I think this wiki has real potential, if you allowed users to make the page of their user that would be good, i will help all I can, would you like help with your main page and templates? KingDonfin You Seem familiar have I threatened you before!!! 06:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Some issues

First, your icon for the wiki is ginormous and cuts into the upper left corner of the page. I don't know if that's because I'm using Monobook, but if it's not that then you should reduce the size as it can prove annoying when it overlaps text/images.

Second, your "trailer" for The Old Republic is in fact a trailer for the first Knights of the Old Republic game (and a rather early one at that, as the graphics are terrible and the interface bears little resemblance to the final version), as is clearly stated at the end of the trailer. For someone who has not played K1 and therefore doesn't recognize the Ebon Hawk/Dantooine/Bandon/Malak/etc and say "Oh, haha, this is an old trailer for K1 from back in what looks like its beta days," it could prove misleading. Qing Guang 06:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Title

Is there any way to change the title to Star Wars: The Old Republic? It's missing the colon that should be there. Sarendipity Talk 09:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Citation of Information

Normally a wiki project doesn't have to worry too much about citation; it's generally known the information is retrieved from the game itself. However, we're in a unique situation in that anything we add to the project right now, and likely for some time to come, is second hand information. I think we need to attempt to cite our information whenever possible, lest we risk providing false information, and simply ignore any information that cannot yet be confirmed by a valid source.

For example, we list Sith and Jedi as character classes, but as far as I'm aware neither has been confirmed at this point; we know there's going to be jedi-type characters, but the details regarding how they will be implemented and what they will be have yet to be revealed. Despite this, we list them as the concrete and definite choices, and even go so far as making edits to other aspects of the project with that in mind. Unless a valid source is cited for this information, we should regard it as rumor and nothing more until a time when such a source is available. -- Heaven's Agent 17:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well from the forums there was an interview where they played as sith. confirms Sith, force abilities, dual wielding lightsabers etc So that will be a good source for several things. There is also a thread on the official site with a metric ton of sources. I agree that we shouldn't go into the speculation train, but I think documenting things as they show up is good. As long as we only use reputable sources. I would hate for this place to get a bad name because someone heard from someone that their aunt's friends cousin who works for LA told them there was a "slaver" build. File:Spikeicon.pngTenetke 02:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
This is an edit to my above statement. I was listing those sources here, mainly because I didn't want each individual page we make to have a sources list at the bottom. We could always list a source on the talk page though. Then that would give a source. I know that I like reading new stuff on the game, so it would help people find out about new features also. I like the idea, I would hate for our pages to become cluttered with sources though. File:Spikeicon.pngTenetke 02:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Honestly, I think we need to simply deal with a section for source information in the articles themselves; it's not really an appropriate use for the Talk Page, and the information does need to be included. For example, I've been following the game's development for some time but was completely unaware of the E3 Sith reveals due to losing my job, having a stomach bug go through my entire family, and the death of my oldest friend. My entire point in making this post was to address the issue rather than simply edit the information out of the articles, something I was thinking would be appropriate since, as far as I was aware, the classes had not been officially named. And quite honestly, unless we point to the sources within the articles themselves I wouldn't blame any random contributor for doing the same. -- Heaven's Agent 06:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to hear about all the troubles. Not everyone can be expected to keep up with every aspect of the game though. That is why we have a community working on the wiki instead of just one person. It takes several people to keep up with the stuff being released, and then there is the work of making pages, categories, templates etc. We could always add a listing to the bottom of the pages with the title source. My problem is that I would hate for a page to have say 50 sources listed. The source information could end up taking up more room than the information provided. The cover system would be a good example. There is information about it, but not that much that needs to be documented. I think we should at least limit it to 1 or 2 sources listed per page. That way we can be sure those sources are reputable, and give ample information without making the page a giant source list. What do you think about limiting it like that ? File:Spikeicon.pngTenetke 16:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

(Resetting Indent)
We definitely need to limit sources as much as possible. I'm of a mind that we should avoid using second-hand sources entirely. This would include Wookiepedia (as a source, though many of their references would serve as primary sources on lore information) and much of what's made available on news outlets and websites such as GameSpot and; basically, any source where we cannot verify the information came from one of the companies involved in the game's development should not be considered permissible within the project. This would allow us to cite the sources directly, and cut down on the clutter such sections would involve. -- Heaven's Agent 17:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The only problem I see with that is that Bioware let some of those companies release the information from their E3 even instead of releasing it themselves. I think that was done as more of a "If we say it is good, well it is our game, but if they say it is good maybe it really is". I think it worked. Then there is the problem of source images, for example the image of the jedi and sith both using lightsabers. The images are released as part of an E3 "pack" because multiple companies that were part of the E3 preview all have the exact same one. Bioware didn't put them up for us. Other than those two issues, and over all they aren't going to be very big, I agree with you. We can include developer blogs, basically anything on the site from the team at bioware. This should include the bioware interviews though. Basically anything that a rep of bioware has said, that way if someone questions it we can simply say "here is where a rep of bioware made the statement, take it up with them". File:Spikeicon.pngTenetke 00:26, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Honestly, if we start limiting our sources I feel it's important to exclude any secondhand info. That does mean the observations from E3 posted by all the news sites would be impermissible, but if we're going to limit some such info, we need to limit it all. Alternatively, we can simply reference it all and deal with a larger references section until a time when we can make our own observations from the game part of the project; I prefer this approach myself.
Images are another matter entirely. Because a wiki functions under a unique license that makes anything we post usable by basically any other project on the internet, we either need direct permission to post images or limit such files to what can be considered fair use. Things like the image packets given to news groups at E3 cannot be used in our project, as we were not one of those groups granted access to them, nor do those news sources function under such a license. Likewise, it would be illegal to modify released images in any way, including resizing or cropping said images. Finally, it's vital that we try to link to the original source within the page of non fair-use articles. We could always approach the developers to receive permissions for some of this content, but that's something that should really be done by a project Admin. -- Heaven's Agent 16:13, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
If you want we can just open up our sources to anything. I have been mostly using the sources directly from ToR website. As for the images I put the link to the fair use law on your talk page. I also gave you the introduction to it and explained our reasoning for fair use. Some people tend to think that fair use isn't very strong but it really is. As long as we don't try to make any kind of monetary claim ourselves. Otherwise everything I use as an image has been posted within the public domain. The images so far I am using are from their vid docs, or their listings they provide. I would be very against us hosting something illegal like leaked pictures or whatever. Fair use on the other hand is fair use, and once they put it out into the public we have the right to take it and criticize it and report about it. Actually all that is listed on your talk page. File:Spikeicon.pngTenetke 18:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.