Line 18: Line 18:
**The '''ONLY''' purpose of the rules is to provide a way to resolve arguments. All alternative proposals ''MUST'' accomplish this.
**The '''ONLY''' purpose of the rules is to provide a way to resolve arguments. All alternative proposals ''MUST'' accomplish this.
[[Talk:Zoids Wiki Rules/Archive 2]]
[[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 01:11, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
==New Proposal: Precedance/Priority==
The above link contains some discussion about naming conventions and the like. No clear consensus was reached, as such the rules were not amended.
NOTE: This topic branches off of Sylvan's topic (the one before this one). Please continue to adhere to the rule of putting lines at the beggining and end of your edits in order to avoid confusion between editors and readers alike, and as always, do not forget to sign your posts with either the sig button avaliable at the editing menu or the input of four tildes (four ~). Also, keep in mind that this specific topic mostly refers to the model kit Zoids pages with several different zoids releases, with that Zoid having atleast more than 1 name to choose from as the title of it's article. A topic for a rule for other types of pages, like character pages, will be established afterwords when this discussion reaches some form of general agreement or disagreement. Said discussion will be based on the outcome of this topic to a certain degree.
'''The following in italics is quoted from the last topic.'''
''Leon35(me): Article titles should be changed only if a debate is brought up regarding the rules on that page's talk page and when the discussion favors a name chnage''
:''Slax01: True.''
''Leon35(me): With regards to model kits only, I think it would be a good idea to establish a guideline of sorts for naming and which names take precedence over others. ''
:''Slax01: If you want to do this you'd have to show me the result of your proposal (in full) so that I know how it would work. This includes characters (ie: will we have separate rules for characters vs models- do characters who appear on models use their anime names?) Also, so I know how it treats specific cases (eg: Do we use Furher over fury? etc.)"''
As requested, I will explain my proposition as clearly as possible.
There has been much discusion over the rules, the most contraversy being over the naming of articles. If you have been following the discussion and can make out the extreme clutter of words in the several different discussions above (Azimuth must teach me how to archive things, if he ever comes back on that is) then you realize at this point that the argument has settled down to deciding between 2 types of rules; popularity and relevance. However, niether idea is perfect and in the end, both ideas would end up causing some contraversy on article talk pages and many article page names would still be inconsistant, just as they are now. However, in this new proposal, I would like to present a comprimise between the 2 ideas that would only benifit the wiki. I am calling it <u>Precedance</u> or <u>Priority</u> for the time being.
This new rule would replace the current popularity rule in place. It would eliminate the relevance idea as well. However, both the popularity and relevance clause's influence this new proposal I am making.
The original popularity rule is that whichever name is most "popular" is the name of that article. This rule also has several sub rules, for example, the use of English names over any other name avaliable (ex Garius vs Tyrannazoid) However, as stated in the above discussions, many flaws are present with this idea and many pages would have exceptions based on that article's situation. Inconsistancies would develop based on how that Zoid was released. For example, Zoid A released in the OJR, OER and NAR takes on the NAR name but Zoid B released in the OJR and OER only takes on the OER name. The relevance idea is the same way in that it has flaws similar to this. Combining the two is the key.
Rather than go around and pick which name out of a Zoid article with 2 or more names for every single article, we should set a standard. Basicly, which Zoid releases take precedance over others. The community would decide which Zoid releases take precedance over other Zoid releases (forgive me for using the title in the definition several times)
Here is another example; Zoid C was released in the 1,2,3,4,5 releases and Zoid D was released in the 2,3,4,5 zoid releases. In this example, Zoids Release 1 has the highest priority as decided by the community, and 5 has the least. (I am using numbers in order to convey my idea better and avoid specifics, and new letters in order to avoid confusion with past examples) In a perfect world, all zoids articles would be named after Release 1, like Zoid C, as it has the highest priority, but not all Zoids were a part of Release 1, like Zoid D. When this happens, the Zoids article name will be whatever release has the next highest priority. In this case, since the name from Zoids Release 1 cannot be used with Zoid D, as it wasn't in Zoids Release 1 and thus doesn't have a name for it, Zoid D's article will take the name of Zoids Release 2, which in this example has the next highest priority.
Now for the tricky part; deciding which zoids releases take precedance or priority over others. Now unless this proposal is even agreed upon, which i am not saying it will, we will save this for later. I will say that the decesion making would be decided based on the popularity and relevance ideas (hence why this is a comprimise) However, unlike the 2 original ideas, they will be altered in order to address each release as a whole, rather than each individual zoid.
No idea is perfect, and with any proposal like this, there are bound to be exceptions regardless of what any of us say or do. I will say right off the bat that inapropriete names such as "Guysack" or "Wardick" will never be used outside of redirects for pages. If we even get around to making this idea a reality, then part of the job will be to ensure that measures will be taken to allow us to avoid those names as much as possible. We are also bound to hit other types if roud bumps along the way, but will handel them one at a time, if/when the time comes to address them.
That is another thing, redirects. I can assure you all that no matter what a page is called, all of that pages alterante names will be mentioned somewhere throughout the article and/or as redirects for that page. After all, a wiki must hold any and all information relevant to its topic.
Finnaly, just remember that now matter what rules are put in place, or what proposals are made, '''a page name may only be changed if a thourough discussion is made on that pages's talk page, and there is signifigant evidence to show that the change adheres to the current version of the Zoids Wikia rules and that the community agrees and is in favor of that change.'''
I gratefuly welcome any and all questions, comments, or ideas, opinions, etc. Please, respond away!
[[User:Leon35|Leon35]] 01:35, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
:Although I'm a little busier outside of summer, I'm around if you need me. Honestly I haven't been able to keep up with this rather extended conversation / argument / debate / whatever. (You're all a little too long winded just to breeze through all of this)
:Anyway, about your proposal. It's a good idea if you're looking for a hard line to draw for naming pages. Personally, however, I think it is too much red tape. I believe that the most common prevalent name within the English-speaking Zoids community should take precedence. The correct name shouldn't be too hard to identify... I think.
:About the redirects, I think I took some time a while ago and created redirects for all the different names for every Zoid given on the list, so we shouldn't have to worry about creating any of those.
:--[[User:Azimuth727|Azimuth727]] 01:24, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
<hr />
Hello Azimuth. It's been a while. What's up?
I joined the conversation half way through myself (i was away for a bit) It was/is a hard thing to keep up with for sure
About your opinion about the proposal, I would have liked it that way originaly, but after the discussion that occured here, it is clear that several members would like a set rule, and I will do what will benift the wiki and the zoid community.
I remember all the redirects you made. I cannot thank you enough for that =)
I have a favor to ask you; can you re-teach me how to archive talk pages? I would like to get rid off most of this clutter without deleting it. Much appreciated[[User:Leon35|Leon35]] 04:05, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
''"Now for the tricky part; deciding which zoids releases take precedance or priority over others.
Now unless this proposal is even agreed upon, which i am not saying it will, we will save this for later.''"
:As there is no proposal of yet (ie, no-one has said ''which'' release should be given priority), the questions I raised in my last post remain. I have archived the page.
[[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 01:11, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
I am currently drafting what a possible line up should be. In addition, there will be set rules for each release, which I am also currently drafting. Here is 1 example i have been able to come up with.
If the a zoid has both an NAR and NJR release and the names differ, NAR will take priority over NJR if the name is a direct english translation, romanisation, or logical change from the NJR name, for example Berserk Furher to Berserk Fury, Gunbluster to Gunblaster, Spinosapper to Spinosnapper. (etc) The NJR would take priority if the NAR name adds an unnecisary addition to the name, for example Iguan would be used over Iguanasaur, Gordos would be used over Gordosaur. If the NJR name can be considered innapropriete by the comminity, then the NAR name will be dominant. For examole, Guysack to Gusak, and Wardick to Warshark.
This is only scraping the surface. Given some time, and I will be able to work on this more, and then post the full proposal. Until then, i am open to questions, comments, concerns, ideas, opinions, and I would like to see other members post thier own drafts for this new proposal, if they so wish.
[[User:Leon35|Leon35]] 10:53, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:46, 26 February 2019


The main rules page has been locked. As they impact every contributor, rules are not something that should be changed regularly, regardless of how small the changes may be. Changes to the rules will only be made after extensive discussion. Feel free to discuss the rules on this talk page, all members are welcome to voice their opinions on either the existing rules, or propose alternative rules. Sylvanelite 13:15, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

Archive and summary

Talk:Zoids Wiki Rules/Archive 1

The above link contains discussion prior to the time of this post. Some noteworthy points are:

  • Reiteration that:
    • The naming rule only applies to the title of a page, not the content, and only when conflicts arise;
    • The naming rule applies to ALL pages, not just models alone, characters alone, Zoids alone, etc;
    • Popularity is to be cited by evidence of consumption (for instance, sales figures, number of re-runs, etc), and should not be biased to any particular media (specifically, internet forums are a very poor gauge of popularity); and,
    • All specific examples should be brought up on their talk page, not here.
  • Clarification that:
    • Gauges of "amount of information" or "relevance" are usually very hard to quantify and are hence subjective;
    • Many pages have not been kept up-to-date. This is not because of exemptions in the rules, but rather simple lack of manpower;
    • The rules may be vague at times. This is intentional, to allow flexibility;
    • The wikia is an English wikia. It should be inherently targeted toward English audiences, even when the original content is targeted at Japanese audiences; and
    • The ONLY purpose of the rules is to provide a way to resolve arguments. All alternative proposals MUST accomplish this.

Talk:Zoids Wiki Rules/Archive 2

The above link contains some discussion about naming conventions and the like. No clear consensus was reached, as such the rules were not amended.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.