Forums / Discussion / Q & A

Recommend: creating a hub entry for potential sub-entries, or turning existing entries into main/sub-entries of other main/sub-entries. Entries refers to events, memes, cultures, etcetera.

I commented a few weeks back that this site would be better to navigate if the entries were all main or sub-entries. This could improve the quality of the site for normal users and in turn make this place more used by the Internet at large. We could improve the site's bottom line if we simply make this site a better experience overall and this is a small thing we can as users improve.

With that in mind, please recommend what entries should be made into main or sub-entries of other entries. If you believe a good main entry does not exist, recommend its creation.

This may in the long-run require creation of broad entries such as cultures or studies in order to improve navigation and organization of the site's memes related to those broad subjects. I am not familiar with this site's editor and would need a little more time looking at edit histories before trying my hand at making any broad entries. I believe broad entries on broad subjects should only be made as hubs for sub-entries, whether pre-emptively for expected future sub-entries or for existing sub-entries.

Feel free to also discuss this concept of how entries should be organized.

Having large trees of entries would be a dream for navigation, but something that I'm not sure about is how entry types would factor into this, because entries can have multiple types.
Also, should this apply to deadpooled entries or other low quality ones? Perhaps they could be connected to stuff like kymtheon, or forced memes.

New entries automatically connecting would be make the structure too hard to manage, but for our sanity's sake, let's say every confirmed entry is included.

I think subculture entries that don't have the above problems should always be a subentry, usually a culture/subculture entry, but could be from a event, site, or even a meme entry.

Oh for sure on all of what you're saying! We would just pick the best main entry now, and change it later if we find a better option. There is no perfect organization system, but using our best judgement we can still come with a good one which is much better than not having a fully fleshed out one like we have right now. I think having our own unique hierarchy system promoted by recommendations by users would be a unique appeal our site could have!

Based on what I know of deadpooled entries, I think they should be added, but a lot of them shouldn't. Essentially, include legitimate ones that are just badly made or were not accepted at the time but in hindsight are fine now, but exclude ones that are entirely made up. Also, like you said entries that are new should be delayed in being incorporated until we are sure they are worth maining/subbing in relation to other entries unless it's something that obviously should be subbed/mained like an event or a meme that just blew up massively. Otherwise it could be a clusterfuck of pointless entries by noobs not putting in enough effort and detracting from the appeal of this system or so I would guess.

We should probably prioritize doing this to confirmed and old researching entries first, but I see no harm in doing this to deadpooled or newer researching entries if someone really wants it and it makes some level sense. Thanks for the thoughts that definitely inspires me.

Public question: Should the CIA have its own entry to put other CIA entries as well as potential undocumented or future entries under?

The FBI already has an entry.

Since the FBI entry is already finished I think it'd be a little too late to simply merge FBI with CIA as one entry, hence I think a new entry to document the CIA would be warranted.

Thoughts?

The Nintendo entry, the Valve entry, the Console Wars entry, the Video Game Logic entry, and the Video Game Myths entry, should be made a sub-entry of the Gaming entry.

I recommend that the Let's Play entry be de-sub-entried from the Something Awful entry and sub-entried to the Gaming entry, because the majority of Let's Plays are associated with Gaming, not with Something Awful, even if Something Awful had a hand in spawning the genre.

Thanks for making this entry. It may be overly general, though that means it fits with what this thread is for. As a hub entry, because many memes with "when" already fit into other categories, those wouldn't work as sub-entries. For entry isolates, I'd say it's fine.

Oh no problem! I will politely contend on it being overly broad, partly because I don't want a mod to get the impression the entry lacks merit when it is what I believe should be near inarguably merited. Also, I just want to summarize the importance of the entry because I like the entry! So to anyone reading this, here's my reasoning as to the "When X / X When" entry's in my opinion, logical soundness in necessity and high merits as an entry.

The point of KnowYourMeme is document the Internet and its memes -failure on either front, in any capacity, should be rooted out in all forms. Thus, no matter what form of entry, even if it is very all-encompassing, or very narrow, should be documented if it is prominent in some capacity on the Internet or in relation to the Internet. If any mod or user disagrees with this paragraph, I strongly invite you to reply with your disagreement and reason(s) why.

The "When X / X When" is a very well-known meme everyone is familiar with on the Internet -this alone makes it worthy of documenting even in a crappy simple short few sentences way as a rough draft, which is very often the case on this site for important memes, at least for a couple weeks before properly being filled out. Though, I did not leave it in such a state and completed the entry 100% in a day -because I had free time and a meme researcher kind of wanted it.

"When X / X When" has its origin fully documented to the best extent possible with the information the Internet has. The about section's fully filled out to the standard degree. The spread is well-documented with each important entry in its history laid out chronologically via documented sub-memes/events; complete with working reformatted references, links and grammar where applicable. If anything, I might worry I documented it so thoroughly people might strain their hand scrolling through it all -not be condescending about it but I fear adding too much more than I already have due to potential clutter/readability issues that would likely cause.

While the entry covers a lot and does build greatly off of existing information, it is in my opinion fully fleshed out and unquestionably meritorious to have documented. Why would we EVER skip documenting an Internet meme? Why would we EVER skip documenting something prominent on the Internet? The form does not matter -if it is prominent on the Internet, we as wiki editors are supposed to document it, based on the site's mission and core values -if I misunderstand those I invite anyone to correct my understanding. I am new after all, it's always possible I am misinterpreting things.

For that matter, it was a bit absurd to not have a meme so cartoonishly common undocumented especially when a genuine researcher writing a Master's thesis even asked why the "me when" meme format was undocumented, inspiring me to document the "when x / x when" format properly. Images/videos would likely retread existing images/videos already documented on other related (though not yet listed as related) entries and those vids/imgs are the only thing I can think of remaining that could potentially be used to add anything further.

As for how mods use this entry, if they want to treat it as a meme, it stands on its own two feet. Likewise, if the site mods want to use the "When X / X When" entry as a main entry for sub-entries using the "when" meme, I recommend it be used that way except in cases where certain memes better work as sub-entries to other memes such as the Sus Jerma meme. As you said, some sub-entries work better under other main entries, and I encourage thoughtful and civil moderator discussion and debate on such matters.

Thanks for letting me piggy-back off your post to explain this. Couldn't think of a better opportunity to.