Talk:TAYS

TAYS

^{NB: This discussion was moved here from Category talk:Candidates for speedy deletion with this edit.}

(Ref.: Track_All_Yer_Ships)

• Oppose deletion: TAYS provides a redirect to Track All Yer Ships, a third-party tool. I find that TAYS is easier to recall from memory than its full name. It is also easier to search for, type and share due to its far shorter URL and a lack of underscores. Other third-party tools are well known by their acronyms, e.g. PCTB and QM, and these acronyms again simplify the search/sharing process and shorten the URLs. There is no risk of confusing TAYS with any other term or acronym from Puzzle Pirates (to my knowledge), so the TAYS article can do no evil by being there. --Therobotdude 15:27, 25 June 2014 (PDT)
• Oppose on the basis of this essay: wikipedia:Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap, and TRD's reasoning above. Chupchup 17:47, 25 June 2014 (PDT)

• Support deletion: Before today, I'd never seen or used any acronym for this report. Furthermore, I am the current maintainer of this report, and if I'd wanted to create an acronym for this report, I'd've done so a long time ago. The fact that I'm maintaining this specific report ought to bear weight to this issue. -- Franklincain ^(t/c) 18:01, 25 June 2014 (PDT)

Compromise offered -- I'll withdraw my request for the deletion of that acronym PROVIDED we have an IRON-CLAD agreement that your acronym does NOT get added into the article itself, EVER. -- Franklincain ^(t/c) 18:12, 25 June 2014 (PDT)

Bear in mind, the Track All Yer Ships article should reflect the everyday terminology used (in fact, so should all of YPPedia's mainspace). For instance, if enough people call the puzzle "dnav" when it's actually "navigation", then a note goes on the navigation article saying people sometimes call it "dnav". Similarly, if enough people call your tool TAYS, then a note should go on the Track All Yer Ships article. While there's just the one person who calls it that (me?), sure, there's no need to mention it in the article. But there can be no iron-clad agreements extending indefinitely: the article is a community resource, and it might one day be beneficial to the community to mention that acronym in the article. --Therobotdude 19:09, 25 June 2014 (PDT)

Wikipedia has another concept that is relevant here: wikipedia:Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. To the best of my knowledge, this policy is also shared here at YPPedia. No editor here owns an article; players do not own Personal Pirate Pages, and software developers do not own articles about their works. YPPedia is a collaborative environment where editors work together to improve articles. If consensus decides that we should act a certain way, then we do so. Time and time again, I have dealt (usually gingerly) with players who wish to delete or redact their personal pirate pages, but YPPedia retains the information therein based on its encyclopedic content. Now it is common custom that acronyms be applied to terms in the game, especially those which are too unwieldy to use repeatedly in text chat, so I would not only support retention of this redirect but I would support an addition to the article describing the acronym. Chupchup 19:14, 25 June 2014 (PDT)

Wow, I so had it backwards in my head as to who made the redirect and who was trying to delete it... Anyway, I have no issue with TAYS. Not a big fan of this proliferation of this redirects for plurals, though, since it's so simple to make a plural link - as in, [[Monkey]]s = Monkeys... --Belthazar451 14:05, 26 June 2014 (PDT)

With regards to latest -- I'll once again point out that TheRobotDude is the ONLY KNOWN USER of this report who wants to use this acronym. Chupchup may be supporting the creation of this acronym, but he has NOT stated he has used this report in the first place (let alone, referred to this report by this acronym). As I see it, one person is trying to create a new acronym, that no one else has used or is necessarily likely to use. -- Franklincain ^(t/c) 14:42, 26 June 2014 (PDT)

I'm not sure how being a user of the report is relevant, but I will point out that I might use it if I had not created a similar but more powerful report in Perl two years ago. Chupchup 14:50, 26 June 2014 (PDT)

(Relevance)... One user is making a solitary request for a nickname of sorts (i.e. the acronym). No other user of the tool in question has ever used or suggested this nickname. And I...hate...nicknames. I have ALWAYS hated nicknames. And if someone is NOT a user of this report, then when the blazes would they ever use that nickname? That is, if someone doesn't use the report, what does it matter if one such NON-user also likes that nickname? Their opinion would have as much relevance to this situation, as would that of a foreign visitor's opinion to local law/politics/(etc.) of the other country that foreigner is visiting, as I see it (that is, it may have some merit, from an academic point of view, and may even have some helpful content, but isn't a vote that counts in the matter at hand -- no disrespect intended). -- Franklincain ^(t/c) 15:05, 26 June 2014 (PDT)

I don't use Imperial Outposts but I still call them IOs. I don't use Intrauterine Devices but I still call them IUDs. I have never been a victim of an Improvised Explosive Device but I still call it an IED... Chupchup 15:13, 26 June 2014 (PDT)

Many people use those acronyms. Only one (or two) uses this proposed new acronym. Why can't you see the difference between these two extremes? "Many"/"most" means a MAJORITY, while "just one or two" means a MINORITY (usually, a very tiny/small one at that). -- Franklincain ^(t/c) 15:26, 26 June 2014 (PDT)

Addendum -- Please read TRD's comment above, dated 19:09, 25 June 2014 (PDT), regarding the difference between majority-of-users versus minority-of-users. -- Franklincain ^(t/c) 15:29, 26 June 2014 (PDT)

Let's not confuse the two separate issues here: 1. Should TAYS be mentioned as an acronym on the Track All Yer Ships article? I stand by my comments dated 19:09, 25 June 2014 (PDT): "if enough people call your tool TAYS, then a note should go on the Track All Yer Ships article. While there's just the one person who calls it that (me?), sure, there's no need to mention it in the article." Currently, I don't think there's a huge need to mention this in the article. 2. Should TAYS, which redirects to Track All Yer Ships, remain? Nothing outweighs the benefits of a shorter (by 15 characters) link, ease of searching, inherent ease of linking, ease of remembering.. etc. TAYS is an obvious, forseeable acronym of the report's full title and there is no real downside to that redirect page besides the fact that the author of the report doesn't like it. Not liking something is not a valid criterion to propose it for speedy deletion. I remind the author that he will never have to use the acronym if he does not like it. To avoid people finding acronyms for something in the first place, choose a simpler name with fewer words and capitals and which is easier to recall from memory and search for. Imagine if Twitter had been called Text-based Instant Messaging... of course people would start calling it TIM. I believe the TAYS redirect is useful and should stay.

--Therobotdude 16:23, 26 June 2014 (PDT)