Trusted
34,029
edits
Forum:Validating non-fiction: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
no edit summary
PintlessMan (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Forumheader|The Panopticon}} Although this wiki's "in-universe" role-play gimmick is probably too entrenched ever to be removed, I'm glad that the community has finally made some strides towards ameliorating some of its more encyclopedically damaging effects, most notably the recent decisions to validate several types of material which the wiki previously labelled "non-canon". Of the remaining problems in this area, one stands out to me because it's both particularly...") Tag: 2017 source edit |
OttselSpy25 (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Forumheader|The Panopticon}} | {{Forumheader|The Panopticon}} | ||
== Opening post == | |||
Although this wiki's "in-universe" role-play gimmick is probably too entrenched ever to be removed, I'm glad that the community has finally made some strides towards ameliorating some of its more encyclopedically damaging effects, most notably the recent decisions to validate several types of material which the wiki previously labelled "non-canon". | Although this wiki's "in-universe" role-play gimmick is probably too entrenched ever to be removed, I'm glad that the community has finally made some strides towards ameliorating some of its more encyclopedically damaging effects, most notably the recent decisions to validate several types of material which the wiki previously labelled "non-canon". | ||
| Line 7: | Line 8: | ||
Here is my humble suggestion: we validate non-fiction. That is, when a rights-holder conveys a fact about the fictional world via some formal non-fiction publication, it should be treated with the same weight as any other official material. We've already validated non-narrative fiction; non-fiction is just the natural next step, and there's a plethora of forgotten information out there waiting to enrich the wiki. [[User:PintlessMan|PintlessMan]] [[User talk:PintlessMan|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC) | Here is my humble suggestion: we validate non-fiction. That is, when a rights-holder conveys a fact about the fictional world via some formal non-fiction publication, it should be treated with the same weight as any other official material. We've already validated non-narrative fiction; non-fiction is just the natural next step, and there's a plethora of forgotten information out there waiting to enrich the wiki. [[User:PintlessMan|PintlessMan]] [[User talk:PintlessMan|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC) | ||
== Discussion == | |||
Strongly disagree with everything here. We have [[Template:Conjecture]] for a reason - to allow pages to bear their "production" names while clarifying that these names have not been confirmed in-universe. | |||
Furthermore, this forum itself is arguing for the validation of non-fiction information while the four rules of [[T:VS]] clearly state that Rule 1 is "only fiction counts." This exists, explicitly, to disqualify non-fiction. | |||
Before we go any further, I'd like to ask that we don't get into the ''Curse of Fatal Death'' naming debate here. But I think it could very well be argued that the "production titles" are not necessarily helpful to our readers or very thoroughly in-universe. The distinction between "The Handsome Doctor" and "The Very Handsome Doctor" is tedious at best. I think it's similar to how during the production of ''Masterful'' Big Finish officially called the 1996 Master "The Movie Master" but went out of their way not to credit him this way. Sure, naming the page [[Movie Master]] would mean there's no longer a story DAB - but what we all need to realize is that ''sometimes a DAB is good''. Story DABs are not the natural evil of the website which need to be purged, they are more than often the right choice for the situation. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]][[User Talk:OttselSpy25|🤙☎️]] 15:01, 9 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
