This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums: War Room Deletion of shipping comments
Note: This thread has been unedited for 1760 days. It is considered archived – the discussion is over. Do not edit this thread unless it really needs a response.
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:

Shipping comments are now permitted on articles where its relevance can be established.

Please do not edit this discussion.

This is something that has only recently come to my attention, and I think constitutes a significant error in the site's discussion policy. Policy states that shipping comments may only be left on the two shipping pages, and that such comments left elsewhere should be deleted on sight, and the user served with a warning. However, I do not see any reason why shipping comments cannot be left on relationship pages; commenting on two characters relationship with one another is completely applicable to the article, and yet by definition counts as a shipping comment, and thus would be deleted. This seems wrong. Consider the situation where someone leaves a comment such as:

I don't think Mako and Asami make a good couple. I'd rather see Mako with Korra, they have more in common.

on Mako's relationships. Is it relevant to the article; yes. Is it going to generate a healthy discussion between users; yes. And yet, by our own policy, this is a shipping comment, and so should be deleted. The user that left this shipping comment, on an article discussing relationships between characters, would served with a warning. This seems very unfair, and unbalanced.

I would therefore like to suggest that the policy on shipping comments be altered to allow such comments on relationship pages. Such comments would still be relevant to the article, and I do not see a reason for not allowing them to stay. HAMMEROFTHOR 15:16, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

I definitely support this proposal. I would even be inclined to broaden it to the relevant character pages. The shipping-rule stems from the ATLA series, where there was shipping, but it was never the main subject of the series. However, in TLoK, shipping is a very important plot line, there has even been an entire episode about it, thus it seems only natural that people would talk about it a lot. Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 19:32, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
I agree with this proposal as well. A comment like that should not be deleted and it seems tedious to issue a warning for an otherwise perfectly okay comment. I would support amending the policy and allowing such relevant, constructive shipping comments on relationship and character articles. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message meRead my fanon) Aang Cosmic Toph-DoBS-2 19:36, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
And the relevant episode page. We cannot ask of people that they don't post shipping comments on "The Spirit of Competition" page. Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 10:53, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
Exactly. The policy seems unbalanced, especially since that episode revolved around shipping. Shipping comments on that page would be relevant to the article, and yet they would be deleted. I can understand wanting to reduce the number of irrelevant MAKORRA, KORRA AND BOLIN 4EVER comments, but the policy doesn't differentiate between relevant and irrelevant comments. Serving people with a warning for posting relevant comments just seems unbalanced. I mean, in all honesty what have they done wrong? HAMMEROFTHOR 11:57, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
I agree with all above. As annoying as coming to the Katara page and seeing "KATARA IS HAPPY WITH AANG!!!" or "KATARA SHOULD HAVE GONE WITH ZUKO!!!" is, they are still relevant to Katara. The same applies on something like on the Bolin page - "Korra and Bolin are perfect for each other!" It's still relevant to Bolin. Dealing out blocks over comments like that on those pages is just silly. Change it up. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk Katara Sprite Season 3Bolin sprite 23:02, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Although there might not be any shipping wars just yet, I am neutral to this proposal, as there is no need for fights over shipping on character pages. Plus most shipping comments are irrelevant. If we are allowed to delete irrelevant shipping comments and users still get blocked for posting a bunch of those, the proposal is fine. Matey Y. (wallA:TLoM) 23:18, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

How can you say most shipping comments are irrelevant. The comment I gave as an example above would be perfectly relevant to the article it would be posted in. If someone leaves a shipping comment on a relationship page (which is relevant to their comment) that comment should stay. If they leave several shipping comments on different pages, or in answer to what other users have written, those comments should also stay. I don't agree with blocking people for leaving relevant comments. HAMMEROFTHOR 23:25, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
I agree. In fact, I don't think shipping comment should be immediately deleted on any page. For many fans, shipping is just as enjoyable as analyizing the socioeconomic structure of Republic City or whatever else people do. Is shipping immature? Yes. Is Avatar a kid's show technically? Yes. Let's not alienate the young fans who come on here by censoring them. I think the policy should be changed to only include Inflammatory shipping comments.
The motion proposed about shipping comments below me, (can't remember who posted it) addresses problems that many Avatar wikians have been having when it comes to posting "Makorra FTW!" and things like that. I just wanted to point out that, while shipping wars are at one extreme, complete censoring of shipping comments on pages other than shipping pages seems to be taking the Tarrlok route. Not to overshadow the initative that the person under me wrote as I think it was very well articulated, but I personally believe that, Unless the comments become inflammatory, let em ship. It's a kids show guys. I assume the admins are a bit older but let's not forget that this show has millions of young fans who happen to adore the shipping aspect of the show. Let them have their fun. After all, I don't hear them complaining about pretentious over analytical condesecending people who, in my opinion are at the opposite extreme of the shippers. Perhaps even worse. I'm not sure how the system works here yet but this is just my two cents. Let them have their fun so long as it doesn't cause any major disruptions. Thanks for listening. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koh the face stealer (wallcontribs) 07:20, 4 June 2012

@Matey, part of this proposal just aims to counter having to block people for posting shipping comments. Blocking someone for that is utterly ridiculous as there is nothing wrong with a shipping comment as long as it is on a relevant page. Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 08:24, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
I don't remember a block being part of the discussion policy, aside from inflammatory comments and spam. And I support constructive shipping comments on relevant relationship articles as well. It seems too restrictive having shipping comments solely on 2 of the hundreds of articles. Axiovatar Talk 06:53, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

@Axio: Someone was blocked a few days ago for a day because they kept posting shipping comments on other pages than the shipping page. Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 08:48, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

I want to make sure that if this rule is imposed rollbacks/admins will still be able to delete irrelevant comments - "MAKORRA!", "MAKO & KORRA!" (comments that give no reason but are plain spam) - without being bothered about it. This rule is to make sure that users do not get in trouble for making relevant shipping comments. If it is to be a shield for irrelevant shipping comments and disable users from being blocked even though they are breaking policy, I will wholeheartedly change my vote. Matey Y. (wallA:TLoM) 19:23, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

You guys might as well just let people post these shipping comments because some of those kind of comments already slip through the radar. I hate shipping, I really hate shipping but you nor I can stop the shippers. They're going to do it anyway, so you might as well let them do it on the character pages.--Omar067 (wallcontribs) 19:27, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

@Matey - irrelevant comments that add nothing to the discussion could still be deleted, this is more about expanding the articles for which relevant shipping comments can be left without being deleted.
@Omar - I don't think allowing shipping comments on every page is necessary, but opening the policy up to allow comments on some other pages is needed. If we allow them on very page, the comments will just be full of irrelevant MAKORRA posts that add nothing. If I read the comments, I don't want to have to read through pages of irrelevancy just to find something readable. HAMMEROFTHOR 19:33, June 5, 2012 (UTC)
I can't help to find it ridiculous to block someone for posting shipping comments just because they're deemed irrelevant by some -or even the majority of the users. Personally, I find all those shipping comments utterly ridiculous. More so, I find commenting in general utterly ridiculous as I cannot wrap my mind around how people can get so worked up of someone disagreeing with someone else about Korra's appearance for example, but that's my opinion. It's clear by the mere multitude of such shipping comments that there are more people disagreeing with us as they keep making those comments. Should they be blocked then just because we -the users who are drawn more to the editing side than the comment side of the wiki- have made a rather strict comment policy that suits us better than it suits the commenters?
If I see a comment I this is ridiculous, I just click away. What do we care? If people want to keep making irrelevant posts -in our eyes- so what? Many of those users are just avid fans searching for an outlet of their fandom, and then we have two options: we can guide their fandom to the relevant pages and maybe gain a useful editor over time, or we can restrict their fandom to the absolute minimum and possible force them to vandalism as they feel restricted. We cannot monitor all the comments, unless we would block every person when they post a few or even a lot comment -shipping comments, so not even vulgar comments out of line, and I, as one of the persons who can go do the "dirty work" of blocking an innocent user for just being carried away in their enthusiastic fandom shipping, find it utterly ridiculous to block someone for that. (before someone starts to think that I'm pro giving green light to all random and irrelevant comments, no I'm not. I am, however, against a policy that allows people to be blocked for posting harmless shipping comments on the wrong pages.) Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 20:09, June 5, 2012 (UTC)
I have given multiple comment warning messages to users, and only one of them did/could I make sure got consequences for what they did. That person had been warned twice before that happened; most of his comments were completely irrelevant, but were also shipping comments. They were plain spam. If we follow what you are proposing, Lostris, we'll start getting spammed with not only "MAKORRA!! WHOO!!!!", but also with advertisements. And we won't try to do anything about it, since "[we can't deal with all of them]". So if we would need some of those guidelines, excluding the shipping guideline, as I have stated above, and a few blocks to keep everything in order, I sure as heck would keep it that way. I have been on the wiki a little bit more than four months and in all that time, I am not saying it is much, I have seen one single block of a user for irrelevant/shipping comments. I have, all the same, given tens of warnings to users about their comments — no, not little innocent language — and have made sure one single block was carried out. If we are to cancel out most of our comment policies, let's do it slowly, shan't we? Matey Y. (wallA:TLoM) 20:51, June 5, 2012 (UTC)
Read my end statement again: I'm not for giving green light to every irrelevant posts, certainly not for advertisement spam-comments. Don't put words in my mouth that I clearly never said nor meant. It's just ridiculous to block someone for a harmless shipping comments even if you deem it as spam. For them it's an outlet of their fandom.
"If we are to cancel out most of our comment policies, let's do it slowly, shan't we?", I don't know which post you read, but it sure wasn't mine. Where did I say "cancel all our comment policies" or where did I say "it's okay to spam" or "no one will get blocked for spamming"? I only said "I am, however, against a policy that allows people to be blocked for posting harmless shipping comments on the wrong pages." Which is something totally different than what you are saying I said. Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 23:08, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

@HammerofThor who are you to say what's a relevent comment or not? Who am I to say what's a relevent comment or not? No one on this site should have that type of authority to decide whether someone's comment/opinion is relevent or not. I don't find shipping annoying at all. And if I did who am I to say it's wrong? It's simply my personal opinion that I have no right to inflict on others in the form of banning the shipping comments on the wiki. Koh the face stealer (wallcontribs) 23:24, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

@Koh: Irrelevant comments are comments about let's say Iroh posted on Korra's page. Or comments like "I like fries". Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 23:26, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

@Lady Lostris I could have sworn the topic was shipping comments. But let me clarify. Shipping comments that are posted on any page relevent to the people of the ship should not be deemed unworthy of being on the wiki simply because some people find them annoying. Koh the face stealer (wallcontribs) 23:29, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Than the same goes, a comment of "Makorra is tha bomb" on Iroh's page, of any other page that isn't Mako's, Korra's, the shipping, relationship, and/or the episode page is viewed as irrelevant.
And that's what we've been saying, that's exactly why HoT has called this forum to state that comments off the shipping page but on the page of the relevant character are not irrelevant. He is on your side in this discussion. Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 23:33, June 5, 2012 (UTC)
@Lostris: Pardon me, Lostris, but weren't you the one who said that when you found an irrelevant comment, you just "clicked" and went somewhere else? Doesn't that suggest ignoring policy; and when a policy is ignored, doesn't it get removed. That's what happened after the USA government banned alcohol back in the twentieth century. Matey Y. (wallA:TLoM) 23:33, June 5, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, and I was also the one that said that I find all commenting irrelevant, so should I enforce policy and delete every comment I see then because I find them irrelevant? There is written policy and that should be followed, yes. But common sense always trumps written policy, just as a judge can sway the interpretation of a law text. And the US government has nothing to do with this discussion, so I will not even address what is wrong with that analogy you made. Lady Lostris vstf (talkHotN) 23:37, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

@Lady Lotris. It seemed like he was implying something else but I could have read have read it wrong.--Koh Koh the face stealer 23:50, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

I support this proposal entirely. Relationships are a major part of the Legend of Korra, therefore comments regarding shippings are just as relevant to an article as any other comments. Nothing to oppose here. ^^ Annawantimes (Talk) 03:10, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
Likewise, I am in agreement with all of you. So long as a shipping-related comment is relevant to the article and well-written and thought-out, I see no reason why it has to be deleted because of this current policy. My full support on this one. The Ultimate Waterbender 16:47, June 7, 2012 (UTC)