Table:What are we, TVtropes?

TVtropes
I don't know about you guys, but I'm getting pretty sick of things on pages that look like this:


 * Here is a point about the subject
 * On the other hand, here is a counterpoint
 * But that could be explained by this point
 * But is also might not!

This is an encyclopedia, not a discussion forum. I see that a lot of this is from IP users but there should be some kind of rule. First of all, actual articles are for FACTS, not speculation. And it's certainly not okay to insert back-and-forth conversations in an encyclopedic article. It makes us look unprofessional and childish. If someone disagrees with a bullet point, they either need to edit it with FACTUAL information, not opinions, or they need to take it to the talk page so people can discuss and decide. Three and four levels deep is way too far for a bullet list. --Buddy 04:10, 19 September 2011 (CEST)
 * I agree with creating a rule. How about adding something like The Infosphere is not a discussion forum to I:R? Sanfazer 18:12, 19 September 2011 (CEST)
 * It's a good place to start. Maybe a little more detail like The Infosphere is not a discussion forum, discuss contradicting opinions on the talk pages or something. Just so it's clear what's okay and what's not. --Buddy 19:43, 19 September 2011 (CEST)
 * I think discuss contradicting opinions on the talk pages shouldn't be in the introduction to the rule, but it could be part of the actual rule. My proposal:
 * The Infosphere is not a discussion forum
 * If you wish to refute a second-level bullet point on, for example, the Goofs section of an episode article, do not insert a third-level bullet point and, instead, reword the existing bullet point or discuss the contradicting opinions on the talk page.
 * (From Talk:The Late Philip J. Fry. Some rights reserved.) Sanfazer 22:32, 20 September 2011 (CEST)
 * Yeah, I like that. I vote for that or some version close to that! --Buddy 03:00, 21 September 2011 (CEST)
 * Then are we good to go? Or do you want to make any changes? Sanfazer 22:37, 21 September 2011 (CEST)
 * Well I was hoping for some more feedback from other users, but since the new ConfTable format, nobody reads anything. So yeah, I think it's good. Splice in some reaction shots of me and shove it on the air. --Buddy 22:40, 21 September 2011 (CEST)
 * Couldn't find the shots, but the rule has been successfully implemented. Hurrah!!! Sanfazer 22:50, 21 September 2011 (CEST)

I'm late to the game, but nice idea. It's been bugging me as well. - akitalk 00:28, 3 November 2011 (CET)