Consensus Discussion

I feel there is a fundamental problem with the character pages cleanup threads. I have already been suspended twice over unilateral moves, even though both times I have been working with the project and logging my moves.

Now I’m seeing other people start to get punished in the same way just because we feel like we’re being micromanaged by people with a fundamental difference of opinion on how the project should work.

The majority of people, including Mods, feel that any major page splits and character moves should have discussion and consensus prior to making those changes.

I’m in the minority that as long as the rules are followed and everything is logged correctly that not everything should be a matter of debate. If people have problems with some moves it can be discussed and if necessary reverted back. Just working on something by yourself shouldn’t be a crime if your still working towards a larger goal with everyone else and are still in open communication with people.

Working together should be asking for help or getting an opinion on something, not waiting for people to say yes or no to you. It personally makes me feel like I’m waiting on the boss to approve my work for me. If a page is improperly launched, then someone will bring it up and then it can be looked at.

I don’t think preventing people from doing things is the best course of action. There are logs of created pages with byte counts on them that should alert the project to new pages. Shouldn’t that be good enough? If someone is working with the project they should be logging every new created page under the logs with byte counts.

Examples:

• If on MCU: Other Superheroes Kamala Khan is over 40K, and the page still has 40K, then the page should be able to be made with no issue. Asking for help to make sure that there aren't any trope misuse or zce's is good, but the page should be fine to just make.

• When reorganizing smaller, lower traffic pages, like The Incredible Hulk, moving characters from one page shouldn't be an issue, e.g. theoretically moving say Hiro-Kala from Supporting Characters to Antagonists, especially if its a smaller page that no one else really cares about. Big franchises like the MCU should have more consensus regarding moves, but smaller works don't really need the same level of care.

• Splitting a page like Shang-Chi into sub-sections regardless of byte count to help with formatting and ease of access e.g. Title character, Supporting Characters, and Antagonists. That should help for formatting and ease of access.

It’s not hard to revert things. If there’s no issue then no one will bring it up. If there is an issues then someone will bring it up and then the group can chime in. If someone has an idea they want to get help with then that’s great, but I don’t think it should be necessary.

Like it’s been said before, it depends on the people who are currently on at the time. Some people are more lax and don’t see the harm in having new pages if it’s done correctly, while other people don’t like splitting off pages if they don’t have too.

I don’t want to seem like I have a bias against some people though. People interpret things differently and have different viewpoints. This is just how I see it.

I personally feel that if a character is at 40K surrounded by a bunch of character that don’t even break 10K then it’s just easier and more practical to split them into there own page. It would seem that most people are going to a page for just one character, so why not split it.

These are my grievences with how the process works. People keep telling me that I'm misunderstanding people. All I’m trying to do is make sure that other people don’t get suspended over these issues. Like I said before, I was content to keep my head down until this started happening to other people. If it was just me then I’m the minority and I can change. But once other people start chiming in with the same complaints then it becomes an issue.

I just feel like launching a new page should be a big deal. For big group projects, however, I’ve come to agree that there should be more discussion on big moves. But launching a page shouldn’t be an issue if the rules are followed.

People made the rules, as long as there followed it shouldn’t be an issue. Especially if it’s in a section where only one person is doing a lot of work.

It's gonna be fun on the bun!

This Is a Wiki, getting the relatively few people involved in cleanup and maintenance threads to agree doesn't really feel like some insurmountable burden.

I didn't choose the troping life, the troping life chose me

"To achieve that goal, we invite editors to be bold and make changes, even dramatic changes, to the wiki if that's what's needed. If you see something wrong, you are allowed to correct it. If you feel something is missing, you are allowed to add it. If you see that there isn't an article for something, you are allowed to create it (with a few exceptions). Nobody will complain as long as you aren't making a mess of things. Two bold editors might come into conflict, so we want them to discuss the issue together, or seek consensus from the rest of the wiki. These changes can be large and quick, but must have justifications (please use Edit Reasons)."

That all seems perfectly reasonable to me. If there’s no conflict. There’s no need to let anyone know.

It's gonna be fun on the bun!

(with a few exceptions) is the key phrase there because splitting off a character page without consensus is one of the exceptions.

Again, going to the CSP (or whichever) thread and saying "hey, I want to move X to Y and merge A with B, how does that sound to people?" isn't some long laborious process.

When I said this is a wiki, I was referring to it being a collaborative project. Getting feedback before you start making big changes is literally the bare minimum being asked of you in this case.

Edited by laserviking42 on Sep 20th 2022 at 10:06:14 AM

I didn't choose the troping life, the troping life chose me

Like I keep saying, the best way to make sure the move isn't "making a mess of things" is to ask ahead of time. We keep seeing cases where unilateral moves were the wrong choice and people are justified to want to know ahead of time because it's so easy to make a mess of things when moving pages.

Edited by WarJay77 on Sep 20th 2022 at 10:20:58 AM

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

If you don't have 's from the thread, it would still be an unilateral move no matter where you think you're logging them.

This has been self-explanatory what it means and the conversation could have ended on that remark.

None of the mentioned examples sound "fine to just make" to me.

Yet it is. Better yet, it's extra steps against doing only one step right every time.

People can't realisticaly determine if there are issues if nobody brings these up.

People don't get suspended if they follow the protocol, it's entirely their fault if they do.

More than one person can still be minority, grammatically speaking.

For someone who feels bringing pages up for discussion shouldn't be needed, when it comes to discussing basic courtesy you sure have a lot to say and standing by it, just saying.

Edited by Amonimus on Sep 20th 2022 at 5:19:54 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

I am collaborating with people. I inform people what I’m doing, I update the logs, I follow the rules. Except when even if I do all of that I still have to fear getting suspended because someone may not like what I did.

Why is following the rules and guidelines not enough? Setting formats and aligning pages to follow those formats shouldn’t be considered unilateral moves.

When working with a community, you should ask for help, not permission. Fix mistakes, not punish them. Understand when there is no malicious intent.

It's gonna be fun on the bun!

If you've already asked ahead of time and someone else has an issue after the fact that's on them, not you.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

I can see why others are frustrated with explaining this, but I'll try once more:

Get consensus before making major moves.

That's all people are saying here. If you are having a philosophical dispute with the idea of having to ask others before you start moving things around, then you should probably ask yourself if wiki editing is for you.

I didn't choose the troping life, the troping life chose me

Gate, I'm gonna be blunt - you didn't follow the rules. In the two times you were suspended, the moves you did weren't just unilateral, they created issues that needed cleaning up. In the second suspension edit, you went in saying that you would do small fixes, then proceeded to merge and split a bunch of pages unilaterally and incorrectly and we had to clean up after you. So stop saying you followed the rules and guidelines when you factually didn't and it's well documented that you didn't.

The rules have been explained to you over and over and over again. If you're still insisting that you followed them at this point, you either haven't listened to anyone when they've explained them, or you're lying to make yourself look better.

Edited by STARCRUSHER99 on Sep 20th 2022 at 10:38:24 AM

That's not how site works, nor any working enviroment I'm familiar with.

Tropers cannot be trusted with large unsupervised editing and we can't monitor them 24h, and CSP issue only proves it.

People are supposed to not make mistakes in the first place.

The wiki does not differentiate repetitive mistakes for malice.

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

...Also that, yeah. This is exactly why I keep pointing out that the rule exists to make sure the guidelines are being followed.

Edited by WarJay77 on Sep 20th 2022 at 10:28:23 AM

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness