The following convention discussion has been discussed and is now marked as resolved. The page has been protected and now serves as an archive. Do not edit this page.
Date Resolved: January 8, 2019
Result: No further action taken.
This convention discussion concerns the following topic: "Bylaws reviews - Sources."
At the end of the page, you have "Create New Subtopic" button, which you can use to voice your concerns, comments, or questions about what the proposal. You can use the "Refresh This Discussion" button, which you can use to make sure that all changes are included to a page.
You can also add your comments to existing subtopics.
Have a happy discussion!
Discuss Article IV here.
Article IV: Sources
A. Acceptable sources
1. Nickelodeon. Any source that is directly from Nickelodeon, including interviews and blogs made by or performed on Nickelodeon staff, its Twitter, Facebook, Vine, and Tumblr, excluding Nick.com's TV guide due to their listings often being false or inaccurate.
2. SpongeBob SquarePants. Any source from a staff member of SpongeBob SquarePants or its Facebook page, including any Twitter account of a staff member of SpongeBob and the Facebook page.
3. TV schedule. Electronic Program Guide (EPG). Zap2it's TV schedule (not the episode guide) and The Futon Critic listings are also acceptable.
4. The social media accounts for the people who are making video games, comics, DVDs/Blu-ray Discs, rides, and books and organizing events.
5. Trusted news sources that are acceptable by a vote of the ESB community.
B. Unacceptable sources - every other source that is not the ones listed above. They include, but are not limited to:
1. Any online database for movies and television, including but not limited to Metacritic, IMDb, TV.com, etc.
2. Any blog or social media that is purely speculation or fanon.
3. Wikipedia due to the nature of its content creation; instead, seek out the sources referenced by Wikipedia and ensure it falls under an acceptable source.
4. Any website that contains sources from the places that are allowed, but speculate on any information about dates or names.
C. Unspecified sources
1. Any source not mentioned in this article should be discussed by the community to determine if it is acceptable or not.
Discuss any proposed changes below. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 00:11, November 13, 2018 (UTC)
I think German Spongepedia should be added to acceptable sources. Its a very reliable source and gets things always right. Us ESB users trust it when they show titlecards on their website and it always true. Germany leaks things earlier than the usa I think. The plots are true. Episode titles are true. Everything becomes true so i think it's now time we start to believe them and accept them as our source of everything aside from the current acceptable sources. Basically, so basically, make them part of our acceptable sources. They even get things right before the USA crew confirms it! 1033Forest (talk) 14:01, November 17, 2018 (UTC)
What is the source of the German Spongepedia? This pretty much falls under Wikipedia. We need to go to the sources of other wikis. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 21:36, November 25, 2018 (UTC)
No, german spongepedia gets all their work from the nick sitemap. They have access to it. plus, nick Germany gives out information on the show before nick USA so its safe to trust them because they get their source from nick germany which is official. but mr. spongebob456 doesn't trust them cuz he tried creating a spoiler policy which would not allow leaked info from them as they are not "official" producers of nickelodeon so i wanna make sure they're included in the policy. 1033Forest (talk) 22:01, November 25, 2018 (UTC)
The discussion should be about whether or not to include Nick Germany, not the German Spongepedia. We have to go directly to the source. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 02:16, November 26, 2018 (UTC)