Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction)/proposed-4-20-09
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Added merchandising section edit
For the moment I don't want to add anything on advertising as the level of use for such is fairly unique, such as the above mentioned Mickey Mouse. However, multiple projects do use merchandising as part of their overall show for real-world impact and these elements routinely pass GAN and FAN proposals as indicating a level of real-world impact. Moreso, without them they would in fact likely fail.陣内Jinnai 22:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- Can you give some examples of these AfDs? I'm somewhat hesitant about this, as it is currently phrased. Phil Sandifer (talk) 13:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Not off hand...wait...Arcueild Brunestud (was closed on a technicality, but the biggest support would be guides, which are merchandising), Characters of Persona 4 (the discussion was actually about merging the article). I know there's some more, but I can't remmber offhand.陣内Jinnai 02:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- I've got to say, I don't think the current phrasing works then - right now it gives the sense that mentioning the existence of an action figure solves all possible problems with an article. Perhaps "information about merchandising" could be folded into the language on cultural impact? Phil Sandifer (talk) 18:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Any other major issues? edit
This content policy proposal, brought on by the debate about WP:NOT has been going for some time. With the exception of the merchandising issue, I haven't seen anything else as an issue by those here so perhaps the time for a wider viewing is appropriate? 15:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- I would support that. Phil Sandifer (talk) 15:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- Something like:
WP:Fiction has been stabilized for some time as a proposed policy after the dispute with WP:NOT#PLOT and problems with the load-bearing nature attributed to the earlier WP:FICT notability guideline proposal. Further nput on it is appreciated.
- Beyond WT:NOT#PLOT and WT:FICT where part of this document relates to, any particular other talk pages you suggest? Any particular wikiprojects (I'm only familiar with WP:Anime and WP:Video games particularly, but I know there are other relevant wikiprojects obviously.陣内Jinnai 20:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I have recently nominated several articles about fictional plot elements for deletion. I am posting notice here because the raise many of the same issues under discussion. These can be found at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2009_July_16#Apocalypse_War and below. Savidan 21:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
General policy page on fiction articles edit
This is a proposal to consolidate the disparate comments on fiction articles on Wikipedia, currently contained, among other places, at WP:NOT#PLOT, WP:WAF, WP:PLOTSUM, and WP:SUMMARY. The goal is to have a single policy page that lays out an agreed upon position for what fiction articles are, in the hopes that it will allow for some of the many disputes about fiction to be settled.
Currently I think the proposal is near finished, and I want to make sure it gets plenty of eyes on it and comments. Phil Sandifer (talk) 15:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
- WP:PLOTONLY may also be relevant. --Cybercobra (talk) 03:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)