Forum:Proposal for Infobox Guidelines policy

Forums: Index > The Wizengamot > Proposal for Infobox Guidelines policy

There has been some discussion recently about infoboxes. Specifically whether to include names such as Perkins and Parry 'Otter that were attributed to Harry even though he did not use them himself. What do you all think? --Hcoknhoj 07:31, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

Specifically, there has been a lot of dispute as to whether the "Alias" section of a character's infobox should include names the character was called by others, or just names they used themselves. For example, should Severus Snape's aliases include "Snivellus" as well as "the Half-Blood Prince"? Should "Hermy" be listed for Hermione? There are three options:

1. The "Alias" section should be restricted to names used by the respective characters themselves.
2. The "Alias" section should include all names which were used to refer to the character, by themselves and by others.
3. A new section, "A.K.A." could be added to the infobox template below "Alias", in which names used by others would be listed.

This change would be incorporated into the existing Character infobox family guidelines policy, which would be renamed as simply Character infobox guidelines. - Nick O'Demus 08:12, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

While I prefer choice 2, I would not object to option 3. --Hcoknhoj 08:51, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

Let me give you a taste of what the infoboxes will look like if we go for option 2 or 3. Let's take Snape for example.

• Snape
• Proffessor Snape
• Sev
• Snivellus
• Snivelly
• Idiot
• Git
• Freak
• The Half-Blood Prince
• Greasy Git
• YOU COWARD
• The bravest man I ever knew
• His favourite, most trusted advisor
• Ugly Git
• Slimeball
• Overgrown bat
• Greasy haired kid
• That awful boy
• That Snape boy

If you really think this is an acceptable standard for this wiki, then you could make a case for adding just about anything to the infoboxes. The alias field is for alias and nothing else. Jayce ^{•Avada Kedavra•Crucio•Imperio•} 10:19, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

That's a good point, but a lot of those could be taken out with a few simple restrictions:

• • Snape - his name, not a nickname or alias
  • Professor Snape - his title, ditto
  • Idiot, Git, Freak, Slimeball, Coward, etc. - generic insults, could be used on anyone, neither nickname nor alias
  • Bravest man, Awful boy, Overgrown bat - more descriptors than aliases or nicknames, he was never directly addressed as such
  • Sev, Snivillus, Half-Blood Prince - unique to this character, referred to or directly addressed as such, would be valid under Proposal 2 or 3
  • Greasy Git - debatable

After all, Alastor Moody is known as Mad-Eye, and called this by others, but when does he ever directly refer to himself as such? The closest I can recall is when he (or rather Crouch while impersonating him) says "and they say I'm mad". By that reasoning, we couldn't consider "Mad-Eye Moody" as an alias either.

In short, a valid alias/nickname/AKA/whatever would be:

1. Singular to that character (with a possible exception for Barny Weasley). "Mudblood" would not be a valid alias, but "Scarhead" or "Loony Lovegood" could be.
2. Something the character either referred to themself as or was directly addressed as.

Nick O'Demus 11:21, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

Im sorry but that's like saying people can add stupid things to the infobox if they want, but only to a certain degree. And what about mispronounciations, such as "Hermy" by Grawp, "Parry Otter" by Slughorn, and "Dunderbore" and "Dumberton" by Mrs Cole? Are they alias as well? Jayce ^{•Avada Kedavra•Crucio•Imperio•} 15:38, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

That still doesn't address the issue with Moody. Also, by that logic we can't use "The Boy Who Lived" as an alias for Harry Potter, unless you can show when he directly used the term himself. And when did Voldemort ever call himself "You-Know-Who" or "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named"? We'd have to exclude several prominent characters' well-known aliases if we went that way.

So let's look at Voldemort's permissible aliases under option 1:

• Lord Voldemort
• Heir of Slytherin
• The Dark Lord
• The greatest sorcerer in the world

What could not be permitted, and would have to be removed:

• You-Know-Who
• He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named
• Chief Death Eater

Nick O'Demus 19:01, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

I'm with Jayce Carver on this one. It's already been adressed by the Admin, and they agreed not to include nicknames in the infobox. I'd say Mad-Eye is acceptable as it's used instead of his real name, and he clearly has no problem being called that. Jayden Matthews 19:16, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

But wouldn't Sev be acceptable by that reasoning then? It was used by Lily instead of his real name, and he clearly had no problem being called that. - Nick O'Demus 19:31, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

I guess there could be a case for it. We don't really know how often the name was used though, we only have one occassion of her using it. Jayden Matthews 19:35, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

I would deem aliases to be unique alternate names by which the character is known. Therefore, aliases would only be terms that can be only applied to that particular character (i.e. "Mudblood" might be an alias for a bunch of different characters, while "The Amazing Bouncing Ferret" would only apply to one person). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:14, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

Here are some definitions.

• Wikipedia:An alias is usually used nowadays to describe a name which hides someone's true identity
• The Free Dictionary:An assumed name
• Word Reference:assumed name, false name, a name that has been assumed temporarily
• Your Dictionary: an assumed name; another name

We cannot go around saying that the "Amazing Bouncing Ferret" is an alias of Draco Malfoy etc, because it's simply not true. Jayden Matthews 20:35, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

How about this... If a person has been called a certain name more than once (to make sure it wasn't a mistake) then it is an alias. This would exclude derogatory terms like Mudblood though. -- Ratneer ^{Owl Me!} 22:09, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

After more consideration, I think a lot of this could be simplified with these three restrictions:

1. The name must be singular to the character. "Mudblood" or generic insults would not be a valid alias, but "Scarhead" or "Loony Lovegood" would be. An exception could be made for "Barny Weasley".
2. No descriptors. To qualify as an alias/nickname, it must be capitalized. "Dark Lord", "Half-Blood Prince", "Scarhead", "Snivellus", etc. would qualify. "That awful boy", "greatest sorcerer in the world", "bravest man I ever knew", "amazing bouncing ferret", etc. would not. Likewise for insults and such. If Snape is called "a greasy git", that would not qualify, but if he was called "the Greasy Git", it would.
3. No mispronunciations. No drunken "Parry Otter", no calling Ron "Rupert" by mistake, and no Binns' mixing up names. It must be deliberate. "Hermy" would qualify as an alias, as that was how Grawp was taught to say her name. Hagrid even asked her if it was alright for him to call her that.

Nick O'Demus 00:27, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

That is perfect Nick. Now we should just vote on it... -- Ratneer ^{Owl Me!} 02:58, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

I second that. --Hcoknhoj 03:04, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

There's still something else that needs to be settled first: should the "Alias" section be retitled to "A.K.A." for accuracy, or should we just agree that we'll be a little loose with the definition? - Nick O'Demus 11:29, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

Of course, we could end the issue once and for all by eliminating the alias field. Radical proposal, possibly, but one that would eliminate the need for such a guideline. There will never be agreement on this issue. When it comes to an alias, I believe that only certain names would apply. In the case of Snape, then Half-Blood Prince would be the only acceptable one. Snivellus is an insult aimed at him by the Marauders. It's not an alias at all. Likewise, Scarhead is an insult, and shouldn't be in the infobox either. Descriptors such as "Chosen One", "Greatest Wizard", etc also should not be in the infobox. Shortened names - such as Bill, Ced, etc - shouldn't be there either, but are acceptable in the main article. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 18:47, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

Wouldn't that be kind of like throwing out the baby with the bathwater? And if we did, how long would it be before some started adding "List of So-And-So's aliases" sections to the character articles?

I don't see this proposal as much different from the restrictions on the "Family" section of the infobox. People still disagree about who should or shouldn't go in that field, but standards were set on who does and doesn't qualify, and if someone adds a name outside of those restrictions, there is a set policy that any user can look to and enforce.

Nick O'Demus 13:36, January 27, 2010 (UTC)