Wikia

Avatar Wiki

Re-organizing Water Tribe articles

10,712pages on
this wiki

Forum page

This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums: War Room Re-organizing Water Tribe articles
Note: This thread has been unedited for 259 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:

History sections should be divided by year at the top level. Otherwise, no changes.

Please do not edit this discussion.

Now, I have been a bit skeptical of this idea in the past, but after a little while of thinking over it, I've decided to create a forum about it. I say we consider a massive re-structuring of how the Water Tribe articles are organized. Not the category, but rather the locations of the Water Tribe. Even if this proposal gets shut down now, I think the change will be inevitable because LoK book two will give us a wealth of new information about the Water Tribe. The current system will be harder to work with then.

The current organization of these articles is a bit strange, primarily due to the Water Tribe's unique three-part structure. The current format follows a sort of Water Tribe--> Northern Water Tribe--- Yakone's village style, meaning there is an article for Water Tribe, a sub-article for the Northern Water Tribe, but only a sub-category for Yakone's village. In the past and perhaps even now, this structure worked perfectly fine because we had fairly limited knowledge of the Water Tribe, but with an entire upcoming season that will largely focus on the Water Tribe, I'm not sure if this will be sufficient anymore. I mean, with an entire season focusing on the Earth Kingdom, we don't do Earth Kingdom--> Si Wong Desert--- Misty Palms Oasis, right? We use a separate article for Misty Palms Oasis, so Earth Kingdom--> Si Wong Desert--> Misty Palms Oasis. Or we do Earth Kingdom--> Ba Sing Se--> Lake Laogai. I suggest the Water Tribe articles adopt this system. The current one only works well with small bits of information, but we're starting to go past that now.

Also, I suggest we change Water Tribe--> Southern Water Tribe compound to the more consistent Water Tribe--> Southern Water Tribe--> Southern Water Tribe compound. The current one doesn't make sense because it implies the compound is of an equivalent medium to the Southern Water Tribe, which is completely untrue because the compound is both smaller and less important, a part of the Southern Water Tribe really.

We should also divide the two time periods of ATLA and LoK. This I'm less certain how to do, if it should even be done. There are many things that exist in LoK but didn't exist in ATLA and vice versa. I'm not saying we need two articles for one location, but perhaps a page-limited division for recurring locations. Ozai Spirte The Final BattleSparks From HadesAzula sprite23 22:10, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're trying say here.TheBigO Fan Bolin sprite Be the leaf 22:27, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Coupla things:

  1. Book Two will bring more information, but until we know exactly the sort of information that will be revealed, I don't see why we should make any major changes. At the moment, very little is known about Yakone's village, so why should we make an article for it now under the assumption more revealed. I think it would be better to do this when/if the information is revealed.
  2. I don't really understand what you mean about the SWT Compound. There is a small section on the compound on the SWT article, with a link to the larger article. As I read your proposal, you were suggesting merging the compound article with the SWT article, which I don't see any point in doing, and also kinda contradicts your argument above that about the Misty Palms Oasis.
  3. Divide the time periods in what way. The history section can detail how things change, and anything that was around but isn't in TLoK can be stated as such in it's section. I don't really see what change you are proposing we make.

If you could clarify some of your points (as I kinda had to assume what you meant for my response) I would be very grateful. HAMMEROFTHOR 22:36, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. I thought I had written in-depth enough for complete clarification.

  1. You make a good point there. But I was looking at this proposal more as something that happens slowly and smoothly, not one rapid change that happens suddenly. That way, we could adjust ourselves to the new information as it comes in. As for Yakone's village, we know more about that place than several Earth Kingdom locations, many of which have a separate article. Take seaport village or Whaletail Island. Yakone's village was the birthplace of two of LoK's most important characters, which is primarily what makes it notable.
  2. I wasn't planning on merging the compound. I was proposing we take it off the Water Tribe's article because it is so insignificant. If it is a division of the SWT, then it only needs to be a sub-category on the SWT article. We don't put other SWT locations on the Water Tribe article, like shipwreck.
  3. Say we are describing a city, but we don't want buildings from the ATLA era to be confused with LoK era buildings. I propose we add some small division to prevent confusion.

Is that better? Ozai Spirte The Final BattleSparks From HadesAzula sprite23 23:24, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

  1. The rewrites, expansions etc. will happen naturally as new information is revealed, so I don't see any need for a forum proposal in regards to this issue. As for creating an article, if there is enough information to create a reasonable article then fine, but creating an article for something just because it might be featured or there might be more information, I see no reason to do so. Again, I think this falls under if it is necessary, do it when it is necessary.
  2. The only reference I can find to the compound on that page is in the locations section, and since the SWT compound is a notable location in the Water Tribe territory, I don't see why it should be removed. Maybe bullet pointing it under SWT would be better, to show it is a part of the SWT but still a notable location?
  3. A division where? Having two sections, one for each time period? I think it would be clear in the writing (or can be rewritten to be clear) which period it refers to. HAMMEROFTHOR 23:43, August 29, 2012 (UTC)
  1. The changes should come naturally, yes. However, it should have already begun as we got a fair amount of new information in LoK book one. Yakone's village, even if it does not get new information in book two (I am doubtful that it will), still has enough info from book one to warrant the creation of a new article, not just a sub-category. Other articles can be created as well. The SWT article encompasses all the villages at the South Pole, but we can create a separate article for Sokka's village. It has been explored in-depth enough, and a new page will differentiate the ATLA era populace from that of LoK's.
  2. There are other notable locations in the Water Tribe that are only sub-divisions of the North or South, but none save the compound are listed here. What makes the compound so different? We saw more of Sokka's village than it, yet the village isn't on the locations list.
  3. Not even some sort of order the sub-categories should be in? Like ATLA stuff first and LoK after? I see what you're trying to say, but I feel there should be some other minor thing to further separate the two series. Ozai Spirte The Final BattleSparks From HadesAzula sprite23 00:38, August 30, 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any need to create any new articles about the water tribe right now unless we get a substantial amount of new information.TheBigO Fan Bolin sprite Be the leaf 15:49, August 30, 2012 (UTC)

Don't we already have substantial information for the articles mentioned above? Ozai Spirte The Final BattleSparks From HadesAzula sprite23 19:29, August 30, 2012 (UTC)

In reply to point number three, about differentiating the ATLA and LOK eras, I agree completely. While the history section does a pretty good job at this already, I think for organizational and convenience purposes it will be in every article reader's best interest if they can understand at a glance when information in the history section about ATLA ends and where LOK info begins.

For this to work, however, it would have to be kept in-universe. AKA, we can't put "The Legend of Korra" to show where LOK info begins. To solve this, I suggest that the sections and subsections be ordered like so:

1 History
    1.1 99 AG
    1.2 100 AG
    1.3 170 AG
2 (Other sections bla-bla-bla...)

This way, readers can pick out at a glance exactly where they need to start finding out, say, about Korra's era, on any article that spans both time-frames. Of course, articles about only something shown in one era would just be ordered

1 History
2 (Other sections bla-bla-bla...)

because there would be no reason to divide the years if there was only one year that has a documented history there.

This would also go for articles that date back to, I dunno, 312 BG, for consistency purposes. But, as mentioned before, if the only era about the article known is 312 BG, then there is no reason to make a subsection say that, but instead just make a normal history section.

As for point one, I agree that we should wait until we know exactly what we're dealing with to make any major changes. And for number two, I couldn't care less about what way the SWT compound is ordered for now, at least until I have an OCD attack. I'll have to examine the articles more carefully before I can actually form an opinion. Krazykid51 21:33, August 30, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Krazy. It looks a bit unprofessional and sloppy to have a giant, gaping seventy-year void of information in history sections. We can easily fix that with subsections, exemplifying the fact that we have proper historical and in-depth information in only certain areas of time. Perhaps this method could be applied to recurring locations outside the Water Tribe as well, for future seasons.
For point one, what about locations that have already been seen? Ozai Spirte The Final BattleSparks From HadesAzula sprite23 21:52, August 30, 2012 (UTC)
I would support having subsections in the way Krazy described if each section is of at least a decent length. Having, just as an example, a couple of paragraphs in the "ATLA" section and then just one line in the "TLoK" section isn't really needed, and in that instance I think having one encompassing section would be better.
As for the new articles, you don't need forum consensus to create a new article. If you think there is enough information to create a reasonably sized article, then you are free to do so. I will however reiterate my point that I think this should only be done if we have enough information now, and not under the assumption that next season will bring more information to expand it into a proper article. If there isn't enough content now, then I think it would be better to wait until there is. HAMMEROFTHOR 11:42, August 31, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I can think of a few articles that could use subsections in the future. And as for Hammer's second paragraph, does that mean we have closure on that bit? Ozai Spirte The Final BattleSparks From HadesAzula sprite23 14:20, August 31, 2012 (UTC)
It's more organized. Support Krazy's proposal. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! Jet sprite 10:37, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki