Wowpedia talk:Personal article policy/Archive01

See WoWWiki_talk:Policy/Naming/Personal_articles.

Policy ratification vote

 * Yes :


 * No :

Comments

 * You will still be able to have separate character pages, Idwarf, they will just be located differently. For example, instead of creating a player character page for my alt at Isobella in the main namespace with all the other articles, I would locate it at User:Aeleas/Isobella.--Aeleas 16:28, 13 October 2006 (EDT)


 * To expand on Aeleas' comment, from what I understand of this change in policy it wouldn't get rid of fan-based articles. Instead it would make it easier to identify one as well as directly linking the originator/owner of the content.  It would make it easier for people to recognize that this is personal content and probably shouldn't be edited without permission or notice.  Think of it as identifying ownership.  Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong!--Cynra 09:12, 14 October 2006 (EDT)


 * That's about the gist of it. Though fanfic will still be marked as fanfic, and can exist in the main namespace if the author wants others to edit it.  -- Mikk  (T) 09:43, 14 October 2006 (EDT)

Implementation Details

 * Move the majority (if not all) articles in relevant categories from the main namespace into the appropriate user's namespace.
 * [√] Category:Fan fiction
 * Category:Player characters
 * Add notes to this policy on:
 * [√] Wowpedia:Naming policy
 * [√] WoWWiki:Policy/Writing/FanFiction
 * [√] Help:Fan fiction
 * [√] Create policy reference shortcut, WP:PA
 * [√] Remove notice from player, PC, fanfic


 * I added an Enforcing section based on discussion during the vote.  -- Mikk  (T) 16:27, 15 October 2006 (EDT)


 * I altered the wording slightly from "allow others to edit the page" to "surrender control over the page". A fanfic work where the original author invites collaboration on specific terms is not quite the same as a standard wiki page, over which the original author has no special claim.--Aeleas 20:06, 15 October 2006 (EDT)

Example
So for example, I would need to move my Engineering guide to User:Tinkerer/Engineering Guide? Seems fair enough :)--Tinkerer 16:13, 8 October 2006 (EDT)


 * No, not the way I see it. It's general-use and useful to all engineers; not restricted to a particular server or a particular guild or what have you.  -- Mikk  (T) 15:17, 9 October 2006 (EDT)


 * The criteria the policy sets out is whether you want to keep the guide as Tinkerer's Engineering Guide, in that you maintain control over it, or make it into a standard, anonymous, collaborative, be-bold-in-editing wiki page. It can still be linked to in the same places and added to the same categories, having it in your namespace just serves to clarify that distinction.--Aeleas 15:46, 9 October 2006 (EDT)

Question: how is this policy enforced? The wording is fuzzy enough to allow leeway ("... where the author wishes to retain primary control"), which in and of itself is not a bad thing, but it seems to me like it can't really be forced upon someone? (And maybe it shouldn't be; maybe we really should refrain from doing anything else other than hinting about this option?)  -- Mikk  (T) 15:22, 9 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Well, I'd say anything like your own character biographies, guides from the forums, stories that you made up yourself are all personal articles. Oh, and enforcing? Click "Move" ;)--Tinkerer 15:24, 9 October 2006 (EDT)
 * I think it's safe to assume that the author would wish to retain control over any fanfic works; by their nature artistic works, as opposed to objective encyclopedia articles, tend not to be collaborative efforts. Even where the original author specifically invites collaboration on a work of fiction, he or she is still essentially exerting control over the content of the article.  The second criteria the policy lists is "receiving credit", which is more clearcut, where the author specifically demonstrates a proprietary interest in by tagging it, e.g. Aeleas' Guide to the Auction House.--Aeleas 15:46, 9 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Okay. How about player pages? The majority are edited by the players themselves but some are actually created by completely different people.  -- Mikk  (T) 19:17, 9 October 2006 (EDT)


 * That example is actually one that I had in mind in trying to set out the criteria to make this distinction.
 * If I were to create a player character page with an RP biography for one of my characters, there would be an implicit understanding that I would retain editorial control over that page. Other wikians would not be likely to contribute their ideas on my character's fictional history, and I wouldn't likely welcome any such additions. Such a page would qualify as a personal page, and would be located under my namespace.
 * On the other hand, there are a few articles on players such as Thott and player characters such as Leeroy Jenkins, which are neutral articles on notable subjects, and not the province of any individual author.--Aeleas 22:04, 9 October 2006 (EDT)

So the Fanfics and Player character pages will all go onto User page. Will the catergory page still be active in that case? I hope we will still have easy access to the fanfics instead of searching for them individually. Its a good idea but I need some clarification. --Invin Dranoel 10:44, 10 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Of course. Categories ftw.  -- Mikk  (T) 11:02, 10 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Seems clear enough. *flexes fingers* I'm up for it ;)--Tinkerer 11:07, 10 October 2006 (EDT)

Which User?
How about something like Sword_of_a_Thousand_Truths? Which user space would that be under? It is a fictional item however it a general factoid. Which user would it be under? -- Gryphon 13:42, 10 October 2006 (EDT)
 * It is not personal, at all. It is for fun, and it has to do with Warcraft. So it should be categorized under Silly, which it is. --Tinkerer 13:43, 10 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Silly needs a banner, when first looking at the page without the fanfic banner, the one single word Silly at the bottom may not be enough to distinguish from other items. -- Gryphon 13:47, 10 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Hmm, I take that back as Dancing is categorized as Silly however is non-fiction. Silly isn't a great category upon reflection. -- Gryphon 13:48, 10 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Silly is a great category! Unless it isn't silly. Then it doesn't belong there. -- Fandyllic (talk) 1:17 PM PDT 10 Oct 2006

I've made a silly banner. Dread Lord C y b e r S k  u  l  l  ✎☠ 01:40, 11 October 2006 (EDT)


 * I like it! Now we need a silly icon, a perhaps a clown or three? -- Kirkburn  (talk) 06:14, 11 October 2006 (EDT)


 * On it :-P  -- Mikk  (T) 06:38, 11 October 2006 (EDT)


 * There we go. Category:Silly, Template:silly :-)  -- Mikk  (T) 09:32, 11 October 2006 (EDT)


 * You sir, are a genius. -- Fandyllic (talk) 10:54 AM PDT 11 Oct 2006