Wikipedia:Trading card game/Action plan/Phase 2:Cards/Individual card proposals

When proposing a card, please observe what elements are required for the type of card you are proposing.

Approved finalized cards

Access levels

Instants

WP:THANKYOU

Articles

Vandalisms

WP:LEW

Discords

Trouted!

Illustrated cards for approval

Village Stocks

Name of card: Village Stocks
Class: Discord
Text: The player who drew this card must disregard any of his own privileges above autoconfirmed for a full round.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:44, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

WIP for review: image —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 07:42, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but everything sems too squished. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Working from Nicky's original SVG (which rendered quite nicely once I brought it into Inkscape), I was able to touch it up a bit and crop the image. I've updated the SVG file and also uploaded a fully-rendered PNG. New image for review. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:35, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Fantastic! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This one started looking funky, as well... Was Ireally that blind the first time I looked at it? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you looking at the right version? The SVG isn't for review, only the PNG matters during review. The SVG won't render properly for review purposes. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected the right margin of the text ability. See the latest version at the same link. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! I clicked Nicky's lnik, not yours. :P ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from the card's original proposal

Quote suggestions

It may be just a tad long, but what about:

It is a truth universally acknowledged that intelligent and otherwise sensible editors and administrators occasionally engage in acts of extreme stupidity.

—Wikipedia:village_stocks

Is there a guideline as to how long quotes can be yet? Bananaclasic (talk) 21:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can't say it in one breath out loud comfortably, it might be too long. The quote should, in general, be approximately 20 gross words (4-letter words) or less. This takes up about 3 lines on the card. The quotee takes up a fourth line. The quote listed above takes up 6 lines alone, plus a seventh for the quotee, so it might be pushing it. The special text takes up three lines. In all, this leaves a very small strip of space for the image. We'd better find a shorter quote. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with Bob, after thinking about it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about "Even the most sensible administrators engage in acts of extreme stupidity." —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse ([[User talk:Nicky

Nouse|talk]] • contribs) 06:37, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather not modify the quote, because then it is no longer a quote. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is from the paragraph below: "The village stocks have been built to identify the wiki-idiots in our midst." —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 22:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That seems good. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:28, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. :) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I was going to nominate a VS one... Oh well. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:14, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to hear your idea, anyway. Fire at will... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same idea. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 20:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great minds... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:10, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the Main Page

Name of card: Delete the Main Page
Class: Discord
Text: The main page was accidentally deleted. Remove administrator access from all adminstrators for one round.
Protected: N/A
Proposed by: ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

WIP for review: image —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 09:21, 26 November 2010 (UTC

It's getting closer. However, if I were you, I would take a look at the cards that Bob has already proposed, and try to make them look like that, meaning use the same fonts, font sizes, etc. As I said, this one is getting closer; it doesn't look quite as squished. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:39, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I discovered many of these issues go away if you open up Inkscape, click File>>Open, and paste the image's URL into the filename field, then open that. Nicky's images actually aren't quite as bad as the MediaWiki rendering makes them look; let's not be so quick to turn them down in the future.

I'll get to work now on touching this one up. Nicky, keep 'em coming if you're enjoying doing it. Turns out your efforts are helping, after all! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finished. I added a background so the card wouldn't be bland. Also, Nicky, don't forget to credit the quotee. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Tis wonderful. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:48, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

Extended content

One admin was discussing the deletion of the main page in IRC and asked if the technical ability to delete pages with over 5000 revisions, like the main page, had ever been re-enabled.
—Wikipedia:Don't delete the main page

Or, we could go for the whole thing:

One admin was discussing the deletion of the main page in IRC and asked if the technical ability to delete pages with over 5000 revisions, like the main page, had ever been re-enabled. Another admin (jokingly) commented that he had tested it and found that the main page still couldn't be deleted. The first admin thought he would test it for himself. The main page got deleted.
—Wikipedia:Don't delete the main page

I think one of those would be good, if we could fit one. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:08, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I was thinking something shorter...is there anything along the lines of "Whoops!" or "Now I know testing the limits isn't always a good idea"? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:13, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually...see the text on the prehistoric proposals page...there's a link around here somewhere that points to rejected proposals, and there's a card illustration there that has a quote on it... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is a truth universally acknowledged that intelligent and otherwise sensible editors and administrators occasionally engage in acts of extreme stupidity.
—Wikipedia:Village Stocks

That one? :) A bit long, but I like it. Hi878 isn't home. ^{(Can I take a message?)} 17:39, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah...too long. See my comment below for the same quote. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:30, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about the following quote? Bananaclasic (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are jokes, and then there are real mess-ups.

--Wikipedia:DDMP

Short, sweet, and to the point

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:39, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems good. No objections here. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Comments from the card's original proposal

This one would not apply if you are above administrator; only if administrator is the highest level you have. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Woot, but I'd apply it to all sysops. Beaurocrats can be corrupt, too, and they should be punished likewise. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:56, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So would we just lower everyone to Rollback that is past it? Actually, I like that. Should Jimbo be exempt? By the way, there is already a design that was proposed for this; it uses the wrong style, but I'm sure you could use the actual picture. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:00, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, thanks for that reminder (actually, I made all those pop-style proposals

) Also-- let's think about this now... if Jimbo deleted the main page, would he get sent to the Village Stocks? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:24, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was thinking that he should keep his vandal-blocking abilities and whatnot, since he has the founder permission. But I wouldn't object to a Jimbo being lowered too. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Server overload

Name of card: Server overload
Class: Discord
Text: All players must discard three cards immediately.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Image comments

WIP for review: image —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 07:31, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everything seems to be too squished. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:02, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can put "Scientizzle" in single square brackets...that's the professional way to alter a quote like that. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 03:55, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Touched up, and PNG'ified: [1] Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic, and bonus points for your new verb. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait! It started looking funky, all of the sudden. Words floating off the card, and all that. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replace "svg" at the end of your URL with "png". You're looking at the wrong one. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I clicked Nicky's, mistakenly thinking that you had both linked to the same page. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:22, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from the card's original proposal

Quote suggestions

How about "Someone must've deleted the sandboox again." It's a joke from the Village Stocks. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 06:42, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer it if we found an actual quote from somewhere, but this would work if we can't. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, how about "Scientizzle succeeded in locking the servers for half an hour on 16 January 2008, by deleting the sandbox."? The only difference is replacing "who" with "Scientizzle". —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 22:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's good, I think. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:28, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Sounds fine. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:15, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mozart

Name of card: Mozart
Class: Article (good)
Text: Musical composer, Wikipedia's first featured article
Protected: YES
Proposed by: CanvasHat 03:34, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

How's this? image —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 07:12, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I summarized the page instead of using the text. Sorry. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 18:29, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, everything seems too squished. Also, there needs to be something between the picture and caption and the page link. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:05, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the opening bit doesn't fit, it doesn't hurt to shorten it some. I had to do that on Abbott and the frogfish, I believe. And....Hi...what sort of "something"? If there's no special text, there's no special text. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:42, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know... I think it looks horrible without something there, though. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:53, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the bottom border runs into the link and the article description overlays itself...a couple modifications and we'll take another look. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Touched up and PNGified. Nicky, it took me awhile to figure out how to edit the images in these, but I finally realized you were doing it with clipping masks. Ingenious. Now that I know that, it won't take me nearly as long to touch these up anymore!

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I still think there should be something between the caption and the link... No idea what, however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No idea what we should add there, myself. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See below. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
Support Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC) Oh, definitely. The first FA definitely has to be included. Hi878 isn't home. ^{(Can I take a message?)} 17:40, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zobel network

Name of card: Zobel network
Class: Article (good)
Text: (Tribute card)
Protected: No
Proposed by: Certes (talk) 23:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

Image that needs making into a card

Card needing review. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'm not sure how many people need to approve the card before it is considered "approved", but I like it! The picture goes very well with the text. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 14:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If a week passes and no one rejects, I'd call it approved. We like to move quickly here...it keeps us alive. If we move too slowly, we kind of fall apart. That's what happened to the first 40 members of this project...they didn't keep the project in motion very often. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it did sort of screech to a halt, didn't it? I'm glad you and I got this thing going again, however (I feel so special!). As for the card, I have the same comment as for Mr. Mozart. Perhaps, for the caption, we could just have a caption for the picture, and then put the text that currently is being put as a caption between the caption and link? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad, too. Ummmmmm...I'd say yes, but that might confuse someone playing the game. When we draw a diagram of the card, the diagram will point to the area below the gray box and say "special text ability" and the text inside the box will have the label "quote or summary of the subject". Rather than moving the text, perhaps we should leave some blank space and include a fancy watermark or something in that blank space, such as the WPTCG logo. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We could, instead, say that the caption is a "quote or image caption" and underneath is "special text or a card description" depending on if it is an article or other. An article would be the second from each statement, and other cards would be the first. Does that seem smart? I am determined to get something between the box and link, as you can tell. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm determined not to remove the quote/summary from the box.

It disrupts the format of the card. So-- we've got two things to maintain-- structure and aesthetics. We need to put something there, though. Maybe one of our other contributors has a better idea we both like. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:47, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As long as something that involves text goes there, I'm happy. I don't really care what it is; I jsut hate having nothing there. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:50, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at this photo and tell me what you think about something along these lines. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Explanation, please. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to the fact that any card with no text in the box contains an image there. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was a very badly worded sentence, and I don't know what it means. It could also be that I am very tired, bu I would rather blame you. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read it after you wake up again...you're probably just sleep-deprived. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still don't get it. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that the cards in that photo that lacked text featured a solid-colored illustration in the "white space". Sorry for being confusing there. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't like that idea. I think it looks idiotic, and we don't want to copy other games too much, do we? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, especially games that look idiotic! *Awaits idea number 4...* Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I still like mine. Perhaps we need more input? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like idea #1, you like idea #2, neither of us like idea #3...Help! we need idea #4! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

The words aren't mine but I have happy memories of learning SVG by adding the diagrams. Please feel free to leave this one out: all I did was to propose a rule set that wasn't even collectable. Certes (talk) 23:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooo...radio stuff? Cool suggestion! And proposing an entire ruleset was a major contribution, even if it wasn't ultimately adopted...it takes time to actually think out a cohesive set of rules, so (at least in my eyes) you've helped significantly. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Bob, it was still an important contribution. Also, the card seems fine to me. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:06, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiOtter

Name of card: WikiOtter
Class: Userbox
Text: For each round, automatically revert the first vandalism that occurs on your turn at no cost.
Required user access level: Registered.
Proposed by: Canvashat (talk) 13:47, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

Here's an illustration proposal for this card. Thoughts? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 01:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Just a couple issues I see at the moment:

The tab at the top needs to be widened...try to keep the spacing on the right and left side of the tab uniform with the other proposals.
The lines in the quote area should break at the left edge of the image expand icon.
Credit the quotee. Do this by copy-pasting the text box to preserve the font format, right-aligning it with the left edge of the image expand icon, and typing "-- TenPoundHammer and his WikiOtters" in the new text box.
You forgot "Image Credit: in front of Dmitri's name.

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:55, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the new version. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 17:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great! Don't forget to link to the original image and attribute it correctly when you upload your images (e.g. Mr. Whoever, CC-SA-BY 3.0, etc). We don't want to get caught not attributing the source images properly. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I fixed everything per your comments! EW_{_i}kist^Talk 16:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking care of that.

By the way, designing a card is hard work and takes a lot of time, so I'm going to declare you entitled to a tribute card. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:37, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, thanks! I'm glad my work is appreciated! EW_{_i}kist^Talk 22:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The only not-praise comment that I have is that the text for the quote could be a smidge larger. Other than that, it is great. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's the same size we've used on all of the cards. It's actually larger than the quotes on the trading cards I own. It'll print at a higher quality than what's on your screen, too, if we use the correct devices. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content
{{{1}}}

Unexpected Turnout

Name of card: Unexpected Turnout
Class: Vandalism
Text: Do not draw cards next round.
User access level: N/A
Proposed by: --CanvasHat 10:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

Here's an illustration proposal for this card. Thoughts? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 02:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know we usually go for the shortest link possible, but I sure like that chuckle in the link. ROFLing and choking to death over here. The image compilation is (although cheap-looking) quite effective and makes the link that much funnier. I can tell you had fun with it

Let's not center the special text. See the comments I put on your WikiOtter proposal; most of them apply here as well. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The new version has been uploaded for this one too. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 17:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! I may be replaceable after all! (It worries me when I feel unreplaceable...it makes me feel too controlling!) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also-- don't forget that cards, once illustrated, should appear on the WPTCG Wiki:Cards to be approved. The redundancy helps ensure one doesn't get missed by those reviewing. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Same as above. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 16:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I approve. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry Bob. You are still unreplaceable. You are still our charismatic leader (unless you want to pass that title on to me?). The card is wonderful. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I'm gonna have to work on training folks if I'm still irreplaceable. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hold up! Let's credit the quotee! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:40, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Twas Ultraexactzz. I'll pop that on the card right now. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 00:07, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you dare start talking like me! 'Tis a crime! By the way, have I welcomed you yet? If not, welcome! Bob, nobody can replace you. Don't even try. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approve unretracted. And LOL at your intermediate edit. I've done that before, but didn't upload it accidentally. And Hi-- who says he's not talking like me? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was talking about the "'Twas", which I haven't seen you say, as far as I can remember. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I say that all the time in chat. Probably not on Wikipedia, though. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry... I 'twidn't mean to start a dispute... (And thanks for the welcome!) EW_{_i}kist^Talk 21:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, if you haven't figured it out by now, Hi and I never get mad at each other, so we get bored and pretend to be mad instead. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How dare you! Claiming that I am never mad at you? I don't think I can stand to be around you any longer. Great! Now the secret is out! Why did you tell him? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, tah zecret iss out, und nau I vill haff to kill you. If anyone calls that a threat I will ... think of something mean ... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

Quote suggestions

A quote from the page: "The preview button stands as a bastion of hope for the meticulous editor." —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 22:44, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This one made me laugh. :) I think it's great. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:30, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. Love it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

That sounds like a single-use card, so it would work best as a "vandalism" class card. Heh, a card like this might be a good way to promote previewing before saving! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:14, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems good to me Bob's suggestion also seems to be good. Also, Canvas, it would be helpful if you used the links for proposals above; it will make it a lot easier for everyone. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 16:33, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has been tweakd as Bob has suggested. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 17:03, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of some sort of Michael Crichton-type out-of-control bot, but that works too.Canvas Hat 21:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by a "Michael Crichton" - type out-of-control? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:59, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Click here or here or, to an extent, here--CanvasHat 13:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm familiar with Jurassic Park; could you elaborate on how that would apply here? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:24, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was a good idea for a bot but it malfunctioned. ( that would be a better name)--CanvasHat 11:54, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! I gotcha now. So you meant to propose a bot with a glitch in the code. That'd make a great proposal. In fact, both ideas are great, so you ought to propose the "Glitched Bot", too. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:43, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiImp

Name of card: WikiImp
Class: Vandal
Text: As long as the WikiImp is in play, each player must begin his turn by sacrificing an edit to help clean up the list of chores the WikiImp has conveniently left for all to see. This sacrifice cannot be counted toward anything.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

Image

Version 1 is up for review. The smallest text on the card may dictate the technology used for printing, but I don't foresee legibility being an issue. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:57, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You, dear sir, are a miracle worker. I love it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! My faith is weak. Please explain to me which part was a miracle, that I might grow in faith.

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like how the tags came out! EW_{_i}kist^Talk 20:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from the card's original proposal

Quote suggestions

"WikiImps are often accused of "drive-by tagging",^{[by whom?]} an accusation that does not bother WikiImps in the least.^{[original research?]}" -Wormwood Appears

ROFL. Definite keeper. Even the name shows a degree of impness... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed.^{[citation needed]}--CanvasHat 22:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)^{[ Why so serious? ]}[reply]

Wow! Yes! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

YES! I can see that we are going to have lots of fun with the WikiFauna. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But of course! I've been trying to think of a good one for WP:BEARDMUSTGO, too. You think that'd be a userbox? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anglo-Zanzibar War

Name of card: Anglo-Zanzibar War
Class: Article (good)
Text: The shortest war in history, lasting about 40 minutes.
Protected: Nope.
Proposed by: ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image suggestions

My proposal can be found right about... here. I'd say the image probably has room for improvement, but it's a start. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 00:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. I totally oppose. The picture was taken six years after the war, it doesn't show anything, and the flags look ugly. :) I would recommend only using a picture, and picking from either this or this. I don't care which; I liek them both. Also, I have a suggestion for the text, because I don't like what is there (did I write that? Ack!). It should say "The Anglo-Zanzibar War, fought between the British and the Sultanate of Zanzibar, was the shortest war in history, lasting around forty minutes." I'm going to be picky with this card, by the way, because I love reading about this war, and... And I want it to be perfect. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I... I... I... But... Ah, well. Message received. I'll try to get the revised version up tomorrow

. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 01:48, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to sound so harsh; I just... Well, mainly, it was the flags that made me freak out; the image choice wasn't that bad. The other two are just better at depicting it, as the one you chose wasn't a picture taken during/right after the war. The text thing wasn't you, as I am the one who wrote it, so it really wasn't as bad as I made it sound. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:39, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. I mostly put the flags there because I needed to fill in some space and the picture wasn't really identifiable as relating to the war. I did come across the picture you recommended (the current one) and I have no idea why I didn't use it originally. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 15:03, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Tis wonderful, or it will be, once Bob and I figure out our little dilemma above. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:35, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
My favorite war. Read through the article if you get the chance. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Support! A fresh subject, woot! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Like. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

William Shakespeare

Name of card: William Shakespeare
Class: Article (good)
Text: None yet
Protected: Semiprotected
Proposed by: VeryPunny

Image suggestions

Here's my proposal. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 00:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good, but it will be better once Bob and I figure out our little dilemma. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:36, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
Fine. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 07:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Of course! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 22:01, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Strong support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:23, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only Martians should edit

Name of card: Only Martians should edit
Class: Wikipedia (bad)
Text: No article dealing with a subject native to Earth may be created or edited.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:24, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image suggestions

The proposal can be found here. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 01:07, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is, unless we're using a different template for bad articles. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 01:09, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

"All involved parties should be banned from editing, and leave the work to uninvolved "Martian" editors" —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 07:14, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:02, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well-done. :) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:40, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did we have a quotee for this one? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 21:45, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gordonofcartoon (talk · contribs) -- Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:55, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Comments from the card's original proposal
Wow... Yes. I think that this one will put smiles on people's faces. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 20:01, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Approved cards for illustration

Tennis

Name of card: Tennis
Class: Article (good)
Text: N/A - Tribute
Protected: No
Proposed by: -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 18:28, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
{{{1}}}

Panzerfaust 3

Name of card: Panzerfaust 3
Class: Article (good)
Text: My NEW FINAL, I MEAN IT, tribute. Modern German antitank weapon.
Protected: NO
Proposed by: CanvasHat 01:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
What i learned in math:small child +Panzerfaust 3 is less than three Seems fine as a tribute. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Support as tribute. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:21, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DNA nanotechnology

Name of card: DNA nanotechnology
Class: Article (good)
Text: Turns out that DNA can be used as a structural material to make molecular machines. Who knew?
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

My tribute card. The text is, of course, subject to revision if I or anyone else thinks of something more witty. Recommended image: File:DNA_tetrahedron_white.png. Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Full support as tribute -- nice to see a fresh flavor of subjects! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:40, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 19:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Niobium

Name of card: Niobium
Class: Article (good)
Text: Yet another transition metal.
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
Support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC) Seems fine. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:13, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technetium

Name of card: Technetium
Class: Article (good)
Text: Yet another transition metal.
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
Support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC) Yep. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yttrium

Name of card: Yttrium
Class: Article (good)
Text: Yet another transition metal.
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
Support. I think we've got elements covered now. Save the rest for an expansion set. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:58, 16 December 2010 (UTC) I would have to agree with both of the things that Bob said. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1 − 2 + 3 − 4 + ···

Name of card: 1 − 2 + 3 − 4 + ···
Class: Article (good)
Text: Apparently this equals 1/4. Blame the mathematicians.
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Support. Actually, it approaches positive or negative infinity. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article, there are several rigorous definitions of the sum of an infinite series that yield a result of 1/4. Bizarre, I know. Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 02:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are no parentheses, and we can't forget our order of operations (PEMDAS) so that snippet, 1 - 2 + 3 - 4, would equal -8. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 06:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like it; good suggestion. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Major urinary proteins

Name of card: Major urinary proteins
Class: Article (good)
Text: Ewwww.
Protected: Yes
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Ew, indeed. How did that get featured? I'll support it as long as I'm not the only one. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:02, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Idk, but i'll stand with Bob..., gradly, the image isn't...--CanvasHat 22:35, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a completely legitimate, and un-disgusting, article about a class of biological proteins. It only sounds disgusting from the title! Yeah, I saw this in the FA list and just had to suggest it. As an image we'd probably use something like this, which apprears on the top of the article: File:Mup1_PDB_1i04.png Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 02:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the title's pretty important for each card, and that one's almost as bad as my "dog-fart neutralizing thong" idea. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:57, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No reason not to support, sadly. :) I'll support it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And the domino effect brings in my support and Canvas's...Nicky? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:33, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support - it works, and I can live with its existence, but I don't particularly like it. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 04:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lojban

Name of card: Lojban
Class: Tribute
Protected: NO
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 22 December 2010

Comments

Extended content

Everyone can be so disagreeable sometimes. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 06:26, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now there's a little-known treasure of Wikipedia! That was an interesting read; I'll definitely support it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LIKE. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:53, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How many Lojban speakers does it take to change a broken light bulb? One to figure out what kind of bulb emits broken light, and one to figure out what to change it into. :-) Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 20:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's about time I found one everyone was happy with! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 01:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Feynman

Name of card: ~~Pet skunk~~Richard Feynman
Class: Article (good)
Text:
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Another former featured article. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Change "Pet skunk" to "Richard Feynman" and I'll support. We don't need name-calling! (haha, copy-paste monster got ya!) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Maybe the copy-paste monster should be a card. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 04:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? I'll support. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:08, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support the copy-paste monster getting its own card! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:17, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

J. Robert Oppenheimer

Name of card: ~~Pet skunk~~J. Robert Oppenheimer
Class: Article (good)
Text:
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Another former featured article. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, even though it's not nice to call people skunks. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:12, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll support this one, but I think that we should make an effort to find articles that are currently a GA or FA. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:10, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, Hi. Let's help preserve Wikipedia's positive image by picking (in the future) current FA's. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:18, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or GAs. :) I would like to just go through and decline all not-current-FA/GAs-or-tribute-cards, but I think that everyone would disapprove, so I'll just leave it at this little mini-rant. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:32, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for restraining yourself.

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:33, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

T-34

Name of card: T-34
Class: Article (good)
Text: Soviet Tank, WWII
Protected: NO
Proposed by: CanvasHat 01:37, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
I don't see any problems. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vampire

Name of card: Vampire
Class: Article (good)
Text: ?
Protected: SEMI
Proposed by: CanvasHat 20:24, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Definitely support as a pop cultural element. Again, please refrain from abusing the special ability proposition line. Give it a semi-protect in reflection of the article's current protection status. Seems to be a good guideline to follow. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:14, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I like this one, although now-a-days vampiracy (?) seems to be more about shirtless teens on the silver screen than wretched beasts spreading an infective darnation epidemic. Anyway, I support. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:54, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I listened to an NPR coverage on vampires over the summer-- the vampire enthusiast they interviewed confirmed that vampiracy reverted to its symbolism of sex even before Dracula was invented. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:27, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it was shoved unto the newer generation when those Twilight books came out. Anyway, is "vampiracy" a word? —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 09:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is now. You just coined it.

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:02, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As much as I hate to say it, I support this article on a card. Depressing where vampire stories have gotten to these days. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:25, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

tenwiki:

*Name of card: Decennial Wikipedia party

Class: Edit
Text: Limit one per deck. All players may opt to sacrifice a card from their hand in favor of a card of their own choice from their draw pile, then have those draw piles shuffled.
Quote: (well, not really a quote, but...) PROMO DECENNIAL CARD: Celebrating ten years of Wikipedia (2001-2011)
User access level: Anonymous
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Image suggestions Anyone like a particular logo from tenwiki:Design? Personally, I think we ought to grab File:10mark_k.svg and stick that onto the puzzle piece in our logo that has the W, in place of it. That'll require a bit of SVG editing, but if I hit a dull spot someday (even if it's over the summer), I can do that. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We could either put that on our existing puzzle piece, or you could try and make the puzzle piece look more like the ones that they have made already. Obviously, we wouldn't just copy theirs onto the card, but maybe you could try and make a version of the black puzzle piece that looks similar to the current one? Bleh. I sound idiotic. Hopefully, you get what I mean. In the meantime, I need to get some sleep; I am having to retype almost everything I say, because I keep hitting the wrong keys. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 07:01, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I've left a message out in the open on a random page where I'm hoping a few folks might cast their eyes near it. Now we've got some real motivation to get this thing developed. Just think of all the fans who would be disappointed if they could never redeem their coupons. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How will people redeem it, exactly? There aren't any good ways that I can think of, at the moment. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we could set up a link at WP:TCG with the text "click here to redeem a coupon", and behind that link, we have an address they can mail it to. Then we can mail them their promo card. By the way, I just had a look at our store where we're planning on selling this. Without a direct link from WP:TCG to the product, no one will ever accidentally stumble upon even the store, much less the product. Just something for us to keep in mind once we released this thing. Which, by the way, will happen. I'm guessing we're only two years away, unless we come across major problems between now and then. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As long as it isn't my address, I'm fine with that. :) We'll advertise the game all over Wikipedia (and meta, perhaps?), I'm sure. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, do I need to print one of these coupons, or can I just have one of these cards when this finishes? I think that anyone that is deserving of a tribute card shouldn't need to print a coupon. What do you think? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm cool with that. I can't help but wonder what facility we'll have to go through to print these cards...but we'll worry about that later. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

This is a proposal that's rather time-sensitive. In 9 days, Wikipedians around the world will celebrate ten years of Wikipedia. Let's contribute to that celebration by offering those hosting the party a decennial promotion card. Since the cards obviously haven't been arranged to be printed yet, of course, we'd issue a sort of coupon. This coupon could be something really simple, like "In celebration of 10 years of Wikipedia, you are entitled to a free promotional decennial card once the Wikipedia Trading Card Game is finished being developed and released."

Thoughts? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

yes.--CanvasHat 22:22, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! With two supports, I'm going to send this on up to the approved section, due to its time-sensitive nature. Bob, will you handle letting the people who would get a coupon know about this? Seems fitting, as you are our still charismatic leader (for now...). I think you should design this one as well, due to your cards being of very god quality (don't worry; I said god on purpose now, as I no doubt will forever). ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to work on the edited puzzle-globe, I already did something like this for a pig latin wiki and already have things in place. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 23:02, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

image

CAT:ESP

Name of card: Malformed semi-protected edit request
Class: Discord
Quote:

hello i would like to change wikipedia thankyou bye bye
— Anonymous User[2]

Text: This bad edit request must be denied with a sacrificial edit before it may be discarded.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Comments

Extended content

:Wonderful! I think that we should attribute it as "Anonymous User" instead of "Anonymous", however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can do :) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like, but the text is a bit vague. Do you mean that a sacrificial edit must be made immediately? Or, if it stays in play, what is the incentive to play the sacrificial edit to take it out of play? Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 20:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The latter. It sort of functions like a vandalism that doesn't prevent an edit; a vandal that doesn't vandalize; a bad policy with no effect. It's just a bad card cluttering up one of the five bad card slots. That's the only incentive to remove it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Five bad card slots? Where did that come from? I've never heard anything about that. By the way, if it doesn't do anything, wouldn't it be good to have it filling a bad card slot (pretending that said slots have been proposed and accepted)? Wouldn't it make it so that you wouldn't have as many bad card slots open for cards that will actually do something? This seems, so far, like a helpful card with an explanation utilizing something never proposed or discussed, unless I am mistaken. By the way, my original support was based on me accidentally thinking of this as a vandalism card, not a whatever-this-is card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is discord, meaning it's not applied to an article, it's just put out there...sort of like a Wikipedia card except it doesn't represent any sort of policy. Remember, we created the class for all those strange things that weren't vandals or vandalism or Wikipedia-space or articles? Yeah, this is one of those. And the "slots" I'm speaking of are mental. All in your head. No physical slots to speak of, unless you want to get to work molding some plastic trays for us. Remember that five (or whatever the number was) bad cards in play at the beginning of a turn ends the game...this card just contributes to that deadly number. That's all it does. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right! I guess I did forget something while writing my response. :P ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved cards needing a quote before they can be illustrated (articles don't belong in this category)

Auto-confirmed (25 cJ)

You may create and edit unprotected and protected articles and policies.

Image suggestions

Any ideas of a user access level icon that would appear on all cards requiring this user access level? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~What if we had some sort of universal user image, like this, and simply put the access level on it as text? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 19:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)~~[reply]

I was planning on using the icons that appear on each user access level. This user access level still needs an icon, though. Sorry for the confusion. Perhaps a green checkmark to represent the confirmation? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, didn't read the question properly. But maybe it could be something like this but with a check mark instead of an exclamation point? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 22:47, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That'd probably be fine. I'll recommend this checkmark. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

We still need a quote for this. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we do. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've done some digging.

Unless there is also some new option to ignore certain promotion types, the user-rights log would become completely useless—being flooded by every user's 10th-edit bar mitzvah.
—CharlotteWebb, in a discussion about turning autoconfirmed into an actual group.

You can see it here; I'll let you find the specific spot. I'll keep looking, as this isn't the best for this particular card, even though I do love the quote. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tempted to say a derivative of that and make you credit me...hahaha. Yeah, we'd better keep searching. OR-- I got an idea...BRB. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hurry! I have to leave! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that didn't work...but I did manage to give out my password to my Wikipedia account accidentally. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well-- I thought I'd get on the IRC and ask around and then quote someone...along the way I decided to reserve my username for the room, but forgot to type the slash...and a password I use both for Wikipedia and for another website got inadvertently posted in front of everyone in the room, probably 100+ users. Then I typed "oops" and someone was like "lol that doesn't look good". Then I exercised my lightning-speed password-changing skills. Thankfully, no one snuck into here or the other unnamed website. Stinks, too... I liked that password. I don't like either of my new ones. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I agree with Bob's first comment (assuming that it wasn't an imposter who somehow got a hold of his password...). Great quote, but there might be one that fits the card better. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 22:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He is probably compromised, but whatever. We should find a card for this wonderful quote. :) But I agree, it doesn't quite work with this. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to refer to the introduction of the autoconfirmation-- not sure we'll find a card for that. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Teh

Name of card: Teh
Class: Vandalism
Text: None.
Proposed by: CanvasHat 15:57, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

"A typographical error is a mistake made in ... teh manual type-setting of printed material." -Typographical error article

Or something along that line? Also, for future reference, are ellipses necessary in the quotes? I know it is generally done, but seems like it would disrupt the fluency a bit in short quotes. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 22:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would say so. I'll have a quick look and see if I can't figure out who introduced that sentence to the article...I'd rather we quote the person instead of the article. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mind linking to the edit? I'm not finding it. And, as best I can tell, it would have been vandalism, as the original version of that sentence was typo-free. Is quoting vandalism advisable? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:19, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that was an intentional typo... I thought it would be kinda' funny, having a "teh" mistake on the card, but I understand if we can't do it because its not a direct quote. That being said, even though it doesn't apply to this, I would say that there isn't anything wrong with quoting vandalism; it would be similar to naming "bad article" cards after WP:DAFT, right? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 16:28, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't thought of it that way-- we decided against cards like "Willy on Wheels" because it would glorify a real life vandal. The reason we're using actual deleted titles for bad articles is to prevent the introduction of bad titles inspired by the game-- if the page gets recreated, someone's likely still watching that title. So now I'm not really sure what to say about this...I do like the idea of an actual typo in reference to typos, but I'm not sure I like one taken straight from an article...perhaps there's a good quote out there (and I'd recommend, since we'll be pointing out someone's flaw, that we get approval from them). Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:15, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep an eye out for one. Finding good quotes is so difficult these days...

EW_{_i}kist^Talk 23:42, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend doing an advanced search and unchecking "article". Most good quotes will be found on talk pages. But yes, it takes a lot of effort (and creative searching) to find a good one. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What about this one? I would assume the typos are intentional here. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 22:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"If, for instance, a long-standing editor makes a lot of tyops, it's perfectly reasonable to check their contrib logs for similar tyops and fixing them." -Radiant!

Me gusta tu citan. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. Und Hallo-- tut mir Leid; ich spreche kein Spanisch. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eres loco. Estoy aprendiendo español. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:34, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ja. Ich habe kein Idee was du sagst, aber es gibt Spaβ. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We must really be confusing people who don't know about Google translate. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:16, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Qui veux traduire Google? EW_{_i}kist^Talk 02:06, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

¡Ack! ¡Todos ustedes, cállate! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Comments from the card's original proposal

So I take it that you mean that an article would be lowered a level? If I have interpreted it correctly, then I like it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 18:26, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like teh idea, but I think "Teh" might be a more appropriate name-- "tyop" doesn't come across to me as an obvious typo-- rather, it reminds me of "sysop" and I had to wonder if that was some access level I was unaware of. "Teh" is an easily recognizable typo, I think (correct me if I'm wrong), and teh most common one, too.

Also...remember a vandalism doesn't need to have a special text on it-- it's an edit that can be reverted (and a typo is something simple enough that a simple quick reversion or edit will fix, so I don't think it makes sense to bump it down a whole class. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:06, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True. I agree with that now. I propose that we never have text for vandalism cards (which would mean that you should take "Text" out of the preload... Actually, never mind; that's where someone could write something clever). ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiDragon

Name of card: WikiDragon
Class: Userbox
Text: If you advance any article three or more ranks in a single turn, advance it another rank at no cost
Required user access level: Registered
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Quote suggestions

"Giants don't have a lot of magical powers, while Dragons certainly do." -Rursus

I fixed a minor grammatical error in this quote. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 23:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...that one doesn't shout, "WIKIDRAGON!" to my ears... there might be something of value in the article (although I'm a bit biased; I wrote a large portion of it). Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too fond of it either. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... Yeah, taken out of context this one really doesn't fit the card well. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 00:03, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Comments from the card's original proposal
I think that for all Fauna, you should need to be registered. Other than that, I like it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:37, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] Sounds reasonable. Amended. :) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiPlatpyus

Name of card: WikiPlatypus
Class: Userbox
Text: Draw until you have seven cards at the beginning of each turn, instead of six.
Required user access level: Registered
Proposed by: CanvasHat 13:33, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

Comments

Comments from the card's original proposal
Sounds good to me. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] Tweaked wording a bit; otherwise, I like it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] Still sounds good. :) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:58, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Poem by a Wikipedian

Name of card: Poem by a Wikipedian
Class: Article (bad)
Text: None.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:28, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

Comments

Comments from the card's original proposal

Explain. I don't get how it would be an article card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 20:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A bad article can have many different forms...this particular bad article is not an encyclopedic article, but rather, a poem a Wikipedian has decided to share by creating a page with nothing on it except the poem. It's a less common sort of vandalism, but I've seen it done before. It's always heart-wrenching to kill it because you know they put extra work into it. If you have a look at the linked policy, WP:POETRYISALWAYSWRONG, it explains why poetry should not be put into the main space. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:58, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So which -space would this go into? Otherwise, I like it, now that you have explained it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 14:28, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bad articles get played in the mainspace just like good ones. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:14, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should change that class to "Page (bad)"? Because this wouldn't be an article, being in the project-space. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we're seeing eye-to-eye here. Ideally, no article is a poem, and no project is, either. The idea here is this: Imagine that some n00b has decided to exercise his ability to create a new article that consists solely of the poem he wrote about whatever, and has saved it into the main space where articles go. This is the sort of page that meets WP:CFD, which is why it would be considered bad. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I totally misinterpreted four words that were in your original repsonse, which screwed up everything that I have said since then. :) You are correct, my good sir, and I support this nomination. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:38, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bill the Troll

Name of card: Bill the Troll
Class: Vandal
Text: While in play, this troll causes one vandalism at the beginning of each player's turn.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

Comments

Extended content
Sounds good. Mix all of those ideas into a proposal, and I'll comment on them. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] Can do. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sally the Troll

Name of card: Sally the Troll
Class: Vandal
Text: While in play, this troll causes two bad cards to be turned over at the beginning of each player's turn.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Image suggestions

Comments

Extended content
Yep. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ricardo the Troll

Name of card: Ricardo the Troll
Class: Vandal
Text: This particularly difficult troll requires double the sacrifice to report or block that a normal vandal would.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Image suggestions

Comments

Extended content
Yep again. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marvin the Troll

Name of card: Troll
Class: Vandal
Text: While in play, this troll causes one bad card to be turned over for every ~~article in play relating to a famous person~~ biographical article in play.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Quote suggestions

Comments

Proposing a change in wording-- "article in play relating to a famous person" ===> "biographical article in play" Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

And again. These all seem fine to me. Maybe you could try changing the names up a bit, though? Nothing too fancy; just so that people can tell the difference without reading through the entire card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:02, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm. Nothing's jumping out at me at the moment. They'd have a different illustration, for sure, though. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:16, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe just troll alpha, troll bravo, troll charlie

--CanvasHat 11:15, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bill the Troll, Sally the Troll, Ricardo the Troll.... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...and Rodriguez Alfonzo Jalapeno Terre Peeetre le Gorgo CXXXVIII, the troll who always signs his posts, even in aricle namespace, causing server overload--CanvasHat 11:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, propose it! (and might I suggest... DCCCLXXXVIII? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

but 'tis too long?(oh,im so depressed)--CanvasHat 11:59, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, yeah I guess it is. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[reset indent] What about one that specifically attacks politicians? It would be similar, but not identical. So its name would be along the lines of Melvin, Melman, Marty, something that sounds similar. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 01:32, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good IDEA! Done.--CanvasHat 12:52, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ban

Name of card: Ban
Class: Instant
Text: Discard one vandal of your choice.
User access level: Admin+
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 26 November 2010

Quote suggestions

"The standard Wikipedia invitation to 'edit this page' does not apply to banned editors." -WP:BAN

I know we try to do humorous stuff, but considering the topic here, this might be appropriate. Also, I could not find one definitive user to credit for this quote as it has been modified a bunch of times over the years. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 23:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the original quote, dating back to 2004:

The standard invitations Wikipedia extends to over six billion people worldwide to "edit this page" do not apply to banned users.
— MartinHarper

Also, I detect a note of positive sarcasm, even though it is a serious guideline. I like it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like the original. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

I'm not entirely sure I understand the card... If you save the card until a vandal is drawn, then it is not instant, so why have you listed it as "Instant"?

Did I misunderstand this quote? "Instant - special action cards that can be played at any time, designed to interrupt negative actions." —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 23:27, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was my understanding that "Instant" cards were to be played the moment they were drawn... The conversation that is undoubtedly about to take place should happen on the rules page, just so you know. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:52, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a place to discuss this here. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 01:15, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed text change: Discard one vandal of your choice. One use is implied, and a discarded vandal can't vandalize. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fine. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:42, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changed :) —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 12:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mars

Name of card: Mars
Class: Article (good)
Text: I'm not entitled to a tribute card, so it would just be a summary of the page.
Protected: NO
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · message · contribs · global contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · user creation · block user · block log · count · total · logs · summary · email | lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · checkuser · spi · socks | rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp | current rights · rights log (local) · rights log (global/meta) | rights · renames · blocks · protects · deletions · rollback · admin · logs | UHx · AfD · UtHx · UtE) 27 November 2010

Comments

Extended content

You wanted more astronomy cards, this is a FA-class astronomy-related article. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, I think that you would be entitled to a tribute card. :) I shall add your name to the list of people who get one. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:44, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AH, you beat me to it, Hi! Oh...Mars has already been featured at least once so it already qualifies without being a tribute card. So I'll remove that as a "tribute card" idea...you get to pick one that's never been featured for your tribute card, Nicky. Also-- support the nomination as a must-have card. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the point of a tribute card was to have one that is thanking you, not a non-FA one. If Robert Abbott (game designer) was an FA, I would still want it to be my tribute card with text that is thianking me. I have re-added Mars to the list. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 22:08, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't particularly want it to be my tribute card, but I'm fine with it anyways. I would've preferred something I'm interested in, like SpongeBob SquarePants or Google (preferably the former.) Mars was just supposed to be an article... it asked for more astronomy-related articles. Sorry for the commotion, folks. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 00:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! I'll remove it as your tribute card; you can pick another. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Way to go, Hi. Lol. Oh, and I love how you posted your whole resume on your proposal here, Nicky.

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:18, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I usually use Template:User10 but this time I used Template:Usercheck-full. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 12:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Melville the troll

Class: Vandal
Text: While in play, this troll causes one bad card to be turned over for every article in play relating to a politician or politics in general.
Proposed by: CanvasHat 12:57, 27 November 2010 (UTC) although it was Nicky's idea.[reply]

Comments

Extended content

I think an explanation of how it would attack articles on politicians would be good. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 18:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just like I proposed it, identical to Marvin but only for politicians. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 03:40, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Explain specificlly how it would work, if you don't mind. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it would be, "While in play, this troll causes one bad card to be turned over for every article in play relating to a politician or politics in general.." —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 04:08, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty; that works. I've edited the "Text" section to reflect that. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

False edit

Name of card: False edit
Class: Discord/Vandalism/Edit (bad)
Text: In one of your articles, you have added false data. +1 vandalism.
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 27 November 2010

Quote suggestions

"long signatures give undue prominence to a given user's contribution." —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:25, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong card, Nicky? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh.

—Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
Seems fine. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] "Fallacy" seems more accurate to me, but I like it. A quick, simple, entry-class vandalism. We need more of these! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Big sig

Name of card:Freakishly long sig
Class: Discord
Text:Rodriguez Alfonzo Jalapeno Terre Peeetre le Gorgo CXXXVIII, the troll who always signs his posts, even in article namespace, causing server overload, has signed his posts. You can not play instant cards this turn.
Proposed by: --CanvasHat 13:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

We could have something really long that runs right off the card. For example:

Discord

Freakesshly long sig

[[|180px]]

Rodriguez Alfonzo Jalapeno Terre Peeetre le Gorgo CXXXVIII, the troll who always signs his posts, even in article namespace, causing server overload, likes to edit a lot, and therefore always causes problems for his fellow Wikipedians (although this isn't usually a big deal for the rest of the world.) He was born in Tallahassee on the twelfth of July, 1984, and quickly moved to Long Island when his mother's job was transferred.

WP:SIG

Image credit:
© English Wikipedia Department of Fun

—Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:09, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The card must be printable, though. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:14, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea; we can just cut off whatever runs over, preferably cutting off half of a word. We need to make sure that the link is legible, however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 19:26, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds feasible. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I totally just realized you created a template specifically to demonstrate that...I'd be curious to see how else you intend on using that template... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Seems good. although we may not be able to fit all of that onto a card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We'll just have to make it fit then.

Trust me on this one. I'll come up with something creative if this card makes it to the illustration candidates. Instant cards are pretty rare in most games, though...this might make a better Wikipedia class card. That way instants would be banned from the game until someone can correct it. After all, changing someone else's sig doesn't happen instantaneously...you have to get them to do it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We'll have to get creative with this one. Maybe t would be a WP-class card that has an effect on the MW software. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol! And it breaks the page formatting.....hey, you are really onto something....now I have a really sweet idea for illustrating it, don't steal it! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you asked, I'll leave it for you. By the way, I just realized that it breaks (as in BR) in the vector skin. See Lopadotemachoselachogaleokranioleipsanodrimhypotrimmatosilphioparaomelitokatakechymenokichlepikossyphophattoperisteralektryonoptekephalliokigklopeleiolagoiosiraiobaphetraganopterygon for an example. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 12:55, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Practical Joke

Name of card: Practical Joke
Class: Vandalism
Text:Show your hand to your opponent, who will choose an edit or instant card and discard it. Oh yeah, and you just lost the Game!
Proposed by: CanvasHat 13:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

' "Practicl jokes are suppost 2 happen on Wikipedia." —an obvyisly real WP policy ' —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:22, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol.

Got a link to go with it? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's the joke. The link is "an obvyisly real WP policy" and doesn't link to anything. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that I like the whole idea of this card; I think that we should pick an actual link, and have a quote that is an actual quote from somewhere. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second the "actual quote" thing. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to decline this card this weekend if nobody can come up with a quote and link. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Heh heh. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 15:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And the title's a fake link! That's great! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 15:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like the fake link. :) However, we do need to have a real link, because that joke won't really work on a card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We could literally put, "<span style="color:#002BB8; cursor:pointer"/>", I think that would be great if it fit. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 00:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could make a red link...Canvas Hat 14:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about WP:PRACTICALJOKE? —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 22:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd replace "you just lost the game" with "cannot be negated". That'll prevent an instant card from overriding the "discard an instant" bit. And woot for the redlink. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:55, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When [he] says "the game," I think [he] means the Game. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Drat! We all just lost the game! Lol, "the game" might make a good card... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If someone hasn't already, I'll propose it. (I'm reading down the page this time.) —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 12:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leonhard Euler

Name: Leonhard Euler
Class: Article (good)
Text: Euler was a pioneering Swiss mathematician and physicist.
Protected: NO
Proposed by: Bananaclasic (talk) 00:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

It's about a famous, non-political person. Bananaclasic (talk) 00:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. ;) Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:05, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - we need more of these cards, keep up the good work! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 08:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A PROPOSAL

Name of card: Halley's comet
Class: Article (good)
Text: Astronomy,
Protected: NO
Proposed by: CanvasHat 21:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content
Support Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Don't see why not. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:13, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Galileo Galilei

Name of card: GAlileo GAlilei (because it is a GA)
Class: Article (good)
Text: All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them. (quote)
Protected: semi
Proposed by: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs · count)

Comments

Extended content
Support. No longer featured, but still a good-class article. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Seems fine. However, I think that we are good for astronomy articles at this point. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Venus

Name of card: Venus
Class: Article (good)
Text: Feminism
Protected: semi
Proposed by: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs · count)

Comments

Extended content
Support. Ah, good. Another space article for the anti-conflict-of-interest policy. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:14, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Are you an astronomy fan, Mr. Pumpkin? We need to try and have a broader range of subjects. :) This is fine, however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Earth

Name of card: Earth
Class: Article (good)
Text: Place to live
Protected: semi
Proposed by: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs · count)

Comments

Lol...I'm tempted to put "Mostly harmless" on this one... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to site your source. It would be "Mostly harmless" --Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, p. ##

—Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 15:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content
Support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Yes. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seduced By the Dark Side

Name of card: Seduced By the Dark Side
Class: Discord
Text: You have vandalized and are banned for one turn, vandalism for one article.
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 25 November, 2010

Comments

Extended content

When you vandalize Wikipedia, no-one wins! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 03:03, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine; we need a link for the title, though. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Wow, that was quick.) I don't know what it would be. Maybe WP:VAND? —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 03:46, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That seems too simple, but I can't think of anything else. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it is a bit general, but it's the best we have for now. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 18:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just +1 vandalism, leave out the opponent bit. All players share the main article space. WP:VAND is good. No reason to make it more complicated than that. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How's this? It's still complicated, but slightly more ruly [opposite of unruly] as well. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 12:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that CJs should be taken away. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:41, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alphonso the Troll

Name of card: Alphonso the Troll
Class: Vandal
Text: Turn over one bad card if there is a video-game-related article in play (unless you really want one of your articles to be vandalized, then it can apply to that, instead.)
Proposed by: CanvasHat 13:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Ignore the sechead----CanvasHat 13:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We might have to use an ellipses in the title for that one. In a real article, it rolls over, but I can't see how we'd represent that on a trading card. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 17:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If we are to ignore the section head, why did you make it so long? Also, I think that having three video-game related articles be vandalized is a bit much, because there probably won't ever be that many video-game articles in play. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 18:18, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should use that as the title, if we can figure how to fit it. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 00:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can't, unless we change the format of all of the other cards. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean it like that, I just mean for this card. Changing the title doesn't seem like that big a deal. We should just ask CanvasHat to switch the name, and that will take care of the problem. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 01:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I understand what you said. What is it that you want done with this card? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:24, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just mean, use that as the title for this card and don't worry about any hard-set policy, it's really not a big deal. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 03:39, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like the idea of having one card with a gigantic title, so gigantic that we had to change the format for it. The only way I would support that is if it were freakishly-rare, or something like that, so that it becomes a "special" card in multiple ways, not just the format-changing one. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Special pages are hard to make, naturally special cards would be rare. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 04:01, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the link should be WP:UN. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:13, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could do WP:UN and meta:TROLL, since they are both short. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, why not? —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

umm... the name is Alphonso...--CanvasHat 13:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

and the name may encourage freakishly long sigs, or not signing your posts...--CanvasHat 13:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

see Big Sig, below--CanvasHat 13:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe 'rodriguez alphonzo...' should be the quote text, I would vote for it. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk

• contribs • wikia) 15:59, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You two just figure out exactly what you want this proposal to be, propose it, and then I'll commnet, because I can't really make sense of this conversation at the moment. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:51, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think, since the proposal below takes care of this one's original idea, it should be Al, just another troll who concentrates on videogames. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 01:44, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tweak the proposal to reflect that, and I shall comment on it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's my place to, but I've changed it. If you're uncomfortable with ME being the one who changes it, feel free to undo. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:36, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine to me. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um...I guess the one I commented on below is a dupe of this. I'll support, and I'm willing to try various things to get the title to fit. I've got a few ideas for this one. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the title to make this make more sense. This one's just alphonso, the one below is the one you're thinking about. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 12:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Thanks for clarifying, Nicky.) Hmmmmm....I'll suggest a slight modification-- "Turn over one bad card if there is a video-game-related article in play." Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could I leave the part in parentheses? —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 09:06, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As long as the quote that goes on this card is really short, yes. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:00, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 03:16, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

False reference

Name of card: False reference
Class: Discord/Vandalism/Edit (bad)
Text: In one of your articles, you have used false data from another article. +1 vandalism.
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 27 November 2010

Comments

Extended content

A simpler variation in proposal below.

I prefer the one below, but either works. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The rules imply at least 170 cards, I think a few variations per card would be completely appropriate. I'm sorry if I sound a bit stressful, it's just my head. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 04:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, 170 cards? Really? I thought it was 100 not counting the access levels and user. I don't have time to do the math at the moment, but maybe we ought to think about reducing the size to 100 or so. Woot for the proposal, though. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, they say things like "each user has 100 cards, if they have 150 they... for two hundred divide whatever by six..." Look, you'll see that kind of thing in the card math section. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 12:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, gotcha. Yes, "standard" cards with variations are good. The troll cards play the variation game as well, as you've probably noticed. I like it, though I feel the "+1" is redundant. So, question time: Should we imply that all vandalisms that don't say otherwise incur a single vandalism counter? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:10, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I—I don't see why not. Yes, that sounds logical enough. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 08:27, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That'll allow for a larger image on some cards and a better wording on others...it'd be a shame to have to include something that's implied and then lose space over it. Not really a problem on this card, but it would be on others. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed!

Name of card: Noticed!
Class: User
Text: An editor has stumbled upon and contributed to a page. +1 class for an article of your choice.
User access level: Anon
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 30 November 2010

Comments

Extended content

Seems good. This should be a rare-ish card, however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of spoiling the fun...does this have to do with something someone would likely be doing on Wikipedia-- looking for Waldo? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not meaning to ruin the joke more, but is mr. Waldo Doe copyrighted

Nope, but Waldo is copyrighted and trademarked. I'm not pointing to the legality issues, though...I'm wondering if this is actually relevant to everyday life on Wikipedia. Looking through a page history for a man named Waldo isn't exactly something people ... do.... is it? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ack! You're right! I've been straying off topic... I now oppose this card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:34, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just trying to make a pun, it's really that some editor found your article. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:49, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That makes more sense...perhaps a title like "Noticed!" would suffice; it'd also save us the effort of royalties. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it, although I don't know why I keep thinking of cards that will infringe on copyrights. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 09:00, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People who find a task second nature are often regular practitioners of that task...do you infringe on copyrights regularly?

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:54, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do better, I copyright plagiarized works. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 03:06, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-vandal

Name of card: Anti-vandal
Class: Anti-vandal
Text: An anti-vandal has located an article and helped it. -1 vandalism counter.
User access level: Anon
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 30 November 2010

Comments

Extended content

Good one! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good; also sounds more like an edit than a user. The user cards are special cards in that you choose one to represent you as a player for the duration of the game, and it shows your specialty. Although, if you wanted to make a user card out of this, you could do it by changing the text to say something like "You may revert one vandalism at the beginning of each turn." I'm fine with either, or both, actually. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just liked Newton's idea of an "equal and opposite" type of user. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:21, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'd originally written 'Anti-vandal,' Hi must've changed it. I don't know what this would be. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 04:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably an instant. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Admins ignoring policy

Name of card: Admins ignoring policy
Class: Wikipedia (bad)
Text: No admin powers can be used while this card is in play
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 05:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Listed at WP:LAME#Userboxes, this is a deleted userbox reading "This user is pissed/annoyed about admins ignoring policy." Not sure what effect is should have, but seems like a good concept to build a card around. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 05:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Good idea. Ummm... How about having everyone lose admin "powers" (if they have them) until this is removed? Any "powers" above and below admins would be unaffected. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:22, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. Or perhaps, all admins ignore all good and bad policy-style (WikiProjects aren't policy-style) Wikipedia cards while it's in play? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like both proposals. Perhaps we could use Hi878's rule for this card, and Bob the Wikipedian's rule for a separate WP:IAR card? Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 20:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As for an IAR card, that ought to be extended to non-admins as well, and I'd also make it a single-turn type deal. In fact, it could be issued as both a good card and as a bad card. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:25, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The weather in London

Name of card: The weather in London
Class: Article (bad)
Text:
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 05:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Listed at WP:LAME#Meta pages. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 05:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Foggy, damp. Support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:10, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

only if the quote explains it (bloody cold, let me tell you) . if not, then some right-minded citizen will delete london's climate section((this is a real redirect) and put per WP:TCG...--CanvasHat 22:37, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thankfully, that's exactly the kind of vandalism folks here are prepared for. That's what makes this an excellent choice-- we've already got the London Climate Guard armed and ready. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of virgins

Name of card: List of virgins
Class: Article (bad)
Text:
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 05:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

I was just thinking of how to illustrate some of these and i saw this... I was all for this when i realized that the illustration may be...questionable any ideas...

Umm, isn't being a virgin sort of the opposite of pornography? There are two pictures on the article Virginity which should do quite well. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 22:33, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content
Listed at WP:LAME#Lists. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 05:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Lol, love it! And the quote from that page is awesome... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:08, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Yes! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

this text is here for technical reasons Category:Wikipedian chemists

Name of card: Chemist
Class: User
Text: Every time you play a chemistry article, you may advance it one extra rank.
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Comments

Extended content

This is the first user-class proposal. As such, let me remind everyone what a user-class card is. During the setup phase, two decks are built. A good article is pulled from the good deck and put into play, and the decks are then shuffled. ~~Six user access levels are set aside, and~~ "Anonymous IP" is put into play. A user card is selected from each player's collection to represent him during the course of the game. This user card contains some special text ability that gives the player some specialty or other advantage for the entire game. When the starter sets are released, I think it would be appropriate to include two or three user cards per set of decks (that would come to a total of 110 cards per set; to include two sets in a double set (commonly known as a starter set) would imply 220 cards) to give a player some freedom in how he plays the game. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This seems a little powerful, and too similar to the instant effect of #WikiProject Chemistry. How about instead, this card gives the user a bonus of one vandalism removed for every edit to a chemistry card? Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 20:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps my wording wasn't clear-- what you've just proposed as an alternative sounds more powerful to me. What I meant to say was this-- any time a chemistry-related article is brought into play, it starts at "start" class instead of "stub" class, and three cJ would be awarded rather than one cJ (although we don't have to award the 2 cJ for the automatic improvement). Since each player is allowed only one User-class card per game, that keeps the effect toned down. Also-- note that per what is rule 1.7.1, an article cannot receive an edit if it has vandalism on it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I love the idea, but not your explanation of User cards. I was under the impression that user rights cards are not set aside; you have to have enough CJs and have found the card. Obviously, a discussion is in order, so I'll throw one together on the rules page. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait! Never mind! Look here! I win! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What? Where does it say access levels are shuffled into the deck? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Main bullet #4. Read it carefully. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Woah. You're correct. I'll change the wording of this proposal accordingly. I'll also recommend we clarify that in the rules sometime. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does it bother you that you don't remember what you supported? It bothers me, somewhat... :P ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It makes me feel like all those democrats who signed the healthcare bill.

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's one of the things I use against my left-wing friends. Not to say, however, that I am right-wing; I would like to think that I am independant of all of that crap, as I point out the flaws in everyone. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So why is this a user card and not an instant? It seems like a user card should give a bonus in the course of other actions played, rather than just have an instant effect. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 20:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's not a one-time effect. It's one effect per chemist per chemistry article. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh, I see now, I misunderstood the text. Perhaps it would be more clear if it said "Every time you play a chemistry article, you may advance it one extra rank." Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 22:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair; I'm fine with that. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:05, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Biography Improvement Drive

Name of card: ~~BLP~~Biography Improvement Drive
Class: Wikipedia (good)
Text: Your first edit of each turn must be on a biography ~~of living persons~~ article, but this edit gets a bonus of one extra vandalism removed for free. This card expires after two rounds.
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

Again with the synergies. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really have drives? I've not heard of them, although it's an interesting idea. I like the text on this card. Definite keeper. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:07, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This card is actually inspired by one that's going on right now—there should be a notice about it at the top of your watchlist page. Actually, for the purposes of this game is should probably apply to all biographies rather than just BLP's, to expand its scope. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 04:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having it be only for BLPs would create the need to mark an article as a BLP, which would take up more space. I don't like the "one extra vandalism removed" bit, because there could, at this point, be a large number of article cards played, and if that is the case, there is a good chance of vandalism not being present, which would make that irrelevant, and which would make the card only an annoyance. I would suggest either replacing that with something else, making the card an instant and having it only apply to one article, or making it "permanent" (barring removal by a bad card), but having it be optional to edit a biography article instead of required. I prefer the third one, myself. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cactus Games has handled the problem of categories rather well by publishing a comprehensive list of cards and what categories each of them fall into. There is a myriad of categories used in that game, from "humans" to "Assyrian kings" -- and no one would ever guess which kings were Assyrian without consulting the list. I was thinking we could probably maintain a CLICK>>> list similar to that <<<CLICK. If we keep it updated as articles are approved and categories suggested, it should be fairly simple to maintain. Any discrepancies regarding whether an article fits into a category can then be "officially" agreed upon, thus removing doubt if there should ever be an official tournament. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So. This category list would obviously be in the rulebook, but what happens when we have a new series with new articles? Where would people get the new categories? Other than that, good idea. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:31, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For biographies it should be pretty obvious which articles count, even without a list. I'm a bit more concerned about things like chemistry and other WikiProject ideas we may come up with, since there could be some borderline cases that players may disagree about. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 04:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heck, it's Wikipedia. Folks can log in and check the updated list. Lol. And...obvious? Pop culture is the last subject I know anything about-- especially people. I'm a nature and computers guy. And let's be honest, did you know Robert Abbott was alive before coming to this page, Antony? I'd never even heard his name before. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized my sarcasm sounded a little put-off...not sure how to reword it, but I assure you I was laughing and smiling as I wrote all that. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:37, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to bet real money on the fact that nobody that has contributed to this project had heard of Mr. Abbott before I forced him upon you all. :) However, I am also willing to bet that a fair number of you have seen things that have resulted from his work (such as logic mazes). ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Logic maze? WTF?--CanvasHat 22:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll let you handle this one, oh Evil Master. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read this. I'm sure you've seen something like one of those. If not those specific examples, you still have probably seen some form of logic maze. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Chemistry

Name of card: WikiProject Chemistry
Class: Wikipedia (good)
Text: Immediately improve all chemistry-related articles in play (i.e. remove vandalism or upgrade class). All subsequent new chemistry articles start at start class instead of stub class.
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Extended content

We need more synergies in this game. I think we should have a number of "WikiProject" cards with similar effects to this one on different topics. I selected chemistry for this one as I've proposed a number of chemical element cards above; space would be another good one since we seem to have a glut of those article cards already. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good observation; but a Wikipedia-class card (which remains active in the playing area once played until removed from play by a vandal) has a rule that changes the game somehow. Are you suggesting each article is improved once per round by this card? That sounds like a quick game-win to me. I'd recommend we change "all" to perhaps "up to two" in order to keep the game more balanced. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:04, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose this is really a combination of an instant and a wikipedia card. The instant effect is that all chemistry articles lose one vandalism—but this happens only once so I feel this effect isn't overpowering. The permanent change is that new chemistry articles get an automatic improvement. I've also just proposed another card below (Article Alert Bot) which interacts with this and other WikiProject cards to have a similar, limited effect as you mentioned. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 04:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would all CJs coming as a result of extra article improvements (including the bit for new articles) go to the person who played the card? If so, I think that either this should be an EXTREMELY rare card, or it should only be like that for the instant half; for the WP-class half, it should be divided up somehow, perhaps going in a clockwise direction every turn. The CJ gain would be too easily accessible and to large, otherwise. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:01, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Power card. It needs some chopping up into multiple cards. I'd keep it Wikipedia-class and get rid of the "instant" ability and chop "all" into one or two. Hi's got a very valid point-- you could unstoppably win in about 7 turns after playing this card if you've got enough chem articles in play. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:39, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll let you handle the chopping; I'm not very good with knives. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:25, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't thought about the effect on cJ's. I suppose no player would get the credit for them, since the edits are ostensibly being made by other non-player members of the WikiProjects. I agree that giving the entire cJ bonus for the "instant" effect to one player would be excessive. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 04:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. So all articles advance one rank, and no credit is given. Oddly, I like it. In fact, I'd support this as a model for most future WikiProject cards. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like that... It just seems wrong... I am of the opinion that CJs and getting them from article improvement shouldn't be messed with (and there is a good chance that this is because I proposed the whole thing... :P). ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if the WikiProject improves the article, you don't get the cJ-- no one does. That's what (I believe) Antony has suggested. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My point exactly, my dear sir. I don't think that CJ-giving should be messed with in any way. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I'm aware you're a stickler about that, my question is whether this idea goes against yours or not. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:46, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody gets these particular CJs, which interferes with someone getting CJs for every card upgrade. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:03, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it adds a neat twist-- suddenly it's possible to make it through a game without becoming an admin. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine! I will allow this, but don't even try to convince me that messing with someone's actual CJ count is a good idea! I still oppose any card with that in mind!</rant> ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Woot, found Hi's limit! I agree with you btw and proposed your unwritten law become written. I expect FULL support from you, Hi. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have granted my full support in this matter. I am glad that it will now be set in stone (or whatever these computers are made of...). ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing solid-state drives on a blade system. I think we've got ourselves a WikiProject now. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected cards

Wikipedia:Trading card game/Action plan/Phase 2:Cards/Individual card proposals/Rejected#Card ideas

Proposals on Hold

Bot Approvals Group

Name of card: Bot Approvals Group
Class: User upgrade
Text: Can prevent a bot from coming in to play.
Required user access level: Autoconfirmed.
Proposed by: ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 17:08, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments

Here's the proposed card. I wasn't sure if we had decided what would be added for access levels, so I haven't included yet. EW_{_i}kist^Talk 17:51, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good if you uncenter the quote. Remember we're trying to maintain a could-be-done-with-Wikipedia look. I like the image composition there. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Center the quote, and I approve. We have decided; anyone can use this one that is autoconfirmed and up. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good point-- All the user access levels bear an icon on them. The icon should be placed at the top of any card requiring an access level. Let's put this one

On hold until the autoconfirmed card gets approved. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quote suggestions

"The Bot Approvals Group approves or denies requests for approval for bots." The only difference is the removal of the word "which," for grammatical reasons. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 22:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like it if we could find something funny, but this one is great. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:30, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does it always have to be a quote? Apples to Apples uses one about 50% of the time, but only when it's funny. And I can't seem to find anything good! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 01:53, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer a quote, but that's just me. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, an alternative (but still not funny) quote could be, "The Bot Approvals Group supervises and approves all bot-related activity." from WP:BOTPOL. I just can't find anything good. But this is Wikipedia, we can make a quote if we really need to. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 06:08, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The original quote is fine; I'm happy with either one. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 20:42, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thou shalt not quote thine self. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol...going against what I just stated, I'm really tempted now to quote Canvashat, as his comment was absolutely classics-- When I see "BAG", I think "plastic bag".' Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That could work... ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:30, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we could do that, if everyone agrees. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Um....I know it's late, but I don't think "user upgrade" is a card class. Userbox? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

BIG SUPPORT :) Solves the amendment problem, I think. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:39, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be good to use its full name, because I saw BAG, and I didn't know what that stood for.--CanvasHat 21:40, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that. I'd never heard of WP:BAG myself. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:00, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't know what BAG is, you obviously haven't paid much attention to anything... But I forget. I spend tons of time just starting with some random thing that I find, and seeing what stories they lead to; I come to BAG often in these wanderings. I have amended it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, when I see BAG, I think BAG--CanvasHat 13:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And when I see BAG, I think BAG. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, fine then. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

International Space Station

Name of card: ISS (International Space Station)
Class: Article (good)
Text: Internationally developed research facility that is being assembled in low Earth orbit.
Protected: no
Proposed by: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs · count)

Comments

Support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:29, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No! This is going too far. We have enough astronomy articles at this point; move on to other subjects! I oppose this one. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retracting my support...I'll support at a later date per Hi's comment. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On hold until more non-spacey ones are adopted

Dwarf planet

Name of card: Dwarf planet
Class: Article (good)
Text: When I was your age, Pluto was a planet!
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

On hold until we've designed a starter set. We've got plenty of spacey ones. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to say the same thing. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:19, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cards for approval

To create a new proposal, select from one of the card classes below:

Good cards:

Bad cards:

Good articles:
please verify it's been featured at least once, this is not the same as a tribute card.

Propose an article card for the good deck

Today's featured article archive

Needed articles
We need a couple of featured articles related to:

famous politicians
living people (documented permission required from living people)

Additionally, regular contributors to this phase (we know who you are, and you do, too) are entitled to nominate one good article of their choice, regardless of its quality. The only requirement is that it is in the main article space.

tribute users
user	cont. phases	tribute card	status
Antony-22 (talk · contribs)	1	DNA nanotechnology	Accepted
Bob the Wikipedian (talk · contribs)	0-2	Psychedelic frogfish	Completed
Canvashat (talk · contribs)	0-2	Panzerfaust 3	Accepted
Certes (talk · contribs)	1	Zobel network	Accepted
Equazcion (talk · contribs)	0	—	—
EWikist (talk · contribs)	2	—	—
GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs)	2	Tennis	Accepted
Hi878 (talk · contribs)	1-2	Robert Abbott (game designer)	Completed
Jéské Couriano (talk · contribs)	0	—	—
Jon513 (talk · contribs)	1	—	—
Lithoderm (talk · contribs)	1	—	—
MithrandirAgain (talk · contribs)	0-1	—	—
Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs)	2	Lojban	Accepted
Pretzels (talk · contribs)	0	—	—
RatonBat (talk · contribs)	0-2	—	—
TomasBat (talk · contribs)	0-1	—	—

Link rot

Name of card: Link rot
Class: Vandalism
Text: None
Proposed by: Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Comments

No text? What happens, then? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:15, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a vandalism counter. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the text should be "+1 vandalism counter"
　—Preceding signed comment by Nicky Nouse (talk) 03:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we only need to state that when it's multiple counters...2 counters or more. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glitched Bot

Name of card: Glitched Bot
Text: For each bot in play, including vandalbots, add one vandalism.
Class: Vandalbot
Proposed by: --CanvasHat 13:31, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

We need to come up with a link for this one. Also, this seems unrealistic; bots can't really control other bots. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 20:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added a link. I agree, the bot shouldn't be controlling other bots. It would make more sense for this card to do something produce one bad article per each player's turn. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it could start archiving random pages :)
　—Preceding signed comment by NICKY NOUSE (talk) 22:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll make a card out of that.

How about making it a Wikipedia (bad) or Discord card instead? What if it applies, say, only to one player's bots, or to all bots but only for a single round? Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, nice idea! So it would work something like this:

For each article your bots should improve, vandalize them instead.

Right? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:48, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That seems fine to me. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:48, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Temptation

Name of card:Temptation
Class: Wikipedia (bad)
Text:Draw twice as many vandal cards each turn this card is in play.
Protected: NO
Proposed by: CanvasHat 14:52, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Good idea! Is there a similar essay/policy that doesn't use that controversial word "dick"? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:17, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, on second thought, that card could rapidly kill the game, so perhaps protection should be lifted. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:19, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Unprotect, and I'll give my full support. And yes, a better essay title would be nice. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:46, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since all of the "major" contributers(?)agree, Done(I still like WP:GIANTDICK better...)--CanvasHat 01:36, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm....that link has more to do with ignorantly bad proposals. It'd make a good card topic, though....looks like there simply may not be a good alternate link for this card. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:40, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity

Name of card: Popular Transclusion
Class: Can't figure one, Edit is closest
Text: A template you've written has been used in 100 articles; pick 3 cards from the good deck and select a favorite.
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 23 November 2010

Comments

I like it! Not to be picky, but an instruction to have the next player shuffle the other cards back into your deck couldn't hurt. Also, "draw" is a bit less confusing than "pick"...at first I thought you meant I actually choose any three cards, which didn't make sense since only one of them mattered. Welcome aboard the team, Nicky! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Bob; this seems like a very good idea for a card. However, I would think that just discarding the other two cards would be better than putting them back into the deck. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 04:07, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. Does anyone have any ideas for what category this would be?
　—Preceding signed comment by NICKY NOUSE (talk) 22:46, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We need a link for this card. I totally forgot to tell you when I commented earlier. :) We are trying to have a project-space link for every card. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:27, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TRANS or Template:High-use. I don't know if you'd be willing to have a ns:template page, but it's appropriate. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 03:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe, Wikipedia:Database reports/Templates transcluded on the most pages. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 03:52, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

image —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs) 05:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is with the "Lorem ipsum" stuff? Other than that, as I said before, oyu are getting closer; now you just need to use the same fonts and sizes, because I think that the ones that Bob used looked god. Also, in the text, I've tweaked it a bit, so you can change that as well. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:43, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

=O Mine look God? Lol. Thanks. Not to sound stuck-up, Nicky, but I've been wanting to say that he's right...the ones you've submitted so far are rather rough. Ehhhhhh....let's save the "lorem ipsum" for when we absolutely need it; it's way overused. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finally got around to uploading a version with what Hi878 said. I changed the fonts and wording a bit. But, note this passage from WP:SVG Help: "Fonts such as Arial and Times New Roman require licencing fees to distribute. RSVG will not be able to locate such fonts, and the text will fail to appear in the rendered image." I would prefer to keep uploading them as SVGs, but we might want to switch to an open font like VejaVu Sans (my personal favorite) that Wikipedia can render. By the way, I just put the lipsum to take up the spce where a quote would be, since this proposal isn't to that sage yet. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 12:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thing is, we're trying to keep the same appearance as Wikipedia for a more authentic on-screen look. I'm not sure what font it uses on Mac OS or Linux, but on Windows it uses Arial. Also, keep in mind the SVG rendering is being done by Wikia, not WikiMedia...although I think both are powered by MediaWiki, so it's quite likely they use the same SVG rendering technology. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Wikia is separate, but think it's safe to assume that they haven't bothered to switch to a different rendering engine. MediaWiki's renderer simply can't support Arial, even if it's what Wikipedia normally uses, because it's not open to the public; it's the makers of the OSs that pay for licensing it, and Wikipedia just doesn't do that. The DejaVu project is open-source, and they may have a DejaVu Arial font available. That would be an acceptable alternative in my opinion. Ask Jimbo, he'll probably tell you something like that too, and he's a Wikia insider. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 08:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see what it looks like, then. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

link —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 03:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty darn close, just super-wide. It'll suffice for the SVG purposes; but when exporting to the PNG, use Arial. If a piece of text fits using the Deja Vu font then we'll know it'll fit in Arial as well. Remember not to use the handles to resize text; change the point size instead. Using the handles stretches the text. I see you've stretched the credit text at the bottom in that example. Thanks for solving that SVG rendering problem, Nicky! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:07, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glitched archive bot

Name of card: Glitched archive bot
Class: Discord/VandalBot
Text: An archiving bot has begun archiving random pages, +1 vandalism for all pages starting with letters a-d, k-q or u-z.
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 28 November 2010

Comments

Proposed form a comment on #Glitched Bot. I'll think about a link. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 16:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I change my mind, it should be +1 vandalism for all pages starting with letters a-d, k-q or u-z. I have changed the text. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 01:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why those letters? I don't have a problem with it, I am just curious. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because archiving all of them wouldn't be random pages, and it would be unrealistic. This is slightly more realistic-ish. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm....good idea, though seems like there must be a better way to randomize it.... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anything, really. Maybe every other letter. Whatever. If you have suggestions, you know I expect them to be shared. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But of course! Also...something really minor...and this goes for everyone, not just you: When editing, can y'all please try to select the edit link next to the card's title instead of the one that says "comments"? It would make it significantly easier for someone to find your comment that way. Just sayin'. Um.....ideas for randomization...I'll think about it and let you know if I come up with any

Oh, oh, oh! you could spin the bot in the middle of the table, and whichever article the top of the card faces gets vandalized.... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But what if you don't have a slippery table? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We could sell smooth bot-spinning plates that say "Wikipedia Trading Card Game: Spin the Bot!" as game accessories. True collectors would buy them. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(again)

We might want to put some type of huge chevron at the top of the page... And what would we do if they don't have one? We would probably use this for more randomizations, because otherwise ONLY true collectors would have them. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 13:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chevron? Page? Huh? Oh, you mean at the top of the card? Sure, great idea! It could go in the "prereq" spot and point outwards from the card's central point of gravity. Heh, if they don't have a finished wooden surface or bot-spinning plate available, then that's just like not having counters. Of course, we wouldn't spin cards in the starter decks, just foil packs and expansion sets-- and they'd be less common. Besides, any finished wooden surface will serve the same purpose. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was discussing this with someone earlier and they thought dice might do the trick. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 07:07, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So...even numbers cover N-Z and odd cover A-M? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking more along the lines of numbering the cards from left-to-right (or vise-versa) and rolling to see what number is out. If there are more than six, multiple rolls might be necessary. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The issue with that is for a 170-card deck, there are very likely going to be many more articles in play than six. Even in a 100 card deck, six is just way too few. I would suggest using a d20 (twenty-sided die) for the roll, but not too many people have one... Take a leaf from Wizards of the Coast and give them out with the sets? Bananaclasic (talk) 17:51, 9 December 2010 (UTC) (And on a minorly related note, I was reminded just why the preview button is so handy.)[reply]

I would prefer just spinning the card to needing to get a special die. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:35, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The issues with spinning a card are immense, though. First, the card would be more susceptible to damage, and that would be a major turn-off for many who enjoy collecting AND playing the game. Think about it: you're flicking the card with your fingernail to make it spin. Second, there isn't always a smooth wooden table to play on. I much more frequently end up using my mattress as place to play a TCG, and cards do not spin well on it. Think of trying to get something to spin on a wool coat, and you've got my mattress. Third, cards are not always set equidistant, and there is not always space to set them so. My mattress is a great example, again, as it isn't very large. Spinning something implies that there are more or less equal places for the arrow to point to. Have you ever played Spin the Bottle? We really need a reliable method of coming up with random numbers, or we ought to toss the idea of randomness out of the TCG altogether. Most TCG's generally don't use randomness anyway, or if they do, it's something small and only requiring a six-sided. No other TCG that I can think of or Google has ever used a method of generating numbers that would work the way we'd need it to work here, anyway. It's always been within a specific, defined range of numbers. Even if we do come up with a good way to generate random numbers, this card's use of it would be counter-intuitive and ought to be changed. Even if we do keep the original text, it wouldn't be quite so random.

Strong Oppose. Bananaclasic (talk) 21:41, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Several valid points there, some that I never thought of. Thanks! Moving toward opposition of randomosity. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We could go back to sets of numbers. And no, I've never played Spin the Bottle, I don't do things off of my computer, especially those things that involve having a "life." —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 06:10, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Life? What is that? Anyways, thank you Bananaclasic; I now think that we need something else as well. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 19:29, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Life is... well lets see. It says that Life (cf. biota) is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have signaling and self-sustaining processes (biology) from those that do not,^[1]^[2] either because such functions have ceased (death), or else because they lack such functions and are classified as inanimate.^[3]

Lolcat

Name of card: Lolcat
Class: Article (good)
Text: I Can Has Cheezburger?
Protected: no
Proposed by: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs · count · logs) 29. November 2010

Comments

Has this been featured? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's C-class. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I suppose it'd be fine for a tribute card if we see some more contributions from you, Pumpkin. Since you've only been with us a very short while so far it's hard to call you a significant contributor already. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More cards and comments, that's all you need to do. ~~24/7~~ 26/7 and you're in, buddy. And you could probably with having that section below as your tribute, if you wanted. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 13:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support this as a tribute card if someone wants to adopt it as such, not least because there are a few good Wikipedia-related lolcats out there: File:Lolrollback.jpg, File:PiksherDeleted.jpg, File:I IZ NOT VANDAL lolcat.jpg Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 05:46, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name of card: WikiCookie
Class: Instant
Text: Give any other player and yourself 5 cJ each.
User access level: At least "Registered"
Proposed by: VeryPunny

Comments

Very attractive; I'll support! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No! You get CJs by writing articles; I dont think that it is a good message that you can get them by improving articles and by giving each other cookies. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 23:50, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I could always change it to drawing a card or two...wait, that's what WP:THANKYOU does. Perhaps we could alter it to give an additional edit to both people. VeryPunny 00:32, 02 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like with the vandal thing, I think there should be multiple ways to gain and to lose CJ, even if they're not a currency. Might I point out that Template:Cookie isn't a policy page? —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 08:25, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Impact Event

Name of card: Impact Event
Class: Discord
Text: Everyone loses 50 cJ, discards their entire hand, and draws a new one. All articles are regressed by two stages, and all bots are destroyed.
Proposed by: VeryPunny

Comments

Impact? You mean like a giant meteorite? Interesting idea. I would think that articles would be destroyed completely, however, not just damaged. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do mean a giant meteorite. I decided against having articles destroyed because that might be a little too harsh, but then again, it DOES cause massive damage. The articles could be maximally regressed (to Start-class) instead of just by two increments. VeryPunny

I don't care about what you do with articles, but I think that CJs should not be touched; once you have them, you should get to keep them. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Destroying an article entirely would be more reflective of unrecoverable damage and also would add a more unsuspected twist to the gameflow. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With the CC-BY-SA and page history, you won't really lose data about a page. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 05:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True...start-class is probably sufficient. I approve. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll point this out before Hi878 gets a chance, there's "supposed to be" a link. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 08:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A person after my own heart. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:13, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LOL (pronounced 'lɒl) —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 03:14, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regressing all articles might be a bit much, but otherwise I support this card. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I still think that CJs should never be messed with. They should be gained by improving articles, and cards should not be able to make you lose them. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable to respect that wish. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:31, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedian's Prayer

Name of card: The Wikipedian's Prayer
Class: Wikipedia (bad)
Text: All users must take at least 15 seconds to pray to Jimbo once per turn while this card is in play.
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 2 December 2010

Comments

It just slows the game down. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 03:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not. I won't stand for idolatry of Jimbo. Instructing players to pray to anyone, in general, is a bad idea as a rule for a game, unless that game is a religion-specific one, like the Christian game Bibleopoly (I'd list non-Christian examples, too, but I don't know of any). Also, the Wikipedian's Prayer ought to be represented as a good policy, as it encourages editors to humble themselves and accept there are certain areas they aren't allowed to edit. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:55, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Change it to whatever you want, it was just a rough idea.

You could lose an edit or edits per turn, as if time is spent praying, that's the time spent NOT EDITING! VeryPunny

That makes it seem as though we are saying that praying is bad. I think that having this as some sort of good policy would be fantastic, however; we need to make the description and picture small, so that we can fit the entire prayer on the card. I think that people would find it pretty darn funny. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I support Hi's idea. Furthermore, what about using the prayer itself as part of the picture?Bananaclasic (talk) 18:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about someone along the lines of "Place an edit card from your hand face down. Five turns from now, play the edit on an article and receive double the centijimbos." Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like it, but aren't you supposed to be WikiBreaking? —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody can stay on a Wikibreak without the enforcer. :) I like the idea as well. We would need to make sure to say that they still get the same amounts for the rest of the time, however. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:12, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I use the enforcer, I can't do my duties with debugging the automatic taxobox... Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Under the Influence

Name of card: Editing Under the Influence
Class: Vandalism
Text: Place an vandalism counter on a random article. This counter can't be removed by you during your next turn.

Proposed by: Bananaclasic (talk) 18:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Define random...--CanvasHat 21:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed text change... Take five shots of something strong, then place a vandalism counter on whichever article is easiest to reach. Just kidding. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not random, just one of your articles. Bananaclasic (talk) 17:17, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So this one would function using whatever we decide is the default target precedence for vandalism. I think that discussion is still unresolved, isn't it? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would seem to be correct. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MJ

Name of card: Michael Jackson...Woo!
Class: Article (good)
Text: Non political.
Protected: YES
Proposed by: CanvasHat 00:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:11, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which protection, my good sir? Full, or semi? I support if it is semi. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:14, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wait... there's no link! How will we ever decide on a link for Michael Jackson?! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 13:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Semi it is, then. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

INAL, but Michael Jackson likely has intellectual property impediments. I bet either some company or his estate owns the rights to his name and likeness, and wouldn't be happy if his name and image (even if freely-licensed for copyright purposes) were used on a card. Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 04:51, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chances are you're correct.

Oppose. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:37, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:autopatrolled

Name of card:Autopatrolled
Class: Userbox
Text:All new articles start as C-class.
Required user access level: Registered
Proposed by: CanvasHat

Comments

We decided against using user rights other than those listed on the user page. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We did? I thought we left additional rights open as userboxes. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:25, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to disagree now.--CanvasHat 16:16, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was my understanding that we were going to stay away from other rights... Perhaps we should discus this one somewhere? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 19:32, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let's. Since you seem to know what you're talking about, and we don't, you start it somewhere and link to it when you're ready for comments. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:02, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I'll let you find it. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:43, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You cruel person!

*checks your contributions* Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:22, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

confirmed

Name of card: confirmed
Class: Userbox
Text: Act as autoconfirmed
Required user access level: ~~USER~~ Registered
Proposed by: CanvasHat

Comments

We decided against using user rights other than those listed on the user page. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 01:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shaky proposal-- "User" isn't an access level. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:50, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...Registered is what I meant...--CanvasHat 14:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only other problem I see here is the extremely unlikely chance the card will be worth anything if drawn. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia

Name of card: Wikipedia
Class: tribute
Text: (tribute)
Protected: autoconfirmed+
Proposed by: Nicky Nouse (talk · contribs · count · logs) 13 December 2010

Comments

I doubt we'll have copyright issues with this one. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 02:15, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll support this one.

. If we have any problems at all, it'll be getting this game made and marketed with the approval of Wikimedia, not putting Wikipedia on one more card hahahaha. As far as I can tell, Jimbo doen't have an issue with it, but then again, apparently some guy name Zack is the person to talk to about it. I don't know who Zack is...do you guys? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zach? seriously?

If this thing is actually going to happen, I doubt there would be a problem with this one. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 19:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tribute? I don't think it needs to be tributed to anyone...it's a formerly featured article, so it already qualifies. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But I still need a tribute card. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 15:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, pick one that hasn't been featured. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:50, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if I feel comfortable with that. All of the best articles are featured (duh,) that and/or copyright infringement!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.155.178 (talk) 01:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between a featured article and an unfeatured featureworthy article is that a featured article has been noticed. There are hundreds if not thousands out there. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:07, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a problem with having an otherwise-eligible card for a tribute card... ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 03:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it's SO much trouble, I'll pick another. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 06:23, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caffeine

Name of card: Caffeine
Class: Article (good)
Text: WAKE UP AND EDIT!
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support. However, I'm not sure that the suggested text really belongs on there as a special ability. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:52, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with Bob on both counts. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 19:37, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technetium

Name of card: Technetium
Class: Article (good)
Text: Yet another transition metal.
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Durian

Name of card: Durian
Class: Article (good)
Text: ~~You may not edit this card if you live in Singapore.~~
Protected: No
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 06:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The text is a bit...deluding. it isnot protected...--CanvasHat 20:12, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. Let's not be ... whatever that's called... discriminatory. Electronic Arts made that mistake when they released a Dr Pepper promo expansion pack for Spore and believe me, they heard about it. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:09, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spore?--CanvasHat 22:25, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, Spore. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The text was intended to be a joke rather than an actual prohibation. It can certainly be changed to something softer. Antony–22 (^talk/_contribs) 02:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I Know that...--CanvasHat 13:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The card is fine. The text is not. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse (talk • contribs • wikia) 15:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I partially disagree. I laught out loud.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 16:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The majority has overruled the text. If no one's got a "softer" text proposal, we'll proceed without text. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give this card until the weekend, and then I shall decline it. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 00:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elk

Name of card: Elk
Class: Article (good)
Text: ?
Protected: NO
Proposed by: CanvasHat 20:16, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support. Rather than filling in the special ability text with random letters, please just leave it blank or something. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 21:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dont be dense

Name of card: WP:BATSHIT
Class: Wikipedia (good)
Text: For each turn only the first bad WP card drawn has an effect
Protected: NO
Proposed by: --CanvasHat 15:43, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Ummmmm....can we find a shortcut that doesn't have a curse word in it? m:Don't be dense seems more appropriate in this case than the shortcut. Also-- this sounds like a power card. Eliminate all but one bad card per turn, and the game has become so easy it's hardly worth playing. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:56, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the card would be fine if we switched it to "The first bad Wikipedia card drawn in a turn has no effect." I also think that it should be an instant; having this permanently there seems rather stupid, regardless of which text is used. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "bad WP card", are you referring to Bad-Wikipedia-class? or just bad cards in general? Since Wikipedia cards should ideally be rare, it wouldn't make sense to assume multiple ones might be drawn in one turn. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I meant class, and you have a good point. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:25, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Patent Nonsense

Name of card: awssdxddttgtfyg
Class: Vandalism
Text: Vandalize A-class article, or highest class available.
Proposed by: CanvasHat 15:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Looks good to me! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link, darn you! Good otherwise. I think that I need to add something about that to the editnotice; I hate saying this constantly. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:56, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - WP:SOFIXIT.

Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to finish the proposal for someone else! I refuse to do such a (usually) simple task when the proposer can easily do it themselves! The fact that it is part of the proposal makes it seem idiotic that someone other than the proposer should have to do it! AGH!!! Okay, I'm done ranting now... ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the edit notice, not the link. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 05:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cracked up the moment I saw the giant "Links!" in the edit notice. Then I read it. Sweet. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, here's a question: Do you want to be trained in my evil ways? ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:12, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which way, oh great master? The evil way of not sorting the proposals weekly? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I'm doing it now! However, if you could trout me if I forget some part of it, that would be helpful. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 02:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, the trout noticed you didn't move any discussions to the appropriate sections. Hurry, it's watching you!!! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gah! Consensus determining! I can't handle it! But seriously though, it will be interesting to see if my computer can handle such a large page. ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are you running? A Pentium with no number behind it? Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's a pretty good computer, a fairly good Macbook. It just can't handle pages that are quite this size, but I figured out how to get around that (but it took longer...). I once was in an edit conflict (with myself). I fixed it from there, saved it, and waited for twenty minutes. :) ~~ Hi878 ^{(Come shout at me!)} 06:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Biography Improvement Drive

Name of card: ~~BLP~~Biography Improvement Drive
Class: Wikipedia (good)
Text: Your first edit of each turn must be on a biography ~~of living persons~~ article, but this edit gets a bonus of one extra vandalism removed for free. This card expires after two rounds.
Proposed by: Antony–22 (^talk ⁄ _contribs) 20:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]