Star Trek Online Geekipedia:ANI
From Star Trek Online Geekipedia
Administrators' Notice Board/Incidents
Welcome to the incident noticeboard. This page is for reporting and discussing incidents on the Star Trek Online Geekipedia that require the intervention of administrators. Any user of the geekipedia may post here.
Please keep your comments civil and please include diffs to help us find the problem you are reporting. As a courtesy, you should inform other users if they are mentioned in a posting. Please make your comments concise, as administrators are less likely to pay attention to long diatribes. Please use neutral section titles that identify the user(s) or article(s) involved, as appropriate.
This noticeboard is a busy and vital part of the geekipedia's administration. Complaints that are not serious and substantiated requests for administrator intervention do not belong here. Please do not clutter this page with accusations or side-discussions within a discussion.
See also The Archive for discussions that have been resolved and removed from this page.
Click here to start a new discussion thread.
Character Pages
Greetings, everyone! I was preparing to upload a Federation character file to the wiki, but noticed the page name was already taken. Whilst I'd normally file this under "s*it happens", in this particular case the page in question is a rather empty WiP article which has not been updated since about 5 months, and in addition to this is just an NPC. The page is located at: http://www.stogeek.com/wiki/T%27Lana
So, two things: Failing to locate a policy for such cases, I'd like to ask if I could take over the page for my own character, and secondly I'd like to propose a policy for NPCs in that they should not "pollute" the already bloated characters category (especially when they contain zero information) but either be hosted on their ship's page, or be moved to a new (and apparently yet to be created) separate NPC category.
In case of the latter, an optional subrule about the page name (as in adding an "NPC_" prefix, for example) might be worth a thought or two as well, in order to prevent NPC pages from occupying a name of interest to a PC. This way, the "first come, first serve" issue would be weakened a bit, in that real player characters would be prioritized.
Thanks for your attention!
--Valias 03:40, 12 January 2010 (GMT)
- You make some good points, and perhaps a policy regarding the removal of the WIP tag after a page has been otherwise abandoned might not be a bad idea, if the page has little of substance such as this one. How do you knbow this is a NPC, by the way? I will see what other wikis have in place for this, but in the meantime I have attempted to contact the author of that page, who is actually fairly active here (as late as yesterday) to see if he would be willing to give it up. --JadeEnigma 05:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- I was operating under this assumption as the ship has its entire bridge crew written up as separate articles, yet only the Captain's article has content. I just noticed that there is a separate section for "other officers" labeled collectively as NPCs, though, so I am not sure anymore if these bridge officers are NPCs or if the entire bridge crew is really roleplayed somewhere. It's possible that the "senior officers" category doesn't have the NPC-tag because the Captain, obviously, is a player character - but the basis for my assumption pretty much boils down to "a bunch of bridge officer pages created half a year ago by that ship's captain" (and then abandoned).
In any case, thanks for your help so far. Let's see what the page creator has to say. :)
If the response is negative, what are my options? When I create a page with an alternative name (i.e. "T'Lana2"), it would show up with that name in the categories as well, right? So there's no way that multiple characters of the same name can appear twice but still retain the correct name?
--Valias 08:00, 12 January 2010 (GMT)
- I was operating under this assumption as the ship has its entire bridge crew written up as separate articles, yet only the Captain's article has content. I just noticed that there is a separate section for "other officers" labeled collectively as NPCs, though, so I am not sure anymore if these bridge officers are NPCs or if the entire bridge crew is really roleplayed somewhere. It's possible that the "senior officers" category doesn't have the NPC-tag because the Captain, obviously, is a player character - but the basis for my assumption pretty much boils down to "a bunch of bridge officer pages created half a year ago by that ship's captain" (and then abandoned).
- What do you think of a new category for "Bridge Officers" and in the case of articles that have the same name, those that are not actual player characters have the phrase "(Bridge Officer)" in the title to avoid disambiguation. These would not be in the character category.
For NPC's, or characters created by users for role-play purposes, we could do as you suggest, however I am not inclined to simply remove any articles that may have not been edited for any length of time. Rather, I believe some form of disambiguation would be best suited to resolve this issue. Thoughts?
--JadeEnigma 09:04, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- What do you think of a new category for "Bridge Officers" and in the case of articles that have the same name, those that are not actual player characters have the phrase "(Bridge Officer)" in the title to avoid disambiguation. These would not be in the character category.
- ADDED: There is also the fact that anyone may create a character of the same name as someone else, and that character is attached to their global name. How do you suggest we resolve this? I ask honestly. I am looking for suggestions.
--JadeEnigma 09:07, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- ADDED: There is also the fact that anyone may create a character of the same name as someone else, and that character is attached to their global name. How do you suggest we resolve this? I ask honestly. I am looking for suggestions.
- You mean like editing all character pages to include the global handle in their title? That is actually a pretty neat idea, as it would also link the characters to their respective players and give readers the ability to make contact in the game.
This would also completely eliminate the necessity to include the BO-tag (btw, I'd just have called the phrase "NPC" to allow a greater spectrum) in the title. Simply have any and all named pages be structured like "name (handle)" and it'd work out. I mean, a player won't have several PCs and NPCs of the same name, right? The distinction will then be made by correct categorization.
-- Valias 16:30, 17 January 2010 (GMT)
- You mean like editing all character pages to include the global handle in their title? That is actually a pretty neat idea, as it would also link the characters to their respective players and give readers the ability to make contact in the game.
- I am still at a bit of a loss as how best to resolve this issue. I think perhaps that in the case of two player characters of the same name, disambiguation might require using the global name in parenthesis; eg. Jade Conway (@JadeEnigma). Adding the global may be something an admin might do if there is a conflict, and it would be required of all articles describing player characters of that same name. --JadeEnigma 06:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, alright - I was just thinking of a somewhat more "uniform" look. Though you are probably correct in that it would look less clean than it is now. Then again, this would be the case with single entries "sticking out" like this as well. It is a tricky subject. If only we knew how Vulcan family names are actually written... (who cares about pronounciation)
Well, it is not the end of the world. But before I consider further steps: The page in question actually IS from a player character, yes?
Also: Sorry for being the first to bring up this issue. It was not my intention to make things complicated.
-- Valias 01:40, 04 February 2010 (GMT)
- Ah, alright - I was just thinking of a somewhat more "uniform" look. Though you are probably correct in that it would look less clean than it is now. Then again, this would be the case with single entries "sticking out" like this as well. It is a tricky subject. If only we knew how Vulcan family names are actually written... (who cares about pronounciation)
- Jade I am not too fond of the idea of having @JadeEnigma at the end of the pages. It just looks bad. It sounds to me like Character main pages (Not NPC's), who ever the author is of the page has Seniority of the character main page. So main character have Seniority over NPC’s. Example: if Dash Vazuras was an NPC then we could contact the owner and have it changed to Dash Vazuras NPC. If it is a main character then the author has full control of the page. Aka. Dash Vazuras is started and owned by User:Vazuras and I am the author of that page and have seniority. Since it is my Main Character, I have full rights to the page. If I were to change that in the future to a NPC then I would subject to the seniority rule of Main Character Pages and NPC Character Pages. This rule also applies to Ships as well. Main Ships vs NPC ships. Another issue I just came across is Users with multiple pages. Jade I just want to keep it fair. Users should have the rights to one main character page. Let me know what you think.(Admin Vazuras 23:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC))
- I have to disagree. I don't believe anyone should own a title to an article, and that for the sake of disambiguation if there are two conflicting articles there should be something in the title to tell them apart, and then the title in conflict leads straight to a properly formatted disamiguation page, with links to both (or howover more there are) of the pages using it in their title. This is standard wiki practise, and something I believe we should especially adopt because of the possibility of two player characters wanting exctly the same name. --JadeEnigma 22:57, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Disambiguation pages are actually a neat idea. But wouldn't this require taking the articles out of the characters categorie in order to prevent them from automatically showing up there? Of course, the disambiguation page itself might replace this function.
The pages themselves could be labeled numerically, i.e. adding a (1) or (2) or (3) at the URL end, depending on when they were created. Or simply add the ship's name. On the other hand, though, I do understand and have to agree with Vazuras that it simply doesn't look as good as having the name stand for itself. Sigh.
There's no way to create subdirectories in the wiki, right? Like adding an "/a/" folder in order to receive two unique URLs for two separate pages that both bear the same name?
-- Valias 23:30, 05 February 2010 (GMT)
- Disambiguation pages are actually a neat idea. But wouldn't this require taking the articles out of the characters categorie in order to prevent them from automatically showing up there? Of course, the disambiguation page itself might replace this function.
- Disambiguation pages are there for people who type an article title into the search bar and press "Go". Something that automatically displays an article that has that exact title. It will also be at the top of the listings if they press "Search" instead. Categories are a function of the article itself and how the author categorises his or her own work. Ultimately we are working in a system that allows anyone to have the same character name as anyone else, with the difference being the global name, and because of that there will have to be some compromises made. To that end, I believe that when someone wishes to create a player character article using a title that already exists here, both articles will require their titles be defined to distingiush one from the other and a disambiguation page be created.
For example, should an existing Character article entitled Spock exist, and someone else comes along to create a character page with the same name, both will then have to be retitled to include the global name of the player in brackets (Spock (@Nimoy) and Spock (@quinto)) and a disambiguation page be contructed. Both of these articles can be in the Character category, however.
URL's as you describe are not really possible. They are a function of the article title, unfortuantely. --JadeEnigma 12:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- Disambiguation pages are there for people who type an article title into the search bar and press "Go". Something that automatically displays an article that has that exact title. It will also be at the top of the listings if they press "Search" instead. Categories are a function of the article itself and how the author categorises his or her own work. Ultimately we are working in a system that allows anyone to have the same character name as anyone else, with the difference being the global name, and because of that there will have to be some compromises made. To that end, I believe that when someone wishes to create a player character article using a title that already exists here, both articles will require their titles be defined to distingiush one from the other and a disambiguation page be created.
- Aye, that sounds good to me. Ultimately, this is something you admins have to vote about, I guess.
-- Valias 12:45, 07 February 2010 (GMT)
- Aye, that sounds good to me. Ultimately, this is something you admins have to vote about, I guess.
- Let me draft a policy regarding this and I will post it here for comments and suggestions. --JadeEnigma 12:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- From the Wikipedia: Disambiguation Pages. We will stick to this policy until the community can draft something more attuned to our needs. --JadeEnigma 08:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
- Here is an example: Vulcan --JadeEnigma 08:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
- Quick question (and sorry for the late reply) - when there's no PC-PC-mix but a PC and an NPC page, as in my case, would this warrant a disambiguation page as well? Or would it suffice to put some sort of "you may also be looking for ..." disclaimer somewhere?
I'm mainly asking because of the suffix also appearing in the category, which is kind of odd when there would be no other page of the same name, considering that NPCs should have their own category (another topic, but very related to this issue).
-- Valias 03:00, 17 February 2010 (GMT)
- Quick question (and sorry for the late reply) - when there's no PC-PC-mix but a PC and an NPC page, as in my case, would this warrant a disambiguation page as well? Or would it suffice to put some sort of "you may also be looking for ..." disclaimer somewhere?
- Ultimately it's the title of the article or page that is important, and will cause ambiguation issues. For something like Vulcan that can be huge, but for player-character articles maybe not so much, so a simple disclaimer may work just as well without all the fuss of an entire Disambiguation page. What is important is that people not be confused, and if the chance of confusion exists, it be addressed as efficiently and logically as possible. What do you think would work best for you? --JadeEnigma 07:45, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I'd rather go for the disclaimer solution - but seeing that I'm talking about an article I'm planning to add myself, it would be logical to assume that I am biased. However, I will add the point that visitors to the wiki are far more likely to look for player characters than an NPC, which is why I was also supporting the idea of a separate category earlier (essentially "purging" the character category of any non-PCs in the hopes of reducing the amount of total pages displayed there).
Actually, I'm not even sure NPCs should have their separate articles at all (might rather be included as a sub-section of their ship's page, as I plan to do), but obviously it may be too late to promote a respective policy. I have yet to see an NPC-page that would truly deserve its own article and could not be included in the aforementioned manner, though. The question that arises from all this is also this: How likely is it that anyone is searching this wiki for some NPC? Would a disambiguation page or disclaimer even be necessary?
Sorry for the issues I seem to be raising. :D
-- Valias 03:00, 17 February 2010 (GMT)
- Well, I'd rather go for the disclaimer solution - but seeing that I'm talking about an article I'm planning to add myself, it would be logical to assume that I am biased. However, I will add the point that visitors to the wiki are far more likely to look for player characters than an NPC, which is why I was also supporting the idea of a separate category earlier (essentially "purging" the character category of any non-PCs in the hopes of reducing the amount of total pages displayed there).
- I am going to start some NPC's from my crew of the USS Worker Bee. It is probably going to take me a while to do this. I am not going to list every member on my ship because I have over 1,000 names, ranks, and M.O.S.'s to input. However, my main bridge crew will have individual articles! For the rest of my 1000 crew members I will probably have a seperate page with just the names, rank, M.O.S of each. The page would look like: USS Worker Bee - Crew Manifest. Aggain main bridge character will have thier own pages but it will look something like this: Jade Conway-NPC. But on my ship page it will look like Jade Conway. So should someone want to use Jade Conway as a main they always can. (Admin Vazuras 07:30, 18 February 2010 (UTC))
- This conversation is becoming far too long. The Star Trek Online Geekipedia is meant to encourage creativity, and sometimes that means contributors may want to create full and detailed biogrophies for their bridge officers or perhaps other characters that are not player characters. We do not ever want to do anything to stifle that. In addition, given Cryptic's "new idea" of allowing anyone to create any (player) character with any name, we are forced to allow for that and I think using their own system (differentiating by global name, in our case by using brackets) is the best method to follow.
- Titles in the wikipedia-verse are unique. Regardless of the category an article is in, there can only be one page with any one title. Therefore, any page describing a non-player character that is in conflict with a player character page will use the title format: NAME (***) where "***" can be NPC, Bridge Officer or any unique identifier that differentiates it from the player-character page. The player character page will be allowed to use the title without any differentiating identifier, however it must have a disclaimer linking to the NPC page in the format: Are you looking for *****? where "*****" contains a link to the other page.
- Obviously these conflicts will have to be handled on an individual basis, and we will rely on contributors to report or perhaps even edit individual articles to meet this policy.
- I will allow one last level of discussion before I move this conversation to the archive, and draft the official policy.
- --JadeEnigma 12:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- PS: Disambiguation pages are generally meant for words or phrases such as Vulcan that can hold many different meanings. I agree that for characters, NPC or PC alike, they are unneccessary.
Species Categories
I would like to suggest that these two categories be separated. The one category contains pages about particular species (ie Romulan, Orion, Andorian), the other category contants pages about Andorian characters, such as Harmony Yshol. Leave the racial pages as they are, but for the category for the characters of that race, call them "Romulans," "Andorians," etc. This way, when we put the Andorian link in a character page, it doesnt link to the species category page, but goes right to the "Andorian" racial page. :)
--Aisling 00:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
