Forum:Guidelines

Forums: Index > Watercooler > Guidelines

Guidelines

Basic discussion

We should probably discuss the guidelines first, before we link to them. Right now, they're basically the ones from the parent wiki. Which is fine as far as it goes (though the wording will have to be adjusted), but that does have consequences. Is it consensus to keep the popularity criterion intact? This would keep out most OC ponies, but it would arguably also disqualify stuff like Humanized ponies, most comics, and lead to discussions about how derivative works should be dealt with (right now, there is a page for Cupcakes with alternate endings, but can anything be posted in that section or does every entry need to meet the criterion separately? similarly, Rainbow Dash is a show character, so does that mean everything she's in qualifies, no matter how far it is removed from the show, even something like this?).-Tulipclaymore 02:50, October 18, 2011 (UTC) If we have the same or similar restrictions as the parent wiki, then what's the point? That's not to say I'm against restrictions; I'd love more of them, in fact: My ideal fan labour space (whether as a namespace, or as a sister wiki) has lots and lots of text (summarising/contextualising fan fiction, videos, comics, memes, creators) and very few images (or at least very few images that aren't somehow tethered to an article; "MLP on Minecraft" could be such an article); I don't think wikis should be repositories for primary works. But that's not the majority opinion, presumably. It would also counteract one of the ideas behind resurrecting this wiki: making it a valve redirecting people's desire to post fan art from the parent wiki to this place. --Tulipclaymore 03:28, October 18, 2011 (UTC) I was kinda hoping you'd be lenient with what goes on the wiki here. Otherwise the entire move was basically pulling the wool over people's eyes: "Yeah, use the fan labor wiki, you can put any kind of fan labor there. Oh wait no, time to delete everything you uploaded." I think, much like FiM wiki, you have to allow galleries even though they don't add much. You should have Humanized ponies, where there's a writeup about how MegaSweet and his predecessors popularized humanized ponies on /co/, and Humanized ponies/Gallery, where copyright-infringing fair-use-for-educational-purposes content can be stored. –Throwawaytv 08:48, October 18, 2011 (UTC) ..speaking as an outsider here of course. –Throwawaytv 08:48, October 18, 2011 (UTC) Like I said, I doubt the people who do currently contribute here want severe restrictions, and I have no intention of pushing them on people. I wouldn't have said anything if the guidelines hadn't suddenly come up. For the record though, I would be just fine with having a humanised ponies gallery, no matter how big, if it was accompanied by an informative article. Just like I'm fine with collecting Equestria Daily banners here, because a) they're connected to an article, and b) there is no other place that does this (to my knowledge). Replacing the popularity criterion with an "anything goes for text, pictures need to be relevant to an existing article" would be a restriction I could get behind. We could probably keep everything currently on here, though we would need to structure it differently (e.g. the Rainbow Dash Minecraft pictures would move from Dashie's page to "Minecraft ponies/Gallery" or something). --Tulipclaymore 20:23, October 18, 2011 (UTC) Well of course we can change some guidelines to match the wiki, of course even if it is free namespace but i still want some sliiighhhtt guidelines so this wiki doesnt run around like crazy.Mylittlewut 21:30, October 18, 2011 (UTC) I agree. But we need to make sure the rules actually do what they are supposed to. For instance, one of your recent edits would invalidate about 90% of this wiki's pages. I'm guessing that's unintentional. Let's take a look at my attempt to adjust the guidelines. I think it's a reasonable compromise between "anything goes" chaos and a wiki stifled by too many restrictions. It lifts the popularity criterion and would allow OC characters, for now, but if we do have problems with it, we can always reinsitute a similar rule (just like we did on the parent wiki). --Tulipclaymore 01:26, October 19, 2011 (UTC) Also i would like to change oc ponies into 'put it in your page' or a special/create as in username/oc and then make a page for people to post their pony with a link, also i think we should have some fanbase topics. but only after we make a fanbase temp (which i can do) it can be like 'this page is heavily/lightly' depentant on fanbase topics. not all of it is true' kinda like that-Mylittlewut 23:38, October 19, 2011 (UTC) Also made a template for pictures without an artist name in the image file name. Example. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mylittlewut (talk • contribs) 23:58, October 19, 2011 I think your first point is already covered by "Very short pages [...] may be deleted and incorporated into a list or hub page" (-> we can create a list with links if necessary) and "Avoid in-universe descriptions" (-> a potential OC pony page must always state "OC pony created by X" or something similar). I suppose we could demand that people put their own OCs on blogs or user pages (e.g. Tulipclaymore/CustomPony), but I don't really want to scare off new contributors by having too many and too restrictive rules. We want people to want to put stuff on here. I'm not sure what you mean by "fanbase topics". Like an article about "Eurobeat Brony" or "Lyra and Bon-Bon"? That's fine, of course. If something is not true, it shouldn't be on the wiki. You probably meant "unverified"? If we don't have it already, we can stealcopy the "this article has very few sources" template from wikipedia or our sister. --Tulipclaymore 22:30, October 20, 2011 (UTC) i don't think we would scare new users, we dont need to demand it, but say its more preffered, or we can possibly move it for users. Nothing to be scared about. And yes fanbase topics like that, but a whole fanbase its hard to verify is all im saying (sorry for the last post being a jumble of words)--Mylittlewut 21:06, October 21, 2011 (UTC) OCs: How about this? How would you like to expand the Fan-made characters page? For a general introduction to the concept, one could get inspired by this and this. The pony creator could be mentioned, as well as other MLP-specific stuff which I don't know enough about (hence why I wouldn't be writing it). And importantly, there would be space for examples. Users could put their own ponies there, and when the page becomes overcrowded, we can move them elsewhere and leave a list (and say so right on the page). That should solve the problem, yes? Also, I took your suggestion and made this template. What do you think? --Tulipclaymore 23:18, October 21, 2011 (UTC) I like the template, will be useful in other topics. And maybe we should leave ocs to the brony wiki and only leave certain popular ones here, possibly removing the oc idea in general.But filling in what an oc is would be nice to new fans-Mylittlewut 02:04, October 22, 2011 (UTC) I think you're right. I added a sentence directing people to that wiki to the guidelines. --Tulipclaymore 10:47, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

shipping

now that i think we have that issue settled, i kinda want to go onto the topic of shipping, should we ban it? should we limit it? my personal opinion is no mane character shipping unless its been proven by hasbro (ex. spike has a crush on rarity)-Mylittlewut 22:06, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. This is not a role-playing wiki nor a place for opinions. If a fic "ships" Twilight and Big Mac, then of course that belongs in the summary for that story. But that doesn't make it universal. We can't realistically forbid covering content just because it contains specific ponies getting romantically involved. But I may be misunderstanding you? --Tulipclaymore 23:41, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

roleplaying im not talking about, im mostly talking about artwork and fanfics.-Mylittlewut 01:38, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid I still don't understand where the problem is (or what the difference between main character and supporting character shipping may be). Can you give me a couple examples of entries that would and would not be acceptable to you? --Tulipclaymore 05:40, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

Main character shipping like the mane 6 (including spike). Shipping examples i wouldn't accept are like This or This but stuff i would accept are art pieces like This and This or even something like this. Reason is because we cannot confirm who is with who and because of fights that might happen due to different likings. But things like spike having a crush on rarity we can see. Supporting characters (like background characters) we cant say whos with who (like lyra and bonbon is widely accepted through the fandom) i hope that clears some stuff-Mylittlewut 19:41, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

I actually agree with you on the pictures you linked to, but probably for another reason. The Twilight/Celestia and Twilight/McIntosh ones are borderline sexually suggestive and not a good fit for a (somewhat) family-friendly wiki. That's got nothing to do with shipping, really. I highly doubt that fights would break out about which pairings are "correct"; the wiki is about fan labor. Anything goes. In Tales, Pinkie gets together with Big Mac. In another story, maybe Twilight and Big Mac are shipped. And a third story may promote yet another ship. (The same goes for images.) It's not a problem. --Tulipclaymore 14:31, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

Fanfics i do not mostly care about, but just pictures incase any r34/questionable things come along. Thats all. Also should we post no r34(sex) pictures and no gore? i dont think we have guidelines along that rule.-Mylittlewut 21:27, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, that's your worry? The wikia terms of use actually prohibit that kind of stuff outright. So super-gory pictures or anything of a sexual nature isn't allowed whether we want it to or not (and I for one don't, anyway). The images in the Cupcakes gallery are already borderline, anything beyond that we can (and must) delete. So I agree with you, but we already have rules in place to cover that. --Tulipclaymore 21:38, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

Ok didn't know, should we leave the guidelines out for now?-Mylittlewut 23:10, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

Once again, I am sorry, but your answers can sometimes be a little cryptic. What do you mean? --Tulipclaymore 10:28, October 27, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, im meaning leave them alone for where they stand.-Mylittlewut 02:18, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

I think so, yes. They're not set in stone, of course, and we can come back to them any time. --Tulipclaymore 18:46, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Ocs again

I'm sorry for changing the guidelines, it seems that people are already setting up ocs and this wiki is still under construction, this doesnt seem like a proper place to post pony ocs. if you would like to object feel free to speak-Mylittlewut 00:43, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

As you'll see, I edited the guidelines in such a way to hopefully emphasise that OC ponies should not normally be posted in the main sections of the wiki; we can't really prohibit people to put that kind of stuff on their user pages, though. And you really need to be a bit more diplomatic and patient when it comes to this kind of thing; you can't ban someone for violating a rule you created half an hour before. This wiki needs to be as welcoming as possible, and that includes going a little easy on newcomers (especially ones that are probably not adults and might be easily frightened off).

I think another thing the incident proves is that we might need to re-think the "fan-made characters" page. I removed Madmax for now and linked to her from the Artists list. Like I said a couple of days ago, the page should probably be more of an explanation of OC ponies rather than a list (which just invites people to add to it). --Tulipclaymore

Dizzy Twister is not an OC pony; I don't think there is anything wrong with her having a page. I've checked, and there is some fan art and even some fanfics about her out there; people just to need to add those. --Tulipclaymore 08:39, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

I know but someone was posting a pony in the fanmade characters, reason there should be a oc pony page liking to username or a special:create page.-Mylittlewut 19:41, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

There's already a wiki for OC ponies (http://bronies.wikia.com/wiki/Wiki_Home). In my opinion, any OC ponies that are in fics should be discussed on the pages of those fics, and other OCs should be left out entirely. As far as I can tell, this wiki is about fics, art, music and videos, not standalone characters people make up. Sure, have a post about the phenomenon of people making OCs in general, and put in one or two examples of notable OCs like Madmax, but yeah, leave OC lists to the bronies wiki.

Tl;dr: agreed. Unattached OCs; this wiki; never the twain shall meet.

Ezn 07:01, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Descriptive filenames

I have an idea for the guidelines for descriptive filenames for this wiki (unless they've already been chosen, in which case, I dunno). It could be the guideline that all future images must have either the title the author gave the picture, or something describing the picture (similar to the descriptive filenames policy on the sister wiki) first off. Then, it should have "by *artist name*" after that, or it should be posted in the image description, if the uploader doesn't want to put it right in the filename. A link to the artist's gallery in the image's description would also be preferable, I think. Finally, if the image is based off of an episode, I think it should be optional, but encouraged, to put the Season and Episode number of the episode it's based off of in either the filename (again, like on the sister wiki), or in the description. But I dunno, what do you think about this? -- This is Jonny Manz, signing off! 06:56, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

And as for currently uploaded photos, perhaps some effort could be made to track down the artists (or something). We could ask the original uploaders, I assume, but if they don't respond (if they've moved on from this wiki, for whatever reason) I would be fine with leaving the files as they are now. They could be "grandfathered in", if bringing them up to the standards above (assuming those standards are approved) proves to be too difficult. -- This is Jonny Manz, signing off! 07:05, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

I don't want to micromanage image uploading. Partly because I'm against that in principle, but also because we're not really flooded with images. What's in the guidelines now already allows for the option of deleting files that aren't properly named and attributed. I don't make extensive use of that power because not all that many images are uploaded; when I delete something, it's usually either pornographic/violent or part of a larger batch of images where it's unclear whether the artist gave permission.

That said, if you want to write a longer version of this help page, you're welcome to do so. I'd link to it from the guidelines and we'll have something to point to when newcomers ask "what's a descriptive name?". --Tulipclaymore 17:12, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try to see if I can think of something. -- This is Jonny Manz, signing off! 05:48, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Profanity

I was just thinking about this: since we have uncensored transcripts of The .MOV Series on this wiki, we can't exactly have a zero tolerance policy against profanity like our sister wiki has. I was thinking that, if it's necessary for an article, it's okay to allow uncensored swearing, but otherwise, only censored swearing/acronyms should be allowed. Not to mention that uncensored swearing would get new/unregistered users blocked by the abuse filter. -- This is Jonny Manz, signing off! 00:12, April 1, 2012 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, I'm becoming less and less confident about those particular transcripts by the day. It seemed like a good idea at the time, and on the one hand, I personally have much less of a problem with "bad" language than I do with violent imagery. On the other hand, it remains widely accepted (in general society) that children shouldn't be exposed to profanity, and the wikia terms of use ban "excessive profanity" in the same section that bans porn and violent content.

Artists with names like n*ggerf*ggot are also a problem. Any page with a name like that on it is going to become uneditable by anonymous users unless we remove the spam filter completely (which I do not want to do). It might theoretically be possible to have the abuse filter give an exemption when it's spelled exactly that way, but I don't know how to do that and the instructions are giving me a headache. --Tulipclaymore 20:26, April 2, 2012 (UTC)

I'll try contacting one of the VSTF; I'm sure they would know how to do that, if such a thing is possible. -- This is Jonny Manz, signing off! 20:50, April 2, 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I contacted Sactage about this; hopefully, he (or one of the other VSTF) gets back to us soon. -- This is Jonny Manz, signing off! 21:00, April 2, 2012 (UTC)

Adding your Own Fanfic

Well I notice this wasn't discussed yet but then if you are the author of a fanfic and wanted it added on the Wiki, is it ok to do so? Pretty much, I'm still deciding if I should add my own fanfiction here except I never know if there are rules about it.--Duo2nd 12:52, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

Certainly. There is no rule prohibiting authors from writing about their own work; that would be a bit silly. Any such page would have to abide by existing rules, of course, so you can't add "author commentary" that hasn't been published elsewhere. But that aside, you can add whichever stories you like, whether it's written by you or someone else. You can use the purple createbox on the front page for formatting/content help if you want to. --Tulipclaymore 18:20, April 22, 2012 (UTC)