Talk:Mr. Fox

In response to your earlier edit, you said, "The heading "Adaptions" allows differences between the book and movie to be discussed from an OOU perspective without a movie or OOU template. The movie template is for articles whose subjects are movie canon only (eg, Green Mist)."

The movie note specifically says: -

Which is exactly what the information concerning the movie fox was all about. The character of Mr. Fox in the movie is nothing like the one in the book. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that he was a completely different character altogether. Therefore, all information concerning him is movie based, hence where this note comes in, and should be included at the part where it says "Film Adaption", describing that all info from that point on is all movie based.

And considering that it is all about the movie, the title heading should say "Film Adaption".

One of the original admins used this note for describing movie based info in several pages. Storyseeker1 (talk) 02:40, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

According to sections IV(c) and V(d) of the WikiFormat, the movie template is to be used for full articles that discuss movie-universe topics. The reason I keep pushing for "Adaptions" over "Film Adaption" is that it is consistent with WikiFormat (IV(c)) and it allows us to be more standardized. Lasaraleen Tarkheena (talk) 23:53, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

What other adaptions are there? I've already told you that the first admins used it to describe the movie parts of the characters/sections of the story. It separates the sections, allowing readers to determine which parts are that of the book, and which parts are that of the movie. Your way is too confusing. Storyseeker1 (talk) 12:29, September 5, 2013 (UTC)

There's the animated version, the BBC version, and the radio version (and probably others I haven't thought of). You're right that "Film Adaption" would be sufficient for this page because we don't discuss any of the other versions here. The reason the WikiFormat stipulates the generic "Adaptions" heading is that one of the goals discussed in the chat and subsequent discussion about the new WikiFormat (the conclusions of which you said you agreed with) was to standardize headings on pages across the wiki. Unless you care enough about this that you want to push for a change in the WikiFormat itself, I really think we should go with what we said we were going to do when we re-wrote the policy. Lasaraleen Tarkheena (talk) 23:53, September 6, 2013 (UTC)

To be honest, I wasn't really paying attention when you were going through that whole thing. I had real life stuff to deal with, like when my dad got sick with his leukaemia, so I wasn't really bothered with the details of a stupid wiki. I go with everything that I said, and what you say is too confusing for a reader. The note says that everything below it is that of the movie, which is what all that info below the Film Adaption heading is, and how info on all other pages should be. It separates info from the book to the movie. Storyseeker1 (talk) 00:11, September 7, 2013 (UTC)

Regardless, you did agree to the policies on that page; this is why I made sure to get consensus before I finalized the changes. I can give you the reasons for the rules about the movie template again if you like, but it really comes down to the fact that those are the rules that the community--you included--agreed were best for the wiki. Lasaraleen Tarkheena (talk) 06:03, September 8, 2013 (UTC)

You wanna continue talking, fine! The changes I made did come out of this discussion. It has told me that you do whatever you want no matter what we discuss, so I'm going to do the same, and you were the one who first made the changes before we sorted anything out, not me. And don't you dare say you didn't  realize I still wanted to discuss the change, because you knew full well what my thoughts were, and I told you right out that I wanted to make changes. You even admitted earlier that the heading "Film Adaption" was sufficient, since all the information in that section referred only to the movie.

I've been working this site longer than you, I've done over 3000 edits on various pages while you've barely done over 700, I've made contributions from uploading images to searching for and deleting duplicate pages, I'm 30 and a graduate of English lit, while any edits you make need to be continuously checked for errors (and just for the record, the correct and more common pronounication is Adaptations, not Adaptions, or didn't you even know that?). Storyseeker1 (talk) 02:07, September 9, 2013 (UTC)

If I did whatever I wanted no matter what we discuss, I would have changed the heading back to "Adaptions" and protected the page indefinitely. But I didn't, because I do value your opinions and your contributions to the wiki. I think you have a good point that adaptations fits better than adaptions; I'll suggest that on the WikiFormat talk page. And you are right that I should not have changed the heading back without waiting for your response. I've already apologized for that; there's not much more I can do. On the other hand, it is my job (as an admin) to uphold wiki policy, so the fact that you don't seem to consider the wikiformat's rules important put me in a bind. Lasaraleen Tarkheena (talk) 23:33, September 10, 2013 (UTC)