The Necessity for references rule change/addition

[Dark_Soul20189]

Permission granted to post it as a staff thread by @DarkGrath

Have talked with Multiple staffs about the problem and all seem to agree, that it's a good idea if done properly.

Now, what I am proposing is simple: making references a necessity for active verses. before we get into a the proposal let's first discuss references a bit.

References are a source from which we get information for a scan or statement. References are needed to be able to quickly find out where a certain statement or scan comes from. This is to make sure we can look into and understand the context better and make sure the source is correct and actually exist. They are also very important for people trying to upgrade, debunk or rework a verse.

Something I just found out about from a staff member after discussing it was this

• Always include the References section in character pages, explanation pages, information blogs, and verse-specific powers and abilities pages to source all the important information covered within them. To learn more regarding how to use them, read the References page. New pages without that section may be deleted after ample warning if no adequate justification (such as the series lacking any useful demarcations, or none of the justifications on the page coming from only one specific part of the source material) is provided in the edit summary or in response to inquiry, and no indication that they will be added is given.

Source here.

Let's be honest even while this is a rule, most people don't follow it. I was told by a staff member and i quote

Well, I believe this was a point of contention when the idea of references was first pushed. It was understood that it would be quite difficult to revise every page on the wiki to provide references, so it was made optional but highly recommended.

So to summarize, we already have a rule in place that almost no one follows.

I think this here is the best point to say my goal in this.
- First to get people to know it is a actual rule to enforce references on every profile.
- Second is to create a new rule for it and force people to take actions and start improving the quality and reliability of profiles and pages.

Before we get into it, I need to mention that No one is expecting everyone to suddenly work on getting references to everything, but we need to start somewhere. This process will take a lot of time and effort. Each step will be important, but can't be rushed. additionally, I think a good addon step would be forcing all new CRT's to include and implement references.

Proposal - References should be a necessity for active verses
Now what do i mean by this?
Active verses and profiles/pages should be forced to add references to where they get there information from.

In the past there existed a thread that when the idea of references being forced, was turned into "highly recommended" due to it being to much work for everyone. Now why do i bring back an old topic? That is simple I have a idea that can solve the "to much work" problem. That it's to strictly define an "active verse" or a "active/important profile/page"
{Will link the thread if or when i find it}


What qualifies as a active verse/profile/page?
to make this simpler let's first make some points.

- It needs to have Multiple users/supporters active on the site.
- Needs to have at least 2 CRT's in the latest 3 months.
- Needs to have users that is often looking over the verse/page/profile.
- Profiles and verses that are still actively being updated only.
- if new profiles are being made of a certain verse.



What qualifies for a important profile/page?
to make this simpler let's first made some points.

- Is used to scale the verse.
- Other profiles are reliant on this profile for the scaling or abilities.
- Any general power page or explanation page.
- Profiles that are often used, whether it's due to them being popular or any other reason.


Proposed rules for forcing references include.

All active verses, profiles and pages must have references. This is so we can assure that the source of the information is correct. What we define as an active verse and profile are those that have multiple active supporters, usually with at least 2 CRTs per 3 months. Naturally the more used profiles and pages are, the higher priority for the references to be added should be.

Note, It should be mentioned that No one expect it to be done fast, but we gotta start somewhere.

additional rule to improve the life for all of us in the future is this.

All new CRT's must include references both in the CRT and in what they implement

These rules can definitely be much more refined in grammar, but the premise of them are good enough.


Pros and cons if these rules would be accepted.

Pros
- Massively improved reliability and Quality of profiles and pages.
- The first step towards everything having references
- Easier to find false information and exaggerations to downgrade.
- All CRT's and what will be implemented will be much more reliable.

Cons
- Will take a lot of time and effort.
- Will force more effort towards creating CRT's, implementing them and possibly evaluating them.


Votes

Agree -
Disagree -
Neutral -


Notes

Note 1 - Already existing CRT's and profiles won't just be deleted if this thread passes.... I have no idea how many times I have accidently caused this misunderstanding.
Note 2 - This sandbox is a work in progress and will be continuously updated and improved throughout the thread.
Note 3 - The exact rule that will be created, can be discussed in the thread.

I thank everyone that will participate in the discussion, and I hope it can remain civilized.

Lastly I wanna wish you all a great day.

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr. Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Agnaa @Just_a_Random_Butler @DarkGrath @Dereck03 @Planck69

What do you think about this?

 

[Planck69]

It was my understanding that references on new profiles (as of the time the original references standard was put in place) were fully mandatory and that older profiles were heavily encouraged to be worked on and have references added. Is this not the case?

I actually don't mind pushing more for references to be added but I don't quite see how to enforce this in a manner that wouldn't lead to mass deletions at least.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I disagree. References are necessary for all new profiles. References are necessary for anything that is added to profiles from this point on. Those are existing rules and they are good rules.
Expecting references to be added to the main character of a verse with 1000+ chapter at the drop of a dime, for example, is completely unrealistic in practice. This kind of thing can take weeks to month of preparatory work for a single character, much less for multiple verses and with many characters each.

In practice, the proposed rules just blocks attempst at keeping these verses at least factually up to date, due to "need to wait with a CRT, because if the verse starts counting as active I will need to spend the next few weeks searching references for everything". If I have a choice between profiles being kept accurate and profiles having references, I choose the former.


Also don't know what you mean with Note 1. Like, are you planning to implement the rule but do nothing if it's not followed? Because then it isn't a rule. Having rules not enforced isn't a great idea. Rules should be written the way they are enforced.

IMO any really active verse will over time get the most important references added, simply due to having frequent CRTs which have to add references to all things discussed in them. To that comes that I regularly see people make an effort to add additional references, so there is progress, just that it isn't extremely fast. But there really is no need for a Manhattan project here.

 

[Planck69]

Expecting references to be added to the main character of a verse with 1000+ chapter at the drop of a dime, for example, is completely unrealistic in practice. This kind of thing can take weeks to month of preparatory work for a single character, much less for multiple verses and with many characters each.

Second this. It is entirely possible for some single profiles to be major projects unto themselves (I myself am working on some of those) and mandating this wouldn't be feasible for them.

 

[Catzlaflame]

• Always include the References section in character pages, explanation pages, information blogs, and verse-specific powers and abilities pages to source all the important information covered within them. To learn more regarding how to use them, read the References page. New pages without that section may be deleted after ample warning if no adequate justification (such as the series lacking any useful demarcations, or none of the justifications on the page coming from only one specific part of the source material) is provided in the edit summary or in response to inquiry, and no indication that they will be added is given.

Let's be honest even while this is a rule, most people don't follow it. I was told by a staff member and i quote

Well, I believe this was a point of contention when the idea of references was first pushed. It was understood that it would be quite difficult to revise every page on the wiki to provide references, so it was made optional but highly recommended.

So to summarize, we already have a rule in place that almost no one follows.

To clarify,

That staff member was referring to old pages (as in pages that existed before AKM’s thread about references), while the rule you cite is referring to new pages (as in pages that were created after AKM’s thread about references). So technically, no, there isn’t an inherent contradiction there. What you are proposing to change is already the standard technically. Here’s AKM’s thread to further support this.

If your goal is to have staff begin enforcing this more, (1) that isn’t really a standard change and (2) how do we do that without having a consequence in place ??

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree with DontTalkDT 100%

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Will start to answer questions but before anything I need to clear up the misunderstandings.

First of, I don't propose forcing any of the current CRT's to suddenly, put refreneces into there post, since that would be unrealistic, what I mean is forcing CRTs AFTER this thread to have it in them, to slowly improve it. This is so we start the process over it.

I am also not forcing any large profile to just change over night, what I am proposing will be a long term process that will take a lot of time and effort. But I think we need to be more strict in our approach towards starting the process, now I will start with replying towards messages

 

[Planck69]

Will start to answer questions but before anything I need to clear up the misunderstandings.

First of, I don't propose forcing any of the current CRT's to suddenly, put refreneces into there post, since that would be unrealistic, what I mean is forcing CRTs AFTER this thread to have it in them, to slowly improve it. This is so we start the process over it.

I mean, that's the thing. We don't allow CRTs to pass changes to the profile without references anymore at all, and haven't for a while. So this part is redundant given that's what we do anyways.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

It was my understanding that references on new profiles (as of the time the original references standard was put in place) were fully mandatory and that older profiles were heavily encouraged to be worked on and have references added. Is this not the case?

I actually don't mind pushing more for references to be added but I don't quite see how to enforce this in a manner that wouldn't lead to mass deletions at least.

As I always managed to fail to explain is that I am trying to force new CRT's and what they are implimented into, to have refreneces. Naturally older profiles, can be left alone for now, unless they are being regularly updated. At most I would suggest frezzeing some profiles, that are crucial for a verse. Deletion should always be a last option.

As I thought I explained decently is trying to classify what a "active" verse and "important" profile/page was. It won't delete profiles, only make it much more difficult to get anything new accepted without references.

Important and active profiles and pages should be a much higher priority to add referneces to then a average profile. We need to find a way to make people actually work on it.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

I mean, that's the thing. We don't allow CRTs to pass changes to the profile without references anymore at all, and haven't for a while. So this part is redundant given that's what we do anyways.

While You may not do it other staff do, and wouldn't it be much better if it was much more obvoius for the users?

I can link multiple new CRT's that lack refeneces that are very new. Some that have passed some that have just been created.

 

[Planck69]

While You may not do it other staff do, and wouldn't it be much better if it was much more obvoius for the users?

I can link multiple new CRT's that lack refeneces that are very new. Some that have passed some that have just been created.

Were the changes added to the profiles without references as well? That's the meat of it. A thread not having the reference in it initially is a bit inconvenient but what really matters is what ends up on the page itself.

If this is to enforce newer CRTs having references within their OPs then eh, fine? It'd be cleaner but I personally don't see that as a priority so long as the pages still have the references added to them when the revision is passed.

As for the above post before this one, I personally haven't seen many people add new references to a profile while neglecting to fill in the old ones, but I suppose it can be incentivised. But I don't feel too strongly about that either.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

I disagree. References are necessary for all new profiles. References are necessary for anything that is added to profiles from this point on. Those are existing rules and they are good rules.
Expecting references to be added to the main character of a verse with 1000+ chapter at the drop of a dime, for example, is completely unrealistic in practice. This kind of thing can take weeks to month of preparatory work for a single character, much less for multiple verses and with many characters each.

In practice, the proposed rules just blocks attempst at keeping these verses at least factually up to date, due to "need to wait with a CRT, because if the verse starts counting as active I will need to spend the next few weeks searching references for everything". If I have a choice between profiles being kept accurate and profiles having references, I choose the former.

I can understand this concern and understand why it is a problem, and what I am trying to make is some strict fuidlines what and what not would be forced, and what would be "highly preferable" in adding refereneces. That means just due to haveing a active verse, dosen't mean you need to directly just do refereneces. But we need to find a good way to actually make people start doing it.... Sorry if I have ad arguments, it's just my Explanation and debating skills have never been that great...

Also don't know what you mean with Note 1. Like, are you planning to implement the rule but do nothing if it's not followed? Because then it isn't a rule. Having rules not enforced isn't a great idea. Rules should be written the way they are enforced.

I wrote it like that due to how many times people thought "So you wanna delete all verses without references""
So it was to clear up that missunderstanding...

IMO any really active verse will over time get the most important references added, simply due to having frequent CRTs which have to add references to all things discussed in them. To that comes that I regularly see people make an effort to add additional references, so there is progress, just that it isn't extremely fast. But there really is no need for a Manhattan project here.

Yes, but then we come to my 2nd point, CRT's need to be stricter in there enforcement of refreneces.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Were the changes added to the profiles without references as well? That's the meat of it. A thread not having the reference in it initially is a bit inconvenient but what really matters is what ends up on the page itself.

If this is to enforce newer CRTs having references within their OPs then eh, fine? It'd be cleaner but I personally don't see that as a priority so long as the pages still have the references added to them when the revision is passed.

As for the above post before this one, I personally haven't seen many people add new references to a profile while neglecting to fill in the old ones, but I suppose it can be incentivised. But I don't feel too strongly about that either.

Honestly from what I have seen, sometimes it gets added, sometimes it don't.

Yes, that is the main point to taking a first step. If the CRT's have references in them, the chances of the references transfering to what they are implimented into is much more likely, I am talking from both experince, and from what I have seen.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I do not think it is necessary to double post as oppose to simply edit the most recent post.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

I do not think it is necessary to double post as oppose to simply edit the most recent post.

Sorry

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

To clarify,

That staff member was referring to old pages (as in pages that existed before AKM’s thread about references), while the rule you cite is referring to new pages (as in pages that were created after AKM’s thread about references). So technically, no, there isn’t an inherent contradiction there. What you are proposing to change is already the standard technically. Here’s AKM’s thread to further support this.

If your goal is to have staff begin enforcing this more, (1) that isn’t really a standard change and (2) how do we do that without having a consequence in place ??

Thank you, I was searching for this post, but as I have repeatedly said, and failed to clear up is that While the rule is in place, it is not fully being followed.

And what I was trying to focus on was as AKM, old thread was, to make Users more adware that they are a necessity for all of our current upgrades... Since they are not fully being followed.

Sadly due to my inability to properly explain myself it seems like I failed hard...

 

[DontTalkDT]

I wrote it like that due to how many times people thought "So you wanna delete all verses without references""
So it was to clear up that missunderstanding...

Yeah, but how do you plan to enforce it then?
You mention "freezing" profiles, but that seems counter-productive to our main priority of having the profiles be accurate.

Yes, but then we come to my 2nd point, CRT's need to be stricter in there enforcement of refreneces.

It's already the rule. The staff knows that it should be done. Feel free to personally point it out where it doesn't happen, if our staff misses it.

---

I don't really see what rule you try to create other than what we already have. You implement a classification of active profiles that should have references... but from what you say you don't plan to enforce it. So it isn't really a rule then. It's just another form of the general sentiment of "all profiles should ideally at some point get references". But that already exists and everyone agrees on it.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Yeah, but how do you plan to enforce it then?
You mention "freezing" profiles, but that seems counter-productive to our main priority of having the profiles be accurate.

That was something I wanted to start a disscussion about, I have a few ideas. But would also like to hear others.

What I mean by frezzeing profiles, is simply not alowing them to be used in vs battles, due to being somewhat unreliable. That should at least bring some motivation to work on it. Some other possible stuff can be disscussed if you or anyone else also have ideas, as AKM said in last thread reworking all old profiles would have been a impossibllle task, and deletion should always be the last option.

But yeah, Profiles being acruate should always be the highest priority.

It's already the rule. The staff knows that it should be done. Feel free to personally point it out where it doesn't happen, if our staff misses it.

Will do, but it does seem like it happens much more often then you think.

Though if I may request, I think it is necessary to remind the users of it. Since it seems like a lot of users either have forgotten about it, or simply to new to know about it.

 

[DontTalkDT]

That was something I wanted to start a disscussion about, I have a few ideas. But would also like to hear others.

What I mean by frezzeing profiles, is simply not alowing them to be used in vs battles, due to being somewhat unreliable. That should at least bring some motivation to work on it. Some other possible stuff can be disscussed if you or anyone else also have ideas, as AKM said in last thread reworking all old profiles would have been a impossibllle task, and deletion should always be the last option.

But yeah, Profiles being acruate should always be the highest priority.

That's a no fun allowed rule. It's the equivalent to "you're not allowed to play until you did your homework."
This is a hobby, people spend their valuable free time on this, so let's not act like overzealous teachers.
It also has the same effect of effectively distracting people from the important stuff, since you can debate with an incomplete/outdated/wrong profile, but not one without references.

It isn't in our interest what engagement is concerned either.


Quite honestly, I see no need for any of this. References are getting added gradually. I have seen many people make an effort in that direction. It's not our top priority. Let's not take things hostage to make something that's already progressing progress faster.

If anything, think of some positive reinforcement instead. I tried making profile of the month contests in the past but it was a lot of effort and didn't go anywhere. But stuff like that is a more reasonable motivator.

Will do, but it does seem like it happens much more often then you think.

Though if I may request, I think it is necessary to remind the users of it. Since it seems like a lot of users either have forgotten about it, or simply to new to know about it.

People regularly don't read many of the rules. Not too much we can do about it other than put reminders when we see it.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

People regularly don't read many of the rules. Not too much we can do about it other than put reminders when we see it.

Just gotta ask this then, If i see CRT's being accepted and implimented into profiles without refreneces, or simply CRT's without referneces can user (such as myself) request the revertion of the edits? and for the user to add references into the CRT?

(Asking this to make sure I am understanding it correctly.)

Also

That's a no fun allowed rule. It's the equivalent to "you're not allowed to play until you did your homework."
This is a hobby, so let's not act like overzealous teachers.
It also has the same effect of effectively distracting people from the important stuff, since you can debate with an incomplete/outdated/wrong profile, but not one without references.

It isn't in our interest what engagement is concerned either.


Quite honestly, I see no need for any of this. References are getting added gradually. I have seen many people make an effort in that direction. It's not our top priority. Let's not take things hostage to make something that's already progressing progress faster.

I am still curious what others think and argue, So i would love to at least wait before them, but either way my sandbox was a failure, but since My goal was more or less reached It was a acceptable defeat.

If anything, think of some positive reinforcement instead. I tried making profile of the month contests in the past but it was a lot of effort.

Yep, I agree. It is just that a lot of people get into a trap of just upgrading (been in such a community myself in the past) But I guess that can be solved by the enforcement of references for CRT's.

Either way this discussion has been helpful.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Just gotta ask this then, If i see CRT's being accepted and implimented into profiles without refreneces, or simply CRT's without referneces can user (such as myself) request the revertion of the edits? and for the user to add references into the CRT?

(Asking this to make sure I am understanding it correctly.)

Also

Reverting the edit would just cause additional work, since then the next time the edit needs to be made again and references added.
But you can write in the CRT that references need to be added or, if the thread is closed, you can write the staff member who approved it and ask them to remind the people who did the edit to please include them.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Reverting the edit would just cause additional work, since then the next time the edit needs to be made again and references added.
But you can write in the CRT that references need to be added or, if the thread is closed, you can write the staff member who approved it and ask them to remind the people who did the edit to please include them.

Alright, Then that is what I will do from now on, Thank you.

 

[Antvasima]

I also agree with DontTalk here. Thank you for helping out.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

What do we currently need to do here?

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

What do we currently need to do here?

Too long since I made this I forgot this even existed, But I am pretty sure it was mostly rejected either way. It can be closed if no one has anything more to add. (It was too rushed on my part and I apologize for that)

Thanks to everyone who participated here though.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for your explanation.

Do you also think that we should close this discussion thread, IdiosyncraticLawyer?

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Okay. Thank you for your explanation.

Do you also think that we should close this discussion thread, IdiosyncraticLawyer?

Yes, given the overwhelming disagreements.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will do so then. Thank you to everybody who helped out here.