All The Tropes Wiki Project, Part XI

[LulzKiller]

The only annoying thing about this category licensing thing is that it makes categorising images for SEO (like I was doing a while ago) more difficult by not having the real list of uncategorised images

[robkelk]

Once an image has a license, it also has a category related to that license - so relying on the uncategorised image list is only useful if images don't have licenses.

[Bob Schroeck]

So I finally went to reconcile these two, and I realize that what we have here are two templates with almost identical names with two wildly varying purposes.

One is a warning to the reader that by the very nature of the page its contents will include unmarked spoilers.

The other is a maintentance alert much like {{cleanup}} indicating that the page has spoilers that should be hidden and aren't.

They also apply different categories to their pages:  "Unmarked Spoilers" for the reader warning, "Pages with Unmarked Spoilers" for the maintenance alert.

Contrary to my earlier stance, I'm thinking now that we shouldn't merge these... but maybe rename the maintenance alert to something a little more indicative instead.  How do {{spoilers need markup}} or even just {{fix spoilers}} sound?

[Bob Schroeck]

Um, guys?

The page-top menus are broken and rendering as plain text bullet lists, and have been apparently about noon Eastern time.  I've checked in a couple browsers it's the same regardless.

Correction: It appears it's not just the menus, but templates as well. Something is seriously borked.

Update: 20 minutes later, and everything's fine again. I hate these kinds of hiccups.

[SelfCloak]

So I finally went to reconcile these two, and I realize that what we have here are two templates with almost identical names with two wildly varying purposes.

One is a warning to the reader that by the very nature of the page its contents will include unmarked spoilers.

The other is a maintentance alert much like {{cleanup}} indicating that the page has spoilers that should be hidden and aren't.

They also apply different categories to their pages:  "Unmarked Spoilers" for the reader warning, "Pages with Unmarked Spoilers" for the maintenance alert.

Contrary to my earlier stance, I'm thinking now that we shouldn't merge these... but maybe rename the maintenance alert to something a little more indicative instead.  How do {{spoilers need markup}} or even just {{fix spoilers}} sound?

That's a good idea, makes sense. The two template names are fine, but I prefer {{fix spoilers}}.

For the categories applied, the one for the maintenance template should be renamed to something different, like "Pages Needing Spoiler Markup".

The unmarked spoiler templates I added to some pages were meant as a warning to the reader.

[robkelk]

Agreed with SelfCloak - in fact, I'd say that all templates meant to tell us something needs to be fixed should include the word "fix" in their names.

---

OT: Today's a good day for the freebie wiki - a brand new editor and a returning editor from the Orain days. Yay!

[LulzKiller]

If I get it right, if we are going to aim for no unmarked spoilers, we will only end up with one template anyway, would we not?

[robkelk]

Well, not a 100% absence of spoilers... at least, not according to the Spoiler Policy

[robkelk]

So, what's the trope here for her nickname?

Landslide Annie earned her moniker by initially prevailing by a single vote (later increased to a 12-vote blowout after a recount.)

[Bob Schroeck]

Sarcasm Mode? Irony?

[SelfCloak]

Ironic Nickname

[robkelk]

Bingo! Thanks, SelfCloak.

[robkelk]

A bit of whimsey spotted at Wikivoyage:Help :

FAQ - fearfully anticipated questions... and answers.

Why aren't we this creative on our main Help page?

[robkelk]

Just made a new category. It could use more pages.

[Morganite]

So I finally went to reconcile these two, and I realize that what we have here are two templates with almost identical names with two wildly varying purposes.

There's something funny about those two spoiler templates... Namely that both seem to have been created by our very own Bob Schroeck, albeit years apart. I'm guessing that the contexts were different to result in such different results. But there sure are a lot of pages that aren't using either one of them. It took me about ten seconds to find a page with a non-templated warning. I don't know if anything on the page actually was an unmarked spoiler, but it was chock-full of things that were spoiler tagged too.

For that matter, there's some awfully weird stuff in the template namespace in general. Do we even use those wikipedia moderation bits? And what's even the point of Template:!(( and it's ilk?

On a different spoiler-related note, I think I may have brought this up sometime before, but either way I'm gonna have a go at it now.

So here's the page for Ar tonelico. Is it for the first game in the series, or for the franchise? Actually it's kind of both. There are tagged spoilers for the second and third games... mostly with no indication they're not for the first game. Some other things are just bizarrely out of context. Meanwhile, the page for the second game is refreshingly free of spoilers for the third.

It seems to me like someone who has played the first game thoroughly, but only that one, should have a trope page for it that they can read without getting spoiled. However, I don't know what the best way to handle this is, given that there's some things that really need commenting on in context of the series as a whole. (I've got some ideas, but it's late here.)

Also, this isn't the only example I've seen of this, it's just one that I'm a huge enough fan of to not have forgotten about (and that I know enough about to potentially fix).

What say you, troper-type people?

-Morgan. Not that this is the only problem with those pages, but the others are more straightforward...

[robkelk]

On a different spoiler-related note, I think I may have brought this up sometime before, but either way I'm gonna have a go at it now.

So here's the page for Ar tonelico. Is it for the first game in the series, or for the franchise? Actually it's kind of both. There are tagged spoilers for the second and third games... mostly with no indication they're not for the first game. Some other things are just bizarrely out of context. Meanwhile, the page for the second game is refreshingly free of spoilers for the third.

It seems to me like someone who has played the first game thoroughly, but only that one, should have a trope page for it that they can read without getting spoiled. However, I don't know what the best way to handle this is, given that there's some things that really need commenting on in context of the series as a whole. (I've got some ideas, but it's late here.)

Also, this isn't the only example I've seen of this, it's just one that I'm a huge enough fan of to not have forgotten about (and that I know enough about to potentially fix).

What say you, troper-type people?

-Morgan. Not that this is the only problem with those pages, but the others are more straightforward...

Agreed, especially considering that the page itself says "For tropes specific to individual installments, visit their respective work pages."

However, I've never played the game, so all I can do is hang a "Cleanup" template on the top of the page and add "Multiple Works Need Separate Pages" to the page's category cloud.

[Morganite]

Even though it's been a while, I know enough to divide everything up... I'm just not sure what should go where exactly.

I see we have "$NAME_(franchise)" pages, so I guess that covers some of the "where". And some bits should probably just go on the individual work pages. But, like, take the Genre Shift entry. It's not a spoiler, and applies to all three installments. Should it go on the franchise page, and be removed from this one? On the franchise page, and stay here? On the franchise page, and every game's page? Something else?

-Morgan.

[Labster]

And what's even the point of Template:!(( and it's ilk?

As for most questions, the answer can be found on Wikipedia:   Basically they're for substituting template metacharacters into templates.  The most common ones are {{=}} and {{!}}, equals and pipe.

[robkelk]

The originator of this talk thread has requested additional input, specifically but not solely from Looney Toons.

[Bob Schroeck]

I'm not quite sure why my opinion was requested, but I didn't really have one and I said so.

[Morganite]

Nonstandard capitalization in trope names doesn't seem like a great idea to me.

-Morgan.

[Bob Schroeck]

Okay.  This cluster of confusing/contradictory names needs some kind of cleanup:

Fan Vid
AMV
Animated Music Video

Each one points to at least one of the others and says "that's another name for this trope", but they're all different, slightly or wildly.

[robkelk]

I think of "AMV" as "anime music video", not "animated music video", just because the term was popularized during the last anime craze.

Without going and looking, I would define these three as follows:

• Fan Vid: a fan-made music video; the visuals can contain animated, live-action, or still content
  
• Animated Music Video: a music video where the visuals are made up solely of animation footage - the official video for Money for Nothing would count
  
• AMV: a fan-made music video where the visuals are made up solely of anime footage. Subset of both "Fan Vid" and "Animated Music Video"
  

Perhaps we should have this discussion on the ATT Forums.

EDIT: After going and looking, I see ATT currently agrees with me for Animated Music Video. The other two either need some serious re-writing to be made distinct from each other, or merged into one Useful Notes page.

RE-EDIT: Taken to the ATT Forums.

[Bob Schroeck]

Okay, who is Davey2010 and why is he creating CSS and Javascript stuff on the Wiki? Is this someone from higher up in Miraheze, or someone we need to take aside for a cooling-down?

[GethN7]

Okay, who is Davey2010 and why is he creating CSS and Javascript stuff on the Wiki?  Is this someone from higher up in Miraheze, or someone we need to take aside for a cooling-down?

Their edits appear to be pretty helpful, actually.

They've either made small improvements to some technical pages or added text for stub pages in other languages.

Asking them to clarify what they are doing and make sure it follows our template procedures couldn't hurt, but the edits appear to be in good faith.