Talk:Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

A quick comment on the quotation limit issue
Yes, I have in the past added more quotes (on this page and others) than was deemed necessary. Yes, it is the perogative of the admins to delete unnecessary or troublesome posts. And yes, while I think that the rule is absolute cobblers and is frankly unworkable, (the whole point of this branch of Wikimedia is surely to showcase quotes from films/literature that are by their nature more quotable than "once every 15 minutes" as the rules seem to dictate, but that's an argument for another time,) I will be reasonable and not add any other quotes to the page until such time as the film can be more accurately transcribed.

However, in the interest of free speech and free thought, I feel it is necessary to go on record as saying that it would fairer and more sensible to apply this rule to articles that are already fully formed, and allow the quotes that are valid and are memorable to survive through a long-term process of elimination and not through some arbitrary quota system. Beyond that, I am and will always be loyal contributor. Radicaladz 15:41, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * While I do not disagree that the established guidelines may seem a bit limiting, these were arrived at after much debate and under threat of a potential shutting down of the site for overquoting from copyrighted works (see here, here, here, or here for some background). Should you wish to open this discussion again, feel free and I am sure there may be many other opinions on the matter. But, as we are currently operating under this guideline, if you would like to add a quote to this or other pages that are at their limit, you must first remove one that is already there. Again, feel free to do so, if you feel there is a better quote than one that is there. ~ UDScott 00:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you, UDScott, for the reply and the additional information. Since I'm only a semi-regular contributor, and I'm not much of a one for protracted debates over what some would uncharitably describe as "being anal" (I'm as guilty of it as anyone, after all), I don't think it's my place to reopen the debate over something that may pan out on its own. I simply want to make my feelings known on the subject, and in addition to express concern that this rule, (from my own admittedly limited research,) seemingly isn't being employed as hard or as fast as I had first imagined. if this were a concerted effort across the domain to limit negative feedback with regard to information usage I could almost step back and admit that perhaps the change would do Wikiquote some good. However, from what I've seen, SPvstW doesn't seem to be anywhere near the length of pages for other films of similar or calculable lengths, and that if such other films aren't being retroactively trimmed to fit said boundaries, it smacks of victimising newer pages at the expense of old ones. As I said, I'm not going to make waves on the subject, and I agree that it's the prerogative of admin staff such as yourself (saw your page; it's a wonder you have time to sleep) to keep this a safe and structured community, but I can't see how the limit can be applied everywhere, and a rule that isn't universal is meaningless. Radicaladz 22:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Again, I don't disagree with much of what you have written. The quotation limits are intended to apply to all pages, but we suffer from having a small number of active editors (especially compared to Wikipedia) who are simply unable to handle the large backlog of pages requiring trimming. Newer pages tend to get more attention because they pop up in the Recent Changes list. You'll also see more care taken with certain pages that have a large following (e.g. Buffy the Vampire Slayer) or are watched by one of the admins. There is a large list of pages that have been cited for having copyright issues (see Category:Pages which need their copyright status checked, where the current count is over 700 pages needing work - and I am sure that there are many more). ~ UDScott 01:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, it's agreed that we both agree. ;) And yes, having contributed to Buffy periodically, I know exactly what you mean. Radicaladz 08:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC)