User:Zappernapper/RatInfo
This page has been created for the sake of needing a page of centralized discussion.
The request for comment by the wider Wikipedia community is on the past decision to merge the 493 seperate Pokemon species articles into their current lists. Specifically, community-wide consensus is sought on whether the current state of the articles is appropriate/adequate and if not, then what would be appropriate.
Related discussions
Archived discussions
Current/Recent discussions
Statement by Zappernapper
It is my proposal that consensus had been gathered by those interested (editors discussing at WT:POKE) that the previous state of 400+ articles was poor.
Many articles were full of original research, instruction, and excessive detail. The existence of such pages as WP:Pokémon test suggest this was a Wikipedia-wide issue as well. The dicussion about what to do broke into three camps, expectedly. One side wished to merge all pokemon into lists, the other wished to leave them seperate, the third sought a middle ground of creating both lists and also shorter, more concise articles that grouped together 2+ related pokemon along source-defined lines.
It seemed discussion pointed editors towards the middle gorund - while not fully satisfying those who felt anything beyond a paragraph on Bellsprout was non-notable cruft, it still took away it's "article-worthy" status, treating it as a secondary subject; and while not claiming Bellsprout itself as notable enough for an article, to write anything one could think of on the Pokemon, it still allowed a safe space to give a fair amount of verifiable, non-instructional detail.
In the midst of working out the how (not the if) a group of editors reiterated their feelings about only having lists, reached consensus among themselves, and went on a merger campaign that several others repeatedly stated was in opposition to previous consesnsus. When shown link after link of supporting discussion, they pointed to their own three-day discussion, claiming consensus. Any attempts to disagree were met with, "No, you're wrong, it's already been decided."
And that is still how opposition is being met.
Content Disclaimer
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
- The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
- There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
- It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
- Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
- Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.