Talk:Stuyvesant

Can the 'This article is scheduled for Speedy Deletion' thing and the thing about low standards be deleted? I think I may have fixed the problem. If not, by all means, carry on and ignore me.

Could use some more interesting fleshing out history, but you've definitely removed the need for the cleanup template and as he's a monarch, the vanity one can probably go as well. (Don't forget to sign your comments, you can do this by hitting the squiggly line button that's second to last and the wiki automatically pops in your name & the date). --Guppymomma 08:14, 8 September 2005 (PDT)

Late-Nite

If it is a colloquialism should it be here? --Angelbeaver ^(talk) 12:24, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

It's certainly wrong. It shouldn't be hyphenated, it shouldn't be 'nite' and it shouldn't be capitalised. To those points, it shouldn't even be here. It and bits of POV need removing from the article entirely. Also worth noting that 'colloquialism' = slang - and 'colloquial' cannot be used in that form. --Sagacious ^(talk) 12:57, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

I'll be blunt: In my opinion, you're both taking this far, far too seriously. --Ponytailguy 13:05, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

I just asked if it should really be here. I didn't actually ask for all that detail(informative as it was).--Angelbeaver ^(talk) 13:07, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

I'll be more blunt: In my opinion, the fact you made the edit in the first place, shows you took it far, far too seriously. The edit note supports my opinion. --Sagacious ^(talk) 13:12, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Enough! Change made. Squabbling no no.--Angelbeaver ^(talk) 13:13, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

I'm tempted to revert again. I won't. But I'd like to say a few words about article sanitization, because that's really what this is. The meaning wasn't obscured, the term isn't exactly foreign to much of anyone, and "fixing" it really only constitutes correctness for the sake of correctness. There's no reason people can't have a bit of "fun" on their pirate pages, especially if it reflects the pirate's personality, so long as the important information still gets conveyed and it's not in violation of any policy, which, in this case... well, I can't find a single policy it was violating, and to many North Americans, "Late Nite" is a perfectly acceptable Entertainment-industry replacement for "Late Night", much like "Tonite" for "Tonight". Mssrs. Merriam and Webster would flip over in their graves, but we don't write the YPPedia for them.

I'm not defending poor English. Articles with horrible spelling and grammar do irritate me, and I do tag them as such. But there's a line between "Bad English" and "Just having some fun". One should be corrected. The other... meh, is it really hurting anybody? Aren't there dozens of articles that are much more badly in need of once-overs? --Ponytailguy 13:18, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

If you want to revert that's fine. --Angelbeaver ^(talk) 13:34, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Regionalised or native slang is still slang, no matter what you call it. And AFAIK, slang isn't appropriate on articles...unless it's directly relevant to the article subject or within the game. (sniped twice...nice removal o.O) --Sagacious ^(talk) 13:37, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Actually, I'd like to reply to the section of comment you erased. :) If you ever say "You're the admin, so you know best" ever again, I shall find a suitable torture device to remove the sentiment from you. Never assume the administrator "knows best" just by virtue of them being an administrator. Theoretically, we're more familiar with policy and we're more aware of the realities of the YPPedia, but there's no reason that knowledge has to be exclusive to administrators, and I should hope it isn't.

Anyway. Sagacious, you still haven't told me what's wrong with slang, in a pirate article, when that slang reflects the pirate in question. If anything, I think allowing a bit of flexibility around these rules on pirate articles makes them more inviting, enjoyable, and useful to the YPPedia. Believe it or not, the people who use YPPedia and the people who use Wikipedia are generally completely different and look for different things in the articles they're reading. I daresay "fun and enjoyable to read" would overtake "absolutely 100% correct from a technical perspective" on many of our users' shopping lists. --Ponytailguy 13:42, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Without getting into the 'discussion' if you are just going to discuss the pirate page policy or any policy for that matter this is not the place.--Angelbeaver ^(talk) 13:45, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Actually... in this instance, we're discussing a particular incident relating to that policy, not changes to it or the policy itself. So, yeah, this is the appropiate place.

Oh jeez, I'm haggling over the appropiate forum for discussion relating to a policy relating to reversions relating to two words. /em goes to do something else for awhile. --Ponytailguy 13:48, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Finally. Calm.--Angelbeaver ^(talk) 13:54, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

I've been calm all time, but it looks like we've got issues here...

I'm getting increasingly bored with hearing the old 'YPPedia is not Wikipedia' line as some kind of general defense from bad decisions by admin - and you seem to be heading that way with justifying your edit. I am not seeking justification by any means, and my original point was your edit seemed incorrect. I didn't start pointing fingers... If anything, my argument is that encyclopedias don't contain slang - why are pirate articles suddenly a magic exception? They're not... --Sagacious ^(talk) 13:58, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Funny, that wasn't my argument at all. Additionally, we aren't striving to emulate an encyclopedia. We're striving to be the best community resource we can be, whatever that means, within the mandate of serving information. This means we need to be accurate and consistent, but this also means we need to present it in a format that doesn't turn off our end-users, which means both content creation and content consultation needs to be as accessible as possible. If we became Wikipedia and nuked every single potential piece of POV in the entire YPPedia, we'd lose a lot more than we'd gain. Now, as Guppy said, I'm going to go do something productive. --Ponytailguy 14:06, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

I ain't being funny or nothing but YPPedia is a free-content encyclopedia, written collaboratively by Yohoho! Puzzle Pirates players from around the world. Yppedia:About. YPPedia is not trying to be an encyclopedia - it is an encyclopedia. --Sagacious ^(talk) 14:37, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Don't make me stop this car! ;) Just to toss my thoughts into the fray: It's fine to correct the English, but if Stu's show is named (or is commonly referred to as) something with the term "late-nite" then it should remain. It's okay for people to choose what they're passionate about, but I do urge all parties here to occasionally consider whether their energy might be more productive if directed to other projects. --Guppymomma 13:59, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Ditto. --AtteSmythe 14:40, 5 September 2006 (PDT)