A new rule for social media links?

[Antvasima]

That works, if you also replace "Original" with "Original URL" in your updated draft above.

 

[Agnaa]

Got it; I've made all of those adjustments.

Here's how it currently looks

• [Position of person making the statement]'s [Name of the statement's source]; [Original URL] (If any); [Screenshot] (If any); [Archived backup link] (If any)

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. That looks perfectly good to apply then.

Here's a version with touched-up grammar:

"When referencing social media content on our wiki, there is a high risk of posts being deleted, changed, or restricted for visitors who are not logged in.

• As such, it's required to capture a cropped screenshot, ideally saved in our wiki or Imgur if necessary, and include it in the references.
• It is also preferable to back up the original links via the Wayback Machine Internet Archive or Archive.Today for extra safety, although some social media platforms may block this option.

"

Got it; I've made all of those adjustments.

Here's how it currently looks

• [Position of person making the statement]'s [Name of the statement's source]; [Original URL] (If any); [Screenshot] (If any); [Archived backup link] (If any)

@Mr._Bambu @Crabwhale @DarkDragonMedeus @Firestorm808 @KLOL506 @Flashlight237 @ImmortalDread

Does this seem acceptable to apply to our Editing Rules and References pages?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Looks good

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for your reply.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Yeah, seems fine. One required, more methods strongly suggested.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. This can probably be applied then.

@Agnaa @ImmortalDread

 

[ImmortalDread]

I prefer it if he added an explanation next to the formatting (at least one or two sentences). Otherwise its fine to be applied.

 

[Antvasima]

What do you mean more specifically?

 

[ImmortalDread]

Wait, what does “if any” mean? I did not understand this part, so a clarification helps.

So, this is the outcome of the thread:

---

Editing Rules
When referencing social media content on our wiki, there is a high risk of posts being deleted, changed, or restricted for visitors who are not logged in.

• As such, it's required to capture a cropped screenshot, ideally saved in our wiki or Imgur if necessary, and include it in the references.
• It is also preferable to back up the original links via the Wayback Machine Internet Archive or Archive.Today for extra safety, although some social media platforms may block this option.

This is how I would structure it:

---

Backup Reference​

• [Position of person making the statement]'s [Name of the statement's source]; [Original URL] (optional information); [Screenshot] (optional information); [Archived backup link] (optional information)

In adhering to our wiki's guidelines for citing social media content, it is imperative to employ the following prescribed formatting. It is obligatory to include both the primary URL and a backup link, and you may include additional information alongside them if it is required. Here's an example of how this structure might be used:

"Dr. Jane Smith, a leading climate scientist; Original URL; Screenshot; Archived backup link"

 

[Antvasima]

That seems fine to me, but I think that the original URL should also be mandatory, and a backup link should be mandatory whenever it is possible to get one.

Thank you very much for helping out.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Edited, and I am glad to help.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you, but you still do not seem to have noted down the linking as mandatory whenever possible, in the manner that I stated above.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Thank you, but you still do not seem to have noted down the linking as mandatory whenever possible, in the manner that I stated above.

---

Backup Reference​

• [Position of person making the statement]'s [Name of the statement's source]; [Original URL] (optional information); [Screenshot] (optional information); [Archived backup link] (optional information)

In adhering to our wiki's guidelines for citing social media content, it is imperative to employ the following prescribed formatting. It is obligatory to include both the primary URL and a backup link, and you may include additional information alongside them if it is required. Here's an example of how this structure might be used:

"Dr. Jane Smith, a leading climate scientist; Original URL; Screenshot; Archived backup link"

 

[Agnaa]

I've made some tweaks to the wording

• [Position of person making the statement]'s [Name of the statement's source]; [Original URL]; [Screenshot] (If possible); [Archived backup link] (If possible)

In adhering to our wiki's guidelines for citing social media content, it is imperative to employ the preceding prescribed formatting. It is obligatory to include both the primary URL and a backup link, if they exist, and you may include additional information alongside them, such as a screenshot if you wish. Here's an example of how this structure might be used:

"Lead Writer's Twitter; Original URL; Screenshot; Archived backup link"

I made these changes both for grammar, to fit more in line with the existing standards on that page, and to give a more typical example.

 

[ImmortalDread]

This is fine.

You can apply the changes at any time you want, Agnaa.

 

[Agnaa]

You can apply the changes at any time you want, Agnaa.

Earlier you suggested putting it under the Organization section, but I think the Referencing Statistics section may work better.

How do you feel about that?

 

[ImmortalDread]

Earlier you suggested putting it under the Organization section, but I think the Referencing Statistics section may work better.

How do you feel about that?

This is fine.

If there is no annoyance, please put it like this:

• Always include the References section in character pages, explanation pages, information blogs, and verse-specific powers and abilities pages to source all the important information covered within them. To learn more regarding how to use them, read the References page. New pages without that section may be deleted after ample warning if no adequate justification (such as the series lacking any useful demarcations, or none of the justifications on the page coming from only one specific part of the source material) is provided in the edit summary or in response to inquiry, and no indication that they will be added is given.
• When referencing social media content on our wiki, there is a high risk of posts being deleted, changed, or restricted for visitors who are not logged in.
  [**]As such, it's required to capture a cropped screenshot, ideally saved in our wiki or Imgur if necessary, and include it in the references.
  [**]It is also preferable to back up the original links via the Wayback Machine Internet Archive or Archive.Today for extra safety, although some social media platforms may block this option.

[**] is the sub-unordered list.

 

[Agnaa]

I'd kinda prefer to collapse it into one paragraph tbh. Those points don't feel like that kind that deserves a sub-list.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I'd kinda prefer to collapse it into one paragraph tbh. Those points don't feel like that kind that deserves a sub-list.

I suppose this works as well. I simply felt the need to break them down because readers can, at the very least, not miss it while reading - a psychological reading trick. It ensures readability in my opinion.

If you still believe this is the better way, I don't mind it either way. It has simply become my way of writing drafts.

 

[Agnaa]

And the section name on the References page, how do you feel about it being "Word of God Statements" instead of "Backup Reference"?

 

[ImmortalDread]

And the section name on the References page, how do you feel about it being "Word of God Statements" instead of "Backup Reference"?

Sounds good. We already established what's for in the explanation line.

Reasonable suggestion I would say, since the terminology is known to the community as well.

 

[Agnaa]

Its now been added to the Editing Rules, and the References.

 

[ImmortalDread]

The thread can be closed, and thanks to everyone who assisted in this matter.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you, but much of the entire point of this thread is that including screenshots along with the link or links should also be mandatory, so that definitely needs to be changed in both of the edited pages here.

@Agnaa

 

[Agnaa]

Ah whoops. The text on the Editing Rules page already says that, but I've now edited the References page to reflect that.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out, but there still seem to be a few problems with the following text.

==='''Word of God Statements'''===
*[Position of person making the statement]'s [Name of the statement's source]; [Original URL]; [Screenshot] (If possible); [Archived backup link] (If possible)

In adhering to our wiki's guidelines for citing social media content, it is imperative to employ the preceding prescribed formatting. It is obligatory to include the primary URL, a cropped screenshot of the message, and a backup link, if possible. Here's an example of how this structure might be used:

"Lead Writer's Twitter; [https://www.twitter.com/LeadWriter/status/test Original URL]; [ Screenshot]; [https://web.archive.org/web/20160901000000*/https://www.twitter.com/LeadWriter/status/test Archived backup link]"

Our new standard are supposed to be for social media links with evidence in general, not just WOG statements.

Also, you still use the statements (if possible) after the screenshot, and I do not see why taking a screenshot wouldn't be possible.

I also made some minor wording adjustments here:

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/index....bmit&type=revision&diff=8141517&oldid=8141353

 

[Agnaa]

I'm not sure what social media evidence there would be outside of WoG statements. Are you thinking of stories written and published on websites like Reddit?

I figured WoG would've been a more intuitive way to talk about and structure it, but if there's other things you want covered I can try to think of a solution.

And fair enough on how a screenshot shouldn't really be impossible. I'll edit that out now.

 

[Antvasima]

I'm not sure what social media evidence there would be outside of WoG statements. Are you thinking of stories written and published on websites like Reddit?

Well, just because somebody has found evidence it doesn't necessarily need to be a statement from an official writer, so I would much rather not unnecessarily limit ourselves in this regard, and give more general instructions.

I figured WoG would've been a more intuitive way to talk about and structure it, but if there's other things you want covered I can try to think of a solution.

Maybe "Evidence from social media" or something similar would work as a title?

And fair enough on how a screenshot shouldn't really be impossible. I'll edit that out now.

Thank you for being reasonable.

 

[Agnaa]

Alright, I've changed the title.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out. I think that it looks good now.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I really don't understand the notion of "if any", it is a bit confusing if you meant (if any optional information) so please reword it differently, unless you are referring to backup link which defeats the purpose of obligatory.

 

[Agnaa]

The page doesn't use "if any" under the social media section, and drafts haven't suggested that for over a day.

What are you asking to be worded differently?

 

[ImmortalDread]

I meant the "if possible" part. Apologies, once again. I suppose I should refrain from commenting at all when I am not at home or feeling stressed.

Isn't the whole point of the backup link to be obligatory and not simply optional? Or, to be precise, does it take precedence over a screenshot? I can understand the legal issues against the company, but if that's the case, we should make it clear that the screenshot must be uploaded to the fandom at least.

I thought this because we need to rely on it more than on a "screenshot," since the latter can be easily faked.

 

[Agnaa]

It's "if possible" since sometimes websites try to prevent archive services from indexing them. They have some ways of getting around this, but they may not always work.

And that "if possible" wording is included in other reference sections with similar issues (for games/movies which may not always have notable events as reference points).

 

[ImmortalDread]

This does not solve the fundamental issues of the possibility that someone may take false (or fabricated) screenshots. However, when looking from another (systematic) perspective, I think it can be resolved by practising the RvR enforcement (the VSBW legal enforcement). So, I should not be worried about it for now.

Alright, the thread can be closed. I apologize for keeping it open; I simply had a silly concern.

 

[Antvasima]

No problem.

I will close this thread then. Thank you to everybody who helped helped out here.