Talk:Violet
From NSwiki, the NationStates encyclopedia.
Should we clean this up?
Discussion moved from NSwiki:Cleanup.
- Why? I accept that it is first person, and informal. But it's an institution. Any thread vaguely like [violet]=Max Barry? would be tossed to spam instantly; instead, it's stickied in Technical. I oppose the insertion of a clean-up tag: this is a game, and we are occasionally allowed to have fun.Gruen2alk 20:27, 6 November 2005 (GMT)
- I see what you're saying. My main problem was with the parts about "sits down and gets a drink of coffee" or whatever he said. It's an encyclopedia, not a storytelling room. ~ Ceorant 02:11, November 7, 2005 (GMT)
- It is pushing the boundaries a bit, though, Ceorana; I agree with you there. --Pacitalkia 03:31, 15 November 2005 (GMT)
- Would it mess up the article to remove the "takes a drag" parts, or is that part of the "history" of the discussion? ~ Ceorant (or rave) 22:03, November 16, 2005 (GMT)
- That's 'traditionally' what TSM says. It's just an in-joke, I guess, and it doesn't detract from it we remove it, per se. Does it really add much, though? Just seems like there are other articles we could concentrate on. Gruen2alk 10:15, 17 November 2005 (GMT)
- Since that whole thing is cut-and-pasted from the two threads on [violet], would it work to simply link to them? ~ Ceorant (or rave) 14:38, November 17, 2005 (GMT)
- That's 'traditionally' what TSM says. It's just an in-joke, I guess, and it doesn't detract from it we remove it, per se. Does it really add much, though? Just seems like there are other articles we could concentrate on. Gruen2alk 10:15, 17 November 2005 (GMT)
- Would it mess up the article to remove the "takes a drag" parts, or is that part of the "history" of the discussion? ~ Ceorant (or rave) 22:03, November 16, 2005 (GMT)
- Why? I accept that it is first person, and informal. But it's an institution. Any thread vaguely like [violet]=Max Barry? would be tossed to spam instantly; instead, it's stickied in Technical. I oppose the insertion of a clean-up tag: this is a game, and we are occasionally allowed to have fun.Gruen2alk 20:27, 6 November 2005 (GMT)
- What this boils down to is: what do we put in its place? '[violet] is an admin'. I can't think of anything else, other than a rather dry list of what she's done (which, admittedly, is the basis for Sal's page). I really would appreciate some other input, but at present, I feel it's a low priority. Gruen2alk 16:32, 17 November 2005 (GMT)
- I don't understand this about a "low priority". If it can be fixed up, it should be. For other data, could we have some information about the theory of [violet]=?=Max Barry in an NPOV format? What's there is just a ctrl-c-ctrl-v from the thread. ~ Ceorant (or rave) 21:39, November 17, 2005 (GMT)
- How do you have NPOV when there is only one POV? [violet] will not reveal their identity just for an unofficial resource's neutrality. Gruen2alk 22:45, 17 November 2005 (GMT)
- As Wikipedia says, present the different points of view instead of just writing them as fact. We can say, "Many contributers have pointed out that...", "The Smoking Man led a topic leading to the conclusion that...", etc. The way it is, there is very little notification that the information is cut and pasted from the thread, and it is written in first person, which should not be done. I believe that this page definitely needs at least a bit of cleanup. ~ Ceorant (or rave) 23:14, November 17, 2005 (GMT)
- NSwiki=/=Wikipedia. And the 'very little notification includes a note stating it is from that thread. Look, if you want to clean it up, do so. But remember: this is just a game. Gruen2alk 23:29, 17 November 2005 (GMT)
- The content rules remain similar. Personally, I didn't understand the tag, and so have edited it to make it clearer. This may solve the problem. ~ Ceorant (or rave) 23:41, November 17, 2005 (GMT)
- NSwiki=/=Wikipedia. And the 'very little notification includes a note stating it is from that thread. Look, if you want to clean it up, do so. But remember: this is just a game. Gruen2alk 23:29, 17 November 2005 (GMT)
- As Wikipedia says, present the different points of view instead of just writing them as fact. We can say, "Many contributers have pointed out that...", "The Smoking Man led a topic leading to the conclusion that...", etc. The way it is, there is very little notification that the information is cut and pasted from the thread, and it is written in first person, which should not be done. I believe that this page definitely needs at least a bit of cleanup. ~ Ceorant (or rave) 23:14, November 17, 2005 (GMT)
- How do you have NPOV when there is only one POV? [violet] will not reveal their identity just for an unofficial resource's neutrality. Gruen2alk 22:45, 17 November 2005 (GMT)
- I don't understand this about a "low priority". If it can be fixed up, it should be. For other data, could we have some information about the theory of [violet]=?=Max Barry in an NPOV format? What's there is just a ctrl-c-ctrl-v from the thread. ~ Ceorant (or rave) 21:39, November 17, 2005 (GMT)
