Difference between revisions of "Kerbal Space Program Wiki talk:Discussions/Fiction"

Revision as of 22:50, 11 February 2014

Eligibility

To avoid sock puppetry I added a section of who is allowed to vote. I guess with accounts created prior to “today” everybody should be fine (so supporter of one section don't create many accounts now). But to give at least new accounts a chance I added the condition for them to do at least non-fictional edits in two different articles. Is that fine with you? Especially that “non-fictional edit” might be to fuzzy. — xZise [talk] 11:06, 16 January 2014 (CST)

I generally think that such fiction should be placed on subpages of user talk pages, with only an index of such pages somewhere on the main Wiki. We may even want to make a User/Fan_Works official designation for the sections, and create a category designation so users can get things on the major index without editing it. Minor fiction in the screenshots are OK, for instance names of user designed rockets and stations. However, it is designated that such descriptions should be the responsibility of the authors, and should not extend beyond basic framing of how the screenshot is relevant to said page. This is a good compromise, and compromises really help out. --Ruedii (talk) 23:46, 16 January 2014 (CST)

Of course “fiction” like naming stations or rockets should be fine. But recently some users wrote fictional stuff, and I was unsure if we should keep it or not. I mean in Talk:Crew the mood was more contra-fictional but that might be biased as pro-fictional hadn't a problem with it they wouldn't notice the discussion on the talk page. That's why I created this here to have at least a centralised discussion or even better at some point a “rule” to ensure everybody if that's what they are doing is accepted or not. — xZise [talk] 04:18, 17 January 2014 (CST)

I generally think that fiction should b allowed SO LONG AS YOU MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT'S FICTION, i.e. put the {{fiction}} thing at the top of the page, and quite possibly put a note at the bottom that's highlighted. Also, you should not be able to link to a section within a fictitious page as it can mislead you into thinking fiction is fact. Basically, I think that it should be allowed so long as the author makes it obvious that it's fiction. - Joseph256 (talk) 3:40, 3 Februry 2014 (GMT)

That's why here is this poll, because I generally think that fiction shouldn't be allowed. And unfortunately linking to a subsection cannot be disabled and sometimes this isn't helpful either. I'm by the way thinking how to solve that list with your contra contra arguments because currently that is kind of messy and not really useful. For example the current system doesn't allow a “debate” like thing (listing an argument, then listing a contra argument, then a contra contra argument and so forth), but maybe it doesn't need to. I'll try to make it more structured. — xZise [talk] 13:18, 3 February 2014 (CST)

Reworked the arguments

Hi I reworked how the arguments are presented. I hope that I didn't miss anything important and deleted it. I'll just list some things to explain the result:

• Instead of heaving a section for each contra argument (currently) I moved them a level up. So both sides can present their arguments more detailed on the same topic.
• I also added the proposal for a separate section. Now I don't know how this option can be voted. With having three options might be a problem to determine the superiority.
• Removed the sentence that basically repeated that there are other locations.
• Also I completely removed the argument that most readers start from the beginning, because for one nobody without a poll can know if that is true. I for example usually start reading the section and if I want to know more I also read the hole article. And of course if you click on a link and it is doesn't place you at a section it won't count for the argument which only covers links to sections.
• I mostly copied the arguments about the authorship and that the KSP wiki supplies some sort of common ground.

— xZise [talk] 16:28, 3 February 2014 (CST)

A third option

I honestly think each wiki editor should have free reign over their User Page area. If we make a specific subpage directory of each user page designation in the user-pages for fiction, then that is the appropriate place for fan fiction. This also prevents edit wars over it. (Which probably should be added to the contra-fiction list.)

As of a compromise, on the main pages, we should keep away from fan fiction, as it usually just gets in the way. However, a certain amount may be needed in some story-based tutorials and for framing of images. This is not to mention the widespread fan speculation out there. All in all, what I'm suggesting we need to make sure there is a third option that we have well defined rules where fan fiction is allowed, and how much of it is allowed there. --Ruedii (talk) 20:36, 3 February 2014 (CST)

Okay, maybe it wasn't clear, but at least I never wanted to restrict fan fiction in the user space (at least on Wikimedia projects they handle it the same way so most should know that in user space anything can be). Also tutorials, campaigns and image descriptions are fine with me too:

I'll try to reword that fiction there is allowed and this discussion/poll will not change that. So if someone votes against fiction, they don't wont against fiction in user, tutorial and campaign space. — xZise [talk] 03:49, 4 February 2014 (CST)

Major grammar and style edits

I thought that the page in its present form felt somewhat garbled and difficult to read, so I made some significant edits to style and grammar. I tried to preserve the original sense of the arguments as best I could; if I messed anything up, I apologize and don't hesitate to change it. Ammonia ocean (talk) 16:50, 11 February 2014 (CST)