Jun. 17, 2021 6:05 AM
Foreward
First off, Id like to apologize for the strange font here. I wrote this in Google Docs to save progress as I write. Apologies if this is not the right subforum — this part of the WBO typically isnt as active when it comes to animanga content, so Im not sure if Im doing something wrong
Okay, some background: Please note that this is regarding animanga info. The wiki does an exceptional job with Bey parts and toys, no doubt. I only want to suggest some improvements on the animanga aspects.
I have edited on the Beyblade wiki awhile back, having around 2k edits on an account of the same name. Some experience with wiki clean-ups here and there, and editing on the Beyblade wiki itself, I noticed some things Ive been meaning to talk about for away. Although I do not edit much anymore, I am still very much a reader of the wiki. As such, I want to propose some changes/suggestions as to make the wiki more professional-looking and nicer to read, if that is not too much of a hassle. I am proposing changes because I dont see a lot of guidelines for the animanga content, and I resonated with some viewers’ feelings when they said the wiki is a mess at times
Proposal One: Make a standard for image captions
As expected, the image captioning function serves to detail the image for the viewer. It provides context and an explanation for readers. While this is certainly a helpful feature, a couple users and I noticed how it can be really unprofessional in some parts. There seems to be no standard and instruction on how to use them for the Beyblade wiki, and thus results in weird, random captions
For example, on Phi’s gallery page:
This is just one example of odd captioning. In other instances, a user noticed a caption that said something odd like “Aiga’s beautiful eyes” and usage of internet/slang words such as “glomp”
While some of the captions are quite professional and straightforward on the wiki, the lack of a standard leaves space for less professional uses such as informal words and personal opinions. And in extension, has a less strict guide on how the image can be captioned -- the captions can range from describing the scene to quoting a character. Sometimes there are no captions at all!
There are three ideas I have:
No animanga captions unless it describes a special move, Beyblade, etc.
I couldn’t quite word this one, but here I go: The Beyblade wiki obviously has many images from the anime. And many of those images are quite mundane, such as characters hugging or smiling or looking at something. Those do not need a caption, simply put
Images that SHOULD have a caption should be something like a picture of a special move or Beyblade, for example. And that caption should be the name of those said things that are depicted in the image
We do not need to see a description of a character smiling. What is helpful, on the other hand, is a good description of what special move is in the picture
Only caption non-animanga official sources
Images that source from the anime/manga do not deserve a caption. However, for official and external material that is added to galleries, I suppose they can have a caption. This can be helpful, as not everyone views Twitter or reads interviews to get exclusive information. Thus, an image of character sketches with “Sketches of [character] by [artist]” as a caption can be helpful in some cases, especially when explaining the context
This option would save time from captioning animanga images
Caption screenshots with its source
The images -- especially animanga screenshots -- should all be consistent in their captions. This is one problem I mentioned earlier: The captions are all over the place, from quoting the character to describing a character’s look, etc.
The captions could possibly follow a sourcing format, such as listing the name of the series, season, and then episode number. For example, this is a possible caption for a Burst image: “Burst: Evolution Ep. 10.” I am highly in favor of this option because it builds a consistent format and keeps stuff in order, so that people can refer to episodes as needed (instead of asking a pal, “what episode is this?”
In the end, there are many solutions to this. All that matters in the end is that we find a way to write professional, consistent captions
Proposal Two: Only link one instance of a page
Most other wikis (including Wikipedia) link each page in only one instance. This means that if something new comes up, it should be linked once and thats it. All repeated mentions should be not linked. For example, if Shu’s page is already linked, do add another one! This gives a professional look and makes the page more organized. For example, look at the image below. The blue text indicates a link
Valt is linked multiple times, which can be unprofessional and distracting. His page should only link him once the first time around, and every other links should be removed. Without mandating only one link each instance, this opens up space for edit farming. People would be editing every page to add small links here and there, and this leads to little contribution to the wiki
Proposal Three: Make a standard for trivia
I will be completely honest: I do not enjoy the current state of the wiki’s trivia sections. Many of them have really small trivia, speculation, or needless ones that do not need to be noted. Many of them are also lacking a citation next to them
Take a look at the image below and I will explain why some of them are not considered “good” trivia
The first trivia has speculation in it. Unless straightforwardly said by official sources, we should not let ordinary wiki editors/audience to connect things to a character
The second trivia is a part of the Burst universe, which many of us already know. At this point, many Burst viewers know how Bey names are similar to its Blader. That trivia should be removed because it is a plot point, not an ominous fact barely anyone knows
The third trivia is what other wikis call “numbering trivia.” It is unneeded because it causes unnecessary stress -- admit it, we all hate numbering stuff off, especially when more would be added later on and we are forced to changed the info later on. Additionally, from experience, readers are annoyed because numbering trivia is vague. For example, “first” could mean anything: First character in-universe? First character in chronological episode order? It is so vague, people hate it
One exception is if the numbering trivia is stated in-universe — for example, the anime says that X is the first character to ever do Y. The problem isnt numbering trivia itself, its just that theyre often from reader inferences and thus, could be inaccurate
Finally, the last three trivia are comparison trivia. Most of us know by now that the Beyblade series are not connected to each other in any way. To compare x to y is unneeded, as it gives the reader an impression that there is inspiration behind the scenes. Believe me, Ive seen people being misled into thinking series share the same universes or that character A is based on character B. Its just unneeded
I have a short guideline (not solid/complete!) on what trivia sections could possibly be like:
Good trivia (often with citations/proof):
* Statements from official material, such as Hiro Morita’s Twitter page or bonus manga pages
* Minor fun facts from the anime, that do not belong in personality sections (ex. “X likes pineapple pizza”)
Bad trivia
* Speculation and theories (Ex. “Red Eye is possibly based on a character from the anime called X)
* Comparisons (Ex. “Valt is similar to Gingka because they are protagonists”)
* Numbering trivia, UNLESS official materials outright say something crucial (Ex, “X is the first villain in Beyblade.”)
* Voice actor listings (Ex. “X shares the same VA as y”)
* Coincidences to other works, unless proven to be intentional
* General unneeded stuff, such as plot points made obvious to viewers
Conclusion
Yep, Im aware that cleaning up the wiki is a hecking pain. It takes effort and energy to make things nice. But I suppose everything comes with a price
Im only here today to suggest these changes because I love Beyblade. And I think its time to reach out and inquire if the wiki could be touched up. Whereas I could always edit myself, I wanted to suggest these changes as to not do huge cleanups without warning and to connect others. Awhile back, a staff member noted that there was a disconnect between the wiki and the WBO — which is true, since some users and I find that the information is messy and displayed unprofessionally. And thus it creates an odd vibe where we dont wanna touch the wiki, eek
I believe that, with a little effort, the wiki can be touched-up one step at a time. Everyone can pitch in and contribute to the cleanups, and the wiki would ultimately be a nicer place to get animanga info at. It might take awhile, but what matters most is that it happens
My final disclaimer: Im just glad if anyone reads this! And Im also aware that not every wiki runs the same and things might actually turn out well for one wiki, whereas it doesnt for another. These are just suggestions based off the thoughts of a couple users and I
First off, Id like to apologize for the strange font here. I wrote this in Google Docs to save progress as I write. Apologies if this is not the right subforum — this part of the WBO typically isnt as active when it comes to animanga content, so Im not sure if Im doing something wrong
Okay, some background: Please note that this is regarding animanga info. The wiki does an exceptional job with Bey parts and toys, no doubt. I only want to suggest some improvements on the animanga aspects.
I have edited on the Beyblade wiki awhile back, having around 2k edits on an account of the same name. Some experience with wiki clean-ups here and there, and editing on the Beyblade wiki itself, I noticed some things Ive been meaning to talk about for away. Although I do not edit much anymore, I am still very much a reader of the wiki. As such, I want to propose some changes/suggestions as to make the wiki more professional-looking and nicer to read, if that is not too much of a hassle. I am proposing changes because I dont see a lot of guidelines for the animanga content, and I resonated with some viewers’ feelings when they said the wiki is a mess at times
Proposal One: Make a standard for image captions
Spoiler (Click to View)
As expected, the image captioning function serves to detail the image for the viewer. It provides context and an explanation for readers. While this is certainly a helpful feature, a couple users and I noticed how it can be really unprofessional in some parts. There seems to be no standard and instruction on how to use them for the Beyblade wiki, and thus results in weird, random captions
For example, on Phi’s gallery page:
Spoiler (Click to View)
This is just one example of odd captioning. In other instances, a user noticed a caption that said something odd like “Aiga’s beautiful eyes” and usage of internet/slang words such as “glomp”
While some of the captions are quite professional and straightforward on the wiki, the lack of a standard leaves space for less professional uses such as informal words and personal opinions. And in extension, has a less strict guide on how the image can be captioned -- the captions can range from describing the scene to quoting a character. Sometimes there are no captions at all!
There are three ideas I have:
No animanga captions unless it describes a special move, Beyblade, etc.
I couldn’t quite word this one, but here I go: The Beyblade wiki obviously has many images from the anime. And many of those images are quite mundane, such as characters hugging or smiling or looking at something. Those do not need a caption, simply put
Images that SHOULD have a caption should be something like a picture of a special move or Beyblade, for example. And that caption should be the name of those said things that are depicted in the image
We do not need to see a description of a character smiling. What is helpful, on the other hand, is a good description of what special move is in the picture
Only caption non-animanga official sources
Images that source from the anime/manga do not deserve a caption. However, for official and external material that is added to galleries, I suppose they can have a caption. This can be helpful, as not everyone views Twitter or reads interviews to get exclusive information. Thus, an image of character sketches with “Sketches of [character] by [artist]” as a caption can be helpful in some cases, especially when explaining the context
This option would save time from captioning animanga images
Caption screenshots with its source
The images -- especially animanga screenshots -- should all be consistent in their captions. This is one problem I mentioned earlier: The captions are all over the place, from quoting the character to describing a character’s look, etc.
The captions could possibly follow a sourcing format, such as listing the name of the series, season, and then episode number. For example, this is a possible caption for a Burst image: “Burst: Evolution Ep. 10.” I am highly in favor of this option because it builds a consistent format and keeps stuff in order, so that people can refer to episodes as needed (instead of asking a pal, “what episode is this?”
In the end, there are many solutions to this. All that matters in the end is that we find a way to write professional, consistent captions
Proposal Two: Only link one instance of a page
Spoiler (Click to View)
Most other wikis (including Wikipedia) link each page in only one instance. This means that if something new comes up, it should be linked once and thats it. All repeated mentions should be not linked. For example, if Shu’s page is already linked, do add another one! This gives a professional look and makes the page more organized. For example, look at the image below. The blue text indicates a link
Spoiler (Click to View)
Valt is linked multiple times, which can be unprofessional and distracting. His page should only link him once the first time around, and every other links should be removed. Without mandating only one link each instance, this opens up space for edit farming. People would be editing every page to add small links here and there, and this leads to little contribution to the wiki
Proposal Three: Make a standard for trivia
Spoiler (Click to View)
I will be completely honest: I do not enjoy the current state of the wiki’s trivia sections. Many of them have really small trivia, speculation, or needless ones that do not need to be noted. Many of them are also lacking a citation next to them
Take a look at the image below and I will explain why some of them are not considered “good” trivia
Spoiler (Click to View)
The first trivia has speculation in it. Unless straightforwardly said by official sources, we should not let ordinary wiki editors/audience to connect things to a character
The second trivia is a part of the Burst universe, which many of us already know. At this point, many Burst viewers know how Bey names are similar to its Blader. That trivia should be removed because it is a plot point, not an ominous fact barely anyone knows
The third trivia is what other wikis call “numbering trivia.” It is unneeded because it causes unnecessary stress -- admit it, we all hate numbering stuff off, especially when more would be added later on and we are forced to changed the info later on. Additionally, from experience, readers are annoyed because numbering trivia is vague. For example, “first” could mean anything: First character in-universe? First character in chronological episode order? It is so vague, people hate it
One exception is if the numbering trivia is stated in-universe — for example, the anime says that X is the first character to ever do Y. The problem isnt numbering trivia itself, its just that theyre often from reader inferences and thus, could be inaccurate
Finally, the last three trivia are comparison trivia. Most of us know by now that the Beyblade series are not connected to each other in any way. To compare x to y is unneeded, as it gives the reader an impression that there is inspiration behind the scenes. Believe me, Ive seen people being misled into thinking series share the same universes or that character A is based on character B. Its just unneeded
I have a short guideline (not solid/complete!) on what trivia sections could possibly be like:
Good trivia (often with citations/proof):
* Statements from official material, such as Hiro Morita’s Twitter page or bonus manga pages
* Minor fun facts from the anime, that do not belong in personality sections (ex. “X likes pineapple pizza”)
Bad trivia
* Speculation and theories (Ex. “Red Eye is possibly based on a character from the anime called X)
* Comparisons (Ex. “Valt is similar to Gingka because they are protagonists”)
* Numbering trivia, UNLESS official materials outright say something crucial (Ex, “X is the first villain in Beyblade.”)
* Voice actor listings (Ex. “X shares the same VA as y”)
* Coincidences to other works, unless proven to be intentional
* General unneeded stuff, such as plot points made obvious to viewers
Conclusion
Yep, Im aware that cleaning up the wiki is a hecking pain. It takes effort and energy to make things nice. But I suppose everything comes with a price
Im only here today to suggest these changes because I love Beyblade. And I think its time to reach out and inquire if the wiki could be touched up. Whereas I could always edit myself, I wanted to suggest these changes as to not do huge cleanups without warning and to connect others. Awhile back, a staff member noted that there was a disconnect between the wiki and the WBO — which is true, since some users and I find that the information is messy and displayed unprofessionally. And thus it creates an odd vibe where we dont wanna touch the wiki, eek
I believe that, with a little effort, the wiki can be touched-up one step at a time. Everyone can pitch in and contribute to the cleanups, and the wiki would ultimately be a nicer place to get animanga info at. It might take awhile, but what matters most is that it happens
My final disclaimer: Im just glad if anyone reads this! And Im also aware that not every wiki runs the same and things might actually turn out well for one wiki, whereas it doesnt for another. These are just suggestions based off the thoughts of a couple users and I