About: Memory Alpha talk:Content policy

Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: Memory Alpha talk:Content policy Sponge Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : 134.155.108.49:8890 associated with source dataset(s)

Since it's always coming up whether "x is canon, y is non-canon" in terms of using it as a reference here, might I suggest that this be renamed as Resource policy, and we try and refer to things as valid and invalid resources, to avoid confusion with the true usage of canon (since things that are non-canon can be valid resources (for background information, etc)). This is not our policy on what is canon - we don't get to define that. Instead, it is a policy on what resources can be used in our articles, and should reflect that. -- Michael Warren | Talk 10:34, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Attributes	Values
rdfs:label	Memory Alpha talk:Content policy
rdfs:comment	Since it's always coming up whether "x is canon, y is non-canon" in terms of using it as a reference here, might I suggest that this be renamed as Resource policy, and we try and refer to things as valid and invalid resources, to avoid confusion with the true usage of canon (since things that are non-canon can be valid resources (for background information, etc)). This is not our policy on what is canon - we don't get to define that. Instead, it is a policy on what resources can be used in our articles, and should reflect that. -- Michael Warren \| Talk 10:34, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
dbkwik:memory-alph...iPageUsesTemplate	dbkwik:resource/5JL54XIU3UMQMqCvoof5kQ== dbkwik:resource/RRZNmZc6DLecMqfJqP9Aig==
abstract	Since it's always coming up whether "x is canon, y is non-canon" in terms of using it as a reference here, might I suggest that this be renamed as Resource policy, and we try and refer to things as valid and invalid resources, to avoid confusion with the true usage of canon (since things that are non-canon can be valid resources (for background information, etc)). This is not our policy on what is canon - we don't get to define that. Instead, it is a policy on what resources can be used in our articles, and should reflect that. -- Michael Warren \| Talk 10:34, 28 June 2009 (UTC) Full agreement and support. This policy already does not really talk about what is canon and what not, but about "validity". The title should reflect that. -- Cid Highwind 12:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC) Also agreed. I assume this is just a matter of a name change? --Alan 16:22, 22 August 2009 (UTC) After the note below, agree. - 16:30, February 20, 2010 (UTC) We all aboard on this? If yes, should we have a bot change all the links already on the talk pages, or just leave a redirect? - 22:33, July 7, 2010 (UTC) Not totally convinced today, but if we do it, I can have SulfBot make the changes. And we'd definitely leave an RD. -- sulfur 14:13, July 8, 2010 (UTC) Why not convinced sulfur? - 06:31, July 14, 2010 (UTC)

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3217, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Standard Edition
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2012 OpenLink Software