Difference between revisions of "Talk:Xsian"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
((X-POSTED!?!!1))0 | ((X-POSTED!?!!1))0 | ||
| − | + | *Also, from the guy who changed the Xsian article from "this is China/Korea/Japan" to something that works in-context. Go figure. --[[User:Scen|Scen]] 11:35, 28 August 2006 (CDT) | |
| − | + | **Which I don't agree with. --[[User:Xstryker|Xstryker]] 15:21, 28 August 2006 (CDT) | |
*Well, nobody had come up with an explanation that (a) was in context, or (b) made sense. The article, as I re-wrote it, allows the story to keep this bizarre orientalist pan-culture called "Xsian," and gives it some realistic cohesion other than to just say "these two terms are Asian in the real world, therefore in Kupopolis they are Xsian because I said." Especially when you are dealing with languages like Chinese, Japanese, and South Asian languages, to suggest they all have common liguistic roots is more than a little silly -- depending on which part of South or Southeast Asia you're talking about, you have two, sometimes three distinct linguistic families in the region. And Japanese and Chinese aren't related to each other at all, except for with the exchange of written language with the spread of Buddhism. And "Chinese" as a language is fragmented into several linguistically distinct dialects, which are (as paralleled in the Xsian article) only unified by way of common writing system. So, you can agree with it or not, but from a realistic and story-context perspective it works and accomplishes what we need it to accomplish. It certainly was not sufficient to leave "xsian = azns" as a permanent Kupopolis reference in the wiki. Given that we write pages and pages and pages about giant robots and lasers, that smacks of laziness, and I think the story is a little better off with something of substance to explain the Xsian culture and language in context. --[[User:Scen|Scen]] 15:52, 28 August 2006 (CDT) | *Well, nobody had come up with an explanation that (a) was in context, or (b) made sense. The article, as I re-wrote it, allows the story to keep this bizarre orientalist pan-culture called "Xsian," and gives it some realistic cohesion other than to just say "these two terms are Asian in the real world, therefore in Kupopolis they are Xsian because I said." Especially when you are dealing with languages like Chinese, Japanese, and South Asian languages, to suggest they all have common liguistic roots is more than a little silly -- depending on which part of South or Southeast Asia you're talking about, you have two, sometimes three distinct linguistic families in the region. And Japanese and Chinese aren't related to each other at all, except for with the exchange of written language with the spread of Buddhism. And "Chinese" as a language is fragmented into several linguistically distinct dialects, which are (as paralleled in the Xsian article) only unified by way of common writing system. So, you can agree with it or not, but from a realistic and story-context perspective it works and accomplishes what we need it to accomplish. It certainly was not sufficient to leave "xsian = azns" as a permanent Kupopolis reference in the wiki. Given that we write pages and pages and pages about giant robots and lasers, that smacks of laziness, and I think the story is a little better off with something of substance to explain the Xsian culture and language in context. --[[User:Scen|Scen]] 15:52, 28 August 2006 (CDT) | ||
| − | + | **What you created is fine. What you removed I happen to think belongs here on the Discussion page. We can put useful OOC info here. Or it could be put at the bottom of the page in a Meta section, either way works. I just don't like the idea that the wiki should be free of meta-information like what we based things on or named them after. --[[User:Xstryker|Xstryker]] 19:32, 28 August 2006 (CDT) | |
---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 00:32, 29 August 2006
((X-POSTED!?!!1))0
- Also, from the guy who changed the Xsian article from "this is China/Korea/Japan" to something that works in-context. Go figure. --Scen 11:35, 28 August 2006 (CDT)
- Which I don't agree with. --Xstryker 15:21, 28 August 2006 (CDT)
- Well, nobody had come up with an explanation that (a) was in context, or (b) made sense. The article, as I re-wrote it, allows the story to keep this bizarre orientalist pan-culture called "Xsian," and gives it some realistic cohesion other than to just say "these two terms are Asian in the real world, therefore in Kupopolis they are Xsian because I said." Especially when you are dealing with languages like Chinese, Japanese, and South Asian languages, to suggest they all have common liguistic roots is more than a little silly -- depending on which part of South or Southeast Asia you're talking about, you have two, sometimes three distinct linguistic families in the region. And Japanese and Chinese aren't related to each other at all, except for with the exchange of written language with the spread of Buddhism. And "Chinese" as a language is fragmented into several linguistically distinct dialects, which are (as paralleled in the Xsian article) only unified by way of common writing system. So, you can agree with it or not, but from a realistic and story-context perspective it works and accomplishes what we need it to accomplish. It certainly was not sufficient to leave "xsian = azns" as a permanent Kupopolis reference in the wiki. Given that we write pages and pages and pages about giant robots and lasers, that smacks of laziness, and I think the story is a little better off with something of substance to explain the Xsian culture and language in context. --Scen 15:52, 28 August 2006 (CDT)
- What you created is fine. What you removed I happen to think belongs here on the Discussion page. We can put useful OOC info here. Or it could be put at the bottom of the page in a Meta section, either way works. I just don't like the idea that the wiki should be free of meta-information like what we based things on or named them after. --Xstryker 19:32, 28 August 2006 (CDT)
I wonder: for the purposes of this wiki, should we really be describing certain story elements according to their real-world equivalents? It kinda strikes me as an OOC aside in this entry, and if you remove the stuff about "Korean, Japanese," etc., I think people would still get the idea from the story elements you've listed below. Just a thought. Because the wiki must stay PURE!!! --Nick 08:22, 7 August 2006 (CDT)
- "Because the wiki must stay PURE!!!" qft --Scen 08:26, 7 August 2006 (CDT)
- You could put it in a Meta section at the bottom. --Xstryker 12:39, 7 August 2006 (CDT)
- Because the wiki must stay USEFUL!!! --Xstryker 12:40, 7 August 2006 (CDT)
- I like that idea, the Meta section at the bottom. Travis? --Nick 13:22, 7 August 2006 (CDT)
- Okay, I really don't like the meta in a story article. I'm going to extricate the OOC references. The wiki can be useful without breaking character. --Scen 17:59, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
- So what you're saying is Bekkler actually does like poopies, in character? Terrorfying!! --JD 18:04, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
- Okay, I really don't like the meta in a story article. I'm going to extricate the OOC references. The wiki can be useful without breaking character. --Scen 17:59, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
In all seriousness I don't really think that the references to korean and japanese really fit, either. Of course, it's Travis' article. So while I'd rather those references be pulled altogether (FOR THE GOOD OF THE WIKI) I think it's up to him. Unless we all can get together and decide what the "rules" are regarding references like that. --JD 18:10, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
WOW THIS MUST BE AN IMPORTANT SUBJECT I CANT STOP POSTING ABOUT IT. I think this could use some straightening up: "but we tend to play around whoever we want" because I don't really know what it means. And since I totally read at a third grade level I probably know what I'm talking about. No shit, srsly. --JD 18:12, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
- ... wtf --Scen 18:15, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
- There is a sentence in the article which makes absolutely no sense. It makes no sense because this part of it: "but we tend to play around whoever we want" makes absolutely no sense. I posit that this sentence could be cleaned up a little, possibly such that it actually makes sense. Understand? --JD 21:56, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
- Okay. Here's my two cents on OOC references in serious Wiki articles: Don't use them.
- Yes, it's easy to point at the Bekkler redirect-hoe-down and call me a hypocrite -- but in my defense it was really funny (shit, i still can't stop laughing -- I LIKE POOPIES), and also it's BEKKLER. Playing around with the Wiki media (without breaking anything) seemed to fit Bekkler, and so that's what I did.
- Yeah, ouch, my sides! Poopies. Wow, now I typed it! HA HA HA! --Xstryker 18:47, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
- But in terms of this discussion, it's apples vs. oranges. And the oranges -- I think we all know -- always win. Why? Because they're fucking cheaters. Goddamn oranges.
- In terms of the Xsian profile, and others like it, I personally think that it's not exactly putting our best face forward to be satisfied with leaving references like that in a wiki article. It would be like leaving Gate's article as "Chrono Trigger," with no explanation or context. If that's what we're going to start doing, why bother with the Wiki?
- I happen to suspect that when Travis put up the Xsian article with real-world references to China and Japan, it was as a placeholder. (granted, I'm not Travis so I can't say, but that's my hunch) And we have a lot of placeholders up now because we've really just barely scratched the surface of filling up this wiki with helpful and pertinent information. So, as a placeholder this article was fine, but I raised an eyebrow a little bit when I noticed that the meta references were no just holding places -- they were picking out drapes, bringing in boxes filled with their clothes and shit, and inviting their friends over for a summer bbq.
- So, I added some content that tries to put this thing we call "Xsian" into something resembling an in-story context. If it's wrong, and Travis says it's wrong, I'll be fine with going back to using a placeholder. But as long as we're talking about what the rules should be regarding OOC in a permanent Wiki article like this... let's keep Meta in the Meta portal. ... hey, wasn't somebody supposed to clean up all the portals?... ohh... ... that was my job!! --Scen 18:26, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
- As always, just assume I think the opposite of whatever Matt thinks. --Xstryker 18:47, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
- Regardless, the meta section here is redundant, because it's pretty freaking obvious what the inspiration is for all things Xsian. It just doesn't need to be said.--Nick 08:40, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
- Also, I changed the article already. :) --Scen 10:27, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
