Hi, folks! We're currently in the middle of an extended wiki development project that will add some nifty tools to the moderation kit (and some bells and whistles for tropers as well). While a full list of what's coming is outside the scope of this topic, there is one very specific thing that needs community involvement and feedback: the namespace configuration system.
In a Nutshell
We're changing namespaces from informal components that anyone can add (you can make an article in the "Glurkbrgl" namespace if you want, just by editing it) to a formal list of allowed values. This list can be added to and offers additional controls, such as the ability to set which style sheet is used by articles in the namespace, which page type is the default, the icon for the namespace tab bar, and how editing and article creation work.Namespace Configuration System
- Namespaces will be itemized in a database table.
- There will be a php page where anyone can view the list and the settings for each namespace, and mods can edit them.
- The configuration system will have (roughly) the following attributes:
- Name: (Main, YMMV, etc.) This will include the canonical capitalization of the namespace (see below).
- Editing Status: This will be a selection from a list of possible restrictions, from "Open" (anyone can edit/create articles) to "Require TLP" (article creation must go through Trope Launch Pad) to "Closed" (nobody can edit or create articles), and a few more.
- Page Type: The default page type to assign to articles in the namespace (a work, a creator, a trope, a subpage, etc.).
- Style: Main, Darth Wiki, Sugar Wiki, etc.
- Auto-Index: Whether the namespace behaves like normal or is automatically indexed, such as in Laconic Wiki.
- Icon: Choose the icon that appears in the namespace tab bar in the header of wiki articles.
- When anyone requests a wiki article (HTTP GET to pmwiki.php), the namespace part of the URL will be checked and forced to the proper capitalization. This will prevent things like "Ymmv", which break wiki functionality.
- When anyone tries to create or edit an article, the namespace configuration will be checked to determine if that action is allowed. If creation is blocked, a suitable message will be displayed. If editing is blocked, then the article will display as locked.
What We Need
What we need from the community is agreement on which namespaces should be kept and which should be discarded. The wiki has accumulated a lot of cruft due to the free-for-all nature of namespace creation, and we want to start with as clean a slate as possible.For reference:
- The formal namespace list is here: Namespace.
- The complete list of namespaces may be viewed with this tool: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/articlecount.php
- The full list of articles in any particular namespace may be seen here, except that it won't work for Main: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/namespace_index.php?ns=YMMV.
How This Will Work
If we decide not to keep a namespace, any articles in it should either be cut or moved to a more suitable namespace. Any such namespaces that have remaining articles when the new system goes live will be set to "Closed", so that nobody can make new ones and the existing ones will be automatically locked.For all remaining namespaces, we need to populate the initial settings: page type, editing status, and style. Note that many of these are already known and configured, so we'll carry those over — there's no need to renegotiate the status of Main or YMMV, for example. I'm mainly talking about the odder ones like, say, Castle.
After the system goes live, if anyone tries to add an article that isn't in an approved namespace, the attempt will be blocked. Requesting new namespaces would be done in the Locked Pages topic or some other topic we create specifically for that purpose.
Rules and Procedures
- The working list of namespaces to load into the configuration system will be stored in Namespace Cleanup Project.
- Any user may bring up a namespace that they think should be removed or given special handling.
- If there is significant immediate consensus, we'll approve it and any required actions (cleanup, transplants) can begin.
- If consensus is not clear, then we will use a crowner to collect votes.
We will also answer general questions about the system in this topic, but we will keep it focused specifically on the namespace project. Off-topic thumps will be used if needed.
- Q: Are we changing any media namespaces (Film, Western Animation, Manhua, etc.)?
A: No, we are not. That's not in the scope of the project; the intent is to configure all media namespaces as they currently exist. - Q: What are we doing with examples subpages (like Castle.Tropes Ato D)?
A: We want to clean those up. Check out this post to see some ideas, and this Google Drive doc for a list of all such articles.
Note: We can't just merge them back together, as most were hard split for size to begin with. - Q: So what should we focus on?
A: That's a great question! We're looking mainly at namespaces that have fewer than 40 articles in them, and that are not medium namespaces. In other words, let's start from the bottom of the list. In particular, let's get rid of one-off namespaces that aren't being used for actual trope content. - Q: Is there a list of all namespaces that are being used for trope example subpages?
A: Thanks for asking. Yes, it's here. Note that some media namespaces were caught in the query.
Edited by nombretomado on Jan 5th 2020 at 11:39:34 AM
Short-Term Projects herald
The Disney/ namespace is also referenced in this thread's opening post.
Contains 20% less fat than the leading value brand!
I am not fundamentally against moving it. Once the previous discussion was linked in the other thread, I was glad to note that such a conversation had taken place.
My concerns were, firstly, that we were saying "it has been decided" without the receipts. When this was seemingly provided, and signed off by Fighteer at that time (June 2017) my next concern was that, despite this happening in 2017, no effort was made to amend our Administrivia pages to reflect Disney/ being devalued as a namespace. Nor, seeing as that did not happen, was this communicated to other mods internally to ensure our editing and statements were in-line with each other.
In fact, it was literally within the same month that outside of this thread it was reiterated that it should be a communal decision, by Fighteer.
To make it clear, I have no argument against devaluing the Disney/ namespace, or those like it. I do have concerns about how this change was handled (or not handled) in 2017 and now: in ensuring this was communicated effectively both to moderation staff and the community (as there were two different messages in two different places, by the same mod, in the same time period) and Administrivia pages.
Edited by nombretomado on Dec 29th 2019 at 10:53:10 AM
Discarded and Feeling Blue
Neither do I. I was one of the people complaining about a lack of consensus, and I only did that because the speed at which everyone started moving wicks was jarring. Things this big need more people involved in the vote, even if the vote is overwhelmingly one-sided. Even if nobody disagrees with doing it, it's just good to have more people say they agree before jumping into the changes.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Short-Term Projects herald
I should mention I also support trashing the Disney/ and Discworld/ namespaces, but also changing the OP and admin page once the discussion ends.
Contains 20% less fat than the leading value brand!
Berserk Button: misusing Nightmare Fuel
In the three days since the issue was first brought up, no one has offered a single argument in favor of keeping the Disney and Discworld namespaces. Seems like a pretty strong consensus.
It's important that we show that there's an actual community consensus instead of a couple people in some random LTP thread on a different topic, especially for something like this.
The initial discussion was in a thread labeled "Star Wars" right after a Star Wars movie released, meaning some tropers might avoid/ignore the thread.
This is a site-wide policy change. It deserves to be properly discussed instead of being rushed after 24 hours during the holidays.
Discarded and Feeling Blue
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Exactly.
Nobody here disagrees with the actual idea of the project. We just wanted more people to be involved in the discussion.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
Short-Term Projects herald
I see 3 votes to keep versus 15 votes to remove on the crowner RallyBot2 created. I have no idea what the arguments for keeping the namespace are. Immediate workload? Liking the namespace? Disambiguation?
Well, I'm following this thread, so you don't have to worry about me making huge chunks of edits around this issue, at least.
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
Goku Black
Could you send a notice to everybody. It's only fair to get the entire sites opinions first
"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."
Veteran Editor IV
I can only assume that people like having Mickey's head as the namespace icon. The Discworld/ namespace doesn't have an equivalent. That said, I've also downvoted keeping the namespace as I don't see it as needed and if there are two pages in the Western Animation/ namespace with the same title they can usually be disambiguated by year (though I bet everyone knows that already).
Edited by Piterpicher on Dec 29th 2019 at 10:30:14 AM
Currently mostly inactive. An incremental game I tested: https://galaxy.click/play/176 (Gods of Incremental)
@brainulator— The original justification for the namespace, many MANY years ago, was that since most of the Disney animated canon are adaptations of classic fairy tales, page title collisions kept happening between the Disney versions and the original.
Since then, we've adopted better, more generalizable solutions to the problem of page title collision (largely adding release year in cases where multiple works share a title), and every discussion that I can find since that policy was adopted has nigh-universally agreed that franchise-based namespaces are a Bad Thing(tm).
I do not know who the three upvotes on the most recent crowner are, as they have chosen not to share their reasons in this or any other thread that I can find.
Edited by HighCrate on Dec 29th 2019 at 1:42:14 AM
~HighCrate, the last line in your post has been struck through. There was no reason to include it.
And now you've edited it out. Either you saw my edit or you realized immediately it crossed the line. Don't let it happen again.
Edited by nombretomado on Dec 29th 2019 at 1:44:50 AM
I was attempting to be silly, and apparently it didn't land in the way that I intended, so I rephrased with more straight ahead language.
If there are good reasons why these three people voted the way they did, I invite them to share those reasons with us so that we may consider them.
Edited by HighCrate on Dec 29th 2019 at 1:53:20 AM
he/him | Image Pickin' regular
I voted to keep the Disney/ namespace since it does still aid in distinguishing with other works and I'm not a fan of disambiguating by release year when it can be avoided. I honestly don't care that much either way, though. If we go through with this, I think they should all be moved to WesternAnimation/ without adding the release year, unless there's already a work by that title under WesternAnimation/.
Keet cleanup
Thank you for sharing your reasoning with us.
I agree with you that, should the Disney namespace be nixed (as seems likely), most works within it should be moved to Western Animation without the release year, except where the release year is necessary to prevent page title collision.
Since your primary concern is page title disambiguation, it may be worth examining exactly how many works within the Disney namespace share a title with another work and thus are likely to suffer such issues so that we can discuss how to address them. I will take a look through the namespace and come back with my findings.
![[down]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_down.png "[down]"){kind=icon}
Also this, which is why I think the Disney namespace should be nixed regardless, but I think it's still worth the effort to examine what doing so will entail.
Edited by HighCrate on Dec 29th 2019 at 2:40:50 AM
Berserk Button: misusing Nightmare Fuel
Disambiguation by year only happens when two works have the same title. And if you don't like that, well, that's what we already do for lots of other works; why should Disney movies get treated differently?
Edited by Zuxtron on Dec 29th 2019 at 5:41:54 AM
he/him | Image Pickin' regular
It only needs to be disambiguated if they share a title and namespace. Otherwise namespaces can distinguish them and subpages can be separated by headers or folders, which is how it is currently with pages like YMMV.The Hunchback Of Notre Dame, and I see no need to change that.
Edited by rjd1922 on Dec 29th 2019 at 4:51:42 AM
Keet cleanup
My understanding is that using folders or subheadings to allow multiple works to share subpages has been deprecated for a while. Can anyone confirm that?
Results A-C:
- Aladdin: Redirect to a Western Animation page; no issues.
- Aladdin And The King Of Thieves: No issue.
- Aladdin The Return Of Jafar: No issue.
- Alice In Wonderland: No issue (WesternAnimation.Alice In Wonderland already redirects to this page)
- Atlantis Milos Return: No issue (shares a title only with a video game based on the animated film, which is in the Video Game namespace)
- Bambi: Redirect to a Western Animation page; no issues.
- Disney.Bambi II: Redirect to a Western Animation page; no issues.
- Disney.Beauty And The Beast: Redirect to a Western Animation page; no issues.
- Beauty And The Beast Belles Magical World: No issues.
- Beauty And The Beast The Enchanted Christmas: No issues.
- Beauty And The Beast Belles Magical World: No issues.
- Disney.Big Hero 6: Redirect to a Western Animation page; no issues.
- Disney/Bolt: No issues.
- Bongo: Redirect to Fun And Fancy Free: No issues.
- Brave Little Tailor: No issues.
- Brother Bear: No issues.
- Brother Bear 2: No issues.
- Chicken Little: Currently shares a page title with a page in the Literature namespace for the original fairy tale, and the YMMV page has sections for both the fairy tale and a 1947 Disney short.
- Cinderella: Currently shares a page title with Literature.Cinderella for the Perault version of the classic fairy tale, which the YMMV page has a subsection for. Additionally, Film.Cinderella is a disambiguation page linking to several other versions of the story, all of which have been disambiguated either by year (e.g. Film.Cinderella 2015) or some other way (e.g. Theatre.Cinderella Rodgers And Hammerstein).
- Cinderella II Dreams Come True: No issues.
- Cinderella IIIA Twist In Time: No issues.
- Clock Cleaners: No issues.
That's all I have time for tonight; I'll work on the rest later. Preliminary results seem to indicate the the page title disambiguation issue is a bit overblown. Most pages have no issue at all and will be able to be moved to Western Animation with no problem. Those that do have issues, have issues that aren't fully solved by the Disney namespace existing anyway.
Edited by HighCrate on Dec 29th 2019 at 3:00:36 AM
Short-Term Projects herald
Apparently, Disney.Frozen's YMMV subpage is already at YMMV.Frozen 2013.
I say that a mod should move over all of the relevant pages in order to preserve the edit history, discussions, and reviews.
Edited by Brainulator9 on Dec 29th 2019 at 5:59:34 AM
Contains 20% less fat than the leading value brand!
Dumbo, etc. wouldn't get disambiguated since they're the "original" work (Dumbo's only possible collision is with its own live-action remake); Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, etc. would need disambiguation by year.
edit: ![[nja]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/user_ninja_2074.png "[nja]"){kind=small}
Edited by RallyBot2 on Dec 29th 2019 at 6:16:03 AM
he/him | Image Pickin' regular
I don't know of any such policy change, and as pointed out by Piterpicher here, if works with the same name always have to be disamgibuated with separate titles, what's the point of having different media namespaces?
~Fighteer references such a policy in the very ATT that you linked.
I don't have a strong opinion on the topic of subpage collision or whether different works should share subpages, but if there is in fact a policy in place, it would be nice to have it written out on an Administrivia page that folks could refer to.
Edited by HighCrate on Dec 29th 2019 at 3:43:35 AM
Discarded and Feeling Blue
If that needs to be done, I'd suggest doing that part at the Outdated Pages thread; we work on rewriting Administrivia pages there.
Took care of the lone Quote/ page. It's pretty much a mistype.
As for Disney/, yeah, we should decide that via crowner.
Edited by Berrenta on Dec 29th 2019 at 10:35:19 AM
she/her | TRS needs your help! | Contributor of Trope Report