The Great Machine:Zocalo

From The Great Machine

Jump to: navigation, search
STOP! Read the following before you post for the first time:

On The Great Machine, Zocalo is a page where the members may gather to discuss various issues concerning the policies and operation of the wiki. It is not a place for idle conversation or off-topic discussion that doesn't directly concern The Great Machine. If you want to have off-topic discussions please visit the Firstones Forums.

The following types of questions do not belong in The Great Machine's Zocalo:

  • Newcomers' questions. Please take the time to read the help pages before posting questions.
  • Facts and canonical questions. Questions regarding specific facts of the Babylon 5 universe should be brought up on their individual page. A discussion of canonical vs fandom material is included below.
  • Bug reports should be forwarded to one of the administrators.
  • Issues concerning specific articles should be addressed on that article's discussion page.

After a period of time, inactive discussions without any long-term value will be deleted from this page. A discussion that may be of use in the future for reference purposes may be moved to a different section, or added to the Zocalo archive.

Please remember to sign and date your posts by typing four tildes ("~~~~"), or clicking the signature icon in the edit toolbar.

Start a new discussion

Contents

[edit] Important ongoing discussions:

[edit] Other important references:

[edit] Source References

In situations where there is question about source of data it makes sense to place this on the discussion page preemptively. Generally any non-canon material should be noted and sorced. If the source comes from an episode, lurkers, or JMS don't bother with direct reference unless asked for. This also allows us to keep source materia (beyond non-canon and similar tags) off the actually article page. Any comments on this policy? --Randomchaos 21:35, 17 Apr 2005 (CDT)

[edit] Ship Names and Classes

For the love of Droshalla, people, please, *please* when creating ship class links or completely new articles, please use the following format:
Omega Destroyer = "Omega Class"
Hyperion = "Hyperion Class"
Specific Hyperion ship = (for example) "EAS Hyperion"

Right now, we have this mix n' match of styles, like "<class> (ship)" or just "<class>", which can cause conflict later with things like the G'Quan class and the man who it is named after. Parentheses in links suck, so let us not use them. I'm going to run through at some point and resolve the issue as it is and hopefully prevent it from being a major hassle before it becomes to large, however if someone wants to beat me to it, feel free.

Sanfam 00:27, 19 Apr 2005 (CDT)

A suggestion for ship names: the first time it is mentioned in an article, it gets called "EAS Whatever" and is linked. After that, it is italicized as Whatever without the EAS. All the EAS's and links get eye-tiring after a while, and the method I have outlined is how history books treat ships. --Grumbler 01:06, 2 Jul 2005 (CDT)

Oh, the timing of your edits :D This is all fine, as long as we make sure the links are in the format of [[EAS Whatever|Whatever]], thus linking to the same page while saving the needless EASness. Brownie points++ Sanfam 01:18, 2 Jul 2005 (CDT)
We need a templating system. See the ParserFunctions stuff that Joe Beaudoin Jr. is starting to implement. --Random Chaos 20:01, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

[edit] What sources are canon?

Really...we need to break down what sources are canon and what sources are not, or at least create a list of "preferred" sources and standardized methodsof listing and/or identifying them.

To me, the TV series and only the TV series is canon. Everything else is to be taken with a grain of salt. Books, RPG supplements, B5W sourcebooks, etc., etc. are, shall we say, deuterocanonical. :-) --Patton1138 01:40, 5 Aug 2005 (CDT)
Not an acceptable answer in this wiki, as JMS himself credits Crusade, all the B5 comix, and three book trillogies as canon. Ya don't go up against the series creator on this. You'll lose. StarChild 02:06 2005 Aug 05 (CDT)
My understanding is that the books, while not perfectly canonical, are based entirely on outlines developed by JMS. For the purposes of this wiki, they should be considered Canon. RPG supplements are definately not canon unless referenced by JMS. I have read that some of the RPG supplements were developed in direct opposition to what JMS wanted in them. Sourcebooks are an unknown quantity. --Random Chaos 20:01, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

[edit] Open Letters

[edit] An Open Letter to Harlan Ellison

as discussed earlier in the Mars article, interest has been expressed in contacting Harlan Ellison regarding the Backstory for Mars in the B5 Universe. Being as he was the conceptual consultant (I believe) for the series run, it seems like he'd be the perfect man to ask. So, What I am proposing is that we, the wiki as a whole, write up a letter detailing exactly what it is we wish to learn and perhaps how it could be gone about. It seems rather appropriate, as the wiki is not made up of any one person. Once it has been deemed complete by enough of the people here, it would be printed and mailed off to Mr. Ellison, hopefully with a response as a possibility. Thoughts on this?


Lets run with it! Since I'm the one who suggested which authors to tap, I think starting with Ellison would be a great idea. But, rather than just commentary, I'd attempt to employ him as a focal point for contact with some of the other authors as well. Looking at his bibliography (very recently), Ellison didn't actually write about Mars in his books, but in his role as "Conceptual Consultant," he focused ideas and stories from a number of classic authors spanning a period from the late '40s to the mid-'80s, and distilled them into a coherent backdrop for B5. Y'see: rather than competing, each of those classic authors added something to an erstaz "common body of knowledge" about Mars. And they all seemed to play off of each other whenever the topic was broached, whether in print or in early TV. grab some of the early stuff (Wells, Bradbury, Dick, Farmer, Sturgeon, Clarke, et. al.), and see if you don't see the Mars of B5 poking through...  :) -- StarChild 20050718 03:48am (CDT) GMT-6
Well, it's there for the editing ;) My high-quality (HAH!) writing is probably not best suited for such a task...so I'm hoping maybe someone with genuine skill can stumble into it... As for the intent of the letter, well...It's up to whoever writes and edits it ;) In all honesty, I'd be more than satisfied with any response (Even a "BAH! Go away you crazy punk kids!"). As long as it eventually happens. I'm hoping this is coherent enough. I'm pretty tired, so...away! Sanfam 04:20, 18 Jul 2005 (CDT)

[edit] An Open Letter to Arthur C. Clarke

Same as above, but perhaps for a slightly less "official" perspective on our favorite red planet. Once deemed finished, it would be printed and mailed off to the proper address.

[edit] Episode pages

I believe we need a slight reformat of the episode pages. Right now, there seems to be a great deal of redundancy between the "Synopsis" and "Main Plot" sections, and the "Backstory" section is practically never used. I suggest leaving only the preview, and then a reasonably detailed run-down of the episode's events in the "Main Plot" (or "Synopsis," whichever is chosen to remain) section, naturally under a spoiler tag. -- MikhailM

Perhaps, but the sections actually serve a multiplicity of purposes:
The synopsis is usually a detailed editorial on the episode,
The Main Plot, served by bullet-statements provides the meat of the episode,
While the backstory, when used, should actually detail the B-plot of each episode.
The reason they haven't been used yet, is that the project is still much in its infancy and hasn't yet been filled in. Note the progression: Format laid, shells filled-in, notes and see-also's added, then synopses, and finally main plots and backstories culled from the previous work. Like the series, its a layered work in progress. (However, adding in the cast info was/is a great touch!) StarChild 20:04 2005/08/04 CDT

[edit] Revamp of the main page and site policy on spoilers

I'm starting to think that perhaps we should attempt to reduce or remove the spoiler-free portions of the site.

Along with this, I am attempting to slim down the in-text spoiler identifier in the hope of making them far less obtrusive. Right now, they painfully disrupt the flow of an article, sticking out like a sore thumb. I'm not quite sure where I should start, but I might go so far as to make a 5px high bar of less contrast.

In my opinion, anybody reading this is quite likely to know B5 in some way, and any attempt to not be spoiled could be handled just fine without our interference. Now maybe instead of removing spoiler-free sections we could simply refine them, but it presents a problem of offering up too much duplicate information. We're trying to distill five years of B5, one half a season of crusade, and four movies into something that can be navigated by someone who might not have seen all.

I really don't know how we should proceed. Well, maybe I do, but only vaguely. Enter the Sandbox

I have to agree. Its a forgone assumption that most of the users of this Wiki know B5 on some level; most have probably watched the series to completion already. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. 22:21, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

[edit] New Sources found

Recently, an anonymous source provided us with some rather interesting behind-the-scenes material. The document in question covers the major races of the non-aligned worlds, with details on their physiology, culture, and such. Considering that this has been stated to be JMS-sourced, should we take it as canon until otherwise contradicted? --Sanfam 01:42, 3 Jun 2006 (CDT)

Is there a way to confirm any linkage between JMS and the document? If your source is anonymous, do you know that you can trust him/her? How can we verify the document's veracity? StarChild 02:00:24 CDT, 23 JUN 2006

Who all are here now? Who's active? What are work area preferences?

[edit] How should we handle information from non-canon sources?

This seems to be a growing issue. While the show's knowlege base is vast, it seems like we're almost trapping ourselves into a corner by keeping out the information found in the B5 RPG. At the same time, we've got a desire to stay true to the show.

Is there any way to take advantage of the nature of the wiki and get the best of both worlds? Could we comprehensively cover both canon and fanon in the same place, or is this pushing the limits of safe division of content? I think we need to discuss this and come to some form of conclusion.

To start, iI'll state my (Sanfam's) case. I don't quite see anything horrible about the new content coming into the wiki. In fact, I rather like the potential for a wide body of information to be incorporated. It would help differentiate us from canon-exclusive sources like the Lurker's Guide, or primarily-fanon sources like B5Tech while remaining accurate enough to use for regular reference. The key would be proper notation of categories. If we can successfully find a way to divide the content of the site up between the different sources, we might have a workable solution. But if not, It just may be too risky to keep conflicting content on the same source. That's my take. Sanfam 20:10, 27 Feb 2007 (CST)

Personally, I don't see the problem with a simple (f) and (c) system, or something of a similar type. Using Fanon sources can help add a personalised feel to a site, and is useful for making things more interesting and filling in gaps. As Sanfam did say to me, another wiki may be possible, but the extra levels of maintenance could prove difficult.

Phrathum 13:37, 28 Feb 2007 (CST)

As a hard-line purist, I'll have to vote against including any kind of fanon, for a few reasons:

  1. I see the Great Machine as the only complete and correct repository of B5 facts. Even though I'd suggest we're currently more extensive, useful and interesting than Wikipedia's section on B5, the JMS Universe is so detailed and intricate that we've got plenty of canon to keep us busy for ages. We should focus on getting the task at hand right, before we start more work for ourselves.
  2. The B5 Universe is neat, consistent and unique. It's come from the mind of a single person, and all the major conflicts have been resolved. So the questions become:
    1. What would we allow as fanon?
    2. How can we ever resolve fanon conflicts;
    3. How would we decide between fanon, fanfic, and random chaos (no offence!)?
  3. The Lurkers' Guide fills a different niche than the Great Machine. It focuses on episodes in real time up to and including each episode; for example, Into the Fire only includes info prior to the departure of the First Ones, and speculation about the future. We can include everything related to the topic in specific articles.
  4. Along with full character biographies, the Great Machine includes definitions of words, descriptions of Races, Ships, Themes, and History spanning thousands of years. No other B5 site does this as well as we do.
  5. As a community, we have enough trouble citing our sources as it is, when we're sticking to strictly canon material. I don't think the average contributor could cope with having to cite (c) or (f) for every sentence they type.
  6. IMHO, I don't think we need to "fill any gaps" or "add a personalised feel" to make the canon more interesting. I can't see how we're backing ourselves into a corner either - there are potentially millions of B5 fans out there who would be interested in this site, when it's more complete. By adding fanon, the risk is too high that we'll change the Great Machine from something great to a self-contradictory shemozzle which is of interest to only a handful of aficionados.

Personally, I'm not at all interested in fanon, even though the B5 RPG might be fantastic, and Into the Fire Simulator back-stories are impressive. I realise this colours my judgement, but I want a website where I can quickly find out exactly who Londo's wives were, and what their personal histories were. Likewise I want to know which Ships were used by the Minbari in the show, not what some imaginative fan or company has come up with. I want accuracy, clarity and completeness, and I don't want to be confused by non-canon information, as recent events prove can happen too easily. Apologies for the length of my AU$0.02 :)

Waylander 00:28, 1 Mar 2007 (CST)

So I think I've come to a decision on the matter!

After some pondering of the ups and downs of the various possibilities, I realized that the best way to make this work is to preserve the canon-exclusivity of The Great Machine while giving a place for editors to create an unlimited range of non-canon information. That is, I am weighing the potential for creating a second, partially connected wiki that can be used for any and all non-canon content. This would allow us to include sources such as B5Tech and any other outside fiction.

Sanfam 09:24, 6 Mar 2007 (CST)

[edit] Spoilers

Hello all. I am fairly new to this wiki but I would like to suggest that we change the spoiler policy for The Great Machine. I am part of the Battlestar Galactica and Memory Alpha wikis and it is their policy to let the reader beware!

This policy is in place due to the fact that almost any article can contain spoilers. Editors putting spoiler warnings in articles does not solve the problem of people avoiding information which may spoil storylines for them. This is due to the fact that most computer monitors are large enough that when the article does come up on screen, the reader can see not just the spoiler but the entire article.

I suggest that we put a message on the Main Page warning visitors that all articles may contain spoilers. What does everyone think of this topic? Nwobkwr 13:41, 26 Aug 2005 (CDT)

The problem is that with a show such as B5 (also BSG in this sense), spoiler warnings do help out here and there. Many times, someone may have only watched up to a certain point, or may have not read the books and may not want to be spoiled on that topic. The spoiler warnings serve the purpose of letting the reader know (for sure) where/what the material they are looking at comes from. And while yes, they might accidentially see something, they could still use their own judgement here and skip over that part. Sanfam 15:39, 26 Aug 2005 (CDT)
In hindsight, I'm thinking that this was, perhaps, a bad decision on my part. I agree with the original poster and would like to suggest hammering down an official policy on this matter. Sanfam 22:28, 31 Mar 2006 (CST)
We had this problem on BSG Wiki. As the primary breaucrat at that wiki I managed to work out a a spoiler policy which benefited all the users. However, with B5, we have a unique problem in that all the episodes have already aired (whereas with BSG, it is still airing and new information is being released all the time that may be considered spoilerific). Despite this, I believe that some of that policy could easily be implemented here. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. 22:16, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
I actually have been discussing a revamped spoiler policy to be implemented in the near future. In short, it would involve removing spoilers warnings regarding Babylon 5 (the Series), as the majority of viewers I've questions seemed to have complete (or near complete) exposure to the show, and stated that these spoiler warnings did nothing to benefit them. Not everyone, however, has access to the books, short stories, comics, or RPG sourcebooks. The new policy would have proper spoiler warnings for these less accessible/lesser known mediums (possibly including Crusade, due to its short run). But I must vanish. Ponder what has been written! --Sanfam 17:35, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
I don't see a purpose to the spoiler policy. If someone is looking at an entry, they want to know more than the show tells. Spoilers only usually show the first few spoilerings, and most pages have such spoilers. If entries are written in chronological order, you just read from the top down, and know that the further you go will spoiler more and more. As Joe said, B5 is finished (except for he occasional movie). We do have the spoiler-free overview for people that haven't seen anything before. --Random Chaos 20:01, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

---

I don't know about everyone else, but I find the spoiler warnings very detracting, and tend to interfere with the prose of an article. I would venture to say that we adopt a standard policy that warns users that "spoilers to new viewers are to be expected", thus removing the need for the spoiler message boxes. This way, we can clean up the writing, making the articles more coherent. Thoughts? -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. 12:41, 8 July 2007 (CDT)

I concur. Granted, we may want to be a bit more careful with some of the underpinning "secrets" of the show that don't get revealed until the end, but if you're watching the very first episode, basically EVERYTHING is a spoiler and the spoiler warnings get a bit ridiculous. --Steelviper 07:33, 10 July 2007 (CDT)
I'm very cool with this. It's been almost ten years, everyone. Buy or rent the DVDs, for crying out loud. Spoilers should be expected for an aired program, but specific episode pages (like War Without End, Endgame, and Sleeping in Light) should get a special "No, really, you will ruin the whole series by reading this" badge. --Spencerian 10:13, 12 July 2007 (CDT)
Right, I doubt there'd be an issue with implementing something like that. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. 20:24, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

Ok, the spoiler policy is up. Feel free to discuss any corrections or additions that may be needed. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. 01:19, 13 July 2007 (CDT)

[edit] Episode guides

Did we want to go with a Lurker's like format for the episode guides, or come up with something on our own?

For now, I've implemented the {{Episode Data}} infobox and did some adjusting to the Babylon 5: The Gathering page. Thoughts? Suggestions? -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. 17:57, 13 July 2007 (CDT)

[edit] Quotes on bio pages

Having edited Battlestar Wiki, Wikipedia, and Memory-Alpha, I find the massive amount of quotes on biography pages is just a bit jarring to me. For instance, the article on Andrei Ivanov has more content in the form of quotes than actual biographical content. Frankly, I much prefer that we stick to a strong biographical format, without the need to bog down pages with quotes.

Therefore, I suggest that we just move a bulk of these quotes from the bio pages to the episodes, creating a "Noteworthy quotes" section in the episode guide. Thoughts? -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. 23:25, 5 October 2007 (CDT)

Retrieved from "http://tgm.firstones.com/wiki/The_Great_Machine:Zocalo"
firstones