Canon vs. Fanon & The Wiki...

[Whipsnade]

And this is the exact debate about what is canon...

No it isn't.

Deflecting the issue into a debate over which version of canon is correct is nothing more than yet another excuse not to do what needs to be done.

The fact of the mater is that all those Vilis UWPs are canon. They're contradictory and they cannot all be "true" at the same time, but they're all canon because they all meet the criteria Don often posted here. You can easily put all those UWPs in the Wiki with their proper cites and allow the reader to choose which UWP best suits his needs.

You already know what makes up canon because Don posted the criteria here very often. You could already be separating all the data which meets that criteria from all the rest. Sadly, you're frittering away your time in a quixotic quest to determine which bits of canon are more canonical than the other bits instead simply be uploading everything that meets Don's criteria and providing the necessary cites.

That well meant but misplaced emphasis reminds me of a story involving an actual business...

Back around the turn of the century I was part of a KPMG team engaged in a business re-engineering consult. While others began their work in various offices, I walked into an instrument calibration lab. In a six-man shop I found...

• A supervisor sitting at his desk supervising.
• Two techs looking for spelling mistakes in various documents while arguing about whether "which" or "that" was a more correct word choice.
• Another tech engaged in a day-long parts inventory which had been done the week before.

... all while there was a three week-plus backlog of instruments awaiting calibration.

While every task those four men were doing was part of their job, every task they were choosing to concentrate on were not the important parts of their job. They, like you, were throwing away their time on inconsequential side projects rather than tackling the work for which the lab was designed, constructed, equipped, and staffed.

Those T5SS sectors are important, but are they as critical as fixing the jumbled mess of data that comprises the Wiki? Maksim-Smelchak asking what people called jump2 trade lines is nice, but does it help fix the jumbled mess of data that comprises the Wiki?

How can you determine which task is important and which isn't? Allow me to suggest you look into the Eisenhower Decision Matrix and begin applying it to your wiki work.

The Wiki could become the hobby resource Mr. Miller envisioned or it can continue on being dismissed by everyone except those who uploaded their "fanon" there.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Given the number of different editions and versions of the game, I have grave doubts if any form of canon is possible, as there are too many contradictions and changes. As for saying that T5 is now canon, that is immaterial to someone who does not have it, and given the amount of errata and the fact that T5 is still not a finished product, saying that it is canon may be changed by the next version..

It's possible when the community starts all working together and not just talking about it.

I don't say what canon is, but Marc Miller does, and has stated that T5 is canon, to my knowledge.

Agree with your statement that not everyone has certain Traveller books or materials... And may not even read what they have. Or that canon may change on a dime... T5 is a product in development with some parts already released. It's evolving.

What is needed in the Wiki is resource citing, stating where any information if from, what edition the information is based on, and in the case of GURPS and Mongoose, is this to be viewed as valid for everyone. If a post is made, the source of it needs to be cited as well.

Great observation.

*** When would you like to start help doing research and entering citations? Would love to have your help. ***

I love the idea that "If a post is made, the source of it needs to be cited as well."

I'm just not that good at herding cats. We humans keep making laws and many of those same humans keep ignoring them. Especially politicians, legislators, and people in government... LOL

Thanks for sharing.

Shabbat Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

The fact of the mater is that all those Vilis UWPs are canon. They're contradictory and they cannot all be "true" at the same time, but they're all canon because they all meet the criteria Don often posted here. You can easily put all those UWPs in the Wiki with their proper cites and allow the reader to choose which UWP best suits his needs.

You already know what makes up canon because Don posted the criteria here very often. You could already be separating all the data which meets that criteria from all the rest.

*** Hey Whipsnade, what's stopping you from getting more involved? ***

I'd love you to type up all of your notes and thoughts and submit them to the community for review. I bet you have some great notes on your ideas about canon.

And I'd really love to show you how to document citations and enter them into the wiki. You could help make all those great ideas you shared happen. It would be great.

The Eisenhower Decision Matrix is very cool. I have used it myself. Thanks for sharing it.

The Wiki could become the hobby resource Mr. Miller envisioned or it can continue on being dismissed by everyone except those who uploaded their "fanon" there.

*** What did Marc Miller envision the wiki to be? I have communicated with him a number of times and I don't recall ever discussing this topic directly. Have you spoken with him about the wiki? ***

I did however, read notes about it, and have had people, who were there when the wiki was started including Don (RIP), discuss it with me. They related it was to be a fan resource whatever that may or may not mean. I'm no expert, but it does appear to be a remarkable success at that. I have been running AKA refereeing games for years and my newer players have always found it useful (I refereed games long before the wiki existed).

It would be great if you started helping to build the wiki into a resource that would be more useful to you as a player and a referee.

Always good to hear different opinions.

Shabbat Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Maksim-Smelchak asking what people called jump2 trade lines is nice, but does it help fix the jumbled mess of data that comprises the Wiki?

Thanks. I have been exploring the Traveller universe like most everyone else who is a fan and I have also been writing articles for the magazine.

My job as a fan of the game is to simply enjoy it. I have voluntarily started crafting the wiki into a better resource, but it's not my job. And my bosses at that voluntary job are few and far between. I also have a different view of it. To me, it's a wonderful resource that I have the privilege of helping to make better. It reminds me of better days when I was a fresh-faced kid enjoying sci-fi RPG's. It's also an awesome sci-fi property that I can pass onto my nephews and the younger generation (I have no children of my own).

I suppose that one could look at the wiki and call it a jumbled mess of data or they could see that it's certainly better than nothing and help build it into something even cooler. That's what Zho.Berka and many earlier fans did with their "wiki" in its time...

I'm not so sure about all of that, but my collection of Traveller books are certainly a jumbled mess of data. I actually think that's part of the charm. They are wonderfully flawed. I don't expect all of my square pegs to fit in round holes. Traveller is human in a truly awesome way... full of politics, corruption, interpersonal squabbles, interspecies squabbles, and even a little bit of old-fashioned sci-fi hope and wonder... Good stuff, it is.

*** What do you like best about Traveller, Whipsnade? ***

Shabbat Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[Enoki]

My favorite part is you start with just enough details to generate wonderfully detailed storylines and adventures from what's given.

 

[Cryton]

Look, to be honest, all's I'd like to see with entries is a notation on where they got the info from and to know if they are adding in their own stuff, or combining things to try and make them make sense.

I really do not care if under Vilis there are 6 different entries, one after the other, so long as all 6 have listed the edition, supplement, or article that listing is pulled from. If there is a seventh that combines them all in credible manner, have the author listed so that credit or complaints can be issued as appropriate.

But a listing as to where the entry originated is a must.

 

[Timerover51]

It's possible
Great observation.

*** When would you like to start help doing research and entering citations? Would love to have your help. ***

I love the idea that "If a post is made, the source of it needs to be cited as well."

With respect to Vilis, I have the Broadsword Adventure, not in digital format, but hard copy, the JTAS 1-24 in both digital and hard copy, and of course, Spinward Marches (1979 edition). I would be happy to begin to assist with what I have, and will make sure all sources are cited. Right now, I am getting ready for my summer World War 2 class, so that would have to have priority. When I post on my military history thread, I make very sure that the source of the information is cited, and if available online, that is indicated.

I'm just not that good at herding cats. We humans keep making laws and many of those same humans keep ignoring them. Especially politicians, legislators, and people in government... LOL

Thanks for sharing.

Shabbat Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

Being a long-time cat owner, I can attest to the fact that cats herd very poorly, unless some attractive bait is used. Catnip is not bad, but sardines and tuna fish is water works much better. The sound of food hitting an empty food dish also gets them moving in the right direction.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Look, to be honest, all's I'd like to see with entries is a notation on where they got the info from and to know if they are adding in their own stuff, or combining things to try and make them make sense.

I really do not care if under Vilis there are 6 different entries, one after the other, so long as all 6 have listed the edition, supplement, or article that listing is pulled from. If there is a seventh that combines them all in credible manner, have the author listed so that credit or complaints can be issued as appropriate.

But a listing as to where the entry originated is a must.

That data is mostly available through the history tab. You can see who entered any article and how it was modified over time. Where the first person got it isn't always obvious, but references are available for most articles, even if they do not have specific page citations. I can show you how to use that history function if you like. Button on the top right.

I am already accepting any complaints, which is why I am responding to this thread. It was easier being anonymous as an IP address. Compliments are few, but all are welcome. I am often the last person who compiled, reconciled, and tried to make sense of the many conflicting data sources. Although many others have put in lots of hard work. I started around 2007 as an anonymous and infrequent poster and started getting serious, making a named account, at the end of 2014.

Best regards.

Shabbat Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

With respect to Vilis, I have the Broadsword Adventure, not in digital format, but hard copy, the JTAS 1-24 in both digital and hard copy, and of course, Spinward Marches (1979 edition). I would be happy to begin to assist with what I have, and will make sure all sources are cited.

Would love to have your help. PM me and I will give you my text if you want support. It is as simple as editing. One of the regulars like me will follow up and help when you like.

Thank you.

Right now, I am getting ready for my summer World War 2 class, so that would have to have priority. When I post on my military history thread, I make very sure that the source of the information is cited, and if available online, that is indicated.

Understood completely. I enjoy your posts.

Being a long-time cat owner, I can attest to the fact that cats herd very poorly, unless some attractive bait is used. Catnip is not bad, but sardines and tuna fish in water works much better. The sound of food hitting an empty food dish also gets them moving in the right direction.

Thank you for the sound advice.

*** Would tuna or sardines motivate you? LOL ***

Best regards.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[Timerover51]

Sardines in light oil or mustard sauce. Pickled herring works better than tuna. My wife likes tuna, not pickled herring, so I have it infrequently. Also, pickled Brussels Sprouts, I am the only one in the family that eats them, so again an infrequent delicacy.

 

[aramis]

Isn't 2D-7 the same as FLUX (unless you are ignoring values below zero in the calculation process in the first instance)?

Yes, they are identical in result space.

 

[aramis]

No it isn't.

Deflecting the issue into a debate over which version of canon is correct is nothing more than yet another excuse not to do what needs to be done.

The fact of the mater is that all those Vilis UWPs are canon. They're contradictory and they cannot all be "true" at the same time, but they're all canon because they all meet the criteria Don often posted here. You can easily put all those UWPs in the Wiki with their proper cites and allow the reader to choose which UWP best suits his needs.

You already know what makes up canon because Don posted the criteria here very often. You could already be separating all the data which meets that criteria from all the rest. Sadly, you're frittering away your time in a quixotic quest to determine which bits of canon are more canonical than the other bits instead simply be uploading everything that meets Don's criteria and providing the necessary cites.

That well meant but misplaced emphasis reminds me of a story involving an actual business...

Back around the turn of the century I was part of a KPMG team engaged in a business re-engineering consult. While others began their work in various offices, I walked into an instrument calibration lab. In a six-man shop I found...

• A supervisor sitting at his desk supervising.
• Two techs looking for spelling mistakes in various documents while arguing about whether "which" or "that" was a more correct word choice.
• Another tech engaged in a day-long parts inventory which had been done the week before.

... all while there was a three week-plus backlog of instruments awaiting calibration.

While every task those four men were doing was part of their job, every task they were choosing to concentrate on were not the important parts of their job. They, like you, were throwing away their time on inconsequential side projects rather than tackling the work for which the lab was designed, constructed, equipped, and staffed.

Those T5SS sectors are important, but are they as critical as fixing the jumbled mess of data that comprises the Wiki? Maksim-Smelchak asking what people called jump2 trade lines is nice, but does it help fix the jumbled mess of data that comprises the Wiki?

How can you determine which task is important and which isn't? Allow me to suggest you look into the Eisenhower Decision Matrix and begin applying it to your wiki work.

The Wiki could become the hobby resource Mr. Miller envisioned or it can continue on being dismissed by everyone except those who uploaded their "fanon" there.

All functionally immaterial.

The wiki is Thomas' Fief. He takes his Marching Orders from Marc directly. For the wiki, it's Thomas call which gets canon labels (and the marching orders, last I heard, are that T5 is the final word on canon short of Marc making changes).

Oh, and Don's Hermeneutic of Canon also includes "Newer trumps older unless otherwise instructed by Marc." Also goes to T5SS data, and only T5SS data, being the sole canonical entry.

Thomas could go with your suggestion, and raise lots of "WTF?" comments, pick his favorite, or do the responsible thing...

... and put the T5SS data as Canon, and the rest as non, except where there is actual canonical text about a change at a specific time.

Perhaps a section "Superseded Canonical Data."

The only reason the T5SS data isn't in the errata files is that it wasn't finished (and still isn't) for all sectors in canon, and it would require 30+ pages of just for the T5SS data changes - especially since Ley and Glimmerdrift both get 100% changed between their CT/Judges Guild versions, The Atlas, and the T20 versions.

If one is being a quasi-luddite grognard and running from only the books they have, it's fine for them to use the old data in their dead tree.

But the Wiki should reflect the Official Traveller Universe... especially since it's hosted by FFE.

 

[tjoneslo]

No it isn't.

Deflecting the issue into a debate over which version of canon is correct is nothing more than yet another excuse not to do what needs to be done.

Right. What needs to be done is go though the 23,470 existing articles and review each for their sources.

http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Rhylanor_(world) - This is an example of an article which combines Canon and Fanon data into one article. The sources listed at the bottom of the article have both books with pages and websites for the source material.

Since you seem to have an option on the matter, what else needs to be done to this article?

The fact of the mater is that all those Vilis UWPs are canon. They're contradictory and they cannot all be "true" at the same time, but they're all canon because they all meet the criteria Don often posted here. You can easily put all those UWPs in the Wiki with their proper cites and allow the reader to choose which UWP best suits his needs.

There is only one canon UWP for Vilis. This is what I refer to when I mean "which canon". Every time I've asked anyone else about "canon" their list is different, wanting to include or exclude books or references they like more, don't like, or are not aware of.

I have Marc and Don's list of what is and isn't canon, and even some of the reasons why. You are going to have to trust me (and the other wiki editors) to review and update the articles to set the canon references correctly.

The Wiki could become the hobby resource Mr. Miller envisioned or it can continue on being dismissed by everyone except those who uploaded their "fanon" there.

The problem here is you and I have a fairly different vision of what an good hobby resource is. I view the fanon as a resource for Traveller referees and an inspiration and encouragement to fans to contribute and expand Traveller.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Right. What needs to be done is go though the 23,470 existing articles and review each for their sources.

http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Rhylanor_(world) - This is an example of an article which combines Canon and Fanon data into one article. The sources listed at the bottom of the article have both books with pages and websites for the source material.

Thomas,

CotI always truncates URL's. You'll have to edit it on order to make it link correctly. I do it all the time.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[Whipsnade]

The wiki is Thomas' Fief.

That's the problem.

Just like the calibration lab I wrote about, we've a little fiefdom whose handful of inhabitants have a skewed view of just what their jobs actually are. Thomas is hanging new curtains, Maksim-Smelchak polishing doorknobs, and various visitors dropping of new pieces of furniture while the roof is on fire and the walls are falling in.

For the wiki, it's Thomas call which gets canon labels...

Apart from the history tabs, just what canon labels exist? Can you look at a page and quickly determine what is canon and what is fanon?

Also goes to T5SS data, and only T5SS data, being the sole canonical entry.

The T5SS should be uploaded. However, should it uploaded before any attempt is made to fix the Wiki's huge structural problems? Should we be hanging new curtains while the house is on fire.

But the Wiki should reflect the Official Traveller Universe... especially since it's hosted by FFE.

Yes it should. Sadly, it currently does not.

 

[inexorabletash]

"Archaeology is the search for facts, not truth."

That's a useful aphorism to keep in mind. Canon refers to *sources*, not what they say. Things in the canon may contradict each other.

Facts are easy: it is an easily confirmable fact that some resource says something. Distilling the truth is a lot harder, usually involving hurt feelings. Ensuring everything is clearly cited would go a long way.

On another tangent: the T5SS data is neither complete not stable.

 

[Sstefan]

... and I thought that the TravellerWiki was ....

an on-line "resaonably" updated Library data; not a writer's resource or set of limitations (canon).

If you don't know what I consider as library data, take a look at some of the "accepted" (dare I say canon?) knowledge of this planet.

Prior to 1400, the world is flat and the center of the universe (or at least the part that was visible. After 1400, not quite so much...

... and then comes the interesting part of who writes history; not much history is available from the vanquished or the vanished (not saying that they failed to record it, but we just haven't found it).


Traveller's library data is much the same" written by the "winner of the last go-round" and the rest is put into some other spot to be "conveniently forgotten" or some-such.

As for separating out articles within the wiki based on sources (whether that is GDW, SJG, Mongoose, or whatever criteria) would really take quite a while based on the sheer number of entries already on the wiki.

As Thomas and Maskim have already said (maybe not directly), feel free to join us on the wiki and make it better.

 

[tjoneslo]

The wiki is Thomas' Fief.

This also isn't true. The wiki is run, as it has since the day of its founding, by the consensus of the contributors.

The current policy and formatting for the citations in the wiki was largely the idea of Hans. He really liked and wanted the page reference for each article. If he really wanted the canon sources for an article, and the sources list was accurate, he could simply look them up.

 

[aramis]

This also isn't true. The wiki is run, as it has since the day of its founding, by the consensus of the contributors.

It's how Marc explained it to me: The wiki is yours to run as you see fit, within the standards he set. That you do so by consensus is your choice.

Believe it or not, COTI is run largely on consensus as well. Major changes in policy go through vetting in the spire, a few have been waived off after which. Infractions are discussed quite often. I answer directly to Marc on the board, and so I have occasionally vetoed suggestions on the basis of protecting Marc's IP and/or finances. But, at the end of the day, Marc expects me to keep the board spam-free, supporting traveller in all its forms, and you to keep the wiki spam-free and supporting Traveller.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

...Maksim-Smelchak polishing doorknobs, and various visitors dropping of new pieces of furniture while the roof is on fire and the walls are falling in.

*** Door knob polishing? Really? ***

It would be really nice if you would be civil, speak politely, and persuade people of whatever position you are advocating with strong arguments. Name calling and ad hominem arguments don't win many points just about anywhere...

Seriously, the roof is not falling in and the house is not on fire. The wiki is stable, has good security, and people are contributing to it. It is improving every day. There is no river of waste product flowing into it either. I don't know where you get that stuff.

Seriously, come and help make it work. You are cordially invited to come help improve the wiki and put some action behind your constructive language. Please.

Apart from the history tabs, just what canon labels exist? Can you look at a page and quickly determine what is canon and what is fanon?

Please make some constructive suggestions how to achieve what you want and then come out and lead from the front by demonstrating the strengths of your proposal. Please.

Or at least study the current situation adequately so you know what is actually going on. It seems apparent that the reason you have to ask what exists for canon is because you have little to no idea what is really there in the thousands of articles. Go check it out. Find specific examples and make specific suggestions for improvement.

95% of the wiki, rough non-scientific estimate, is T5 canon. Straight from T5SS archive. Astrographic data. Backed by published data. Reconciled the best anyone can despite conflicted sources. There is very little fanon when you get down to it.

I know because I have literally gone through something like 10,000 articles or more and looked through the history log, cleaned up the articles, worked with Thomas, Don, and others, and made serious headway in making the blog a better resource.

Seriously, please back your words with actions. Come and do something concrete and stop with the belittlement and name calling. Take action. Make it better.

The T5SS should be uploaded. However, should it uploaded before any attempt is made to fix the Wiki's huge structural problems? Should we be hanging new curtains while the house is on fire.

Talk to Trav Map, Josh, Marc, or the "inner circle" about that. I don't do that update although I would be happy to help if it was desired by any of those folks. I have been learning Trav Map coding so I can be of more use that way.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.