I have a proposal for blue countries and wiki article stuff.
Blue countries tend to have a mix of every culture, nearly non-coherent, non-consistent.
Therefore i think we could make them non-canon, and instead for describing specific places included in the blue countries as “fictional” countries. Countries not on the map, but used on the wiki to make things more sense.
Commonia, for instance, is a mix of every native tongue new users have.
This does not make sense if there is a german country describing a chinese district just across the border.
Instead, non-mapped, wiki-filler, and coherent “countries” could be described on the wiki.
Comment from Bixelkoven on 7 January 2020 at 17:00
I don’t see a point in describing details of blue countries on the wiki, they will always be under constant change, Commonia in particular. The other smaller blues have somehow developed a specific theme like Midistland (German-Spanish) and Drull (Dutch) and maybe Gobrassanya.
Commonia in particular is there to serve as the tutorial zone for new mappers and you cannot just force all new mappers to map in Chinese to fit the theme of the country, they would get disinterested and will leave.
I don’t think blue countries should have anything on their wiki pages besides basic information (symbols, data and the geographical introduction).
Comment from Mapping Expert on 7 January 2020 at 17:36
What you have planned can challenge the objective of the wiki, which is to describe what is on the map and related topics. If this is done, we would be placing on the wiki “what we would like to have in the blue countries”, instead of what is actually evidenced on the map.
We cannot do much to establish “something national” (language, history, wiki content) in blue countries, as they constantly change and new users usually focus only on entering the OGF world. If we try to do so, we could disinterested many users looking to create their country in OGF.
This thematic regulation should be applied more to the owned and collaborative territories, where users could already adapt to the characteristics of the region.
Comment from theruler on 7 January 2020 at 18:49
I feel like something is misunderstood, since there is no point in creating coherency in blue countries, for instance Commonia, it would make it non-canon to say.
Instead of making it canon, we could incorporate “coherency-making” filler, non-mapped countries, which do not have an article of their own, but rather would, lets say, for example an article about a country neighboring Commonia.
Instead of saying;”A war happened between Exampleland and Commonia in 1983”, it could be like this: “A war happened between Exampleland and Fictivenation in 1983”, so it would become canon.
I understand that some blue countries are in fact coherent in some ways or another, and they could maybe become canon in their own ways, but as of Commonia, it is non-canon and should not be included in an article describing:”The Great War of Commonia and Examplia (1983-1998).” or the Great Famine etc,
They should NOT be mapped, NOR described in the wiki (like a terriotry, at least.) , but it should fill the place of wars and diplomacy in the wiki instead of Commonia.
Comment from zhenkang on 7 January 2020 at 23:13
I just ignore blue nations
Comment from iiEarth on 7 January 2020 at 23:34
Also, instead of making the situation more complex, why not . actually make an ‘official’ language of Commonia? The two main languages are English and Chinese, so we could reinforce the ‘rule.’
Comment from theruler on 8 January 2020 at 15:36
Comment from Mapping Expert on 8 January 2020 at 22:43
You should discuss this issue with the administration, because they (in conjunction with other users) coordinate most of what is done in the blue countries. I’ve already given my point of view, but I think it’s a good idea (although there are some confusing details).