Wikia

Avatar Wiki

Watchlist Random page Recent changes
Lady Lostris's wall > Commander Bumi
  • BalthCat
    Commander Bumi
    BalthCat

    Why is this article move protected? There's absolutely no discussion, and in 500 edits I don't see any move attempts...

    Anyway, this article is insulting, in a way. The fact he's a fictional character aside, it would rightly be seen as bigotry to define a person primarily by his lack of someone else's ability. While Amon was a villain, the Equalists complaints mirror real world problems. When people with power define others in terms of their lack of this power, it is offensive. This article should be titled something like Bumi (Commander).

    Did Sokka teach us nothing? ;_; - BalthCat (wall • contribs) 03:19, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

      Loading editor
    Quote History
    • KettleMeetPot
      KettleMeetPot

      She's not going to be replying for a while, so I am just going to take over for a second. And which article? When bringing these sorts of things up, make sure to always link it in your post.

        Loading editor
      Edited by KettleMeetPot
      Quote History
    • BalthCat
      BalthCat

      Bumi (non-bender) methinks.

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • KettleMeetPot
      KettleMeetPot

      The article is move-protected per policy, which dictates that any article with over 100 comments becomes automatically protected. Policy found here.

      As for your opinion on how the article name would be derogatory to define Bumi primarily as a non-bender in the title, let me assure you it was not made to offend anyone or with that sentiment in mind. It's just the easiest way to differentiate the character from King Bumi, and really, easily obtainable information is the primary thing the wiki is concerned with.

      If you want to change the article name, I suggest you bring up a proposal in the war room.

        Loading editor
      Edited by KettleMeetPot
      Quote History
    • BalthCat
      BalthCat

      Then the policy is ridiculous and obstructive. It discourages participation, as I will now demonstrate by not bringing up a proposal in a pretentiously named "war room" because it's too much damned work just to rename a little article. This is a Wiki not a battle. This sort of discussion belongs on the article's talk page, and the only reason I came here is because even if I made the case there, and people agreed, it would be impossible to do without administrator intervention. (On the upside it appears someone else has made this EXACT recommendation. Huzzah!)

      ps: Obviously no one intended the article to be offensive... there's no one to offend. However, that is exactly how passive bigotry works. No one claims to "intend" to offend people by defining them as "not white" or "not straight" or "not pretty" but they do, because society teaches us that it's convenient to do so. - BalthCat (wall • contribs) 03:49, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • SifuHotman90
      SifuHotman90

      I reeeeeeeeeally think that you're over playing this one.

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • BalthCat
      BalthCat

      Which, the ban on moving articles by peons or the bigotry analogy? :)

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • KettleMeetPot
      KettleMeetPot

      I do not see why a simple move-protect would discourage participation. Editing information in the articles is where participation is mostly measured, but on such a large wiki, there are always a few vandals willing to make things hard by moving pages, so high activity pages are protected. Pages are also meant to be renamed/moved with community consensus, since this wiki is but a conglomeration of users working together, so everyone has a say.

      The War Room is a place of debate, so I do not see the harm of naming it such. Also, you put too much stock in the admins. They are regular contributors with no more power or voting leeway than the rest of us.

      And lastly, that may be the case in the real world, but you cannot parallel those examples of bigotry to a wiki. Passive bigotry? There are no benders or non-benders in the real world. Why should this even matter? In-universe, it has already been established that there are many non-benders who have made significant impact in history and are respected.

        Loading editor
      Edited by KettleMeetPot
      Quote History
    • SifuHotman90
      SifuHotman90

      The analogy, I think? I think I just shouldn't have said anything, I tired as hell right now.

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • BalthCat
      BalthCat

      That's my point exactly. In-universe, non-benders have impact and are respected. In-universe it would be offensive to label Bumi primarily by his "non-bender" status. That's something Tarrlok would do. While I brought it up half to be silly, I also brought it up because I think it behooves us to discourage this kind of thinking generally.

      As for the policy: It discourages participation because it requires people jump through hoops to make a simple change. It's discouraging me, because I don't want to have to deal with that kind of bullcrap. And it's the first time I've ever come across a similar policy on a wiki. It's completely alien to how Wikipedia generally functions (arguably Wikia's spiritual parent), ie: the "Be bold" policy. Not all changes are serious enough to require pre-determining community consensus, and assuming all moves are serious enough is a mistake. (Especially concerning new content.)

      Additionally the policy is illogical precisely because it applies to active pages. Active pages are those which *are the most closely monitored* and thus the most likely to be fixed quickly. Such a policy makes more sense, if it makes any at all, when it is applied to those articles which may remain vandalized for long periods of time unnoticed, ie: small, unpopular articles. - BalthCat (wall • contribs) 04:17, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • SifuHotman90
      SifuHotman90

      The only reason he is labeled as Bumi (non-bender) is to differentiate between him and King Bumi from the original series. It would just be confusing to leave them both as Bumi. Just go and take up the ordeal in the War Room where there are TONS of discussions brought up regarding bettering the wiki.

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • BalthCat
      BalthCat

      Night folks :3

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • KettleMeetPot
      KettleMeetPot

      Look, nobody thinks of it like that. Except you. So, I do not see your point in the least. The only purpose for article names in such a manner are for differentiation; there is nothing unambiguous about this, and there is no underlying prejudice towards non-benders. That is utterly proposterous, so I will stick to the point that you were being silly about it all.

      You need to understand that information is able to be freely edited on the wiki, but articles names are in some senses far more important. They are the bookmarks where all the information is stored, and are relevant to countless page links and redirects. They are not small in any way... It is especially important that the wiki remains easy to navigate, and article names are to the point.

      And you're right, not all changes need community consensus, but this is one of those that do. And you seem to overlook the fact that any new user can create a page, and then add in that new content, but if there is new content for an existing page, they can add that in via editing.

      And also, this wiki is by no means small, and there aren't as many all-around-the-clock active contributors as you think. There are so many active articles at any one time that efficieny takes precedence, and there must be a general protection rule to decrease any additional workload. Page names are usually set in stone once created because they are usually relevant and concise. If it is not the case, then there is a proposal to change it (of which there are very few, since this does not occur too often). I mean, how many times do you need to try to get a name right? And if its right, then there will never be a point to change it (i.e nearly all the ATLA pages) until something drastic comes up, so I don't understand your hate against the protection rule.

      For article name vandalism on less-trafficked articles, you forget that there are also users, anonymous or no, out there who want to help the wiki, and we rely upon them to report such incidences.

        Loading editor
      Edited by KettleMeetPot
      Quote History
    • Lady Lostris
      Lady Lostris

      As Kettle pointed out, I was not going to be able to reply for a while due to being asleep. Most has been said already, but I just like to clarify a few points. Bumi (non-bender) has been named as such to make a distinction between King Bumi from the first series. At the time the article was created, we did not know a lot of the character to make a distinction any other way. The only thing that we know of him was that he was Katara and Aang's first born son, their middle child, and a non-bender. Of those three elements, non-bender was the most neutral and shortest to list, (just as Kya is named Kya (waterbender) to make a distinction with Katara's mother). However, the moment the last two episodes aired, it was immediately proposed to change Bumi's page to Bumi (United Forces general) or jut Bumi (general) as either of those would be better than what we have now. So that fist name was never meant to be permanent, but it was just the best we had at that time.

      As for the move-protect policy. We have had some vandals who thought it was fun to rename our articles. You are right that a rename is easily fixed, but that was not the problem with that. The problem with renaming an article is that when you do, you also rename the talk page and the -in the case of Aang's page as it was then- the thousands of comments made on that page, and it are the comments that posed a problem. The wikia bot handling the name changes had trouble quickly transferring all the comments to the new name and when it was about half way done or something, the page got renamed back, thus creating a loop between the two page, and resulting in a loss of more than 3000 comments -all redirects which had to be deleted manually. In order the prevent anything like that to ever happen again, policy was made that pages with a large amount of comments (aka +100 comments) -regardless whether or not they are the subject of vandalism or not- will be move protected in order to preserve the comments if that page would be immediately renamed again or something. I hope you can understand the reasoning behind that. This does not mean in any way that you cannot contribute otherwise by editing and all. It's this wiki's habit of making decisions based on consensus in a public "War Room" (only named as such after the Fire Nation War Room as a comical nod to the series this wiki is about, nothing more), as opposed to the comment section of a page -as you cannot ask people to keep an eye on every comment that passes the revue to see whether or not a comment may be remotely interesting. The comment traffic on this wiki is way too high for practices as that.

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • BalthCat
      BalthCat

      I'm familiar with the concept of disambiguation. My main reason for posting here was to point out the ban was in place, and to get it removed, not realizing it was a silly policy, and I followed that with part of my reasoning for renaming it. My main goal was not to chastise the site for Bumi (non-bender). As I said above, I was half-silly, half-serious in that regard.

      The Talk page (where such discussion belongs) is completely empty. If this site uses some sort of other comment system which breaks when standard MediaWiki functions are used, then perhaps the comment system should be shoved in the trash where it belongs (or at least fixed) rather than constructing ridiculous rules around it. (I'm also hard pressed to find 3000 of your average internet comments of sufficient value to limit editors, but that's another story.) - BalthCat (wall • contribs) 18:09, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • Lady Lostris
      Lady Lostris

      Talk page, comment section, all the same thing to me. If you want to see a page with large numbers of comments, pick on of the main characters of ATLA, or the TLoK page, or one of that series main character pages, or the film pages. There are many pages with a number of comments that easily succeeds 3K. So a silly policy to you saves us a massive cleanup in case such vandalism would be repeated again. I'd rather take my chances with the silly policy then. But if you are unhappy with it, this wiki allows everyone to voice their opinions in the War Room as stated above, and you can start a motion to overthrow that bit of policy if you want to.

      And limit editors, aren't you a bit exaggerating? How often do you find yourself as an editor limited and in the pressing need to change the name of a page? I am a fervent editor, I was one of the most active ones we had on this site for nearly a year, and I have renamed maybe 3 pages on my own because I found it better fitting. I would hardly all that limiting my editing abilities as everything else is still available to you. Besides, it is not like there would never be an admin around to change the page name to the desired name if it bugs you that much. We have 7 admins and together they cover nearly all the hours of the day, so that should be enough to counter the very minor limitations an editor might encounter by not being able to rename a page.

        Loading editor
      Quote History
    • 54.224.79.93
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Retrieved from "http://avatar.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:707754"
Advertisement | Your ad here

Latest images

Add an image
6,197images on the wiki
See all photos >

Recent Wiki Activity

See more >

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki