(reply) |
(reply) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
: I speak for myself when I say my home is "here". I'm an uninvolved party at Wikipedia when it comes to the 24 Project over there. I think it's a fantastic improvement drive, but generally I've always thought that Wikipedia should be provide simple, general outlines about 24 content... and then link to us here for more information 8). |
: I speak for myself when I say my home is "here". I'm an uninvolved party at Wikipedia when it comes to the 24 Project over there. I think it's a fantastic improvement drive, but generally I've always thought that Wikipedia should be provide simple, general outlines about 24 content... and then link to us here for more information 8). |
||
: How come mergers worry you? – [[User:Blue Rook|Blue Rook]] 23:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)<sub>[[User talk:Blue Rook|<font color="lightblue">talk</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Blue Rook|contribs]]</sub> |
: How come mergers worry you? – [[User:Blue Rook|Blue Rook]] 23:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)<sub>[[User talk:Blue Rook|<font color="lightblue">talk</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Blue Rook|contribs]]</sub> |
||
| + | |||
| + | ::It worries me because this user is known to get "out of control", at one point they suggested that no character in the series was important and warranted an article, except for Jack and Chloe. I'm worried that if they are given "an inch", they will "take a mile", so to speak. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap">[[user:Steve C|<big style="color:#900">Steve C</big>]] // [[user talk:Steve C|<font color="#090">talk</font>]] // [[special:emailuser/Steve C|<font color="#4682b4">email</font>]] // </small> 01:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC) |
||
| + | |||
| + | :: Surely that's a POV, subjective thing to say. At least the editor has a defensible viewpoint, no? That editor has a point: to have a large quantity of fictional character articles from all the popular fiction shows out there would be far, far beyond the scope of what Wikipedia is specifically tailored for (namely, a general interest English encyclopedia). But I don't agree that only Jack and Chloe deserve their own articles. We'd at least have to add David Palmer and Tony to that list ;) |
||
| + | :: Simply because I support ''24'' knowledge with all my heart doesn't mean I will automatically believe that Wikipedia should contain character articles for every main character. That's what this wiki is for, in my opinion. If you'd like to talk about this more, please send me an email, since this forum topic goes against the rules as it doesn't pertain to improving ''this'' wiki. – [[User:Blue Rook|Blue Rook]] 21:37, 7 September 2008 (UTC)<sub>[[User talk:Blue Rook|<font color="lightblue">talk</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Blue Rook|contribs]]</sub> |
||
Latest revision as of 21:37, 7 September 2008
Forum: The Situation Room > 24 Project on Wikipedia
Hi guys. As you know, I'm on a "break" at Wikipedia, and I can't edit there for a while. I just wanted to let you guys know about this person, they are a person who has merged a lot of 24 articles in the past, and seems like they are ready to start again now I am gone. Can you guys keep an eye on this and try to stop them? I didn't know where else to go. Steve C // talk // email // 21:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- I speak for myself when I say my home is "here". I'm an uninvolved party at Wikipedia when it comes to the 24 Project over there. I think it's a fantastic improvement drive, but generally I've always thought that Wikipedia should be provide simple, general outlines about 24 content... and then link to us here for more information 8).
- How come mergers worry you? – Blue Rook 23:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs
- It worries me because this user is known to get "out of control", at one point they suggested that no character in the series was important and warranted an article, except for Jack and Chloe. I'm worried that if they are given "an inch", they will "take a mile", so to speak. Steve C // talk // email // 01:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- Surely that's a POV, subjective thing to say. At least the editor has a defensible viewpoint, no? That editor has a point: to have a large quantity of fictional character articles from all the popular fiction shows out there would be far, far beyond the scope of what Wikipedia is specifically tailored for (namely, a general interest English encyclopedia). But I don't agree that only Jack and Chloe deserve their own articles. We'd at least have to add David Palmer and Tony to that list ;)
- Simply because I support 24 knowledge with all my heart doesn't mean I will automatically believe that Wikipedia should contain character articles for every main character. That's what this wiki is for, in my opinion. If you'd like to talk about this more, please send me an email, since this forum topic goes against the rules as it doesn't pertain to improving this wiki. – Blue Rook 21:37, 7 September 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs