ReginaldDrax

Errmm - she did kiss Clem, on the lips, not a sisterly kiss.

Just read your Trivia entry - nice catch.

I don't think though, that Woodward's the person who gets to decide whether or not Elsie's LGBQ or not by the way, that decision would be the showrunner's. And you notice that scene was cut, removing Woodward's stated motivation for the kiss so it may be that the Nolans wanted it to be ambiguous.

Shame it was cut, that sounds interesting. And I like her comments about it not mattering what sex Elsie is, we really don't see that enough yet.

Hi,

Those fields need be added into the Infobox/Character template. The data will show up on the pages then. I'll be looking at that template tomorrow.

I *think* all of the "Host Character" boxes have been switched to "Character" - did I miss any?

Hi,

Sorry it took me a while to answer. This is the code to Copy and Paste in source mode for host characters:

{{Infobox/Host Character
| title            = 
| image            = 
| imagecaption     = 
| aka              = 
| ID number        = 
| status           = 
| actor            = 
| seasons          = 
| firstseen        = 
| lastseen         = 
| death            = 
| appearedin       = 
| current lifespan = 
| occupation       = 
| creationdate     = 
| deathdate        = 
| deathcause       = 
| park             = 
| narrative role   = 
| family           = 
| age              = 
| gender           = 
| ethnicity        = 
| hair             = 
| eye              = 
| height           = 
| weight           = 
}}

Some explanations of those fields are at Template:Infobox/Host Character.

You're generally ok to copy code from other articles, and don't worry about making a mess, we've all been there so just shout up and someone will be along to help out. Before long you'll be one of the someones who turn up to help out.

Is that enough info for you at the moment?

Don't hesitate to ask if you need a hand.

yep, thanks a lot, I'll start to convert human infoboxes to the host ones in hosts pages in a moment :)

Nice :)

Have a look at the link in my reply if you can, I put lots of comments in the second copy & paste example to explain the fields.

hey Reg, pls check out my comment under Teddy's page, I need some help in remembering in order to understand which deaths I should track and which not...

one more suggestion for the characters who have host copies of themselves - i think it'd be better to not name the headings "Host %character's name%" but "Host version", so it's an uniform general heading and not unique (like, we do have paragraphs "Personality", but we don't name it "%character's name%'s personality", i hope you know what i mean)

Hi,

I've been discussing this with Fandom staff and they're of the opinion that we'd be best to have a single page that describes both the human and host versions of a character - which means we'll need a single version of Infobox/Character that will cope with both hosts and humans, and with both in the same article.

The headings in a Character article will need to cope with this, as you point out. One way to do it would be a structure like this:

== Biography ==
=== Human Version ===
=== Host Version ===
== Personality ==
=== Human Version ===
=== Host Version ===

Do you see what I mean? What do you think?

wow, sounds crazy but i already like it! HOWEVER, this will probably make their pages more 'spoiler'y... like, imagine a viewer who learns Hale's dead, checks the page quickly to see if it's true and bumps in divisions on human/host versions everywhere... personally, the current state of Hale's page looks great to me, maybe you should consider just elaborating it [the "Host Version" paragraph] instead of dividing every other sections in two parts? that'd be less spoilery... this is what I mean:

Infobox/Character
==Biography==
==Plot== !-- for human version --
==Death== !-- for human version --
==Killed Victims== !-- for human version --
==Personality== !-- for human version --
==Quotes== !-- for human version --
==Appearances== !-- for human version --
!-- and THEN... the host version heading (h2) which includes all original headings in h3! --
==Host Version==
Infobox/Host Character
===Plot=== !-- for host version --
===Death=== !-- for host version --
===Killed Victims=== !-- for host version --
===Personality=== !-- for host version --
===Quotes=== !-- for host version --
===Appearances== !-- for host version --

that would be cool (in my opinion) as well as less spoilery, more compact and would require less changes. that's just as merging two pages in one!

Yes, I like that.

The site is very spoilery anyway tbh. But I like your compromise idea.

Okay, apologies that we didn't fix this formatting issue straight away — it's quite complex and is about to get even more complex.

Originally, the advice was that we should consolidate the information into their main base pages — in some way, this still is the right decision. We're now recommending a U-Turn on this decision, and believe that the best idea is to again consolidate these articles individually; for example Host Hale's article would be better served away from the original at Charlotte Hale/Host (note the /Host is important, and much better than (host)).

As you both mention, there are potential clashes with infoboxes, and having more than one infobox per page is a little distracting and awkward in terms of readability — would a new reader be confused seeing an infobox half the way down the page? Potentially. Infoboxes are aimed to summarise an article and, unfortunately, adapting an infobox for more than one type of character is a difficult feat.

The other aspect is spoilers. We want to make people aware that spoilers are a huge aspect of wiki's, unfortunately (again), they're going to encounter them. We could add a notice at the top of the article (like Williams), but this is very bad for SEO. For example, if you search William Westworld in Google, the summary for the article is quite odd as the template at the top is breaking the result. The only way we can truly ensure we don't spoil for those folks is to separate these articles out again.

It's worth reading this blog to get a better understanding of the underlying issues.

Let me know what you think, apologies again for the U-turn, this is a complex situation.

Hi Luke,

Ok, thanks for the reply and don't worry, I'm not about to have two infoboxes on any page.

I'll finish the modifications to those character pages that are for both humans and hosts.

maybe the warning on William's page is tampering with the SEO because it's just a plain text? I've seen real spoiler alert templates on other wikis (can't remember a single example, damn) and they don't seem to break the result, why don't you create a one (like the ones we do have about asking help with editing stab articles in a dark black style)?

so we're back to separate pages, huh? well, that's even more spoilery since it gives away the info straight in the search string. I'm cool with that, but if the double infobox was the only issue we could've refrained from creating the second one in "Host Version" paragraph...

p.s. i'm OK with anything just give me something to edit :P

Hi Mampac,

Have a look at Charlotte Elizabeth Hale's page. That's the format I'd like to go with. I'm just adding the host specific fields from Template:Infobox/Host Character to Template:Infobox/Character so that we can use a single Infobox for human and host characters.

Spoiler templates (or otherwise) and quote boxes always tamper with SEO.

Hi,

That all sounds interesting.

You want to pick a character and try it out? (your choice, but if you pick teddy you'll be there all night...) I'm not into copying another wiki per se (even TWD), but it does sound interesting.

Drop me a note a when you've done one and we can talk it thru.

check out Arnold Weber, Robert Ford, Theresa Cullen and James Delos.

I hope you like it :)

I like it - Nice one Mampac, thank you.

Antonio, hi.

Thank you for your message and the information.

I'm happy to agree to keep information private when required and to sign an NDA if required. Do you need my email?

Reggie

Not really, I can send the email to the address that you are using in Fandom.

I will send you the email in the next hours ;)

Cheers

Hi GLK,

My mistake, that's an old way of doing things. You can enter the cast details directly into that section of the article.

Reggie

No worries, sorted.

Hi,

Sorry, I have been a tad busy.

Sounds interesting, what do you have in mind?

Hello, I sent you some of the details over on your discord DMs a couple days ago

Sorry, but I don't use discord.

Ah ok. One of our things planned involved creating a Discord separate from the current embedded one so we could have more control.

We would also like to see an increase in engagement and hope achievements can help that. We also would like to see more engagement in discussions and were thinking by disabling the article comments it could help increase engagement in discussions, as the same type of comments occur there.

We also were interested in enabling the gadgets extension which would allow for us to create 4 new skins based on the 4 parks in the series.

Let me know what you think!

Hi,

I'd like to see more engagement as well, it is not easy to keep people involved with such a long gap between seasons though we are seeing new editors working now that the new season is nearly here. I'm pleased to see the content manager and yourself here - that will help will fill the gap.

Discord: Have there been problems with the current Discord channel?

Article Comments: Are article comments being retired? Is there a timeline for this? I like the Discussions but comments there are not associated with a particular page or even an Episode or Season so I'm reluctant to disable Article Comments unless there's a Fandom statement that they're going to be retired. Article comments are one of the ways fans engage with the Wiki, I don't think that should be discouraged.

Gadgets: This sounds good - where can I find out more?

Discord: No problems, but will help with current editing efforts, as for example, several wikis would have wiki-editing/discussion related channels. We could help maintain it for you if you don't actively use discord.

Comments: Aren't retired, and it will be migrated to UCP but the replacement feature hasn't be developed yet. Would be better to promote discussions with the broader/more public space with the app. There are still talk pages but of course isn't a big obstacle if you wish to keep comments.

You can look here for an example of what else gadgets does.

Also we were interested in creating a landing page for the upcoming season. AN example of one would be like this, we would even have a give away involved like Stranger Things had. Would you be fine if I set one up?

The link for the Stranger Things landing page doesn't work, this sounds interesting though. A Season 3 landing page for the mobile version would be good.

Gadgets is based on Javascript - so users will have to have Javascript enabled in their browsers to see the effects? How does this effect mobile browsers and keeping mobile and desktop in step?

Leaving comments enabled won't effect the availability of Discussions, whereas disabling Article Comments would remove a way for users to engage with the material. I'm happy with Article Comments, and unimpressed with Discussions.

Achievements - I was puzzled this was being asked for, since it's always been enabled. I see that it's now not a wiki feature - I'll ask support to turn this back on.

Requiring users to login before editing.

We've had this enabled for a while, in response to some spam comments and edits. What's the current advice on this feature? I don't want to discourage editing.

Great, I'll work on the landing page and get the community manager to enable achievements.

That's fine if you'd like to keep article comments.

For Gadgets, we'll use CSS for the design, but only available on desktops. It won't affect mobile viewers.

As for anonymous editing, it should only be a temporarily measure to defend against anon vandals but shouldn't be always enabled, as a wiki is very large. So could be good to allow anonymous users to edit again for a while and see how that goes.

> So could be good to allow anonymous users to edit again for a while

Done

This is what the landing page would look like: User:TimeShade/sandbox

Could add more characters to the character navigation of course.

Just realized, I only have the CSS is my personal CSS atm, feel free to at it in your personal css or if you have the portable CSS JavaScript enabled with this: User:TimeShade/wikia.css

Looks good (understatement) 👌

It's available here: Project:Season 3.

Do you think we can add link to it on the top navigation and/or main page? Any preference?

And...

Both is better, I'd say.

Great, I've added a link to the main page and the top nav.

I'm trying out the landing page at the top of the main page - what do you think? It's obviously sized to fit in the rh column

There's no width set, so if you move it, it'll fit the column or page.

Hey, I made some adjustments to the landing page, including adding a spotify widget for the soundtrack (as it's a top search item) and including Playsonic's weekly recaps.

Hi TimeShade,

Thanks for letting me know - looks good, the recaps in particular are nicely done.

Could you check the link from the picture of Bernard please? It's not quite right.

The landing page in general looks good.

No problem, fixed the link for Bernard.

Thanks!

Hello Luke,

Thanks for your message. It would be very helpful if you have time to create the template articles for the S3 episodes we think we know - thank you. We can always rename them later if needed.

Hi,

All of the episode pages for the episodes we currently know have been created on the wiki. Between now and when S3 airs, I'll be working on ensuring the main pages have the best information available — overall, however the wiki looks pretty solid!

In regards to Episode Names, how would you feel about renaming this article to "Episode Title Analysis"? We've found that nearly everyone who visits this article leaves almost immediatley, which is not what we want. This suggests that they're not finding what they want on the article, which we believe to be a list of all the episodes. Do you have any aversion to moving that page and at "Episodes" or "Episode Names" we list all of the episodes? Let me know!

Thanks :)

Hi Luke,

Episode Names - Ok. I've renamed it to Episode Names - Meanings and referred to it that way on the page that linked to it. The text around the link didn't give the impression it was a list of Episodes though, maybe it's just not a very good article and didn't get people's attention when they had a quick look.

A list of Episodes sounds like a good idea. It does introduce another list to maintain - could it be done with include files so that we don't have to have multiple lists of the same information? Is that too complex? What do you think?

Thanks for renaming that. I think it's a good article — and one that many wikis have — however if it isn't something a user is looking for at that time, they're bound to click away.

I'm not sure about listing them using that method, as I don't believe said method allows them to be sorted into the order in which they aired? I'm not too well versed with that, however, and it's probably just easier to do it as simple as we can with links. I would more than likely be managing the updating of the list, however, and the next CTM that is assigned (for seasons four and five), if it is not me, would also maintain the list if you're worried about it being a burden.

Hi Luke,

Episode are already listed in the Season articles and are also in the Navigation menu - that's a fairly common way for for wikis to be organised and one that most visitors will be familiar with. Where were you thinking an Episodes List article would be linked from?

Hey!

At the moment, we'd place the link somewhere like the season articles, citing "See full episode list" or something the like. We know that the episodes are linked in the navigation, but it seems people are still searching for them anyway, despite being linked. It's just something we thought would increase the amount of time people stay on the wiki.

Hope you're having a good week :)

> it seems people are still searching for them anyway

Do you mean because people were clicking on the Episode Names link? It was always obvious from the context that the article was about the meanings of the titles, so I wouldn't take that as justification to add a new article

Do you have other traffic data not available to me? Can I see it?

There is some data to suggest this, yes. Other data suggests that when people search "Westworld Episodes" on Google, they find themselves on the wiki and almost instantly leave the page as it is not what they're looking for.

Unfortunately, this data is confidential and cannot be shared. Our intention is to help the wiki, however and we believe this will do so.

Ok. You say you have evidence that a list of episodes would be useful. Please share that information with me, not the other confidential information on the traffic that this wiki draws to fandom, just the information that backs up your suggestion please.

Hi, apologies for the late reply.

Antonio is the CM for this wiki and has the data, and I've spoken with him and he agreed to share the data with you shortly — I'm not sure when, but I don't think it's a pressing issue to get this created.

In regards to Theresa Cullen, is there any reason you prefer this article to be in the past-tense? She is dead, afterall. I know there is a policy on not changing content style, but this goes beyond the BrEng — American English differences. Having articles written in the wrong tense can give the idea that they're not up to date, and people may stop reading articles as a result.

Wrt tense. The convention here is (or should be) present tense for all characters - otherwise you know if they're current immediately you see the first line of the character page.

And thanks for asking about the data for me.

I didn't have time to finish s3e1 plot earlier - most annoying.

Hey — how did you find the finale? It was pretty good in my opinion, shame it wasn't liked by critics. I didn't for one second think that Dolores would've trusted Bernard with the encryption key, especially given their current enemy relationship. I do wonder what Bernard saw in the Valley Beyond, however.

I've begun updating the majority of main character pages, and they're nearly complete. Following this, I'll look around to ensure I've covered all of S3 extensively, and then I'll work to tie this assignment up, but will remain around for a little while in case I have missed anything — I hope to have this done by tomorrow, or the end of the week at the latest.

Let me know if there is anything pressing that needs my attention, otherwise, have a great day/night :)

I'm pretty mystified by much of season three tbh. We seem to have moved from a show where slight differences in the labels on two cans was very significant to one where the two (very different) versions of Hale's last message to her son were just a continuity error.

I saw you editing your way though the character plots today, sterling stuff, power editing. Thanks Luke.

Have a good bank holiday and stay safe please. All the best for your end-of-years assignments.