Speculation and theory

[Joe ST he/him]

Are we allowed to put Alloy of Law speculation in these articles?

What's our policy on speculation and theory in articles? Especially relating to unreleased books.

[mycoltbug]

I thought at one point that we had said Speculation and Theory weren't to be added to the Wiki. I think the reason was because we wanted the Wiki to be verifiable information. But I could be wrong, I've been known to be every once in a while.

[Joe ST he/him]

I thought at one point that we had said Speculation and Theory weren't to be added to the Wiki. I think the reason was because we wanted the Wiki to be verifiable information. But I could be wrong, I've been known to be every once in a while.

Indeed it doesnt really make sense to speculate much on the wiki, else there'd be no point for forums.

[Eerongal he/him]

I thought at one point that we had said Speculation and Theory weren't to be added to the Wiki. I think the reason was because we wanted the Wiki to be verifiable information. But I could be wrong, I've been known to be every once in a while.

Yeah, i think that was something that came up some time back, and we decided to leave all theory on the forums.

[Chaos he/him]

I think we can actually put some theories on the wiki as an archive. Sometimes speculation can be relevant to an article, such as Adonalsium, which we don't really know what it is, precisely. So it's kind of guesswork.

We should not discuss theories, at least, but commonly espoused ideas can be placed in there. I want to make a Theories category on the wiki, with special rules and such for that. My rationale being that if the Coppermind is the complete source, then these things are useful to have in there. But I'm thinking more cosmere ideas, there. Book speculation is something entirely different.

I don't know how we want to handle book speculation. On one hand, if at the bottom of an article people want to put Speculation, and link to various ideas, I think that could be okay, as long as that does not overshadow the factual contents of the article.

Ultimately, anything on the wiki should add to people's understanding of the topic at hand. Can speculation do that, sometimes? Yes, of course. If it is really, genuinely adding to the article, then I believe my only additional requirement would be to ensure that speculation is clearly labeled.

There is a lot of wiggle-room here. We should take things on a case-by-case basis. Darniil made this question on the Talk:Spook page, so I'm assuming this would be about if Spook is the Lord Mistborn. That's a really low-level speculation (and it's heavily implied). Are we seriously going to contest that?

Like I said, I would need to know what was going to be said to make a judgment. If it's about the Lord Mistborn, carry on.

[Joe ST he/him]

well yes, commonly held/debated theories warrant inclusion, so that people know where to go look for more information on the topics. but personal speculation should be discussed on the forums, then if it gets espoused enough, it should be mirrored on the wiki..

edit: on the other hand, speculation such as Darmiil's is probably too much spoilers, since people might not have read the prerelease materials, and some (such as I) dont want to, nor want to know any of the story before it's released for real

[Chaos he/him]

Well, the Coppermind is chock full of spoilers. Publicly released sample chapters are acceptable material to make articles about, in my opinion.

[Zayde he/him]

But the thing is, the book hasn't even been released yet. Some people's desire to get the most out of their book purchase is greater than their instant gratification desire. Yea the Coppermind is full of spoilers, but those books have already been published so if you're on the wiki, chances are you've already read what you're looking up. If it hasn't been published, there are significantly more people who haven't read the sample chapters because not everyone wants to read them ahead of time. So what I'm saying is this case is different because there are a greater number of people actively trying to avoid spoilers for Alloy of Law until it is published. So let's say you've read Mistborn, but not the Alloy of Law chapters, and you look Mistborn up on the wiki, chances are you will run across info on Alloy of Law because it's part of the overall Mistborn series. On the other hand if you're looking up information on say Elantris and haven't read Mistborn, you're not likely to run across Mistborn spoilers in Elantris articles. Unless you happen to stray into Cosmere articles.

The issue is less about spoiling the book your looking up, and more about accidentally spoiling other books while looking up info on the book you've already read.

Which raises an interesting point. Maybe the Coppermind should clearly mark articles that relate to the Cosmere and multiple series so that people know they should expect spoilers from "unrelated" books (unrelated meaning that Warbreaker and Elantris are essentially standalone novels with the exception of behind the scenes cosmology).

[Joe ST he/him]

Which raises an interesting point. Maybe the Coppermind should clearly mark articles that relate to the Cosmere and multiple series so that people know they should expect spoilers from "unrelated" books (unrelated meaning that Warbreaker and Elantris are essentially standalone novels with the exception of behind the scenes cosmology).

tis a noble goal, and one I fully support, but not when using mediawiki. Marking things becomes incredibly unwieldy. I'd far prefer to create a system that allows the users to select which books they have read and only show informations on those books, but that is definitely unattainable with mediawiki or really any current system... alas, I can dream

[Eerongal he/him]

tis a noble goal, and one I fully support, but not when using mediawiki. Marking things becomes incredibly unwieldy. I'd far prefer to create a system that allows the users to select which books they have read and only show informations on those books, but that is definitely unattainable with mediawiki or really any current system... alas, I can dream

just a thought, but this extension or one like it might work for something like that. Though, i dont know if we could set it up to where a user has control over it themselves

[Chaos he/him]

I think we could be able to put up disclaimers for cosmere stuff, or really spoilers for any other book on an as-needed basis. So for Spook, there could be a section at the bottom with an Alloy of Law spoiler link, since he is primarily in the Mistborn trilogy. Does that make sense?

[darniil he/him]

Sorry for jumping in so late on this thread. And thanks, whoever it was, for bringing my question here.

As Chaos assumed in post 5, my question on the Talk:Spook page was about whether or not to mention that the Lord Mistborn is probably Spook. That was something that I didn't want to just add in without checking first, hence my question.

Since I'm still a newbie here, I'll keep my mouth shut on the topic and stick by whatever decision is reached by The Powers That Be.

---Unrelated to thread, but informational---

I created my account here because my mother and I were discussing the Mistborn trilogy in relation to the Alloy of Law chapters, trying to remember details for various characters. I knew about the site, so I came over to look things up and discovered the information I wanted wasn't listed yet. So, after finding the pertinent chapters in HoA, I decided to add the info I was looking for in case someone else ended up looking for it. I hope I can be more of a help to the wiki in the future.

Also: It's interesting the things one can stumble upon when looking up info on the Kuiper Belt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysnomia_%28mythology%29

who shares her nature with Atë ("ruin");

[Joe ST he/him]

yo Damill, dont worry about adding things before asking. If we decide it doesn't belong, it will be removed, but before then it might as well be there so we can easily discuss its relevance.

and damnation, thats an awesome coincidence

Joe

[Chaos he/him]

Sorry for jumping in so late on this thread. And thanks, whoever it was, for bringing my question here.

As Chaos assumed in post 5, my question on the Talk:Spook page was about whether or not to mention that the Lord Mistborn is probably Spook. That was something that I didn't want to just add in without checking first, hence my question.

Since I'm still a newbie here, I'll keep my mouth shut on the topic and stick by whatever decision is reached by The Powers That Be.

---Unrelated to thread, but informational---

I created my account here because my mother and I were discussing the Mistborn trilogy in relation to the Alloy of Law chapters, trying to remember details for various characters. I knew about the site, so I came over to look things up and discovered the information I wanted wasn't listed yet. So, after finding the pertinent chapters in HoA, I decided to add the info I was looking for in case someone else ended up looking for it. I hope I can be more of a help to the wiki in the future.

Also: It's interesting the things one can stumble upon when looking up info on the Kuiper Belt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysnomia_%28mythology%29

That is some very cool trivia.

As for Spook, just put that info in a separate section at the bottom of the article, with a disclaimer about Alloy of Law speculation. I think that'd be fine.