Referential Captions on Character Pages

there does need to be an "Allow referential captions on work pages and subpages" option for fairness's sake. probably also "Allow referential captions on work subpages, but not on main work pages".

e: since this is a pagetopper, i will note that Amonimus added these to the options.

Edited by ChloeJessica on Jul 31st 2022 at 5:52:07 AM

Just for posteriority, I'll note that they are definitely allowed on trope pages because they operate under different standards, since trope articles can be more tongue-in-cheek. Healing Shiv's caption, for instance, was heavily favored in its IP thread.

Yeah, adding them onto stuff like recap or character pages potentially causes Reference Overdosed feeling. On trope pages they aren't as bad.

bumping for the sake of getting a crowner hooked.

the options, all mutually exclusive:

• Allow referential captions on work pages and their subpages.
• Prohibit referential captions on work pages, but allow them on work subpages.
• Prohibit referential captions on all work pages and subpages, except for works by the same creator.
• Prohibit referential captions on all work pages and subpages, except for works in the same franchise.
• Prohibit referential captions on all work pages and subpages. Captions may not include references to any other work.

If it's all good now you can ask a mod to pin the crowner via Holler.

e:

Edited by Amonimus on Aug 2nd 2022 at 11:44:04 AM

Crowner hooked.

I don't see why "allow references to works by the same creator" and "allow references to works in the same franchise" need to be mutually exclusive.

Some other potential exceptions I can think of:

• references to works that a work is based on/inspired by
• references to extremely well-known works, such as The Bible and certain Shakespeare plays

It's because a creator can have a wide variety of works beyond the single franchise? Take Nintendo. If we allow "references to other works by the same creator", then you can have Zelda jokes on Pokemon pages. For channels, like Cartoon Network, then the possible reference list is even further. Basically, it's the difference between referencing the game adaptation on the page for the manga, and referencing two entirely different works.

"same creator" is inclusive of "same franchise" in like 99% of cases also.

e: i announced the crowner on ATT.

Edited by ChloeJessica on Aug 2nd 2022 at 2:26:26 AM

That's a good point, "Creator" can be pretty loose. I was thinking of individual people with primary/solo creative control.

What about references to Creator Thumbprints and the like?

To "Prohibit referential captions on all work pages and subpages, except for works in the same franchise.". However, I think it might be fine if the work being referenced is by the same creator(s).

i know we have to wait out the timer before we can act, but... that seems pretty decisive, huh?

Edited by ChloeJessica on Aug 2nd 2022 at 5:27:01 AM

Again, it depends on what "creator" means.

The people/person who made the work in question.

...I'm aware of the definition of "creator", thank you. But as I mentioned just a few posts ago, a creator can mean anything from "one single writer" to "the entire corporation that produced the work, along with hundreds of other unrelated works". The difference between doing it for Edgar Allan Poe and Disney.

Even if the intent of the rule is to limit it to a specific person, you think people won't just take advantage of the ambiguity?

Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 2nd 2022 at 8:31:29 AM

i feel like that leaves loopholes where people can make irrelevant references because the same key grip or head gaffer or sound mixer or what have you worked on two different movies; also could lead to actor shoehorns (for instance, a caption referencing Black Widow on an unrelated movie starring Scarlett Johansson). Creator in the context of everything except music and indie projects usually refers to the company that made the work.

Edited by ChloeJessica on Aug 2nd 2022 at 5:32:32 AM

Well, you were wondering what I meant, so I just explained that to you. If it helps, I was talking about the main people who were responsible for the works in question.

Edited by RandomTroper123 on Sep 17th 2022 at 8:07:28 AM

key grips and gaffers and sound mixers (oh my!) aren't actors or VAs and would still technically qualify as creators in this sense.

Especially since TVT itself lumps all these people and groups as creators. You'd be fighting an uphill battle if you try and say "these people are creators, these people aren't".

I know that (EDIT: in case that wasn't obvious), I just left something out in my comment regarding them.

Edited by RandomTroper123 on Aug 2nd 2022 at 5:53:29 AM

alright, in that case, where do you draw the line? are videographers important enough? CGI effects creators? stunt doubles? for video games, mocap artists? UI designers? debuggers?

everyone involved in the production is necessary to the production. either they all count or none do. any line you can draw is arbitrary.

I said might in the first post, geez. And I'm aware that everyone in production is necessary, that's obvious. If you want to answer your questions seriously, no to all, you're stretching what I meant.

I asked in the first place because "creator" is an ambiguous and broad line to draw, and even if we try and limit it people aren't going to abide by arbitrary limits.

I understand that now, which I tried to suggest in a previous post.

im not trying to jump down your throat, Random, im sorry. im just trying to get this hammered out not just for the sake of this discussion but for the sake of anyone else who might come in with similar thoughts.