User talk:Ishdarian/Archives/2012/May

Teatime?

A few pointers now that you're in the shiite so to speak:

1. I know that many good editors (include previous admin Dennis Brown) have the best of intentions diving into this cesspool, but good intentions are unfortunately not enough to get good results here.
2. The most important point to note even if you ignore everything else is this problem is more complex than can by solved with trite piecemeal rule changes. This isn't to say that it's a "complex" problem, because it's not, just that it's not surprising the current simplistic process has failed so miserably so many times.
3. Despite the massive input of time/resources into the affair, the amount of work done is surprisingly trivial. When I said it's a non-trivial problem, what I mean is that it might take a moderately intelligent person a few days to figure out. Unfortunately this hasn't happen yet for any of the existing parties, and it's unclear whether it will/could.
4. Substantive inputs longer than a few lines long tend to get the TLDR treatment, so when we add this to the couple points above, it's easy to see how a fundamental roadblock exists here.
5. It's this dilemma coupled with a few very dominant editors (ie look who always sets the agenda) who don't understand it which makes the process hopeless.

TL;DR: Without resolving more prerequisite issues, anything that can come out of all this is destined to fail. It's basically like trying to solve an algebra problem with an inadequate understanding of arithmetic. Cheers. Agent00f (talk) 10:55, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it's failed miserably so many times. There has been a lack of communication from both side. Do me a favor: break it down Barney-style, right here, and tell me what YOUR idea for this is. You've alluded to a solution you had, and you say you encountered resistance. Please, this is a safe haven. Show me what YOU think we should do. Also, please include these 'prerequisite issues'. Ishdarian 02:44, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I've posted a simple breakdown in reply to Anna at the bottom of the talk page, but another breakdown is if we can all accept that piling more stuff on a page saves it from AfD by virtue of mass, then there should be no problem with piling events onto the end of a promo's own page. This would work for all smaller promos (the userbase all agree here). Of course this would mean that the UFC's page is 100+ event long. The logical followup from that is if this kind of omnibus is acceptable, then we should also accept the SAME THING but with html anchors transformed to links to separate entries. As long as the entries are cleanly and consistently linked together, it's just a better way of presenting the same info as one massively long omnibus. This means that wayward events won't qualify (ie inherent notability), but well formed coherent sets of event will. It's minimally intrusive and brightline testable. I've gotten very positive comments from other users for this idea but it's been shut out altogether at every turn.

The prerequisite issues as alluded to is 1) this might require a bit of rethink at the WP:sports level (IMO it should) since this can be used for other sports in similar situations (other fast-growing sports tend to be in the same trap as MMA but less visible to deletionists). The process so far is very focused on generalizing higher level rules built for other problem to this new situation. 2) as a matter of face, there's no way the AfD clique will support anything that allows MMA event pages more or less as they are, no matter how strictly formatted (templatized, etc), no matter how high of a brightline standards we set. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agent00f (talk • contribs) 03:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I really, really don't like the idea of stacking all the events at the end of the UFC main page. The omnibus should work fine for that. I have an idea for the omnibus that should get everything flowing in harmony, similar to what you recommended. One thing I don't like is redundancy. If the mainspace page exists for an event, then the omnibus should only link to the event page. If the omnibus is set up chronologically, then flow between events in a chronological order is relatively easy.

I also think you're wrong about the supposed 'AfD clique'. From what I've seen, they can be very reasonable to work with, but walls of text and snide remarks/personal attacks will tune just about anyone out. If we can all keep heading into this in a level-headed manner, we can work something out that everyone can agree with. When people butt heads all the time, progress can not happen. Ishdarian 03:21, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not saying we should actually do this for UFC, it's simply an intermediate step (applicable to shorter promos, everyone including deletionists agree here), which then leads to the step of the breaking the chain of events into individual pages for promotions which get too long (which is what we have now). There's just a link at the end of the promo's pages which leads to the first page in the chain, which then chains to the next, etc. If you look at the sidebar on UFC events, that's how they work. With this setup, there's no need to "break out" anything, just as there's no need now. It helps to think of it as an abstract framework first. I'll try to draw a picture. Agent00f (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Here are 3 images for what I'm talking about (note to self, do not use Word for drawing diagrams):

1. This is what omnibus works in the abstract (piling on) for small promos. Nobody would say this violates wiki rules. http://i.imgur.com/CK3kW.png
2. This is what's been implemented for small promos. This perfectly fine according to everyone in the process: http://i.imgur.com/WJrtP.png
3. This is what I'm proposing for larger promos where the above becomes unwieldy. It's exactly the same info, just divided in a way that makes sense for usability instead of all on one page. Note the only change is that page anchors are changed to links (green arrows). It's easy to navigate, and better in every way in terms of design for use in sequential (in time) sports: http://i.imgur.com/9gA5Y.png

I would upload this to wiki (and the mmanot page) but need to do other stuff atm. Agent00f (talk) 04:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

AN link

I modified your posting at AN about the RfC to jump directly to the RfC. If you object to this, feel free to revert. Hasteur (talk) 13:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Ishdarian 02:45, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

RfC/U notice

As you have worked with User:Agent00f, I wanted to make you aware of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Agent00f. I know it's moving backwards, but I'd like to have all previous attempts at least tried before going for the final solution. Hasteur (talk) 01:32, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

2012 in UFC events

I believe it is two bold to have zero mention of fights covered on other pages as it does make this page as a summary of year useless and is going to make the case of selling this page to the fanbase harder. I won't revers as depending on how you count them that could take me up to or over the 3RR, I do think you should reconsider it however. Mtking ^(edits) 03:59, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't looking at is an a summary list. I figured it was more of a place where we could incubate the articles that don't meet notability standards. Like List_of_Street_Fighter_characters. Do you get where I'm coming from? Ishdarian 04:10, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I see where you are coming from, I just don't think that is the right way and if you read the comments of the fans that do like it, it is because all the info is in one place, removing it will just end upsetting them and result in know one linking it. Mtking ^(edits) 04:17, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Chris Diamond 'WRESTLER'

Hello, Ishdarian. You have new messages at C.Fred's talk page.
Message added 04:04, 16 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Anonymous posts

Please stop leaving anonymous posts in my user page. Thanks. Evenfiel (talk) 03:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, didn't even realize I was logged out. Thanks! Ishdarian 03:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is MMA AfD's. Thank you. Mtking ^(edits) 11:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)