Thank you Edit
Thank you for the comment you left for Jspoelstra. The guy really gets on my nerves all the time. Sorry if this does not make too much sense, but really thank you. LoneGunMenWander (talk) 19:56, November 3, 2016 (UTC)
Silver Shroud costumeEdit
It's not Silver Shroud Custome, it's custome. The proper noun is Silver Shoud, costume is just a common word following it. Only if it's a proper noun, we cap the first letter. Anything else it's lowercase You can check it in the policy. Custome is lowercase. So I'm going to change it back again, to the name according its page name. If you feel you're still in the right, you can ask an admin mediator, it's one of the rules for this kind of dispute. You can choose one, I'm willing to accept his or her judgment. Jspoel 20:20, November 3, 2016 (UTC)
- You bring on the location page names into this question. Those are a much closer call to cap them or not. Here, I'm (we) am often not that sure to cap them or not. In the past I've asked American native speakers help here, and they aren't sure either. We mostly leave them as it is now. For example all the stations. It might just as well be Station instead station I think. You still see some differences there. Item pages are easier to judge. I still say costume is clearly a common word, anywhere it's used as a piece of clothing. All the pages with ... costume have a lowercap c. So it's still c. Jspoel 11:40, November 4, 2016 (UTC)
Please forgive me for this, because I am no longer an active presence here at Nukapedia, and I am basically intruding where no one wants me anymore. I just happened to notice the discussion between you an J, and since it involves a project that I personally spearheaded, I figured that I would weigh in just a bit.
There is a good reason for what J is doing, even though, like you, I wish that he would use edit summaries more. Unfortunately, he is not explaining the issue very well, so I'll go ahead and detail out what my project had been so many years ago:
- At Nukapedia, we have taken a very heavy stance in support of proper American-English conventions. In regards to proper capitalization, what this roughly translates out to, is that we do not let the game(s) create the rules. The games do not get to dictate proper grammar, or proper typography. This is for a myriad of reasons:
- Bethesda, even alone, are not even remotely well known for being consistent with their spelling. Then you have to add in Obsidian in to the mix, and we have a bunch of weirdness that disallows the use of any (non-existent) established precedents to base modified capitalization off of.
- What is capitalized by Bethesda/Obsidian, borderlines on the asinine quite frequently. 'Feral Dog' just isn't right, and neither is 'Super Mutant,' or even 'Girl.'
- By following proper conventions, instead of religiously following in-game grammar, we can put an emphasis on special descriptors, such as with what we do when referring to the Great War by capping 'War.' - so, for example, when we write pre-War/post-War.
Ultimately, what it boils down to is professionalism in consistency and established conventions. Not quite as convoluted as what a university might expect, but pretty close.
So what does this mean?
- Super mutant
- Fenway Station
- Nuka-Cola plant
- Railway Rifle
- Ghost Farm
- Cito's Shiny Slugger
Anyways, I'll wrap this up - I just wanted to give a more in-depth explanation as to what the deal is. And I also figured I'd point out that with tens of thousands of articles, there will be mistakes; so, if you happen to see incorrect capitalization, then definitely feel free to add a bit more consistency to Nukapedia. 寧靜 21:28, November 4, 2016 (UTC)
- That's a bit of a tricky one, because American-English is just so full of double-standards and exceptions to the more general rule(s). In this specific case, the Hope Diamond is a full on proper noun cluster, while the 'costume' in Silver Shroud costume is not a proper noun cluster, since 'costume' is nothing more than a generic descriptor.
- What makes this tricky, is that it's easy to fall into the trap of believing that secondary entities get to dictate the rules of proper grammar, all because it would require an unprecedented sort of fascism to force them to do otherwise. A perfect example is an independent business a few minutes away from my apartment, which calls itself the Mountain Creek Laundromat, even though 'Laundromat' is just a generic descriptor, and isn't a part of the proper noun cluster.
- On the other side of the spectrum, it is proper for a business to, say, let's use an in-game example, The Third Rail. There are no generic descriptors in that cluster - it's all a unique name that qualifies as a proper noun cluster.
- There are more vague rules, such as it being proper to say the 'Nuka Cola Corporation;' however, it would be improper to say 'Nuka-Cola 'Bottling Plant.''
This does bring up an interesting dilemma, though... my experience with Nukapedia is that there's not really anyone around anymore that can distinguish between certain proper nouns and their generic counterparts. I noticed that pretty quickly when I decided to leave (if you'll forgive me for saying so), especially when clusters are involved, and the more vague rules of American-English rear their heads. In cases such as these, compromise is acceptable, as there's really no use in getting overly-pedantic, or worse, overly-bureaucratic over something so droll.
In that regard, I wish you the best of luck - I'm sorry that this has been one of your first experiences here at Nukapedia. I truly do hope that your future experiences are better. 寧靜 21:25, November 5, 2016 (UTC)
- I'm pretty much done talking about the Silver Shoud costume. If you want a second opinion, ask another administrator to mediate like I told before. If I make a sensitive edit, I'm leaving summary edits. Otherwise with the small(er) edits I don't. I think I've earned trust enough for that by now. Jspoel 23:34, November 6, 2016 (UTC)
I'm glad that we could at least talk about it - trademarks/copyrights are admittedly not my specialty, so I'm afraid that I can't go into that tract of thought in any meaningful way. :( Hopefully, though, you'll be able to work things out with the more active user-base (I know that's not a very satisfying thing to read).
In regards to J, I think you should give him a good chance. I'm not really going to get seriously into his character, as he's a deeply private man, and I know that he wouldn't appreciate me doing so. But I do know that he cares about this wiki and its users, even if it can be hard to tell sometimes from an outside perspective.
He has a few habits that can be annoying - my main advice for these scenarios is to get with him privately. As I said, he's a private man, so he likes to avoid making public scenes. I have worked with him for many years, and I can promise you that he'll take what you say into consideration - ask him to jump into chat and PM each other, or see if you two can E-Mail each other, and I'm sure it'll net you a much more meaningful conversation.
Anyways, happy editing! Hope to keep seeing you around the wiki. 寧靜 04:38, November 7, 2016 (UTC)
Who are you to tell who should be making summary edits? It's a courtesy and not something that's written in the policy for your information. I'm not doing it myself if it's not sensitive, and I don't ask it from the other rights-holder users. It's nice if they're doing it, but it's not an obligation. About my edits, in the past half year they mostly existed from checking all unfamiliar user edits made overnight, correcting/blocking and next to that making a few dozen of my own. I've slowed down from doing that in the years earlier. I'm not a content writer and the bulk of my own edits exist of fairly plain to follow edits which don't need a summary. All done by hand by the way. Together with my experience they hardly need overlooking and the more experienced people on the wiki know that. We have a few active patrollers and admins, I don't check their edits either because I know by now they're good. I'm not the communicative bc from the wiki, but there are other bcs and admins who fill that role better. I do my part and I think it's good enough. Your posts may have some influence of me and I'll think of it in the future, we'll see. Jspoel 23:31, November 7, 2016 (UTC)
- I edit many, many pages for various reasons. I soon notice them and when I do, I might as well adjust it. It's a minor grammar issue that bugs me. Jspoel 14:42, December 21, 2016 (UTC)
I was checking your edit on the coffee tin and I think you might want to ask an administrator about it. I did not undo your edit because I'm not real sure myself. I agree with coffee tins being a fairly rare item, but at the same time, they respawn at almost every location you find them in unlike fusion cores. Once you pull a fusion core, it's gone, and the ones in ammo boxes are random spawns. IMHO if they (coffee tins) qualify as notable loot, it's just by the slimmest of margins...but as I said, you might wanna ask an admin to be sure. StormRider71 (talk) 04:55, December 28, 2016 (UTC)
- Makes sense to me. In truth, I forgot about the buzzbites. From that point of view, I'd say yeah, you're absolutely right. That's an idea that's not in the notable loot guidelines, but should be...if a fairly rare item can be used to craft an even more rare item, then it definately should qualify. Nice work as far as I'm concerned. StormRider71 (talk) 05:33, December 28, 2016 (UTC)
Sick of your crapEdit
Slocum's Buzzbites recipe is not a holodisk or note, check your Creation Kit data. It's a miscellaneous item. Jspoel 15:59, December 29, 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry, although I can dip in from time to time at the moment, the request you've left is a complicated one I'm not able to work on at the moment.
- I'm making plenty of small edits, but they're mostly from opening pages of 2 hours of checking all the edits made in the night before. I also make edits some of which cost me half an hour for a single edit, like maps. We are allowed to make tiny edits as long as it even slightly improves the page. I may hold off on the double spaces from now on. You should make your own edits, not concentrate so much on someone elses. Jspoel 16:54, January 4, 2017 (UTC)
You are not being ignored, I was able to commit to a 5 minute Skype conversation. Unless you'd like to discuss new model constitutionalism, the legal issues of the jungle camp at calais, or the system of regional government the U.K. was prepping in case of a nuclear war, or buy some car insurance that's all I'd be able to offer you right now. I'll look into it when I can, but it will be a few weeks. Agent c (talk) 16:56, January 4, 2017 (UTC)
Don't worry, I also remember you under Aiken Drum :) No need to feel bad, it's not the kind of things that keep me up at night, even if it would have been an attack on me (quod non). Besides, in general, I support it that users dare to stand up to users with special rights when they have the feeling that they are abusing tools or that the users aren't treated correctly. That being said, while I don't mind the beef between you and Jspoelstra, I do mind to some extend the tone of the discussion. I understand that you may feel attacked or ignored, but I think the tone of some talk page messages is needlessly agressive. Keep in mind that everyone here is just a volunteer doing his/her best to help people with problems. We aren't making money doing this and we aren't sociopaths trying to bully certain users. While the methods of everyone may differ, and in this case, go completely against what you think is best, I think it would have been better to have used a more moderate/understanding tone, which you for example already do a lot better in the forum you created. And don't consider this remark as an attack or lack of trust etc., I've already said things on this wikia that I later regretted because the tone of the message was off (even though I still supported the point of the message), so I'm very aware keeping cool isn't always the easiest thing. Now I just try to wait a day to answer on something when I don't think my answer will be right if I write things the moment I read them. Anyway, that's my 2 cents. I don't know if you agree on it or not, or if I may have misunderstood you, but feel free to contact me further if that would be the case, or if you'd like to discuss other stuff. - Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog) 17:43, January 5, 2017 (UTC)
- As I said earlier, I understand your frustration over the fact he doesn't change something that you consider important, and only replies by "I'll consider it," but that doesn't mean your solution should be to just react the way you did. To be blunt here, he has the right to ignore your request. In the end, the guidelines are just general recommendations. If things are like this and if this really bothers you, the best way to go is to change the guideline to a binding rule, as you're trying right now with that forum. It seems however that there isn't much support for this kind of change, and I'm personally also against such a change. Not getting things the way you wanted isn't fun, but if the majority decides otherwise, there isn't much you can do about that. I've also had forums and votes that in my opinion badly damaged our Wikia, and in which I was one of the great opponents (categorization changes, deletion of mentioned-character pages, ...), but in the end, if the majority votes differently, that's the way it is, even if those votes on editing stuff are voted by people that don't edit themselves.
- As for the editboosting, I don't really understand your point there as much as in the edit summaries. I've seen you taken a pretty agressive stance on this from the start of your discussions with him. I think more good faith would have been more useful on this matter. To me, it seems like the number of edits is very relevant to you to the point that it bothers you when others get too much of them which they don't deserve in your opinion. But in all honesty, edits don't really matter. The only things edits matter for is for special rights requests, but Jspoelstra is already highest rank. We don't get paid per edit and we don't hurt anyone by getting an extra edit. When I check edits, I just look to make sure the edit is an improvement, no matter how little of an improvement. If it's an improvement, it's good, if it's not an improvement, I'll undo it. In Jspoel's case, it's true that a lot of his edits are tiny improvements, but even some apparently tiny improvements can be very useful. I for example do a lot of maintenance edits recently that come down to fixing redirects. While they may seem minor, I was told that they improve our results in search engines, which makes it pretty important to do on a large scale. A point that I do understand is that you complain about a lot of edits to the same page, as that stuff is messy to patrol, but I don't consider myself in a position to give criticism on that, as I personally also prefer working paragraph per paragraph, which means I regularly also have more edits on 1 page when I'm editing.
- About Jspoel, I know he can be very direct in his communication, which can make him come over as rude, but he's actually a great guy in my experience. I remember starting with the same feeling of him trying to push his will on people, but he usually has good reasons for things that seem irrelevant. If you don't understand him, you can always ask for information on his talk page or ask him for a conversation in chat. He has never refused that to me, and I have very positive experiences of chats with him. Just be aware that a friendly question is more likely to get a friendly answer. And about the one-man project, I can tell you, if Jspoelstra wouldn't have been here, I'm pretty sure that this Wikia wouldn't even matter anymore. If it wasn't for him, I wouldn't be here anymore, and I don't think many other editors would be around here anymore. I would probably just be over at The Vault editing there, as that Wiki would have been a lot more complete and alive than this one would have been. As last time, when you disagree or if I'm wrong, please tell me, I'm just saying my thoughts on these matters. - Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog) 19:18, January 5, 2017 (UTC)
Forum: Edit summariesEdit
I just wanted to drop you a message out of courtesy regarding my reference to full stops and spacing in the forum as I concerned my wording may unintentionally cause offence. I know using it as a point could potentially be misconstrued as having a dig. If I could think of another rule to use I would have done to save any upset on either side.
Personally I find two spaces great for legibility and is a rule I have been aware of since I was a child, but never knew of its history or application until you brought it up and I did my own research. There are a lot of unwritten rules in editing around here and if the worst of them can be cleared up and put on paper it would help a lot. For the most part if I start working on a page and I can clearly see where I am going from the code given to me then I'll try to keep what I do consistent with whats already there. Sakaratte (talk) 01:08, January 8, 2017 (UTC)
- I do agree that a large number of the summary free edits by special rights users following my edits can be very off putting to editors, especially when they are a change of no significant value or in policy e.g. addition and removal of spaces that do not affect the pages appearance once rendered. I'd also argue that a lot of these edits are minor, but the minor edit flag is very sparsely used in these instances as well. When you make a change in those areas it is very hard to justify you actions making surmising add the same fuel to the fire. Where an edit is being made to align it to policy the summary should at least read changed inline with X policy so users are encouraged to go read up instead of feeling deflated because they don't know why a change has been made.
- I work as an analyst as well as programmer so to me each of those 'petty whines' are worth a look in to see if its worth further investigation. If 90% of editors are using the original standard in the article and only 10 are using the new edit as standard, then edits of that type shouldn't be used. If you have a more devisive split (55:45) then this is an area that really needs to be looked in to and something firm on paper. If I had the access and tools to do so I would be more than happy to look at a laundary list and judge each item on the facts so a full and open discussion around policy can happen.
- I don't think you have made a bad call at all. You saw an issue and raised it, it didn't go in your favour but that doesn't mean there was absolutely nothing to take away from it. Change does need to happen with regards to edit summaries for the reasons you have stated, targetting the detractors to its use (policy creation/changes elsewhere and role model behaviours) could generate a more natural improvement in summaries. I have switched edit summary prompts on now so I can forget much less. Sakaratte (talk) 16:52, January 8, 2017 (UTC)
I'm with you Edit
Don't know exactly how I came across the topic, but I've read now through your whole forum about summaries: I'm so with you, Felice, regarding the
use unuse of them!
I won't say anything about your personal "beef" with somebody else, that's not my concern, and I simply have no opinion at all about both of you. (However, one little thing: don't mistake "earned trust enough" for "earned the right", if that's the quote you cited; I agree with some people from the forum, saying the contributor's name is relevant for checking the edit or leaving it; and "trust" and "right" are two different things.)
I also come from a different wiki, where the guideline isn't that clear. It's more or less only an invitation to use the summary. I even know of a further wiki – where I just can't find the guideline –, who explicitly says, use it only for sensitive edits, and not at all for mass-edits.
My own policy, however: "use it every time". You might find lists in my history, where a several hundred edits in row have all the same summary, e.g. "fix link after pagemove". Not so difficult, the summary input box uses autofill in an intelligent manner, placing the recently most used items on top, so I only have to type "f" (in that case) and then can choose the first one. That's definitely less than 10 seconds per edit, say 1 or 2.
But when I browse through my wiki's recent changes… now, you know, what I'm speaking of. Very contributor dependent, sometimes seemingly even day dependent.
I wonder, why apparently everybody in the forum only saw/read your wish to establish some force to the guideline, and feared for the consequences, but nobody understood the intention behind, the reason. To open a page's history and look for a relevant edit, without having to check all un-summarized revisions because otherwise there's nothing to find.
Yes, adding a category is obvious, as well as correcting punctuation. Those are edits which speak for themselves. But if I put it into the summary, then the next editor wouldn't have to look into that difference because he knows, that's not what he's looking for.
And in other cases, even for trusted editors, I sometimes simply want to know what they have done with the article. Only to find a link change then in the diff, they didn't summarize? Had I known, I could have spared that time…
So, again, Im so with you!
I don't post this to the forum, because I'm inactive here. Don't want to barge in, when I'm active on another wiki.
But I felt I'd have to support you. By the way, I'm speaking of an admin's POV.
Two ideas about the topic:
- It wasn't explicitly said, but the "staff" people, the important mass contributors, the veterans, the admins of course, they all have an exemplary function. Why, as a newbie, should I fill in that field, if no one else is doing it? Perhaps this is an argument (not in terms of dispute), that could convince some people.
- Somebody said, you could contact wikia staff for a change in the edit page. I, too, don't believe, they'd change it in a way, the summary will become mandatory. But a less intrusive and more subtle option exists: the preference, to get warned when leaving the summary blank, could be removed as such and set to active by default. So everyone will get the warning, and at least some people will reconsider a summary.
And for your own work: don't spend too much time browsing pages' histories without result, only to look if your planned edit had been reverted before. Edit! If it will be reverted (again), then you have a feedback, then you can react. If not, that time would have been a waste anyway.
I appreciate it, though I still see this particular case as a quick judgement on a harshly enforced policy against speculation, despite being somewhat excessive. SierraX (talk) 00:09, January 18, 2017 (UTC)