306
edits
Forum:Our Credibility (Or Lack Thereof): Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
KrytenKoro (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Trig Jegman (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| (22 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Forumheader|The World that Never was}} | {{Forumheader|The Realm of Sleep|The World that Never was}} | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ --> | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
{{17m|text= That might be true, but, do we really know how much people visited our Wiki? Who knows, maybe the number of visitors might decrease. Or, we might even barely have any visitors at all. I mean, finding anons or new users in the Recent Changes can be pretty here :/ Of course, not that I'm implying anything here, but it's just... y'know... It worries me a bit. }} | {{17m|text= That might be true, but, do we really know how much people visited our Wiki? Who knows, maybe the number of visitors might decrease. Or, we might even barely have any visitors at all. I mean, finding anons or new users in the Recent Changes can be pretty here :/ Of course, not that I'm implying anything here, but it's just... y'know... It worries me a bit. }} | ||
{{KrytenKoro|emotion= | {{KrytenKoro|emotion=hungry|The enemy gallery headers are certainly a more visible form of categorization, but categorization they still are. Though, with the existing way we cover them, including "Crank Tower", "The Experiment", and "Hostile Program"...I think we have an easy out. | ||
Name those sections "Other". Honestly, we have not confirmed whether all of them (specifically those stated above) are truly entelechies, and "Other" is both non-committal, and a neat pun on one of the term's used for a non-Nobody. | Name those sections "Other". Honestly, we have not confirmed whether all of them (specifically those stated above) are truly entelechies, and "Other" is both non-committal, and a neat pun on one of the term's used for a non-Nobody. | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
To us, though: '''''are''''' we using "Somebody" in any place where it is visible and could come off as claiming it as an official term? I'm absolutely certain we never use it in actual text, but does it appear anywhere beyond categories and inputs? If so, it would be possible to both use the "Other" specified above, or create a quick disclaimer template which states something like "'Somebody' is used here to refer to a complete person with a heart, mind, and soul. 'Somebody' is not the official term for this type of being, but is used within several quotes to informally refer to it. It should not be taken as a canon, official term."}} | To us, though: '''''are''''' we using "Somebody" in any place where it is visible and could come off as claiming it as an official term? I'm absolutely certain we never use it in actual text, but does it appear anywhere beyond categories and inputs? If so, it would be possible to both use the "Other" specified above, or create a quick disclaimer template which states something like "'Somebody' is used here to refer to a complete person with a heart, mind, and soul. 'Somebody' is not the official term for this type of being, but is used within several quotes to informally refer to it. It should not be taken as a canon, official term."}} | ||
{{Asif|sho=Actually, I was thinking of getting a new editor to say something along the lines of this: | |||
:''I'm a new editor at the wiki, and I realized how much misinformation is in it. There's too much for me to possibly find on my own, so could you please help me put together a list of misinformation I can show to the admins?'' | |||
Maybe we could get SidVI to do it? I don't know...}} | |||
{{KrytenKoro|I...don't think it will help the situation at all to be setting up pretenses and attempting to "trick" them. I wasn't able to access the gamestop threads on my phone, but the two I could see, they were hardly unanimous there anyway. Add that to the Somebody issue, and the situation is ''not'' that we have glaring errors that everyone else in the world can see, it's that this small subset of commenters disagree with our interpration a few events. And that's fine, if they can make a case for their interpretation, that's gravy. But the onus is on ''them'' to prove their case—it's hardly accurate to say that these people are 100% correct about everything and that we should be desparate for their approval and info. | |||
I think we have a healthy enough process of fact-checking and improvement, especially compared to gamefaqs itself, or even those individual users (and yes, this is a bit of a false comparison, since we should always strive for our own perfection). If those users would like to be part of the fact-checking process, that's fine, and we invite them to contribute. If they just want to bitch and moan (like, honestly, they've only ever done), that's also fine, but I have no interest in seeing it here.}} | |||
{{LightRoxas|text=I think it's important to note that most of our credibility is simply carried over from our previous existence as a wikia-wiki, where we were certainly susceptible to lots more vandalism than we are now. That being said, we would still be foolish to not try and change our credibility.}} | |||
{{KrytenKoro|Sure, but let's not start panicking because gamefaqs, of all places, criticized us. If we have errors, let's examine them and correc them. But there's no point in worrying about what other fansites think about us, especially when those fansites aren't much better (or even worse).}} | |||
{{LightRoxas|text=Actually, that's exactly my point. Frankly, the Internet is gonna be filled with hate, especially between fansites. Anyways, I went through the trouble of listing all our supposed options in the Somebody case: | |||
*Somebody: Never really used outside of Axel in CoM, but much shorter and concise than other options. | |||
*Other: Only used by Roxas when referring to the complete beings of a Nobody. Doesn't seem to make sense for, say, Goofy or Simba. | |||
*Beings: Doesn't work, as Roxas and Naminé are referred to as beings in the Secret Reports. | |||
*Complete Beings: It might work, but is way too long and sounds very clumsy. | |||
*Characters: Doesn't work, includes Heartless, Nobodies, and the like. | |||
*Other Characters: Very lazy, and probably the worst thing we could name them. | |||
*Entelechy: An English word that basically means true being, and sounds awesome. However, it would likely confuse some readers. | |||
*Existent: This is a word I propose, as Nobodies are referred to several times as "non-existent." But that's just my two cents, which rarely proves to be worth anything.}} | |||
{{Chitalian8|time=20:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC)|neku= From what I understand, "Other" isn't meant to be used the way Roxas said it, it's meant to be used along the lines of "Other Characters".}} | |||
{{KrytenKoro|So, here's what I see as the options: | |||
*Keep "Somebody", add a disclaimer template to all visible uses. | |||
*Keep "Somebody" for input-use only, make it invisible wherever it is visible, and use "Other" when that's impossible. | |||
*Use "Entelechy", which is a plain English word that means ''exactly'' this type of thing, instead of being Nomura-speak, may or may not use disclaimer (honestly not needed, but due to the obscurity of the term this may come off as even more confusing to readers). My personal favorite, but likely to cause even more of an outcry than somebody, and for good reason. Basically, if we use this one we are choosing "being technically correct but mostly passive aggressive at random internet douches" over "giving our readers clear, accurate information". | |||
"Complete Being" is never once spoken in any of the scripts I found, and is exactly as made up as the gamefaqers wrongly accuse "Somebody" of being. Same goes with "Existent". We can't use "characters", "people", or "beings", because the games themselves ''explicitly define Heartless and Nobodies as being included in those terms''. "Other" is not acceptable as a type, only as a passive aggressive header for the enemy galleries—it's in-game context is specifically "the original persona of a Nobody", and there's an argument to be made that it could refer to the Heartless in the pair, given Sora's situation. | |||
Honestly, I think the best solution is to simply continue using "Somebody" for most uses, to switch to "Other" for enemy galleries, to remove "Somebody" wherever it's used as if it was an official classification, and to add a disclaimer note (like {{MG}}) wherever "Somebody" cannot be made invisible. Afterwards, to set fire to the world, beginning with KHU and GameFaqs and eventually progressing through everything else.}} | |||
{{KrytenKoro|Okay, I was able to check the gamespot one, and they did specify two possible errors: how Sora got his Keyblade, and the "Keyblade of Worlds' Hearts" thing. I don't see them actually giving any sources or complaints in the history of the article (are they talking about the wikia article, maybe? Regardless, can someone check the Ultimanias to verify the information?}} | |||
{{Asif|shohappy=Great news! The Keyblade of Worlds' Hearts thing was something I wanted to delete ages ago, since as of now no source has been posted. I'm glad someone else commented on that.}} | |||
{{KrytenKoro|C-C-C-Caveat to that, they ''did'' say that whatever we had was based on a faulty translation. Soooo...we need to check the original material and see what a ''good'' translation says, rather than just deleting the claim.}} | |||
{{Asif|shoembarrassed=...I know that.}} | |||
{{LightRoxas|riku=I fixed the issue of where Sora got his keyblade (on Sora's article, at least. It might be elsewhere).}} | |||
{{KrytenKoro|Aqua didn't perform the ceremony, to my memory. I'm pretty sure Ventus made him a wielder, while Riku gave him the Keyblade.}} | |||
{{Asif|sho=I though Ven only made him a dual-wielder and that his heart was naturally as Keyblade-worthy as Riku's.}} | |||
{{neumannz|time=03:52, 11 October 2011 (UTC)|text=Contact with Ven's heart made him a Keyblade wielder; having Ven's heart rest within him makes him a dual-wielder. | |||
"Other" would be highly satisfactory for enemy galleries and such; after all, that symbol that we use for "Somebodies" is the Ultimania's symbol for "Other". If we need an alternative category name, maybe "Unaffiliated character" or just "Unaffiliated" or something similar? After all, what we call "Somebodies" are just characters that don't fall into the major groups of Heartless, Nobodies, Unversed, and Dream Eaters.}} | |||
{{LightRoxas|text=My bad, I got confused between Kairi and Sora. It is my understanding that Ventus is the complete reason he can wield any keyblade, including dual-wielding. <small><small>dang noobishness...</small></small>}} | |||
{{ShardofTruth|time=19:52, 11 October 2011 (UTC)|talk=This is not completely true as explained [[Talk:Bequeathing#Ven is not the reason Sora can use the keyblade.|here]] by [[Special:Contributions/24.7.239.218|24.7.239.218]].}} | |||
{{TNE|time=22:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)|blahtext=So they're picking on us on all that ''and the spoiler policy''? Seriously.......? | |||
I could facepalm at their general direction. | |||
Inasmuch as we have gotten some things out of canon/outside the universe, I've checked Traverse Town and there are quite a number of articles which have a tag slapped on it saying that story has to be in-universe. <big>Can't. they. even. SEE. that. blatantly. massive. tag.</big> Not that I'm trying to defend us - where we are wrong, we are wrong, but where we have actually ''1) made a spoiler policy page so that it'd be visible to others, 2) slapped tags calling users to iron out what's wrong'', really now, there's no cause for them to complain.}} | |||