AVID:Requests for Comment/New rules for Availability section and other changes: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted

Inline

Revision as of 17:38, 14 December 2022

Should we ban such phrases like "Seen on films/shows by this company from this time" and similar phrases from the Availability section?

And also should rename Trivia to Facts, Music/Sounds to just Sounds, Music/Sounds Trivia to Sounds Facts, and Logos to Description? Sickminecraft45 (talk) 16:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Support

Support the availability part (The Third Place) 16:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Support the availability part. Also, can we ban the use of "Don't expect this to appear on" comments? IAmThe789Guy (talk) 17:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC) IAmThe789Guy

Oppose

Oppose the renaming part (The Third Place) 16:33, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose Why should we rename our sections? They're perfectly fine as the way it is right now. Logohub (talk) 17:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose in the world for the renaming, Abstain for the Availability part because it already has been implemented. Compooper (talk) 17:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose for the renaming part; it'd be change for the sake of change instead of change for the sake of being beneficial. Abstain for the renaming part as per Compooper. · Talk · Edits 17:14, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose for both. Banning common phrases are rather dumb and hard to avoid for newcomers. Like the tip provided on the tutorial guide, it is not acceptable unless examples are provided, so for people who dislike this phrase, it is partially outlawed. As for the renaming part, no reason is provided why. This feels more like band wagoning the FX/SFX renaming than a reasonable proposal. As for the request itself, as I stated before, these sections are fine and concise as they are. "Facts" literally encompasses everything in the description, "Sounds" will feel off without music being prominently mentioned in the section, and "Description", similar to my reasoning with "Facts", sounds more like the "Logo", "Technique", and "Music/Sounds" sections combined. Also, if a DescriptionIncomplete template is added, then some editors may confuse that with the "Description" section itself rather than others in the article. Camenati (talk) 17:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Oppose for the Availability part. I haven't really saw a problem with this. Oppose for the renaming part. Like Scoob, can we not try to rename every single section. There was a early request similar to this. (• USER TALK! •) 17:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Abstain

Comments

Comment: "Seen on films/shows by this company from this time" is already not allowed. Here's an excerpt from the tutorial guide: "Be specific! Don't just say "found on the company's releases at the time", name at least some of the releases the logo is known to be on." AVID:Tutorial Guide Logohub (talk) 17:08, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 #{{Oppose|strongest}} for the renaming part; it'd be change for the sake of change instead of change for the sake of being beneficial. {{Abstain}} for the renaming part as per Compooper. [[File:T807sig.png|50px|link=User:Trevor807]] '''·''' '''[[User talk:Trevor807|Talk]]''' '''·''' '''[[Special:Contributions/Trevor807|Edits]]''' 17:14, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 #{{Oppose}} for both. Banning common phrases are rather dumb and hard to avoid for newcomers. Like the tip provided on the tutorial guide, it is not acceptable unless examples are provided, so for people who dislike this phrase, it is partially outlawed. As for the renaming part, no reason is provided why. This feels more like band wagoning the FX/SFX renaming than a reasonable proposal. As for the request itself, as I stated before, these sections are fine and concise as they are. "Facts" literally encompasses everything in the description, "Sounds" will feel off without music being prominently mentioned in the section, and "Description", similar to my reasoning with "Facts", sounds more like the "Logo", "Technique", and "Music/Sounds" sections combined. Also, if a DescriptionIncomplete template is added, then some editors may confuse that with the "Description" section itself rather than others in the article. [[User:Camenati|Camenati]] ([[User talk:Camenati|talk]]) 17:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
-# {{Oppose|Strong}}'''for the Availability part'''. I haven't really saw a problem with this. {{Oppose|Strongest}} '''''for the renaming part.''''' Like Scoob, can we not try to rename every single section. There was a early request similar to this. [[File:Charlie fiddlesticks signature.png|200px|link=User:CharlieFiddlesticks]] ([[User talk:CharlieFiddlesticks|• '''USER TALK!''' •]]) 17:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
+# {{Oppose|Strong}} '''for the Availability part'''. I haven't really saw a problem with this. {{Oppose|Strongest}} '''''for the renaming part.''''' Like Scoob, can we not try to rename every single section. There was a early request similar to this. [[File:Charlie fiddlesticks signature.png|200px|link=User:CharlieFiddlesticks]] ([[User talk:CharlieFiddlesticks|• '''USER TALK!''' •]]) 17:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 ===Abstain===