Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Oh for... nuke those. If people want to wander to Wikipedia, they'll search it.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry Pratchett
As far as I can remember, the only wrestler pages that lack that little bit are those that were put up before Wikipedia decided the wrestler was "notable" enough for a page, such as Black Rose. I'm guessing us mostly leaving the creation of wrestler pages to one guy until his ban is the reason it's done that way.
Plagiarism seems like a silly complaint to me though. Were not doing school work and we're not producing commercial products. Information is information. If anything, the wikipedia format of using paragraphs that generally organized by relevance and chronology is much more efficient than our alphabetical story telling device/audience reaction/trivia bullet point format. So, if say someone really wants to add something they feel is important about a wrestler but can't express it as a blue linked wiki word, just suggesting another article on the subject does seem fair. My only problem with wikipedia is that there is a pro wrestling wiki, and a women's wrestling wiki, and a lucha libre wiki, and...well I don't feel wikipedia really should have articles on pro wrestlers or really go all that in depth on entertainment. It's supposed to be an educational website, not a fandom website. There is no shortage of fandom wikis I think are more appropriate places for articles on individual pro wrestlers.
That's why he wants you to have the money. Not so you can buy 14 Cadillacs but so you can help build up the wastes
IAT, scroll way down to the bottom of the page. All the way down.
See the License info down there? Wikipedia has one too, in their own variation. So does pretty much every other site on the web.
Part of what even the loosest of those cover is no plagiarizing.
It's not about schoolwork. It's about ethics and the law. And just manners. It's rude to take someone else's stuff.
TV Tropes has been around for about fourteen years at this point that I'm certain of. We've developed our own community and our own way of doing things, a system in which generally the individual units of the Hive Mind have had a big part in developing.
We Are Not Wikipedia and we don't want to be.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry Pratchett
I agree. Let's not make a practice of referring people off to Wikipedia on our articles. First of all, we'd like people to stay here, not head out to other sites. But another problem we have is fandom myopia giving particular types of media far more presence than they merit. Pro wrestling is one of those areas that we have issues with. If someone wants the bio for Hulk Hogan (or whoever — you can tell I'm out of touch with the modern scene), they can go find one of those other sites on their own. Here, we care about the tropes used in the fictional work.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Okay, I think you misunderstood me completely, but just in case I want you to think something over. When our website's completely different text format makes directly copying a wikipedia text to one of our own articles impractical at best, how exactly is plagiarism something we have to worry about?
Look, when someone actually creates something, copying it is bad. When you're doing a school paper that requires you to do research, going to a the summary someone else completed rather than writing your own is dishonest and prohibits your ability to learn.
When you're putting information into a public wiki, neither of those is a problem. We don't own information itself and neither does wikipedia. It's not plagiarism when two wikis mention *wrestler began to change look at this date*. Even if someone learns it from wikipedia, they have no monopoly on typing about pro wrestling, if the relevant information is true, then the information is fair game. If you can indeed find an article here that is a word for word copy and past of a wikipedia article, hell, if you can find a paragraph that is such of wikipedia content, TV Tropes might have a problem on it's hands, but chances are you probably won't because this user base doesn't copy wikipedia articles, the format doesn't really let them even if they wanted to, one has to reword the same information because TV Tropes by it's nature demands it. Plagiarism against that other wiki is not being committed and we need not worry as it is unlikely ever to be.
But that's just issue number one, and I've participated here seven years or so, so I kind of get number two. The only reason we have a pro wrestling namespace, the main reason we have namespaces in general, is because of an edit war turned forum dispute involving one fan's protest to seeing Christian's page renamed. But really, what's the problem inherit hyperlinking, especially if you really think pro wrestling gets too much attention from fans on this wiki, to another one? I agree that wikipedia shouldn't be the place they go to, but a pro wrestling site should be perfectly acceptable. Video games, toys, cartoons, they all get The Wiki Rule references. Bulbapedia, The Transformers wiki, Wookiepedia, Piklopedia, etc, etc. What, is a genre reference too broad or something? Because nowhere have I seen that disclaimer but if so there's still the Dragon Gate Wiki, The Lucha Underground Wiki and other more appropriate alternatives.
Edited by IndirectActiveTransport That's why he wants you to have the money. Not so you can buy 14 Cadillacs but so you can help build up the wastes
It actually is a problem that some tropers copy word-for-word from other wikis to post on our site:
- https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?parent_id=49807&type=att
- https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?parent_id=42352&type=att
- https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?parent_id=41768&type=att
I'm not specifically concerned about external linking as regards plagiarism. It happens, it's something to deal with, but linking to other sites probably has little impact on it.
External links can direct users to the source for any claims made in the article. This can be particular important with articles for fan fiction, Let's Plays, webcomics, etc., where it may not be immediately obvious how to find the work. For feature films and TV shows and such, it's pretty easy to find them, and there is not really a singular "source" — other than promotional websites, which do not actually contain the works. Any online links to the content would likely either be pirated or paywalled, neither of which is acceptable; regardless, they may not be an official source, which may get the link taken down at some point in the future.
We don't link to IMDB pages for films; we don't link to the iTunes store for musical albums; we do not link to the Amazon store for books. Same reason: these are not primary sources.
For wrestlers, the same problem applies. The "source" for any claims made in the article would be the entirety of their wrestling career, which you can't (legally) get by linking to a singular external site. Wikipedia is not a primary source, and is not valid (under its own rules, even) as a citation. The same goes with any other third-party wiki, unless our article is actually about said wiki.
So, again, for external links, you may use them:
- In the description (not the footer) of work articles when the link takes you to the primary, official, legal, and freely accessible source for the work.
- In examples when the link takes you to a [legal] source where the example may be seen, as long as the link is not the entire context of the example.
For articles where these conditions cannot hold true (the legal source is not available for general public viewing, or the legal source is not a discrete weblink), external links should not be used.
Edited by Fighteer "It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
During my random wikiwalks, I've noticed that almost every single wrestling page has a note at the bottom saying something like: "As usual, you can find the basics at The Other Wiki." (Where "The Other Wiki" is a link to the Wikipedia page for that wrestler.)
No disrespect to The Other Wiki, but I'm not sure this is something we want. (Sending all that traffic off-site.) Before I take it to the projects forum for cleanup, though, I thought I should quickly poll the hive mind. There's obviously nothing wrong with the occasional link to the Other Wiki, but this sort of consistent, systematic redirection seems...not quite kosher.
Random examples (literally found by clicking the "Random Media" button until I found a couple of examples): Jacqueline and Fandango.
ETA: In addition to other problems it might have, it occurs to me that this practice may encourage plagiarism...
Edited by Xtifr