Talk: People/Archive

This page is an archive of previous discussion.

Character Alphabetization

Moved from User talk:Rrius.

People are alphabetized by their last names. It is common and it is prevelant. It is also done on several wiki's. Besides, major changes like this should be discussed first. ---- Willie - HtS 03:48, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

I have restored my edits, and here is why: My version helps editors; yours hinders them. I will start by explaining what drove me to make the edits in the first place. I recently re-read TGS, and was reminded that the Rebel Grays had appointed a replacement for Delana. I did not have the book in front of me, but I remembered all of the information except her exact name. I did, however, remember that it began with "N". I decided therefore to use Category:Gray Ajah for its intended purpose. Unfortunately, she wasn't under "N" because Sanderson (or Jordan) happened to give her a surname. As a result, I had to scan every member of the Gray for ones beginning with "N", then sift through them despite the fact that they were scattered throughout the page. Had the list been properly formatted, I could have merely looked under "N", eliminated the ones it couldn't be, and clicked the right one. Someone looking for a Red called "Sashelle" would find the same problem.

Again, my version helps, but yours hinders. In favour of yours, all you can say is that people are alphabetized by last name. Sure, in the real world, in the West, that is true. Of course, that is not true in many countries, especially in Asia. In any event, forcing the names of all WoT characters into that paradigm doesn't make sense. How many times has Pevara's last name been mentioned in the series? Set that against how many times "Pevara" has been. The categories serve a function, so their form should be dictated by that function, not a European convention that is of no value to editors trying to use the website. You further state that other wikis list characters that way, yet you fail to mention what wikis or whether they have anything to do with WoT. I reject out of hand any analogy to other series both because the mere fact that things are done differently elsewhere has no bearing, and because names in WoT aren't quite the same as other fiction worlds.

Additionally, other WoT resources alphabetize by first name. See, e.g., Encyclopedia WoT: Characters.

Finally, you allege that I should have discussed the matter first. To begin with, there is no clear place to do any such thing. What's more, there was no clear reason why I shouldn't have gone ahead and made the categories more accessible for editors. More importantly, I could make exactly the same claim in return. The edits having been made, there is no reason for you to have swept through and reverted them all before beginning a discussion.

Since there is a clear utilitarian reason for my version and none for yours, I have restored my edits. -Rrius 09:34, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. I'm actually leaning towards Rrius on this one. But I think we should wait till Willie get's back from vacation so he can give his input. And I understand on the confusion of where to talk about this. We were hoping the forum would be a place to talk about it.--OPTIMOUS 06:54, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

I know it sounds stupid, but I don't know anything about the forum namespace (i.e., what it's for, how to make sure someone sees something there, etc.). Basically, if a tool here isn't more or less identical to Wikipedia or mentioned in the "Welcome!" at the top of this talk page, I probably don't know it exists or, if I do, what it's for and how to use it properly. -Rrius 07:32, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

You could have just used the find option in your browser....[ctrl+f] then type the name, would have highlighted the link. — fbstj 12:07, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

No, I could not have done. I didn't remember the exact spelling, which was the point of looking it up in the first place. To be excessively detailed, I remembered it was N, an A or O, followed by N or S, then a bunch of other letters. My browser would have been annoyed if I had tried to look that up. It is something a list is good for (like when you look up a word in the dictionary because you can't remember how to spell it), but only when the word and the ones like it are listed together. Moreover, that doesn't answer the question of which method makes more sense. Do people go around talking about the Black Salidar Sitter Mosalaine? No, they talk about Delana. Would you expect look up Rand's first bondholder as "Alanna" or "Mosvani"? -Rrius 00:38, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry dude I completely disagree on you on this one. Most Aes Sedai have last names and so should be placed in alphabetical order with the last name. I would be fine if they were all just first name then Sedai but they aren't--GuanYu79 09:55, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

What is the point of list alphabetically by last name? It would make sense if they were known anywhere near as well by their last names, but they aren't. Why exactly do you feel it necessary to impose our cultural norm where it is unhelpful at best? This is a bit frustrating because I think I have a rationale argument, and apparently at least someone agrees with me, but the only response I get is, "They have last names, so we should alphabetize by them." I really think I am entitled to a better explanation than that. I say using the names used most by the authors and by fans should be the ones used to sort. What exactly is the response to that? As I see it, the reasons for sorting by last name in, say, a phone book, simply do not apply to alphabetizing characters in Wheel of Time novels. So, once again, if everyone knows Halima's little friend as "Delana", why would we force people to look for her under "M" rather than "D"? How many people even know her last name? If the choice is once again not to answer these questions, perhaps this one will get a response: What do you feel the purpose of a category is? I have to admit to more than a little exasperation at the more or less complete dismissal here, so please forgive the tone if it offends. -Rrius 04:11, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

they wish to be consistent (with wikipedia?) But I've come round to your view, it makes more sense — fbstj 21:27, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

No I value your opinions and nothing like a good old debate. The problem as Aes Sedai don't refer to themselves as ____ Sedai and as the books progress more and more people are not using the honorary Sedai at the end of their names--GuanYu79 22:53, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

I think you've missed my point completely. "X Sedai" has nothing to do with it. When an Aes Sedai is mentioned in dialogue or regular prose, it is almost always by first name and without a last name. When fans discuss Aes Sedai characters, it is almost exclusively done by first name without a last name. It is really as simple as that. Also, I note again that I still haven't received an explanation of why alphabetization by last name is a better idea than actually being helpful to people trying to use this site. -Rrius 03:40, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

---

To start at the beginning, it could also be said that my version helps editors and yours hinders them. What happens when someone comes along and tries to find a character and the only information they have to go on is the first few letters of their last name? Either way, people are going to have difficulty.

Secondly, I find it really hard to believe that what "drove" you to this was having to "scan" the Gray Ajah category for a first name that began with "N." Let's take a look at that. When you first went to that page, you probably looked under "N" first, right? Seing only one name (Nisain) and finding that she was not it, you had to look at first names. Your "scan" should have taken you to the "C's" next. Opening up the Naorisa Cambral's page, you would have discovered the target of your search. I guess I am finding it difficult to see your hinderance at searching a list of fourty pages, three of which aren't characters.

Third: Yes, people are alphabetized by last name. Yes, in the real world. Yes, it the West. And, if you understand Asian names, yes poeple in Asia are alphabetized by their "last" names. What we in the West call a "last" name is called a "surname" or "family" name by many other countries. Yet in Asia, and other parts of the world, this family name is placed before the "given" name or what we think of as a first name. So, in Asia, it would be Cambral Naorisa and not Naorisa Cambral. I find it very hard to belive that someone who knows what a matronym is doesn't know about surnames and Asian names.

Let's delve into that third point a little more. We all live in the real world, right? Is it really that much of a leap to try and impose our world view on something fictional? Next, I'm kind of puzzled as to why you bring the "West" into this. This is a series that was written by a westerner, is being edited by westerners, and is being finished by a westerner.

Fourth: Other wikis and other websites. Since we are dealing with liturature, there are 186 wiki's in the Books hub alone. I randomly selected twenty of them. Nineteen alphabetized by last name. The one that didn't, and I'm sorry for not remembering which one it was, had characters that only have one single name. Do these other wikis have anything to do with WoT? No, they don't. But as the saying goes "what's good for the goose is good for the gander." What works for other fictional worlds can work for this one. Yes, things are done differently at other wikis, but many things are done the same as well, so that "mere fact" bears no weight. As for names being not "quite" the same as other fiction worlds; try Googling some secondary and tertiary WoT names when you get a chance.

Now, on to other WoT resources: Seven Spokes alphabetizes by last name. The books themselves, in the glossaries, alphabetize by last name.

Fifth: Yes, there are clear places to have discussions. First would be Category talk:People since this concerns all of the characters. Second would be the Forums. I have to cry foul here. You have edited on the Forums. When you went there, you didn't look at this and think "Hey, this is something new." If you didn't, whatever, it just strikes me as odd. Side question: How does Wikipedia alphabetize peoples' names in categories?

Sixth: Reverts. The reason I reverted them is so that all the pages are the same until consensus is reached on the issue. Now we have some pages one way and other another. To new members, that can be confusing. So, yes, I did "sweep" through and change them back before I posted to your talk page. You will find that to be a prevalent attitude on just about every wiki. With the edits more than a week gone, we can just wait for consensus.

Seventh: Categories. Categories are used to group pages. They are not, at least in my opinion, a search function.

Eighth: Listing things together. Your way would split up all of the Damodreds, Trakands, Mandragorans, Cauthons, al'Thors, al'Veres, Aybaras, ad nauseum. Also in that talk post, you mentioned Alanna. For the longest time, I got the name Alanna confused with some other sister, whom I can't remember now. The only way I could sort it out was by her last name. So, yes, when I think of Rand's first bondholder, I think of Mosvani.

If you take nothing else away from this, at least take this: Different people are going to have different views on how to do things. ---- Willie - HtS 07:04, August 23, 2010 (UTC)

Before addressing your main points, I want to address your last one and one of my own. My patience is not limited, and it has been trod on now more than I can take. You said I should "take from this" that ""different people are going to have different views on how to do things." I have been fairly patient here, but that patronizing tone is completely uncalled for. I never said no one would have other views and expressed my extreme annoyance that no one was bother to explain the views that I clearly knew were out there. If you really want to have a conversation about this, try not being...like that. I also want to call you out for removing content from my talk page. You have every right to direct people to a new page and copy content at that page from mine, but where exactly do you get off taking it upon yourself to remove content from my userspace? I realize that you have put a lot of work into this wiki, but if you want to own it, please rename it to include your name.

Now, to address your main points:

1) That is a ridiculous point, and I hope you realize it. Who would go searching for an Aes Sedai by a few letters of her last name? Aes Sedai are known by first name, and very few with last names have those names mentioned more than once. Therefore listing by last name is absolutely insane.

2) No, that is not how it happened. I had to isolate all the "Ns" and use process of elimination.

3) Regardless of how many "real world" cultures use family names, it does not make sense for Aes Sedai. As such, our living in the real world does not mean we should list them by last name. What's more, in the real world, the purpose of a list is not merely to show off that you have a list. for the list to actually function, it needs to be searchable. Despite your desperate first point, the most reasonable way of doing that for Aes Sedai is to sort them by first name.

You have been so overzealous that you even sorted one woman by her grandmother's first name, which would have been forgivable I hadn't noted the fact in the edit summary of an edit you reverted.

4) The fact that other wikis for unrelated books is completely irrelevant in guiding how to list Aes Sedai. Full stop.

5) First, it does not apply to all characters—it only applies to Aes Sedai. I have said over and over and over and over again "for Aes Sedai". As a result, Category:People does not really make that much sense. Nor does Category:Aes Sedai, since the relevant characters are so far buried in that category. As for the Forum namespace, I've already addressed that point. If you are crying foul, you are either not reading what I wrote or are being purposely obtuse. I answered a query about a the possibilities of Achievements. It is asinine to suggest that I should simply have decided that the Forum space was the place to take a theoretical content dispute.

6) Whatever, I'm not even going to bother going down this road with you. I disagree with you, you disagree with me. If you choose to debate this point bad words will certainly emanate from one keyboard or another. On the small point about a difference between some pages and others, yes, the one large group where characters are known by first rather than last name are categorized by first name. If there are others who should be too, they can be swept up later. Since, say, Asha'man or nobles or Emond's Fielders all are either known best by last name or both names together, of course they should remain sorted as is.

7) Categories are meant to group things so that people can find them. They are not just shiny collections of ones and zeroes meant to impress newcomers. They are mean to help people find pages. For Aes Sedai, the sorting system that makes sense is sorting by first name.

8) As I've already said, the sorting would only apply to Aes Sedai, so no, you're just wrong. As for your idiosyncratic way of remembering Alanna, well, it's idiosyncratic. The sorting of characters should not hinge on what amounts to an oddity you have with one character. I presume even you best know Delana as Delana, so we can dismiss that point for what it is.

If you're offended by my tone, you've drawn it out, so I will not apologize. Again, I recognize all the hard work you've done here, but I do not like being treated as though I'm pissing on your lawn. What's more, I don't like being treated as though I should have known that I should go get a pissing on the lawn license before doing so. -Rrius 09:37, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

First, that last bit by me was not ment to be patronizing at all. Simply a reminder to all that different people have different viewpoints. If you took it as patronizing, then I apologize.

As to moving the conversation to this page, it is common wiki practice to do that. I have seen it on several wikis. What we have now is the same conversation in two different places. Someone might miss the small note at the bottom of the section on your talk page and respond there when they should be responding here.

Next, I would like to address one main issue and then I'll go point by point. The changes you propose would have to be applied to all characters. You and I have had this discussion before. If something is done one way on one page, it should be done that way on all pages. This isn't a "personal preference," it is a limitation of the software. If it were possible to sort the members of the Ajah categories by first name, but leave last name alphabetization intact on other categories, then I would agree with you. This is not the case, however. With the character template that we have, alphabetization is either one way or another; it can't be both. Take a look at Category:Queens. Elayne is listed under E, but her mother is listed under T.

1.) It is not a ridiculous point. I often go searching for Aes Sedai by their last name. So, no, it is not absolutely insane, nor is it even remotly insane.

2.) Again, I have a really hard time figuring out your with your sifting and scanning of the Gray Ajah category. I guess I just can't wrap my head around the problem of looking through thirty-seven names.

3.) Honestly, yes it does make sense for Aes Sedai, and for all the characters. And yes, the list does function. It may not function the way you want it to function, but it does function. As for the matronym, yes you are correct. When I did the reverts, I didn't notice that. I apologize for that.

4.) No, it is not irrelevant. Wikis look to other wikis to see what works. However, I am willing to drop looking to other sites for precident.

5.) Yes, it would apply to all characters, see above. Even if it didn't, Category talk:Aes Sedai is the place to discuss that since it concerns all Aes Sedai. Also, a sub-sub-category is not "buried." I'm going to drop the Forum issue, as the best place to discuss things was on a Category talk page.

6.) Again, see above.

7.) This, in my opinion, could also go either way. See point 1.

8.) See above. My point with Alanna was to say that not everyone always searches for first names. This goes back again to point 1 and the "different peoeple, different views."

In general, I am not offended by your tone. It seems to me that your are arguing your point passionatly. No one that I can see, least of all me, is trying to treat you in any negative way. Optimous agreed with you. Fbstj tried to offer you a different way of doing things and then came to agree with you. GuanYu79 offered his dissenting opinion as have I. I hope that we can all work together to better the wiki. ---- Willie - HtS 14:47, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

I don't have time to address (or even read) the numbered points right now, but I will address the others. First, if you still don't see it as patronizing, that's a problem. It very clearly is, in addition to being wholly inappropriate under the circumstances for the reasons I've already explained. Next, moving a conversation is common, but deleting text from the old page is not. The proper method is to make it obvious that no new text should be added while directing users to the new location. That's all the more true when the original page is in another person's userspace. Also, you are just wrong about whether pages can be sorted differently in one category from the way they are in others, hence the "default" in "Defaultsort". Finally, I never said anything about any of those other editors, except to the extent some were also included in dissenting without a basis. The "your" in my comment was singular. -Rrius 19:52, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry that you feel that I was being patronizing. That was not my intention and I apologize. Next, I have seen it done where the entire conversation has been moved, even from a user's talk page, to a different page. Apparently, it is done different at Wikipedia. Again, sorry about that.

As to the categorization itself: Yes, you are right, if we manually added categories to pages, we would be able to sort them one way in one category and another way in another. However, with the character template that we use that automatically adds a character page to categories, we do not have the option to change the sort key of the automatically added categories.

As to the whole "pissing on the lawn" thing, I have tried to be civil towards you. I have argued my side of this without using phrases like "absolutly insane" and without calling your ideas and points ridiculous. I have apologized to you on several counts. There are wikis where what you said would have been seen as a personal attack. Please take this into account. ---- Willie - HtS 20:16, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

Whether they would have been considered personal attacks on another wiki is immaterial. As I've said, I felt provoked by your tone. Whether you intended the tone is beside the point; It was there, so I responded. As to calling your arguments "ridiculous" and "insane", they were. They may make some kind of sense to you, but they didn't actually make sense as a response to what I was actually saying. I argued again and again about how Aes Sedai are talked about, but you kept responding to a completely different argument. Perhaps it is my fault for assuming you had read what I'd written, but there it is. Finally, as to moving, I have said, and will say again, it was not moving the discussion that I found objectionable—it was deleting the text from my talk page. It is enough to make it clear no new discussion should be added and direct people to the new location. That is especially true where, as here, the original location is someone else's userspace. -Rrius 03:43, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

No, it is not immaterieal. Personal attack are taken very seriously. Being provoked by anyone's tone is absolutely no excuse for being rude.

Now, as I see you don't understand the bigger picture I've been talking about and have not read what I have written, I can accept that you would think my ideads are ridiculous and insane. ---- Willie - HtS 13:28, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

---

Heck you guys, heck!... now why dont you just have both? A page somewhere called Characters by first name, or :Category:Aes Sedai/by name ((To be honest with you, I dislike mediawiki for its insistence of doing things badly. meh)) — fbstj 11:05, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Categories were created to replace stand-alone lists. As for your category suggestion, we would run into the same problem that we are having now, which is how to alphabetize the characters one way in one category and another way in others while using our character template. :) ---- Willie - HtS 19:28, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

I still don't understand what the problem here is. There is always a default for category sorting; it is either set automatically as the article title or by the value entered in Defaultsort. No matter how the default is set, individual categories can be set with customized values. For instance, if Elayne Trakand is sorted by E, then L, then A, etc., all one has to do to change how it's sorted in Category:Queens is enter [[Category:Queens|Trakand, Elayne]]. (Incidentally, rulers do seem to be another set of characters best known by first name. How many would have guessed that Ishara, the first Queen of Andor would be under C?) -Rrius 03:43, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Open up Alanna Mosvani's page. Look at the bottom where you would add or remove the categories. See? No category names for you to alter, no place to put a sort key. The whole reason I added the DEFAULTSORT magic word to all of the characters who have last names is because there is no place on the articles themselves to manually change the sort key. ---- Willie - HtS 13:28, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Solution

Okay, after a few questions and comments at community.wikia's forums I have found a way to give everyone what they want. Here is the way it works. The {{Character}} template will need to be changed slightly and the DEFAULTSORTs will have to be restored. I've changed it for a few tests to make sure that it would work. As of right now, without any further changes, only the nine Ajah categories alphabetize by first name. All other categories will alphabetize by last name.

Now, we will need to decide two things:

1. Is this something that wants to be adopted by the community?
2. If so, What categories will be sorted by first names and which ones will be sorted by last names.

I call for a quick vote. Please indicate your yes or no vote below with a # sign and your signature (~~~~). No votes, please give a disenting reason.

Yes, adopt this

• — fbstj 09:45, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

No, do not adopt this

1. ---- Willie - HtS 13:28, August 29, 2010 (UTC). Disenting reason below.

Adoption discussion

• I really do think the default sort should still be first name for Aes Sedai because in generic categories like Category:Unknown nationality, people will look for Aes Sedai by the name they actually know them by. In categories such as Category:Queens, a surname sort might make sense (assuming there is actually a justification for having rulers sorted by surname), so they can be sorted specifically (even then, Eldrene ay Ellan ay Carlan should still be sorted by first name because "Carlan" is her grandmother's first name, not Eldrene's last name). My way would require absolutely no change to the {{Character}}, and only spot changes to the affected categories for the affected Aes Sedai (not many, I would imagine). If there is a consensus in the other direction, all categories more or less AS specific should be included: Category:Novices, Category:Accepted, Category:Unaligned sisters, Category:Rebel Aes Sedai, Category:Elaida a'Roihan's White Tower, Category:Sitters, Category:Ajah Heads, &c. -Rrius 03:43, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

• I was willing to do this if it where the Ajah categories and maybe the those that you listed. However, as I thought about it more, I have changed my mind. There needs to be a standard across all character pages. If Aes Sedai are sorted by first name throughout the wiki, new users would be confused having some people one way and other antoher. Also, I believe it looks sloppy having Asne Zeramene next to Yurith Azeri. I needs to be one way or the other. ---- Willie - HtS 13:28, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
  

• • I'm sorry, but what new user is going to come to this wiki not knowing that AS are primarily known by first name? Would you list Queen Elizabeth under "W" for "Windsor"? Consistency for consistency's sake is not a terribly compelling argument. Actual usage is the key, and it militates against consistency, despite whatever inconvenience that may cause to the person who visits this site without have read any of the books or related stories. People who know the character Asne would not necessarily know her last name or the letter it begins with. It is simply unreasonable to expect people to root around the entire list rather than putting the name where people expect to find it. -Rrius 04:55, November 6, 2010 (UTC)

• • • Right now, after all these months, I don't really care if the characters are sorted by first or last name. What does matter is that ALL of the characters are sorted the same way. As for the rest of that, I thought we weren't using real-world examples. If we are, the I wouldn't categorize Queen Elizabeth under "W" because British royalty does not commonly use a surname. Furthermore, I'm not saying we should have consistency for consistency's sake, I'm saying that we should have consistency so that things are organized, and organization lends itself to usage. Also, most people do not go straight to a category to search for articles. That is why we have a search function. People who know the character Asne wouldn't root around for whatever category she might be in and then try searching for her, they would just type in "Anse" into the search bar and be done with it. Like I said, I have given up caring one way or the other as far as first or last name, it just needs to be all or nothing for all the characters. ---- Willie - HtS 13:46, November 7, 2010 (UTC)

I thought all WoT websites sorted characters by first names (yes, it is unconventional in real life, but the WoT sites I visit use this first name method. RJ's Randland is unique in this I think). All the readers and sites I chat with are acustomed to using first names. I think the default should be to sort by first name, but if you want to go the extra mile then go ahead and do both first and last name sorting. I prefer typing first name for WoT searches (Rand; Egwene; etc.). Ronmamita 12:37, September 14, 2010 (UTC)