Changes: Forum:Regarding leaked information

Revision as of 22:26, 5 December 2024

Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Regarding leaked information

See also: Forum:Formalization on Rules Regarding Leaks (7)6(four) (talk) 11:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Section 0

(7)6(four) (talk) 11:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

It may help to give some context to this list. Do these all contain references to leaked information? If so, are these all the pages with such information, or only the ones you found after a particular search, or only ones that fit a particular description? The association between Toys and User:Pikachu7889, for example, may not be readily apparent.Fluffbrain (talk) 17:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

My apologies for the lack of context; I'm less proficient at presenting information than at looking information up.
References or more.
Only some (probably missing others) of the ones regarding information that was leaked before the leakage that prompted #Section 1.
No direct association. Toys#cite note-41, Toys#cite note-6, Toys#cite note-hahashuan-4, Toys#Unconfirmed releases; https://mlp.fandom.com/wiki/User:Pikachu7889?file=Map_of_Equestria_online_version_2012-08.jpg.

(7)6(four) (talk) 18:29, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I see; thanks for clarifying.Fluffbrain (talk) 18:19, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Section 1

This topic is probably long overdue.

As season 8 looms closer and closer, it is getting harder and harder to keep select information off the Wiki and under wraps. Obviously, information about stuff that hasn't been released -- and information about stuff that's still a long time from now -- is still off-limits. But as more episodes get revealed (especially those that were leaked), naturally more and more users talk about them in the comments. And for this sort of thing, I don't know if the comments can be policed that efficiently.

So how should we move forward? Given that content is always subject to change before it's aired on TV, things like episode credits, episode order, episode titles, etc. should be taken with a grain of salt before they are corroborated by official sources. And of course, sharing links is still forbidden. But once a leaked episode has been revealed, should users be allowed to comment about it if they have already watched it? Should certain information be allowed to be published as long as it's hidden?

What happens next? 03:01, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

I have a suggestion! I say, add any and all information about an episode only if their name and synopsis is released to the public! If the episode hasn't been revealed, don't add anything about that episode in! But if the episode has the title and synopsis revealed, then I guess adding in even the leaked info on that particular episode is ok! But that's just my suggestion! ;) --Mega Sean 45 (talk) 03:10, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

I suppose that's fine. Once the title and synopsis are independently corroborated outside of the leak content, then the other known information about it can be added, while taking into consideration spoilers. Non-spoiler information like writers and storyboard artists, if known, I think are okay. Song and character details should be okay on workshop pages before being moved to the mainspace upon airing. I would take it case-by-case. Dogman15 (talk) 04:00, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good! How about the "character appearances"? Could they be updated via leaked content when the episode info comes out, or wait till legit info comes out? --Mega Sean 45 (talk) 04:05, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. It's just data, not actual leaked images or sound. Dogman15 (talk) 04:50, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Can leak-based comments that are deleted be restored when the content they're about is officially released? (7)6(four) (talk) 04:06, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

That'd be a lot of deleted comments to go through. :P I think if comments on released episodes is allowed, users can repost them if they want to.

04:10, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Having leaked information on mainspace articles here could result in Wikia being issued a cease and desist by Hasbro. A similar situation happened on the Call of Duty Wiki regarding leaks for one of the games, and the end result was that we had to remove the infringing material from the pages it was on. It really wasn't a big deal, but we are running the possibility of it happening. Anything that is publicly released for Season 8 should be on the wiki as any other information should be.

No one here will get in any legal issues but it might end up being a large inconvenience if we have to sift through pages and get everything off if Hasbro approaches Wikia with an order to do so. Keep an eye on how leaked Season 8 material is being dealt with elsewhere. Is it being routinely scrubbed off of YouTube, DailyMotion etc.? If so, then it's likely that the same scrubbing could happen here too.

Regarding comments, they don't really need to be actively policed... if someone goes and does a large info/pic drop on a comment or comment chain then sure delete it... but informal conversations are probably fine.

04:14, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

You're paranoid. Dogman15 (talk) 04:50, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

You're unbecoming of the position you hold when you make comments like that.

22:13, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Support (7)6(four) (talk) 22:47, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

https://spongebob.fandom.com/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&user=Kirkburn (7)6(four) (talk) 00:07, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Let's see what will happen with those new Equestria Daily discussions. They are going to let people discuss the entire season. IMO, they are feigning ignorance by pretending some site has released synopsi officially. But overall I would suggest not to add any leaked info until the episode is released. Vengir (talk • contributions) 08:36, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I could agree with restricting main namespace material to only the stuff that has been officially released. I'm less sure about what to do with the comments - whether to be more merciful and allow talk about the episodes that have been leaked (once they're officially confirmed and scheduled, with an article in the main namespace), or to continue to delete comments that explicitly reference material regarding those episodes that has not been officially released yet.--

Jonny Manz^talk_contribs^e-mail_{edit count} 04:52, March 3, 2018 (UTC)

On the note of ignorance—feigned or genuine—from Equestria Daily, they've said ~~S08E25 Unknown Pegasus Filly #1~~ Rainbow Harmony "is still a mystery. Hopefully we get a name for her later on" despite her official name having already been leaked (as one of two, with neither individually identified but the other being since-individually-identified-elsewhere Trusty Splendor), and regarding her name, what'll this wiki do? (I really don't want this to be another preexisting-but-overlooked-official-name situation, like when this wiki inaccurately had Peachy Pitt placeholder-named or when Derpibooru had Ginger Beard mistagged.) ~~(7)6(four) (talk) 14:37, September 8, 2018 (UTC)~~ (7)6(four) (talk) 23:34, December 2, 2018 (UTC)

Well, despite alerting others to the situation, I haven't kept this from getting worse: third-party fanart of her (sometimes with Rainbow Flash) has her misidentified as "Rainbow Flare", only one of the two words within which matches those within her official name ~~(regarding the remainder, I'll say "Elements of")~~. Since a certificate for her (like Dapper Dash's certificate and Trusty Splendor's "cerficiate") must have been officially released (to Natalya only, but other one-of-a-kind official material—such as this My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic Issue #12 cover and these toys—has already been introduced), can her official name be used by regarding its leakage as word-of-mouth indication of what that officially-released certificate says? ~~(7)6(four) (talk) 20:36, November 17, 2018 (UTC)~~ ~~(7)6(four) (talk) 17:14, November 18, 2018 (UTC)~~ (7)6(four) (talk) 23:34, December 2, 2018 (UTC)

Gameloft's mobile game added her; does it use her name (whether in-game or internally)? (7)6(four) (talk) 21:14, November 30, 2018 (UTC)

It does (meaning her name's been sourceable from game data since a week ago)! (7)6(four) (talk) 03:52, December 8, 2018 (UTC)

I think, for the purposes of preventing misidentification/misrepresentation of info, certain details are permitted for use on the Wiki - provided that the context of said info becomes public through English-language sources first. For example, this character - whose name I presume is actually Rainbow Harmony - has now appeared in-show, so her name is permitted for Wiki use. This is worth including in the guidelines I outlined below.

17:04, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

Edits made; Rainbow Harmony's official name is now on the Wiki! (Whereas at Derpibooru, unawareness of her official name has escalated to the point that a naming poll—which even includes the official name of separate character Rainbow Swirl—is being wasted on her...) (7)6(four) (talk) 23:34, December 2, 2018 (UTC)

Section 2

I think that the episode titles that have been revealed should be in the article workshop. There's no use in delaying the inevitable. Now we don't have to look for synopsis, Production numbers, or guest spots right away for some because the information is not all there yet.

That's at least my stance on dealing with the leaks. Not everything surrounding the leaks should be posted, but the little bit of info we place here might make a difference in future spoilers being avoided.Dry63 (talk) 02:36, March 2, 2018 (UTC)

Episode order and airdates are still an issue here. We have no way of knowing if episodes will be aired in the order they're intended or when they'll be aired.

03:22, March 2, 2018 (UTC)

I think the episodes that are leaked that are also now confirmed episodes (Ex. Horse Play) should be allowed to be spoken of, just limitedly. Also the pages should be allowed to filled in, because some episodes are now existent ones and thus it'd make sense to allow for their information to be shared. EmpressYzma (talk)

I think morally the thing to do would be to not add leaked material. But I guess it's always going to be a "hot topic" for people to discuss, so maybe some sort of measure to limit or redirect the discussion of leaked material (i.e. offsite such as a dedicated Discord channel)? 51.7.131.55 address (talk) 00:39, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Will the Ambox template be necessary for the rest of Season 8 once the rumors are proven fact that Canada's Treehouse TV will be airing weekly episodes two at a time? -DJ Lucifera (talk) 04:25, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Are you asking about whether discussion will be allowed after the episodes air on Treehouse TV? If so, the answer is yes, as that is an official airing, even though it's not on Discovery Family.--

Jonny Manz^talk_contribs^e-mail_{edit count} 04:57, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Discussion is allowed? Don't you mean "still not allowed"? Since they aired on Canada'a Treehouse TV predating their American TV premiere on Discovery Family. -DJ Lucifera (talk) 15:36, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

An official airing is an official airing, doesn't matter where - it's a legitimate release of the episode. The only reason it was decided to restrict discussion on the leaks is because they were illegitimately released.

Plus, it also helps that all the episodes that will be airing early have a set airdate on Discovery Family (I can't remember if discussion was allowed on the Polish release of the Magical Movie Night Equestria Girls specials - since the English version was available as an alternative audio option - until the specials got a set airdate on Discovery Family. I feel like it was, though)--

Jonny Manz^talk_contribs^e-mail_{edit count} 10:41, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Section 3

(sigh) Well, now what? Should users be allowed to comment about these episodes as they please now? 11:05, May 16, 2018 (UTC)

I guess so. The situation, in essence, is similar to previous international early releases. But also not quite, because while those episodes are in Finnish, there is already an English translation available to most of them. I would at the very least suggest allowing to freely discuss episode 12, as well as share pictures from other episodes. Vengir (talk • contributions) 11:43, May 16, 2018 (UTC)

The Finland dub wasn't stolen like the leaks were, so these episodes are completely legal! We just can't do transcripts since it's not in English, but we can talk about the footage! That's what I think should be done! ;) --Mega Sean 45 (talk) 15:38, May 16, 2018 (UTC)

Some preliminary stipulations, then, taking all above input into account:

Episode 12 discussion is permitted.
Episode 10, 11, and 13 discussion is still limited to what's been announced or confirmed by English-language sources.
Publishing character appearance info is permitted.
Production info (such as cast credits) is permitted but should be kept hidden.
External links to screencaps are permitted, but uploading to the Wiki is not.
Sharing anything from the leaks including English-language video is not permitted.
English-language transcribing (except from official sources) is still off-limits.

This is only a rudimentary draft; I'm open to amendments. 16:04, May 16, 2018 (UTC)

Support If discussion also includes stats, then we're good to go! :3 --Mega Sean 45 (talk) 23:33, May 16, 2018 (UTC)

If My Little Pony Friendship is Magic Wiki:Administrator guidelines#Comment deletion didn't include "Comments in a language other than English", I would've suggested permitting Finnish-language discussion of episodes 10, 11, and 13. (7)6(four) (talk) 02:51, May 17, 2018 (UTC)

I would say open up discussion on all the episodes, but I think you're right, it would inevitably devolve into discussing content of the leaks, since those are in English (asking people to stick to what could be gleaned from the visuals of the official Finnish release would be an unrealistically high standard), so

Support the guidelines as written.--

Jonny Manz^talk_contribs^e-mail_{edit count} 08:37, May 17, 2018 (UTC)

Okay, then if there are no objections, I guess we'll go with these guidelines until further notice.

01:23, May 19, 2018 (UTC)

Should this also extend to leaked Equestria Girls content? That is, after the content has officially premiered, discussing leaked material pertaining to it is permitted?

17:21, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

I'd take it one step further: We can include it in the main article specifically stating that this is a leaked earlier version that was different from the aired version. Because of that, its canonicity is debatable.

BenRG - I Hope to Keep This Peaceful (talk) 17:25, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

"Canonicity" aside, the leaked version was not meant to be publicly available, so I'm not sure about featuring such information on the mainspace or outside of comments.

18:01, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Support - the same rules should apply for the leaked EG content. It can be discussed in the comments, but should not be added to the articles.-- Jonny Manz^talk_contribs^e-mail_{edit count} 04:18, February 8, 2019 (UTC)

Section 4

Why'd this get removed? Tiny Pop's broadcast is neither non-English nor a leak, so we've no need to wait for Discovery Family's broadcast. (7)6(four) (talk) 04:12, June 7, 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. As much as I don't like it, I don't see any reason to not add the summary and transcript right away.--

Jonny Manz^talk_contribs^e-mail_{edit count} 04:37, June 7, 2018 (UTC)

Any source(s) for The Hearth's Warming Club supposedly being season 8 episode 14 in production (not Zap2it) order? Omitting leak-exclusive information is one thing, but including (leak-disproven) speculation would be going too far. (7)6(four) (talk) 13:22, July 9, 2018 (UTC)

Late answer but now we have sourced info. A Matter of Principals is episode 14 in production order. It will air in Australia on July 29 after The Mean 6 which will be day ealier and they go by production order. Kuco28 (talk) 12:32, July 16, 2018 (UTC)

It appears there's already fully-colored screencaps leaked on a different website (one of which involves a certain character returning this season). Can stats be added now or do we still have to wait for a proper English (Australian or American) airing to add stats? -DJ Lucifera (talk) 05:14, August 16, 2018 (UTC)

As those are never-leaked officially-released foreign-language episodes, it seems fair to follow the same procedure as with episode 12. As such, I believe that you should be allowed to post the stats. Vengir (talk • contributions) 07:35, August 16, 2018 (UTC)

PSA: https://derpibooru.org/tags/rosetta+nebula is a fan-misspelled typo, not the official spelling of Unknown Woman's leaked name. ~~(7)6(four) (talk) 00:35, October 10, 2018 (UTC)~~ ~~(7)6(four) (talk) 15:30, October 10, 2018 (UTC)~~ (7)6(four) (talk) 15:46, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

Was that alleged leak Generation 5 picture confirm? I don't want the show to end with Season 9, and neither do the crew. Then again, it could continue through the comics like Invader Zim and Avatar.Whitehorse24 (talk) 14:18, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

This forum is for discussing how leaked materials are to be treated on the Wiki, not for discussing the content of leaked materials itself.

14:36, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

Section 5

Here's a suggestion: Have an heading named "Unconfirmed or Leaked Information" under each relevant main-space article. Then hide it behind an expandable template that must be opened by the user to be read. Therefore, the individual user must choose to see the information.

Above the expandable template, have a large message template warning that this information is not to be discussed in the Comments Section or the Chat.

BenRG - I Hope to Keep This Peaceful (talk) 20:11, November 18, 2018 (UTC)

A number of Wikis I frequent do this. Its effectiveness is debatable, but with proper moderation, it's worth considering.

17:04, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

Then i must say though, I'd be concerned about what Callofduty4 said above. 343TheGuiltyProphet - Talk 20:37, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

Does this removal indicate stance-change? (7)6(four) (talk) 15:44, January 12, 2019 (UTC)

I would have been okay with shortening it, but it should not have been removed entirely.

15:52, January 12, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I removed it as I thought since Season 8 is over, it didn't matter so much but I like the little one you've replaced it with Impy. 343TheGuiltyProphet - Contact

16:03, January 12, 2019 (UTC)

For Friendship is Magic animated media#Best Gift Ever animated shorts and/or My Little Pony Best Gift Ever/Animated shorts, may production-order numbering be noted? (7)6(four) (talk) 20:36, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

Re: "Let's not make any overt guesses here":

My Little Pony: Equestria Girls: Make Your Own Magic: Starswirl Do-Over is "based on all-new Equestria Girls digital content" detailed in 2017 leakage
According to 2017 leakage, 2NE1 - FALLING IN LOVE M/V has the same manner of reference relevance that きゃりーぱみゅぱみゅ - PONPONPON , Kyary Pamyu Pamyu - PONPONPON does
2017 leakage has revealed Puffed Pastry

What overt guesses? (7)6(four) (talk) 00:03, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

Guesses as to exactly how much of the book is based on digital content and how much of it is book-exclusive.

01:07, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

Ah, you mean this kind of thing? My use of "digital content's earlier-released novelization" (not "digital content and its earlier-released novelization") was for the sake of people who'd otherwise mistake the digital content as being based on the book (like Forgotten Friendship getting mistaken as being based on A Friendship to Remember); my apologies if it backfired and looked like assumption too much. (7)6(four) (talk) 01:46, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

Section 6

The most recent leak contains a considerable amount of unreleased song information: demo versions, full versions, alternate versions with different lyrics, etc. Should the Wiki use this information, despite its very nature of being leaked? Or should we do as we've done before: acknowledge that it's out there but disallow its publishing? If we do allow it, does that make anything else that's been leaked fair game to cover on the Wiki (with the obvious exception of any coverage of FUTURE content)? 13:50, October 11, 2019 (UTC)

It's still stolen info, brah. The wiki should only use content if it's released fairly. Think of these leaks as contraband. I think we might get in trouble if we added this stuff on here. Best we don't add of that stuff. --Mega Sean 45 (talk) 04:46, October 13, 2019 (UTC)

I completely disagree with Sean. If we know something major like the missing lyrics of a song, it makes no sense to just pretend it doesn't exist. And I really doubt we'd get in trouble for having factual information on the wiki; after all, only one person is responsible for the information getting out (well, if you don't include the people with poor passwords that were guessed, but that's neither here nor there). There is no objective qualifier for what "fair" means. I like Imp's third proposition: Allow publishing or mentioning of any leaked content (except for future content, such as the "making the memories book" shorts that we've seen the scripts for but have not yet been announced or released). Just make sure it otherwise fits in with proper wiki formatting and has a citation pointing to a copy of the material being referenced. (i.e, re-host the screenshot or short MP3 clip yourself, don't link to the "romesilvanus" or other site you downloaded it from.) All the other stuff is in the past, and is historically significant, and probably won't ever be released by Hasbro, since they don't really care about this show any more now that it's over. Dogman15 (talk) 16:05, October 14, 2019 (UTC)

And how do you feel about the idea that hosting such information on the Wiki would essentially make the site complicit in its distribution - especially if, by your own suggestion, we re-host screenshots and MP3s?

16:23, October 14, 2019 (UTC)

Fine then! We don't have to re-host screenshots or MP3s! No citations needed. But at the very least, the full lyrics of Invisible and All Good should be documented/transcribed. We don't have to talk about the other stuff on this wiki, such as trivia learned from the piano/early demos (like early versions of the lyrics or who performed the demos), or information about the 2009 animation test with Tara Strong voicing Twilight, Rainbow, and Pinkie. We don't have to talk about the stuff learned from various versions of the scripts, or the singers' sheet music for various songs. But lyrics to finished songs that were withheld from us because editing? Those fully-written and finished lyrics should be documented, even if hidden behind a toggle. Dogman15 (talk) 03:48, October 15, 2019 (UTC)

Does "the stuff learned from various versions of the scripts" include clarification of officially-released content? Some otherwise-misinterpretably-credited character voice examples: in Castle Mane-ia, Cathy Weseluck's Construction Pony isn't the beekeeper Parcel Post; in It Ain't Easy Being Breezies, Brian Drummond's Band Pony isn't the male Cloud Chaser (contrary to both Behind The Voice Actors and Derpibooru); in Celestial Advice, Kelly Sheridan's Goofy Changeling isn't Ashleigh Ball's Changeling 1 (contrary to Behind The Voice Actors), who isn't Vincent Tong's Changeling 2 (contrary to Behind The Voice Actors), who isn't the uncredited S07E01 Unnamed Changeling #2 (contrary to Behind The Voice Actors). (7)6(four) (talk) 12:42, October 15, 2019 (UTC)

That's actually all really fascinating information that I didn't know about previously, thank you. Not sure what to do with that info right now, though... Dogman15 (talk) 09:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

A Decade of Pony (clip) and an image officially preview; My Little Pony Friendship is Magic Wiki:Workshop? (7)6(four) (talk) 12:42, October 15, 2019 (UTC)

My opinion is this: As long as we're in danger of being in trouble if information that was illegitimately released was published here, don't do it. Wasn't that our concern with the season 8 episodes? Wasn't it brought up back then that other wikis have gotten in trouble for that? Our limit should be "Is there hot water involved?" GoldenLine (talk) 01:16, October 15, 2019 (UTC)

Can I see some proof that other wikis got in trouble for such things? Do we have any actual evidence that we're in "danger" for "publishing" information about the leaks? I'm not convinced. We're a fan-run wiki; we have no official designation or affiliation. I like the idea I read about up above, where we hide it behind a toggleable click. Information wants to be free. The show's over and Hasbro doesn't care about G4 anymore. They've moved on to G5. Dogman15 (talk) 03:44, October 15, 2019 (UTC)

Speaking of other wikis and G5... (7)6(four) (talk) 13:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, on a related-but-separate note, both that wiki and this wiki have unwritten some coverage of the My Little Pony: Tell Your Tale (season 2)‎ episode 24 leak, but unlike the hack-based G4 leaks, this G5 leak came from an official animator (with fan "Doc Anubis" as middleman), so should it really be excluded to the same degree? (7)6(four) (talk) 02:45, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

w:c:callofduty:Talk:Team Player (level)#Copyright (which ended up with w:c:callofduty:Forum:Retiring COD:LEAK) is what was brought up back then. (7)6(four) (talk) 13:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Putting legality aside, I don't think it's ethical to just include the leak on the wiki as just another source of information. But this is a significant thing that happened in the history of MLP G4 and I do support mentioning that fact (no citation required), along with informing – in broad categories – what was leaked (eg. "song demos", "all script revisions", etc.) without actually presenting any specific information we can only find there. If the leak clarifies something that is factually incorrect on the wiki, but could be reasonably guessed (such as voice actors, songs music keys, etc.), then it's fine to correct (we wouldn't be able to tell the difference between using and not using the leak). If something is factually incorrect and could not be guessed, then reword the fact to make it sound as if it was unconfirmed or remove it entirely. Vengir (talk • contributions) 13:24, October 15, 2019 (UTC)

I suppose I can support using the leak to correct wrong information (such as incorrect song lyrics).

22:33, October 17, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in like this out of the blue, but I agree with what Vengir said. I'm an admin on another wiki and I've always been very uneasy about leaks, so I've been strongly against any distribution of it. There may not be any real "danger" of publishing it but it's possible that Hasbro might contact us to remove the leaked info. It's happened before with other major toy companies that asked bloggers and other sites to remove leaked images and stuff. Also . . . I think there's a good chance that some of the full versions of the songs may eventually be released in an official album, so it may be just a matter of waiting. Daffodillydoo (talk) 18:28, October 18, 2019 (UTC)

Agreed as to the full versions of songs. I say, however, in the unlikely event that they're not released by the time G5 rolls around, we can conclude that they won't be released and at that point, it's fine to cover them.--

Jonny Manz^talk_contribs^e-mail_{edit count} 10:16, October 26, 2019 (UTC)

What I'm most ticked off about is not documenting the full lyrics of Invisible and All Good as they're known to be. I don't think Hasbro is ever going to officially release those songs. As far as the bigwigs are concerned, those songs don't matter anymore. They've moved on to Pony Life and have essentially completely abandoned official support for anything related to Friendship is Magic. Dogman15 (talk) 09:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Section 7

It's been quite a long time since the show ended. Hasbro is not revisiting G4 in any meaningful way, and will probably not ever officially release any new material that was created during the course of the show's run (2009-2018/19). Was a consensus ever reached here? What's the word on factual information about voice/singer credits and cut lyrics/full versions of songs? Dogman15 (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

We need a new discussion on this. This is ridiculous. The full lyrics of songs, as written (before they were cut for time), need to be documented on this wiki. The chances of Hasbro caring about this wiki listing the full lyrics for songs is infinitesimally small. The chances of the company taking legal action against it is even smaller than that. Come on! As one of the admins, this is an issue I would like to champion. Dogman15 (talk) 11:02, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't think ImperfectXIII or Flashimmer are ever going to listen. They're downright restricting us from contributing to the MLP Wiki. They even claim that Rainbow Roadtrip was released on Netflix on July 29, 2019, completely ignoring the fact that the release got canceled. They're also still forbidding anyone from uploading the Friendship is Forever clip show galleries, for as long as they stay unaired worldwide for a really long time. FirePuppy (talk) 23:42, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Is this still true as of 2024? Both of those individuals, and also (7)6(four), are still active, but haven't replied in this forum since 2019 (Imperfect), 2022 (76four), or ever (Flashimmer). And technically speaking, I outrank all of them right now. None of them are administrators, and I happen to be one. I'm very tempted to just go ahead and add missing lyrics to articles of songs that have fuller versions we know of thanks to leaks. Dogman15 (talk) 21:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I think there's still discussion to be had on the topic, but I also think it's reasonable to put a timeframe on the discussion, something like allowing action after three months since the last comment if no consensus is reached (as an example, haven't thought it out much). I personally think it's speculative to assume that the creators of the leaked content wouldn't mind having their work published if they didn't sign off on its release. It's not uncommon for writers or artists to not want a piece of theirs published or publicly associated with them. Not every leak is equal, though, and for some there may be compromises we could make as a wiki, like creating a spoiler tag or template that auto-hides content unless a "show" option is pressed. Fluffbrain (talk) 22:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Community consensus is required before altering policy. I haven't read all of this just now, but something akin to the suggestion in section 5 is the kind of compromise I would suggest. Per the policy on official material, all leaks would need to be verifiable and cited to be material used in production. (However, as above, any links to or inclusion of material that was obtained illegally would be inappropriate.) Also per concerns in the other sections, we should avoid covering leaks of current releases, and any coverage should be minimal. In general I do support including any information that we know was production material, but we should be careful with it. ~Bobogoobo (talk) 40?cb=20120702121758

22:26, December 5, 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:09, 5 December 2024 (view source) Fluffbrain (talk \| contribs) (→‎Section 7) Tag: Source edit ← Older edit		Revision as of 22:26, 5 December 2024 (view source) Bobogoobo (talk \| contribs) (→‎Section 7) Newer edit →
Line 435:		Line 435:

	:::I think there's still discussion to be had on the topic, but I also think it's reasonable to put a timeframe on the discussion, something like allowing action after three months since the last comment if no consensus is reached (as an example, haven't thought it out much). I personally think it's speculative to assume that the creators of the leaked content wouldn't mind having their work published if they didn't sign off on its release. It's not uncommon for writers or artists to not want a piece of theirs published or publicly associated with them. Not every leak is equal, though, and for some there may be compromises we could make as a wiki, like creating a spoiler tag or template that auto-hides content unless a "show" option is pressed. [[User:Fluffbrain\|Fluffbrain]] ([[User talk:Fluffbrain\|talk]]) 22:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)		:::I think there's still discussion to be had on the topic, but I also think it's reasonable to put a timeframe on the discussion, something like allowing action after three months since the last comment if no consensus is reached (as an example, haven't thought it out much). I personally think it's speculative to assume that the creators of the leaked content wouldn't mind having their work published if they didn't sign off on its release. It's not uncommon for writers or artists to not want a piece of theirs published or publicly associated with them. Not every leak is equal, though, and for some there may be compromises we could make as a wiki, like creating a spoiler tag or template that auto-hides content unless a "show" option is pressed. [[User:Fluffbrain\|Fluffbrain]] ([[User talk:Fluffbrain\|talk]]) 22:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::Community consensus is required before altering policy. I haven't read all of this just now, but something akin to the suggestion in section 5 is the kind of compromise I would suggest. Per the policy on official material, all leaks would need to be verifiable and cited to be material used in production. (However, as above, any links to or inclusion of material that was obtained illegally would be inappropriate.) Also per concerns in the other sections, we should avoid covering leaks of current releases, and any coverage should be minimal. In general I do support including any information that we know was production material, but we should be careful with it. <span style="border:1px solid #FFC36B; padding:3px;">~[[User:Bobogoobo\|Bobogoobo]] ([[User talk:Bobogoobo\|talk]]) {{filepath:Lyra speaks S2E25.png\|40}} <span style="color:#558ABE;">22:26, December 5, 2024 (UTC)</span></span>