All The Tropes Wiki Project, Part XXVI

[robkelk]

Since Miraheze has put a (malformed) notice on the "Upload a file" page on the private wiki mentioning the difference between US Fair Use and UK Fair Dealing, I have updated Template:Fairuse to make clear which Fair Dealing provision applies to our use of copyrighted images.

I also moved "Template:Fairuse" to "Template:fair dealing", and updated the license documentation.

Anybody want to make a bot run changing thousands of file pages that use "{{fairuse}}" to use "{{fair dealing}}" instead? I left a redirect so the template move hasn't broken anything, but it would be nice for the pages to be tidy.

[GethN7]

Since Miraheze has put a (malformed) notice on the "Upload a file" page on the private wiki mentioning the difference between US Fair Use and UK Fair Dealing, I have updated Template:Fairuse to make clear which Fair Dealing provision applies to our use of copyrighted images.

I also moved "Template:Fairuse" to "Template:fair dealing", and updated the license documentation.

Anybody want to make a bot run changing thousands of file pages that use "{{fairuse}}" to use "{{fair dealing}}" instead? I left a redirect so the template move hasn't broken anything, but it would be nice for the pages to be tidy.

I would ordinarily be pleased to do so, but I currently have a very poorly functioning internet in terms of bandwidth speed.

That said, I would recommend using AutoWikiBrowser for this task, having it use any responsible administrator's bot account (it requires one for all edits made with the program), setting it to take all pages from the Template:Fair Use category (which will include all pages the template is used on, barring the template page itself, then having it run a simple change of the template markup to use the new text.

This tool can be downloaded freely from Wikipedia and comes with full instructions at the same.

[robkelk]

I'm working on adapting Wikipedia's list of logical fallacies to ours. Does anybody know what we call these fallacies?

• "I refuse to listen to you" (w:Invincible ignorance fallacy)
  
• "Let's agree to disagree" (w:I'm entitled to my opinion)
  
• an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete real event or physical entity (w:Reification)
  

I will no doubt have more later - this is a small bite from the buffet, to gets us started.

[Norgarth]

a while back I found and saved a group of pics featuring a Referee that were about calling penalties on various logical falliacies.

11 of them total, would you be interested in them? or at least potentially amused?

[robkelk]

Under s30 of the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, we need to be able to identify what's in images before we can use them. (For example, either the name of the referee in the photo above or the date and teams of the game that he was calling.) Can we do that with your images?

[robkelk]

I'm working on adapting Wikipedia's list of logical fallacies to ours. Does anybody know what we call these fallacies?

• "I refuse to listen to you" (w:Invincible ignorance fallacy)
  
• "Let's agree to disagree" (w:I'm entitled to my opinion)
  
• an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete real event or physical entity (w:Reification)
  

I will no doubt have more later - this is a small bite from the buffet, to gets us started.

More:

• "He has a reason for saying that" (w:Appeal to motive)
  
• "He's right because he's poor" (w:Argumentum ad lazarum) -- the inverse of "Appeal to Wealth"
  
• "Better dead than Red" (w:Red-baiting) -- Related to "Hitler Ate Sugar", but at the other end of the political spectrum
  
• "Because I said so" (w:Ipse dixit)
  

[Norgarth]

Under s30 of the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, we need to be able to identify what's in images before we can use them. (For example, either the name of the referee in the photo above or the date and teams of the game that he was calling.) Can we do that with your images?

probably not, I didn't make the pics, just saw them when someone else posted them, and I've had them for at least 2 years.

well, at least 1 of the pics shows that it was a Pittsburg vs Baltimore game, still not a lot of help as while they all look to be the same Ref (and I'm unsure how to go about identifying him), I can't be sure they are all from the same game (probably, but not for sure).

well, the 'fouls' committed include:
- a Nirvana Fallacy: Refusal to accept any solution that's not perfect
- Troll on the field: person there just to cause shit
- false Dichotomy
- proof by intimidation: difference between refuting a point and shouting it down
- false causality: coincidence used as evidence
-hedging: Use of a word that does not m,ean what they think it means
-caught in an echo chamber: Refusal to accept facts that contradict their own bias
- the standard ones even _I_ can identify) Ad hominem, moving goal posts, circular logic, and 'no source given'

not sure if that helps any with the naming issue you're dealing with.

[GethN7]

Rob, I thought of a simpler solution than just changing our fair use template to different markup on every page, just change the text of the template to something like:

"This image is used under either fair use (US standard) or fair dealing (UK standard). If there is a conflict, we default to the more operative of the two standards for all images"

And we can link to the legal definitions of both standards in the template and even state which one is operative due to our hosting ATM.

[robkelk]

I've already changed the text of the template... and added a link to the UK law.

I did that before I asked whether anyone wanted to run a bot job...

[GethN7]

I've already changed the text of the template... and added a link to the UK law.

I did that before I asked whether anyone wanted to run a bot job...

Wise men think alike I see.

Reason I'm more about that than bot jobbing all the templates (my internet has recovered enough I could do a bot job, albeit slowly) is our hosting could change (we get placed on other servers in other legal jurisdictions for example) and this just saves us hassle, because nigh all jurisdictions where we are likely to host our wiki have some version of a fair use clause in their legal literature and just modifying our templates to reflect our current hosting law is much simpler.

[Labster]

Just as some wrap-up on the Kiwi Farms thing.  This feels like a place where everyone agreed so fast that we're probably doing some practices totally wrong.

I have a suspicion that everything in Category:Website needs a bit of a look to see if it's in compliance with our policy.  Pages like [[4chan]] and [[8chan]] don't really have anything about creative content, but it wouldn't hurt to document the rare pepes and creepypasta discovered there.  Fundamentally, website is not really a category of things we want to index.  What we do want is:

* Sites that distribute creative content, like TV networks or publishers do, such as AO3.
* Sites that are essentially tropes of their own, like the Twitter Rant.
* Collaborative fiction that happens primarily on forums and Tumblr and formerly(?) Livejournal
* Sites where the website is the medium for the creation, like Time Cube or Ted Cruz for Human President

And I'm not sure we quite have the proper categories for that.  Of course I was never really happy with "Web Original" and "New Media" either.  I mean, it's been 400 years and we still have the "novel", and here we are doing the same thing again.

We also might want to explicitly name some things as on-topic in the ATT:ONTOPIC section

* Tropes in fiction
* Works of fiction and creative nonfiction
* Publishers/networks that distribute creative works
* Creators, writers, actors, and artists

[robkelk]

Well, let's find out whether the Tropers agree whether the pages in Category:Website are off-topic. I just put a "delete" tag on our page for Encyclopedia Dramatica, as a test case.

[Umbire]

I think 4chan and like boards (e.g. 2ch) would pass muster as a "place where stuff occasionally gets made" type of article - I'm on the fence about ED specifically, per the comment I left on that talk page (and am currently editing to better reflect my thoughts).

[GethN7]

Well, let's find out whether the Tropers agree whether the pages in Category:Website are off-topic. I just put a "delete" tag on our page for Encyclopedia Dramatica, as a test case.

Well, good call, I have just issued my own thought on the relevant talk page.

That said, while I tend to take a pretty broad view of websites as a whole as works, I do agree not every website would be relevant, and I would definitely agree with Labster on the idea the website must be considered a source of creative endeavour that has impact beyond it's own internal community at the very least.

[Umbire]

Well, let's find out whether the Tropers agree whether the pages in Category:Website are off-topic. I just put a "delete" tag on our page for Encyclopedia Dramatica, as a test case.

Well, good call, I have just issued my own thought on the relevant talk page.

That said, while I tend to take a pretty broad view of websites as a whole as works, I do agree not every website would be relevant, and I would definitely agree with Labster on the idea the website must be considered a source of creative endeavour that has impact beyond it's own internal community at the very least.

Seconding this.

[Bob Schroeck]

Geeze, you take an afternoon to go shopping and everything changes...

<grin>

I'll give my opinion when I have an opportunity to review today's edits on the wiki.

[Umbire]

So much of my time lately's been spent catching up on a Link to the Past randomizer tourney - one such video linked here - and I was wondering, with how plentiful randomizers are, would they warrant a trope page of their own? At the least they're a specific type of Challenge Run that deserves coverage, though they just as often see use for "casual" play.

[GethN7]

So much of my time lately's been spent catching up on a Link to the Past randomizer tourney - one such video linked here - and I was wondering, with how plentiful randomizers are, would they warrant a trope page of their own? At the least they're a specific type of Challenge Run that deserves coverage, though they just as often see use for "casual" play.

It might be a good subtrope for Self-Imposed Challenge.

[Umbire]

Right. I'll put a pin in a draft for whenever a slot's free.

[robkelk]

We have slots free, as long as you don't already have three candidates in the workshop.

[Bob Schroeck]

<sigh> A couple minutes ago (2:08 PM EDT or thereabouts), the wiki just crashed, and is doing nothing but throwing up "This wiki is temporarily unavailable ... (Cannot access the database: Cannot access the database: Connection refused (db101) (db101))" messages now.

EDIT: It's not just us. Meta is down, too.

EDIT 2: It took almost a half hour, but it's back now.

EDIT 3: I spoke too soon, we seem to have nothing but 50X errors right now.

[GethN7]

They did mention they'd be doing maintenance today.

[robkelk]

Until 21:00 UTC, so expect this sort of thing for another three hours.

[Bob Schroeck]

Oh... I'd forgotten about that. <facepalm>

[Umbire]

We have slots free, as long as you don't already have three candidates in the workshop.

Which is what I was referring to, yes. Don't immediately remember the number of candidates I have right this moment.