More actions
Proposed deletion[[edit source]]
Alright, let's start this off, shall we. Hello, I am here as directed by one of your admins on Twitter with the intent of asking for this page to be removed from the wiki entirely. Now I know you have all your policies about "if it's in the franchise, we will document it" and I get it, it's somewhat commendable and you wanna have that big page count. I'm admin for another wiki myself and I know that having big page numbers is impressive and fun, so I get it, I really do. But as I will highlight, this page ultimately has no reason to exist and I guarantee you that no one will miss it once it is gone and no one will think any less of you for removing it.
At first, we have to ask ourselves; "Why indeed does this page exist? Why is it not enough to just attach a link to the Wikipedia page of the same topic?" Because I'll tell you, no one is going on TARDIS Wiki to read about sex or about the penis or vagina or whatnot - that's what Wikipedia and biology books are for - they're here to read about Doctor Who.
And it is also important to note the actual damage that pages such as this does to the reputation of the Wiki. I'm sorry to tell you and really, it must be really hard to miss but pages like this only serve more ammo for people to mock this Wiki; the more these pages remain, the more the Wiki's reputation falls, further and further. TARDIS Wiki holds some degree of power when it comes to Doctor Who documentation and it is quite awe-inspiring - but we cannot lie to ourselves and pretend like it's not because it's one of the oldest services to exist and people stick around out of loyalty. That doesn't mean, however, that this will always stick and you must ask yourself, do you want to risk it? Do you want all this work to become a footnote? You may find this laughable, after all, where else would people go? Well that may be true for now, but with the continued existence of these pages, and the continued damaged reputation, you can't say it'll remain forever.
I also have a significant number of other points which I shall now bullet-point out for you, a collection of data and reasonings you may find helpful in your decision to remove this page or not.
- Pages such as this simply do not belong on a Doctor Who Fan Wiki, it only serves as something to mock and if this were another fandom wiki, such as Wookieepedia - which do indeed have pages like this - I would be making the same point, however I find TARDIS Wiki admins easier to communicate to and quickly to respond.
- The sheer offensive nature of it all; many people find these pages to be plain offensive - no one wants to go on TARDIS Wiki and see slurs targeted towards their sexuality or gender identity. I'm sure you don't believe in these slurs but documenting them in a place they don't need to be is harmful.
- People find the pages based around specific body parts to be creepy, uncomfortable and objectifying. Is this something you want the wiki to be known for?
- No fandom wiki needs a page devoted to sexual characteristics unless the wiki is about an adult orientated work. If you feel the need to include this info, it should be on the relevant story’s page.
- It can make the Wiki just seem immature for immaculately documenting these whilst leaving other parts much more sparse.
Hopefully you can see where I am coming from here and you will join me in my journey to getting these unnecessary pages deleted. Thank you NatalieRobyn812 ☎
I agree with all your points. The existence of these pages really baffles me. I get that the policy allows them to exist, but just because a page can exist doesn’t inherently mean it should. SherlockTheII ☎ 15:34, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- First off, let's not have the same exact conversation on numerous talk pages. It's counter-productive to the whole case and produces numerous similar conversations. I've been eagerly awaiting the return of the forums so that we could have this exact conversation. Let's face it, this Wiki needs to find the line between an "encyclopaedia" and a "fan wiki". Personally, I understand why these pages are here but I don't see why people flock to the Tardis Wiki to read these articles. A while back, I said the exact same thing with certain pages being offensive and it became clear to me that most editors didn't completely understand what the terminology meant. Understandably, the response was that "we just write what we read/see" as per protocol. But pages such as "poof", while being a thing in the real world, are at their core not appropriate. I have no problem with "slur", but splitting them into individual pages are, in my personal opinion, too far and not appropriate.
- As I say, please keep this debate/conversation to this one page to avoid the same debate happening on every page you've raised this issue. It just isn't productive for the debate. Also, this is something we'd raise at the forums but I don't know when exactly they're returning. As you say, if these pages disappeared tomorrow, no-one would miss them. They're not necessary, in my personal opinion. But that's all it is: an opinion. I suggest admins get together with the wider community (and by community, I'm talking about outside of the wiki), and think about a potential policy change regarding these kinds of pages. TheFartyDoctor Talk 15:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- Please let's keep these discussions in one place. Talk:Fetish will do. @Natalie, copypasting the same message on a dozen pages really isn't much use here… Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 17:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Necessary?[[edit source]]
Though I'd intended when we had the slurs discussion before to leave this until a further discussion, I think it worth taking a crack at it right now given that another person who would fit the term of LGBTQ+ whom happens to be a long-standing member of the Wiki has indicated their strong disapproval of this page as well. All of these points noted on this page seem to be rather indicative of the homophobic nature of the usage - so I would recommend moving them to the homophobia page, and focusing the points as part of the homophobic mentality of the individuals using them. JDPManjoume ☎ 23:24, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
yeah i think its ok for it to be removed, not really a needed article anyway -864mc (dont have an account)