Tolkien Gateway:Meetings/1 April 2012/Transcript

[2012-04-01 20:04:11] <KingAragorn> Welcome to TG's April 2012 meeting! Mith, Morgan, Gamling, and KingAragorn are all in attendance.
[2012-04-01 20:04:29] <KingAragorn> So,
[2012-04-01 20:04:35] <KingAragorn> Tolkien canon.
[2012-04-01 20:05:01] =-= Mith has changed the topic to ``Welcome to Tolkien Gateway's meetings channel | Next meeting: Sunday 1st April 2012 | To register your attendance click here: http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Tolkien_Gateway_talk:Meetings/1_March_2012
[2012-04-01 20:05:14] =-= Mith has changed the topic to ``Welcome to Tolkien Gateway's meetings channel | Next meeting: Sunday 1st April 2012 | To register your attendance click here: http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Tolkien_Gateway_talk:Meetings/1_April_2012
[2012-04-01 20:05:31] <KingAragorn> I bring it up because I think our policy is mess, which stems from the fact that Tolkien canon is a mess.
[2012-04-01 20:05:41] <KingAragorn> Is there anything we can do to reconcile this?
[2012-04-01 20:06:21] <Morgan> I've actually started to think that Mith has a good point; perhaps it's just best to leave it to the reader to decide the "canonical" status.
[2012-04-01 20:06:55] * Mith graciously bows.
[2012-04-01 20:07:07] <Morgan> We can help the reader by explaining if the concept was published or unpublished, abondoned or kept, etc
[2012-04-01 20:07:17] <Morgan> Provide references, etc
[2012-04-01 20:07:19] <KingAragorn> Yes, I don't think we should even say that early stuff is not canon
[2012-04-01 20:08:00] <KingAragorn> It is what it is
[2012-04-01 20:08:32] <Morgan> Yes
[2012-04-01 20:08:43] <Mith> I have always maintained that a) the canon templates are a pain and b) it is not - and can not - be our place to decide what is canon and what is not. This incurs too many value judgements on our part and opens us up to too much criticism
[2012-04-01 20:08:53] <KingAragorn> I agree, the best thing that we can do for the reader is to explain if it was published, not published... etc.
[2012-04-01 20:09:04] <KingAragorn> Yeah
[2012-04-01 20:09:55] <Gamling> Yet we must guard against articles that do not acknowledge cannonical issues if present.
[2012-04-01 20:10:41] <Morgan> Certainly
[2012-04-01 20:10:59] <Mith> Certain things are canonical (Gandalf), certain things are not (Trotter), and there is a lot of grey. The best we can do is admit the situation is grey
[2012-04-01 20:11:20] <Morgan> It must be obvious from the article text that a concept is grey
[2012-04-01 20:11:56] <Gamling> Frequent use of the "Other Versions of the Legendarium" not only tell the reader about alternatives but increase the scholarship content of our articles.
[2012-04-01 20:12:22] <Mith> For articles in the grey we can have a "Canonicity" section, perhaps?
[2012-04-01 20:12:57] <Mith> And that could list, dispassionatelty, arguments for and against
[2012-04-01 20:13:23] <Morgan> Do you mean something like http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Glorfindel#Controversy
[2012-04-01 20:13:27] <KingAragorn> Yes, that's a possibility
[2012-04-01 20:13:31] <Gamling> Do we keep using the "Noncanon" and "Disputed Canon" templates?
[2012-04-01 20:14:10] <KingAragorn> I think we only need a non canon template for concepts that appear in adaptations only.
[2012-04-01 20:14:17] <Mith> Yes. I think that section is badly named. It's not a controversy per se.
[2012-04-01 20:14:19] <Morgan> +1 KA
[2012-04-01 20:14:45] <Gamling> +1 KA
[2012-04-01 20:15:22] <KingAragorn> Glorfindel#Controversy shouldn't really come to the conclusion it does
[2012-04-01 20:15:24] <Mith> Well, we're moving in the right direction, at least. :p
[2012-04-01 20:15:37] <KingAragorn> i.e. "Tolkien Gateway believe that..."
[2012-04-01 20:16:06] <Mith> Yeah I actually think we've invented the controversry
[2012-04-01 20:16:15] <Mith> "Are the two Glorfindels the same?"
[2012-04-01 20:16:17] <Mith> "Yes."
[2012-04-01 20:16:24] <Mith> My God, what a controversy!
[2012-04-01 20:16:59] <Morgan> Sorry guys, I have to be gone for 2 hours...
[2012-04-01 20:17:13] <Gamling> Goodbye
[2012-04-01 20:17:15] * Morgan is away
[2012-04-01 20:17:19] <Morgan> Bye
[2012-04-01 20:17:27] <KingAragorn> Well, I think we've come to some sort of agreement anyway
[2012-04-01 20:17:29] <KingAragorn> Bye!
[2012-04-01 20:17:41] <Morgan> Anything more quick, KA?
[2012-04-01 20:17:45] <KingAragorn> I feared it would take much longer
[2012-04-01 20:17:51] <KingAragorn> Nope
[2012-04-01 20:18:01] <Mith> Best. Meeting. Ever.
[2012-04-01 20:18:09] <Morgan> Haha
[2012-04-01 20:18:23] * Morgan is AFK
[2012-04-01 20:18:23] <KingAragorn> But can we make this policy with so few here?
[2012-04-01 20:18:48] <Mith> It's better than the non-policy now.
[2012-04-01 20:18:54] <Mith> I don't think we're over-turning a policy
[2012-04-01 20:18:59] <Gamling> We publish the notes and if it's a problem then we can reopen it.
[2012-04-01 20:19:02] <KingAragorn> We should probably just make a forum page and see what everyone else thinks
[2012-04-01 20:19:11] <KingAragorn> Yeah
[2012-04-01 20:19:18] <Mith> I look forward to nobody arguing against it.
[2012-04-01 20:20:36] <KingAragorn> Is there anything else to discuss?
[2012-04-01 20:21:15] <Mith> Can I mentioin something
[2012-04-01 20:21:21] <Mith> Not as a discussion point perhaps
[2012-04-01 20:21:24] <KingAragorn> Sure
[2012-04-01 20:21:31] <Mith> Countdown to the Hobbit improvement articles
[2012-04-01 20:21:38] <Mith> We are continuing to fail catastrophically
[2012-04-01 20:22:19] <KingAragorn> We are
[2012-04-01 20:22:42] <KingAragorn> Although it has brought these page some attention
[2012-04-01 20:22:50] <KingAragorn> Just not enough
[2012-04-01 20:23:12] <Mith> What can we do to fix this
[2012-04-01 20:23:30] <Mith> (I note that I have not been very active recently, so shouldn't judge too much.)
[2012-04-01 20:23:38] <Gamling> Is the problem because a committee is working on each article?
[2012-04-01 20:23:54] <Mith> (The reason being that my laptop broke so am sharing a family PC I don't get great access to.)
[2012-04-01 20:24:03] <Mith> The problem is that a committee isn't working on each article!
[2012-04-01 20:24:12] <KingAragorn> Indeed
[2012-04-01 20:24:23] <KingAragorn> I had hoped that we would work together
[2012-04-01 20:24:28] <KingAragorn> But I have no answers
[2012-04-01 20:25:59] <Mith> OK
[2012-04-01 20:26:19] <Gamling> It's intimidating to work on the big articles, such as "Gandalf", because you know that so many are going to review your work with a fine-tooth comb.
[2012-04-01 20:26:25] <Mith> Do you want me to change the article on the hme page. What is next?
[2012-04-01 20:26:32] <Mith> +1 Gamling
[2012-04-01 20:26:34] <Mith> I said this!
[2012-04-01 20:26:39] <Mith> I'm being all smug about it
[2012-04-01 20:26:50] <Gamling> :)
[2012-04-01 20:26:56] <Mith> No one listens to me
[2012-04-01 20:26:59] <KingAragorn> Elrond
[2012-04-01 20:27:35] <KingAragorn> I listened to you, I had hoped that this would go some way to address the problem
[2012-04-01 20:29:14] <Mith> Hmmm
[2012-04-01 20:29:17] <Mith> I don't have solutions
[2012-04-01 20:30:25] <Mith> Where are the editors?!
[2012-04-01 20:31:24] <KingAragorn> New or old?
[2012-04-01 20:31:53] <Mith> Both
[2012-04-01 20:32:04] -->| Amroth ([email protected]) has joined #Wiki
[2012-04-01 20:32:11] <KingAragorn> Hello Amroth
[2012-04-01 20:32:36] <Amroth> Hello Gamling, KingAragorn, Mith, Morgan and Pallando
[2012-04-01 20:32:46] <Gamling> Looking at the Elrond article there are only 2 sentences about his involvement in The Hobbit, with no references. Perhaps if we concentrated on just updating The Hobbit bits of the big articles we could get them in shape for the Countdown.
[2012-04-01 20:32:53] <Gamling> Hello Amroth.
[2012-04-01 20:33:03] <KingAragorn> I agree
[2012-04-01 20:33:47] <KingAragorn> I went off on a tangent with Sauron and improved other sections whilst leaving The Hobbit bits unchanged
[2012-04-01 20:34:13] <Amroth> (I will have to go in a few minutes)
[2012-04-01 20:34:35] <Amroth> I agree with Gamling we should first concentrate on The Hobbit sections.
[2012-04-01 20:35:11] <Amroth> If that has been done we could improve the other parts of the articles.
[2012-04-01 20:36:58] <KingAragorn> Amroth: http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Forum:Tolkien_Gateway_canon_policy
[2012-04-01 20:37:29] <Gamling> I've recently updated most of the articles on The Hobbit dwarves, except for the big articles on Thorin, Balin, and Bombur.
[2012-04-01 20:38:05] <KingAragorn> Thorin is mostly done, it just needs his actions in The Hobbit fleshed out.
[2012-04-01 20:38:41] <Amroth> Gamling: It was very interesting to read the improved articles of the Dwarves :)
[2012-04-01 20:39:01] <Gamling> I am now reading "The History of the Hobbit" by John Rateliff to see if I can add more.
[2012-04-01 20:41:36] <Mith> Excellent news Gamling
[2012-04-01 20:43:00] <Amroth> KA: I will give a respond in that topic after thursday (when I've more time)
[2012-04-01 20:43:00] <Gamling> Yeah, but it's over 800 pages of material to take in, which is why a lot of my time isn't writing articles but researching.
[2012-04-01 20:46:34] <KingAragorn> Research definitely consumes much more time than actual writing
[2012-04-01 20:51:28] <Mith> Have we reached a conclusion?
[2012-04-01 20:53:30] <Mith> KingAragorn, Gamling?
[2012-04-01 20:53:35] <Mith> Amroth?
[2012-04-01 20:54:17] <KingAragorn> I don't think so
[2012-04-01 20:55:04] <Amroth> I've no idea what has been discussed (except for the canon) or what still needs to be discussed.
[2012-04-01 20:55:54] <Gamling> The discussion was the sad state of the article updates for the Countdown to The Hobbit Movies.
[2012-04-01 20:55:55] <Amroth> As I joined after the meeting started.
[2012-04-01 20:56:20] <Gamling> They aren't getting done.
[2012-04-01 20:56:41] <Amroth> True, I think we had a simular discussion during the last meeting.
[2012-04-01 20:57:28] <Amroth> Was a conclusion reached?
[2012-04-01 20:57:51] <KingAragorn> I suppose we agreed that we should focus on The Hobbit bits as a group
[2012-04-01 20:59:18] <Amroth> I have to leave now (I have a a History school exam tomorrow).
[2012-04-01 21:00:24] <Gamling> Keep the Annals of Aman, the Grey Annals, and Appendix B in mind and you'll do fine.
[2012-04-01 21:01:31] <Amroth> xD
[2012-04-01 21:03:15] <KingAragorn> Good luck!
[2012-04-01 21:03:15] <Amroth> Bye
[2012-04-01 21:03:18] <KingAragorn> Bye!
[2012-04-01 21:03:24] <Amroth> Thanks!
[2012-04-01 21:03:29] <Gamling> Bye
[2012-04-01 21:03:48] |<-- Amroth has left irc.tolkiengateway.net (Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client)
[2012-04-01 21:05:21] <KingAragorn> I guess the meeting is adjourned?
[2012-04-01 21:06:17] <Gamling> I think we chit chatted enough about the topic you listed.
[2012-04-01 21:06:33] <KingAragorn> OK, meeting adjourned.