Forum:Mythbusters - replacement page

So I'm working on that replacement for Mythbusters page I promoised on Monday... Then got distracted from... So never uploaded it. I wouldn't be suprised if we don't have this lot somewhere anyway. Been trying to make this specific to the wikia itself.

Heres so far;

What are "Source reference"?

These are proof of research, correctness or vailidation of data.

Why Source information?

Sourcing information is important to the wikia needs and helps back up statements on the wikia. Sources act as easily locating information for other editors to check. In otherwords, they act as quality control nd help other editors check information is correct.

List of Reiable sites All sources acceptable to the wikia will be listed below, the wikia will only accept these as reliable sources, when new ones come up they will be added to.


 * (List to come - basically we're going to limit this to only trust worthy sites)

What note to use as a source'

Youtube comments. Also, songs themseves can be problematic when used as sources. For example, some common complaints agaisnt Sonika are her pronounications. However, a well tuned song can create the illusion that Sonika is better then she is. Also, as proven within the fandom, often fans have divided opinions on quality and tuning, and "poor" quality songs have been known to gain popularity against "better" quality tuned songs.

Dealing with Rumours

If a rumour surrounding some information happens, remove this information ASAP if a legit source cannot be found. Even if the information is correct, the information can only be returned with proper sourcing information. Return when source specigfically declaring the subject matter at hands is found.

Any Exceptions?

There are no exceptions to this rule, however, there are some sections that are somewhat difficult to provide sources for.

Voicebank libraries are considered amongst the hardest sections to source and at times almost impossible to source. Even when sourced, many of these contain opinions which differ per user. This sections are the only sections you might be hard to push for sourcing. The reasons often vary, for example, Kaai Yuki has a soft vocal and therefore its fine to mention this in the section. However, this is actually difficult to source because few take time to describe a vocal in depth. Therefore the voicebank library sectiosn are the only sections you will likely see unsourced. But, information entered there is subject to change due to opinions at the time of writing, and will likely change depending on opinion even when sourced. Therefore even when sourced, this section may not be correct or neutral and will constantly be subject to changes. If any source seems out of line, editors should point this out in "Article Comments" and show proof of validation.

Popularity can also be hard to do, at when talking about popularity always list the date of entry. For example, if you look up Youtube hits on the "09/05/20012", note the date. Also record which sites you looked up and the hit numbers. Sites accepted as proof are NND, Youtube, Deviant Art, Pixiv. Google is not always a ideal source, but at a pinch can act as one. Reason being is the fresh hoold for information is difficult to place a boundary on and just about any result can occur, often not reflecting a true reflection on popularity.

Any further issues?

If in doubt, remove information ASAP.

Things not to post

In the past we accepted reactions to specific softwarevia a "Reception" sections. This turned out for the worst and was purely opinion-based with impossible to prove implications. Not all Voclaoids had offical reviews and not all Vocaloids had honest or in-depth reviews when they did, negative issues were often neglected and only praising was found. For example, Sweet Ann's Sound on sound review detailed heavily who and what she was, however, Sonika recieved a more limited review. Any information on the voicebank itself will be posted. Often the only intensive reception was from the fandom itself which was often bias and limited, which is why it was removed and replaced with "Popularity", which was sourcable.

Discussion
None of this becomes offical. Remember, this will replace Mythbusters. One-Winged Hawk 19:35, April 27, 2012 (UTC)