Forum:When can we create "The Impossible Astronaut" page?: Difference between revisions

{{Forumheader|Panopticon}}

::Okay, there's not an exact date there as to when the article can be '''created by an admin'''.  That date doesn't need any specificity because the article is created [[tardis:protection policy#Locked articles|as a locked article]].  But there ''is'' an exact date as to when it can be opened to editing.  That doesn't happen until the credits roll on the first broadcast wherever in the world has the debut.  In other words, ''[[The Impossible Astronaut]]'' will be open to editing at approximately 8pm British Summer Time, 23 April 2011. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''18:49:46 Mon&nbsp;'''11 Apr 2011&nbsp;</span>

::Thus it ''would'' be possible for us to have this "create-but-lock-one-or-two-weeks-ahead-of-transmission" thing that you guys are talking about by autumn, ''if and only if'' people agree to change '''[[Tardis:disambiguation policy|disambiguation policy]]''' in the manner I've described above.  But for right now, I'd argue for not starting articles prior to the date of first transmission.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''15:12:49 Tue&nbsp;'''12 Apr 2011&nbsp;</span>  

::::Wiki-wide lock?  If by that you mean, Ghastly, that the wiki would be completely locked to editing but by registered users, yes, this can indeed be made a "private" wiki.  But it ain't happening.  In the words of the guard in ''[[Tooth and Claw]]'' "you will dismiss all further thoughts of it".  I find in these forum discussions that people are often down on IP users, but trust me, they make some ''fabulous'' contributions.  We don't need to lockdown ''the whole damn wiki''; it's more than enough to prevent creation of the article until the appropriate time.  Furthermore, I kind of disagree with protecting "main" pages like [[Eleventh Doctor]], [[Dalek]], etc. from editing.  From moving, yes, but not from editing.  I'm not sure, but I think on balance we're preventing some ''good'' edits to happen.  Not everyone ''wants'' to create an account, and I think we need to consider the fact that there are many times where users will legitimately want to IP edit, such as when using a ''public'' computer.  Sure, anonymity is the cloak of troublemakers, but IP users aren't the antichrist. So this wiki will go on lockdown precisely when my body goes cold.

::::Bringing the discussion back to the original question, I'd like a little feedback, if you guys would, on this notion of converting all story titles to automatically disambiguated ones.  Again, if we make all TV stories end in (TV story), all novels end in (novel), all short stories end in (short story), all audio stories end in (audio story) — and the like — then we ''could'', in my view, create new story pages, say, a week prior to broadcast without too much fear that it would be the wrong name.  And we'd also get an honestly ''huge'' boost in the ease with which the entire database could be maintained.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''13:01:06 Sat&nbsp;'''16 Apr 2011&nbsp;</span>

::Whatever happens, though, I would advocate making our changes in the gap between the two halves of the series, rather than trying to rush it through here at the last minute.  Remember, this is our first real test of the policy as it stands now.  It was made in response to what happened last year, and so has really only covered SJA series 4 and the Christmas special.  Maybe we can learn something by letting it stay in place ''as is'' throughout this first part of the series.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''21:10:46 Sat&nbsp;'''16 Apr 2011&nbsp;</span>

:Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant by "it" and "the page".  Anyway, I've explained the relationship between disambig policy and starting a page prematurely twice in the thread already.  The fullest explanation is in my second post in the thread.  I think the reason you might be having a problem with understanding the relationship is because you don't understand why this ban on creating articles was implemented in the first place.  It wasn't really about preventing rumours and bad information on the story page, although that was certainly a ''part'' of the discussion.  It was because there were two instances last series where we had to go back and change dozens of links because '''we got the ''name of an episode'' wrong'''.  We can't really help it if the BBC changes the name of an episode at the last minute, but that doesn't happen that often. ''The Vampries of Venice'' is a fairly unique case.  What we ''can'' prevent is when we create an episode title unaware that the title actually names a thing in the DWU.  '''Every single BBC Wales series has at least one episode with a title that describes something in the DWU.''' If we change disambig policy so that ''all'' TV stories are disambiguated [[story name (TV story)]], then we'll never have a case like ''The Pandorica Opens'' (or ''Midnight'' or ''Utopia'' or ''New Earth'' or ''Rose'') again.  And that's what really concerns me about starting a page too early.  We can easily edit a page so that its rumors and errors are spirited away.  What's harder is if we have to find all the little links that have been made prior to the episode broadcast, or, as in the case of TPO, prior to the point when someone ''realises'' the title describes something in the DWU.  There were literally ''dozens'' of links that needed to be changed once we realised that ''The Pandorica Opens'' was a painting.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''22:53:53 Sat&nbsp;'''16 Apr 2011&nbsp;</span>

:::Not quite sure who addressed me directly above (Skittles, maybe?) but, yeah, my base position is exactly as you've outlined.  '''Unless we change disambig policy to require disambiguation like [[Episode (TV story)]]''', then I believe the best solution is to not create until after the credits roll on the global premiere of the episode.  However, that doesn't seem to be what the majority of users want.  They want ''some'' kind of article a bit before.  Therefore, in the spirit of compromise, I can agree with the starting of a fully protected article a week or so before broadcast, '''as long as it's named in the format, [[Episode (TV story)]].'''  And I'll personally do the work to make ''every'' story article on the wiki fit that nomenclature.  As for Skittles' comments that changing links to mistaken story titles "isn't so bad", well, you've got a different idea of how you want to spend your time editing this wiki.  The ''last'' thing I want to do is to edit bad links, as I did last series.  ''Total''. ''Waste''. ''Of''.  ''Time''.  As was the case with ''The Pandorica Opens'', it wasn't a one-time fix.  It's not like when you catch it and change all the ''existing'' links that editors suddenly get what's going on.  They ''continue'' to make improper links, because maybe they haven't cottoned on to the fact that the title requires disambiguation.  Even [[user:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] didn't immediately see that ''The Pandorica Opens'' was the name of the painting.  (Heck, I still have a hard time remembering Paradise Towers is the actual name of a building, rather than a bit of authorial irony.)  And the sheer number of novel/comic/short story/audio names I'm finding that ''require'' changing over — even though the articles have been created ''for years'' — is fairly surprising. The best solution for both this problem, and just wiki maintenance in general, is to require that the media name be appended to ''every'' story.  That way, bad links simply won't happen — unless an editor is totally unobservant and has the autosuggest feature turned off.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''12:29:38 Mon&nbsp;'''18 Apr 2011&nbsp;</span>