April 2023

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
161718192021 22
23242526272829
30      

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Monday, March 29th, 2010 06:54 pm
The discussion about Tropes has raised the problem of how to deal with the multiple pages about consent issues/sexual assault: we've got Rapefic, Noncon and Dub-con, all with somewhat different content. Noncon in particular is defined entirely in relation to rapefic and dubcon, and all the history of the trope is on the rapefic page. I feel that none of the pages can be comprehensive when the content is spread out this way.

My preference would be to merge the pages into one [[Sexual Assault (Trope)]] or [[Consent Issues in Fanworks]] page or the like and redirect, but I suspect that will prove an Unpopular Fannish Opinion. Alternatively, how about an umbrella page with the main content, so that the terms can be usefully compared, leaving the three pages as brief glossary terms that link to the umbrella page?

Other suggestions?
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010 12:27 am (UTC)
Also, clearly this organization thing is contentious, and has been from the beginning. To be honest, I'm still vaguely disgruntled how the h/c organization controversy was handled, even though plenty others objected that whump, torture and hurt/hurt was all bundled into h/c on the talk page, the official word was otherwise.
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010 12:46 am (UTC)
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm anti-authoritarian period, and my own answer to everything is BOTH. So sure! put whump, torture, and hurt/hurt on the h/c page--aaaaand wikilink them all to their own pages too. Why NOT both?
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010 01:06 am (UTC)
The problem to have the same things in two places is that it makes maintenance of the information harder. So I can see why you would want to have information about one thing in one place for that thing, and only links rather than full text in other places.

And as to why I didn't make a torture page anyway, well, because someone who I understood was an admin said it shouldn't be done for h/c and its their wiki and they have arbiting power when there is no consensus?
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010 12:50 am (UTC)
Yeah, having just looked at that h/c page?--what is the downside to having the info on both pages? What god would strike us down if, in addition to that h/c page staying just the same, the word whump was *ALSO* wikilinked, the basic definition taken, and people started expanding over there too! I'm personally pro-redundancy--I don't care if the same info is repeated multiple places, especially at the start, because my thought is that each page, though similar to start, will grow as fandom grows. My 2c, YMMV!