Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 61: |
Line 61: |
| :For another, you use the act of someone using their own work on two related sites as if it has anything to do with writing. Explain to me, how I can possibly in any capacity make a similar section without having it turn out exactly the same. If I had an interest in improving the Birdo article, that would effectively be your argument - waste time writing the same content. To suggest that I don't have "pride" in something that I scoured the Internet to find all of the sources for, and have spent hours writing and rewriting is absurd. Again, writing has nothing to do with what you are describing. I'm sorry that you prefer your readers to learn less about certain elements, but I'd prefer our readers were able to learn about these things. As it stands, all Birdo presents is "oh hay, stats!". It's not pride in MarioWiki, but rather disdain for Wikipedia that prevents you from daring to allow such content. Or, heck, even probably the fact that if it is allowed, it becomes standard, and raises the expectations for articles. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 20:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC) | | :For another, you use the act of someone using their own work on two related sites as if it has anything to do with writing. Explain to me, how I can possibly in any capacity make a similar section without having it turn out exactly the same. If I had an interest in improving the Birdo article, that would effectively be your argument - waste time writing the same content. To suggest that I don't have "pride" in something that I scoured the Internet to find all of the sources for, and have spent hours writing and rewriting is absurd. Again, writing has nothing to do with what you are describing. I'm sorry that you prefer your readers to learn less about certain elements, but I'd prefer our readers were able to learn about these things. As it stands, all Birdo presents is "oh hay, stats!". It's not pride in MarioWiki, but rather disdain for Wikipedia that prevents you from daring to allow such content. Or, heck, even probably the fact that if it is allowed, it becomes standard, and raises the expectations for articles. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 20:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC) |
| ::Yes, but writing something that is directly from Wikipedia is still not allowed. It is called Wikidump, and does not make the article any better. {{User:Fawfulfury65/sig}} | | ::Yes, but writing something that is directly from Wikipedia is still not allowed. It is called Wikidump, and does not make the article any better. {{User:Fawfulfury65/sig}} |
| :::It is by my hand that it is written. We don't allow Wikidumps because it's considered theft. One cannot steal from themselves. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 20:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::Yes, but you still can't put content here that is on another wiki. {{User:Fawfulfury65/sig}}
| |
| :::::You mean the real original wiki that started it all. Btw, why was Shadoom blocked? He didn't seem to be trolling to me. {{User:Booderdash/sig|.}}
| |
| :::::Preventing content that originated from Wikipedia from being on this Wiki for the sake of it defeats the purpose of the rule. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 06:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :::::: Except it's not "for the sake of it". Beyond concerns of ripping off Wikipedia or maintaining an in-house style, there is one simple little reason.
| |
|
| |
| ::::::It's '''boring'''. For both the readers and the users of this site, there is *no* benefit in having a section lifted verbatim from a much more popular site. Casuals and newcomers have already read it somewhere else while veterans are stuck with a clashing eyesore that is not representative of the site.
| |
|
| |
| And looking at the edit itself, I wouldn't even support it even if it wasn't a Wikipedia copypasta. Sites like Wookiepedia and the Transformers Wiki (both much, '''much''' more comprehensive about the real-world context that us) don't have sections for the "Reception" toward a specific character, either. Why? Because it doesn't belong. Wikipedia makes a big deal of only covering things that have an importance or a cultural impact. Listing "reactions" toward a character is one way of establishing notabillity, and that is fine... for them. However, ''we'' do not have the burden of notabillity anything related to Mario goes in. We're targeted toward Mario fans who wants the details, the trivia, the obscure minutia - the ''cruft'', as Wikipedia call it. And I'm sure no Mario fan is interested in seeing what some random IGN editor thinks of one character. --[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] 12:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::Good point. You find it boring! Great to know that you are the bastion of opinion on this web site. Basically, the goal of this Wiki is to avoid anything that Wikipedia focuses on; wonderful to know. As opposed to being comprehensive and interesting [yes, believe it or not, some people DO like to read about that kind of stuff], the focus of this Wiki is personal speculation, game guides, and trivia. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 21:54, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::NARCE. You have been told we don't want to have content copied directly from wikipedia, and you have also been told why we don't want to have it. Continuing this discussion is pointless, since you don't listen anyway. If you want to help us here, you have to follow our rules. If you don't want to do that, no one forces you to stay. This discussion should end here and now. Good day. - {{User:Edofenrir/sig}} 21:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::You know, me not agreeing with people does not transfer to me ignoring people. I'm still at a loss for words as to how '''more''' content is bad for this article [besides "lolwerenotwikipedia"]. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 22:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::::It' sbecaue all that info had so many links that do not have pages, and never will here. Evenm if you wrote it on Wikipedia, it belongs on Wikipedia, and that's that. {{User:BluePikminKong497/sig}} 22:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::::Eh, just leave him alone. He had his answers, and that's that. All further discussion won't yield any useful results anyway. - {{User:Edofenrir/sig}} 22:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::::And I already fixed all of those broken links. It's information. It educates, informs, and helps people better understand the subject. God forbid that someone see a character in a fictional media in a real world context. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 22:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::::::Well then why is Bowser on wikipedia? and Sonic? and Spongebob Squarepants? and Ebenezer Scrooge? and etc.... {{User|KS3}}
| |
| ::::::::::::I'm not sure what you mean. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 22:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::::::::Enough with this discussion, it is meaningless. No matter what anyone says, that content is not going into the Birdo article. {{User:Fawfulfury65/sig}}
| |
| ::::::::::::::So basically, I just have to wait a year or two until this Wiki transforms into a more serious Wiki, like it did over the past couple of years [to some extent]. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 22:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::::::::::As long as the information is on Wikipedia, it's not going here, and if you try to remove it, some other person will revert your edit at Wikipedia and give you a warning. {{User|KS3}}
| |
| :::::::::::::::::<s>I have enough now. It was explicitly asked by two admins to drop this discussion. The next one to continue it will receive a penality.</s> - {{User:Edofenrir/sig}} 22:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::::::::::::If this discussion is a problem, then people can go away from the page. It harms no one that this discussion is still going on. But since you've gone to the point of threatening dissenting opinions, I reckon I'll drop it. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 22:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::::::::::::::Eh, I changed my mind. Do whatever you want on this page, as long as you restrain from flaming each other. - {{User:Edofenrir/sig}} 22:47, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::::::::::::::This wiki has become a nightmare now. It's more horrible then back then around January, where <s>I</s> my brother am being blocked constantly for some reason. {{User|KS3}}
| |
| Still, when you upload it to Wikipedia, is part of Wikipedia. --{{User:Tucayo/sig}} 23:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Warning ==
| |
|
| |
| {{Warning|2=being a smug blowhard}}
| |
|
| |
| Alright, listen up. It is our policy that content shall not be copied from Wikipedia onto the Super Mario Wiki. Ever. You can argue that this is stupid 27 ways and it won't make a bit of difference. You follow the policy or you leave the site. End of discussion.
| |
|
| |
| If you've got a problem with that, maybe I'll ban you for a year or two until you transform into a more serious contributor. No, that's not a joke. Tread lightly. {{User:Twentytwofiftyseven/sig}} 23:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :I was around way back when this site was copying entire Wikipedia articles, and I was one of the people who fought to have them removed [and we threatened with a permaban as well]. The rule is in place to require users to put effort into their work, not just lift things other people wrote. The reasons of the rule do not apply to this situation at all. - [[User:NARCE|NARCE]] 23:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Eh Hey ==
| |
|
| |
| Aren't you going to remove the Block Template from your userpage? You can remove the block template yourself when unblocked. They're not like Warnings... [[User:Mr Man|Mr Man]] 07:49, 31 October 2011 (EDT)
| |