Talk:Issue 12

>_> err... power customization and Nem system are deffinitly not in i12, nor i13, or i14.. you won't see them in 2008 at all. --Sleepy Kitty 04:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

No idea who keeps on adding those. Leandro 14:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I added a heading "Speculated Content Unlikely to Happen" and moved Power Customization, Archnemesis/Alterego and UI Graphics Overhaul/Upgrade in there (the last one because I don't see the devs messing with the game's user interface at this point; at most I see them adding another powers tray, too much of a change to the user interface after 4 years is likely to do much more harm than good). I also removed "Various bug fixes/power alterations" because those things always happen, Issue release or not; we're getting a good chunk of changes right now with Defiance 2.0, new MOG, improved Rage, etc. Leandro 14:43, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Issue of Existence

Being that this is an encyclopedia of all things heroic (and villainous), should we really be waisting time on an article that consists only of speculation? - Blue Orchid 22:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes. That way when someone asks "is X going to happen in the next issue?" we point them to this page instead of repeating the same answers over and over. Leandro 14:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

An encyclopedia is a tome of events that have happened, not of events that will not happen. Issue 12 has not happened, nor has there been any official press release on what will come with Issue 12, therefor, it is speculation and does not belong here. This is an encyclopedia, not a message board. Asking That way when someone asks "is X going to happen in the next issue?" Really does belong on a message board, not here. This article is a waste of time and disk space. -Blue Orchid 15:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Clearly, this article is not for you. Feel free to ignore it.--GreyDog 16:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Paragon Wiki is very encyclopedic in nature, but it is not actually an encyclopedia. These Issue articles generally start out as highly speculative and gradually become increasingly factual as the Issue's release draws closer. (Such as the confirmed bit about SG mode.) The article is probably not ideal, but it does serve a helpful purpose and is not harmful. -- Sekoia 22:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you missed the point. Speculation belongs in a forum, not in an encyclopedic article. If you are presenting speculative information, even if it does become fact at a later time, you destroy your journalistic credibility. I would put little weight in anything a developer says in an interview only because a developer can only discuss updates to software as it exists at the time of the interview, and even then there may be intentional misinformation, either to protect the sensitivity of the project or to see how gullible fans are. Because you are choosing the maintain a wiki for City of Heores, you assume the responsibility to be accurate in the information you provide. -Blue Orchid 20:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Your opinion is a minority one. Speculative articles are perfectly appropriate in a knowledge database dealing with a constantly evolving topic.--GreyDog 00:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

o,o speculative articles of this nature are only allowed in small does, in an agreed upon format, and most notably marked as being such. You might note the "The features discussed here may be implemented in future issues and are subject to change before release." tag at the top. We put that there from the get go so that ppl know that the information is not accurate yet, and merely a listing of known features and projects that are in work.

When possible, we refine it as we're allowed to (often we're under a NDA on what we can add) and mark what content has been confirmed. As it is now, some of the spec info is still under spec and not confirmed because while its known that the devs would like it to be in this issue, it might have to wait till issue 13 instead. When i12 is no longer under NDA, we generally will move such to the next issue page.

o.o in the end, "journalistic credibility" is important to us, but this is a wiki! There is a very good reason why wiki's are not allowed as sources for any kind of serious work. Many wiki's wouldn't even bother with even marking the tag on there, we do as part of our professional pride. Your opinion on this matter does matter to us, but I'm afraid that this is a lesser of two evils. In order to prevent this page, we'd have to lock it to keep users from editing it. Its better this way where various different opinions are at a compromise.--Sleepy Kitty 01:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, your premise is flawed so your argument fails. This is not Encyclopedia Brittanica. The goal of this wiki is to maintain information about the City of Heroes/Villains game that would be of interest to the City of Heroes/Villains community. Speculative information regarding future issues is of interest to the community. It is thus appropriate. Nowhere on this wiki will you find any policy supporting your notion of "journalistic credibility". I'm sorry you're so adamantly opposed to this article, but it's fairly clear that your voice is in the minority here so the article's going to remain. And frankly, you're wrong about accuracy anyway. We'd be destroying our journalistic credibility if we listed speculative things as being confirmed content because that's clearly wrong. But we're not doing that. We're accurately reporting that certain things are speculative but unlikely, other things are possible, and a few things are confirmed. -- Sekoia 10:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

The addition of a clear marker stating that this article is based on speculation is a welcomed one. The reason that I have continued this argument, even though my voice is that of a minority, is to preserve credibility. You know that this is a wiki, I know that this is a wiki and we both know that the information is not going to be entirely accurate. However, there is a (good) chance that some visitors to this wiki will take this information to be gospel and use it accordingly, regardless of the fact that a wiki is not an acceptable source of serious work or not. The average user may not care or know any different in that regards.

Also, in furthering this argument for accuracy, we are creating articles based on a company's product that does not belong to us (unless one of you happen to work for NCSoft). While you are not paid representitives of NCSoft, you are representing their product in that you are creating a fansite about their product. This directly reflects their product and since we enjoy using our product, it would be our duty in maintaining a fansite regarding the product to cast the product in the best light we can. Ensuring accuracy and at least tagging articles properly (i.e. speculative articles) would serve the product the best. This is why I'm asking people to be careful. I've seen sites get shut down and/or webmasters get sued because of fan sites not accurately representing a product or proper credit being given. -Blue Orchid 12:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)