HRWiki talk:Inclusion guidelines - Revision history

Trey56: /* Character Relationships */ also this one

Trey56 — Sun, 25 May 2008 21:06:53 GMT

Character Relationships: also this one

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:06, 25 May 2008
Line 90:		Line 90:

	For more information, please call our toll-free number or visit [[Talk:The King of Town and The Poopsmith's Relationship]]. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)		For more information, please call our toll-free number or visit [[Talk:The King of Town and The Poopsmith's Relationship]]. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
		+
		+	:See [[Category talk:Character Relationships#Scope]] as well (a similar conversation that was started, but fizzled out). {{User:Trey56/sig}} 21:06, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Brightstar Shiner: /**/Character Relationships

Brightstar Shiner — Sun, 25 May 2008 21:01:06 GMT

: Character Relationships

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:01, 25 May 2008
Line 46:		Line 46:

	I think a point should be added explaining which character variations deserve their own articles. I do understand that [[Zubs and Coach B]] and [[Head Bad and Strong Body]] contribute more to their emails than the 2046 characters do to [[your funeral]], but I do not understand how [[Modestly Hot Homsar]] contributes enough to the plot of [[different town]] to get a page of itself. [[User:Bad Bad Guy\|Bad Bad Guy]] 03:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)		I think a point should be added explaining which character variations deserve their own articles. I do understand that [[Zubs and Coach B]] and [[Head Bad and Strong Body]] contribute more to their emails than the 2046 characters do to [[your funeral]], but I do not understand how [[Modestly Hot Homsar]] contributes enough to the plot of [[different town]] to get a page of itself. [[User:Bad Bad Guy\|Bad Bad Guy]] 03:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Character Relationships ==
		+
		+	There seems to be quite a bit of controversy over which [[Character Relationships]] articles to keep and which ones to delete. Arguments about how varied, conflicting, or prominent a relationship needs to be to have an article have surfaced, but haven't been dealt with. We need to settle on some rules. Here's a conversation [[User:Heimstern Läufer\|Heimstern]] and I had a little bit ago on IRC, slightly edited to remove some stuff that didn't pertain to the topic:
		+
		+	<blockquote>
		+	[4:16pm] Brightstar: Eh... there's something wrong on the wiki that I think needs to be taken care of.<br/>
		+	[4:16pm] Brightstar: It happened a few months ago and just sort of got brought back up again.<br/>
		+	[4:18pm] Brightstar: Character Relationships. When do they merit a page? What do we want and what don't we? What needs to be done to [[HRWiki:Inclusion guidelines]] (something I started, so this concerns me) to fix this problem?<br/>
		+	[4:20pm] Heimstern: Hey, Brightstar. I need to leave in a few, but I do have some thoughts on that.<br/>
		+	[4:20pm] Brightstar: Okay.<br/>
		+	[4:20pm] Heimstern: I think it's hard for us to do this because we don't have a whole lot of precedent.<br/>
		+	[4:20pm] Heimstern: Since there are relatively few character relationship articles.<br/>
		+	[4:21pm] Brightstar: What do you mean by precedent?<br/>
		+	[4:21pm] Heimstern: A track record as to what we want and don't want.<br/>
		+	[4:21pm] Brightstar: Ah.<br/>
		+	[4:22pm] Brightstar: How many relationship articles do we have?<br/>
		+	[4:22pm] Heimstern: I consider inclusion guidelines descriptive rather than prescriptive. That is, they describe what we do, not prescribe what we must do.<br/>
		+	[4:22pm] Heimstern: That's why precedent is important for this kind of thing.<br/>
		+	[4:23pm] Heimstern: Still, we do have a little bit of precedent.<br/>
		+	[4:23pm] Brightstar: If I remember correctly, the Inclusion guidelines were purposefully written that way so as not to seem absolute in determining what pages to delete.<br/>
		+	[4:23pm] Heimstern: For example, the deletion of the Poopsmith and KOT.<br/>
		+	[4:23pm] Heimstern: Yeah, that's right. Like the pirate code, they're guidelines, not rules.<br/>
		+	[4:24pm] Brightstar: What should they be?<br/>
		+	[4:24pm] Heimstern: Good question. It's hard with so little precedent.<br/>
		+	[4:24pm] Heimstern: I can tell you my opinion.<br/>
		+	[4:25pm] Heimstern: These are things that make relationships notable, in my mind:<br/>
		+	[4:25pm] Brightstar: The title was changed from Deletion Policy to Inclusion guidelines because precedent wasn't wanted in that case.<br/>
		+	[4:26pm] Brightstar: We wanted people to consider each article on a case-by-case basis, since the guidelines were for every article.<br/>
		+	[4:27pm] Heimstern: 1. If it's frequently featured in a way that's important to the plot. Example, HR and Marzi, HR and SB, SB and The Cheat, Bubs and Coach Z maybe. This is the best kind of relationship article.<br/>
		+	[4:27pm] Heimstern: 2. More than one-sided is a plus. That was what people didn't like about Poopsmith and KOT. Was pretty one-sided.<br/>
		+	[4:28pm] Heimstern: Those are the main things I've taken into account.<br/>
		+	[4:29pm] Brightstar: But this is specific, so we can have precedent. Maybe a seperate section on Inclusion guidelines once we work it out. We'll want consensus on this one, not just a Band-Aid one or two user thing that everyone will be happy with on the first try.<br/>
		+	[4:29pm] Heimstern: But what the community thinks, I don't know.<br/>
		+	[4:30pm] Heimstern: You could bring it up on the talk for inclusion guidelines, if you think it's important.<br/>
		+	[4:30pm] Heimstern: It may already be there.<br/>
		+	[4:30pm] Heimstern: But you could revive it (you like doing that, after all! :) )<br/>
		+	[4:31pm] Brightstar: Like I said, we should let the community decide. This is more abstract than second-person and affects more future edits than Favicon. And I think someone brought it up elsewhere, but the discussion died out.<br/>
		+	[4:32pm] Brightstar: Oh, reviving stuff is my speciality. I guess people listen to me, so it might be a good idea for me to add a new comment somewhere.<br/>
		+	[4:35pm] Brightstar: I'll go to Inclusion guidelines. That's the page that'll be edited once everything's decided.<br/>
		+	[4:36pm] Heimstern: Yes, I think it's the right place.<br/>
		+	</blockquote>
		+
		+	For more information, please call our toll-free number or visit [[Talk:The King of Town and The Poopsmith's Relationship]]. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 21:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Bad Bad Guy: /**/Character Variations

Bad Bad Guy — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 03:10:20 GMT

: Character Variations

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:10, 13 August 2007
Line 42:		Line 42:
	::I don't know; ''should'' this page be deleted? I just assumed we would nix it after I finished the page. We can keep this page and link to the original discussion at Da Basement and this discussion here at HrWiki:Deletion Policy's talk page. I guess it's not useful to delete this subpage. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)		::I don't know; ''should'' this page be deleted? I just assumed we would nix it after I finished the page. We can keep this page and link to the original discussion at Da Basement and this discussion here at HrWiki:Deletion Policy's talk page. I guess it's not useful to delete this subpage. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
	:::After looking over the Deletion Policy page, I think we should keep the "On Deleting Pages" part and delete the rest. In '''twenty minutes''' I will make the big move and try to connect the talk pages in the process (even though Deletion Policy's talk page is empty). -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 22:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)		:::After looking over the Deletion Policy page, I think we should keep the "On Deleting Pages" part and delete the rest. In '''twenty minutes''' I will make the big move and try to connect the talk pages in the process (even though Deletion Policy's talk page is empty). -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 22:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Character Variations ==
		+
		+	I think a point should be added explaining which character variations deserve their own articles. I do understand that [[Zubs and Coach B]] and [[Head Bad and Strong Body]] contribute more to their emails than the 2046 characters do to [[your funeral]], but I do not understand how [[Modestly Hot Homsar]] contributes enough to the plot of [[different town]] to get a page of itself. [[User:Bad Bad Guy\|Bad Bad Guy]] 03:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

It's dot com: User talk:Brightstar Shiner/Deletion Guidelines moved to HRWiki talk:Inclusion guidelines: move into project space

It's dot com — Sun, 15 Apr 2007 04:59:59 GMT

User talk:Brightstar Shiner/Deletion Guidelines moved to HRWiki talk:Inclusion guidelines: move into project space

← Older revision

Revision as of 04:59, 15 April 2007

Brightstar Shiner: I'll make the big move in twenty minutes.

Brightstar Shiner — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 22:10:02 GMT

I'll make the big move in twenty minutes.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:10, 30 January 2007
Line 41:		Line 41:
	:These discussions, since they are part of the page should also be moved before deleting this page (should it even be deleted?) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 18:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)		:These discussions, since they are part of the page should also be moved before deleting this page (should it even be deleted?) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 18:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
	::I don't know; ''should'' this page be deleted? I just assumed we would nix it after I finished the page. We can keep this page and link to the original discussion at Da Basement and this discussion here at HrWiki:Deletion Policy's talk page. I guess it's not useful to delete this subpage. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)		::I don't know; ''should'' this page be deleted? I just assumed we would nix it after I finished the page. We can keep this page and link to the original discussion at Da Basement and this discussion here at HrWiki:Deletion Policy's talk page. I guess it's not useful to delete this subpage. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
		+	:::After looking over the Deletion Policy page, I think we should keep the "On Deleting Pages" part and delete the rest. In '''twenty minutes''' I will make the big move and try to connect the talk pages in the process (even though Deletion Policy's talk page is empty). -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 22:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Brightstar Shiner: on the other hand...

Brightstar Shiner — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 18:39:23 GMT

on the other hand...

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:39, 30 January 2007
Line 40:		Line 40:
	Okay, right now I'm ready to make this a real page. What I'll do is copy the info here, delete the info [[HrWiki:Deletion Policy\|there]], paste the info here into that page, and have a sysop delete this page. Before I do, is there anything on the HrWiki: Deletion Policy article that we want to keep? I understand that not many users are around this time of day (and the only reason I'm here before 3:45 is that school was cancelled), so once again, I won't do it until you guys give me the OK. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)		Okay, right now I'm ready to make this a real page. What I'll do is copy the info here, delete the info [[HrWiki:Deletion Policy\|there]], paste the info here into that page, and have a sysop delete this page. Before I do, is there anything on the HrWiki: Deletion Policy article that we want to keep? I understand that not many users are around this time of day (and the only reason I'm here before 3:45 is that school was cancelled), so once again, I won't do it until you guys give me the OK. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
	:These discussions, since they are part of the page should also be moved before deleting this page (should it even be deleted?) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 18:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)		:These discussions, since they are part of the page should also be moved before deleting this page (should it even be deleted?) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 18:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
		+	::I don't know; ''should'' this page be deleted? I just assumed we would nix it after I finished the page. We can keep this page and link to the original discussion at Da Basement and this discussion here at HrWiki:Deletion Policy's talk page. I guess it's not useful to delete this subpage. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Stux: /* Anything Else? */ note

Stux — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 18:29:18 GMT

Anything Else?: note

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:29, 30 January 2007
Line 39:		Line 39:
	:::::::::There's also the issue of things that would be considered "bad examples" should be deleted and thus not available as examples at all. - {{User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C/Sig}} 01:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)		:::::::::There's also the issue of things that would be considered "bad examples" should be deleted and thus not available as examples at all. - {{User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C/Sig}} 01:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
	Okay, right now I'm ready to make this a real page. What I'll do is copy the info here, delete the info [[HrWiki:Deletion Policy\|there]], paste the info here into that page, and have a sysop delete this page. Before I do, is there anything on the HrWiki: Deletion Policy article that we want to keep? I understand that not many users are around this time of day (and the only reason I'm here before 3:45 is that school was cancelled), so once again, I won't do it until you guys give me the OK. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)		Okay, right now I'm ready to make this a real page. What I'll do is copy the info here, delete the info [[HrWiki:Deletion Policy\|there]], paste the info here into that page, and have a sysop delete this page. Before I do, is there anything on the HrWiki: Deletion Policy article that we want to keep? I understand that not many users are around this time of day (and the only reason I'm here before 3:45 is that school was cancelled), so once again, I won't do it until you guys give me the OK. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
		+	:These discussions, since they are part of the page should also be moved before deleting this page (should it even be deleted?) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 18:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Brightstar Shiner: last words before the big move (don't worry, I won't do it yet)

Brightstar Shiner — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 18:02:49 GMT

last words before the big move (don't worry, I won't do it yet)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:02, 30 January 2007
Line 38:		Line 38:
	::::::::Sorry, but either we do examples for all of them or for none of them. As ISTC said about seven posts ago, we should be consistent and the one bad example is pretty out of place. Also for the reasons I said earlier. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 01:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)		::::::::Sorry, but either we do examples for all of them or for none of them. As ISTC said about seven posts ago, we should be consistent and the one bad example is pretty out of place. Also for the reasons I said earlier. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 01:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::::There's also the issue of things that would be considered "bad examples" should be deleted and thus not available as examples at all. - {{User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C/Sig}} 01:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)		:::::::::There's also the issue of things that would be considered "bad examples" should be deleted and thus not available as examples at all. - {{User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C/Sig}} 01:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
		+	Okay, right now I'm ready to make this a real page. What I'll do is copy the info here, delete the info [[HrWiki:Deletion Policy\|there]], paste the info here into that page, and have a sysop delete this page. Before I do, is there anything on the HrWiki: Deletion Policy article that we want to keep? I understand that not many users are around this time of day (and the only reason I'm here before 3:45 is that school was cancelled), so once again, I won't do it until you guys give me the OK. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 18:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ilko Skevüld's Teh C: just tagging on to BSS's already good reply

Ilko Skevüld's Teh C — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 01:42:43 GMT

just tagging on to BSS's already good reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:42, 29 January 2007
Line 37:		Line 37:
	:::::::Oh! no, no, no. I didn't mean a bad example for ''every'' item, I meant a bad example for that one item (#7). I wasn't clear enough about that little issue. ;) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 20:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)		:::::::Oh! no, no, no. I didn't mean a bad example for ''every'' item, I meant a bad example for that one item (#7). I wasn't clear enough about that little issue. ;) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 20:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
	::::::::Sorry, but either we do examples for all of them or for none of them. As ISTC said about seven posts ago, we should be consistent and the one bad example is pretty out of place. Also for the reasons I said earlier. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 01:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)		::::::::Sorry, but either we do examples for all of them or for none of them. As ISTC said about seven posts ago, we should be consistent and the one bad example is pretty out of place. Also for the reasons I said earlier. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 01:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
		+	:::::::::There's also the issue of things that would be considered "bad examples" should be deleted and thus not available as examples at all. - {{User:Ilko Skevüld's Teh C/Sig}} 01:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Brightstar Shiner: still no

Brightstar Shiner — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 01:25:38 GMT

still no

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:25, 29 January 2007
Line 36:		Line 36:
	::::::I...''think'' I followed that. What you're ''trying'' to say is that we should have an example of what not to do on each guideline. Well, I tried that, and I think it would make the page more confusing (no pun intended) if there were too many examples. Also, people might disagree about a certain page's bad-example-ittude and have a big ol' argument, which is not what we want. If it's okay with you, I'll just keep the page as is. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 19:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)		::::::I...''think'' I followed that. What you're ''trying'' to say is that we should have an example of what not to do on each guideline. Well, I tried that, and I think it would make the page more confusing (no pun intended) if there were too many examples. Also, people might disagree about a certain page's bad-example-ittude and have a big ol' argument, which is not what we want. If it's okay with you, I'll just keep the page as is. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 19:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::Oh! no, no, no. I didn't mean a bad example for ''every'' item, I meant a bad example for that one item (#7). I wasn't clear enough about that little issue. ;) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 20:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)		:::::::Oh! no, no, no. I didn't mean a bad example for ''every'' item, I meant a bad example for that one item (#7). I wasn't clear enough about that little issue. ;) --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 20:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
		+	::::::::Sorry, but either we do examples for all of them or for none of them. As ISTC said about seven posts ago, we should be consistent and the one bad example is pretty out of place. Also for the reasons I said earlier. -{{User:Brightstar Shiner/sig}} 01:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)