FANDOM


Line 227: Line 227:
 
==Kraven==
 
==Kraven==
 
By your tone I feel like I'm being accused of something. If you feel like like I didn't go far enough in my rewrite feel free to take it to the next level. --[[User:Stature|Max]] 04:27, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
By your tone I feel like I'm being accused of something. If you feel like like I didn't go far enough in my rewrite feel free to take it to the next level. --[[User:Stature|Max]] 04:27, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
  +
  +
:"Sorry, but no" is not the most cordial way to start a conversation, especially when discussing a subject that is sensitive around here. Sorry, but I'm a real person with a real name, and sometimes I like to be talked to like one. But at any rate, I take plagiarism very seriously. I've taken a lot of heat enforcing it over the past year. I gave it my best shot on the Kraven article, but there are only so many ways to type "Kraven ran across the rooftops on an Elephant." I guess I didn't live up to your standards, and that's your right to feel that way. If you think it needs to be improved feel free to edit it. It is a Wiki after all. I support your efforts and am willling to help, but until then I consider the manner closed.--[[User:Stature|Max]] 05:57, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:57, May 24, 2010

 Click to create your...



Error: image is invalid or non-existent


Students

im sorry i wouldnt be able to tell you the exact number, as im not sure exactly, but it is im prettty sure. Forearm and Longnecks' names are correct. Basilisk's im not so sure myself.. to be sure you could ask on the forums, or ask an admin, as im sure some might know for sure.. but please next time dont put up the redirect as it deletes all the info. on the page. you could sugget a move on the page, by typing at the top {{subst:Move|newpagename}} if youre sure youre right, (and i might be wrong), but ill try and find out though..... but id say its better to leave them alone until then.. --Johnnybravo44 22:26, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

ive been looking on some sites but cant find anything.. ive asked an admin for help on the forums. hopefully it will be cleaned up in a few days, with all the right info... ill try and keep looking myself though.. --Johnnybravo44 22:48, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

sorry didnt mean for that to sound mean, i was simply just fixing the move tag --Johnnybravo44 23:03, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

looks like youve got it with the move tag --Johnnybravo44 23:20, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

so far ive even looked through every New X-Men issue i have (including their first appearances) and i cant find anything.. [one website] says their names; [another site] does seem to be correct though.. ((Comics:Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe Vol 4 13 confirms their names according to uncannyxmen.net)) --Johnnybravo44 16:41, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
ok it seems those arent there real names.. (and i still have NO idea where they came from) so the move tag should take two weeks for a bot to change it, leaving anyone who wants to make an argument ((much like i did)) to state their claims, and possibly even prove it. but yeah thanks for catching that! i always just assumed that those were there real names. --Johnnybravo44 03:50, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

Captain Britain

first of all, sorry for the mishap and thanks for catching some stuff like that. secondly, on Katherine Fraser (Earth-616) and Dai Thomas (Earth-616), (characters in the Comics:Captain Britain Vol 1 series) would you happen to know their real first appearances? if you do could you fix their pages also? thanks! --Johnnybravo44 22:41, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

hey thanks for finding them, hope you dont mind but i fixed the first appearances to show the month and year also, its easier too. and is Dai Thomas Welsh or British? i put welsh but im just making sure.. --Johnnybravo44 23:59, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
You were perfectly right about the citizenship; I went ahead and changed all the ones I could find (from modern times at leat) that had citizenship English to United Kingdom - including Captain Britain, btw -, which now shows up as "British". I'm not too sure about your claim that Braddock was never an alcoholic, however; that was quite an issue between him and Meggan and was thoroughly explored in the early Excalibur issues, from what I can remember...--edkaufman 12:51, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
whoa, you're right. sorry, got caught up in the fever. i'll double check. What do we do with the predating ones? i agree they were not citizens of the UK, but what to do? I'd go with english for most part (Morgan le fay, for example, who was certainly a citizen of Arthur's England at one point). About the alternates: If you find reference, feel free to adjust them, but if none is give, I'd go with UK, for simplicity's sake.
As for Braddock's alcoholism... I'm not sure I agree with your reasoning, but I'll read the stories before getting into an ill-prepared argument, ok?--edkaufman 14:16, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
Yes and no. There was definitely an England in the 6th century, but no formal country and therefore no citizenship. Yes, it wasn't called England at the time, but the present day description for the region still holds true. The whole idea of the nation-state is only about 500 years old. So for those before that, I'm happy enough with giving a region, as sub-dividing them further creates a huge number of unnecessary categories that aren't useful. I'm fine either way, I just prefer simplicity in a case where science doesn't hold true anyway.
As for the alcohol: "drinks normally for a European..."? Lol. If you turn that phrase around too many times, it could just as well mean that in Europe, we're all a bunch of alcoholics who pretend that isn't the case by pretending it is structural and calling it social drinking. But I can see the point about the differing perceptions. As I said, I'll reread the issues.--edkaufman 14:44, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

Jolly 'Ol England!

Thanks so much for clearing up all those citizenships. It's very easy to get the history wrong when you live in a different country. :)

So Morgan le Fey is from Gorre originally, what's the group name for people from there? (i.e. America -> Americans).

Thanks again!

Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talkcontribsemail) 18:12, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

No idea offhand what citizens of Gorre would be called, sorry. Sometimes it's obvious - Anglians are from Anglia, Romans from Rome, Hamburgers from Hamburg (yes, genuinely, that's the proper name) - other times less so - people from Newcastle are Geordies. Maybe Gorrians, but that doesn't sound quite right. As for citizenships in general, it's all down to the dates and a bit of history. For instance, any character native to Alaska or Hawaii who was born circa 1900 say, would not be an American citizen, at least not by birth. Lokiofmidgaard 20:18, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Plagiarism

Hey Loki!

Thanks again for posting yet another problem we need to deal with. I've updated the Plagiarism template so all you have to do is add:

{{Plagiarism|URL of site taken from}}

To the top of the page you want to add that to. (Instead of having to copy/paste the entire thing every time). I also added the 'Plagiarism' category, which will be a sub-category of the Priority Copy Edit category, so that people fixing those pages know what they're getting into.

If you have any questions about this, I'll be around. Thanks again! :)

Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talkcontribsemail) 18:29, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to eavesdrop, but since this issue affects all of us, I wanted to clarify. What should we do with plagarised pages? Is it enough just to rewrite the information in our own words? Do we need to find new images? Some stuff is obviously fair use (real name, issue appearances, creator info) but what is the best thing to do with the other stuff?
Artful Dodger 19:41, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Rather than post duplicated replies on both your user pages, I'm going to assume that the Watchlist feature will let you both know the conversation's continued here. Thanks for making the plagiarism template easier to apply, though hopefully there won't be too much need for it. As for what to do with them? I don't set policy here, but my advice is to clean them out as much as possible. There's two factors to consider, the legal and the goodwill. On the legal side, if you copy huge screeds from elsewhere and don't acknowledge that it is someone else's work, then you are committing plagiarism; if you copy screeds and put up a "this was copied from XXX" you are not guilty of plagiarism (as that requires passing the work off as your own), but you are guilty of copyright theft. Making a few small changes to the text while keeping it substantially the same doesn't get you out of that. A total rewrite so that it isn't recognisable as being the same text is a minimum requirement in such cases (and, if someone got litigious, might still not save you, not if the sentence structure, etc shows it is still the same text judiciously altered using a thesaurus). But beyond that is the goodwill factor. If you put a lot of effort into creating something like a reference website, and then someone comes along and just lifts the info and images straight from your pages, with having the manners to ask, without having the manners to give credit, basically without manners, you are going to hack them off (and keep in mind the Appendix site, which is the one being lifted from most of the time here has got protective coding on most pages to stop someone just copy/pasting, meaning anyone copying from it knows it the site owner doesn't like it and has had to actively and knowingly circumvent that). So the question of how much needs to be altered comes down to one thing imo - do you do change just enough to be legally covered, or enough to avoid destroying the goodwill you might want from that other site? Lokiofmidgaard 20:18, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Assumption correct! :)
A few things I'd like to help clarify:
The major contributors here (most are administrators, but not all) are all aware of the differences the database and the appendix have had in the past, and would like nothing more than to do what it takes to rectify the situation and move on once and for all.
Some statistics of this site may help clarify the problem with accurately preventing plagiarism here. There are over 300,000 pages on the wiki, with more than 60,000 of those being pages that would likely be targets for plagiarism. There are almost 2 million registered users who can edit these pages, and we see an average of about 250 unique users log in and make an edit every month. These 250 users make somewhere between 7,000 and 40,000 edits in any given month, with an average of about 16,000 edits every month. We have 24 administrators with only about 9 of those actively editing. So that's an average of 1700 edits for each administrator to check every month. The average amount of edits per admin in the past month is only 700 (pageviews weren't available). So each administrator would have a lot more work on their plate just to cover the average month. On high months, each would be looking at close to 4500 edits to check. So things can quickly and easily get out of control, especially when a normal month can't be policed completely. The best that can be done at this point is to try to cover as much as possible, and deal with each user found plagiarizing on a case by case basis.
All of that being said, everyone here is open to new suggestions and ideas about how to address this issue. It is generally felt that plagarism found on this site reflects worse on the site itself than it does on the individual who posted it, and we'd like to do anything possible to maintain our good name.
Due to the nature of this site, and the sheer volume of changes that are made month-to-month, plagiarism will likely never be completely stamped out.
In my own opinion, a mutual agreement between the sites would probably be in the best interests of everyone. Providing quality links back to the appendix on this site whenever possible would generally boost google visibility of the appendix, increasing it's rank and resulting in more viewers routinely referring to it. Though it sounds like you fine gentlemen at the Appendix aren't interested in seeing your pages duplicated elsewhere, incredible efforts could be made to ensure that any duplicated information leads directly back to the source, weather by link or by reference. In any case, I'm sure we could find a way to satisfy every want of the guys at the appendix should the information become shared. It seems like such a waste to limit the visibility of such high quality information, especially when we're all fans of the same material, and in our case, fans of the work of fans! :)
If the outright removal of all content that resembles what is on the Appendix (as we find it, of course) is the only option we have in order to bury the hatchet, no problem. We'll set our policy as such. But anything we can do to achieve more than that together would be in both of our interests. Either way, as long as we can move forward as friends and bear no ill will towards each other, we'll be happy. (Our policy today is that repeated instances of adding plagiarized texts to our database is not tolerated).
Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talkcontribsemail) 19:19, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

:Some statistics of this site may help clarify the problem with accurately preventing plagiarism here. The best that can be done at this point is to try to cover as much as possible, and deal with each user found plagiarizing on a case by case basis. I fully understand that with Wiki sites, because they allow virtually anyone to amend pages, plagiarism is not easy to stop. Making the effort to do your best on that front counts though.

:In my own opinion, a mutual agreement between the sites would probably be in the best interests of everyone. Providing quality links back to the appendix on this site whenever possible would generally boost google visibility of the appendix, increasing it's rank and resulting in more viewers routinely referring to it. That's really not for me to decide. The Appendix is Jeff Christiansen's site, not mine.

:Our policy today is that repeated instances of adding plagiarized texts to our database is not tolerated). It's a step in the right direction - but not removing that list of alternate Earths which was copy/pasted from the Master List isn't. Unless Jeff gave explicit permission for it to be posted on this wiki, it shouldn't be here. And I wasn't going to raise it, but since you mentioned the fallout between the Appendix and Database, and said you know the reasons - lifting images from another site without asking isn't going to endear you. Yes, I've heard the argument "you don't own the images." Jamie said that when he was asked to stop people taking images from the Appendix. That he appeared happy to let people do that is probably the biggest bone of contention between the sites. Legally, sure, the Appendix doesn't own them - but don't expect most sites to like others just helping themselves to the images that site took the time to scan. Don Markstein's Toonopedia doesn't (read his Unauthorized use Policy, which applies to images or text); from discussions on other talk pages here Uncanny X-Men.net apparently raised it as an issue with the Database; and it's not viewed favourably by the Appendix either. Lokiofmidgaard 19:38, March 31, 2010 (UTC)


I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that I fully appreciate your feedback and opinion, and since you are a heavy user of both sites, I personally hold your opinion in high regard.
I appreciate you acknowledging the difficulties with handling plagiarism on wiki sites, and sincerely hope everyone on our sister sites understand as well as you do that we're actually trying over here, making as many efforts as possible to resolve these problems. We always welcome and appreciate any help they can give.
My mistake about the appendix, I know Jeff own/runs it, but had hoped that the upper echelons of contributors such as yourself held some clout about the direction the site would go. I suppose the Appendix isn't the type of community that gets together and talks about the decisions related to the site, and probably thought it was since we generally operate that way. As I think of it, I do remember now that Jeff or one of his designates checks everything that is put onto the site before it goes up.
I've removed the reference list, since it's obviously an item of contention. You are right about its usage, and even though I used it only for reference here on this site, any act of goodwill I can personally perform is something I am willing to do. I do hope it's still viewed as an act of goodwill, even though you had to ask twice to remove it.
I'm also personally willing to remove any images on our site that are direct copies of images from another site, if they want. I went through all the pages you flagged as plagiarized and tracked down the users who uploaded the images (which were also stolen). I then went through every image those users had uploaded and deleted any that came from the Appendix or uncannyxmen.net (uncanny's images are pretty easy to tell apart). Again, I'd hope that all of that work is viewed as an act of goodwill towards the offended sites, and that the consolidation of these acts is changing the general view of this site.
From what I've heard from Jeff and Jamie, I'd be willing to guess that they probably won't be best friends any time soon, so I was hoping to mend fences between the major contributors in the mean time, and slowly build trust between the founders. When it comes down to it, we're all just fans of the same material, and in a perfect world would be working together to make the best single body of work we can.
Again, thank you for your help.
Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talkcontribsemail) 21:03, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Mar

thanks for the fix up, i forgot of the preview as Mar's first.
and thanks for taking out Mar in issue #9, i didnt see them in others,
but i figured i missed it as the last editor put it in, so
i thought it Mar's first.
--Johnnybravo44 17:10, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
sorry, Mar wasnt named till issue 10, and that got me confused as im just on it now. ;) --Johnnybravo44 17:20, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

pink percy

I never said he is gay. All I did was restore the phrase that Lee stated him to be gay and not "intended him" to be gay and then completely changed his mind about it (as opposed to the examples you gave where the characters turned out to be something completely different). There is a difference. And if you'll note, this is given under trivia, not as part of the character biography, since, as you rightly pointed out, there is no in-story proof. However, I still find it a noteworthy fact. Check the version now, can you live with the compromise?--edkaufman 23:33, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

If you put in the Gay Characters category, then you are listing him as gay, which is not accurate. And if you list the trivia, you need to list the counter-evidence, since that (a) is in-story, and (b) was written by Stan, contradicting his later claim that he intended him to be gay (and intended is the right word - he never showed it or even hinted at it in the comic, so while he may now be saying that was part of an unspoken backstory, it's exactly the same as those other examples I gave - backstory a writer had in mind that was never ratified by the stories they wrote. Lokiofmidgaard 23:37, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't the one who put him in the category; all I did was undo your edit, which was factually less correct then the original text and add a reference for it. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to get hung up over this. But honestly, I don't remember his in-story het relations. Do you have a reference? Cause if not, I would leave him in the category. They're rare enough as it is in the Marvel Universe... ;)--edkaufman 23:43, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
Ok, sorry, just realized, I actually was the one who added the category. Still - unless we have actual evidence to the contrary, I don't see why not...--edkaufman 23:47, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
References? Sgt Fury #23, where he was shown to be a skirt chaser - and before anyone says that gay guys sometimes womanise as a cover for their true sexuality, yes, but if that was the writer's intent, then they would balance it with hints of it being a cover, rather than leaving it standing as evidence of being straight. And "unless we have actual evidence to the contrary, I don't see why not"? That's no way to run a guide. Unless you want to list as fact any comments writers make in interviews or internet postings simply because they haven't been openly contradicted in a story. Lokiofmidgaard 23:55, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, Sgt. Fury #23 has a flashback of Percy lovin the ladies. In Stan's introduction in Marvel Masterworks Sgt. Fury vol 1 , he mentions that Percy might be gay. I don't think Percy should be categorized as gay either, but I don't see why we can't have a note about Stan's claims in the trivia.--Max 00:05, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
And we do have a note about it in the trivia. But I also feel said note should be balanced with a note that the stories Stan himself wrote suggest he isn't gay. And that unless and until we have in-story evidence to support the claim by Stan, the Gay Character category is inaccurate and misleading, because it leads casual readers of this site to think it is confirmed information (since Percy shows up on the list of gay characters), which it isn't. Lokiofmidgaard 00:09, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. As long as whatever you guys settle on is factually accurate I'm good with it.--Max 00:12, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
Checked the reference, you're right. Fine. However, yes, a statement made by writer/editor/creator of the character (who was writer for a long and editor for the whole time that the original series was published) that is not contradicted in story is - in my book - good enough as a reference, especially considering the background that there was no way that homosexuality could be portrayed in the books at the time because of the comics code and/or publishing morals at the time. I can live with the edit as it stands now (since there is evidence to the contrary) and let's remove the category, but frankly: Telling other contributors off before giving reference to the contrary at the same time is "no way to run a guide" either. --edkaufman 00:20, April 7, 2010 (UTC)

back to the students

hey lokiofmidgaard you should check out some of the students' pages, they finally have names!! ;) --Johnnybravo44 00:46, April 8, 2010 (UTC)

if possible, could you put a reference by the charaters' real names on their pages you are editing. it would make their pages look better, and most likely help the move go faster. thanks if you can! --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 07:59, April 30, 2010 (UTC)

Kraven

By your tone I feel like I'm being accused of something. If you feel like like I didn't go far enough in my rewrite feel free to take it to the next level. --Max 04:27, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

"Sorry, but no" is not the most cordial way to start a conversation, especially when discussing a subject that is sensitive around here. Sorry, but I'm a real person with a real name, and sometimes I like to be talked to like one. But at any rate, I take plagiarism very seriously. I've taken a lot of heat enforcing it over the past year. I gave it my best shot on the Kraven article, but there are only so many ways to type "Kraven ran across the rooftops on an Elephant." I guess I didn't live up to your standards, and that's your right to feel that way. If you think it needs to be improved feel free to edit it. It is a Wiki after all. I support your efforts and am willling to help, but until then I consider the manner closed.--Max 05:57, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.