Okay - what I'm imagining is a three-step process:
1. Create subpages for each of the proposed categories.
2. Move the current content of the main page in Sandbox/Mohs Scale Of Science Fiction Hardness and replace with descriptions of and links to the subpages.
3. Flag works on the subpages that have been sorted into the new system (e.g. by strikethroughs).
Sound good?
Yeah I'm good with that.
@nrjxll The page doesn't need examples, but we want it, it's for fun. Yes, obviously all science fiction works will belong into one of the categories. And your point is? Wouldn't that be a good thing? I for one thought so.
edited 7th Mar '11 7:58:51 PM by CounterBlitzkrieg
Why are you reading this line?Well, if we listed them, it seems to me that either we'd have one large page or issues with notability will come into play.
But it's Just for Fun, and the current page isn't solely filled with Trope Overdosed things (my one pet peeve with this sort of thing), so I withdraw my objection.
(Skipped a lot of posts, but the idea seems clear enough, and the crowner options' descriptions certainly help summarize the issue.)
Concerning example listing: I suggest we impose a restriction of three examples per category which the Troper Hive Mind can generally agree that they describe the category well, to preempt rapid overinflation of the article in the future. The rest of the examples can simply be shuttled off to each work-in-question's own article.
edited 16th Mar '11 5:37:06 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.So will the scale be changed once we figure out what to do with examples on the page? Personally, I don't have a problem with people putting examples on the page nor do I like the idea of having a limit to the number of examples per category. I rather like the current format, since it also ends up being a good catalogue of similar sci-fi series' that I can follow up on later, and it gives a better impression of the spectrum within the categories.
Plus it would be a little hard to get tropers to agree on just three examples that define a category.
edited 3rd May '11 3:55:46 PM by redlar
I laugh in the face of suffering.I disagree strongly with limiting it to three examples per category. For one thing,
—> "It is about the examples, dorkwoods!" Janitor, back at the beginning of the wiki.
For another, limiting the examples to three greatly increases the probability that someone reading the page won't be familiar enough with any of the three to get a good idea of what the category is really like. With a sliding scale, the more of the examples you are familiar with, the easier the divisions on the scale are to see. It's the similarities between works that define where they go on the scale.
edited 3rd May '11 4:11:46 PM by Madrugada
I really think somebody needs to get this done. Even if its just resorted examples. On a side note, we definitely need something in there that points out that hardness in a work is based on the period of time it is made in, even if it's based on science from a previous time period.
Therefore, Fallout should not be in the place on the scale that it currently occupies.
As said before, FTL shouldn't automatically make a work soft. Why Metal Gear, Fallout, and FEAR are higher up on the scale than Contact is beyond me.
Here's an idea I've had that's probably going to be extremely controversial: require every entry to have an actual scientific explanation for its position, and recommend adding citations to the explanation.
So many of the out of place entries reek of people not bothering to do the research.
edited 3rd Jun '11 9:54:49 AM by Archereon
This is a signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.Wait, what? I thought the change had already been made?
That's probably not a good idea. We've already voted in a new scale (which does do away with the "FTL Stigma"), and I was under the impression the change had already been made, but apparently not. Adding in something like that would just be confusing and IMO overly critical of "soft" SF.
I'll get started on it.
Edit: The old text is at Sandbox.Mohs Scale Of Science Fiction Hardness; the examples I chose for the rewrite are added to the subpages, with descriptions mostly cribbed from the old page.
edited 3rd Jun '11 7:33:23 PM by RobinZimm
I think we're done — everything else to be done can be done by Wiki Magic.
Looks great! There was just one problem—the page was tagged as a work, not a trope, so it had blank moment and YMMV links at the top. Fixed it.
Is there anything else?
Writing a post-post apocalypse LitRPG on RR. Also fanfic stuff.In spite of the index tags in the article, the sub-pages are not being indexed. I took a look, and found that the "does indexing" box was not checked off as it was supposed to be, so I did... and it still did nothing.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Crown Description:
Several tropers question whether the present categories correctly describe what science fiction fans mean when they discuss how "hard" or "soft" a given work of science fiction is.

I think that would fall under "taking the joke too far". It should be done only if it makes sense to have ten items on the scale, not for the sake of the title pun.