Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Guardian Hegemony"
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
This category was deleted because, frankly, it's a useless categorization. There never was a formal alliance called "Guardian Hegemony," and the only people in the story who actively used the term were Tasnicans during the Imperialist era when Guardia and Tasnica were rivals for influence in the Fringe. The term itself had a loaded and somewhat pejorative connotation. No nation, then or now, proudly declares itself part of a Guardian Hegemony. And this is part of the reason why I wish Adam had asked me or Nick before he created the category: either one of us would have told him not to use it. I also wish a stink hadn't been made over the fact that I wiped the category, for the reasons stated above, and I think that it applies to all of us (not just Adam, because while Adam has been doing the lionshare of the organizing and categorizing of the Wiki, there are a couple other people who've created new categories/portals as well): if you're going to help out with the organization end of this thing, you're going to have to accept that the writers retain discretionary editing power over the categories where it comes to individual writers' assets. If somebody categorizes something I made in a way that I feel is either inappropriate, or incorrect, or otherwise misrepresents my stuff, I'm going to change it -- and it's my prerogative to change it. If I give a reason for it, fine. If I don't, oh well. (and just so we're clear: this isn't a prerogative I'm claiming just for myself. my use of first-person pronouns was just for the sake of being concise. if our positions were reverse and I categorized Ticonderans under Kupopolis Drug Addicts, and he didn't approve and changed it, that's his right) But anyway. This is the last time I'm going to say anything on the matter, even if a similar situation crops up down the road. [[User:Scen|Scen]] 23:11, 2 August 2006 (CDT) | This category was deleted because, frankly, it's a useless categorization. There never was a formal alliance called "Guardian Hegemony," and the only people in the story who actively used the term were Tasnicans during the Imperialist era when Guardia and Tasnica were rivals for influence in the Fringe. The term itself had a loaded and somewhat pejorative connotation. No nation, then or now, proudly declares itself part of a Guardian Hegemony. And this is part of the reason why I wish Adam had asked me or Nick before he created the category: either one of us would have told him not to use it. I also wish a stink hadn't been made over the fact that I wiped the category, for the reasons stated above, and I think that it applies to all of us (not just Adam, because while Adam has been doing the lionshare of the organizing and categorizing of the Wiki, there are a couple other people who've created new categories/portals as well): if you're going to help out with the organization end of this thing, you're going to have to accept that the writers retain discretionary editing power over the categories where it comes to individual writers' assets. If somebody categorizes something I made in a way that I feel is either inappropriate, or incorrect, or otherwise misrepresents my stuff, I'm going to change it -- and it's my prerogative to change it. If I give a reason for it, fine. If I don't, oh well. (and just so we're clear: this isn't a prerogative I'm claiming just for myself. my use of first-person pronouns was just for the sake of being concise. if our positions were reverse and I categorized Ticonderans under Kupopolis Drug Addicts, and he didn't approve and changed it, that's his right) But anyway. This is the last time I'm going to say anything on the matter, even if a similar situation crops up down the road. [[User:Scen|Scen]] 23:11, 2 August 2006 (CDT) | ||
| + | :That's all fine and good, but deleting categories or articles without any explanation (even "I didn't like it") is still not playing nice. And "and it's my prerogative to change it. If I give a reason for it, fine. If I don't, oh well." is kind of infantile. If that's the way you want to be, fine. But it's not very adult. If you made a category "drug addicts" and put Ticondera in it I'd like to think Adam would delete it and then put something like, "Plz don't do that thnx don't like it." And if he didn't he'd be the one remiss. Also, you deleted both the category and the ''talk'' (???) What's the point. The talk is still there in the history. Why make comments and then hide them? I don't understand. --[[User:JD|JD]] 02:54, 3 August 2006 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 07:54, 3 August 2006
(baleted?)
"Well, if you're going to create categories for things without talking to the writers whose things end up in that category... where's the "common decency" there? " -- Matt
- If you hadn't noticed, Adam has made an enormous contribution to the wiki by going all the hell over the place, adding stub notices, grouping shit into categories... 90% of the categories my stuff is organized into were made by him. If everyone threw a hissy every time he put new category tags at the end of their stuff: 1) everyone would be PMSing all the time and 2) 90% of the articles wouldn't be categorized. If you don't want him categorizing your shit, fine, say so. But I think it's a pretty great thing he's doing, trying to help organize the wiki. --JD 20:40, 2 August 2006 (CDT)
- Just so we're clear: I didn't throw a "hissy." I wiped a category, and then Adam left a snarky passive-aggressive comment when he marked the page to be deleted. I should also make it clear that nobody's saying Adam isn't doing a good job keeping the Wiki organized, but he's going to have to live with the fact that there are other Kupopolis writers who use the wiki, and sometimes they might disagree with the way their articles are organized and, yes, they may change/wipe out categories that Adam makes. And sometimes, they might even do it without explaining why, and honestly I don't think they have to explain why. It's their stuff, and if they want to alter the way it's presented or categorized, they should be free and welcome to. I should also note that it wasn't just my stuff that had been put under the category in question -- I don't particularly think Nick wanted to have Medina categorized in Guardian Hegemony. Scen 22:47, 2 August 2006 (CDT)
And since this got brought back up again after I thought it'd been put to bed:
(insert reason for deletion here)
This category was deleted because, frankly, it's a useless categorization. There never was a formal alliance called "Guardian Hegemony," and the only people in the story who actively used the term were Tasnicans during the Imperialist era when Guardia and Tasnica were rivals for influence in the Fringe. The term itself had a loaded and somewhat pejorative connotation. No nation, then or now, proudly declares itself part of a Guardian Hegemony. And this is part of the reason why I wish Adam had asked me or Nick before he created the category: either one of us would have told him not to use it. I also wish a stink hadn't been made over the fact that I wiped the category, for the reasons stated above, and I think that it applies to all of us (not just Adam, because while Adam has been doing the lionshare of the organizing and categorizing of the Wiki, there are a couple other people who've created new categories/portals as well): if you're going to help out with the organization end of this thing, you're going to have to accept that the writers retain discretionary editing power over the categories where it comes to individual writers' assets. If somebody categorizes something I made in a way that I feel is either inappropriate, or incorrect, or otherwise misrepresents my stuff, I'm going to change it -- and it's my prerogative to change it. If I give a reason for it, fine. If I don't, oh well. (and just so we're clear: this isn't a prerogative I'm claiming just for myself. my use of first-person pronouns was just for the sake of being concise. if our positions were reverse and I categorized Ticonderans under Kupopolis Drug Addicts, and he didn't approve and changed it, that's his right) But anyway. This is the last time I'm going to say anything on the matter, even if a similar situation crops up down the road. Scen 23:11, 2 August 2006 (CDT)
- That's all fine and good, but deleting categories or articles without any explanation (even "I didn't like it") is still not playing nice. And "and it's my prerogative to change it. If I give a reason for it, fine. If I don't, oh well." is kind of infantile. If that's the way you want to be, fine. But it's not very adult. If you made a category "drug addicts" and put Ticondera in it I'd like to think Adam would delete it and then put something like, "Plz don't do that thnx don't like it." And if he didn't he'd be the one remiss. Also, you deleted both the category and the talk (???) What's the point. The talk is still there in the history. Why make comments and then hide them? I don't understand. --JD 02:54, 3 August 2006 (CDT)
