where to next?

[rtil]

true, but i didnt say shadow of the penillian needed its own page. I'm saying if that was zwickel's only animation, even though he is clearly talented, it didn't get a good score or any awards so if it's awards you're basing being allowed to be featured, zwickel wouldnt be featured although HE clearly deserves it due to his talent

I do agree with your point about sprite movies not getting allowed in for that reason. I should contradict myself by saying we shouldnt let ANY spriters in here unless all the characters are their own original characters for that reason alone, besides the fact that the majority of spriters just rip their graphics from other sites

weekly awards are an interesting consideration, but i disagree with letting them be the decider. weekly awards are only judged by a movie's ability to sustain it's high score for a period of days. it's better than judging daily awards because there are some things that win daily awards that were made in like 4 hours (robot frogs for example, due to mass voting), but then again, there are movies like SMBZ intro and some of legendaryfrog's old shit that still has ridiculously high scores. plus there are plenty of things that don't win daily/weekly awards even though their movie could be better than everything won on that day.

in my opinion nothing newgrounds-based should decide what gets on here except perhaps that they released something that's deemed good by whoever ends up being part of the quality control team.

talent is subjective. i also don't believe talent exists. but then again, no one shares my opinion on talent, and no one shares yours. so it's not based on that.

again, tough luck with zwickel's flash. i never said score or awards had anything to do with a cartoon having merit, so stop saying it. I was merely suggesting the idea and seeing what people thought of it, and that was only for a select few amount of awards. It's not about deserving, it's about practicality. I want qualifications set for articles surrounding animations in so that I don't have to deal with the fact that 75% of all cartoons deserve one based on someone's view of "talent". If a group of people can agree on an animation having merit for an article, then that's fine. But guidelines need to be set on this first.

This can also lead to it being inefficient and frustrating. If Anipedia grows to a point where many articles are being made every day, it might get difficult to keep things under control. So besides everyone being on quality control duty, there needs to be a few (not one) set guidelines on what makes a cartoon 'notable'. Despite your disagreement with anything Newgrounds related being a deciding factor, please keep in mind that Newgrounds is by far the largest internet flash portal on the internet, and if it wasn't for Newgrounds, Anipedia would probably not exist, and you and I would not be right here today.

1. perhaps it would be better to base it on how much they've improved over the time they've been animating? I suppose you could say if someone gave a shit enough to improve a lot from the start of their animation career, then its obviously a passion, but since people are writing articles about themselves, they can judge it i guess
2. no, but my point was there is no second rule, im taking this one out due to the fact that its sort of irrelevant
3. i think it would have to be people that you trust (particularly people moderating the site) that should be able to rotate into it. they should also need to know what "good" flash is and can't have the mindset that animators like illwillpress and legendaryfrog are "good animators". the "at least 1 year experience" rule would apply to who gets to judge probably more than who gets featured. one of the biggest factors, is, they cannot be biased. if they have something against who's trying to get a page, it would be less likely a chance that they'd get in (like if i was judging on a day wonchop wanted to be featured on the site, it would be totally unfair to him because i would automatically vote no)

1. Again, still subjective.
2. ok
3. why do you keep talking about "featured" stuff? there is no featured content on anipedia, at least right now. we're just talking about the creation of articles. the biased thing is taken care of by simply nulling out anyone who had anything to do with the creation of/is a friend of the person that made the article. and of course i will only add people i trust to the rotating group.

in fact, instead of rotating, i'd just want it to be a very large group of people, so that a large majority of people put together a good amount of opinions and discussion on the matter. I'm sure most won't end up being trivial, although i don't doubt the drama of the flash animator world will not pour onto anipedia.

If someone wants to make an article about Alvin, fine. But the last thing I want is a diehard fan writing it. i want non-biased articles, and i only want straight facts. if it got praise, note its criticisms. most people make alvin out to be a god.aasaddfffjewjfef dude dont let anyone make an alvin article he isnt an animator

this place will turn into a fucking flashwiki clone the moment that shit happens

what are you basing this presumption off of? it would be a neutral article.

[anigentleman]

talent is subjective. i also don't believe talent exists. but then again, no one shares my opinion on talent, and no one shares yours. so it's not based on that.

well i dont mean talent, i mean they're just good animators in general and have the ability to make something good

again, tough luck with zwickel's flash. i never said score or awards had anything to do with a cartoon having merit, so stop saying it. I was merely suggesting the idea and seeing what people thought of it, and that was only for a select few amount of awards. It's not about deserving, it's about practicality. I want qualifications set for articles surrounding animations in so that I don't have to deal with the fact that 75% of all cartoons deserve one based on someone's view of "talent". If a group of people can agree on an animation having merit for an article, then that's fine. But guidelines need to be set on this first.

no no, i just saw the suggestion and wanted to put in my two cents on it.

This can also lead to it being inefficient and frustrating. If Anipedia grows to a point where many articles are being made every day, it might get difficult to keep things under control. So besides everyone being on quality control duty, there needs to be a few (not one) set guidelines on what makes a cartoon 'notable'. Despite your disagreement with anything Newgrounds related being a deciding factor, please keep in mind that Newgrounds is by far the largest internet flash portal on the internet, and if it wasn't for Newgrounds, Anipedia would probably not exist, and you and I would not be right here today.

you're absolutely right. in fact, i was being beaten to death with a stick in an alleyway when i was younger but the guys who were beating me realized it was 11:45 and they needed to go deposit their experience points for the day so they immediately stopped and ran off

newgrounds saved my life

1. Again, still subjective.
2. ok
3. why do you keep talking about "featured" stuff? there is no featured content on anipedia, at least right now. we're just talking about the creation of articles. the biased thing is taken care of by simply nulling out anyone who had anything to do with the creation of/is a friend of the person that made the article. and of course i will only add people i trust to the rotating group.

in fact, instead of rotating, i'd just want it to be a very large group of people, so that a large majority of people put together a good amount of opinions and discussion on the matter. I'm sure most won't end up being trivial, although i don't doubt the drama of the flash animator world will not pour onto anipedia.

by saying featured i mean animators who get a page made for themselves. arent these standards made to judge who can have a page?

[rtil]

talent is subjective. i also don't believe talent exists. but then again, no one shares my opinion on talent, and no one shares yours. so it's not based on that.

well i dont mean talent, i mean they're just good animators in general and have the ability to make something good

still subjective.

This can also lead to it being inefficient and frustrating. If Anipedia grows to a point where many articles are being made every day, it might get difficult to keep things under control. So besides everyone being on quality control duty, there needs to be a few (not one) set guidelines on what makes a cartoon 'notable'. Despite your disagreement with anything Newgrounds related being a deciding factor, please keep in mind that Newgrounds is by far the largest internet flash portal on the internet, and if it wasn't for Newgrounds, Anipedia would probably not exist, and you and I would not be right here today.

you're absolutely right. in fact, i was being beaten to death with a stick in an alleyway when i was younger but the guys who were beating me realized it was 11:45 and they needed to go deposit their experience points for the day so they immediately stopped and ran off

newgrounds saved my life

if you don't believe me then tell me where else you would have seen my animations

1. Again, still subjective.
2. ok
3. why do you keep talking about "featured" stuff? there is no featured content on anipedia, at least right now. we're just talking about the creation of articles. the biased thing is taken care of by simply nulling out anyone who had anything to do with the creation of/is a friend of the person that made the article. and of course i will only add people i trust to the rotating group.

in fact, instead of rotating, i'd just want it to be a very large group of people, so that a large majority of people put together a good amount of opinions and discussion on the matter. I'm sure most won't end up being trivial, although i don't doubt the drama of the flash animator world will not pour onto anipedia.

by saying featured i mean animators who get a page made for themselves. arent these standards made to judge who can have a page?

no. everyone can have an encyclopedia page about themselves, so long as they've made something. now when it comes to individual animations having their own page, that is a different story.

[anigentleman]

still subjective.

ass u

if you don't believe me then tell me where else you would have seen my animations

lmao im just trying to joke around silly

no. everyone can have an encyclopedia page about themselves, so long as they've made something. now when it comes to individual animations having their own page, that is a different story.

ohhh i get it

alright well i think the only qualification there is if it's a good movie judged by a quality team or something

OR we could have a page for example "anigens cartoons" where its just an article on all of the cartoons said person has ever done instead of making an individual page for individual cartoons

[DrRobot]

in what ways would you consider a cartoon "good"?

[rtil]

alright well i think the only qualification there is if it's a good movie judged by a quality team or something

OR we could have a page for example "anigens cartoons" where its just an article on all of the cartoons said person has ever done instead of making an individual page for individual cartoons

the group of people judging is the best way to topple this.

also, the infobox with your list of cartoons is the reason why you don't need to make a page for each persons individual list of cartoons. people should utilize the infoboxes ability to list that. they can also describe each one on their page such as Jenova did. he made a good wiki article.

in what ways would you consider a cartoon "good"?

it's subjective. therefore, the more people that express their opinion on the same thing, the more agreeable it is.

[anigentleman]

EVERYTHING IS SUBJECTIVE TO YOU WHAT HAPPENED TO US

[Dagolith]

ur, do we have to make new accounts on Anipedia instead of just using the ones we have now?

[DrRobot]

yea, i don't think rtil wants to integrate this stuff. it's easier to keep it seperate

[anigentleman]

what do you mean

[Dagolith]

Fuck, now i have to make a new account!

[Dagolith]

this has probably already been said, but how about a music download section, we could put u links to song play/Downloads. i have a lot of stock instrumental music that is pretty good.

[rtil]

there is a time for that, but not now.
please see the focus page.
i don't have the knowledge of sql databases to be integrating forum accounts with wiki accounts. i'd probably majorly screw something up, plus it only takes about 2 seconds to make a wiki account.

[Muted]

Now my personal opinion on the matter would be to not have independant pages for animations. Have all information on animations listed on the page of its respective animator, because I'm not sure I see the merit of listing the details any animations unless it's a detailed analysis of the work within.

That said, maybe I'm missing the point a little. Are we aiming for a learning resource for artists looking to improve or a breakdown of the flash community?

[anigentleman]

Now my personal opinion on the matter would be to not have independant pages for animations. Have all information on animations listed on the page of its respective animator, because I'm not sure I see the merit of listing the details any animations unless it's a detailed analysis of the work within.

That said, maybe I'm missing the point a little. Are we aiming for a learning resource for artists looking to improve or a breakdown of the flash community?

rtil can speak for himself, but I'd have to say both. if it was just a learning resource, it would just be a tutorial hosting site. if it was a breakdown of the flash community, it would just be archives. No, it is both. It's also a breakdown of famous animators, famous cartoons, and flash cartoons. It is mainly about animation as a whole, combining both important aspects.

[rtil]

Now my personal opinion on the matter would be to not have independant pages for animations. Have all information on animations listed on the page of its respective animator, because I'm not sure I see the merit of listing the details any animations unless it's a detailed analysis of the work within.

That said, maybe I'm missing the point a little. Are we aiming for a learning resource for artists looking to improve or a breakdown of the flash community?

rtil can speak for himself, but I'd have to say both. if it was just a learning resource, it would just be a tutorial hosting site. if it was a breakdown of the flash community, it would just be archives. No, it is both. It's also a breakdown of famous animators, famous cartoons, and flash cartoons. It is mainly about animation as a whole, combining both important aspects.

anigen is right. if you look at the category tree on the right on the main page you'll see what i plan to cover. our focus currently, however, is the flash community.

[redmongoose]

websites more deserving of articles than those shitty ones anigen mentioned;

joecartoon.com
campchaos.com
icebox.com <--- this is a very important one

[rtil]

talk about old school, thanks for reminding me about those places

[anigentleman]

http://anipedia.thebackalleys.theblacknigg...sshole.edu/rtil

[egoraptor]

I'm with Muted. Are flash movies themselves significant enough to have their own pages? I think it would be better to post information about notable flash movies on the author's page.

I mean... is there really enough information about one specific movie to make a whole page about it? I would assume you explain the story and then somehow get "behind the scenes" information, but is that still really enough to make the transition from a section of an author's profile to its very own page? I think what should go into deciding what deserves its own page or not is whether or not the information on the page would be anything anybody cares about. Because honestly, if someone really wants to know about a movie that badly, they can just watch it, you know?

I think it would be a good idea to create a couple example pages of movies we unanimously agree should have their own pages to determine if it's really worth the trouble. Because if movies we all agree should have their own pages don't have very interesting information to display or much information at all for that matter, then how do we expect less "worthy" flashes to hold up?