SiIvaGunner Wiki:Moot/Log 2022 October 01

22:59: Ironwestie: Welcome!
23:00: Pokemonfreak777: hello
23:00: mBluett: hi oomfies
23:00: Coolbeans Cruz: wassup guys
23:00: SonicFan53: 👋
23:00: Madotsuki417: Will try to be more active for this one haha, making something at the same time but I'll amke do
23:00: Mick the Squirrel: bonjour
23:00: Spottygamester: Hello
23:00: FelixJeremy: I can't be here once again
23:00: FelixJeremy: I wish you a great meeting
23:00: Spottygamester: Thanks Eddie.
23:00: mBluett: mootuals
23:00: FelixJeremy: And maybe dm me if they are important I need to be aware off
23:01: Ironwestie: We'll wait another couple minutes for folks to filter in
23:01: ZachHasArrived: I might have to leave soon, but here's my first proposal if you get to it: User:ZachHasArrived/My Moot proposals
23:01: Ironwestie: While we wait, presenters, please be ready to present
23:02: Coolbeans Cruz: I probably won’t talk much this time because I’m at a party but I’ll try to at least vite
23:02: Ironwestie: Our docket for today:

- Ironwestie - Should we increase the frequency of moots (2 weeks)?
- pokemonfreak777 - Discuss thresholds/criteria for memes/frequently ripped tracks/anything else that might need it (may need multiple meetings)
- Mick - Remove Mr. Krabs as a meme and replace it with something else
- ZachHasArrived - Redefining "Sans is Ness" meme
- minindo (on behalf of overcast) - This issue [https://discord.com/channels/787504555763826738/787504555801051172/1015008524956336139]
- Mick - How do we define visual artists?
- Mick - Contributor art subpage gallery
- ZachHasArrived - Reformatting rip pages with "special" titles
- pokemonfreak777 - should new categories be created for images in the following groups (Page comment, User thread, User blog, subsections under "Used on the wiki"), and if not, what existing category should they be in? (Reference)

Spottygamester pinned a message to this channel. See all pinned messages. — 10/01/2022

23:03: Ironwestie: Alright, let's begin
23:03: Mick the Squirrel: In the event that i'm interrupted irl or just stop talking you all are free to discuss my points without me
23:03: Ironwestie: First order of business: I noticed that we have a LARGE docket this time and we also did last time
23:03: Ironwestie: so I wanted to gauge interest on having the moot run every 2 weeks, or at least have another moot in 2 weeks
23:03: Ironwestie: which would be October 15
23:04: Ironwestie: Any thoughts?
23:04: Spottygamester: I wouldn't mind that tbh.
23:04: Coolbeans Cruz: I’m all good with this
23:04: ZachHasArrived: Yeah, I think 2 weeks should be the norm.
23:04: Mick the Squirrel: agree, two weeks is a good time
23:04: Pokemonfreak777: personally i am in favor of this. the docket is likely never going to be shorter
23:05: Spottygamester: Especially since we've been getting a lot of topics during these lately that don't always get discussed in a single moot due to how many there are.
23:05: Madotsuki417: yeah, i was wondering if the frequency of moots would eventually run out in the past
23:05: Madotsuki417: but i think for now we dont need to worry about this and theres
23:05: Madotsuki417: way more things people actually want to cover
23:06: Ironwestie: mm okay. I'm hesitant to say every two weeks since I won't have time to run them every time
23:06: Ironwestie: but I'm up to do Oct 15 for now
23:07: Pokemonfreak777: other options are a temporary increase until we get through most of the major topics or delegating the role to another mod
23:08: Ironwestie: mm, that is a good option if we know how may topics we need to cover. that's one of the reasons why I'm thinking we should feel out how Oct 15 and November go before committing to every 2 weeks
23:08: Spottygamester: Doing a test run isn't a bad idea at all.
23:08: Spottygamester: Plus we don't know if we're frequently going to get this many discussion topics regularly.
23:09: Ironwestie: Yep. As for the latter, I'll check in with the mod team
23:09: Ironwestie: Okay, let's do Oct 15 for now
23:09: Ironwestie: Next presenter, you have the floor
23:09: Pokemonfreak777: oh i guess we're not voting on that?
23:10: Ironwestie: oh right haha
23:10: Ironwestie: Summary: We're going to meet again on Oct 15 and assess whether we need to do every 2 weeks

-----

23:10: Mick the Squirrel:
23:10: Spottygamester:
23:10: Pokemonfreak777:
23:10: SonicFan53:
23:10: Coolbeans Cruz:
23:10: Ironwestie:
23:11: Madotsuki417:
23:11: Ironwestie: 7-0 support, great
23:11: Ironwestie: @pokemonfreak777 , you have the floor
23:11: Ironwestie:

- pokemonfreak777 - Discuss thresholds/criteria for memes/frequently ripped tracks/anything else that might need it (may need multiple meetings)

23:12: Pokemonfreak777: ok so in the last moot, we started a discussion about establishing some baseline thresholds/criteria for various things on the wiki, notably memes. since then, i have written a tentative section detailing some preliminary guidelines for minimum requirements for memes, taking into account some of the concerns expressed during and after the moot, located here: User:Pokemonfreak777/Miscellaneous Criteria#Meme criteria

Nothing written here is set in stone yet; I'd like to use this list as a starting point for today's discussion on memes, mainly the following: Which bullet points need modifications before being made official, what kind of modifications and why?

Example modifications: increasing/decreasing threshold, turning a recommendation into a requirement and vice versa

Which bullet points should be included/excluded as a requirement/recommendation and why?

If you are able to provide an alternative for a proposed excluded bullet point, this would be helpful as well.

Which bullet points here are good as is and can be made official?
Assuming a potential meme meets all the requirements, what should the moot proposal and discussion look like?

simple criteria check + rubber stamp approval vs. arguing your case using requirements as evidence

23:13: Ironwestie: Aside: I appreciate how well thought out this is
23:13: Spottygamester: Same here.
23:13: Ironwestie: To keep this organized, shall we go through this point-by-point?
23:13: Spottygamester: I'd say so yeah.
23:13: Pokemonfreak777: sounds good
23:14: Ironwestie:

Memes must be used in at least 30 rips.

23:14: Coolbeans Cruz: agree with this
23:14: Spottygamester: I think I'm okay with that.
23:14: Madotsuki417: i think 30 is a fine enough threshold
23:14: SonicFan53: Same here
23:14: Mick the Squirrel: i agree with that minimum but that would require steve harvey and eggnog to be deleted
23:15: Ironwestie: @pokemonfreak777 Is this list intended to be retroactive as well?
23:15: Coolbeans Cruz: honestly I don’t really see them as memes
23:15: Madotsuki417: i would actually consider these old minor memes from 2017 honestly so
23:16: Pokemonfreak777: personally i say yes, but that would depend on what the consensus wants to do
23:16: Ironwestie: my impression was that this list of criteria is just to spur new discussion of new memes
23:16: Madotsuki417: i think a legacy rule would be fine for what categories we currently have
23:16: Madotsuki417: and if people have a problem witht heir existence they can be removed like hwat happened with asthetic anyway during a moot
23:17: Pokemonfreak777: yeah the main goal of this list is to help decide whether the new memes qualify
23:18: Pokemonfreak777: of course memes that don't quite reach but were already established as a meme can be grandfathered in, which isnt uncommon
23:18: SonicFan53: if that 30-rip requirement gets put in place, what new memes would be there because of it?
23:19: Mick the Squirrel: ooh
23:19: SonicFan53: (just a curious question)
23:19: Pokemonfreak777: i think mick has a list somewhere?
23:19: Mick the Squirrel: User:Mick the Squirrel/meme appearance threshold
23:19: Ironwestie: this is only one of several criteria on the list, keep in mind
23:19: Spottygamester: Mhm
23:19: SonicFan53: Yeah, i know, it's just a curious question
23:19: Spottygamester: I feel we should move on to the next point.
23:20: Ironwestie: any strong oppositions / supports for this 30 rips rule?
23:20: Spottygamester: I don't mind it.
23:20: Spottygamester: I think a lot of people in here see that as the standard already.
23:20: Madotsuki417: theres nothing wrong that'd happen with 30yeah
23:20: Coolbeans Cruz: I feel like we should just go through all the rules faster because this will take wayyyyy too long
23:20: Ironwestie: sure

23:20: Ironwestie:

Memes must be used by at least 2 rippers.

23:21: Spottygamester: I'm okay with this one as well.
23:21: Coolbeans Cruz: I think there should be more ripper maybe?
23:21: Mick the Squirrel: yeah thats simple i agree
23:21: Ironwestie: how many?
23:21: Coolbeans Cruz: I think 4 is a good number (edit: I think 3 is better)
23:21: Spottygamester: I feel if we extended the criteria it would be too much.
23:21: Madotsuki417: yeah that would eliminate cases of jokes being forced by like 1 person
23:21: Pokemonfreak777: some context for this one. this is specifically to prevent something like quinn wolf (which only one contributor has been doing) becoming a meme
23:21: Madotsuki417: i think 3 is fine enough honestly
23:22: SonicFan53: I'd say 3 or 4 would be a good number for this one personally
23:22: Madotsuki417: 2 is ok but i feel like there's still a couple "2 people's random injoke" things that can come in cause of that
23:22: Madotsuki417: 3 people's random injoke however is perfectly ok
23:22: Ironwestie: agreed, Memmy
23:22: Pokemonfreak777: im okay with 3 or 4

23:22: Ironwestie:

Memes associated with channel event(s) should also have a presence outside of them.

23:22: Spottygamester: Hard agree with this as well.
23:23: Madotsuki417: i guess what counts as a presense? idk being used in some substantial way outside the event like what happened with yankin
23:23: Coolbeans Cruz: agreed
23:23: Ironwestie: (I'm just going to move on whenever there's a lull in the conversation and then come back near the end)
23:23: Madotsuki417: bad bunny for example was literally only used for easter and makde like what 2 opperances
23:23: Pokemonfreak777: this one i added cuz of the fortnite event and hamood discussions
23:23: SonicFan53: absolutely agreed
23:23: SonicFan53: harlem shake is a good example
23:24: Spottygamester: I think what it means is that, it's not a meme if the majority of uses of the source are tied to events.
23:24: Spottygamester: That's how I read it anyway.
23:24: Madotsuki417: i dont like this definition cause that stll honestly applies to most memes
23:24: Madotsuki417: that get used in events
23:24: Madotsuki417: but i get what the intent of it is
23:24: Madotsuki417: and i agree with that
23:24: Coolbeans Cruz: I don’t completely agree with this, Harlem shakeover had like 200 rips and I’d still call it a meme
23:24: Spottygamester: It was considered a meme before the event though.
23:25: Ironwestie: so maybe "majority" isn't the best term
23:25: SonicFan53: maybe more like
23:25: Madotsuki417: i think what we should more say is
23:25: SonicFan53: if it is consistently used outside of events
23:25: Madotsuki417: there should be a very obvious consistent presence of the joke
23:25: Madotsuki417: outisde of the 1 evnt
23:25: Madotsuki417: like yankin popped up a good chunk after yankover and persisted for the rest of the year
23:25: Madotsuki417: harlem shake was already running outside of shakeover
23:26: Madotsuki417: watch me whip is a mainstay of the channel and that was "introduced" with an event
23:26: Madotsuki417: same with gadget
23:26: SonicFan53: and still appears sometimes now
23:26: Madotsuki417: this would mostly discredit things like dat boi and bad bunny which
23:26: Madotsuki417: dont really pop up that often since their events
23:26: Spottygamester: Yeah
23:26: Madotsuki417: dat boi like does pop up but nowhere near enough to call it a meme imo
23:26: Madotsuki417: and bad bunny ☠️
23:26: Ironwestie: So something like: "Memes associated with channel event(s) should also have a presence outside of them; they are consistently used outside of events."
23:27: Madotsuki417: cdsm is also a good example of a event joke that ecame a mainstay
23:27: Spottygamester: I only associate Bad Bunny rips with that one Easter event.
23:27: Spottygamester: CDSM is a very good example yeah.
23:27: Ironwestie: Mk, finding the next point

23:27: Ironwestie:

Memes should be relevant to the channel's lore.

23:28: Spottygamester: Not sure about this one.
23:28: Coolbeans Cruz: hard disagree, there is very little lore nowadays
23:28: Madotsuki417: mixed on this one? cause most memes will never be relevant to the channels lore if they are not from 2016
23:28: Spottygamester: The lore has been dormant for ages.
23:28: Ironwestie: Note this is a "should"
23:28: Madotsuki417: steve harvey got lucky for being in halloween 2019
23:28: Ironwestie: not a "must"
23:29: Madotsuki417: yeah but i feel like its not that major of a point as to what counts as a siiva meme
23:29: SonicFan53: yeah i'm a bit iffy on this point
23:29: Pokemonfreak777: i included this mainly because i wasnt sure if there were "memes" that arent like used a lot but referred to because of some underlying channel history
23:29: Madotsuki417: i get the intent but at this point most memes are never going to fit this criteria
23:29: Coolbeans Cruz: yeah
23:29: Madotsuki417: and most memes that would are legacy ones anyway
23:29: Spottygamester: This is the main issue I have with it as well.
23:29: Ironwestie: agreed. lore relevance is not a helpful measure of what makes a meme a meme
23:30: Mick the Squirrel: justinrpg?
23:30: Madotsuki417: lore relevance is more a bonus not a requirement/suggestion
23:30: Ironwestie: yes, that's what I mean. like if something is used in lore, it's great and is probably a meme
23:30: Ironwestie: but most things won't be used in lore
23:31: Pokemonfreak777: btw we can decide to remove/add points here as well (such as this one it seems)
23:31: Ironwestie: mhm. what I'll do near the end is have us vote for each of them to keep / remove
23:31: Ironwestie: so moving on to multi-source memes
23:32: Ironwestie: @pokemonfreak777 could you explain what you mean by "multi source memes"?
23:33: Pokemonfreak777: so last moot, mick brought up an interesting point about the 30 rip threshold. if an artist has 30 songs each used in a rip, should they be a meme?
23:34: SonicFan53: I'm guessing stuff like Daft Punk and Maroon 5
23:34: SonicFan53: are what "multi source memes" refers to
23:34: Mick the Squirrel: and general video games (robobot, undertale, doki)
23:34: Pokemonfreak777: the idea behind the multi-source meme is trying to solve that issue by ensuring they have multiple memes that are at least single-source
23:34: SonicFan53: Oh and those yeah
23:34: Ironwestie:
```
Memes must have at least 5 sources.
```

23:35: Madotsuki417: this might be too high becuase of well- big chungus

ironwestie pinned a message to this channel. See all pinned messages. — 10/01/2022

23:35: Madotsuki417: that has 3 main ones
23:35: Spottygamester: Oh yeah that's a good point lol.
23:35: Madotsuki417: i dont know if there directly needs to be a count on how much sources there should be honestly
23:36: Madotsuki417: i feel like this exact same criteria would be easily able to apply if a joke had like- 2 main sources for example
23:36: Ironwestie: mm, I think this criteria is for bands and sources like Daft Punk and Maroon 5, as SonicFan mentioned
23:37: Ironwestie: I don't recall whether we have any sources like those as memes tho
23:37: Spottygamester: MLP can also count for this as well.
23:37: Madotsuki417: Hololive is a recent one
23:37: Spottygamester: Yeah.
23:37: Madotsuki417: and if it was used by more people, quinn wolf
23:37: Spottygamester: and Hololive is almost entirely Sarve.
23:38: Ironwestie: okay. I'll move on

23:38: Ironwestie:

Each source under consideration must fulfill the single-source meme criteria.

23:38: Ironwestie: this maybe points to Memmy's point here
23:39: Spottygamester: That makes sense, but I do wonder how the number of uses would apply to them.
23:39: Ironwestie: I'm personally undecided on this one. I'm not sure how it would work
23:39: Spottygamester: Same here.
23:40: Spottygamester: I do like the intent though.
23:40: Ironwestie: like if an artist has a hundred songs, do all of them need to categorize the artist as a meme? I think that's a bit much
23:40: Ironwestie: so meme significance
23:40: Ironwestie: I think that's pretty clear
23:41: Ironwestie: unless you have something to add pokemonfreak?
23:42: Pokemonfreak777: i guess an example i can think of for the previous point is minecraft. assume for a moment the only rips we got from it were from the volume alpha and beta tracks. would minecraft be a meme?
23:42: Spottygamester: Not really.
23:42: Spottygamester: At least in my eyes.
23:43: Pokemonfreak777: yeah i agree. however under the single source meme criteria it would technically count since each of them has ~30ish tracks
23:43: Ironwestie: ya I get the intent, just not sure how to reconcile all of the weird cases this would allow
23:44: Pokemonfreak777: i guess the idea was something like first 5 sources need to fulfill the single-source requirements and the rest can be under
23:45: Spottygamester: I think we should just focus on trying to sort out the criteria for single source memes first before going on with this.
23:45: Pokemonfreak777: im okay with that
23:45: Ironwestie: In any case, I'll move on. we can loop back to these points at the end
23:45: Ironwestie: Meme significance

Memes that qualify as a single/multi-source meme in one season are minor memes.
Memes that qualify as a single/multi-source meme in multiple seasons are memes.
Memes that qualify as a single/multi-source meme in all seasons are major memes.

23:46: Coolbeans Cruz: I disagree, it should not just depend on when the meme was used
23:46: Coolbeans Cruz: also this would stop every meme after 2016 from being major
23:46: Spottygamester: Going to be honest, I really don't like this idea. I feel like making qualifications for when something is a major or minor meme would really overcomplicate things.
23:46: Ironwestie: that's a good point
23:47: Spottygamester: This is another good point as well.
23:47: Mick the Squirrel: can we remove the "minor / major" line from the meme pages in that case
23:47: Madotsuki417: honestly i dont dislike the idea of categorizing what counts as a major/minor meme
23:47: Madotsuki417: but i feel like it would overcomplicate things a tad
23:47: Ironwestie: Mick, that's a different discussion altogether
23:47: Madotsuki417: espeically since the idea of what counts as a major meme is very blurred nowadays
23:48: Spottygamester: Yeah.
23:48: Ironwestie: Okay. We've reached the end of our list
23:48: Ironwestie: to summarize,
23:49: Ironwestie: it seems like:
we're mostly okay with the "at least 30 rips" requirement
...and the "at least 2 rippers" requirement (people suggested it be 3)
we're good with the "channel events should have presence outside of them" point

but we haven't reached consensus on the other parts (and for some we're opposed to them)

23:50: Ironwestie: have I missed anything? does anyone have anything else to bring up?
23:50: Spottygamester: There was some debate on increasing the ripper threshold.
23:51: Ironwestie: yes, people recommended it be 3 instead of 2. I'll edit my post
23:51: Pokemonfreak777: i guess just that if anyone has any alternatives to the removed points or any additional points they think should be added feel free to bring them up now (if you have any right now) or at a future moot
23:52: Ironwestie: I'm not sure what to do about multi-source memes and significance, myself. I'll have to think about it more
23:52: Spottygamester: I think we should save those two for a future discussion.
23:53: Spottygamester: Since there's still clearly a lot about them that needs to be thought about.
23:53: Pokemonfreak777: sounds good. the page will stay up until everything is resolved to satisfaction
23:53: Mick the Squirrel: should we skip my krabs point then? it was kinda relying on an answer to that
23:53: Ironwestie: sure, Mick
23:53: Madotsuki417: 👍
23:53: Ironwestie: so I'll take the single source points to a vote, and we'll put it into practice for now if it gets support
23:54: Ironwestie: but we'll be updating these rules overtime. this is a huge discussion that will take multiple meetings
23:54: Spottygamester: Sounds alright to me. This isn't going to come into effect just yet.
23:55: Ironwestie: Okay, so this vote is whether to implement the follow points to practice. They will not be finalized and applied to the wiki until we finish talking about the other points, since there will be room to discuss them again next moot
23:57: Ironwestie: Summary: For single source-memes:

1. Memes must be used in at least 30 rips.
2. Memes must be used by at least 3 rippers.
3. Memes associated with channel event(s) should also have a presence outside of them.
4. Memes should be relevant to the channel's lore.

23:57: Ironwestie: Please vote for ALL FOUR of these points

-----

23:58: Pokemonfreak777: 1. 2. 3. 4.
23:58: Mick the Squirrel:
23:58: Ironwestie: 1. 2. 3. 4.
23:58: Coolbeans Cruz: 1.

2. 3. 4.

23:58: Spottygamester: 1. 2. 3. 4.
23:58: Madotsuki417: 1. 2. 3. 4.
23:59: Ironwestie: 1. 6-0-0 support

2. 6-0-0 support 3. 6-0-0 support 4. 0-2-4 oppose

23:59: Ironwestie: so:

For single source-memes: 1. Memes must be used in at least 30 rips. 2. Memes must be used by at least 3 rippers. 3. Memes associated with channel event(s) should also have a presence outside of them.

0:00: Ironwestie: okay, let's move on to the next item
0:00: Ironwestie: @ZachHasArrived :

ZachHasArrived - Redefining "Sans is Ness" meme

0:00: Ironwestie: @ZachHasArrived are you here?
0:01: Ironwestie: I'll move on
0:01: Spottygamester: He said he had to leave soon.
0:01: Spottygamester: But he did link to his proposal.
0:01: Spottygamester: User:ZachHasArrived/My Moot proposals
0:01: Ironwestie: I'd rather not talk about a proposal without its presenter present
0:01: Spottygamester: Alright.
0:01: Spottygamester: That's fair.
0:02: Ironwestie: I don't want to misrepresent a person's argument
0:02: Ironwestie: The next item is:

minindo (on behalf of overcast) - This issue [1]

0:02: Ironwestie: @minindo are you joining the moot?
0:02: Spottygamester: I'd wait a little to see if he responds.
0:03: Ironwestie: I'll wait a couple minutes
0:04: Ironwestie: Okay I'll move on
0:04: Ironwestie: For future moots, please appoint someone to present for you if you are unable to make the meeting
0:04: Ironwestie: @Mick

Mick - How do we define visual artists? Category:Visual artists

0:04: Mick the Squirrel: description is a bit loose - if someone makes a quick joke scribble for a rip one time does that make them a visual artist? are general video edits (such as ytpmv visuals) included?
0:05: Ironwestie: what criteria would you recommend?
0:06: Mick the Squirrel: thumbnail / UI design (mth), and drawn art for visual projects
0:07: Ironwestie: I don't quite understand. are you saying that visual artists should do one of those things, or all of them?
0:07: Ironwestie: or are they examples
0:07: Mick the Squirrel: either
0:07: Spottygamester: I've always seen visual artists as people who are part of the art team and have contributed art to things like the CCC and KFAD.
0:08: Mick the Squirrel: yeah
0:08: Pokemonfreak777: so then what would be the main difference that makes someone part of visual artists but not sg art team?
0:09: Mick the Squirrel: it could probably just be changed to that
0:09: Ironwestie: the reason I'm asking what criteria you're suggesting, Mick, is that we ask presenters to propose something so we can vote "yes"/"no" on it (well, support/oppose, technically)
0:10: Ironwestie: so I'd like to hear what you suggest we do
0:10: Mick the Squirrel: only include drawn art / original design artists for the category
0:11: Mick the Squirrel: general video editing is art, just not what the category is for
0:11: Spottygamester: I'm fine with that.
0:11: Mick the Squirrel: oh yeah and don't include people who have only made a joke scribble once.
0:12: Pokemonfreak777: im okay with that. not sure who is currently in that category and falls in the latter and not the former though
0:13: Ironwestie: ya, do you have an idea of which contributors would be removed from that category, if any?
0:13: Ironwestie: (talking to Mick)
0:13: Mick the Squirrel: just minindo at the moment
0:13: Mick the Squirrel: (no offense)
0:14: Mick the Squirrel: hello
0:14: Minindo: Sorry about that, well technically I was the person appointed to present for overcast, but he rescinded this I don’t think he wants it discussed in the moots anymore, I apologize for forgetting to remove it from the page
0:15: Ironwestie: Gotcha, thanks for clarifying
0:15: Minindo: Dang, I’m late to a good discussion about the memes oh well

I’ll stick around for the rest of this

0:15: MSL925 the fox: Same lol
0:15: Spottygamester: Hi Miles.
0:15: Ironwestie: we were just talking about what counts as a "visual artist"
0:16: Minindo: That’s interesting
0:16: Mick the Squirrel: wait actually no keep minindo
0:16: Mick the Squirrel: logoswap
0:16: Mick the Squirrel: Tyrell Badd ~ The Truth Isn't Sweet - Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth
0:16: Minindo: Yeah I’m not like well versed in the visual arts I suppose I can’t think of any time I’ve tried that for siiva, I’m just skilled at video editing
0:16: Ironwestie: and Mick was suggesting we only include drawn art / original design artists, and not people who do video editing or a single joke scribble
0:16: Minindo: Okay that’s true
0:16: Minindo: Logoswaps I think should count
0:17: Minindo: That’s graphic design

edit: Also the harlem shakeover logo

0:17: Minindo: I still agree here though
0:18: Ironwestie: ya. as an aside, it would be great to see some kind of list of all the art pieces people have worked on
0:18: Ironwestie: I think that's something Mick mentioned. I don't remember if it's on the docket
0:18: Ironwestie: ah, it's the next one lol
0:18: Mick the Squirrel: it is
0:18: Minindo: Showdown with the ultimate chimera certainly functions as a large list of visual artists to get you started
0:18: MSL925 the fox: Thought of explaining two ideas I had for events which are basically:

- Have a consistent pattern for events - have a page for events and other things that have appeared over multiple years as a Sorta update to the “trivia” section of the channel events page

0:19: Ironwestie: Miles, that is a good idea to talk about, but let's leave that for after the discussions we have on the docket
0:19: Mick the Squirrel: i don't think anyone has to be removed from the category actually
0:20: Ironwestie: okay. then this change would just exclude future entries to the category
0:20: Mick the Squirrel: yep
0:20: MSL925 the fox: Oh whoops
0:20: Pokemonfreak777: i guess the only thing this might do is prevent the people who submitted one fanart piece to the wood man birthday mixes from being included?
0:20: Minindo: That’s definitely outside of the scope regardless imo
0:21: Ironwestie: yes, and I think that makes sense. I personally don't think the fans who submitted art to the birthday mixes are visual artists (or necessarily contributors to siiva)
0:21: Mick the Squirrel: i had another plan in mind for them but it's on hiatus
0:21: Minindo: I think an artist on a woodman fan art compilation should only get a category that mentions that if they actually have a contribution somewhere else
0:22: Ironwestie: right, I agree
0:22: Pokemonfreak777: yeah the description is vague enough that it could have been construed that way (before this potential change)
0:22: Ironwestie: okay, let's take it to a vote
0:23: Ironwestie: Summary: Category:Visual artists should drawn art and original design artists, not contributors who do video editing or a single joke scribble (for example, in Wood Man birthday remixes)

---

0:23: Mick the Squirrel:
0:23: Coolbeans Cruz:
0:23: Pokemonfreak777:
0:23: Madotsuki417:
0:23: Minindo:
0:23: Spottygamester:
0:23: Ironwestie:
0:24: MSL925 the fox:
0:24: Ironwestie: 7-0 support
0:24: Ironwestie: @Mick , feel free to present your next proposal

0:24: Ironwestie:

- Mick - Contributor art subpage gallery

0:25: Mick the Squirrel: User:Mick the Squirrel/contributor#Proposal
0:25: Mick the Squirrel: what it would look like is above.
0:26: Spottygamester: Going to post the contents of it here so that it shows up in the backup.

Contributor art subpage galleries are exactly what they are titled, gallery subpages for visual artists.

In my opinion, the visual art aspects of SiIva are kinda underrepresented on this wiki. The problem is that Rips by author / Lists of contributions is not a good format to store individual art. Unlike rips, which are usually individual, most contributions by visual artists are all melded within the same project. See the category sections on:

 *  I Wanna Thank Me - A SiIvaGunner Christmas Comeback Crisis Side Story
 * SiIvaGunner: King for Another Day Tournament Direct 9.21.2019
 * Field of Hopes and Dreams (PAL Version) - Deltarune
 *  the SiIvaGunner Art Fusion Collab doesn't have many contributor categories at the moment but it should

The only possible dent in this is the CCC stuff. I don't think the CCC assets and specific art credits are public yet, and likely won't be until it ends in the next few millennia. If it is given an art folder or something we will be able to complete it, but for now we can either:

 *  exclude it (most likely)
  * ask siiva / art team members if they can disclose which pieces they worked on (we should start with "I Wanna Thank Me", as it has the most contributors at the moment).
  * Upload art if they are allowed to share it, just use screenshots if they can't

0:27: Minindo: Everything there sounds good to me
0:28: Ironwestie: I like this idea a lot. A lot of wikis have gallery pages for people, and I'm not sure why we never implemented this
0:28: Pokemonfreak777: i like this idea. would this be placed on the category page for an artist or a separate gallery?
0:29: Mick the Squirrel: a subpage
0:29: Mick the Squirrel: (so they can go under the gallery subpages category)
0:29: Spottygamester: Would this be for each contributor?
0:29: Mick the Squirrel: yeah
0:29: Ironwestie: even non-visual artists?
0:30: Pokemonfreak777: there are a few artists that only contributed art to a rip, should their category be removed or redirect to the gallery?
0:30: Madotsuki417: (worth stating im currently restarting my pc due to reasons, ill be back in 3 or so minutes give or take, and i might miss the vote, however I will say I do like this idea)
0:30: Mick the Squirrel: have a separate category and gallery
0:30: Mick the Squirrel: rippers can keep the list format
0:31: Mick the Squirrel: rippers who are also visual artists have both
0:31: Ironwestie: I'm confused. do we not have pages for contributors who have not ripped but have contributed art?
0:31: Pokemonfreak777: so for example this person would have a category and a gallery correct Category:Atlaszoidac
0:31: Mick the Squirrel: yes
0:31: Pokemonfreak777: well i just showed one. edit: nvm i misread
0:32: Mick the Squirrel: a lot of visual artists don't have pages at all
0:32: Mick the Squirrel: (i made a list of some hidden in the category)
0:33: Ironwestie: so just so I understand
0:33: Ironwestie: some visual artists who have only contributed art to a rip (but haven't actually ripped) don't have pages
0:33: Ironwestie: so we're wondering what to do with those people for the gallery subpages?
0:34: Mick the Squirrel: making galleries is to promote making their main pages
0:34: Ironwestie: we should just create their main pages regardless, if we're counting them as contributors
0:34: Mick the Squirrel: yeah
0:35: Mick the Squirrel: the galleries are just a way of making their work more viewable
0:35: Ironwestie: I see
0:35: Ironwestie: thanks for clarifying
0:35: Ironwestie: okay, if there are no other thoughts on the gallery subpage idea
0:36: Ironwestie: let's take a vote
0:36: Ironwestie: wait, sorry I just remembered something
0:36: Ironwestie: the last part of your proposal states:

The only possible dent in this is the CCC stuff. I don't think the CCC assets and specific art credits are public yet, and likely won't be until it ends in the next few millennia. If it is given an art folder or something we will be able to complete it, but for now we can either:

 *  exclude it (most likely)
  * ask siiva / art team members if they can disclose which pieces they worked on (we should start with "I Wanna Thank Me", as it has the most contributors at the moment).
  * Upload art if they are allowed to share it, just use screenshots if they can't

0:37: Ironwestie: I don't think we have discussed what to do out of those 3 options
0:38: Pokemonfreak777: i think we should do the best we can with what we have, maybe add a disclaimer that it probably isnt everything
0:38: Mick the Squirrel: we (or just i) can ask people if they'd mind disclosing who drew what
0:38: Mick the Squirrel: if siiva will kill them if they leak credits early, we just don't add them to the subpages
0:39: Mick the Squirrel: just make a note at the bottom saying "they contributed unspecified art to i wanna thank me"
0:39: Ironwestie: I think given that contributors are not encouraged to make their contributions public, we should not go around asking every visual artist what art they made
0:40: Spottygamester: I'm not sure how many art credits for the CCC the artists can reveal as well.
0:40: Ironwestie: I would want to check-in with backroom about whether that's okay to do and give a heads up to the siiva team
0:40: Spottygamester: If any at all.
0:40: Mick the Squirrel: first option then, exclude
0:40: Ironwestie: to be clear, the wiki team has communicated with backroom before, but I don't think we need to bother them about this
0:40: Mick the Squirrel: with the note
0:41: Spottygamester: Yeah, revealing CCC credits would definitely need to go through the team.
0:41: Minindo: Honestly just exclude it for now
0:41: Spottygamester: And I don't really want to bother them with that either.
0:41: Minindo: I know that “for now” means “for 1000 years” but still
0:41: Ironwestie: for now = for ever
0:42: Pokemonfreak777: dang was the ccc really that bad (i wasnt here for it)
0:42: Ironwestie: okay, then let's take a vote on the two points
0:43: Ironwestie: Summary:

1. Make a gallery subpage for visual artists (including those that do not yet have a page) 2. We will exclude art credits that have not been made public yet (e.g. CCC art credits)

0:43: Ironwestie: ----
0:43: Mick the Squirrel:
0:43: Spottygamester: 1. 2.
0:43: Ironwestie: 1. 2.
0:43: Pokemonfreak777: 1. 2.
0:43: Coolbeans Cruz: 1. 2.
0:43: Madotsuki417: 1. 2.
0:44: MSL925 the fox: and:support:
0:44: Minindo: 1. 2.
0:44: Ironwestie: 1. 8-0-0 support

2. 7-1-0 support

0:45: Ironwestie: Next item:

@ZachHasArrived : ZachHasArrived - Reformatting rip pages with "special" titles

0:45: Ironwestie: He wasn't responding earlier so I'll move on
0:45: Ironwestie: @pokemonfreak777 :

pokemonfreak777 - should new categories be created for images in the following groups (Page comment, User thread, User blog, subsections under "Used on the wiki"), and if not, what existing category should they be in? (Reference)

0:45: Pokemonfreak777: alright
0:46: Pokemonfreak777: so following the discussion last time about what to do with files in Special:UncategorizedFiles, we decided to create two new categories for wiki forum images and wiki editor images to deal with them. while i was creating the lists for awb to categorize them, i noticed other images that don't neatly fall into the newly created categories or any existing category, which i listed here: User:Pokemonfreak777/List of uncategorized files by location

So my questions basically boil down to this: Should we create a new category for images in these groups as well (and what do we call it)? If we do not want to create a new category, what existing category should they be in?

0:47: Ironwestie: logistically speaking, these lists make it very easy to use AWB to add categories (ty for doing that by the way)
0:48: Pokemonfreak777: np. i tried my best to also specify what kind of pages they were found on, but im not sure where they should go
0:48: Ironwestie: so the groups are: Page comment, User thread, and User blog, correct?
0:50: Pokemonfreak777: mostly yeah. i'd also like to know where some of these should go too, since theyre big and/or weird: FANDOM-related, Used in templates, JOEJOE'S BIZZAERE JOJOKE/Gallery, Gallery - Mega Man Legacy Collection
0:51: Spottygamester: The ones used in templates could go in a "Template images" category.
0:51: Mick the Squirrel: keep jojoe in bonus media i love how much of a shitposty mess that category is
0:52: Mick the Squirrel: i thought the woodman fanart was being deleted months ago
0:52: Ironwestie: the bonus category is a mess, lol, but it's also where those images belong anyway
0:52: Ironwestie: mm I have a thought on that category, mick, but let's resolve this discussion first
0:53: Mick the Squirrel: k
0:55: Ironwestie: oh sorry, mick, the woodman fanart is the "gallery - mega man legacy collection" stuff
0:56: Ironwestie: I think it's safe to delete at this point. we didn't need it for that other gallery page (as we discussed in a previous informal meeting)
0:56: Mick the Squirrel: i wanted to keep it actually
0:56: Ironwestie: oh?
0:56: Minindo: clarifying this more, i still think woodman fan art contributions should be mentioned on contributor categories, the fan art videos just can’t justify the existence of a contributor category on their own
0:57: Ironwestie: (for the log, which can't see quotes, minindo quoted:

minindo: I think an artist on a woodman fan art compilation should only get a category that mentions that if they actually have a contribution somewhere else

0:57: Mick the Squirrel: if we're not making pages for these people putting their art on the page is the least we can do
0:58: Ironwestie: I believe we discussed this at a previous meeting, but I don't remember which one
0:58: Ironwestie: I don't think it was a moot
0:58: Mick the Squirrel: also comment from you 5 years ago
0:58: Mick the Squirrel: https://siivagunner.fandom.com/wiki/Gallery_-_Mega_Man_Legacy_Collection?commentId=4400000000000094572&replyId=4400000000000241366
0:58: Ironwestie: yes, that

0:59: Ironwestie:

I disagree based on the previous methods we've used to document rip pages. In "Overworld - Super Mario Bros 2", for example, we documented almost all of the comments on the rip and their sources. The wiki hasn't yet run into a space issue, and I don't believe that 156 Wood Man pictures can't be resized or re-ordered to be more space-efficient.

Furthermore, the Neocities page may be temporary, and any Twitter collection of images would be lost to time. A user might delete their account or post, and thus the picture would be lost. This is why the wiki exists: to document the channel before it ends, and to show appreciation for the people that contribute to it. Fan art is no different. I will admit that I am a little biased because I spent some time uploading and double-checking them, but I strongly believe that keeping the images honors those who submitted fan art and comprehensively details the rip.

0:59: Ironwestie: I've reconsidered over the past 5 years
1:00: Ironwestie: It was a selfish reason, but I originally wanted to keep the gallery because I spent like an hour uploading them from neocities
1:01: Ironwestie: I don't think that it's bad to have the gallery page up now that we do have it, but I don't think it's fair to expect that every woodman birthday should have a gallery
1:01: Ironwestie: it was easy for this one because neocities had all the images already
1:01: Pokemonfreak777: i mean we're keeping images from the boards anyway, what's another 156 wood man images?
1:01: Mick the Squirrel: for consistency in the wood man collabs it should be all or nothing - we could just screenshot
1:02: Ironwestie: mm, my main concern is that there is now a discrepancy
1:02: Ironwestie: yes that's what I'm afraid about, Mick. I think it should be consistent, but don't think it's fair to expect that every woodman birthday rip have a gallery
1:03: Ironwestie: anyway, that's a bit of an aside
1:04: Mick the Squirrel: if we are keeping the images i think all images from all the videos should be in one category, "wood man fanart" or something
1:04: Ironwestie: I'm pretty sure we used to have a category like that until we decided to delete it
1:05: Ironwestie: hm I can't find it in discord. perhaps it was a wiki forum discussion
1:05: Pokemonfreak777: so currently i have the following:

Page comment, User thread, and User blog: Unknown
FANDOM-related: Unknown
Used in templates: Template images
JOEJOE'S BIZZAERE JOJOKE/Gallery: Bonus media
Gallery - Mega Man Legacy Collection: wood man fanart or delete

1:06: Ironwestie: I think Page comment, User thread, and user blog can go into "Wiki forum" or "Wiki editor" (I'm not sure which), and I think FANDOM-related should definitely have a category
1:07: Spottygamester: I agree with iron.
1:07: Spottygamester: The first can be "Wiki forum images" or something like that.
1:07: Pokemonfreak777: the weird thing about fandom related is that only admins can add categories to that?
1:08: Ironwestie: I don't know about that. I can add it to the category in any case
1:08: Pokemonfreak777: yeah the editor vs forum decision is why i kept it in a separate list
1:09: Ironwestie: (for log: pokemonfreak quoted:

ironwestie — Today at 1:06
I think Page comment, User thread, and user blog can go into "Wiki forum" or "Wiki editor" (I'm not sure which), and I think FANDOM-related should definitely have a category

1:09: Pokemonfreak777: i tried adding a category and the option wasnt there so i assumed that was the case
1:10: Ironwestie: ya I'm not sure either. honestly I'm getting a bit tired after 2 hours of meeting
1:10: Coolbeans Cruz: me too
1:10: Mick the Squirrel: i'm not tired just kinda getting bored
1:11: Pokemonfreak777: should we table the undecided lists to next meeting?
1:11: Madotsuki417: yeah
1:11: Ironwestie: sure
1:11: Spottygamester: Same here. Plus I need to go to bed lol.
1:11: Madotsuki417: i honestly tuned out a lot and just tried to stick around and understand what was bieng siad
1:11: Madotsuki417: haha
1:11: Ironwestie: So:

Fandom-related: [some unnamed category] Used in templates: Template images JOEJOE'S BIZZAERE JOJOKE/Gallery: Bonus media

1:12: Ironwestie: I'm having difficulty coming up for a name for the fandom-related one
1:12: Ironwestie: "wiki images" is way too broad
1:12: Pokemonfreak777: FANDOM images?
1:13: Ironwestie: okay, let's do that for now
1:13: Ironwestie: vote time
1:14: Ironwestie: Summary: The pages in the following subsections of User:Pokemonfreak777/List of uncategorized files by location will be categorized as follows:

1. Fandom-related: FANDOM images (a new category)
2. Used in templates: Template images (a new category)
3. JOEJOE'S BIZZAERE JOJOKE/Gallery: Bonus media

1:14: Ironwestie: -----
1:15: Spottygamester: 1. 2. 3.
1:15: Pokemonfreak777: 1. 2. 3.
1:15: MSL925 the fox: 1. 2. 3.
1:15: Mick the Squirrel: x3
1:15: Ironwestie: 1. 2. 3.
1:15: Coolbeans Cruz: all of them
1:15: Ironwestie: @Rhythm Toys ?
1:16: Ironwestie: okay, I'll count votes
1:16: Ironwestie: 1. 5-0-0 support

2. 5-0-0 support 3. 5-0-0 support

1:16: Ironwestie: cool, that's a wrap for our moot
1:17: Ironwestie: we'll have our next moot oct 15
1:17: MSL925 the fox: oh what about my stuff?
1:17: Ironwestie: it has been two hours. how is everyone feeling?
1:17: Spottygamester: Tired.
1:17: Ironwestie: are we up for another discussion?
1:17: Pokemonfreak777: honestly same
1:17: MSL925 the fox: mean if you want to
1:18: MSL925 the fox: i can jus wait
1:18: Spottygamester: We can put it part of the next moot.
1:18: MSL925 the fox: yeah
1:18: MSL925 the fox: just have it be the first thing
1:18: Ironwestie: sure
1:18: Ironwestie: okay, see y'all on the 15th!
1:18: Spottygamester: I'm going to go now. See ya everyone.
1:18: Pokemonfreak777: see ya
1:19: Mick the Squirrel: good night undertale