DF2014 Talk:Blue diamond

Removal of first joke

I think that the first joke in the D for Dwarf section ought to be removed. It feels forced (see "blocky-limbed") and out of character for the wiki, and more importantly, i worry that it may be seen as promoting that which it references, making the Wiki look bad for promoting a game that cannot be played ethically and is poorly maintained by one of the worst, most anti-competitive and monopolistic companies in the world. BlueManedHawk (talk) 11:48, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I wasn't gonna say anything at first, but I noticed you're really on this. I think you're putting a little more emphasis on these jokes than you really need to. Also, you're using the word "promoting", which is a strong word in this case. I mean, not really. That's not much "promoting", we're basically just making silly tongue-in-cheek references to pre-existing products. Also, I think the entirety of Earth and its grandmother knows about the existence of Minecraft anyway... I'm not exactly a fan of that company myself, but you're making it sound like more than what this really is. -- Zippy (talk) 12:12, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

I get that it's a joke, and that many people already know what Minecraft is, but what I'm mostly concerned about is that it's going to hurt the reputation of the Wiki and make it seem like it supports immorality. However, even assuming that it doesn't, I think that just the fact that it feels forced and out of character for the wiki alone is criteria enough to remove it. BlueManedHawk (talk) 12:15, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeeeeeeaaaaahhhh... My man, I think I can say with complete confidence that this wiki is proooobably not going to have that issue. Also, saying the joke is out of character for the wiki is false (unless there's a specific detail I'm missing), because there's a plethora of pages that have those same type of jokes. A slight sprinkle of humor on the wiki is fine, at least in those "D for Dwarf" sections. Even the elves page has constant references to them being tree-loving hippies and how hated they are by the community. You're really looking too deep into this. -- Zippy (talk) 12:52, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

> [S]aying the joke is out of character for the wiki is false[…], because there's a plethora of pages that have those same type of jokes.

Do you have any examples? Also, even if the joke is in-character, i still think that the forced feeling of the joke should lead to it either being rewritten to be more subtle and elegant (i hate that word, but i can't think of a better one) or being removed entirely. BlueManedHawk (talk) 13:13, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

This page makes a reference to the character "Sparkster" from the Rocket Knight games. This page makes a Cheetos joke, and also references the infamous game, Cheetah Men. This page references a very well-known sponge that lives in an underwater pineapple. This page makes a joke about the band, The Beatles. This list goes on. I'm really, really not understanding your viewpoint. Do you think that people will view that blue diamond page, then suddenly go "Gasp! By golly, is this wiki really promoting stuff from that bad company!! >=O"? -- Zippy (talk) 13:59, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the examples. All of those also feel forced.

As for people's reactions, i think it will probably be more of an "oh ffs why they referencing that shit", which is still not a great reaction to induce in people. BlueManedHawk (talk) 14:05, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

🤔 I'm sorry man, but this feels so random. I don't think I've ever seen anyone remotely care about those low-key references. Also, I don't think you understand this community very well. We all share hilarious stories about what the game randomly generates, a lot of which are very jarring and ridiculously hilarious. It's not a game that's taken too seriously because of how random it could be. The wiki kind of reflects that. Also... how old are you? -- Zippy (talk) 14:20, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to be honest: I'm not sure how any of what you just said relates to this. Could you please clarify? Also, i'm not going to post my private information online. BlueManedHawk (talk) 14:24, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm still not comprehending how having these little references is somehow a big deal. Not one person in the community has ever complained about them, and this wiki isn't 100% serious anyway. It's really not worth the energy to even think "oh ffs why they referencing that shit". I don't think I can further simplify how I explained the humor of the community and the wiki. In the end, I'm sure that Minecraft reference is gonna be sitting on that page for an extremely long time, unless a mod (for some very random reason) decides that's not allowed.

I'm starting to think this is more about your hatred for Mojang rather than the wiki. -- Zippy (talk) 18:09, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

No, it's a hatred for Microsoft, which i'm sure most people would agree is completely rational. I wasn't trying to criticize your explanation of the culture of the humor of the wiki; i just didn't understand why it was relevant to the discussion. My concern is that having the reference there in the state that it's currently in (where in terms of interpretation it seems to me that it's neutral at best and complimentary at worst) will lead to the wiki being interpreted in a bad light. BlueManedHawk (talk) 18:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I'm gonna reset the tabbing so the text isn't so squished. Okay, so... Yeah... What I'm getting out of this, is more of a "let's remove that reference because I hate this company" rather than a "let's remove that reference because a lot of people hate this company". I'm in no way trying to sound mean about this, but I find this a bit ridiculous. The way I see these pages, are things with a little sprinkle of goofy references to a thing that's popular and most people know exist anyway, rather than some sort of shameless plug. If a company turned babies into smoothies, then yeah, that'd be a large problem. On that note, if you think that strongly that Microsoft/Mojang shouldn't be referenced, then maybe you should head over to the Villains and Heroes Wikis and get them both shut down completely, because those two places exist solely to have pages on fictional characters from every form of media. -- Zippy (talk) 22:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

It's not just that i hate this company, it's that hating this company is completely rational. See |here for some examples. Microsoft is an anticompetitive company that exploits its consumers via its monopolies for its own benefit, not caring about the long term effects over its short-term monetary benefit. They are clearly evil, and must be completely taken down, but that's beyond the scope of the wiki. What the wiki can do is stop promoting them by removing references that aren't sarcastic or that portray them as good.

I'm not against the Villains and Heroes wiki documenting stuff related to Minecraft because, as far as i know, their goal is to be a completely comprehensive archive of all information relating to villains and heroes in any piece of media, regardless of whether the media is morally okay or not. There's a certain site that i would compare this to, but frankly i'm genuinely concerned that if i made that comparison i would get my account here in trouble. Anyway, historical preservation is something that i can always get behind. But this seems to be getting away from the scope of this discussion. BlueManedHawk (talk) 08:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

You think that Microsoft is evil and that hating Microsoft is rational. Frankly, I personally think that your viewpoint is irrational. If you want to go on a crusade against them, then feel free to do it somewhere else. --Quietust (talk) 16:27, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Why do you think my viewpoint is irrational? BlueManedHawk (talk) 18:57, 28 July 2022 (UTC)