282
edits
User talk:ArcToraphim/Archive2: Difference between revisions
Clarification and solutions requested from the relevant EB...
ArcToraphim (talk | contribs) |
(Clarification and solutions requested from the relevant EB...) |
||
| Line 1,046: | Line 1,046: | ||
While I'm not invested enough in the topic to get into an extended argument, I thought it might be worth pointing out that there is indeed a debate on the {{wp|capitalization of "Internet"}}, and the usage seems to be gradually changing toward lowercase. In particular, I'd like to highlight that in 2016, the Associated Press and The New York Times both shifted to lowercase, which I personally feel is a significant milestone. Since this is a topic for which usage is likely to continue to change in the near future, would it be prudent to avoid confusion and have the staff make an executive decision one way or the other and add it to Bulbapedia's style guide? [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 19:04, 21 January 2017 (UTC) | While I'm not invested enough in the topic to get into an extended argument, I thought it might be worth pointing out that there is indeed a debate on the {{wp|capitalization of "Internet"}}, and the usage seems to be gradually changing toward lowercase. In particular, I'd like to highlight that in 2016, the Associated Press and The New York Times both shifted to lowercase, which I personally feel is a significant milestone. Since this is a topic for which usage is likely to continue to change in the near future, would it be prudent to avoid confusion and have the staff make an executive decision one way or the other and add it to Bulbapedia's style guide? [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 19:04, 21 January 2017 (UTC) | ||
:Shrug. If you want to run that query, you need to ask another staff member, though seriously, don't make it sound like it's a big thing. But imo I think until a consensus is reached by grammarians, it should remain capitalized. [[User:ArcToraphim|Kai]] * the [[User talk:ArcToraphim|Arc]] [[Special:Contributions/ArcToraphim|Toraph]] 19:38, 21 January 2017 (UTC) | :Shrug. If you want to run that query, you need to ask another staff member, though seriously, don't make it sound like it's a big thing. But imo I think until a consensus is reached by grammarians, it should remain capitalized. [[User:ArcToraphim|Kai]] * the [[User talk:ArcToraphim|Arc]] [[Special:Contributions/ArcToraphim|Toraph]] 19:38, 21 January 2017 (UTC) | ||
== Shipping, Speculation policy and maintenance == | |||
Do Shipping articles belong in this wiki still? And if so, how do we make them visible/easy enough to find and clean up? They're inherently speculative, and often NSFW. And isn't the argument that that it's "an important part of the fandom" as subjective as saying the same thing about porn and fanart? I would like a clarification on why it stays outside of personal opinion and your job, especially since many of the articles are unkempt, poorly edited and written, out of date, not edited often, hidden to the point of being hard to find unless you the ship's most common name, have dated templates, and defy existing shipping article policy, resulting in less revenue from ads on them for Archaic. I am open to all suggestions on how to increase their visibility to encourage cleanup and regular, consistent editing...or the ending of individual shipping articles, and info being condensed into a single, succinct article on the fandom practice and its relation to Pokémon. And no, I'm not against shipping, I'm just trying to help start the cleanup of that part of this wiki. | |||