Off-Site Respect Threads on Wiki Pages (Staff Only)

[Bobsican]

Well, we can just list them as exceptions, so something like this could work:

"Do not add any respect thread links from external sites to our character profile pages, as they can't be properly monitorized to keep their content of sufficiently high reliability for our purposes, and they recurrently do not meet our standards. Feel free to remove any such existing links that you come across. The same applies to calculations hosted in external sites, however, exceptions are made to the ones that are were hosted in NarutoForums as they were previously accepted."

The NarutoForums website is now shut down, so there shouldn't be issues of new calculations being made over that domain.
Also, specifying over character profiles may be a bit counterproductive as it invites users to loophole from it by just posting them in verse pages instead, which isn't much different from the current issue, so alternatively:

"Do not add any respect thread links from external sites to our pages, as they can't be properly monitorized to keep their content of sufficiently high reliability for our purposes, and they recurrently do not meet our standards. Feel free to remove any such existing links that you come across. The same applies to calculations hosted in external sites, however, exceptions are made to the ones that are were hosted in NarutoForums as they were previously accepted."

 

[SamanPatou]

Should we add that Respect Threads can be added if they are approved through a CRT and hosted/imported on a wiki blog, crediting the author and adding a link if they are taken from somewhere else.

I'm not sure about just adding external links even if they have been evaluated, as the original website might be edited overtime, adding unevaluated stuff. Like, extra old RT that haven't been touched in centuries are very unlikely to change, but still.

 

[Bobsican]

Should we add that Respect Threads can be added if they are approved through a CRT and hosted/imported on a wiki blog, crediting the author and adding a link if they are taken from somewhere else.

I'm not sure about just adding external links even if they have been evaluated, as the original website might be edited overtime, adding unevaluated stuff. Like, extra old RT that haven't been touched in centuries are very unlikely to change, but still.

I really think they should be archived links in Archive.org, so that they can age well, as it has been said before, some websites have as an standard to delete the post and replace with a new one (on another link), and I'm sure we can't really expect an user to always be there to update it accordingly, let alone redo the evaluation process and so on everytime, assuming we're going to still feature them at all afterwards.

 

[Antvasima]

A new draft:

"Do not add any respect thread links from external sites to our pages, as they can't be properly monitored to keep their content of sufficiently high reliability for our purposes, and they recurrently do not meet our standards. Feel free to remove any such existing links that you come across. The same applies to calculations hosted in external sites, however, exceptions are made for the ones that were hosted in the NarutoForums as they were previously accepted. However, if possible, they should be copied to blogs in the wiki, with credit given to the original calculator."

 

[Bobsican]

Looks good, but I would wait to see what some others think.

 

[Elizhaa]

The new draft looks fine to me, also.

 

[Agnaa]

1. It should be "monitored" instead of "monitorized"
2. That still doesn't really say that respect threads can be included if they're evaluated.

 

[Bobsican]

That still doesn't really say that respect threads can be included if they're evaluated.

Well, it seems the general consensus from most of the staff is to just not feature them at all, but I wouldn't oppose it if they're only usable within blog posts and are evaluated, with the link to the original respect thread (if any), being archived in Archive.org and linked to that version, as said before.
We would also probably need some standards to properly evaluate them, as it may not be as simple as just listing a ton of feats with minimal commentary, especially for cases where complicated lore or debatable details get involved.

 

[Agnaa]

Create a CRT for the verse to see if people think it's acceptable enough to include.

I'm also not sure if it's a good idea to require them to be ported over to blog posts. They use different formatting, reformatting it all would be a massive pain in the ass.

 

[Bobsican]

Well, alternatively the archive.org link can just be given to the archived version of the respect thread used, with the user giving minimal additions beyond giving credit, if required, and then the comment section of the blog post is used for evaluation.

Also, only one respect thread should be used per blog post, as I'm sure some otherwise would fill a blog post with a ton of respect threads and ask for evaluation, which not only would be hard to navigate around, it also would make proper evaluation far harder.

 

[Agnaa]

I think that's fair, then.

 

[Antvasima]

It should be "monitored" instead of "monitorized"

Fixed. Sorry about being blind in this case.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, alternatively the archive.org link can just be given to the archived version of the respect thread used, with the user giving minimal additions beyond giving credit, if required, and then the comment section of the blog post is used for evaluation.

This seems to make sense to me. What do the rest of you think?

Also, only one respect thread should be used per blog post, as I'm sure some otherwise would fill a blog post with a ton of respect threads and ask for evaluation, which not only would be hard to navigate around, it also would make proper evaluation far harder.

I suppose that this makes sense as well.

 

[Bobsican]

To keep things clear, as it seems some may take it for granted, whether or not off-site respect threads are featurable or not is not set on stone yet, and the current consensus from most of the staff is to just not do so at all, so if you agree for it or not to begin with is something to say now as well.

 

[Antvasima]

Should I send out notifications to our staff members again?

 

[Bobsican]

Surely, yes, it would help to keep more consistent thoughts of the staff on the current matters.

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @SomebodyData @The_real_cal_howard @Dragonmasterxyz @Celestial_Pegasus @Soldier_Blue @Saikou_The_Lewd_King @Andytrenom @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Ogbunabali @Abstractions @WeeklyBattles @Colonel_Krukov @Shadowbokunohero @Mindovin @Jvando @Just_a_Random_Butler @Dino_Ranger_Black @Gemmysaur @JustSomeWeirdo @LordGriffin1000 @Theglassman12 @Crabwhale @Eficiente @GyroNutz @DarkGrath @The_Wright_Way @Moritzva @Firestorm808 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Everything12 @Duedate8898 @Planck69 @KingTempest

We would appreciate some further input here before we go ahead.

 

[KingTempest]

I have an alternative issue.

A lot of offsite links get deleted from their website, which the respect threads fall under.
We get a lot of calcs from Narutoforums, and the calc might get deleted or the origin/important parts of the calc gets deleted, and then we'll have to redo it in the future since we don't have it.

This same issue happens with some respect threads I've seen. Whenever I want to find a feat to add on to a page or a CRT

In all honesty, I have no issue with offsite respect threads, but it'll be much safer if we could transfer it here so it doesn't get deleted under our watch.

 

[Moritzva]

I agree with KingTempest absolutely.

 

[Planck69]

I agree with KingTempest as well.

 

[Bobsican]

Yeah, it seems it was agreed on already that if they were going to be featured, we wouldn't link directly, but rather to an archived version in archive.org, as we did with NarutoForums calcs.

 

[Antvasima]

Would the rest of you be fine with if we use Bobsican's suggestion, and link to backed up versions of the respect threads to separate blogs in our own wiki (one for every thread link), and then use the comments sections if necessary?

 

[KingTempest]

Would the rest of you be fine with if we use Bobsican's suggestion, and link to backed up versions of the respect threads to separate blogs in our own wiki (one for every thread link), and then use the comments sections if necessary?

That would be fine

 

[Antvasima]

Just to clarify, we would then remove the respect threads from regular profile pages, back them up to archive.vn, and then post them in separate blog posts in the wiki.

 

[GyroNutz]

I'm fine with KingTempest's solution

 

[Antvasima]

Do you mean the solution I posted that he agreed with above?

 

[Elizhaa]

Would the rest of you be fine with if we use Bobsican's suggestion, and link to backed up versions of the respect threads to separate blogs in our own wiki (one for every thread link), and then use the comments sections if necessary?

Seems fine.

 

[Bobsican]

Would the rest of you be fine with if we use Bobsican's suggestion, and link to backed up versions of the respect threads to separate blogs in our own wiki (one for every thread link), and then use the comments sections if necessary?

Just a minor thing, using the comment section isn't an optional thing for the purpose of evaluation, like how calculations are treated, they require at least one staff member being explicitly fine with the content.

That being said, if we do end up featuring off-site respect threads like this and so on, some basic guidelines to base evaluation on would be required, as said before.

 

[KingTempest]

Just to clarify, we would then remove the respect threads from regular profile pages, back them up to archive.vn, and then post them in separate blog posts in the wiki.

This seems like it would take a lot of work, but it seems worth it. Doesn't seem harmful

 

[Antvasima]

Well, we would only post the archive.vn links at least, not actually copy the entire respect threads link by link and scan by scan.

 

[Dino_Ranger_Black]

KingTempest has a solid solution but SamanPatou has also made a good point that there could be a feat(s) with a respect thread that may not be analyzed properly or isn't/aren't legit at all. I suggest before transferring the respect thread to this site, the person doing it in mind should take a look at feats first and check for the ones that are valid and the ones that aren't.

 

[Bobsican]

KingTempest has a solid solution but SamanPatou has also made a good point that there could be a feat(s) with a respect thread that may not be analyzed properly or isn't/aren't legit at all. I suggest before transferring the respect thread to this site, the person doing it in mind should take a look at feats first and check for the ones that are valid and the ones that aren't.

Indeed, that's why each one will require staff approval from now on, like how we do in calculations, after all, we can't expect users to be responsible and reliable enought by themselves to just link a respect thread after being archived in archive.vn

 

[Dino_Ranger_Black]

Indeed, that's why each one will require staff approval from now on, like how we do in calculations, after all, we can't expect users to be responsible and reliable enought by themselves to just link a respect thread after being archived in archive.vn

I actually wouldn't mind that approach.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Create a CRT for the verse to see if people think it's acceptable enough to include.

I'm also not sure if it's a good idea to require them to be ported over to blog posts. They use different formatting, reformatting it all would be a massive pain in the ass.

Yeah some sites don't translate over well to a Wiki Blog.

I just say use archive links if we don't make our own RT.

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah some sites don't translate over well to a Wiki Blog.

I just say use archive links if we don't make our own RT.

Blogs providing an archive link with an explanation of any missed feats/feats we don't use/etc. seems to be the consensus on how to do it.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Yeah that works for me if we are keeping them around

 

[Antvasima]

So is the Editing Rules page fine to use for this, and is somebody willing to write a draft text for the new regulation based on what we decided above?

Also, should we start a new discussion thread in our wiki management forum in which some of our staff members can ask for help with finding respect threads from our character profile pages, removing them, backing them up, and posting the new backed up links in blogs?

 

[Bobsican]

So is the Editing Rules page fine to use for this, and is somebody willing to write a draft text for the new regulation based on what we decided above?

Also, should we start a new discussion thread in our wiki management forum in which some of our staff members can ask for help with finding respect threads from our character profile pages, removing them, backing them up, and posting the new backed up links in blogs?

The latest draft says:

"Do not add any respect thread links from external sites to our pages, as they can't be properly monitored to keep their content of sufficiently high reliability for our purposes, and they recurrently do not meet our standards. Feel free to remove any such existing links that you come across. The same applies to calculations hosted in external sites, however, exceptions are made for the ones that were hosted in the NarutoForums as they were previously accepted. However, if possible, they should be copied to blogs in the wiki, with credit given to the original calculator."

If we're going to still feature them at all it can also be:

"Do not add any respect thread links from external sites to our pages, as they can't be properly monitored to keep their content of sufficiently high reliability for our purposes, and they recurrently do not meet our standards. Feel free to remove any such existing links that you come across. The same applies to calculations hosted in external sites, however, exceptions are made for the ones that were hosted in the NarutoForums as they were previously accepted. If one desires to feature them, they should be copied to blog posts in the wiki (one per respect thread), by archiving the link in archive.vn, with credit given to the original creator(s) and proper evaluation by staff and knowledgeable members in such blog post."

As for the second part, yes, such thread probably should be managed pretty similarly to how the Calculations Evaluations thread is, although there shouldn't be priorities for them given that no profile actually relies on them, and are far more optional, some basic guidelines on how to evaluate them also would be required, as said before, namely regarding content that's "questionable" for our standards, lack of proper citations over a certain part and how the user can try to "fix" them in some cases by detailing in the blog post after dropping the link and credits.

 

[Antvasima]

I made a few adjustments to the draft text:

"Do not add any respect thread links from external sites to our pages, as they can't be properly monitored to keep their content of sufficiently high reliability for our purposes, and they recurrently do not meet our standards. Feel free to remove any such existing links that you come across. The same applies to calculations hosted in external sites, however, exceptions are made for the ones that were hosted in the NarutoForums as they were previously accepted. If one desires to feature them, they should be backed up to archive.vn, after which the backed up pages are linked to in blog posts in the wiki (only link to one respect thread per blog post), with credit given to the original creator(s). Our staff and knowledgeable members can then evaluate which of the feats that seem reliable or not in the blog post comment sections."

However, we have one significant hole in our plan here: What should we do after respect thread feats have been properly evaluated via the blog post comments? Lock the comments section, and link to the blog post in the related character profile page?

 

[Bobsican]

The new wording works.

Just as we do with calculations, the comment section remains open, but the blog post, once accepted, can then just be linked accordingly to the respective page.
The Standard Format for Character Profiles and the Standard Format for Verse pages also requires a minor rewrite to have a proper section to feature them consistently. The former can specify that this stuff can be featured in the Feats section, rather than just arbitrarily at the end of the profile, and the latter probably below the calculations section.