Huh.
Personal experience is not a reliable source. That's why you can't make a page on that basis there. This page
provides more details.
As a sidenote, getting your opinions published in a way that makes them acceptable to Wikipedia standards requires far more than merely putting them on the Internet. Reliable sources are not hearsay, either.
And to be fair, this is not the page for this kind of discussion, really.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Does this apply to things other than examples or work pages? For example, can any show have a recap page?
Hide / Show Replies
No, it's strictly a "what gets examples and work pages" rule. It's sometimes taken out of context, though.
As for recap pages, if there is enough material, sure.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
This is a really bad rule. Basically anyone can make an entry about anything, no matter how terrible or how politically incorrect it is.
Hide / Show Replies
You have summarized the rule accurately. Please take it to the forums if you would like to challenge it, providing reasons for why it is bad.
Edited by 87.114.151.154 That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
Well, yes, but it's still the proper place for it rather than this discussion page.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
Also, the original poster of this discussion has been booted.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
What just stories posted on sites like Mibba? Are they allowed, and if so what section would they go under?
Hide / Show Replies
Yep, those are allowed; they are published on the web. If the last part of your question refers to namespace, Literature/ is used for web novels.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
Bully in the Alley
I was thinking we could add a note about how the reverse applies too: just because something is well-known or popular; "notable" by other standards, doesn't mean it has a page already, and rather than complaining or being SHOCKED about it not being there, then add it oneself or put it on the List Of Shows That Need Summary.
To be fair, I haven't really seen anything like that, so I may be trying to address a problem that doesn't exist, but that's why we have discussion pages after all!
"The only way to truly waste an idea is to shove it where it doesn't belong." Hide / Show Replies
Hi, my name is Chris Cutter, I'm the co-founder and head writer for The Awesome Blog, a blog that covers everything from, social commentary, comedic articles, and serial novels. I'm also a troper, and was wondering if, because of this trope, my associate and I could create a page for our blog? Thank you in advance. :)
Hide / Show Replies
Yes, you can. Make sure you have at least three tropes about it to start with or it could get cut, and put it in the Blog/ namespace. See also How To Create A Works Page, and good luck!
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
Awesome thank you :) Already rolling under the Blog/ namespace. How would I add a picture (our logo) to make the article more catching?
Edited by ChrisCutter
Use the image uploader to get it on our server. Images In Wiki Pages has formatting tips.
"We consider every work notable. Unless it is nothing but porn. We don't need porn in order to understand storytelling."
... I am extremely confused as to what is considered "nothing but porn" here now after what happened. Is it "anything with shown sexual content, especially if the character is underage by USA law or looks underage, and anything that has pedophilia undertones even without erotic content" now?
Edited by banedoyle Hide / Show Replies
^This particular rule is for Porn Without Plot or Fanservice Without Plot. The paedo rules are to be discussed in the Aboud Content Violations Discussions forum thread in the Content Violations forum.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
No Real Life Examples Please states that "a work portraying real life is still a work", and examples of how a work portrays a real-life subject are fine. So I guess these are the exceptions to there being no such thing as notability: where Wikipedia requires that a subject be mentioned in reliable sources, no-real-life tropes require that a subject be mentioned in works. Where did I err?
Hide / Show Replies
There is no such thing as notability with regard to works. Real life is not a work of fiction, political speeches aside.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
Diagonalizing TheMatrix
For extra effect, imagine Uncle Vernon shouting this at Harry Potter- who soon discovers that his parents died not in a car accident, but a heated VfD debate, then goes on to become one of the greatest Wikipedia editors in the history of the world.
Edited by TripleElation Pretentious quote || In-joke from fandom you've never heard of || Shameless self-promotion || Something weird you'll habituate to
How far is this valid? Of course, it applies to tropes and examples, that's for sure. Does it also apply to works, so may you, for example, create a page about a book that, let's say, has only been published in German and had a print run of 5000 copies? Or, to go even further, the author of said book? May he have his own page? And then there are, of course, celebrities, like Barack Obama - how much of a celebrity do one have to be? And what about the Useful Notes section? Does anything that may be useful - for example, a long explanation of the ruling system of Charlemagne - deserve its own page? Basically, where are the borders (if there are any)?
Hide / Show Replies
This applies to all works. All works are admitted.
If you want to write up a page on a creator of whatever fame, it is admissible, as long as it list tropes related to the creator. Not an encyclopedia article, a description and a list of tropes.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
Could we add a bit of a corollary? I've seen some things that, "No Such Thing As Notability" aside, really don't need to be on the page. I remember one reference to an online RP that someone was in once. TINSTAN aside, having that on the page doesn't really help anyone to understand the trope better.
Hide / Show Replies
Neither does six dozen references to Anime works that only five people outside of Japan have ever seen, yet we don't stop those examples.
Being in a Japanese-produced work is not enough of a difference to warrant its own trope.
I wish Wikipedia was more like TV Tropes. The problem with Wikipedia "notability" is that the sources they cite are often prejudiced. For example, I wasn't allowed to write an article about Boise because the only source I could site was my own experience living in Boise but I've noticed other articles that cited sources that were written by people who had no firsthand knowledge of the subject they were writing about. So basically, Wikipedia becomes a form of hearsay because all you have to do is get your prejudicial opinions published and then you can cite yourself in Wikipedia and say whatever prejudicial thing you want and it must be true.
I wish there was a better way to authenticate material. No system, (citing sources or giving examples) is fool proof.
Hide / Show Replies