Forum:Premature page policies - again

I want to bring this up again. I really do think we shouldn't have these pages before the episode airs. As I stated before "We are not a news organization. We are an encyclopaedia which documents that which has happened, not that which will." As far as I can tell, there's no benefits to the page being created early, but there are benefits if we wait. These are the benefits of waiting to create articles, something which I truly think we should consider doing. --The Thirteenth Doctor 22:20, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Titles of episodes and character names are subject to change until the moment the episode airs. This removes that possibility.
 * Note: The change from The Pandorica Opens to The Pandorica Opens (TV story) took about 24 hours using a bot, and even then it didn't get everything. 
 * 1) The rumours and such don't get out of hand.
 * 2) The page will not be deleted countless times until "enough information" is gathered.
 * 3) Time can be spent doing other things to improve the wiki, not necessary things because someone can't wait a few weeks.
 * If we're really concerned about rumours and such, why not create a very basic page - "X is the Yth story of series Z" - as soon as the title is confirmed by reputable sources, and then just lock it until broadcast. A template with notices describing our policies against material which has not yet aired can be placed on the locked page. Having this up and viewable will discourage all the other problems apart from possible renaming, planning and discussion for the eventual unlocking can still take place on the article's talk page, and when the time comes we can easily unlock the page and quickly get it up to standard.
 * So long as there are missing pages, people will want to create them, and despite not being a news organisation we've inherited those enthusiastic viewers because of our status as a major reference work. With this plan I believe we can prevent our readers and users from jumping the gun, and drastically cut down the amount of housework the advanced users have to do. All we'll then have to worry about are the possible title changes as you say, but at the end of the day that's not a horrible piece of housework to accomplish and the redirects will preserve the site's functionality in the meantime. Rob T Firefly 22:39, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I can see what you're saying. That would work for episodes, and an admin can fully protect it until a certain time, ie when it airs. For characters and actors and such, I'm still against any pages being created. It's a compulsion to fill in those damned red links is what does it, which is why I can see your idea working. --The Thirteenth Doctor 22:47, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Here's a template I quickly threw together to illustrate:


 * This or something like it could be placed atop the protected pages before broadcast, along with extremely barebones info, possibly links to the previous/next story pages (similarly locked) in the infobox, and no characters or other things to redlink until broadcast. Here's a mockup. Rob T Firefly 05:25, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm okay with this. I know I've been creating the recent SJA episodes, only because it's tedious to go through and fix infoboxes after everyone's messed with it, so I just like to get the basic format and infobox in place before everyone starts filling the article.
 * I agree with characters and actors, I hate seeing articles written that say "This actor will appear in an episode of Series Fnarg" and the article being uncategorised and unsourced.
 * Currently I've got all the upcoming SJA episodes fully create protected (and I've got what I hope is every permutation of 'Christmas Special 2010' locked as well, you can see a full list of protected titles here).
 * Should these locked pages have the layout and infobox? Or just a note saying "this is story X of Series Y"? I'm in part in favour of having the basic layout of inbox/layout in place, that way it can be set up beforehand and then fully protected to a certain date, then when it's unprotected it's ready to be edited on. --Tangerineduel 11:17, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Exactly what I was thinking of; the point to this would be so admins can have the tidy infobox and template in place, without worrying about the info going untidy and requiring babysitting before broadcast.
 * I like the idea of having the basic layout there with the to be added notes, all the easier to fill in later and create a page that's more easily brought up to standard when it's unlocked. A completely empty or infobox-only page might result in a bit of a mess as the rush to populate it takes place; having the layout already there would simplify that for everyone. Rob T Firefly 01:40, October 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * Alrighty, it's all done.
 * Death of the Doctor has been created as a bare bones article, with Template:Protected until broadcast (as created by Rob T Firefly) on the top, Template:Full protect further down under the infobox also on it.
 * I've also updated the Tardis:Spoiler policy to reflect this, with a section on 'Actor and in-universe articles' for stuff yet to be broadcast any of those sort of articles will be deleted if they're created. --Tangerineduel 16:07, October 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks good! Glad I could help. Rob T Firefly 21:10, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Right. THIS IS A STUPID IDEA! Only Admin can edit but when some one else has usefull information you put it on the talk page and nothing happens. On all SJA pages there are Synopsis yet there not added to the page before being protected so for a week or what ever we have a page that has no information why don't we just wait untill after the show airs Joshoedit 19:16, November 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * The idea isn't that "nothing happens," the idea is that putting known pre-airing info on the talk page or forums gives us somewhere to collect and discuss the info before the page is unlocked. After the show airs, the article is unlocked and you or anyone else can easily move that known information from the talk and forum pages into it. Rob T Firefly 19:24, November 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * The idea isn't that "nothing happens," the idea is that putting known pre-airing info on the talk page or forums gives us somewhere to collect and discuss the info before the page is unlocked. 
 * Ahh we're supposed to be the Dr. who specialist wikipdea. ITS POINTLESS WHEN WIKIPIDEA ITS SELF HAS MORE RELEVENT INFO THEN US! and yes for death of the doctor i did put up info i found on the talk page. It wasn't disscused or added untill after protection was lifted
 * Heres just 2 soulution. why don't you "lock" the pages when theres vandalsum or an editing war or create the page AFTER the episode airs @ the moment we've got empty pages that are currently created a week in advance some times we have MONTHS in advance. Why should all the info go on the series page when we have specialised pages? Joshoedit 05:32, November 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * and yes for death of the doctor i did put up info i found on the talk page. It wasn't disscused or added untill after protection was lifted
 * That is exactly as it should work; discussion is fine, but adding to the article is meant to begin after airing. That's the whole point; future TV stories are not actually within the stated scope of this wiki, it's meant to focus on what has aired. Rob T Firefly 21:47, November 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * So why bother making blank and empty pages why not just wait until airing day to create the page? Joshoedit 22:18, November 17, 2010 (UTC)=
 * So why bother making blank and empty pages why not just wait until airing day to create the page? Joshoedit 22:18, November 17, 2010 (UTC)=

=


 * As discussed earlier in this forum thread, it was decided that populating the locked page with barebones info and an empty layout would make it easiest for the page to be quickly brought up to our standards with the known info once it's unlocked. When the page is opened up for normal use users can easily fill in the blank spots in the existing layout, rather than having to create the layout and populate it all at once.
 * If you haven't already done so, please read this entire page from the top; following the whole course of this discussion should give you a more complete understanding of where this site's admin and policies are coming from. Rob T Firefly 00:13, November 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed that vandalism is annoying i was involved in stopping an incident earlier this year its a good idea to block the pages BUT its stupid when its left with no information and abandoned. Also the pages are prime candidates for deletion as this section of the PAGE Rules . Also The Empty Planet took (and is still taking) 3 times longer to lose its stub then the nightmare man. You three are the only ones that agree with this new rule every talk page of senior members have "We want a poll. to change this""This rule is a waste of time" Etc.Joshoedit 20:06, November 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * If you were to stop shouting for a minute and actually read this forum, you will see why the rule is in effect. If you disagree with it, bring it up on a new forum and suggest changes you think should happen, and kingly ask others Users to put their ideas down. Shouting about it will not help your cause - all you need to do is start a new forum, as I have suggested and say 'When creating a new television episodes page, can we add in the synopsis before fulling protecting the page" and then give you reason(s). I would also check you spelling before publishing any more, as it can look really bad. Mini-mitch 19:56, November 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * If you were to stop shouting for a minute and actually read this forum, you will see why the rule is in effect. If you disagree with it, bring it up on a new forum and suggest changes you think should happen, and kingly ask others Users to put their ideas down. Shouting about it will not help your cause - all you need to do is start a new forum, as I have suggested and say 'When creating a new television episodes page, can we add in the synopsis before fulling protecting the page" and then give you reason(s). I would also check you spelling before publishing any more, as it can look really bad. Mini-mitch 19:56, November 20, 2010 (UTC)

Most users actually agreed with this policy, its just you (Joshoedit) and Ghastly that haven't really thought about it. If you had to constantly rollback the edits of randoms then you would understand. No one wants or needs a poll.--Skittles the hog 21:31, November 20, 2010 (UTC)