Forum:Discussion for new articles of kh3

Forums: Index > The World that Never was > Discussion for new articles of kh3

KrytenKoro - And when you see me standing there, you'll know you've got a friend with a rock, I mean a big-ass rock. TALK - This one strongly advocates requiring all changes to KH3 articles not made by 2+ years editors be discussed on talk page first, because we are seeing rampant violations of the manual of style, like listing "personality" sections for characters who don't talk within the actual games, or using a name throughout a synopsis section that the game pointedly refuses to use for that character. I appreciate that people are very excited about the new game, but it's ballooning into a massive mess that's going to be a nightmare to clean up afterward, and unfortunately most of the people with the experience to write articles correctly, or review the recent changes, are either busy playing the game, or avoiding spoilers until after they finish the game.

Discussion

Neumannz — Looks like I'm gonna have to jump...! TALK — I work alone! Except when I work with Xion...which is all the time. — 14:15, 1 February 2019 (UTC)   I realize I'm coming off of a long period of inactivity, but I would agree with this suggestion. If there's a pattern of MoS issues, then we really should be discussing edits and additions before putting them on pages.

NinjaSheik - All of this might have started with a lie...But I'm really am glad that I could meet you... TALK - One day, the light-it will be ours, and it will bring us together. Til then, I'll be in your heart... I agree with this suggestion. I share everyone's sentiments about the game's release and the excitement it brings to all the fans, but for the last few days, the staff has been busting their butts off just trying to keep up with all the new users and influx of edits, many of which violates our MoS. Many edits are done by users who aren't even bothering to follow the MoS, despite having edited on the KHWiki the past. New users are just coming onto the wiki are just skipping ahead and inserting content about the ending, not checking the storyline and relying on assumptions, and proof-reading before publishing. All of this causing too much chaos on the KHWiki, with so many users prioritizing quantity of KHIII content over quality of edits.

I disagree because I think it would negatively impact the wiki and just make the 2+ year crowd's workload even harder, and I think "2 years" is an arbitrary subjective number which is overkill. That means someone who's been editing the wiki for a year and 11 months must ask for permission to edit a KH3-related article's on the talk page, which is inane. So far, the edits I've seen in recent changes have been pretty logical and positive, and doing things like helping out with plot summaries. Instead of trying to reduce newcomers, I think we should just step up our game, correct the articles, tell people how to improve, and move on.

And yes, I jumped the gun because I didn't realize how much KH3 removed the Frozen storyline and that it would remove the famous "betrayal" plot twist. That was a one-time event and I promise I won't do it again. Also, we are basically done learning the true names of each character in the journals. It's not the end of the world because a wiki called a character "Woody Pride" instead of "Woody" or something like that. Soroxas (talk) 20:13, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

TheSilentHero 盾 - Shield! — 12:00, 2 February 2019 (UTC) We decided to have all edits go through Moderation for now. This is done so the staff can more easily keep up with the many changes people are making these days, while still giving users the ability to edit themselves. We're not doing this so we can reject edits if they're not completely fine, but rather so we can see if they need additional edits. It's only a temporary measure, and we'll only keep it for the first week(s), until the flood of edits slows down a bit.

It would be nice if you created a MediaWiki Sidenotice. Then everyone will see it before. Pain88 (talk) 20:14, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

It's not asking for permission on the talk page, it's presenting a draft for discussion, and to make sure that all policies are being followed -- the same thing that even bcrats do when they are proposing a major change for an article. I'm not suggesting a hard measure like locking the articles, but instead encouraging users to be more conscientious in their edits, because we're seeing a lot of gun-jumping.

The Frozen thing, for example, should have never happened in the first place. The information that was put in was not based on sources -- the wiki should never, ever guess. "Remy" makes sense, because reliable sources pre-release used "Remy", as does "Woody Pride" (since SE itself officially used that name, just not in the final game, so it's actually undecided if it's still valid or not).

The point is to get editors unfamiliar with the wiki's policies (which is why the 2-year suggestion) to not see the policies as "those arbitrary things that the staff use to punish me", but to actually understand how they work and why they're useful."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 13:18, 5 February 2019 (UTC)