| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Status | Closed |
| Request date | Unknown |
| Requesting party | JuJube ( talk · contribs) |
| Parties involved | Vorteus ( talk · contribs), Mr.bonus ( talk · contribs), Coolgamer ( talk · contribs), Kung Fu Man ( talk · contribs), kelvSYC ( talk · contribs), Dan Lander ( talk · contribs), SeizureDog ( talk · contribs), Jonny2x4 ( talk · contribs) |
| Mediator(s) | Flakeloaf ( talk · contribs), Vassyana ( talk · contribs) |
| Comment | When reopened, a clear strong consensus was displayed, with very few and limited objections to the consensus. Unanimous assent is not required for consensus. A supermajority supports the previous compromise and is unwilling to further accomodate the dissenting view. Therefore, I have closed the mediation accordingly. |
[[Category:Wikipedia Medcab closed cases|]][[Category:Wikipedia medcab maintenance|]]
Please observe Wikipedia:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.
Mediator response
- Does this case still require mediation or can I close it? --
Ideogram 21:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, sadly still requires mediation. Sorry to bother you folks with this though.--
Kung Fu Man 23:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'll look into some policy notes on this one. In the meantime, perhaps one or two editors from either side could post a short blurb down there explaining (to me, not to each other) why they think their version of the article name should prevail? Does the discussion at Talk:E. Honda pretty much summarise it? Flakeloaf 22:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, sadly still requires mediation. Sorry to bother you folks with this though.--
Kung Fu Man 23:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
It seems as though a compromise has been worked out. See compromise offers and the copious discussion below. Vassyana 07:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Closing. -- Ideogram 12:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Case reopened per request. Vassyana 22:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Closing. Vassyana 17:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Compromise offers
In addition to the "column A vs. column B" options, it's been suggested that common names be adopted, with the clarification that a character's "common name" is the one used to refer to them during character selection, including an announcer's voiceover if any. This means Street Fighter characters' names would be the so-called "common names", while other characters such as those from Samurai Showdown & Virtua Fighter, would retain their full names.
- Compromise reached?
It seems as though a consensus has been reached. Full names should be used when they appear in-game, otherwise common names should be used. Is this correct? Vassyana 07:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Seems so. I would rather at least the Darkstalkers character pages be able to include the manual as this would create some minor inconsistency with the naming of those pages (Morrigan's last name gets mentioned in the games, but Victor's does not, but both are in the manuals for the first two games), but everything else seems to be agreed upon.--
Kung Fu Man 07:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- I will leave the case open for now. If the compromise holds, I will close the case in a couple days. Vassyana 08:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
What is flawed about the statement of compromise above? Please be specific, but concise. Vassyana 22:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- you said that "Full names should be used when they appear in-game, otherwise common names should be used. Is this correct?" yes, but the method we agreed on (check Vassyana's talk page or the below discussion) was to use names any typical player would see. The format we came up with to decide which info is easily accessible and will be seen by any typical player in any given game is to use names written on the player selct screen, underneath the energy bars or the name announced by the voice actor. Kung Fu Man's compromise means rooting around the depths of the game for any trivia where the surnames may be written (endings, bios etc) instead of using the name mentioned in the places every gamer will see - the player select screen is the first thing a player sees, while playing the energy bar is always visible and when the character is announced (after selection, on versus screen or when winning/losing a match ) then the game's voice over is heard stating the character's name. Mr.bonus 13:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
- Okay, this is out of hand at this point. The consensus was if it appeared in the game somewhere it was fine. That's even a paraphrased quote of what Mr.bonus and Vassyana said here and everyone was content with). I don't have anything else to even discuss on this further other than ask why bother with this when the person who pushed to have it reopened is more determined to 'have it his way' (for evidence I'd like to direct you to Vassyana's talk page which accuses me of "underhanded tactics" for making changes in compliance with this mediation well after it had closed). There's nothing left to mediate. Anyone other than Mr.bonus disagree?-- Kung Fu Man 23:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
It had appeared to me that the discussion closed with the compromise contrary to whatever consensus we had (which was almost what KFM had proposed), and foul play is afoot just because some party wants it "their way". Let's see what case the party reopening the debate has to defend the reopening with. kelvSYC 03:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
My logic is that Wikipedia is and has always been a factual encyclopedia. Regarding the naming convention regarding Vega, Balrog, and M. Bison, the proper names as they were first released in Japan, the creating nation, should be used as fact. M. Bison's character is a direct play on Mike Tyson, and the joke makes no sense with the name change. Also, other video game characters that have articles follow the "nation of origin" rule. Take a look at Doctor Eggman. Instead of the article being named "Dr. Robotnik". Despite being known as such in America and Europe, in Japan, the character has always been named Dr. Eggman, and that is the name that should be used for a factual article. The difference in U.S. and Europe names should be explained on the articles, but the Japanese names are canon. They have always been known as such, they are what they were first named, and they are still called by those names in the nation they were invented in, along with most die-hard fans insisting on using the proper names. I don't see the problem here, and it seems painfully obvious to me that the names should be changed to reflect factual data. Coolgamer 03:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- That issue's already been resolved. Doctor Eggman is there because he's no longer called Dr. Robotnik. Wikipedia is not supposed to cater to the "needs" of die-hard gamers, but to average people. JuJube 03:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- The character's been referred to as Doctor Eggman since the last video game console generation, even in English editions, so it should stand well enough.
kelvSYC 15:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia should cater to factual requirements. The original name is the factually correct one, and should be used in an encyclopedia. The ACTUAL name of the characters should be used.
Coolgamer 17:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- If I may, that's really another matter, though it's shown that for cases like this the most recent US name is used for the characters (personally, I too prefer Robotnik, but it's not a case up for much debate, instead one you should take up with Sega. If you do wish to continue this debate though, please make your own mediation topic regarding it?--
Kung Fu Man 18:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- The reason I bring it up is because not only was a message about this left on my Talk Page, but this mediation topic includes me as one of the central figures. Re-read the list of participants.
Coolgamer 21:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- I added this here because it was a naming issue related to Street Fighter, and I didn't want any more bad blood building up. But if it's really important to you, you can make a separate mediation topic. I think policy is really clear on that issue, though. JuJube 21:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- The reason I bring it up is because not only was a message about this left on my Talk Page, but this mediation topic includes me as one of the central figures. Re-read the list of participants.
Coolgamer 21:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Taking original names to be correct is not a sound argument - if it was, I don't think Ralf Jones or Clark Steel would be where they are now. After all, the original English names for those two are different... (This is also contrary to consensus that newer names are for the most part better, but someone else has already pointed this out). kelvSYC 20:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- If I may, that's really another matter, though it's shown that for cases like this the most recent US name is used for the characters (personally, I too prefer Robotnik, but it's not a case up for much debate, instead one you should take up with Sega. If you do wish to continue this debate though, please make your own mediation topic regarding it?--
Kung Fu Man 18:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia should cater to factual requirements. The original name is the factually correct one, and should be used in an encyclopedia. The ACTUAL name of the characters should be used.
Coolgamer 17:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, please check
User talk:Vassyana for the reasons I wanted this debate reopened. The format was to use the names written or announced on the player select or during gameplay (under the energy bar). I have already gone over this on the talk page of Vassyana, but for example, Edmond Honda has appeared in a bio screen in one game, whereas E. Honda is written as his name without fail on all select screens, under all energy bars and this is always his announced name. Naming his page Edmond simply because it has appeared once in one section of one game doesn't mean it is common enough to be his article title. The method agreed on by myself, Dan Lander and Flakeloaf only affects charcters from Street Fighter, Darkstalkers, Soul Edge/Calibur and a few other characters (Fatal Fury's B. Jenet has the wrong title of Bonne Jenet), as full names are nearly always displayed/announced in other fighting games (virtua fighter, king of fighters, fatal fury, tekken, etc).
Mr.bonus 13:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Why are we at this again? You have not made any real compromises with regards to your position, while the rest of us have been willing to bend somewhat. Sounds like "sore loser attitude" to me. The point is that we are trying to build consensus, and we all need to make sacrifices, which you are unwilling to make. And one thing the rest of us have agreed on is that consistency across different video game series is more important - your idea advocates double standards. kelvSYC 15:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- I still don't buy this argument, honestly. There's still a double standard. You might be able to convince some people that Cloud Strife is a commonly used name, but what about Celes Chere, Kain Highwind and countless other Final Fantasy characters that generally don't get a last name in games they appear in? JuJube 21:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that this does seem like sore losership. What's the point in creating a naming guideline that only applies to fighting games? Whatever we decide on should be applicable to all video game characters, which the previous compromise was. Ideally, the guidelines should apply to all fictional characters, but since we haven't heard from opinions of anything other than gamers, that's a discussion for a later date. -- SeizureDog 20:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
This is absurd to reopen this: none of us is even discussing this any further, and the agreement was reached. I move to close this once more. What say you?-- Kung Fu Man 13:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
The first part of our chat can be found here
the second part of the discussion can be found here /Archive 2
| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Status | Closed |
| Request date | Unknown |
| Requesting party | JuJube ( talk · contribs) |
| Parties involved | Vorteus ( talk · contribs), Mr.bonus ( talk · contribs), Coolgamer ( talk · contribs), Kung Fu Man ( talk · contribs), kelvSYC ( talk · contribs), Dan Lander ( talk · contribs), SeizureDog ( talk · contribs), Jonny2x4 ( talk · contribs) |
| Mediator(s) | Flakeloaf ( talk · contribs), Vassyana ( talk · contribs) |
| Comment | When reopened, a clear strong consensus was displayed, with very few and limited objections to the consensus. Unanimous assent is not required for consensus. A supermajority supports the previous compromise and is unwilling to further accomodate the dissenting view. Therefore, I have closed the mediation accordingly. |
[[Category:Wikipedia Medcab closed cases|]][[Category:Wikipedia medcab maintenance|]]
Please observe Wikipedia:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.
Mediator response
- Does this case still require mediation or can I close it? --
Ideogram 21:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, sadly still requires mediation. Sorry to bother you folks with this though.--
Kung Fu Man 23:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'll look into some policy notes on this one. In the meantime, perhaps one or two editors from either side could post a short blurb down there explaining (to me, not to each other) why they think their version of the article name should prevail? Does the discussion at Talk:E. Honda pretty much summarise it? Flakeloaf 22:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, sadly still requires mediation. Sorry to bother you folks with this though.--
Kung Fu Man 23:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
It seems as though a compromise has been worked out. See compromise offers and the copious discussion below. Vassyana 07:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Closing. -- Ideogram 12:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Case reopened per request. Vassyana 22:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Closing. Vassyana 17:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Compromise offers
In addition to the "column A vs. column B" options, it's been suggested that common names be adopted, with the clarification that a character's "common name" is the one used to refer to them during character selection, including an announcer's voiceover if any. This means Street Fighter characters' names would be the so-called "common names", while other characters such as those from Samurai Showdown & Virtua Fighter, would retain their full names.
- Compromise reached?
It seems as though a consensus has been reached. Full names should be used when they appear in-game, otherwise common names should be used. Is this correct? Vassyana 07:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Seems so. I would rather at least the Darkstalkers character pages be able to include the manual as this would create some minor inconsistency with the naming of those pages (Morrigan's last name gets mentioned in the games, but Victor's does not, but both are in the manuals for the first two games), but everything else seems to be agreed upon.--
Kung Fu Man 07:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- I will leave the case open for now. If the compromise holds, I will close the case in a couple days. Vassyana 08:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
What is flawed about the statement of compromise above? Please be specific, but concise. Vassyana 22:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- you said that "Full names should be used when they appear in-game, otherwise common names should be used. Is this correct?" yes, but the method we agreed on (check Vassyana's talk page or the below discussion) was to use names any typical player would see. The format we came up with to decide which info is easily accessible and will be seen by any typical player in any given game is to use names written on the player selct screen, underneath the energy bars or the name announced by the voice actor. Kung Fu Man's compromise means rooting around the depths of the game for any trivia where the surnames may be written (endings, bios etc) instead of using the name mentioned in the places every gamer will see - the player select screen is the first thing a player sees, while playing the energy bar is always visible and when the character is announced (after selection, on versus screen or when winning/losing a match ) then the game's voice over is heard stating the character's name. Mr.bonus 13:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
- Okay, this is out of hand at this point. The consensus was if it appeared in the game somewhere it was fine. That's even a paraphrased quote of what Mr.bonus and Vassyana said here and everyone was content with). I don't have anything else to even discuss on this further other than ask why bother with this when the person who pushed to have it reopened is more determined to 'have it his way' (for evidence I'd like to direct you to Vassyana's talk page which accuses me of "underhanded tactics" for making changes in compliance with this mediation well after it had closed). There's nothing left to mediate. Anyone other than Mr.bonus disagree?-- Kung Fu Man 23:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
It had appeared to me that the discussion closed with the compromise contrary to whatever consensus we had (which was almost what KFM had proposed), and foul play is afoot just because some party wants it "their way". Let's see what case the party reopening the debate has to defend the reopening with. kelvSYC 03:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
My logic is that Wikipedia is and has always been a factual encyclopedia. Regarding the naming convention regarding Vega, Balrog, and M. Bison, the proper names as they were first released in Japan, the creating nation, should be used as fact. M. Bison's character is a direct play on Mike Tyson, and the joke makes no sense with the name change. Also, other video game characters that have articles follow the "nation of origin" rule. Take a look at Doctor Eggman. Instead of the article being named "Dr. Robotnik". Despite being known as such in America and Europe, in Japan, the character has always been named Dr. Eggman, and that is the name that should be used for a factual article. The difference in U.S. and Europe names should be explained on the articles, but the Japanese names are canon. They have always been known as such, they are what they were first named, and they are still called by those names in the nation they were invented in, along with most die-hard fans insisting on using the proper names. I don't see the problem here, and it seems painfully obvious to me that the names should be changed to reflect factual data. Coolgamer 03:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- That issue's already been resolved. Doctor Eggman is there because he's no longer called Dr. Robotnik. Wikipedia is not supposed to cater to the "needs" of die-hard gamers, but to average people. JuJube 03:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- The character's been referred to as Doctor Eggman since the last video game console generation, even in English editions, so it should stand well enough.
kelvSYC 15:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia should cater to factual requirements. The original name is the factually correct one, and should be used in an encyclopedia. The ACTUAL name of the characters should be used.
Coolgamer 17:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- If I may, that's really another matter, though it's shown that for cases like this the most recent US name is used for the characters (personally, I too prefer Robotnik, but it's not a case up for much debate, instead one you should take up with Sega. If you do wish to continue this debate though, please make your own mediation topic regarding it?--
Kung Fu Man 18:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- The reason I bring it up is because not only was a message about this left on my Talk Page, but this mediation topic includes me as one of the central figures. Re-read the list of participants.
Coolgamer 21:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- I added this here because it was a naming issue related to Street Fighter, and I didn't want any more bad blood building up. But if it's really important to you, you can make a separate mediation topic. I think policy is really clear on that issue, though. JuJube 21:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- The reason I bring it up is because not only was a message about this left on my Talk Page, but this mediation topic includes me as one of the central figures. Re-read the list of participants.
Coolgamer 21:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Taking original names to be correct is not a sound argument - if it was, I don't think Ralf Jones or Clark Steel would be where they are now. After all, the original English names for those two are different... (This is also contrary to consensus that newer names are for the most part better, but someone else has already pointed this out). kelvSYC 20:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- If I may, that's really another matter, though it's shown that for cases like this the most recent US name is used for the characters (personally, I too prefer Robotnik, but it's not a case up for much debate, instead one you should take up with Sega. If you do wish to continue this debate though, please make your own mediation topic regarding it?--
Kung Fu Man 18:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia should cater to factual requirements. The original name is the factually correct one, and should be used in an encyclopedia. The ACTUAL name of the characters should be used.
Coolgamer 17:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, please check
User talk:Vassyana for the reasons I wanted this debate reopened. The format was to use the names written or announced on the player select or during gameplay (under the energy bar). I have already gone over this on the talk page of Vassyana, but for example, Edmond Honda has appeared in a bio screen in one game, whereas E. Honda is written as his name without fail on all select screens, under all energy bars and this is always his announced name. Naming his page Edmond simply because it has appeared once in one section of one game doesn't mean it is common enough to be his article title. The method agreed on by myself, Dan Lander and Flakeloaf only affects charcters from Street Fighter, Darkstalkers, Soul Edge/Calibur and a few other characters (Fatal Fury's B. Jenet has the wrong title of Bonne Jenet), as full names are nearly always displayed/announced in other fighting games (virtua fighter, king of fighters, fatal fury, tekken, etc).
Mr.bonus 13:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Why are we at this again? You have not made any real compromises with regards to your position, while the rest of us have been willing to bend somewhat. Sounds like "sore loser attitude" to me. The point is that we are trying to build consensus, and we all need to make sacrifices, which you are unwilling to make. And one thing the rest of us have agreed on is that consistency across different video game series is more important - your idea advocates double standards. kelvSYC 15:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- I still don't buy this argument, honestly. There's still a double standard. You might be able to convince some people that Cloud Strife is a commonly used name, but what about Celes Chere, Kain Highwind and countless other Final Fantasy characters that generally don't get a last name in games they appear in? JuJube 21:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that this does seem like sore losership. What's the point in creating a naming guideline that only applies to fighting games? Whatever we decide on should be applicable to all video game characters, which the previous compromise was. Ideally, the guidelines should apply to all fictional characters, but since we haven't heard from opinions of anything other than gamers, that's a discussion for a later date. -- SeizureDog 20:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
This is absurd to reopen this: none of us is even discussing this any further, and the agreement was reached. I move to close this once more. What say you?-- Kung Fu Man 13:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
The first part of our chat can be found here
the second part of the discussion can be found here /Archive 2