Talk:The Gathering

Description

The description do not match truely the story of the issue. I don't want to spoil it yet but what to do? Remove or not? --N'Nanz (talk) 09:56, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

You're absolutely right; that description was utter nonsense, and most likely spoils the story of the next comic. I have updated the description accordingly and should now match the story.AMBER^(RΘCK) 10:29, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that the previous description is the one officially released by Blizzard or Wildstorm. You can see it here --N'Nanz (talk) 11:03, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

Official description is official description, dammit. Don't remove it.--Lon-ami (talk) 15:10, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

No. Why should we? First of all, we shouldn't copy descriptions from Wildstorm in the first place (copyright issues), but most importantly: it is incorrect. Isn't it our duty to try and provide information that is as accurate as possible? Clearly, this is wrong. Also, the sentence "Further explore the world of the best-selling MMORPG in this hit comic series!" is as horrible as any marketing line could get. That also has to go.AMBER^(RΘCK) 08:07, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

Official is official. If you don't like it, add a summary. Commercially, that is the official description, and as that, it should be included. Also, it's not just at the Wildstorm page, it's at other previews, too. Quit this stupidity and avoid me calling mods to warn you. By that argument, we should remove everything that is outdated, nope? If you don't like WoWWiki's policies, go open a thread at Forum:WoWWiki_policy and quit removing content.--Lon-ami (talk) 11:06, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me? First of all: we're having a disagreement here, right? To the best of my knowledge, it's just that. I'm not being rude whatsoever. I have explained what and why I amanded the article. There's really no need to patronize me. I've been here for over three years, I know what I'm doing and seeing as I'm not breaking any rules, the fact that you threaten to report me is sincerely uncalled for. It is my right to disagree with you, just as it is yours to disagree with me. So we'll talk. That's what we're here for on this talk page in the first place, right? To try and reach consensus. This is not Arathi Basin or trenches in the fields of France, so for the sake of a smooth editing process: let's not be rude. And you're not any better or higher up any ladder than me. Thanks for understanding.

Secondly, it doesn't really matter by whom the introduction was written, whether that'd be Blizzard, Wildstorm or my grandmother, the description has clearly not been invented by a WoWWikian. Therefore: directly copying these things from the original source is plagiarism. Simple and effective. I didn't make that policy up, that's been set in stone. Furthermore, I'd like to know why we should put at much "official" info up as possible, even when it is clearly incorrect and contains horrible marketing lines. We're not some slave company of Blizzard: we're WoWWiki and we have a mind of our own. One last thing: all outdated info should go if we have accurate and updated information. In this specific case, we do. So there's no reason to keep the trash. Please get back to me, address all of my points this time around. One last piece of advice: for the sake of sanity don't go ad hominem. It's not even in your own interest, either. AMBER^(RΘCK) 22:19, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

I don't think your point of copyright is valid as it was found in the public domain, so, I don't think whoever wrote that would matter if it is displayed here or not if it's referenced (in the external link). It's like if we start deleting the covers because they are displayed in wildstorm pages... Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 03:01, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

That's not a fair comparison. The copyright policy (more specifially the "fair use" section) has some very strict guidelines regarding the copying of text. One of the things that strikes me as most important to this question is "Quotes must be used sparingly, and be as brief as possible." In this case, the quote is easily avoided. Another point: I don't want to go too deeply in copyright law (just the WoWWiki policy will do for the purpose of maintaining the wiki), but just because the quote is widely available does not mean it's in the public domain. In fact, contemporary work is never in the open domain unless explicitly stated.AMBER^(RΘCK) 14:45, September 24, 2009 (UTC)