be recognized without having to scan the description.

~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 08:19, 27 March 2007 (CDT)
Should we make the "Status" field appear in the older videos, or should we only add it to videos that were released with the designation? Since it wasn't a distinction previously, I'm not sure that we should retromagically apply it to the older vids. Either way we should definitely add it to the template for current use. --JayHenry 14:02, 27 March 2007 (CDT)
Retromagically, that's a great term! I would also favor making it an optional field though, so that if the videos don't have a Status the field should just not show up. I think that the status of the older videos was purposefully ambiguous. At first, Bree thought her parents didn't know she blogged. Then OpAphid starts watching her vids. Then we find out Gemma does. Then apparently her father knows about them too. They're public in the sense that they're not protected, but they were not necessarily intended for Op's, dad's and Gemma's viewing.
The status field should be kept simple. "Private" if it's like a diary entry; "Private transmission" and "Recipient" if it's a message for someone; "Public" if it's, well, public.
OwenIsCool 00:40, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
i think everyu video should have a field, and that it should who the video was sent to and what kind of video, not just if its public or private. some examples would be Public YouTube VLog (all the videos that in the breeniverse were uploaded to YouTube initially, regardless of where they appeard first in the real world), Private MySpace Vlog, Encrypted Email Message, Secure uploud to OpAphid Server, for groups with Level 7 clearence, whatever. - Misty 14:41, 27 March 2007 (CDT)
Okay, from recent videos it seems like there are two fields we should probably add: faction and status. I think these fields should be optional and only included on videos where these things are specified in the description.--Jonpro 22:10, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
Yeah, we need faction and status. I agree they should be optional and only included when the videos specify as such. Another thought: someone requested awhile ago that we allow the template to include length. I'm not opposed to the idea, though I'm skeptical that anyone has the energy to go through adding the lengths to the 150 odd videos. --JayHenry 10:23, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
I tried to add the fields, but it doesn't seem to be working correctly. If someone a little more template savvy could fix it, that'd be great. As far as the length field, I'm open to adding it as optional, then if someone wants to add the lengths, more power to them.--Jonpro 11:42, 4 April 2007 (CDT)

Move Blog4 to Blog?

I was wondering, if we moved Blog4 to Blog, would the links automatically update, or would we need to edit each one? Now that we are using Blog4 for all the videos, it would make more sense to just call it Blog, since the earlier template was deleted. -misty 15:08, 10 04 2007 (CDT)

Well, they wouldn't automatically update, but I could change them all with the LGBot relatively easily. I don't know if the change is absolutely necessary, but I guess it wouldn't hurt. Other thoughts?--Jonpro 15:11, 10 04 2007 (CDT)
Well, I always found the Blog[number] naming kinda confusing...I keep asking myself, "why make blog, blog2, blog3, blog4, if only one is used?". If there is only one official LG15 blog template, it should reside at Template:Blog. Having it at Template:Blog4, when 1, 2 and 3 aren't used, only confuses people.
~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 15:42, 10 April 2007 (CDT)
I tend to agree. I think we can go ahead and make the change soon unless anyone is really opposed to it.--Jonpro 16:10, 11 April 2007 (CDT)
Okay, this is done. And now that "length" has been added to all the videos, I'm making it a required field. Every video has one, and it will be easier to spot if it has the label but no actual length.--Jonpro 09:04, 12 April 2007 (CDT)


I think that the template should have somewhere to put the Location, now that our location pages are looking good. Thoughts?   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 10:46, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

You know, the location that the video took place in. Thoughts? 13:05, 30 June 2007 (CDT)
I think that's a good idea, but we'll probably want to consider that a video could take place in more than one location. Also, there will be the task of going back and adding all the locations to the video pages. I like the idea though because it should give the locations pages more visibility and add a little more useful info to the video pages.--Jonpro 13:59, 30 June 2007 (CDT)
I like the idea too, but like Jon said, it might be difficult when there's more than one location.. or a location that's unspecified/unimportant (like Rockin' the Boat... where IS that exactly??) I concept I think this is a really good idea, though, and if someone can figure out a good way to execute it, I'm all for it! Oh, and I don't mind going through and adding locations to the older videos.. hell, I (mostly) did it for the lengths, so eh, this is just another thing "to do". Lol yeah. And hey Jon, nice to see ya again!! --Zoey 14:15, 30 June 2007 (CDT)
More than one location, we could have commas, or "This location" & "That location." I really think this could work. We wouldn't automatically link the text to an LGPedia page, because if it's like Rockin' the Boat, we don't really know where it is. Those former OpHead sleuthers could probably figure it out in no time. And for the unknown locations, how about the "location" form is just optional. So we don't have to have "Location:Unknown" on a bunch of video pages. Like Zoey, I don't mind going through and adding locations either.   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 11:24, 8 July 2007 (CDT)
I won't give up on this dream. LOL. Zoey, Jon, do you guys still have an opinion on it? I still say, let's go for it.   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 12:41, 17 July 2007 (CDT)
A Location slot would be pretty cool, IMO. A bunch of videos already have a description of the location in their respective notes, so it would be nice to see a "home" for them, so to speak. I do have one question . . . would we put in the "story location" or the actual, real life location?? My best examples would be like the Wyman Foundation and the La Jolla Inn, which weren't really those things in real life. --Pheon 02:36, 18 July 2007 (CDT)
Well, Pheon, the way that I'm imagining it is that it would be where the video took place in the story. Wyman Foundation, La Jolla Health and Soccer Club, Jonas's house (actually Kenneth's house), Bree's bedroom (Mesh's apartment]])... we would just list where it is in the story.   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 10:15, 18 July 2007 (CDT)
I added a location= variable on Zoey's behalf, conditionally, so it doesn't show up on all the old videos. It's a pure input variable, there's nothing auto-linked, so it's up to the user to link or not link a location correctly. The caption says "Location(s)", so it's good for multiple entries as well.
If it is wished, I can write a Template:Location that works like the initials one, but the time-difference between writing {{location|Bree's bedroom}} and [[Bree's bedroom]] is marginal, and not in favor of a template.
If anyone sees any parsing problems on video pages because of this change, either contact me or revert asap. (Although I'm pretty confident everything worked as it should.)
~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 14:28, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

There we go. All added. I am going to go die now :) --Zoey 19:23, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Wow, I just had a chance to visit the 'Pedia today and it's already done! Zoey, Silver, & Renegade, you amaze me! --Pheon 23:10, 18 July 2007 (CDT)


Now that the creators announced the season finale, I say we add a season form to the template. Love, -R- 20:32, 13 July 2007 (CDT)


I didn't really know where to put this, so I decided to put it here. I was wondering if someone could whip me up a version of this for me. But as you can see Here I am trying to recreate the video page (FOR FUN NO SERIOUSNESS INVOLVED.) If you see at the top, I started to make a Blog template horizontally, but knew something would go drastically wrong because I wasn't doing it correctly and stopped. If one of you guys has some free time to make me a vertical one to match into the colors of my project and put it up here for me, I'd appreciate it. Remember that I'm doing this to practice re arranging stuff, I'm not expecting this to become the next video template, O.K. Love, -R- 00:17, 15 July 2007 (CDT)

Redesigning for new theme.

Well, due to the new red-on-blue/blue-on-red theme, I made two templates in my sand box. I'll post the discussion for the LG15 one here.

Episode 243
Star white on blue.gifBlogStar white on blue.gif

She can feel dead people's hands . . . ewww.

Blogger Bree
Date Posted 20070730
URL old.LG15.com
Length 2:10
Description I'm prepared and I'm excited
Faction The Order
Status Public Video
YouTube Tags lonelygirl15 bree daniel danielbeast jonas jonastko
Production Credits
Bree Jessica Lee Rose
Barb Staley Prom
Carl Craig Coyne
Adjacent Blogs
Previous "They Broke In!!!"
Next none
Previous by Bree "Something's Coming"

The problem—theres something wrong with the code. Yeah. I don't know how the <noinclude> and "Preview" got in the template code, but it did. Help?

adding stuff

I was thinking that we can add the first line of the video to the template, like we can add '''{{PAGENAME}}''' is the {{EPISODENUMBER}} video in the [[lonelygirl15]] video series. It is also the {{SEASONNUMBER}} video in season 2. or something. I think just in general we should add a new template for season 2 so we only have to make major changes to 4 articles (as of now) Love, Randy (Say Wha'? | Whachu Doin'?) [Sun, Aug 21, '07 - 1:58 AM, Central Daylight]

That is technically possible, but not necessary, IMO. All it does is making you copy two lines more template code rather than one line of text. Why would we need a new template? The current one works fine.
~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 07:09, 12 August 2007 (CDT)

I think I'd put this here...

Well, I have an idea for the video template :] I want it to look somewhat like thiiiis:
Blog Layout Test.jpg
Hrm? Yes? No? Well I can't code that good. Of course we can change colors and stuff, I just wanted to through this out here. Love, Randy (Say Wha'? | Whachu Doin'?) [Sept. 21, '07 - 9:1* PM, Central Daylight]


Okay, so because of the new promo vid for LG15:TSIY featured on Inside LG15 yesterday, I figured I would try to make a color scheme series thingy for The Show is Yours. It kind of worked, but the coding got messed up on the Episode Number, the Cast, the Length, and whatever else. I keep trying stuff and I fixed some stuff but I'm generally suckish at wikicoding. Could someone please give me a hand and keep my TSIY stuff but fix what I broke? K thanks! Sorry about the suckish look of every video page now! But it's easily fixable by someone who knows wikicoding. Which isn't me. 19:08, 6 January 2009 (CST) (Sorry, this is actually Kevin, but I'm not logged in)

I reverted it back to what it was before. The show won't premiere until February, and there's plenty of time to add it in the meantime, and it will probably make more sense to hold off on that until we know the color scheme and name of the chosen show. --FH14 23:22, 07 January 2008 (EST)

Small request

A small request: When nothing is entered for Blogger, could it like, not be there? I have a feeling that the N1ckola videos aren't going to have bloggers. Kevin 14:57, 29 January 2009 (CST)

Broken URL Coding

The code/template (I'm not sure which) for the forum link isn't working. Instead of a clickable URL, there's a text string with two curly brackets at the end. --Kitsaber691 (talk) 03:42, 23 June 2016 (UTC)