Talk:Bionicle/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Let's try something new

Alright, let's try approaching this from a new perspective: I ask that everyone who wants an external link included on this page, including the ones that are already there, go to Wikipedia:External links, read the policies there, and post explaining what policies there justify why a specific site should be linked to. Any links that can't be shown to conform to policy will be deleted. Right now, the only site I see that I think should stay is the BS101Wiki, since it contains information that would be considered too specific or too speculative to be included on wikipedia. --InShaneee 00:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Uhg, there is nathing there that says the sites shouldn't be on. We might as well not even HAVE a fan sites section, I told you this would happen, there used to be alot of sites there, now there's one.-Jedizati 01:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, there is. That pages says SPEFICALLY what kinds of pages can be linked to. It is an official policy, and it taken seriously. --InShaneee 01:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

According to that page, fanlistings are occasionaly exceptable. If you take other sites off cause they're fanlistings, and then leave one or two on, you're contradicting yourself.-24.115.72.117 02:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Just leave the fan sites there, or take them all off. If you have a prob with that, well, your the admin, so do what is right.-Jedizati 02:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

You're both right, which is why I suggest taking off all but the Bionicle wiki. Any objections? --InShaneee 02:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

It's your decision, do it if you want.Jedizati 13:07, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Quote from the applicable part of WP:EL: "Fan sites: On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such. In extreme cases, a link to a web directory of fansites can replace this link. (Note: fanlistings are generally not informative and should not ordinarily be included.)" BIonicle is a topic with many, many fansites, and seeing as BZP is the major Bionicle fansite, I don't see why a link to it shouldn't be allowed. btw, InShaneee, the Wiki is a part of a much larger site called BS01 which has much more reference info. So I would take off the wiki link and just link to BS01 --torritorri 15:28, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh and one more thing: all the people reading this should go and read WP:CIVIL and follow it. --torritorri 15:30, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Ug, this is getting out of control!

Either No links, Just BS01 Wiki, or all the fan sites,-Jedizati 16:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Please don't keep posting if you have nothing new to add to the disscussion. --InShaneee 19:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

BZPower needs to stay. Greg often gives details in the forums, either explaining current things or giving info about the near future (like Irnakk's nature and powers). Therefore the site would be considered a source and should be linked. Drakhan 18:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Anything that he says can reasonably be added somewhere here, negating its usefulness as a link. As for which site is the 'biggest', BS01 actually has an Alexa ranking almost twice as high as BZPower, which I think ends that argument right there. --InShaneee 19:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure I get what you're saying, InShaneee. If I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying BZPower doesn't need to be linked to because any info from BZPower can be added here. What I'm trying to say is that "here" gets info from BZPower, so according to Wikipedia policy, BZPower should be acknowledged as a source of info and linked to. Drakhan 00:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I think this whole links thing is stupid. Who cares anyway.-Jedizati 20:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I say anyone who wants should put fan sites up. Free encyclopedia. --Toa of Sound 22:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I wish Epsilon hadn't started the whole thing. It is now a big mess.--Dark Jedi 22:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to point out Rational Thinker started the discussion that started the issue. No offense to Rational Thinker, but I am not completely at fault for the matter at hand. –BoMEpsilontalk 00:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
I suppose I'm at fault, too; I'm the one who started the discussion over MaskofLife because I got tired of seeing it repeatedly added and removed, and that messy discussion led into more messy discussions over other fansites. But hey, at least we're talking things out and trying to come up with a solution. Drakhan 00:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

This isn't really "something new", y'know?-Jedizati 01:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Finger pointing aside, I'm still not seeing any evidence of why a link should stay. --InShaneee 03:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I am confused.-Jedizati 12:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

We told you all of the fans sites should stay. Any site posted should stay.--Dark Jedi 13:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Dark Jedi, you said earlier all fan sites should be removed. –BoMEpsilontalk 16:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Either they're ALL removed, or they ALL stay-Jedizati 17:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Again, you're just stating your opinion, and not taking policy into consideration in the least. Alright, here. Since this seems to be a policy thing more than a style/content discussion, I'm going to be bold and go ahead and edit the links section so it conforms to the external linking policy. If anyone thinks this is in error, please bring it up here. --InShaneee 17:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
I re-added BZPower. One of the Wikipedia policies is "name your source," and BZPower - especially the Ask Greg forum topic - is consistently a source of official information that isn't found anywhere else. Drakhan 21:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
You're misunderstanding that policy. That means that links must be provided for any 'iffy' information, so as it can be proved. What information exactly does BZPower provide that isn't provided in the BS01 Wiki? --InShaneee 01:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
But BZPower is still the original source of the info, both for the BS01 wiki and for this wiki, and should be acknowledged as such. BS01 is a good resource, but it can't claim that its information is directly from the author; BZPower can. Drakhan 03:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if it's directly from the author, it just matters that it's sourced. If you want to reference specific statements in this article to specific statements made on your site, that's one thing, but you still haven't provided a reason to link to your site in general. --InShaneee 04:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Because the most direct source is always best. And I've referenced specific BZPower forum posts in articles like Axonn, Brutaka, and Order of Mata Nui; so why not link the main site in the main Bionicle article? Besides that, BZPower is the biggest fan community out there (I know you said BS01 has a higher something-or-other rating, but that's more a reference site than a community). I know we shouldn't include every fan site out there, but we should certainly include the best of the best, and BZPower qualifies.
And for what it's worth, BZPower isn't my site. I haven't even gotten around to joining the forums yet. I just think it's a good resource, a good fan site, and all-around worthy of a link. Drakhan 05:54, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

You still aren't talking about guidelines, just stating your opinion again (which is why I'm going to remove the link, again, for the time being). Just because it's referenced elsewhere has no connection to its inclusion here: those links were providing relevant, appropriate resources. Also, as far as guidelines are concerned, Alexa rating carries more weight than membership. --InShaneee 06:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

If that is your dissicion, I'm content with it.-Jedizati 18:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

i want to seriosly work this out, it is good that we finally are, it is good that we agree on at least one thing (i hope), that BZpower should stay on. I also think all links posted should stay.--Sonic blur 00:17, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the BS01 link to the BS01 homepage, seeing as that is the page that hosts the Wiki, and has info that the Wiki doesn't. I don't see why anyone should have a problem with that, but if you do, please bring it up here. --torritorri 04:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I do, and I've taken the liberty of changing it back. I understand that BS01 is the parent site of the wiki, but it's not at all unusual for wikipedia to only link to the most pertinent place of a site, and I strongly believe that the BS01 Wiki is that place. The parent site seems to have mostly fan content, while the wiki is more concerned with more official product/storyline matter. Hence, I think that's what should be linked to, if anything. --InShaneee 04:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Actually, if you dig a little, there's stuff that the wiki doesn't have, but I respect your decision. Also, a lot of the info from the wiki was actually copied from the parent site. --torritorri 05:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Why not have links to both? The wiki certainly has enough info to warrant its own link, while BS01 proper has copies of official online content, like webisodes and online versions of the comics. That ought to be worth a link, especially as a fair amount of that content isn't available on the official Bionicle site anymore. Drakhan 05:54, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Because, as I've said before, this isn't just a matter of opinion. Wikipedia does have very specific rules governing what can and can't be linked to. One of the reasons for this is this very reason: fans always want 'their' site linked to. Even if it is 'official' material, if it's available on an 'official' site, all the better! The problem is, most of this stuff isn't what we consider encyclopedic, including fan-made material. If it meets the criteria in WP:WEB, you could always consider making an individual page for it, but I still don't see how it fits the inclusion criteria. --InShaneee 06:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Very spedific rules? Well let me tell ya how many fan sites I've came upon on this site!-Jedizati 12:14, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

There are fan sites all over wikipedia, if you havn't noticed. All post should stay. And by the way, Shane, free country, I will say whatever I want. Quick being so disruptive please. Anger is alright, but try and control your anger. Thanks.--Toa of Sound 14:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

If you would kindly show me where these fan sites are, I would be more than happy to remove them, as per policy. And once again, please keep your comments civil. --InShaneee 20:14, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, it's my understanding that none of the information in BS01 is fan-made; from the wiki to the "bios" to the image gallery, it's all official information, to my knowledge. However the Wiki certaintly is the most pertinent part of the site, so I can definitely see what you're saying. -Huzzah! 03:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

You're absolutely correct, Huzzah!. The information on the main site is official. If I had a personal choice, I'd leave it on the main page (as it's where most of the BS01 Wiki info came from, amongst other places), but it would be easier to leave it on the Wiki link (that's up to date to the very letter). But, I must ask... who re-added the BZP link? --Swert of BS01 Staff Member, Graphics Manager

Alright, that settles it for me. The external linking policy allows for 'A' fan site to be linked to, and if it's got official content (that I take it can't actually be gotten from official sources anymore), that's more than enough for it to be included as a good source. I'm going to change that link to BS01's front page and remove the BZPower link. If anyone wants to dispute that, they can take it up here. --InShaneee 16:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, now instead of me getting angry again, I am going to say sorry, for what I have said against you and other people. Again, please, let all of the fan sites posted please (Although I know you won't. sigh)--Toa of Sound 2:58, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

It is against wikipedia policy to do that, which you would know if you would just read it. Also, there is no excuse for forging another user's signature. --InShaneee 20:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Sense my 24 hours are up, InShaneee, I told Dark Jedi to post under my sig. We are friends, and sense I was still blocked... I told him what to say for me. Don't acuse him of anything please. It is entire friend coraspondince. --Toa of Sound 20:48, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, I just noticed that a link called "Nuipedia" was just added to the External Links, and you didn't delete it, but only moved it to a different place on the list. Please explain why you feel this unknown fan wiki that people have barely heard of gets to stay on the list; but the largest, most popular fan community doesn't. Drakhan 23:51, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Drakhan, "Nuipedia" doesn't have any useful information that can't be found on BS01 or their wiki, has false information, and is planning to put fan creations and list them as official rahi. I'm deleting it. -Lihyahm (61.8.110.101 02:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC))

Now hang on just a moment. I know how this might look, but there's more to this situation than meets the eye. This isn't just some fansite. If you look at the link to Nuipedia, you'll see that it's hosted by Wikia, one of Wikipedia's sister projects. This gives it a bit of some special status, simply because that means that the site's creation and continued existance is approved by the same people who run Wikipedia. As a matter of fact, Wikia was founded for the sole purpose of helping to suppliment Wikipedia by providing content that people might find useful, but might be considered unencyclopedic here. What I'm saying is that this link is a neccisary part of the page, as it is a part of the Wikipedia family. Sorry for any misunderstanding, and I hope some of the contributers to this page may take a look at Nuipedia and possibly add some content there. --InShaneee 02:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
... Nope, not buying it.
If you want a Bionicle-centric wiki, the BS01 one is far more complete. Even this wiki is more accurate than Nuipedia (Nuipedia classifies Makuta as a Great Spirit, for one thing). It doesn't matter much where sites came from, it matters far more what they have. The official sites have exclusive content. Between the main site and the wiki, BS01 is the most complete Bionicle resource anywhere. And BZPower provides up-to-date news and a thriving fan community.
InShaneee, you were earlier limiting fan sites to just one according to the strictest interpretation of Wikipedia policy (and I quote: "The external linking policy allows for 'A' fan site to be linked to..."). Even if Nuipedia is hosted by some sister project, the fact that you would reject a distinguished fan site but allow a vastly inferior site to stay, well, it frankly makes you look like a hypocrite. Drakhan 05:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
We're not getting into this discussion, because the policy here is clear: Wikia sites do not qualify as fansites. They are a part of Wikipedia. Not only should the link be there, it MUST be there. A Wikia site is only created when Wikipedia believe that there is content that could be extended there that would not fit on Wikipedia. You're welcome to your opinion on the quality of the site, but do not remove the link again. For the last time, Wikipedia is not anarchy. We do have rules here, and Wikia has special dispensation. --InShaneee 18:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, it does make you look like a hypocrite. It seems like you keep changing the rules. I personally have gotten tired of these discussions. They just go on and on, and nothin good usually comes from them. --Dark Jedi 21:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC) Didn't mean to mess up your sig, Shane. Also, I think friend corispondince, using eachothers screen names, should be allowed.--Dark Jedi 21:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

If this disscussion is just gonna go on and on and on and on and on the links should all be off. MAN! I don't even know what you guys r talking about anymore!-Jedizati 03:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, it seems we can't come to an agreement. This will probably go on until someone gives in. I give in, I don't care anymore. You probably won't hear from me often in this discussion. Go ahead InShaneee, you are the admin, we can't stop you. Let me just remind you though: The customer is always right.--Toa of Sound 20:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, I do care, Toa of Sound. It's a down-right shot to my pride to see an inferior wiki come up, and immediately my Wiki, which has lived for half a year already, be buried right underneath it. I have proof that my wiki should be the one linked.

My Stats and the Nuipedia's Stats. I'm not pointing out members here, I'm pointing out articles and page views. BS01 CLEARLY has more activity done and more progress done than Nuipedia. Granted, it's a new wiki, but totally unnecessary. Plus, that wiki allows ANYONE to edit... mine requires membership, and that is always free. Plus, mine has control over vandalism without outside help, and has generally more information and a good website to back it up. Granted, the server we're on is not the greatest, but we pay well for it, and they help us out (the server also plays host to BZPower). Either have the Nuipedia link removed, or at least point out the content on it is far inferior to the BS01 Wiki, which has had time to be built and has 100% accurate information. I plead of you. --Swert of BS01 Staff Member, Graphics Manager

I agree, leave the links alone already. But InShaneee is not going to give in, trust me. --Toa of Sound 22:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)MoLi Admin

This discussion has gotten waaaaaaay to crazy for me. Jedizati, out.

I am a member of the BS01 wiki, and I would like to put some backround info on Nuipedia's founder, KFan II. He became a member of BS01 Wiki, and he made some not so good edits. For instance, he put that Krekka was a Toa, Roodaka and Sidorak were visorak, among other things. Of course, this did not go down well with other members, and they asked him to stop, but he got mad and left the wiki. He then went of and formed Nuipedia. The thing about Nuipedia is that it has wrong iformation, rules that involve Nidhiki and Krekka hunting you down, and most of the edits made by it's founder. I don't see why a wiki that is very unproffesional is judged higher than the BS01 wiki, which has a Counter Vandallism Unit, Articles for deletion page, Collaboration of the Week, and great members and Admins. I don't mind if Nuipedia is listed, but if is is, at least list BS01 Wiki, espesialy since you list it on the Matoran page. Update:Okay, I see that BS01 Wiki is listed in an indirect way under BS01, which is fine, but I now think that Nuipedia shoud be removed, especialy because it was added by it's founder probably just to advertise it.--Bioncicleman of BS01

You're not listening. Wikia sites don't qualify as fansites, they are Wikimedia family sites. That means they get special dispensation, and should be included if one exists on the topic at hand. This is not something I made up, this is a guideline, and therefore is not up for discussion, period. --InShaneee 01:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I was listening, I just don't agree with you. I never stated that it was a fan site. The wiki is not like for instance Star Wars where it has a good wiki at hand, not one that has wrong iformation. But, there is nothing you can do to make me agree with you, and there is nothing I can do to make you agree with me. I've given up on this discussion, and I no longer care as long as Nuipedia isn't taking away the desivered atention to BS01 Wiki.--Bioncicleman of BS01
I'd like to see this guideline. Could you please link to it? Drakhan 02:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Alright, my bad. Upon furthur investigation, the policy had deviated from what I had been hearing before. Wikia sites are treated as any other external site. That being said, I've gone ahead and removed it. Now, if you guys will kindly stop flaming Nuipedia, hopefully we can put this whole issue to rest. --InShaneee 03:15, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Why do u love removing stuff? --Toa of Sound 16:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC) MoLi admin

One last word. I predicted this! (Except for the BZP part). The only fan site left is BS01!!!-Jedizati 18:33, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

It is sad that some people are so selfcenterd, SHANE!!! You have ruined a perfectly good fan site listing space on the Bionicle page!!! Why, why are you so selfish? You need a good slap!!! Man oh man, let me tell you!!!--141.158.133.70 13:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC) KNOCK IT OFF, PUT ALL OF THEM BACK ON NOW! THE LAW!!!

Wow, that is how to deal with it! I totaly agree, no good came of this... it is sad... why can't people live together in peace, and let everyone contribute?--Toa of Sound 18:02, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Why is every one flaming InShaneee? Nuipedia is gone, so is Mask of Life so can't we just accept that BS01 is allowed to stay and others aren't. -Lihyahm(60.228.191.35 01:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC))

Lihyahm, people have said that before. Infact, InShanee said almost the excact same thing at the top of this very disscuccion. Look where we are now-Jedizati 12:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

This is getting crazy. Who agrees with me?-Jedizati 20:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC)The Admin of the MoLi

As I said below, please keep your comments to discussion of the article's content. --InShaneee 22:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

This disscusion seems slightly out of control and too argumentative. I would just like to say that as long as the fan sites is following the Wikipedia guidlines, follows common sense rules and manners that make it a suitable link (ie. not full of advertising, not obscene or rude, not incredibly hard to understand, ect), is not completely irrelevant and contains a significant ammount (yes I know it varies with viewpoint but what else am I supposed to say) of information, even if it is simmilar to another site or says the same things I think it should be allowed a place in the links section. The viewer should be the person who choses which site he/she visits, we should not dictate what sites the viewer should learn about (as long as they follow the things listed above). I have been a member of BZP for a while and I think it is incredible worthy of a place in the links section as is BS01, they contain a wealth of information, BZP also contain many excellent discussions, news articles, information of future bionicle products links/storyline. I'm sure their must be many other fan sites that also deserve a link in this wikipedia article, and many which would be a waste of a viewer's time (eg. one with little information on bionicle). But we should let the viewer decide which ones to see and the site admins/members/visiters decide wether to put up a link to a bionicle fan site. If we don't like a site or think it should not be there we don't have to use that link, though if it is sensible to remove the site and the majority of viewers agree or would agree that it should be removed (because it is offensive, is not relevant, has lots of advertising, ect.) then you should remove it, but not just because of your personal opinion of the site. Of course there will be some dissagreements, but I think through a sensible and rational discussion these can be settled. I am sorry about the length of my post but I just want to make my ideas clear, I hope many of you will agree with what I have said, thanks for your time. --Tortuga Turaga 15:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

While I appreciate your point of view, the policy already exists and is clear on external linking, so it's not something that anyone can just decide. If you'd like to refute the policy itself, please take it up on the talk page of Wikipedia:External links, as that's the only way things could possibly change. --InShaneee 22:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I did not mean to sound as if I was going against the policy, in fact I was trying to support the guidlines. More to the point I can see nothing in the External Links Section that forbids or even strongly disaproves of putting up more links to fansites, it merely says "including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such". This does not say that you cannot include more than one major fansite link, if it means this it should say it clearly, it seems to be saying that if there is a major fansite it should have a link in the links section. I do agree with the view that there should not be lots of minor and relatively uninformative fansites cluttering up the links section but as I said I think, as do others, that BZP (as well as any other major (I stres major) fansites) should have (and does) a rite to be in the links section as it is a major, very usefull and informatiove relevant fansite and is thusly suitable to be in the links section along with anyother suitable fansites (eg. follows the Wikipedia guidlines and has enough relevant information and resources). It even has some relevant advantages (my previous post) over BS01 that make up for the fact that it's information is less in depth than BS01. To sum it up there is nothing in the policy that forbids or strongly discourages more than one major fansite link. --Tortuga Turaga 17:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but there is, and you quoted it yourself. "ONE MAJOR fansite"; I'm not sure how much more clear that can be. That was put into place to discourage the linking of fansites altogether except when strictly neccisary, and even then, only one. The fact is that it's pretty easy to determine what fansite is 'the biggest', while trying to decide what is 'big enough' leads to bickering on the scale of what preceeds these messages. Wikipedia is not a repository of links, this is very clear policy-wise. --InShaneee 21:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm with Tortuga on this. I've already made most of my points, so I'm not going to bother repeating them, but I will say this: on nearly every Wikipedia article I've seen for a popular franchise - comic books, TV shows, video games, whatever - there are at least two or three fansites listed. It seems like you're the only one - even the only admin - to have a problem with this. Drakhan 02:42, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
You can say what you want on the matter, but this isn't up for discussion: this is clear policy, (if you can't believe that, then GO AND READ IT YOURSELF), and I've had several discussions with other admins who couldn't agree more with me; no discussion on this page is going to change that policy, either. As I said before, if you would like to provide links to such pages, I would be glad to visit them and update their external links sections to conform to that policy. Just because they aren't up to standard doesn't mean this page has to be. --InShaneee 19:19, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Replying to InShaneee: Um, I did point out that the policy did not say anything infact explicitly forbid or even strongly discourage fansites, all I said (I really don't like repeating myself)it just says "including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such". This does not say that you cannot include more than one, it implies that if there is a major fansite it should have a link in the links section. If it is meant to discourage more than one fan site link it should say so clearly. Please listen carefully to what I have said, read the whole policy rather than just paying attention to the "one major fansite" part and try not to be so dismissive. I think Drakhan's point on there being more than one fansite link in other articles on popular franchise is very important and backs up our point strongly. Why should fansite links on the bionicle articles be so strongly discriminated against, much more than in other wikipedia articles? If other admins disagree with there being multiple fansite links then why are there plenty of articles with multiple fansite links and why doesn't policy confirm this? I'm sorry but I can see little ground for your argument (though I can understand some of your points), though I would be pleased to hear more points supportng you view. I have already given my reason for how it would be sensible to let other major and useful fansites (such as BZP) to be included in the links section so I won't go on about that any more, it is just this matter of the policy that I think needs clearing up. --Tortuga Turaga 20:42, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I'll try again to clear it up now. By one, it means one, which is meant to imply ONE. I've discussed this with other admins, who agree that there's a lot of pages that have far too many links, thus many people seem to misunderstand, and that most of those links should be removed, as well. This isn't my view; this is policy. Argue it somewhere else if you want, nothing will come of doing it here. --InShaneee 21:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay I agree with that and I do not want to carry on this argument. But could you re-phrase the policy to make it a bit clearer thus avoiding futher misunderstandings and encourage the other admins to make it fair by removing multiple fansite links? Or you could allow (only) one or two more major fansite links as it is not strictly forbidden by the policy and it would be unfair if the other articles still maintained their multiple links. I still, as I'm sure many others do, think that this is slightly unreasonable but it is the policy of the website so obviously we would have to follow it which I am fine with. --Tortuga Turaga 20:12, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Once again:
  1. The policy says ONE, so 'one or two more' ARE against policy.
  2. I don't write the policy. If you want it reworded or rewritten, you have to ask on the talk page of the policy. --InShaneee 20:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't wan't to turn help this into a bickering argument and I said I agree in my previous post but it would be rude not to reply:
In responce to point one: see my post from the 8th and 14th as they prove this point wrong (read carefully and pay attention to what I said), in your previous post you made a reasonable justification which I agreed with so I thought it was sorted out. Now you seem to go back to your first argument which I proved wrong by reading the WHOLE policy and which says (yet again I repeat myself)nothing that actually forbids or storngly discourages multiple fansite links, you seem to be only paying attention the "one link" part and not to the "is appropriate" and the fact it does not forbid them.
In responce to point two: sorry I don't know much about how the site works and is run partially because am not a member but thantks for the advice, I think I'll do that.
But to cut a long story short: I have said I agree as you gave a reasonable justification (that it is meant to imply that only one fansite link is allowed and other admins also support this) in your previous post so lets' stop this argument now as it won't get us and where as we have agreed about the core issue. Though to make it fair could you and the other admins get rid of other multiple fansite links? Thanks. --Tortuga Turaga 19:11, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Never have I seen so much arguing about external links. Like you say in your reply, the policy reads "including a link to one major fansite is appropriate." It means that just one is appropriate. If you have fifteen, then it is not appropriate and you have an example of what Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files. This is what the statement means. Multiple links is discouraged, strongly in fact. The one fan-site link is also mentioned there. I could understand maybe two, at the most, if and only if the content on those sites happened to be equally as good or the two sites were somehow directly related. As for the last part of your reply, do you have any idea just how many articles there are? What you ask is near impossible. If you see a page with a bunch of links, remove them and cite the policy in your edit summary. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I agree with you, I understand what the policy intends to imply and thank you for saying that two at the most could be allowed. I thought two would be a sensible number of fansite link, seeing as there are plenty of others with multiple fansite links and you could get two different types/styles of fansite in. I apoligies about all this bickering but I took the "including a link to one major fansite is appropriate" to mean there should be a fansite link (seeing as "one... is appropriate" does not mean five can't also be appropriate) so I thought it would be okay to have multiple links. But I am not arguing about this triviality of the phrasing of the policy anymore as I understand now what it is supposed to mean. I really did not want to argue and I'm glad this is over. Sorry if I have annoyed any of the admins. The only issue left is wether to allow one more fansite (and only one more as that seems to be okay and I think everyone would agree with allowing only one more) link and if so which one, for this it might be an idea to start a new section, seeing as technicly it is not forbiden just discouraged (I understood that it was discouraged in the first place but I did not know it was strongly discouraged). So I guess the argument is not absoulutly over :( but it is probably near the end (pheww). I don't think I'll take that much of a part in it, but I would suggest if we do allow two fansite links (including BSO1) BZPower should be the other for the reasons I've previously mentioned. Ps. I apoligies for the length of my posts, I tend to be not good at condenseing what I have to say. -- Tortuga Turaga 19:10, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I meant that two are a rare instance and should only occur under special circumstances, like them being directly related. Does BZPower provide a unique resource beyond what BS01 does? If it has some kind of exlusive and helpful difference, adding it might be ok, but if it's just a figurative clone, then there'd be no point. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Never mind. It's a forum. Wikipedia shouldn't be linking to forums. There are some cases where it might be necessary, like in an instance where a specific quote is used, at which point you would site the specific thread and/or post as a reference, not as an external link. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:49, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

As much as I hate to dredge up this discussion yet again; I just went to mark the articles on BZPower and Mask of Destiny for deletion, but found that BZPower already survived three attempts (so I'm not going to bother to make it four). If there's an article about the fan site that is able to survive like this, shouldn't the site get a link on the page of the site's subject? Drakhan 16:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe so. I mean, Bionicle links to everything official, and the website articles link to Bionicle. Personally, I think that's good. --InShaneee 20:43, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Surviving a delete doesn't prove much, since it is technically a notable website for this particular topic. There's also ways of influencing the vote through outside sources. That Bionicle wiki page provides everything a fan site should be in a single link, so adding more links would be redundant. I've read something about a creator posting at one of those others, so that is a plus, but it'd be better for reference links. Should you want to use a specific quote, you reference the exact page the quote is on in an appropriately titled section. Just linking for the sake of it is unnecessary. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 06:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


This has gone to far!

Well, this has gone way bad! It is all wrong! I think we should just forget it, calm down, and just leave peacefully, before it gets more serious. Let InShaneee win, can't stop him, no point in fighting. Dark Jedi retires from the Bionicle descussion, and it would be wise to follow.

I agree, wise descision, Toa of Sound out. Toa of Sound retires from the Bionicle descussion, and it would be wise to follow.

I agree, but I will remain on top of what is going on on this page. I will be back once and a while.-Jedizati 12:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Please restrict your comments here to discussion of article content. This is not a message board; if you wish to leave, there is no need to announce it. --InShaneee 18:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Is it over?

It looks like the Bionicle External Links dispute has come to a halt, good. If you have any problems with the way things r now, don't. I think it is now good the way it is.-Jedizati 20:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

That was wild. Like, the whole discussion. I'm very glad it's over. –BoMEpsilontalk 16:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I really hope it is, though it may not be as there may be some people with more points, but I think it is sorted out now fairly and I doubt there is anything else anyone can say, though I would like on final reply to my previous post. --Tortuga Turaga 20:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

It got messed up, but w/e...--Toa of Sound 16:44, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/i/o/Talk%7EBionicle_Archive_2_9c50.html"