[TopAce]

What's the difference in Expanded Universe and Non-canon in the case of FreeSpace? Nothing.

The non-canon category is short so far. As soon as there are more articles, we can start dividing into subcategories. As soon as there are more campaign-related articles, we can further divide the non-canon category. I think something like this should do:
Non-canon (category)--> MindGames (category)--> Starborn (article)

[aldo_14]

What's the difference in Expanded Universe and Non-canon in the case of FreeSpace? Nothing.

The non-canon category is short so far. As soon as there are more articles, we can start dividing into subcategories. As soon as there are more campaign-related articles, we can further divide the non-canon category. I think something like this should do:
Non-canon (category)--> MindGames (category)--> Starborn (article)

Kara just explained exactly that; 'expanded universe' has a context and purpose within its use in campaigns and mods, i.e. it is canonical in relation to that creations 'universe'.

[karajorma]

What's the difference in Expanded Universe and Non-canon in the case of FreeSpace? Nothing.

There is a difference. If I put an article about the starborn in the  MindGames (category)--> Starborn (article) section then I'm saying something about MG. If however I put the article in Non-Canon then I'm trying to say that the article is relates to other campaigns even though it quite clearly doesn't.

As I just explained that's the problem with the non-canon section the way it is now. The articles in there aren't one person saying this is how the Shivans work in my mod. It the same guy saying this is how the Shivans should work. There is a huge difference between those two statements and to my mind the second one has no place whatsoever in the wiki. We get newbies coming along every month and saying "I think the Shivans did this...." Should that all go in the wiki?
 Don't talk to me about length. Cause some of the non-canon stuff in there is short and almost complete conjecture. For instance the article on Talania.

The non-canon category is short so far. As soon as there are more articles, we can start dividing into subcategories. As soon as there are more campaign-related articles, we can further divide the non-canon category. I think something like this should do:
Non-canon (category)--> MindGames (category)--> Starborn (article)

The non-canon section should be completely removed and simply replaced with a user campaigns section. If any of the non-canon articles currently present can't find a single campaign that supports their idea then the question that has to be asked is why are they  in the wiki in the first place?

[WMCoolmon]

(If you are looking for on-topic discussion then skip the first block)

...
...
...
I had expected it to be treated as an attempt to solve a problem which affects the wiki not as a ridiculous attempt to score points off of me.

You know what, Kara? You're right. You are apparently going to have to revise your opinion of me, because I am not a pushover who lets people claim popular mandate with a vote that is unclear. In fact, I'm pretty stubborn.

You use phrases like "The fact is...". That doesn't make whatever you say after that a fact.  I've pointed out that I misunderstood the question because the definition of non-canon (in this case) is "Anything outside the Freespace universe". I'm not sure whether I made this clear or not, so here it is:

Because we had discussed the possibility of removing user campaigns beause they, too, are non-canon I figured that was under discussion here. Essentially, any articles on the wiki discussing something of a fictional nature outside of the Freespace universe. Because we had not discussed articles such as the SCP, I skipped over it when thinking about "non-canon".

Then you made a post saying that assumption is wrong. You essentially said, 'No, I didn't actually mean what I asked...' and at that point I lost my regard for the poll because you didn't mean what you said, you didn't mean what I thought, and you didn't make that clear. Read Kal's post on the second page of the thread. According to you, regardless of the results of the poll, the Inferno article should be allowed in so why would he even mention it otherwise?

I should probably point out that I realize that even though I agreed with you that a poll on the Manifesto would be useful, I don't think that just because I agree with someone about something being useful, that it means that they're going to go right out and do it. It could be someone else, or they could do something else. This seems pretty obvious to me...I know of no religion or government law where this isn't the case


I do have to take something of a lawyer-like position here - I believe that having the Shivan Manifesto and other similar articles in the wiki is useful and outweighs the potential risks expressed by others. I don't believe that theories like the "Badger Manifesto", "Shivan BBQ", or "Spacecrack theory" sound like they belong in the wiki, but if they meet the same criteria as the Manifesto then I don't see why they shouldn't be put in the wiki. Since there are others that do not agree with this, I have to argue my case. If I've had a strategy in this, it's been to take the reasons that the other side uses as criteria for determining what goes in the wiki and point out how they apply to the Manifesto as well. Although that's rather un-lawyerlike.

I'm going to try to ignore any more personal attacks from now on.

What's the difference in Expanded Universe and Non-canon in the case of FreeSpace? Nothing.

The non-canon category is short so far. As soon as there are more articles, we can start dividing into subcategories. As soon as there are more campaign-related articles, we can further divide the non-canon category. I think something like this should do:
Non-canon (category)--> MindGames (category)--> Starborn (article)

Kara just explained exactly that; 'expanded universe' has a context and purpose within its use in campaigns and mods, i.e. it is canonical in relation to that creations 'universe'.

I don't see why the Manifesto has to be part of some 'expanded universe' to be added to the Wiki. It comes up fairly often in the community which IMHO is why it should be in there. In that way, it's more like the Freespace Lingo or Freespace Community pages, although I don't think it really belongs in either since it's more on the subject of Freespace. If you treat it as 'expanded universe' then you'd have to add half the posts in General Freespace to the wiki, if not more, since they would be just as valid as the Manifesto. And we've got stuff that isn't canon to Freespace or a specific Campaign in there that people have found useful. (See: SCP)

But maybe dealing with it as a Freespace theory is a bad way to do it. Possibly we could put the FS Lingo section into the FS Community section, and add a category in there for 'Community topics'. This page could have links to the Manifesto, Freespace 3, the whole incident with Derek Smart, etc etc.

There is a difference. If I put an article about the starborn in the  MindGames (category)--> Starborn (article) section then I'm saying something about MG. If however I put the article in Non-Canon then I'm trying to say that the article is relates to other campaigns even though it quite clearly doesn't.

By putting it in the non-canon section, all you're saying is that it's non-canon. You're not making any kind of relation to other campaigns, unless you say that you are in the article text.

[aldo_14]

I don't see why the Manifesto has to be part of some 'expanded universe' to be added to the Wiki. It comes up fairly often in the community which IMHO is why it should be in there. In that way, it's more like the Freespace Lingo or Freespace Community pages, although I don't think it really belongs in either since it's more on the subject of Freespace. If you treat it as 'expanded universe' then you'd have to add half the posts in General Freespace to the wiki, if not more, since they would be just as valid as the Manifesto. And we've got stuff that isn't canon to Freespace or a specific Campaign in there that people have found useful. (See: SCP)

Again, the SCP is not related to the storyline or setting of the game universe; it sits in the same realm of canonical arguement as the installation instructions in the box - i.e. completely outside it.   I think this has been stated clearly about 3 or 4 times now?

 I'd also add that one of the key arguments against the SM is that it has the same 'value' as about half of Gen.FS, it just happens to be a 29 page long document rather than a discussion (which arguably makes it less informative).  As it stands, IMO the description you're applying to non-canon is exactly the same as you could apply to speculative fiction.  In which case, should we have that in the wiki?  I don't think so myself, because I think that's moving away from referential value.

[WMCoolmon]

Again, the SCP is not related to the storyline or setting of the game universe; it sits in the same realm of canonical arguement as the installation instructions in the box - i.e. completely outside it.   I think this has been stated clearly about 3 or 4 times now?

Exactly. Yet it's in the wiki (I assume) because it's useful because people can looking things up from it or be directed there by other people to learn about a topic relevant to the community.

I'd also add that one of the key arguments against the SM is that it has the same 'value' as about half of Gen.FS, it just happens to be a 29 page long document rather than a discussion (which arguably makes it less informative).  As it stands, IMO the description you're applying to non-canon is exactly the same as you could apply to speculative fiction.  In which case, should we have that in the wiki?  I don't think so myself, because I think that's moving away from referential value.

But it's distinguished from the rest of the stuff in General Freespace in that if I say the words "Shivan Manifesto", most of the veterans will recognize what I mean and will have an idea of what I'm talking about. Other people won't, or will misunderstand what it is (See the entry in the wikipedia about the Manifesto being canon).

[CP5670]

Can't we just have a fan fiction section rather than this ambiguous "non canon" thing? And I don't see why custom campaigns are any more a valid form of non-canon material than fan fiction is.

I'm not sure why the current Manifesto article is really "non canon" in the first place, as it doesn't include the actual Manifesto at all but only talks about it. The Manifesto's content may be garbage but its existence and the arguments it has caused are a reality. This is quite different from, for example, having a non canon disclaimer at the end of the Lucifer article and then saying that "a second one was discovered in the Derelict campaign," which is what I interpreted the poll to be about. So as I said before it's really a matter of whether the wiki is about the FS universe only or the FS community.

(If you are looking for on-topic discussion then skip the first block)

fl4m3w4r!!1

[Shade]

My take on the fan fiction vs fan campaign debate is that the difference is simply that you can't see fan fiction in the game. You can't play it. You can with a campaign, and as such, though non-canon, campaigns are a fact of the game and should have a place in the wiki (though a seperate place well away from canon stuff)... whereas the fan fiction isn't, and shouldn't. Well, until someone makes a campaign out of it anyway, in which case it just moves to the campaign category and can be put in there as a campaign background if the authors want to.

[karajorma]

I've pointed out that I misunderstood the question because the definition of non-canon (in this case) is "Anything outside the Freespace universe".

Yet when I clarified you continued to use your misunderstood definition. The "I misunderstood" argument can only carry you upto the point where the situation was explained to you in more detail. You continued to talk about how non-canon meant the SCP after both Aldo and myself had explained what that meant. In fact you've done it yet again while I was typing this!

Using the words non-canon may have been a mistake but what is the title of this category? Is all the SCP info in that category? No. Should be pretty easy to see why I used the term then shouldn't it?
 The matter has been clarified. If you still don't understand then ask for more clarification but let me make this clear. Removal of the SCP information is not under discussion.
 

and at that point I lost my regard for the poll because you didn't mean what you said, you didn't mean what I thought, and you didn't make that clear.

If you really want to be lawyerish about this I'll be happy to start another poll but considering that I doubt anyone who voted no is going to vote yes for a milder interpretation of the matter I had hoped you'd see that it was pretty much a moot point. If as you claim many people thought that removal of non-canon meant removing the SCP, Freespace Lingo, user campaigns and despite that the matter was still deadlocked with 10 votes each and has now in fact swung in favour of the no argument can you not see that a vote for a more lenient version of the question is obviously going to go against the non-canon section of the wiki?

The reason why I didn't simply close the poll and make a new one is that it has already served it's purpose. Do you honestly think that any poll on clarified version I've posted since I came back to the thread on Sunday is going to swing in favour of the SM and the non-canon category?

I do have to take something of a lawyer-like position here - I believe that having the Shivan Manifesto and other similar articles in the wiki is useful and outweighs the potential risks expressed by others.

Maybe you do but if I believe your argument at least 50% of those who had voted considered the risks so bad that they were willing to cut out the SCP and the user campaigns in order to get rid of it. Unless of course those who voted no did understand what was under discussion and hadn't misunderstood what was going on.

You use phrases like "The fact is...". That doesn't make whatever you say after that a fact.

I used the phrase once. To say that everyone who voted no either understood the discussion or was actually voting for a stricter interpretation. Given what I've said in the previous two paragraphs do you really want to question that? Cause I'm game if you are.

I'm going to try to ignore any more personal attacks from now on.

I'm not attacking you. I'm asking you to remember that this is a friendly discussion of how a section of the wiki should be administered. It's not a points scoring exercise. I've already made my position clear numerous times yet you continue to resort to the argument about why the SCP is non-canon even past the point where it has been explained to you. I'll take any further attempts to make that argument as trolling since by now you should hopefully understand that it wasn't ever on the table.

I don't see why the Manifesto has to be part of some 'expanded universe' to be added to the Wiki.

It's in a big section labelled non-canon which contains explainations of various thing like the Lupus Nebula, Talania and the SM. Are you seriously telling me you think that someone new to the wiki isn't going to think that it's a concerted effort by the community to extend canon?
 If it's in a sub category of a user-made campaign it is much more obvious what the SM is.

If you treat it as 'expanded universe' then you'd have to add half the posts in General Freespace to the wiki, if not more, since they would be just as valid as the Manifesto.

And that is the objection to having the SM there. People will treat it as an extended universe and the only way to balance that out would be to include a heap of stuff that shouldn't be on the wiki. I made this point several days ago. The SM belongs on the forums not the wiki. It certainly doesn't belong on what could easily be construed as an extended universe page.

[Wanderer]

Then how about the option that has been suggested in this thread, creating a new category 'Fan fiction' and tossing all the non-canon non-campaign related stuff in there and all non-canon but campaign related stuff into their respectice campaign groups. As IMHO fan fiction =/= extented universe while non-canon ~ extented universe.

[karajorma]

Problem with that is that several other people seem to be against a fan fiction section on the wiki.

[Shade]

If that refers to my first post, then when I wrote "If it had to be anywhere, my preference would be a 'fan fiction' section off the main page" I actually meant off the main HLP page along side the galleries, glossary, articles etc. areas, and not off the wiki start page.

Hell, I remember long ago reading what amounted to an entire novel based in the freespace universe once, revolving around some humans getting captured by shivans and how they managed to save humanity... not a bad story as I recall, even though I disagreed with the writing style. Can't remember what it was called though, or where I saw it. But anyway, that's more of the sort of thing that could fit into a fan fiction area. It all should share the trait that it's not in game, simply a story or theory that's there for the reader's pleasure.

If such a fan fiction ara got filled up with stuff like that, I think it'd be a great read.

[WMCoolmon]

...

Don't agree with a lot of what you said, but I'm ignoring it.

I don't see why the Manifesto has to be part of some 'expanded universe' to be added to the Wiki.

It's in a big section labelled non-canon which contains explainations of various thing like the Lupus Nebula, Talania and the SM. Are you seriously telling me you think that someone new to the wiki isn't going to think that it's a concerted effort by the community to extend canon?
 If it's in a sub category of a user-made campaign it is much more obvious what the SM is.

Yes, that is exactly what I'm trying to tell you. If it was an effort by the community to extend canon then it would not be in a section titled "non-canon". If you or anybody else chooses to read any more into that, then the fault for whatever faulty conclusions drawn from it lie with that party.

I do not know what the significance of Talania is or why it is in the wiki, since noone has bothered to write anything up on it. As for the Lupus Nebula article, I don't think it's been handled properly. Not only does it lack the non-canon notice, but "It is clearly the best" is too subjective for my tastes. For all we know Volition could've been referring to a presumeably-undiscovered nebula that would've been visible in the period.

Also, I noticed that the "Stellar information" on systems is non-canon...it should be noted as such. While Capella IRL is apparently a quatenary star system, in the game it seems to have only one sun. IIRC there was also an issue with the planets as well, the last time that was brought up. As far as Freespace goes, having factually incorrect but canonically accurate is probably more important.

If you treat it as 'expanded universe' then you'd have to add half the posts in General Freespace to the wiki, if not more, since they would be just as valid as the Manifesto.

And that is the objection to having the SM there. People will treat it as an extended universe and the only way to balance that out would be to include a heap of stuff that shouldn't be on the wiki. I made this point several days ago. The SM belongs on the forums not the wiki. It certainly doesn't belong on what could easily be construed as an extended universe page.

It shouldn't need to be balanced out with a heap of stuff (I assume you mean aldo's criticisms, rather than other topics) so long as the article makes it clear that it is non-canon. Again, if someone chooses to read more into the article's inclusio, they are really only doing themselves a disservice, and the wiki cannot (and should not really try) to anticipate what subtle meanings someone might read into something. For all I care, someone can take the indication that the wiki exists as a sign that HLP is made up of pathetic losers who haven't had enough money to buy any new games since 1998. It's no more factual than assuming there's some overt movement to expand canon; but neither do I feel that we need to take action to prevent it.

Edit: Oh, and to clarify - I do think the Lupus Nebula page should be in the wiki, just in a slightly more accurate form.

[Sandwich]

FYI, I'm sooo not following any of this, so if there's anything crucial I should see, point it out to me, m'kay? Don't take that as disregard for the importance of the issue, but I just haven't had time lately. Rorry.

[Goober5000]

I'm in favor of closing the poll and the thread and let everything continue happening, on its own, just like before. Those who want the Wiki improved will improve it, and those who are content to play armchair quarterback can take what they get.

[karajorma]

If we do that then you'll probably get an edit war cause the first thing I'm doing is taking down the non-canon page and organising things how the majority wanted it.

As I said before if someone really wants the SM stick it in as a sub-category of their campaign. It will still turn up if someone does a search on the wiki but it won't be part of the extended canon that I keep saying that I want to avoid. If no one wants it then it should be allowed to gather dust like every other topic on the forum that has served its purpose.

Don't agree with a lot of what you said, but I'm ignoring it.

Feel free. I'm happy to let everyone else draw their own conclusions based on that.

Yes, that is exactly what I'm trying to tell you. If it was an effort by the community to extend canon then it would not be in a section titled "non-canon". If you or anybody else chooses to read any more into that, then the fault for whatever faulty conclusions drawn from it lie with that party.

Let me get this straight. We're making this great resource for newbies to understand the community better. Then we put in information that is very likely to be misconstrued by a fairly large percentage of them and that is somehow going to be their fault?

The solution if to try to avod that happening in the first place. If you're perfectly willing to let new people come in and get completely the wrong idea about the SM why bother with an entry at all. Far better to have them simply ask on the forum and get a sensible answer than allow them to go onto the wiki and get the wrong idea.

It shouldn't need to be balanced out with a heap of stuff (I assume you mean aldo's criticisms, rather than other topics) so long as the article makes it clear that it is non-canon. Again, if someone chooses to read more into the article's inclusio, they are really only doing themselves a disservice, and the wiki cannot (and should not really try) to anticipate what subtle meanings someone might read into something.

It's not subtle. Quote a few people can see full well that newbies are going to get it wrong. You're acting like only one or two people will ever get it wrong and their opinions shouldn't count anyway. I don't see how I can possible accept that conclusion if I can see such an easy way to avoid it.

[aldo_14]

Exactly. Yet it's in the wiki (I assume) because it's useful because people can looking things up from it or be directed there by other people to learn about a topic relevant to the community.

Did you actually understand what I said?  It's of technical value, it has nothing to do with the issues of storyline, universe or - in essence - the literary creation of FS.  There are 2 seperate issues; the debate of canon is about what should be included as reference - useful reference - for the Freespace storyline and setting.

But it's distinguished from the rest of the stuff in General Freespace in that if I say the words "Shivan Manifesto", most of the veterans will recognize what I mean and will have an idea of what I'm talking about. Other people won't, or will misunderstand what it is (See the entry in the wikipedia about the Manifesto being canon).

The same could be said of the HLP Movie or the Capella BBQ Theory.  In any case, this is only IMO a reasoning for at most a brief 1 line definition and perhaps an external link to the original SM thread, not in-wiki reference.  Also, if we place the scope for justification for non-canon as being merely age or usage, it would act to exclude new theories; whilst I'm fine with that in the sense of opposing this type of entry, it would be pretty unfair to any new theory.

NB: as far as fan-fiction goes - you don't see it in the regular wikipedia, do you?

[Taristin]

Umm. Right. This has gotten quite ugly.

I change my vote. Non-canon should be allowed in the wiki... on it's own page.  or with a brief reference, if it pertains, in the canon to a link to the new page. And le it be clearly known that it's someone ele's speculation. We don't need people mixing the events of say, the great war part II, with BWO to undertand Bosch...

[StratComm]

This is LONG overdue.  The non-canon in this poll should be changed to "Fan Fiction", the Shivan Manifesto link posted in there with an explanation as to it's importance, and this whole damned debate closed.  WMC, I really hate to see someone with your integrity intentionally skewing this debate, as you know as well as anyone else that there's a line here that should be debated and yet is not because everyone has been totally occupied with counterarguing your point.  That said, I'm equally dissapointed with a few others for fanning the flames, so to speak.  If I "misunderstood" this poll to be about user-made campaigns (since the only post I made prior to this one was an attempt to clarify the issues at hand) then this whole damned thread has been over an inconsistancy in terminology, and to be honest I'm not sure that there's much of a debate at all.  The thread should have been about the SM in the first place, because it really is a unique example that falls in the cracks of this argument.

[CP5670]

I think the "non canon" thing is fine as far as the poll goes. I mean, if articles about fan fiction pieces (that are in there only because they are well known, not because they make sense) aren't allowed, then there is no real reason to have articles about fan fiction on which user made campaigns are based either. I'm sure there are campaigns out there with inconsistencies and contradictions as bad as the SM.

You know, who wrote the Shivan Manifesto anyway? Is he still even around? It would be interesting to hear his thoughts on this whole issue.