Difference between revisions of "Blog:Changes to notability policy"
(→Discussion) |
Solar Dragon (talk | contribs) (→Discussion) |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
== Discussion == | == Discussion == | ||
| − | + | I like the current policy. I think it's funny to find information like that and it bring us articles and give us more visitors. This is a wiki about Simpsons not Wikipedia, if a person/place is in the Simpsons it's should have an article./[[User:AleWi|AleWi]] 12:39, 14 November 2012 (EST) | |
| + | :Except these articles don't give us more visitors, it's not funny to find stubs and most of these locations/characters are real-world or real-world fictional and don't need an article here, only a mention in the references tab. <span style="font-family:AR Darling,Baskerville Old Face,Bell MT">[[User:Solar Dragon|<span style="color:black">The</span> <span style="color:blue">Solar</span> <span style="color:red">Dragon</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Solar Dragon|<span style="color:bgreen">Talk</span>]] - [[Special:Contributions/Solar Dragon|Contribs.]])</sup></span> 12:44, 14 November 2012 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 12:44, November 14, 2012
This is something that I have been thinking about for a while now. I totally disagree with articles about characters or locations mentioned in passing or just seen written down or on a sign, in passing. I think that these should be against the notability policy.
If a character is just mentioned in a sentence, their name said or something about the character said, that, to me, is just not notable and does not deserve an article. If it is a reference to a real person or a fictional character, it can be mentioned in the episode's references tab. It doesn't need a full article. Most people won't search for someone who has only been mentioned once in the show here and I'm sure that Special:PopularPages will reflect this with most of these articles.
The only mentioned characters and locations I would be fine with keeping are those which have had a certain emphasis on, are discussed about for a long time, more than a second or two, like most of our mentioned only articles. You may have noticed that when I go through episodes and make articles about them, I generally skip out adding mentioned only appearances, unless we already have an article for the character or location.
These articles are mostly stubs anyway and are poor quality, lacking images and much more information, something that we should not have on this wiki.
I am therefore proposing that we make the changes to the notability policy to reflect this. The updated policy should read:
Characters
- Characters mentioned in passing do not deserve an article. If the character is mentioned a few times in a discussion and a large emphasis is placed on the mentioned character, they can get an article.
- Character names seen written down do not deserve articles.
Locations
- Locations mentioned in passing do not deserve an article. If the location is mentioned a few times in a discussion and a large emphasis is placed on the mentioned location, it can get an article.
- Location names seen written down do not deserve articles.
I know that many people are all for having an article on anything related to The Simpsons but this, I feel, is ridiculous. We do not need an article on everybody mentioned in the show. No other wiki on the Internet has articles on something so trivial as a mentioned character or location and neither should we. Solar Dragon (Talk • Contribs.) 11:34, 14 November 2012 (EST)
Discussion
I like the current policy. I think it's funny to find information like that and it bring us articles and give us more visitors. This is a wiki about Simpsons not Wikipedia, if a person/place is in the Simpsons it's should have an article./AleWi 12:39, 14 November 2012 (EST)
- Except these articles don't give us more visitors, it's not funny to find stubs and most of these locations/characters are real-world or real-world fictional and don't need an article here, only a mention in the references tab. The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.) 12:44, 14 November 2012 (EST)
