Danbooru

Requesting Wiki Review

Posted under General

I'd like to get a few wiki articles reviewed - they've had changes made in the last few days which contain data of the accuracy.

wiki #47565 - it talks about Takao being welded to Myoukou, which is not sourced from the original Wikipedia entry or other online sources, which only state she was moored at Seletar Naval Base as being "moored as floating AA batteries"

wiki #22584 - the SPAS-12 entry had a lot of text added, which wasn't sourced and doesn't appear in Wikipedia or my copy of Ian Hogg's "Military Small Arms of the Twentieth Century", which had to be reverted.

wiki #12697 - lots of extra unsourced text added to the entry, including the last paragraph about "It's also believed, though not certain, that Yeager has seen his Strike Witches portrayal; the image of post #592290 was sent to his myspace and facebook pages. It is absolutely certain that his wife saw the image; the rumored response was "Goodness gracious, I'm all kinds of sexy."

Updated

Reverted the entries to the last untainted version. All of the edits were done by a quasi-vandal trying on insert some kind of headcanon into the wikis.

Either way, there's no reason for the third wiki to be six paragraphs long. "KISS principle" applies here; cut out fluff that doesn't pertain to or assist with tagging.

Adding two more wiki entries:

wiki #49709 - Yamato doesn't have an official swimsuit in the art - the linked to post is a fan drawing based on the anime appearance, not an in game CG like with Akebono or Sazanami.

wiki #56214 - no source given for Kay from Girls und Panzer being supposedly the daughter of an American GI

Might want to check any wiki entries edited by that guy, as there seems to be a pattern.

Hello.

I responded to a builder, who told me to contact Jarlath about the wiki issues. I did contact him, but for some reason I was accused of "harassment" for doing so.

I have no idea why that happened. I wrote only three short (one paragraph, in response to his own) pm's about the issues he found, there was nothing that could be considered harrassment inside. That was only my attempt to solve this issue.

I'm still open for coversation about whats confusing, unnessesary or inaccurate but I hope it's understandable why I'm a little confused.

I'd like to start with the SPAS wiki page and see if anyone has questions on that. Jarleth seemed frustrated that much was changed but there seemed to be no sources. I can clairy literally anything on that webpage if nessesay, so ask about anything that seems false.

I don't care about getting anything restored but I want to at least show that I wasn't pulling information out of no where.

Updated

I'm less concerned about the information being unsourced than by how utterly irrelevant it is. We're not trying to compete with Wikipedia for completeness.

A long as a tag's wiki page provides a concise explanation of what the tag is used for, that's quite enough. The majority of the information provided should describe visual characteristics that help distinguish the tag from other tags, appearance-wise. For the sake of clarity and brevity, further reading really ought to be confined to external links.

For the record, I did direct the user to this topic to discuss issues related to it several times, as well as to the Writing Wiki Entries page.

To reinforce what Iridescent Slime already said - it says right there in the Danbooru wiki to be concise and relevant to Danbooru and tagging. Noting that the SPAS-12 is a Franchi made automatic shotgun is important. Detailing its history and the US Federal assault weapons ban of 1994 is not. Saying that Charlotte Yeager is based on Chuck Yeager is relevant to the Strike Witches tags - talking about Chuck Yeager, his life, and a supposed reaction to a picture of her is not.

Debating tags and wiki entries belongs to the forums, as these involve and impact the community as a whole - especially when the system suggests tags based on entries in the Wiki and system. They're not a personal matter.

iridescent_slime said:

I'm less concerned about the information being unsourced than by how utterly irrelevant it is. We're not trying to compete with Wikipedia for completeness.

Of course, there's just no set standard of how much should be written about what.

Since writing about stuff is failry eady for me, I left it to the moderators to determine what was fluff or not. Perhaps a character limit should be established?

Jarlath said:

For the record, I did direct the user to this topic to discuss issues related to it several times, as well as to the Writing Wiki Entries page.

g. Noting that the SPAS-12 is a Franchi made automatic shotgun is important. Detailing its history and the US Federal assault weapons ban of 1994 is not. Saying that Charlotte Yeager is based on Chuck Yeager is relevant to the Strike Witches tags - talking about Chuck Yeager, his life, and a supposed reaction to a picture of her is not.

You did direct me here but to my knowledge this was supposed to be a discussion on misinformation, not a public dispute.

Using the SPAS article as an example, I had written what it was, why it was interesting, its history and some trivia. I copied the format directly from other danbooru wiki articles. With yeager I described her personality, appearance and equipment, again like other wiki articles.

Perhaps it was excessive and silly and unnecessary, but I didnt lie and used other users as a base.

Updated

MyrMindservant said:

Musashi (kantai collection) wiki currently states that she has short hair, but this seems to ignore her two side up twintails that are reasonably long even in official art.
Wouldn't it be appropriate to remove that statement?

Seems short hair with long locks would apply in most cases, as apart from the tails her hair is cut short. I've amended the wiki, but in any case it's only a general guide, images should be tagged by what the artist has drawn.

TheGreens said:

Of course, there's just no set standard of how much should be written about what.

Since writing about stuff is failry eady for me, I left it to the moderators to determine what was fluff or not. Perhaps a character limit should be established?

Character limits aren't a good indicator of relevance or usability of an article - they're more useful when you need to constrain something to save space on a physical page or to reduce bandwidth used.

As the Writing Wiki article says, keep the page short and useful to tagging. Descriptions of physical appearance or behaviour for a character, the layout of a place, or things typically associated with a thing or character, etc.

TheGreens said:

You did direct me here but to my knowledge this was supposed to be a discussion on misinformation, not a public dispute.

Using the SPAS article as an example, I had written what it was, why it was interesting, its history and some trivia. I copied the format directly from other danbooru wiki articles. With yeager I described her personality, appearance and equipment, again like other wiki articles.

Perhaps it was excessive and silly and unnecessary, but I didnt lie and used other users as a base.

Note that, for the SPAS article, the key issue was that it wasn't concise or relevant to the tagging of posts - describing that it has a pistol grip with folding hook is important to distinguish it from a Remington_870 or USAS-12. But it doesn't need six paragraphs of trivia to help identify it in a picture.

Ditto anything on Charlotte E Yeager beyond her physical description, role in Strike_Witches, maybe her relationships and plot importance. We don't need to know more about Chuck other than he provided her name, especially when there were other things quoted above which weren't sourced, part of Strike Witches, or important to Danbooru.

Kay_(girls_und_panzer) also doesn't have any officially defined backstory in the extra materials, from what I recall, and outside of the fact that she led the oppositions in the Saunders match, is unimportant. Knowing she's a genki blonde bombshell with a jersey coat and shorts or a miniskirt is more important.

MyrMindservant said:

This is somewhat offtopic, but I didn't want to make a new thread for it.

Musashi (kantai collection) wiki currently states that she has short hair, but this seems to ignore her two side up twintails that are reasonably long even in official art.
Wouldn't it be appropriate to remove that statement?

Blue_Trident said:

Seems short hair with long locks would apply in most cases, as apart from the tails her hair is cut short. I've amended the wiki, but in any case it's only a general guide, images should be tagged by what the artist has drawn.

We might note that her official art has her with short hair (barring the twintails), but in the end it's a general guide and we'll have to fix it again if official art with an alternate_hairstyle shows up later.

MyrMindservant said:

This is somewhat offtopic, but I didn't want to make a new thread for it.

Musashi (kantai collection) wiki currently states that she has short hair, but this seems to ignore her two side up twintails that are reasonably long even in official art.
Wouldn't it be appropriate to remove that statement?

I don't know why you're asking in this thread- you're free to remove whatever you want that doesn't seem appropriate.

Jarlath said:
Kay_(girls_und_panzer) also doesn't have any officially defined backstory in the extra materials, from what I recall, and outside of the fact that she led the oppositions in the Saunders match, is unimportant. Knowing she's a genki blonde bombshell with a jersey coat and shorts or a miniskirt is more important.

I don't think this should be directed at me; my discription of her was literally three sentenes. The only thing I wrote otherwise was that her backstory wasn't known outside of the fact that she was from a mixed family.

Jarlath said:

Character limits aren't a good indicator of relevance or usability of an article - they're more useful when you need to constrain something to save space on a physical page or to reduce bandwidth used.

well, sure, but if you could just give a ballpark estimate then that would help- say 1500 characters or under unless otherwise approved.

Jarlath said:

As the Writing Wiki article says, keep the page short and useful to tagging. Descriptions of physical appearance or behavior for a character, the layout of a place, or things typically associated with a thing or character, etc.

Note that, for the SPAS article, the key issue was that it wasn't concise or relevant to the tagging of posts - describing that it has a pistol grip with folding hook is important to distinguish it from a Remington_870 or USAS-12. But it doesn't need six paragraphs of trivia to help identify it in a picture.

the only issue I have with this is about how much and how deep "descriptions of physical appearance or behavior" could run; especially in terms of history.

Just give me a rough estimate of how much you want me to thin down a particular topic and I'll have at it. I have no issue rewriting stuff or deleting stuff.

TheGreens said:

well, sure, but if you could just give a ballpark estimate then that would help- say 1500 characters or under unless otherwise approved.

You seem to be missing the point here. Irrelevant cruft is still irrelevant regardless of character count. If what you're adding isn't pertinent to tagging, it doesn't matter whether it's a four-word sentence or a thousand-word wall of text.

TheGreens said:
I don't think this should be directed at me; my discription of her was literally three sentenes. The only thing I wrote otherwise was that her backstory wasn't known outside of the fact that she was from a mixed family.

Three irrelevant sentences, which aren't important to tagging (her family is never shown in screen, nor is it talked about in the official manga). Also, I'd like to see a source for the "mixed family" statement, since said family is never mentioned anywhere in the show or the BD extra material. The only families we see are either associated with the Oarai girls, or Arisu Shimada (due to her also being from a famous senshado family).

TheGreens said:
well, sure, but if you could just give a ballpark estimate then that would help- say 1500 characters or under unless otherwise approved.

The count doesn't matter - the wiki is to be fairly concise and helpful to tagging. If we need more detail on the minutae of their love life, it belongs in the "See also" section with a link to whatever article elsewhere discusses that.

TheGreens said:
the only issue I have with this is about how much and how deep "descriptions of physical appearance or behavior" could run; especially in terms of history.

Just give me a rough estimate of how much you want me to thin down a particular topic and I'll have at it. I have no issue rewriting stuff or deleting stuff.

We don't need the history of the SPAS to identify it in a picture. We need to know its physical description and maybe where it appears if it's important, along with a "See also" section for more details or related tags (like Shotgun), or how it differs from a Remington pump action.

So, identifying Kay as a long-haired blonde with blue eyes and large breasts who usually wears an open blazer or a bomber jacket? Important to note. Her family who has never appeared in the manga or show, and who don't appear in the pictures drawn as a result? No need to add it to the wiki.

Updated

Jarlath said:

We need to know its physical description and maybe where it appears if it's important, along with a "See also" section for more details or related tags (like Shotgun), or how it differs from a Remington pump action.

I though that the see also section was only for links, not additional information? Or do you mean only outside links?

Jarlath said:
So, identifying Kay as a long-haired blonde with blue eyes and large breasts who usually wears an open blazer or a bomber jacket? Important to note. Her family who has never appeared in the manga or show, and who don't appear in the pictures drawn as a result? No need to add it to the wiki.

That's fair. But by that logic, why was the description of "Brash, boastful, big-breasted, blue-eyed and blonde, Kay is the epitome of a patriotic American" removed, when it abides by these rules and isn't excessive?

And please, I beg you, give me a character cap to stay within, even if only a mock one.

Bringing this topic up again due to a couple recently-edited wiki pages that caught my eye: a6m zero and yin yang. Neither wiki contains much information that is useful for tagging purposes; a6m zero in particular doesn't describe the appearance of its subject at all, apart from letting us know it is a "carrier-based fighter aircraft". But both pages go on to add several additional lines of irrelevant information that is well beyond the scope of our wiki.

Would it be out of line for me to remove the unnecessary factual details from these pages and any more like them? The extra information, while probably of interest to some, doesn't really concern this site's purpose. If anyone here wants a history or philosophy lesson, that's why we have links to other sites.

iridescent_slime said:

Bringing this topic up again due to a couple recently-edited wiki pages that caught my eye: a6m zero and yin yang. Neither wiki contains much information that is useful for tagging purposes; a6m zero in particular doesn't describe the appearance of its subject at all, apart from letting us know it is a "carrier-based fighter aircraft". But both pages go on to add several additional lines of irrelevant information that is well beyond the scope of our wiki.

Would it be out of line for me to remove the unnecessary factual details from these pages and any more like them? The extra information, while probably of interest to some, doesn't really concern this site's purpose. If anyone here wants a history or philosophy lesson, that's why we have links to other sites.

Go ahead and remove the extraneous info. If you find any links that describe the same thing, just go ahead and put them under an External Links header.

Agree with the above... the wiki should be used for tagging purposes, with extraneous info being pointed to in the External Links section.

However, careful consideration should be considered on what is/isn't useful for tagging purposes. Connections to another tag may be lost if certain information is missing.

Mikaeri said:

Go ahead and remove the extraneous info. If you find any links that describe the same thing, just go ahead and put them under an External Links header.

Seems like all the additions to both pages were lifted straight from the respective Wikipedia articles, which were already linked. In the case of yin yang, it was copied verbatim, whereas in a6m zero it was dressed up in user #448299's excessively lavish prose. Either way, I feel like we're not losing anything by reverting to the older, unembellished versions so long as the external links are left intact.

1