Changes: Forum:Tackling First-Person; Converting to Third-Person

Revision as of 01:20, 20 March 2014

This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.

Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > Chat Moderator Request - Dead Gunner

This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.

This application has been closed by author request.

Hello, Nukapedians and friends alike, I, Dead Gunner, am humbly asking for chat moderator rights.

About me, and my qualifications

I was once an anon, I remember using the wiki during my Fallout 3 and New Vegas playthroughs, and I was astounded by the amount of content on here. After Lonesome Road came out, I decided to make an account, though I wasn't active. I have been active now for around 6 months, and I have grown to love the people here. I have also been active in the wiki's chat accessory, and I love to be there, I always have a better mood when I have just been on the wiki's chat.

At night-time though, some of the mods disappear from their keyboards and people cause havoc on here. I remember one guy who began using dolan speak to ask for help in Fallout: New Vegas, it was apparent that some people were annoyed about the guy, so I told him to PM me and I helped him with the game. He eventually thanked me and left the chat, leaving the people in the chat feeling more comfortable on the chat.

Some reasons I think I will make a good moderator is that I tend not to have a bias, which would help in decision making. I also have been voting on issues of importance in the wiki, and putting my thoughts into proposals. I have also been here, very late at night, around every night. It may not matter in chat, but I am an active editor and I contribute to the community. I understand that I have been banned twice, and that this may tip the scale in your decisions, but I have grown and learned from my bans, and in hindsight, it was good for me to get banned, because now I know how it feels, and I will want to only issue bans to those who truly deserve it. I know the rules, and try to break up fights when I can, and I always try to be a decent person to whomever I meet.

Some people say we have enough chat mods, but if someone is willing to take the job, why not give them a shot? I am willing to step to the plate. I hate the fact that some come to the chat and don't feel a good atmosphere. Please, give me the chance to ensure that this place will be enjoyable for anyone, and everyone. As a last thought to all who think we have enough mods, remember this quote, "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." Thank you. ^{"Respect and Honor"} 15:26, October 13, 2012 (UTC)

Hours

I can be here nearly every day from around after school - 4:00 PM EST to at least midnight EST nearly every night. Weekends I can be on as late as people need me on.

Endorsement

GarouxBloodline - Some Assembly Required!
TALK - 04:12, October 10, 2012 (UTC)

My name is Leon, an Administrator here at Nukapedia, and I approve of this chat moderator request! I believe Gunner has deserved this chance, and I will be looking forward to seeing how he deals with the soon to follow community consensus. Good luck!

Editcount

There should have been a list of this user's edit counts here, but the edit counts feature is no longer available.

Poll finished on 4:15 pm October 20, 2012 (UTC).

A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
You can vote by placing one of the following lines in the appropriate section:
- Use # {{yes}} ~~~~ if you support the proposal.
- Use # {{no}} ~~~~ if you are against the proposal.
- Use # {{neutral}} ~~~~ if you wish to abstain.
Please do not edit other user's votes.

Yes

Higgey the Scotsman _{(talk page)}
Ghoullover666 (talk) 22:23, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
File:Vault-Tec Circle.png ^{"Editing With Triple S Technology!"} 10:28, October 14, 2012 (UTC)

No

"Not everybody who meets the requirements will automatically become a special rights user, they are appointed on a per-need basis." You have described to me ONE instance where someone with special rights was needed, one instance that could have happened god knows how long ago, and instead of reporting it, you allowed him to stay in chat and continue to break a rule, it's not a matter of "oh well he tried to help someone" it's a matter of the fact you allowed him to stay instead of reporting him, as most do, and as most should do. Moving on, your method of breaking up fights is as someone on another forum so aptly put it is "Everyone chill the fuck out", jumping in a random points asking people to "chill out", one should note that when you say this, the situation is perfectly calm. That only says to me that you perhaps do not know when is the right time, and when isn't the right time to step into others perfectly normal conversations. Furthermore, whenever I see you on, the chat is populated not only by normal users, but by plenty of mods/admins that handle situations arise. You described to me another scenario during your time slot where someone broke the rules, but you then said he was correctly punished at the time. Have their not been 3 other requests stating they will be in your time slot? And are these people there during this time? Yes. Does this show that you can fill a gap no one else can? Absolutely not. Mods are on when you are, and do their jobs correctly when the need arises for them to use their rights. "It's better to have it and not need it", so what's the point in giving you rights you will never use? Because I can't see one. If people are to be appointed on a per-need basis, and there is no need for you to be appointed, then it's a no, through and through. --^Talk 15:54, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
Well, where do I start... to be honest, fraze already kind of pointed out most of the points I was going to make, so i think ill just keep this kind of short. Do i think you could be a mod? Yes, with a bit of practice I do actually, but heres the thing: we really don't need it right now, and the rules state we make mods on a per-need bias. We already have up to 5 or 6 mods in the chat at times, and 3 or 4 when ever your available, all do their job right, and all do a good job at keeping the peace; don't get me wrong, you are better than some in qualifications, but overall I don't think you should be a mod as of right now, we have enough, so why take the time in trying to make more and make them good? Because, as stated before, you aren't exactly assertive, and even if that's because your afraid of being judged or criticized, that's kind of the risk you take if you want the position of power. So, to conclude, could it happen? Maybe. But right now? No, i dont think it could.--Emiko~<3 (talk) 19:57, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
As you posted a link to banned material in chat during your campaign, I am obligated to vote no. Agent c (talk) 00:40, October 14, 2012 (UTC)
Same reason as chad. Sorry man, but that stunt literally fucked up any chance you had. ^{"Hail to the Pigeon!"} 00:48, October 14, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

Well, You have been very polite and friendly to me since I have joined (Not long ago) But I feel that I need to know you a bit better but I wish the best of luck to you and I will remain neutral for the time being. ^{"Veni Vidi Vici"} 18:20, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
~~I have reasons to vote yes, and almost the same amount to vote no. I will think this over and vote then. ^{"Hail to the Pigeon!"} 19:17, October 13, 2012 (UTC)~~
~~Silent abstain. Agent c (talk) 20:16, October 13, 2012 (UTC)~~

Comments

I would like the honest opinions of everyone put down here, or in the poll, that way, either if I get rights or don't, I can still improve myself for the better. ^{"Respect and Honor"} 15:34, October 13, 2012 (UTC)

Result

Application has been closed by originator's request. The Gunny 01:00, October 14, 2012 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{Forumheader|Wiki proposals and applications|archived}}{{Archivedforum}}
-I propose the following measure to combat the usage of second- (or even first-) person from articles and convert them to third-person. While our policy instructs that we have our pages in accordance with third-person, this can be tricky; I often find huge pages written entirely in second-person, which is very intimidating as an editor. Thus, I offer this measure to assist the perspective conversion:
+<!-- Please put your content under this line.  Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ -->
-'''Every week, we create a list of 297 articles—continuing through all until we finish— that we as editors will convert to third-person.'''
+'''This application has been closed by author request.'''
+Hello, Nukapedians and friends alike, I, [[User:Dead_Gunner|Dead Gunner]], am humbly asking for chat moderator rights.
-While this figure can be too drastic, '''consider the following:'''
+==About me, and my qualifications==
-* Not all pages are in second-person; thus, not every article listed would be affected and would need change
+I was once an anon, I remember using the wiki during my Fallout 3 and New Vegas playthroughs, and I was astounded by the amount of content on here. After Lonesome Road came out, I decided to make an account, though I wasn't active. I have been active now for around 6 months, and I have grown to love the people here. I have also been active in the wiki's chat accessory, and I love to be there, I always have a better mood when I have just been on the wiki's chat.
+At night-time though, some of the mods disappear from their keyboards and people cause havoc on here. I remember one guy who began using dolan speak to ask for help in Fallout: New Vegas, it was apparent that some people were annoyed about the guy, so I told him to PM me and I helped him with the game. He eventually thanked me and left the chat, leaving the people in the chat feeling more comfortable on the chat.
-* The current figure allows us to complete the conversion in just one year
+Some reasons I think I will make a good moderator is that I tend not to have a bias, which would help in decision making. I also have been voting on issues of importance in the wiki, and putting my thoughts into proposals. I have also been here, very late at night, around every night. It may not matter in chat, but I am an active editor and I contribute to the community. I understand that I have been banned twice, and that this may tip the scale in your decisions, but I have grown and learned from my bans, and in hindsight, it was good for me to get banned, because now I know how it feels, and I will want to only issue bans to those who truly deserve it. I know the rules, and try to break up fights when I can, and I always try to be a decent person to whomever I meet.
-* This is a collaborative approach; '''if we have 10 editors, for example, each would need only edit less than 30 every week''', which is little to ask. '''If everyone with special rights participated, we’d need only edit 10 each.'''
+Some people say we have enough chat mods, but if someone is willing to take the job, why not give them a shot? I am willing to step to the plate. I hate the fact that some come to the chat and don't feel a good atmosphere. Please, give me the chance to ensure that this place will be enjoyable for anyone, and everyone. As a last thought to all who think we have enough mods, remember this quote, "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." Thank you.
+[[File:FNV NCR Armor.jpg|20px|link=User:Dead Gunner]] [[User talk:Dead Gunner|<font color= "Black"> <sup>''"Respect and Honor"''</sup> </font>]] 15:26, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
+==Hours==
-* As more pages are added, we can just continue the weekly list, even if our time surpassed a year, as the proposed system only accounts 16,620 articles.
+I can be here nearly every day from around after school - 4:00 PM EST to at least midnight EST nearly every night.
+Weekends I can be on as late as people need me on.
+==Endorsement==
+{{Talk
+ |image= Leon sphere.png|60px
+ |color=Black
+ |color2=Grey
+ |color3=Black
+ |namecolor=White
+ |textcolor=White
+ |textcolor2=Black
+ |line=Maroon
+ |border=Maroon
+ |name=GarouxBloodline
+ |sig='''Some Assembly Required!'''[[File:ForGaroux.png|40px]]
+ |time=04:12, October 10, 2012 (UTC)
+ |text=My name is Leon, an Administrator here at Nukapedia, and I approve of this chat moderator request! I believe Gunner has deserved this chance, and I will be looking forward to seeing how he deals with the soon to follow community consensus. Good luck!
+}}
+==Editcount==
-* Even if a page does not have first-person, it may use "the player" or similar incorrect words that this effort can eliminate.
+{{Editcounts|Dead Gunner}}
+{{Poll|run for 7|start=16:15, October 13, 2012 (UTC)}}
-We can create a project to encompass all this or add it to the [http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Wiki:Manual_of_style_project manual of style project], which covers third-person.
+==Yes==
-Any comments and suggestions are welcome; if this (type of) idea doesn’t work, what can we do about this issue? [[User:69.l25|69.l25]] ([[User talk:69.l25|talk]]) 04:27, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
+#{{Yes}} [[User:Higgey the Scotsman|Higgey the Scotsman]] <sub>([[User_talk:Higgey the Scotsman|talk page]])</sub>
+# {{yes}} [[User:Ghoullover666|Ghoullover666]] ([[User talk:Ghoullover666|talk]]) 22:23, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
+# {{yes}} [[file:Vault-Tec_Circle.png|20px|link=User:Dwellersims]][[User talk:Dwellersims|<font color= "Purple"> <sup>''"Editing With Triple S Technology!"''</sup> </font>]] 10:28, October 14, 2012 (UTC)
-==Signup==
+==No==
+#{{no}} "Not everybody who meets the requirements will automatically become a special rights user, they are appointed on a '''per-need''' basis." You have described to me '''ONE''' instance where someone with special rights was needed, one instance that could have happened god knows how long ago, and instead of reporting it, you allowed him to stay in chat and continue to break a rule, it's not a matter of "oh well he tried to help someone" it's a matter of the fact you allowed him to stay instead of reporting him, as most do, and as most should do. Moving on, your method of breaking up fights is as someone on another forum so aptly put it is "Everyone chill the fuck out", jumping in a random points asking people to "chill out", one should note that when you say this, the situation is perfectly calm. That only says to me that you perhaps do not know when is the right time, and when isn't the right time to step into others perfectly normal conversations. Furthermore, whenever I see you on, the chat is populated not only by normal users, but by plenty of mods/admins that handle situations arise. You described to me another scenario during your time slot where someone broke the rules, but you then said he was correctly punished at the time. Have their not been 3 other requests stating they will be in your time slot? And are these people there during this time? Yes. Does this show that you can fill a gap no one else can? Absolutely not. Mods are on when you are, and do their jobs correctly when the need arises for them to use their rights. "It's better to have it and not need it", so what's the point in giving you rights you will never use? Because I can't see one. If people are to be appointed on a per-need basis, and there is no need for you to be appointed, then it's a no, through and through. --[[File:Sign243.png|20px|DragonBorn96|link=User:DragonBorn96]]<sup>[[User Talk:DragonBorn96|Talk]]</sup> 15:54, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
-This goal requires a coalition of willing editors; thus, before a project is established we must know that there is a sufficient amount of users who will help out, therefore making the project realistic. To sign up is to commit yourself to making an effort to sort through any number of the weekly 297 articles and change them to third-person. This should not be overwhelming with a good amount of volunteers, and I must remind you that not every page will need fixing, but they will be listed in alphabetical, order so all will appear. '''Please place your name below if you agree to work on this project once it is set up. This is necessary to see what number of people will participate.''' I look forward to working with whoever volunteers.
+#{{no}} Well, where do I start... to be honest, fraze already kind of pointed out most of the points I was going to make, so i think ill just keep this kind of short. Do i think you could be a mod? Yes, with a bit of practice I do actually, but heres the thing: we really don't need it right now, and the rules state we make mods on a per-need bias. We already have up to 5 or 6 mods in the chat at times, and 3 or 4 when ever your available, all do their job right, and all do a good job at keeping the peace; don't get me wrong, you are better than some in qualifications, but overall I don't think you should be a mod as of right now, we have enough, so why take the time in trying to make more and make them good? Because, as stated before, you aren't exactly assertive, and even if that's because your afraid of being judged or criticized, that's kind of the risk you take if you want the position of power. So, to conclude, could it happen? Maybe. But right now? No, i dont think it could.--[[User:Emikowolf|Emiko~&#60;3]] ([[User talk:Emikowolf|talk]]) 19:57, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
+#{{no}} As you posted a link to banned material in chat during your campaign, I am obligated to vote no. [[User:Agent c|Agent c]] ([[User talk:Agent c|talk]]) 00:40, October 14, 2012 (UTC)
+#{{No}} Same reason as chad. Sorry man, but that stunt literally fucked up any chance you had. [[file:Pigeon Approved.png|20px|link=User:Denis517]][[User talk:Denis517|<font color= "Green"> <sup>''"Hail to the Pigeon!"''</sup> </font>]] 00:48, October 14, 2012 (UTC)
+==Neutral==
-''To sign up, please type <nowiki>"# ~~~"</nowiki> below:
+#{{Neutral}} Well, You have been very polite and friendly to me since I have joined (Not long ago) But I feel that I need to know you a bit better but I wish the best of luck to you and I will remain neutral for the time being.[[File:CaesarLegionSymbol.png|20px|link=User:Adrick of the West ]]<font color= "Red"> <sup>''"Veni Vidi Vici"''</sup> </font> 18:20, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
+#<s> {{Neutral}} I have reasons to vote yes, and almost the same amount to vote no. I will think this over and vote then. [[file:Pigeon Approved.png|20px|link=User:Denis517]][[User talk:Denis517|<font color= "Green"> <sup>''"Hail to the Pigeon!"''</sup> </font>]] 19:17, October 13, 2012 (UTC) </s>
+#<s>{{neutral}} Silent abstain.  [[User:Agent c|Agent c]] ([[User talk:Agent c|talk]]) 20:16, October 13, 2012 (UTC)</s>
+==Comments==
-# [[User:69.l25|69.l25]] ([[User talk:69.l25|talk]])
+I would like the honest opinions of everyone put down here, or in the poll, that way, either if I get rights or don't, I can still improve myself for the better. [[File:FNV NCR Armor.jpg|20px|link=User:Dead Gunner]] [[User talk:Dead Gunner|<font color= "Black"> <sup>''"Respect and Honor"''</sup> </font>]] 15:34, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
-# <small>[[File:User OfficialLolGuy.png|30px]]</small><small>&nbsp;<span style="border: 1px solid black"><span style="background-color:red; color:white">[[User:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:red; color: white">''' OfficialLolGuy&nbsp;'''</span>]]</span>[[User talk:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:blue; color:white">'''&nbsp;Talk&nbsp;'''</span>]]</span>[[User blog:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:orange; color:white">'''&nbsp;Blog&nbsp;'''</span>]]</small>
-# [[User:FFIX|FFIX]] ([[User talk:FFIX|talk]])
-# {{User:Limmiegirl/Personal_page_index/Sigdata}}
+==Result==
-==Final Guidelines==
+Application has been closed by originator's request.'''<span style="border: 2px solid gold; background-color: red; white-space: nowrap; ">[[User:The Gunny|<font color= "gold">&nbsp;The Gunny&nbsp;</font>]]</span>&nbsp;'''[[file:380px-USMC-E7 svg.png|x20px|link=User talk:The Gunny]] 01:00, October 14, 2012 (UTC)
-Now is the last time to voice any concerns with the way this project will be implemented. I'd like more people to sign up as well. Here are the general rules; if nobody contests them, they, along with user discretion, will guide the project:
-{| class="va-table"
-!colspan="4" |<big>'''Pronouns/Subjects'''</big>
-|-
-!{{yes}} Do Use
-!{{No}} Do Not Use
-|-
-| * "Player character"<br />* Common third-person pronouns<br /> * "One" when not specifically referring to the player character
-|* "Player"<br /> * Common second-person pronound<br /> * "One" when referring to the player character<br /> * "Singular they"
-|}
-* '''Note:''' "Player" can be used when directly referring to the player '''not the player character.'''
-* '''Note:''' Do not make an effort to change second-person in an article's "Bugs" section.
-==Wrapping up Current Concerns==
-*Most people agree that second-person can be left in bugs. Are you okay with that FFIX? You seem to be the main person proposing a possible change.
-*As for the confusion around one, they, player character, and so on, does this help?
-{| class="va-table"
-!colspan="4" |<big>'''Pronouns/Subjects'''</big>
-|-
-!{{yes}} Do Use
-!{{No}} Do Not Use
-|-
-| * "Player character"<br />* Common third-person pronouns<br /> * "One" when not specifically referring to the player character
-|* "Player"<br /> * Common second-person pronound<br /> * "One" when referring to the player character
-|}
-* '''Note:''' "Player" can be used when directly referring to the player '''not the player character.'''
-'''Examples:'''<br />
-{{no}}''The player must go there to complete the quest.''<br />{{no}}''You must go there to complete the quest.''<br />{{No}} ''One must go there to complete the quest.''<br />{{Yes}} ''The player character must go there to complete the quest.''<br />{{Yes}} ''He or she must go there to complete the quest.''<br />{{yes}} ''One can find a Nuka-Cola on the shelf.''
-* What about "they"? We've discussed it quite a bit, and while it is informal, I have no problem with it because it helps balance our sentence structure.
-*As for the chart, I feel we can use "one" whenever, but a concern was brought up. Would the new usage for "one" be okay, though?
-==Comments/Discussion==
-===General===
-I concur wholeheartedly, if we write our articles completely in third-person, our format is undoubtedly objective. That's how I've always attempted to do my edits, but as you said, there are a lot of articles that do not meet this standard. I will help wherever/whenever I can. [[File:Enclavesymbol.jpg|40px|x30px|link=User:Eden2012]] 04:47, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-:Still need clarification on what is acceptable/not acceptable between the player vs the player character. Also is Vault Dweller/Chosen One/Lone Wanderer/Courier preferred? [[User:Great Mara|Great Mara]] ([[User talk:Great Mara|talk]]) 04:53, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-::I'd prefer 'the player character', myself. [[File:Enclavesymbol.jpg|40px|x30px|link=User:Eden2012]] 04:55, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-:::You are the ''player''. You play as the ''player character''. The ''player character'' is also The ''Vault Dweller-Courier'', which are all interchangeable with ''he or she''. So, avoid ''"you"'' and ''"player,"'' and go with "he or she," "one," or a specific player character (e.x. "Vault Dweller"). [[User:69.l25|69.l25]] ([[User talk:69.l25|talk]]) 04:56, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-{{od|:::}}Eliminating these terms altogether is an ideal goal, as they can be quite cumbersome; e.g., instead of "If the Lone Wanderer asks so-and-so about the whatever, he will tell him/her about its location," try "Asking so-and-so about the whatever leads him to reveal its location." Saying that doing a particular action "leads to" or "enables" a result is a good habit to remove perspective altogether. But if there is no other good way to phrase something, then "Vault Dweller/Lone Wanderer/Courier" or "player character" works--just use sparingly. --[[User:FFIX|FFIX]] ([[User talk:FFIX|talk]]) 20:35, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-Quite sometime ago I had my bot go through and count thousands of articles with first person on it, excluding dialogue articles. I think it's in my sandbox, I will try to find it. --[[User:TwoBearsHigh-Fiving|TwoBearsHigh-Fiving]] [[File:Intercom01.png|x20px|link=User talk:TwoBearsHigh-Fiving]]   08:24, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-Good initiative. I'm willing to help where I can, but I'm honestly not interested in a deadline like "you have to do 10 articles this week." Sometimes I have time, but other weeks I just don't have that time. I also think that when I have that kind of deadlines, this wiki may feel more as a burden to me, than how I feel about it now. Sorry if it sounds lazy or unmotivated, but that's how I see things if I'm honest. -[[User talk:Peace'n Hugs|<font color= "grey"> <sup>''Greets''</sup> </font>]] [[User:Peace'n Hugs|Peace'n Hugs]]  ([[User talk:Peace'n Hugs|talk]]) ([[User blog:Peace'n Hugs|blog]]) 09:15, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-This would be a scope for a project, not really a policy issue, and in any case whilst its nice to have targets, I know from experience other issues that its not quite that easy.  [[User:Agent c|Agent c]] ([[User talk:Agent c|talk]]) 10:46, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-Agreed. It is strange to see "the player" or "you" when it is actually the player character being referred to. <font size=3px><span style="border: 2px solid firebrick; background-color: azure; white-space: nowrap; ">'''''[[User:Energy X|Energy]] [[User talk:Energy X|X]]'''''</span></font> 14:38, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-This is a great idea, I tried doing some of this myself, however I discovered the task to be too daunting and I found myself going back and forth between pages. We also need some clarification on the use of "the player character" and "the Courier", etc., as to which sections they should be in, etc. <small>[[File:User OfficialLolGuy.png|30px]]</small><small>&nbsp;<span style="border: 1px solid black"><span style="background-color:red; color:white">[[User:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:red; color: white">''' OfficialLolGuy&nbsp;'''</span>]]</span>[[User talk:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:blue; color:white">'''&nbsp;Talk&nbsp;'''</span>]]</span>[[User blog:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:orange; color:white">'''&nbsp;Blog&nbsp;'''</span>]]</small> 16:31, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-I disagree, "the player" is no more first-person than "one", which is specifically prescribed in the editing guidelines as a proper alternative. {{quote|The player" should never be used. "The player character" and "The Courier" (or other protagonist) are interchangeable and should be used, however, "The Courier" is preferred.}} should not be enforced as part of an official project without a clear consensus being first properly reached. Apart from that, I support the innitiative as a whole. {{User:Limmiegirl/Personal_page_index/Sigdata}} 23:59, February 13, 2014 (UTC)
-: It is not first (or second) person from a strictly grammatical point of view; however, it refers to the wrong person when used in an article here. It refers to the person actually playing the game, who is not the person being described in our articles. For example, if an article states that completing a quest will add a certain item to the player's inventory, this would be incorrect, as the "player's" inventory consists of a wallet, car keys, etc. while the "player character's" inventory consists of bottle caps, stimpaks, etc. --[[User:FFIX|FFIX]] ([[User talk:FFIX|talk]]) 00:08, February 14, 2014 (UTC)
-::"The player" is a direct substitute for "you." "One" is not necessarily a substitute for "you" (saying, "One can find it here" isn't specifically saying, "you can find it here" because it pertains to any character, though you are included); however, I agree that in walkthrough-type situations, saying "one should go here" is pretty much saying "you/the player should go here," so we do need some clarification. [[User:69.l25|69.l25]] ([[User talk:69.l25|talk]]) 00:11, February 14, 2014 (UTC)
-:::I don't see a problem with "one" in general, other than that it can sound awkward and sometimes even comical. But I've also seen places where it fits perfectly. I don't think we should say it is wrong to use in any particular situation, just that we should always think of different ways to word things and use the one that seems to be the most natural while still being technically correct. --[[User:FFIX|FFIX]] ([[User talk:FFIX|talk]]) 19:51, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
-===Third-person in Bugs===
-I'm in. I've worked on this issue here and there, but without a list to work from, I have mostly done it either while patrolling edits or just using the Random Page link. I did save a copy of TwoBears' bot output, but of course it eventually got stale and also there was no way to coordinate it with other users. Could the bot be tweaked to recognize quotes and other legit sources of 1st/2nd person and generate a page of links with minimal false positives, and maybe update its results on a regular basis? It's tricky, I know. Oh, and [[Fallout Wiki:Editing guideline#Perspective|current policy]] states that the Bugs section is exempt from this guideline. Does it not seem reasonable to remove this exemption so the bugs conform to the same rules as the rest of the article? --[[User:FFIX|FFIX]] ([[User talk:FFIX|talk]]) 20:35, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-:Changing the bug policy would require a community vote, which can be cumbersome. Though, if we were to require third-person in bugs, it'd be best to create this policy before we implement my idea so we can target bugs if needed. I always thought bugs were a bit informal, so they wouldn't need as much scrutiny as an article's other contents, but we'll see how everyone feels about this. [[User:69.l25|69.l25]] ([[User talk:69.l25|talk]]) 21:01, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-:: The thing about bugs is that they just get ruined by third person. I tried altering some second person out of the bugs sections on some articles a while back and afterwards, they just looked extremely silly. Bugs sections really aren't built for third person, imo. <small>[[File:User OfficialLolGuy.png|30px]]</small><small>&nbsp;<span style="border: 1px solid black"><span style="background-color:red; color:white">[[User:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:red; color: white">''' OfficialLolGuy&nbsp;'''</span>]]</span>[[User talk:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:blue; color:white">'''&nbsp;Talk&nbsp;'''</span>]]</span>[[User blog:OfficialLolGuy|<span style="background-color:orange; color:white">'''&nbsp;Blog&nbsp;'''</span>]]</small> 21:16, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-::: Maybe a good compromise is that it isn't wrong to fix the bugs section if it can be done reasonably well, but it is not required for the article to be considered "fixed." --[[User:FFIX|FFIX]] ([[User talk:FFIX|talk]]) 21:19, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-::::Bugs are informal, the use of first and second person is necessary in them for them to be clear and concise as they are referring to unintentional elements that directly affect the person playing the game and not just the characters inside of the game. If you can fix a bug so that it more professionally uses first or second tense then that's fine, but we should avoid attempts to convert all bugs to third person and proceed on a case by case basis. --[[User:-bleep196-|-bleep196-]] ([[User talk:-bleep196-|talk]]) 01:45, February 15, 2014 (UTC)
-{{Od|::::}}I'm OK with not changing the policy for bugs, since the issue with them is a bit more nuanced than with the rest of the article. In one case, it might mention the need to restart the machine or reload a save, which really would be directed at the player and second person would be appropriate. In another case, it might mention that (for example) entering a building or picking up an item can trigger a problem, which would still be referring to the character. Rather than try to detail each situation where it is or isn't appropriate to change, I think it should just be a judgment call by the editor and when in doubt, just leave it. I would probably still change it where appropriate on my edits, but for simplicity's sake in moving the project forward, the policy should stay unchanged. --[[User:FFIX|FFIX]] ([[User talk:FFIX|talk]]) 19:46, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
-The ban on using "''the player''" should not be an absolute one, it should specify the instances when it is permissible. Also, the singular they is prohibited as per the Wikipedia's MoS. {{User:Limmiegirl/Personal_page_index/Sigdata}} 20:00, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
-:Yes, I've seen instances where "player" is acceptable, but not using it is a general rule and applies only when the subject is the player character. [[User:69.l25|69.l25]] ([[User talk:69.l25|talk]]) 19:30, February 17, 2014 (UTC)
-==="Singular They"===
-Also, since we're on the topic, I'd like to discuss our usage of what is known as the "singular "they"". This blatant distortion of proper grammar seems to be widely accepted in informal writing and as far as I can tell, this wiki's article space. It is incredibly common here (since the player character can often be a male or female, therefore having to use "him or her," "his or her", or "he or she" a lot). {{User:Skire/Sig}} 20:57, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-: Reading this in articles bugs me as well, although I understand that repeatedly saying "he/she" or "him/her" or "his/her" gets very awkward at some point. Another good reason to write totally impersonally wherever possible. If the use of the PC's title is limited to one or two occurrences, then "he/she" or "him/her" can be used without being too cumbersome. --[[User:FFIX|FFIX]] ([[User talk:FFIX|talk]]) 21:05, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-::The key is balance. Using "the player character," for example, over and over again is grammatically correct, but it reads horribly. "There" has never bugged me too much, but I agree we can be more formal without it. [[User:69.l25|69.l25]] ([[User talk:69.l25|talk]]) 21:11, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-:::Right, I don't think it's a must (although it's something I'd support). Overall, I don't want to create too much frivolous work that people will need to do, not to mention that our articles are not exactly intended to follow the highest standards of formal writing anyway. {{User:Skire/Sig}} 21:15, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-I know that using the "his/her him/her he/she" ''can'' get in an almost unreadable state, just as well as too many "The player character" this and "the player character" that, so I've tried to use both sparingly to better an article instead of constant "you"s. But also, somehow (to me at least) use of a lot of "the Courier" "Lone Wanderer" etc. in articles seems to not read like quest walkthroughs or whatever and read like a story like I have no part of. [[User:Leea|Leea]] ([[User talk:Leea|talk]]) 23:29, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-There is nothing wrong with using "They" in the singular sense, and is indeed proper grammar both technically and collectively. It has been used acceptably in research papers and college standards for as long as I can remember. Saying otherwise is tantamount to those that say "Irregardless" is not a word, when yes, yes it is a word even if it is a double-negative. [[Special:Contributions/69.247.6.120|69.247.6.120]] 23:37, February 12, 2014 (UTC)
-:I disagree completely. We use as baseline the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style Wikipedia Manual of Style], which, regarding contested vocabulary, states:
-{{quote|Avoid words and phrases that give the impression of straining for formality, that are unnecessarily regional, or that are not widely accepted}}
-:That right out of the bat excludes the singular they (and ''irregardless'', for that matter). {{User:Limmiegirl/Personal_page_index/Sigdata}} 23:49, February 13, 2014 (UTC)
-::Well said, Lims. Common sense should explain this one thoroughly: "They" is plural. The antecedent (e.g. "the player character," "the Courier" etc.) is singular. Also, justifying its usage by saying it is widely used is fallacious. {{User:Skire/Sig}} 00:20, February 14, 2014 (UTC)
-:::From the same MoS, it is clearly outlined that "They" ''can'' be used to declare '''informal''' neutrality, and while such a usage is sort of disputed, it makes up for a hole in the English language which is why it is accepted as proper grammar.
-"'''They''' – regard this as a plural pronoun that uses a third person plural verb conjugation (see below: "they show"), but the word is now commonly used, especially in speech and informal writing, as a non-gender-specific third-person singular pronoun (which modern English otherwise lacks). Alternatives include "he or she" and generic "he". Some writers argue that generic "he" is generic (as the name implies) and thus includes both sexes. Others find it sexist or too old-fashioned. The pronouns "you" or "one" can be used in some sentences.
-*Disputed usage: A person is rude if they show no respect for their hosts.
-*Undisputed usage: One is rude if one shows no respect for one's hosts.
-*Undisputed usage: It is rude not to show respect for hosts.
-Also, it would be best not to use "Common sense" as an argument, as common sense has been proven to be a logical fallacy. [http://corkskeptics.org/2011/05/03/the-common-sense-fallacy/][http://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/ENGL1311/fallacies.htm][http://learn.lexiconic.net/fallacies/][http://www.cracked.com/article_17142_5-ways-common-sense-lies-to-you-everyday.html] [[Special:Contributions/69.247.6.120|69.247.6.120]] 01:11, February 14, 2014 (UTC)
-:What you just quoted is just confirming what I said, that the singular they is of disputed usage and therefore improper in an encyclopedic context. And our standards are encyclopedic, not informal. As interesting as the prescriptive vs descriptive grammar debate may be (and I'm not being sarcastic here, I really do find it interesting), it ultimately has nothing to do with us. We're not typing in a hurry, an encyclopedia isn't instant messaging nor spoken conversation. If a specific passage cannot simply switch they for one without being awkward, then we can simply rewrite the passage as a whole. We have all the time in the world, there's no need to strain formality for the sake of expedience in our articles, and it's quite ironic to embrace an informal usage and unencyclopedic language in a project specifically designed to enforce the MoS and remove informality. {{User:Limmiegirl/Personal_page_index/Sigdata}} 12:54, February 15, 2014 (UTC)
-::In most cases, I would never have the audacity to argue such a point. For me, it seems as if the singular "they" fills a unique position in that the English language does not account for properly. If it comes down to it, then rewriting our articles would be the best goal. But keep in mind that there are always exceptions, and Wikipedia certainly does not dictate modern/archaic conventions. But as it is disputed, its wide-acceptance does become null in a professional sense, so I will digress from that point. [[Special:Contributions/69.247.6.120|69.247.6.120]] 13:01, February 15, 2014 (UTC)
-===New Project===
-How are people feeling about creating a new project vs. adding it to the manual of style project? Alternatively, we can create weekly forums that include a list of articles and a progress table. This would be easier than tacking on hundreds or articles to one progress table every week. [[User:69.l25|69.l25]] ([[User talk:69.l25|talk]]) 23:56, February 13, 2014 (UTC)
-:A project would be the best approach to this. --[[User:-bleep196-|-bleep196-]] ([[User talk:-bleep196-|talk]]) 01:47, February 15, 2014 (UTC)
-===Final Guidelines==
-No concerns remaining. I'm ready to support the project as-is. {{User:Limmiegirl/Personal_page_index/Sigdata}} 20:50, February 22, 2014 (UTC)