Outdated Administrivia Pages

Sorry for chiming in late. Yesterday was a rather long day at work.

Anyways, the sandbox looks good so far!

I took Willbyr's suggestion and changed up the "What a TLP should contain as it prepares for launch" section to "Ways to strengthen your TLP".

Does anybody know if a page has to have passed a long time since creation to be added to Pages Needing Wicks? I just added Unfocused During Intimacy to that index, but found out the trope was only created back in August. Should I revert that edit by the way?

Wow, that needs crosswicking.

I'd probably revert that addition, but then again, 6 wicks shouldn't be that hard to get.

Also, I know we just went through a major change on that page, but I feel like Renowned is not steep enough. A discussion post mentions that "a lot more things have 51-299 wicks and aren't that well known." It's a 2011 post, by the way. I agree to an extent, for example Captured Super-Entity has existed since at least 2007 and has 185 wicks, but I haven't heard of it until now. Maybe just double Renowned's requirements to 278-999 (69-999 if newly made, 139-999 if 1-3 years old) and adjust Healthy accordingly?

As it's the Super-Trope of the Can tropes, I'm not surprised it's under the radar? It's children are more popular than the parent, overshadowing it?

Most of its examples seem to go beyond just imprisonment, and should be moved to Sub Tropes anyway?

Edited by Malady on Dec 10th 2019 at 2:06:06 AM

I suppose that Captured Super-Entity doesn't have much potential, but how about Enforced Plug? 150 wicks, 2007 or earlier creation, I think I saw it once but then forgot it. It mentions being a subtrope, but to only one thing, and is also considered a subtrope to something else.

I'm not trying to push for tropes getting popular or anything, just saying that our standards for "Renowned" may be too low. Do you agree that Renowned's requirements should be doubled to 278-999 (69-999 if newly made, 139-999 if 1-3 years old) and Healthy's changed accordingly or not?

Also, for TLP Guidelines, I'll compress the page by removing unneeded [==] formatting around TLP as just all caps words don't trigger a wiki word (this was a dumb mistake as part of my "change YKTTW to TLP" effort during my novice days when I thought that because YKTTW is an auto-link, TLP would be too.)

Edited by Piterpicher on Jan 8th 2020 at 9:13:08 PM

No objections with doubling the wicks for "renowned".

I'm wondering if This Is a Wiki (and This Is A Wiki), instead of a redirect, can be a new page. I've seen it used in two ways, so the proposed new page would explain both and maybe contain a couple of See alsos:

• Repair, Don't Respond: Currently redirects here. This is a wiki, so if you see something that's incorrect or missing, you can edit the page yourself. Be bold.
• This isn't your page: The Fic May Be Yours, but the Trope Page Is Ours is related, but this applies to work/creator pages that aren't just yours. This is a wiki, so other users can edit this page. It does not belong to you, other users do not need your permission to edit it, and they do not need to consult you when an action such as cleanup is taken on the page.

For an example of "This is a wiki" used in the second sense, see this ATT query. There are more out there.

Edited by Tabs on Dec 13th 2019 at 9:59:42 AM

I could see this as Ambiguity Index + Predefined Messages.

Should the latter link be moved to Administrivia.Predefined Messages?

So I think Sandbox.TLP Guidelines is lookin' pretty good now.

Sandbox.Easy Launching, erm... yeah, still at a loss for how to fix this page beyond just cutting it entirely.

• 1 for doubling the "Renowned" requirement.

As for This Is a Wiki, I'm okay with the suggestion, or we could just make an actual page for this to point to explaining these rules in brief, and making it clear that This Is A Wiki, so anybody can add content but nobody owns any of the content, and at the end of the day the content is here to be read by non-editors, etc.

Got a third vote for doubling Renowned from Thatboy by PM, so I'll do it tomorrow if no-one objects.

Also started Sandbox.This Is A Wiki. It's a rough draft, but it summarises the two policies it most commonly refers to in a brief way. I wouldn't be fully opposed to a disambig, I just think a general explanation could work.

Edited by Piterpicher on Dec 14th 2019 at 6:54:52 PM

Looks pretty good to me. (Maybe it should be broken into more than one big paragraph though)

Thanks, though I think that it would be hard to split the middle section to more than one paragraph. The composition here is [question and answer]->[explanation of how being a wiki affects us]->[conclusion], and it probably wouldn't work as well as I don't think paragraphs should be too short either.

That's true, I just felt it would've been better if both concepts covered weren't together, as if they were the same concept. But still, this page is good.

I made an alternate version, for comparison/contrast.

Both are good, though the alternate version looks better since it's broken up a little.

I'm happy either way.

Thanks for the upgrade. I like how it further elaborates on my points, though why did you change "it should be treated as a wiki first and foremost" to "it is a wiki first and foremost"? I worded it that way deliberately because some people only use our forum and don't edit the wiki which might be freeloader behavior and I think my wording discourages that.

Edited by Piterpicher on Dec 17th 2019 at 1:11:04 PM

I like the new wording better, it's more concise and truer to the goals of the site. That being said, there's nothing wrong with just using the forums if someone wants to do that.

Because I think "it should be treated as" is a weaker claim than "it is". In the original, the forums could be the dominant facet of the website, and we pretend that the wiki is. I revised it to outright state that the wiki is the dominant facet, implying that everything else is an extension of the wiki.

Right, I think it's a valid change. People who want to use the forums alone probably aren't the ones who need to hear this anyway, as they aren't likely to be the ones demanding edits from others or getting protective over an edit they've made.

For the TLP guidelines re-write, can we push Net Hats a little harder? It would cut down on so many premature launches.

Sorry if that was already mentioned. Not everyone has the time to read 9 pages.

I agree, we should.

Here's the page again, to make it easy.

Edited by WarJay77 on Dec 22nd 2019 at 1:19:45 PM

I'd also like to invite ~Pfff133 here, because they also pointed out some flaws with this page, and I think they could help out a lot.

I'll gladly give/do my 2cents. So, how does this work? Can I edit the sandbox myself or should I give feedback from here? Or can I make small clarification edits, but anything contextual needs to be talked about here first?

I think the last one; big changes should be discussed.