GuildWiki talk:Pop culture

I presumed this article had something to do with citing references. I recommend it be changed to something like "Pop culture references".  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 18:38, 15 April 2007 (CDT)
 * IMO a guideline would be more appropriate than a policy, and this should be moved to . -- Gordon Ecker 21:23, 20 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Agrees, but good ideas. RT | Talk 06:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Guideline
Like they said above, this needs to be a guidline not a policy. It is a wonderful proposal but it should not be a policy. It more or less helps guide people in the right direction, if something like this was to happen. So while I support this as a whole, I do not support it as a policy. Good Job to the person that wrote this though! :o) -- Shadowphoenix  17:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to agree here, a policy is too strong. Good idea, though, even if it usually happens anyway.[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]]Entrea  [Talk]  00:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I like Gordon's idea above of remaking this as . I just don't have the motivation to do that right now.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 02:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

related discussion
I just archived a related discussion on my talk page. Read it here. &mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 22:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

doesn't solve the underlying problem
This needs to be policy because it is needed for conflict resolution, but it doesn't really solve the problem because there are no clear criteria on how to resolve conflicts. We have three types of references:
 * a) references confirmed by arenanet. Give a link to the source and put it on the article.
 * b) references that stand up to community consensus
 * c) references that don't

The line between b) and c) is vague at best, and trivia that was on an article for months with no opposition, surviving edits by several editors, may suddenly be deleted. The only sure way to avoid this is to post the alledged unconfirmed reference on the article's talkpage, under a "Trivia" heading. If some people agree and nobody opposes, the trivia could then be copied onto the article. This gives every reference a place to exist and avoids frustration and conflict.

Existing conflicts about trivia would be resolved by requiring everybody who reverts a piece of existing trivia to put it on the article talkpage under the "Trivia" heading so it doesn't get "lost". --◄mendel► 19:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * "This needs to be policy because it is needed for conflict resolution" orly? Where? I also don't think that every piece of trivia should be added just because they may get lost, as sometimes totally dumb trivia is added which has nearly no standing at all. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 01:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems that the majority of article reverts that aren't caused by outright vandalism or spam are caused by trivia, so there is low-key conflict about this almost every day. Given that a piece of trivia is often the first thing a new contributor adds, and that getting reverted basically sends a message of "you are useless, and we don't want you here", a better way to resolve this would certainly not come amiss.
 * Adding trivia to a talk page, as is my suggestion, would be no problem, as sometimes totally dumb comments are added to talk pages which have nearly no merit at all, so it's common practice, basically. ;-P
 * We should see to it that the trivia isn't lost not because the trivia has value, but because the editor who added it does. --◄mendel► 09:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

What is left for this?
This has been a proposed policy for a while now. What has to be done before it's official? Seeing this, this, and this all within 12 minutes made me remember this policy. --Macros 12:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * See the section above. -- ◄mendel► 14:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought all that had been addressed. --Macros 14:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My main point in that section is This gives every reference a place to exist and avoids frustration and conflict, and it's not been adressed by your recent edit at all. As it stands, the policy is here for wikilawyering to back people up who delete trivia; it does not reflect a consensus that helps resolve these conflicts amiably, though I agree it may be better to have a policy than nothing. -- ◄mendel► 14:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Then I'm out of ideas. Most controverisal trivia has already been discussed to death on the talkpages. Any new discussion about trivia is going to be tainted by previous ones. Maybe you're right, the only purpose of this policy is to give an official reason for deleting trivia :\ --Macros 15:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)