HBO content[]
Hello hello. Wanted to discuss the issue of mixing HBO and video game content here, since I think this might be the one article where we're doing that.
For the most part, we've been keeping the HBO and video game canons separate; different articles, even for things that share the same name like Boston/Boston (HBO series). Since this was a small article, we've included the HBO trivia of the known jokes from the book in this article instead of making a separate (HBO series) article for it. This has historically been, and is still, primarily an article for the artifact in The Last of Us/Part I/Left Behind, with a certain form that artifact articles follow. Most of the information and links on the page are video game-related. I wanted to check how we feel about handling the HBO information. I'm not particularly a fan of our current state, having HBO content in the "known jokes" section alongside game info, since it's a separate universe from the video games' canon. My current thoughts are:
- Move the HBO content to an (HBO series) article: Allows easier linking references to it from the HBO articles without having to "cross the streams" of the game and show canon spaces. However, it'd be a pretty short article on its own (if it weren't for the fact that it's a memorable artifact in the game, I don't know that it would have normally warranted an article for the TV show).
- Move the HBO info to the "Behind the scenes" section as trivia: Saves us having another very short article knocking around, but doesn't give the HBO version its own space.
- Keep it as-is and just accept it as an exception to the rule.
I lean toward option 1, but I want to see if anyone else has strong feelings about how hard we cut the line between the games and the show as a general policy. 😄 ❯ RinasaurusRex (talk) ❯ 00:50, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I guess I'm indecisive, because all 3 options sound good to me. I'm pretty sure I'm the one who originally added the show's jokes to the page, so in that sense part of me still favors option 3. Like you said, if it hadn't been a featured artifact in the game, I doubt we'd even consider giving it its own article for the show. But the problem with option 3 is, where do you draw the line? When is it okay to combine game & show content in the same article, and when do they need to be split? Probably better to just not introduce any ambiguity, and keep everything separate.
- So I guess I'll vote for option 1, also. Swedgin (talk) 04:10, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm also somewhat indecisive, since it's a relatively small article which would be split into an even smaller article. And as Rina mentioned, its validity is a bit ambiguous considering that artifacts don't exactly translate on-screen the same way they do in the games. It's the same reason why no one has created articles on weapons like the revolver or assault rifle, or even for something like the kid's drawing.
- I'm teetering between options 1 and 2. On one hand, we've been pretty consistent in keeping the two universes separate, but on the other, I can see why some trivial references such as this would be better off in a BTS section rather than having their own article. But as Swedgin said, where do we draw the line? Would we create articles for everything that has a video game counterpart, or make exceptions for certain types of content? NinjaFatGuy (talk) 18:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have to echo Ninja here. I like Option 1, but that would make a for lot of stub-ish articles on the wiki, which is my only real concern. Thing is, there are some artifacts especially, like those mentioned above that seem to be included just as Easter Eggs in the show, so Option 2 could work in some cases as well. Unfortunately, I have no idea how or where to draw the line on this. M67PattonZippo (talk) 22:50, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I will chime in my thoughts of this matter. As stated above, the clear debate here is less so much about this article specifically and furthermore towards the question regarding: how much content is deemed necessary to justify splitting an article from a united universe article (both HBO + game content) into two respective universes. While the length of content could be deemed a problem, it is worth noting we do have many short pages. To remind us of the debate had over the Firefly pendant articles, they are all astronomically short and are heavily repetitive in content (Pendant x is found at y. To collect it do z) but we for years have kept all of them despite their length. Therefore, regarding concerns over the length of the articles, we do have a substantial precedent for having short articles with repeptitive content, which these hypotheticall No Pun Intended articles would have given both are in each universe (TV and game).
- Based on all of that, I would say splitting the article in two is fair to do, especially given locations and uses of the book differ in each medium; while the narrative objective and content of the book's jokes are generally the same, their are distinct differences (eg: Ellie doesn't use it with Sam and Henry and there are substantially less jokes shared in the TV show compared to the game, on top of the lack of player mechanics to include too). Furthermore, I would also then say that an article for making a HBO version of the kid's drawing from Ish's hideout would be allowable as well. Unless anyone can come up with a different justifcation for keeping them united (that also doesn't contravene having all the Firefly pendant articles split as well), then this is my viewpoint. It also avoids us seeming to make "exceptions" to the distinctions which may confuse other editors and readers; by establishing a flat rule, we avoid seeming as though we are merely picking and choosing because we actually have a clear rule: if the content generates more than a single line, then it stands to split the article (hypothetical wording not final).
- To summarise, my vote is to split the article. Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 21:15, 10 August 2024 (UTC)