emailconfirmed, Administrators
15,041
edits
No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
NateBumber (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 76: | Line 76: | ||
:::Personally, I find Nate's outlined proposal fairly clear, but if others struggle to understand perhaps the wording could be cleared up a little or something? idk. [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|📢]] 20:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC) | :::Personally, I find Nate's outlined proposal fairly clear, but if others struggle to understand perhaps the wording could be cleared up a little or something? idk. [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|📢]] 20:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC) | ||
: Any further movement/refinement on this? [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 10:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
::Let it be said I've been meaning to write a reply to this when I can find the time, so this serves as a good reminder… [[User:Chubby Potato|Chubby Potato]] [[User talk:Chubby Potato|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
::Scrooge, in your view, is further movement or refinement necessary? The consensus (save one self-acknowledged outlier) seems to be that the proposal is clear enough to be actionable. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 14:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::I don't know if it's ''necessary'', but I do think there's ways the wording could be tightened/improved yet; I think Danochy was getting at something elegant with the "non-originality" talk, for example, rather than some what woolier way your current draft speaks of "for example, 'Victoria (Imperial Moon)' would imply Christopher Bullis invented her", which I think is something of an extreme example. Betruth, both the Victoria and Lavinia example seem like they could be tightened into a clearer standard than just "unclear or actively misleading": in both cases the logic seems to be that story dab-terms should if possible be avoided for ''characters whose debut is not the place the reader is expected to first encounter the idea of this character's existence'', or something of the kind (I'm sure it can be worded less clunkily). [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 14:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
::::That's a great point. I'm also reminded of the "[[Hermit (The Time Monster)]]" discussion on [[Talk:Ansillon]], as well as example of [[Melody Pond (Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut)]], which [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] described (accurately, in my opinion) as an "awful unintuitive name"… Cases which could be addressed by a more carefully-worded proposal here. I'll pitch a more concrete wording here shortly. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 18:27, 25 September 2023 (UTC) |