Inkipedia:Ink Pump/Archives/2024-12-10

From Inkipedia, the Splatoon wiki
This page is an archive.
It contains older discussions that are no longer ongoing. If you wish to discuss one of the topics here, please bring it up on the current discussion page.

Retiring wall of fame

Should Inkipedia:Wall of Fame be retired? It has been 4 years since someone was inducted, and no nominations have been made during that time.

If retired, the wall would remain, but it would be made clear that nominations are no longer allowed, and the page would be locked to prevent editing.

It's possible that the lack of nominations is caused by the page not being linked anywhere, so a possible alternative course of action would be editing policy pages to link to the wall of fame process. Heddy (talk) 08:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, there are a lot of current editors that deserve to be in the Wall of Fame as much as the few ones that are already there.
I think that it should either be maintained and updated or entirely removed, but leaving it like that would be a bit unfair for other editors that deserve it as well.
Alternatively, I think (altrough it may be just my perception) that a Request for Rights is not suited for nominating someone to the Wall of Fame.
Requests for Rights are requests that have a dedicated page and that are generally used for voting things that affect the wiki somehow, while adding someone to the Wall of Fame doesn't really affect the wiki in any way and that's why I think creating a dedicated page for such request may seem a bit redundant or unnecessary. I personally think if maintained, voting should take place on the Wall of Fame's subpages or even at the bottom of the page and then archived when finished.
That's just my perspective tho. It's moon [Talk!] 10:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Knew this would get pushed here before I was ready eventually. I swing the opposite, I'd actually prefer to see it removed if not conceptually retired. I fundamentally disagree with the purpose of a board like this, truthfully. I think all four or five members on there have been great, to preface—This isn't a dig on them by any means. I think it can cause issues with morale and how edits should be respected across the board. We have seen hundreds to thousands of editors come and go, and had quite some notable ones leave prior. They are noticably not on this Wall of Fame. Should we try and go back and add users to the list, we them have to play what ultimately leaves a bad taste in my mouth of "who's contributions stick out more than others", which could boil down to extremely subjective criteria like popularity, where edits were made, general online presence, or just that being staff inherently makes you WoF; otherwise, the prime takeaway from "grading" contribution to the community for WoF is that it implies that some edits are better than others (as they are being memorialized through their creator) or worse, that some editors are better than others. This is obviously not the case but I doubt that will stop people from feeling like it is. This functionally IS a quality analysis, as the community must look at the nominee's edit history and say "what makes this stick out over other edits to be considered noteworthy and significant?" which seems petty and pretentious. What if they're not nominated to be on the board when they decide to retire after 4, 5, 7 years of writing on the site? Wouldn't you be kinda peeved by that? What about if a request to be added to the WoF fails despite some obvious merits still being present? I don't want people leaving an extensive time on Inkipedia feeling like their edits mattered or were valued less than people who are on the WoF because they are NOT on the WoF. This also goes for smalltime contributors, those that might only make ten spelling tweaks and never touch the site again: I think those edits are just as valid as a WoF editors' changes and shouldn't be celebrated any differently. Looking away from the past and towards the future, it poses the forever challenge of people only making edits to be p o p u l a r in an attempt to be on the Wall of Fame board. It also increases the staff workload, managing another time based countdown with page archival systems and having to manually update some pages each time. My solution? If you like what someone is doing or recently done, tell them directly. I think it'd brighten a lot of folks' day to open a talk page notification to see a compliment on their work, and it's far more personalized and meaningful than a bulletpoint on a page. Userboxes might be fun to mess around with too, if you're feeling like going the distance. I want Inkipedia to support and respect all edits of all sizes, of all quanities, of all name spaces, with care and pride that it's towards a great cause, and I simply think that the Wall of Fame board can do nothing but detract from that. Trig - 12:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
@Trig Jegman: Just to clarify, when you say you prefer removal over retirement, that means you want the WoF page to be deleted entirely?
I can agree with deleting the page, though I would want to copy the current WoF induction reasons to the respective user talk pages, so that the compliments and recognition these users received is not totally lost. Heddy (talk) 20:57, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Fully nuke the thing is preferred, or if that doesn't fly, making it abundantly clear that its no longer a thing or supported and is strictly there for archival purposes if that does not work. I think copying content to user talk pages is more than appropriate to preserve support. Trig - 21:34, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I see no opposition, and per the consensus policy no formal proposal is needed if consensus is reached on minor issues, so I have deleted the Wall of Fame process for being unused and unnecessary. I have preserved the content by copying it to the respective user talk pages of the four inducted users. Heddy (talk) 07:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi! Uhh is it possible for me to make posts if it is pleas tell me how thank you! Kraken1 (talk) 00:29, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
What exactly do you mean? Anyone is free to post on the Ink Pump, use the "add topic" button on the top of the page. We allow wiki-related discussion posts, but not general posts like one might do on social media. Yoshifan52 (talk) 00:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Nvm moon helped me Kraken1 (talk) 02:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Nvm moon helped Kraken1 (talk) 02:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Lyrics table format and templates

There are editors and administrators suggesting me to bring the issues of song lyrics tables to here (Ink Pump) for a site-wide discussion.

This is a follow-up issue of this archived discussion.

When I tried to edit articles of Splatoon songs, I initially didn't notice a site-wide discussion took place (the one linked above), and there has been a plan to migrate the "Lyrics" sections of the song articles into table formats.

As the rework of the lyrics into tables had been done "behind the scenes", when I try to submit my improvements/edits, I often run into conflicts - I mean, debates and duplicated efforts. Most of the debates happened in Talk:Three Wishes, which somehow became uncivil that I don't want to bring up again.

Anyway, here are my things I wish to discuss regarding the lyric tables:

1. The Template:Inline singer lyrics. As there would be a lot of icons presented as singers, especially for a song like Three Wishes. Making a template is the first thing I did before putting the singer icons into articles.

It has a simple syntax to call: {{Inline singer lyrics|Shuraherani|S3 Callie|S3 Marie}} (Callie/Marie:) Shuraherani (see the template page for detailed usage)

But I've got disagreements on how the character icons should be presented. The goal of the template is to separate content from presentation when editing the lyric transcriptions, not to enforce a particular presentation for singer icons. (I wish in the long term, such presentations can be tweaked with per-user CSS.)

(My intention is to use Template:Inline singer lyrics whenever possible for all lyrics for song articles, but I'm not sure if we need a vote to decide that.)

2. Songs with dialogues. For Big Betrayal and Suffer No Fools songs in particular. Ideally a template should be used for presenting the speaker icons and names. But I don't like the table presentation idea by Argentu. My alternative idea is presented here, and I wish some feedback on that.

3. It doesn't seem that Inkipedia supports Draft namespace. Please correct me if I'm wrong. As I consider draft articles in other users' pages "private" drafts, I would generally refrain from editing them or improve them. That is to say, I will not touch Argentu's sandbox pages, thus I hope Argentu understands the situation.

--Explorer09 (talk) 09:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

1. For the most part, I do find this template very effective and it's just the colored boxes that I have issues with.
One reason being that they're not consistent and the other being that they're a bit distracting. I do think that if you removed the boxes, they'd be fine and further applicable.
2. My goal was to show that Off the Hook and Fire & Ice were on opposing sides of each other, not necessarily where they were in the video. I, biasedly, think it's fine and also easier and better sorted for me to edit.
Your alternative idea does not, however, show an alternative way to represent spoken dialogue. It also does not take into account the issues presented by Suffer No Fools having almost entirely translated lyrics.
3. I do appreciate that you haven't edited my sandbox without asking me first. If you feel uncomfortable messing with mine, feel free to take the formatting of a given section and mess with it in your own sandbox page. ArgentuTA164 (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
You can copy the code of this version of the template and it would give you character icons without the background colors. As mentioned, it's not meant to enforce a particular style, but to ease the maintenance of transcribed text.
Even though I can't say which of the styles would be agreed by everyone and applied site wide, my reasons of having those background colors for the character icons are these:
Splatoon singers are all associated with a kind of "signature colors". They are used in colored lyrics, character names and other places. Usually people can identify which singer sings what by looking at the colors of the text. (Like this: なすた！ リヴァ！) But with the text colors gone, there should be another way to bring the singers' signature colors. I would argue this is a much stronger identification than the character icons ("colors" is one of the core theme of Splatoon, sorry for those colorblind players).
(A) (B)
My original intention was to use the "squared" version of the icons as it provides the color I need. Until I realize not every character has such kind of icon with background color, I roll my own solution using CSS for bringing this in. I admit it's not perfect, but still enough to convey my vision.
Explorer09 (talk) 19:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
We should avoid colored text for the lyrics; even though there's official precedent for it, there's accessibility concerns. The whole point of adding idol icons to the lyric formatting was to replace the colored text. The general goal of the lyric tables is to make the official lyrics available to all; we should try to accommodate colorblind or otherwise visually impaired readers. The icons may display the singer name via alt text, which would quickly tell a reader using a screen reader which lyric is sung by which idol (the way colored text typically would signal such without use of a screen reader).
Even though Splatoon as a series has a heavy emphasis on use of color, and as a whole isn't entirely accessible for all audiences, on the wiki we try to adhere to basic web accessibility guidelines. A major issue with color-coded text has been Frye's signature color, which is overly bright (difficult to read no matter what, tricky even if altered to be darker, pre-emptive measures can conflict with our dark mode settings etc.)
For the icons I vote for the square versions. Yoshifan52 (talk) 02:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
A small comment here. Accessibility is one of the reasons I dislike putting icons as image syntax inline in the lyrics (Argentu's original approach), and why I made Template:Inline singer lyrics.
As for colors, I believe they are useful for marking keywords as they're usually done in the game. This includes marking the speaker's name in color to distinguish from the speech itself. I was trying that in lyrics as well. Imagine you can style the singer names in lyrics this way: (Callie/Marie:) Shuraherani
That's it. Explorer09 (talk) 23:37, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
I'd rather just use the inline singer lyrics since it's an actually decent template (I stand by the boxes looking bad though). ArgentuTA164 (talk) 00:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Argentu, can you take a look at this draft template and share your opinion on this version? I added border radiuses on the icons so that they look "less ugly" to me. The template code is also moved from inline CSS to using TemplateStyles. Explorer09 (talk) 18:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Yea the rounded edges look much better. Now, I would just use the BG colors from the Three Wishes music video but after that, I think it'll work perfectly.
Well, that and I think we could work in some shortcuts in the icon names, like "S3 1A" to get Callie's Return of the Mammalians icon. ArgentuTA164 (talk) 20:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
S3 Callie already uses Return of the Mammalians Callie icon. See Template:Inline singer lyrics/map for the keywords supported. Basically, if there is no need to add a new singer icon, just use existing keywords for consistency. Explorer09 (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
We have a lot of pages that use redirects for shorter/simpler terms, like every Splatfest page having a shorter version for all of its teams. (Try searching for "Nessie", it gives you a redirect.) The shorter versions would function the same but are less cumbersome to type over and over and over again. ArgentuTA164 (talk) 01:51, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
For a template's arguments, it makes no sense to use an even shorter name. You can use "S3 1A" internally when you draft, then use the "text replace" function of your text editor to change them to the proper keyword before publishing to this wiki. Explorer09 (talk) 07:40, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

TemplateStyles and class naming

I start a new sub-topic here. Is there any naming rule or convention regarding the CSS classes in templates in Inkipedia? Since I wish to convert Template:Inline singer lyrics from using inline CSS to using a stylesheet, I wish to reserve certain class names for use in this template. 

    .inline-singer-list
    .inline-singer-lyrics
    /* Maybe other "inline-singer-*" names */

Is that allowed? Explorer09 (talk) 02:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Update: I have drafted the style sheet, and the draft template page for testing. Explorer09 (talk) 18:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
No real format. Just try to make them distinct enough where they wouldn't reasonably conflict with something else. In this case the names you chose are acceptable. Trig - 18:51, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Lyric table format simplification idea

I am raising the issue here as I don't like to debate this topic with Argentu privately and I also seek opinions of other users.

Let's ignore the corrections of the lyric content in the said page and instead focus on the presentation styles. Which style would you choose? And does anyone come up with a better idea for the lryic table? Explorer09 (talk) 02:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Just to make sure my opinion on the topic is explicit instead of implicit, my preferred design is B. It is the design I had intended once the inline singer lyrics template was created. I'm admittedly not sure how I feel about line breaks yet.
(Design A is also outdated as it does not use the inline singer template.) ArgentuTA164 (talk) 03:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Waiting for opinions of more people. And I forgot to show this draft page of Anarchy Rainbow for discussion. This draft page is also what I called design (D). Perhaps it's worth mentioning that (D) looks good on mobile without any layout modification. Explorer09 (talk) 07:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Out of the 4 options, (d) looks the cleanest to me and while I would do some tweaks, I prefer lyric tables to only dedicate one column to singer's icons, as the priority of a lyric table is giving proper information on what is sung, what it translates too and who sings it. In cases where other singers join mid-line we would need further duscussions/ideas on how to best reflect it.  Perfectionist  (talk) 18:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
For "other singers join mid-line". Liquid Sunshine is the example I have in mind, and currently I use (C) for that. Explorer09 (talk) 02:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
I would argue that Design D is not the cleanest. Design B clearly illustrates who's singing in what lines and also who isn't, and already has a method for showing that someone is joining midline, which was one of the initial purposes of the original table design and inline icons to begin with. ArgentuTA164 (talk) 06:07, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Separating data templates

Due to the numerous differences, I think that adding separate blaster and brush data templates would be beneficial for ease of editing. The blaster and brush classes are separate from shooters and rollers in Splatoon 3, so it would make sense, too. The Thing (talk) 17:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm surprised there isn't! If there's going to be a proposal for this, you have my support! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 19:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
As the one who created the templates, I found it natural to have them combined due to overlapping parameters, at least for Splatoon 1 and Splatoon 2.
Do you want to do this for all the templates, or just the Splatoon 3 templates?
@XarrotD your opinion would be valued on this topic. Heddy (talk) 15:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Only the Splatoon 3 templates currently because they're separate classes in that game. If it would be too annoying to separate them, the classes could have separate templates for the next Splatoon game.
For brushes, it would eliminate the need for the IsBrush parameter, which is only used to differentiate between rollers and brushes.
For blasters, it would remove some of the "if" coding, which can be annoying at times due to how many there are.
Creating the templates wouldn't be too hard considering the information is already on the other templates. In addition to what I said before, it would also make it easier to understand for people who didn't know that blasters and brushes weren't their own classes before Splatoon 3, because the template names would just have the class names in them. The Thing (talk) 16:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
I think separating blasters and shooters makes sense, but not rollers and brushes. The roller template isn't super complicated currently and the differences between brushes and rollers are negligible. The shooter template is, quite frankly, a mess, and probably needs a facelift.
I've been hesitant to make major changes to the data templates for awhile because I think that they should be re-written into modules anyways, but I've been painfully slow at getting that set up (as you might already know). XarrotD (talk) 20:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, but I disagree. If we're going to separate Blasters and Shooters, we should separate Rollers and Brushes for consistency. We can't pick and choose what we fix, it should be both or neither. Just my opinion, Stay Fresh! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 16:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
I think you would feel differently if you had created or edited the template. Good template design involves avoiding unnecessary duplication of effort. Since the templates are 99% the same, every time we want to update the template, we would have to edit 2 templates instead of one, which unnecessarily duplicates the effort required, for seemingly almost no benefit. The purported benefit, the removal of "IsBrush", is just too insignificant.
You say it should be changed for consistency, but templates are not visible to readers. So, that change would not improve the consistency of the reader's experience. We could set up a redirect from "Brush data S3" to "Roller data S3", and we could note the combined use on the template page, so that editors are not lost when trying to find the right template to edit. Heddy (talk) 19:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Regarding IsBrush, is that an official parameter from the game files, or did we make it so the template could work? If it's an official parameter, then that would be a point in favor of keeping rollers and brushes in the same template. Heddy (talk) 17:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
It is not an official parameter (probably should've used something other than PascalCase for it to differentiate it from other params). However, its only purpose currently is to control whether the template says "sliding" or "rolling" when referring to the function that occurs whenever the ZR button is held. XarrotD (talk) 19:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I ran a text replacement to "is brush" for the 4 pages "IsBrush" appeared on. If there are any other "unofficial" parameters that PascalCased, let me know, and I can run a text replacement to all lowercase and spaced. Heddy (talk) 19:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

About old template names and redirects

I know there has been an effort of renaming templates after this Rename site templates proposal, I request that the site administrators keep the redirects of the old (CamelCase) template names. Don't delete them. The main reason is, now, when I view an old revision of an article (such as this one), the page unnecessary breaks (with red links around to the templates that no longer exists). Although it is discouraged to use the old template naming, deleting redirects, in my opinion, does more harm than good.

For maintenance reasons, I also suggest a maintenance category like Redirects from other capitalisations that can put these template redirects in. This way whenever an editor calls a template under an old name, a robot can be set up to rename the template call automatically. Explorer09 (talk) 04:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Preservation of previous page revisions' functionality in this way is not a reasonable goal at this time; you may view an article's previous contents without the rendering errors via clicking the "edit" button when viewing an individual revision. Yoshifan52 (talk) 19:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Let me clarify my argument. Here I consider this breakage is unnecessary and that redirects are cheap arguments apply (see also "Don't delete redirects"). Here, deleting redirects doesn't free up any space in the database, and it made editors like me having a hard day comparing page revisions. I knew the reasons discouraging old template naming, but leaving redirects doesn't hurt anything at all. It is the deletion of them that does more harm than good. Explorer09 (talk) 01:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
We are not Wikipedia and do not strive to emulate Wikipedia's practices. As our wiki is much smaller scale than Wikipedia, it is much easier to check what now-deleted pages and redirects were. If you're ever having trouble navigating revisions like that, staff can help explain what was moved and where. Keeping previous revisions completely functional may not add stress to the database but it does add bloat to maintenance tasks. Yoshifan52 (talk) 00:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
I have no idea what "bloat to maintenance tasks" the redirects would add. Could you elaborate? Explorer09 (talk) 06:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm in agreement with Explorer09 here, we may not be Wikipedia but that doesn't mean we can't look at their policies and justification for doing something as a reference for why we should also do it, not just copying Wikipedia for the sake of copying Wikipedia. I see no harm from keeping the redirects, and harm from unnecessary deletion of them. Hewer (talk · contributions) 09:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Just to clarify my position: I'm okay with things in "File", "Module" and "Category" namespaces be moved without redirects because there are valid, technical reasons (e.g. redirecting "jpg" to "png" can break some rendering, simple #REDIRECT can't work with modules, etc). But the main (article) and "Template" namespaces are the least likely that you need to delete redirects. So it's best to keep them even when they are never linked. I believe MediaWiki already has a feature to hide redirects in "all pages" lists, so I can't understand why they cause maintenance burden. Explorer09 (talk) 09:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
There's no reason (in my opinion) to keep template redirects. Pages are in constant states of evolution and therefore improvement, so I don't see much merit at all in the observation of old page versions/revisions. The "maintenance" reason is more of a navigational and structural one: Keeping redirects means there are effectively two different template names for the same function, which drives up inconsistency from page to page. If they need to be edited in bulk (lets say by regex or manual observation), it is more difficult to perform sweeping actions or locate templates quickly because of said multiple names. Furthermore, when searching for a template for use, the redirect will appear in the search bar (and inconsistently in the link suggest, still trying to figure that out) which clogs up results people are actually looking for, or cause confusion why there multiple similarly named templates for those that don't understand how redirects work. Trig - 18:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:StageQuotes

When on the discussion of template naming, I noticed one template (and module), Template:StageQuotes, had not been moved to the new name (Template:Stage quotes). Is there a particular reason for it not to be moved? If it's just because a Lua module depends on it (Module:News dialogue), and admins don't know how to fix that, then I can help fixing it. (Because I just learned how to code Lua/Scribunto modules for MediaWiki.) Explorer09 (talk) 10:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Chief Executive Mover Of Templates here: I just haven't got to it yet. I've been busy with a lot of stuff behind the scenes both on and off platform (NIWA's Cross Wiki Week, Inkipedia's DMCA takedown notices to Fandom, restructuring wiki materials) and thus haven't quite finished here. I'll be getting to it.....eventually. Promise! Trig Jegman - 18:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Just to give the note that I've helped moved the pages of Template:Stage quotes and all its subpages to the new names. However, the calls to the old {{StageQuotes}} template are too many to update one by one. So it's better to have a bot to help that task (replace {{StageQuotes| to {{Stage quotes|). Explorer09 (talk) 10:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

About Ages of Manga Characters

This is referring to character ages for the mainline Splatoon manga featuring Goggles! I noticed that many early characters have adult ages listed on their character profiles. I would like these ages to be removed due to them being unconfirmed! Nowhere is it stated what ages the characters are; you can only assume they are at least 14 based on having humanoid forms. There is also no canonical information to suggest the characters have aged beyond 14 (excluding characters such as Emperor and Gloves, who have backstories which imply they could be older). The idea of time passing was in context of the video games, and the manga deviates from the video games in many ways; there's no mention or implication of time passing the same way for the manga. Thus, these ages are based purely on headcanon and aren't factual details taken from a proper source, like the volumes. I don't think headcanons should be allowed since people will mistake these ages for being canonical, when in reality nothing is confirmed regarding this topic! Sakuraloha (talk) 07:59, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

After some consultation with another savvy editor (due to my own personal lack of manga knowledge), I'm highly inclined to agree on this matter. It's okay to comment on aspects such as characters returning to certain areas after, say, an unspecified 'long time away' or etc. but that should be done in a more specific writeup rather than speculating on their ages in infoboxes.
I'm further inclined to say that we should not even include baseline minimum ages for characters unless they are specifically suggested in some way, as I am aware the manga does already fudge some other details of Inkling biology that are otherwise firmly established in the games; developmental stages of Inklings or Octolings may be no different in this regard. Even if we knew it beyond a doubt to be accurate within the manga, it's also just somewhat unnecessary & redundant to throw the same catch-all age number in every single character's page.
Unless there's more relevant info to provide or other points of discussion to consider (such as if there are any individual characters or specific groups of characters with stated ages), my aim would be to carry out a complete removal of any manga character ages sometime in the near future. I freely invite the input of others if this sort of info exists, as any ages to remain should be cited to a specific source; I am not equipped to look for or cite this info firsthand, so I ask for your cooperation. Driftin Soul [Talk!] 00:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
The removal of ages in their entirety would be an acceptable conclusion! This would make their pages accurately match the ambiguity of the source material; I have been following the manga since it was first announced, and at no point in time has there been a specific number age stated for any character. Even the "at least 14" information I mentioned earlier is, like I said, just an assumption! (Some characters ARE stated to be younger or older than others, such as the sibling characters, but that seems like information better suited as a mention in a character description.) Sakuraloha (talk) 01:44, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Comparative age ranges to other characters would be another great fit for the main body of the page, yep!
I've also just had another editor in the Discord reaffirm that character ages are wholly absent, so that's even more weight against. I'll probably give it about a week or so just in case there might be some info flying under the radar that someone else might be able to volunteer, but if nothing is mentioned by that time I'll carry out the removals as planned (if some info happens to be found later we can always re-add at that time).
Thanks for your input and for bringing this topic up! Driftin Soul [Talk!] 01:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
That sounds reasonable to me! Thanks to you as well~! ♪ Sakuraloha (talk) 02:10, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Rename weapon class articles to plural

I'm suggesting the following page moves:

  • Shooter > Shooters
  • Roller > Rollers
  • Charger > Chargers
  • Slosher (weapon class) > Sloshers
  • Splatling > Splatlings
  • Dualie > Dualies
  • Brella > Brellas
  • Blaster (weapon class) > Blasters
  • Brush > Brushes
  • Stringer > Stringers
  • Splatana > Splatanas

Why? Because:

  • Wikipedia's naming guidelines allow plural article titles for classes of things. I know we're not Wikipedia, but this is an instance where it makes sense to borrow one of their policies.
  • The parenthetical clarifications "(weapon class)" are not needed, as everyone already knows that the plural forms refer to classes, and singular refers to the weapons with those names (Blaster and Slosher).
  • This is shorter when parenthesis are dropped.
  • This is what everyone calls them.
  • The bold word in the first sentence of each article is the plural form.

Reasons to not do this:

  • Achieves complete consistency in applying an "article titles are singular" rule.
    • However, there is no such rule in our Manual of Style. Such an unyielding level of consistency is not necessary in my opinion, as this is clearly a good case to make an exception for.
  • This creates situations where links are formatted like [[shooters|shooter]] when the singular is the display text for a link to the class article, which is much more to type than the inverse situation like [[shooter]]s when the plural is the display text for a link.
    • However, this can be resolved by simply using redirects when applicable (use [[shooter]] in articles, redirect to shooters), to avoid typing the longer format. Redirects are cheap as far as system resources are concerned, and redirects don't show up as a problem on a report unless there is a double redirect, so we should not be afraid to use them, even if "avoid redirects at all costs" seems to be the currently popular practice.

What does everyone think? Heddy (talk) 15:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Since the official in-game (and internal) terms are in plural I fully support this.  Perfectionist  (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Admittedly fewer than I thought at first but there are [references to ____ describing the class on all combined Sheldon/Quotes]:
12 shooter, 6 blaster, 24 roller, 8 brush, 35 charger, 6 slosher, 7 splatling, 5 dualie, 2-6 brella (again, ambiguous), 2 stringer, 1 splatana
0 shooters, 2 blasters, 4 rollers, 3 brushes, 1 chargers, 1 sloshers, 3 splatlings, 2 dualies, 0 brellas, 2 stringers, 0 splatanas
In my opinion this shows that the classes cannot be originally defined as being plural (especially with the prevalence of the phrase ____-type weapon where ____ is singular}; singular is more prevalent (in this instance) and is then expanded out to be (rarely) plural, not other way round (which I don't believe would make grammatical sense).
Menus admittedly do contain pluralised versions, but they are also showcasing e.g. a collection of shooters from the shooter class.
tldr: singular more prevalent as spoken in game, imo class=singular, the weapons in that class when =plural Pialpha1 (talk) 18:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
This tells me that Nintendo uses whichever form feels natural, with a significant preference for singular. The use in menus is most similar to the use case under discussion: titles. Given that both forms are acceptable, I think we should consider what is best for the wiki, not only what Nintendo prefers to use in dialogue. Heddy (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Initial argument I personally had to support my view (feelings, subjective) was:
A. A matter of consistency (Inkling, , etc)
B. Not being a fan of articles being pluralised in general, especially with the lack of use the pluralised version gets, (beyond the equip screen, is there any?)
C. That the class was singular in name (utterly mad but thought that the weapons were shooters, the class they were in was shooter) so shouldn't be changed at all
B and C I can now see my reasoning as being flawed but I think A still stands up (yes I believe weapon class and species to be comparable in this instance); moving the articles would be inconsistent with other pages on the wiki. But, overall, I do now understand and support this move Pialpha1 (talk) 16:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
You are using Sheldon quotes as reference. Naturally in dialogue the singular and plural is used depending on the structure of the sentence. The in-game (and internal) part I am mentioning are the terms used for the in-game weapon types, which are in plural.  Perfectionist  (talk) 19:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
The class is in plural unless it is saying "shooter class" or "shooter weapon class" but if it is only the term, it is "shooters".  Perfectionist  (talk) 19:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
I think it makes sense to look at Wikipedia's MoS when discussing policy changes, and as you said Wikipedia does permit plural titles in this instance. I support this change. Pitako (talk) 16:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
I support the proposal for reasons already told. Olivia (talk) 19:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
I don't think it'd be a great decision. It's a minor edit, and in the grand scheme of things wouldn't end up being too significant. Like Perfectionist said, using Sheldons Quotes as a reference isn't a very stable argument. Just my opinion, but don't forget to Stay Fresh! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 15:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Of course it's a minor change. But that's not a reason to avoid doing it. If anything, being a minor change is a point in favor of the change. Sheldon uses singular more than plural, so I'm happy to disregard it; Sheldon does not speak in wiki article titles anyways. Heddy (talk) 04:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
I don't agree with this, though I'm a bit late to the party. Many of the reasons I'm against it have already been stated, but generally it's far more inconsistent to most other page titles being singular. Trig - 18:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
This is true, for example, with Splat Bomb. As it is a weapon as well, would we not have to name it Splat Bombs for consistency? Same with things like turning Splatfest to Splatfests, Anarchy Battle to Anarchy Battles. Small little problems like this would overall make this change more bad than good. Lastly, don't forget to Stay Fresh! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 00:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Splat Bombs are not a weapons class. The topic suggests changing the weapon class pages, nothing else. Yoshifan52 (talk) 00:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
That's true, but we can't just make a change like this for only 13 pages, as consistency always becomes an issue. If we didn't change other pages to match, these would be an outlier. NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 14:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
We completely could make a change to only 13 pages; those 13 pages are all related under the same category and would be consistent with one another. It's fully possible to pick and choose where to apply that type of consistency based on closer examination of the topics at hand. Yoshifan52 (talk) 17:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
My thinking is that classes of things should be plural. The things you listed (Splat Bombs, Splatfests, Anarchy Battles) are not classes of things. Heddy (talk) 18:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
So you're saying we would pluralize things like Sub Weapons, Events, and Modes? NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 21:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, primarily, I am saying we should pluralize the weapon class articles, like Blasters, Sloshers, Chargers, etc.
Regarding the idea of pluralizing other articles, I do think it would be nice to have a general "rule" to help editors, should they encounter another article that would benefit from a plural rename. But to do that, we'd have to discuss and define what types of articles benefit from the plural form. I had suggested the "classes of things" rule because that's what Wikipedia has as their rule. Your examples (Sub Weapons, Events, and Modes) do seem like they could fit that rule. But I'm not entirely sure about that rule. Heddy (talk) 22:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
If we would go with this plan, I think articles that would be pluralized are large classes of things, like an umbrella. Things like Events, or Modes. Small classes of things, like Catalog, might stay singular, due to it being small. (There are only eight.) Of course, such a loose organization system is bound to cause problems, so this is just a draft. Maybe we could have a page where we discuss these pluralizing criteria. Just my opinion, but don't forget to Stay Fresh! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 17:33, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
A bit late to this talk. I don't think that "everyone already knows that the plural forms refer to classes" necessarily, but as long as we keep {{for}} - For the main weapon with the same name, see.., changing the names to plural sounds good to me. It's moon [Talk!] 17:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Don't worry about it! Personally, even as I'm against this change, it would help with the Blaster and Slosher problem. I think instead of Slosher and Blaster (weapon class), it should just be (class). What do yall think? Stay Fresh! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 14:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Competitive Page Images

Greetings Inkipedians, and happy Splatoween! I'm making this discussion to repropose my idea (that was a failed proposal due to it's irrelevancy to a proposal) of the change to Competitive pages, more specifically the weapon based ones. The original proposal is here, if you are looking for details. As a short recap, this proposal was intended the change the weapon infobox images on competitive pages, from promo renders to either the 3D or 2D game images (from the equip screen and battle HUD respectively) and as a demonstration, I made what it'd look like here. There's an option for Splatoon 2, and two for Splatoon 3. The reason why I feel like this change is significant enough to bring up is for presentability. In my opinion, (and this has always been a minor irk of mine) just plain sharp edged images seem displeasing. I don't mean every square or rectangular image, (because we can't fix this problem for all of them) but the ones on infoboxes for weapons are very avoidable, and I think they should be. What are y'all's opinions on this? Happy Splatoween, and remember to Stay Fresh! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 15:56, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I think the promo renders were chosen as the competitive infobox images to help differentiate the competitive pages from mainspace articles about the weapons, and I think it does help in that regard, so I would prefer to keep using the same images on those pages. Heddy (talk) 22:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
I agree that this idea works on principle and that it likely served perfectly fine at the time it was implemented, but it is somewhat flawed now in the context of Splatoon 3, which did not give updated promo renders for all weapons. To give one arbitrary example, the Slosher does not have a S3 promo render, which is especially problematic given it underwent a design revamp. Driftin Soul [Talk!] 22:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Oh, I was not aware. In that case, then I suppose we should use whatever images make it easiest for competitive players to identify the weapon. Heddy (talk) 00:12, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Actually, quite a few weapons don't have promo renders, I could probably list a few off the top of my head. If we're looking for most identifiable by competitive players, I suggest the images at the top of the screen during battles, (the 2D icon) since, well, they battle competitively. I guess 3D could be better, but they don't spend too long on the equip screen or looking at who splatted them. Don't forget to Stay Fresh! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 12:34, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
As a side note, it turns out that all of the weapons without promo renders are already using the 2D icons! Therefore, I don't think shifting all pages to it would be that difficult. NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 12:41, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
The best way is to probably go with the 2D image icons as we know that every weapon has them (unlike promo renders). The image thing has always been a thing that irks me since we didn't get them for every weapon and I kinda just defaulted to using 2d icons for ones that don't have them. For consistency though I do think we could move on to only 2D icons. It's still important to differentiate them from the main pages so we shouldn't have the 3D icons. ChessMaster [TALK] 13:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree with this. NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 13:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Well, seeing as no one has publicly disagreed (As of November 4th, 12:30 EDT) , do I have to go-ahead to make these changes? NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 17:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes, you can make the changes. Heddy (talk) 20:09, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the ok! I'll begin tomorrow afternoon. Stay Fresh! NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 02:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Oh I forgot to mention, Splatoon 1 Infoboxes will use the SplatNet icon. NewSquidbeakSplatoon (talk) 01:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

What is our policy on fan lyrics?

So I noticed sprinkled throughout the wiki we have "lines that sound like XYZ in English." (or at least on Anarchy Rainbow's page).

I wonder if these are considered fanon, and so should they be removed? Also, listen to this. Strange, ain't it, if you sift through more of that content creators' videos, you'll find that the Inkling and Octoling languages sound an awful lot like English, eh? If fan lyrics are allowed on Inkipedia, should we have these, or not?

Just wondering. PawnShop75 [Talk|Contribs] 22:56, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Fan lyric interpretations are generally not allowed given the prevalence of official lyric releases. For the Anarchy Rainbow example, those short exclamations that reasonably resemble real words are fine to document, as they seem intentional. Yoshifan52 (talk) 08:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
I still think we should remove them, as it's all just interpretations after all. One person could hear that and one person couldn't. PawnShop75 [Talk|Contribs] 21:07, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
While that's true, there is generally some amount of interpretation that is necessary when making any statement about music beyond the barest "time signature and key" information (and even then, those can be heard differently between people, too, especially as it gets to weirder time signatures or keys!). So saying "this line resembles XYZ" feels as valid to me as assigning a genre to a song, especially when it also is thematically appropriate. UnderFlorence (talk) 23:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
So what to do with fan lyrics like the ones linked above? They literally say "Chaos and Order!" right? PawnShop75 [Talk|Contribs] 23:05, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Official lyrics for the new version of Ebb and Flow are expected to release with Ordertune soon. Fan lyric videos like the one you've linked should be generally taken with a grain of salt, but I'd be fine with listing just the "chaos and order" similarity if others agree it's plausible. Yoshifan52 (talk) 23:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
I think fan lyrics should be removed all together.
I don't hear the "trick or treat" line, but I hear other ones. To me, this is a violation of policy. PawnShop75 [Talk|Contribs] 23:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
It is most likely done intentionally in a mimicry/homophonous sense, ergo worth noting as the series is full of puns and references like that, similar to how a lot of text and signage in the games similarly mimic and reference real words/brands. Or, it is coincidental yet reasonably noticeable by many, a type of trivia our policy explicitly allows for. Yoshifan52 (talk) 23:53, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Alright. PawnShop75 [Talk|Contribs] 00:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
I know this conversation is finished, but as a sticking point, Caitlin Koi doesn't try to dechipher anything, quoting a part of their channel description: "The soundtrack's lyrics are not in a real language, instead "squid language" which is intentionally untranslatable. The music is fun to sing along to, but it's difficult to learn the real gibberish lyrics, so by inducing an illusion called auditory pareidolia, I can create lyrics in real language to sing along to." Olivia (talk) 11:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
This also kind of proves that our fan lyrics already on the wiki aren't really intentional in any way. PawnShop75 [Talk|Contribs] 15:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
If that was the case absolutely all the time we wouldn't have cases like "Ink o sink fazaro" in Inkoming! or the oh yeahs in We're So Back. Olivia (talk) 16:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
We're So Back is most likely going to be part of the Ordertune booklet, as no lyrics have been released yet. ArgentuTA164 (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Would a "List of Notable Content Creators" be plausable?

I've been thinking: There are many Splatoon content creators out there, and should we cover them (in a list, not in seperate pages). If so, should that be in the mainpspace, competitive, and what sub/follow count would be the minimum (25K, 50K, 100K, etc.).

Second idea: Perhaps we should rename the "Competitive" namespace to "Community." This would open up a number of new opportunities.

But if not, oh well. Just an idea. PawnShop75 [Talk|Contribs] 19:28, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Content creators may be noted only if they are otherwise relevant to the competitive scene (for example, a lot of popular Splatoon streamers are competitive players). The qualifications of what make a creator notable would broaden significantly if that part of the wiki's scope was broadened from "competitive" to "community".
The wiki aims to note official information and competitive scene information, the latter which must reach a base threshold of notability for us to document; we don't make articles for every single fan-run tournament. Community information steps out of this circle, as it involves a lot of fanon information and interpretation, such as subjective opinions, interpersonal drama, shipping, fan works etc.
The community as a whole as a topic is nebulously large. For example, would a viral meme Tweet count as a community happening, necessitating archival of the Tweet and subsequently us documenting some information on the poster? For a Tweet to go viral it means thousands of (most likely) Splatoon players/fans engaged with it, so there is technically community relevance. This is an extreme example; ultimately the community is too broad a subject for us to cover. Content creators come and go, often changing focus from subject to subject; a list of Splatoon content creators would need a lot of maintenance. I don't think it would be useful to our wiki, as we would have to strive to document every "significant" mention of Splatoon on the internet. The goal of a such page would be moreso to direct readers towards popular social media pages, rather than document information relevant to the series.
Broadening the scope would entail writing a lot more articles about even less wiki relevant subjects. It's not completely out of the question, but it's the kind of thing I would only advocate for if I strongly felt the wiki lacks key community-related information and thus wanted to personally help write such directly, which I do not. Yoshifan52 (talk) 21:17, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Interesting... Would this be a topic (the list of content creators part) to make a proposal about? PawnShop75 [Talk|Contribs] 21:27, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
You may do so if you'd like. But do note the proposal guidelines recommend having gauged public opinion on the matter before the proposal launches, to help understand if a proposal is even necessary. Yoshifan52 (talk) 21:34, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
This is too open-ended to be a reasonable content scope. Remember: Inkipedia only serves to cover official topics. The only reason that Competitive content gets covered at all is because Nintendo has officially sponsored/endorsed/hosted Splatoon related competitive events. The same cannot be said for content creators. Where do we draw the line at notability? What if people disagree on metrics? I also just outright do not want to deal with the hassle of drama with increased vandalism of pages for creators trolls don't like, or how this site should handle any Jackpot-esque situations. It would also drive up the list of pages needing made, which as of right now is still already quite high. I'd rather focus on more concrete topics to expand and document first over more fanon-level material. Trig - 18:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Should we make a redirect kensa .52 gal to the glooga dualies9

I don't know why but lol Kraken1 (talk) 04:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

No, they are two completely separate weapons with the only notable similarity being that they have the same kit (and the gloogas don't have the kensa gal's kit until Splatoon 3). OrderSquid38 [Talk] 04:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
Lol I know it's just wery funny and wanted to see what other people think Kraken1 (talk) 04:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
Please note that these talk pages are for actual wiki editing discussions and not jokes. OrderSquid38 [Talk] 04:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
Ok but it was t a joke I wanted to see what other ppl think Kraken1 (talk) 04:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Are we sure that the fire rate doesn't increase on the glooga dualies after rolling?

I mean even if it's the slightest bit Kraken1 (talk) 20:29, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Glooga Dualies normally fires every 9 frames. After dodge rolling, it stays firing every 9 frames. The data section on its page doesn't state a fire rate increase, because there isn't one. Yes, the DPS (Damage Per Second) does increase, but that's because the damage increases, unlike other dualies. Also, I don't really know why you're asking about this because OrderSquid38 was the one who edited the page to say that Glooga Dualies increases in fire rate after dodge rolling. The Thing 20:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Kraken1 changed the description so that it said the dodge rolling increases the fire rate. My edit reworded their edit with correct grammar and spelling, but I did not realize at the moment that the actual description was incorrect. OrderSquid38 [Talk] 20:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Oh, yeah, Kraken1 did change the description to say that the fire rate increased after dodge rolling, my bad. I forgot the the wiki compiles the edits on the Recent Changes page, and thought that it was just showing the most recent of the two edits. Sorry, OrderSquid38. The Thing 21:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Well sorry if I made inaccurate edit I was pretty sure Kraken1 (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

So 2 things

Should we make a place were people can just chat? Should we make it so people can post polls? Kraken1 (talk) 04:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

That would be cool :) (talk) :) (talk) 14:51, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
There is a Discord if you would like to join. We used to have polls but were discontinued due to lack of interest. OrderSquid38 [Talk] 15:02, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
I'll ask my parents if I can have Discord because rn I don't have an account :) (talk) 15:04, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
I can't have discord :( Kraken1 (talk) 22:44, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
same OctoStar (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Just 1 Thing

I'm new so I have ALOT of questions and recommendations but here's the 1rst 1:

can we have a fan page where ppl can post fan art, fan-made music, stories, and stuff like that?

just wondering :) (talk) 14:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

No, this wiki is for official Splatoon information. While you can upload personal files and make user subpages, none of these should be put in mainspace. OrderSquid38 [Talk] 15:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Trust me you don't want to learn the hard way Kraken1 (talk) 22:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
lol ok I won't OctoStar (talk) 01:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://splatoonwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Inkipedia:Ink_Pump/Archives/2024-12-10&oldid=661347"