Difference between revisions of "Talk:Cacowards 2021"

From DoomWiki.org

Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
::Should honorable mentions have the Cacoward sidebar thing, though? It's a visually prominent item in a map's article that I think should be reserved for winners and runners-up. A statement in the lede is enough of an honorable mention in those articles. -[[User:PhilthyPhilistine|PhilthyPhilistine]] ([[User talk:PhilthyPhilistine|talk]]) 12:18, 21 December 2021 (CST)
 
::Should honorable mentions have the Cacoward sidebar thing, though? It's a visually prominent item in a map's article that I think should be reserved for winners and runners-up. A statement in the lede is enough of an honorable mention in those articles. -[[User:PhilthyPhilistine|PhilthyPhilistine]] ([[User talk:PhilthyPhilistine|talk]]) 12:18, 21 December 2021 (CST)
 +
 +
::: I strongly think yes, it's very convenient for browsing, and complements the map articles pretty well. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 12:20, 21 December 2021 (CST)

Revision as of 13:20, 21 December 2021

Honorable mentions

For context, lines like "At the 2021 Cacowards it was listed in the special 21 More For '21 section" on individual project pages create a prestige tier that really isn't meant to exist (it sort of makes that feel like something to work for and an "omission" as a bad thing -- when in reality the 21 there are heavily editorialized in a way that even the other mainline awards/runners-up aren't) and also isn't really distinct from the other special features. The function of that feature is mostly a convenient condensation of the Coffee Break, Challenge Sidebar, Misc Community Tour type features that were dissolved into something more organized, with the many near runner-ups included too. Those mentions are pretty much the same "level" and relevance as the other special features (which are in some cases blurbed as basically-HMs). So it'd be most accurate to avoid that on project pages, and in the Caco pages, to list special features too if they are listed, in a section like "Honorable Mentions and Special Features". --Rd (talk) 00:20, 21 December 2021 (CST)

I'm glad you posted this here. I agree; adding that stuff to the wiki waters-down the Cacoward distinction. There are already plenty of winners and runners-up each year. (But from a casual, non-wiki standpoint it's cool that these people who worked hard on their projects get a nice paragraph of recognition.) -PhilthyPhilistine (talk) 00:32, 21 December 2021 (CST)
There was some historical precedence for Honorable Mentions in 2004 and 2010. A few days before the 2021 edition, Dynamo alerted me that a special page with 21 entries was being prepared. Our discussion both on the wiki and on IRC then led to support for HMs in the {{wad}} template and the related category. But I guess I made too big a deal about it in the intro descriptions -- they're downplayed now. --Xymph (talk) 06:11, 21 December 2021 (CST)
Should honorable mentions have the Cacoward sidebar thing, though? It's a visually prominent item in a map's article that I think should be reserved for winners and runners-up. A statement in the lede is enough of an honorable mention in those articles. -PhilthyPhilistine (talk) 12:18, 21 December 2021 (CST)
I strongly think yes, it's very convenient for browsing, and complements the map articles pretty well. --Dynamo128 (talk) 12:20, 21 December 2021 (CST)