Talk:Episode 682

Long Summary
I personally think that the longer and more detailed a long summary is, the better. I don't see any problem with Xil's writing style, or any incorrect information, so I don't see the point in removing a perfectly good edit.

21:03, February 15, 2015 (UTC)

We are writing a resume, not a book neither a chronicle. No other page has such a long summary, so this is too long, otherwise all the others are to be re-written. And "the longer and more detailed a long summary is, the better" should mean that you must describe also all facial expressions and feelings, of all characters. We MUST limit to what is needed to understand what is happening. --Meganoide (talk) 21:20, February 16, 2015 (UTC)

Forum:History Section Lengths. Just because you use a lot of words doesn't mean you are adding more content. Being over descriptive is not good because you draw away the attention from what you want to tell.

In regards to the claim that no other page has this kind of length and detail of description: I wrote the long summaries for Episode 678 and Episode 680 in the same manner as I wrote the summary for this one, and since no one objected back then, I assumed that it was fine to write like that.--Xilinoc (talk) 01:52, February 17, 2015 (UTC)

There are a LOT of pages written badly or that are unnecessary too long in this wiki in my opinion. I believe that's due the fact many editors update the pages therefore every detail is added one sentence at time. Somehow, this "overly descriptive" style became rather common and spread over the wiki. The point is that there are many ways to tell what's going on without leaving out any information. In the forum, I've addressed the issue and I also added some examples.

Leviathan explained perfectly what I wasn't able to say. And the forum he linked received a lot of agreements, so why now people are against a reduction of this summary? I'm waiting 24 hours to let people understand, but then I'll cut down useless statements. --Meganoide (talk) 14:36, February 17, 2015 (UTC)

That forum only applied to character articles. Besides that there's no such thing as a too long summary. SeaTerror (talk) 18:03, February 17, 2015 (UTC)

Why didn't SeaTerror understand that only SERIOUS users' opinion was asked? Does any SERIOUS user want to tell something? Otherwise I'll continue my work of cropping text. --Meganoide (talk) 18:11, February 18, 2015 (UTC)

Xil's writing style if fine. Let him keep doing what he's doing. Roranoa Drake II (talk) 18:54, February 18, 2015 (UTC)

^ Totally agree with ST and Drake. Xil's writing style is fine, and I have no problem with it at all. 23:22, February 18, 2015 (UTC)

You're crazy, you don't understand that it must be a SUMMARY, not a description. --Meganoide (talk) 00:01, February 19, 2015 (UTC)

Calling people crazy really won't solve the problem, just sayin. 00:03, February 19, 2015 (UTC)

No such thing as a too long summary? What do you think the definition of "summary" is? I'll have to agree with Levi and Mega on this. It's not good to be overly descriptive. 01:04, February 19, 2015 (UTC)

5 vs 3. Poll it. SeaTerror (talk) 09:45, February 19, 2015 (UTC)

Alright guys, I talked to Xil about what is exactly problematic with his writing style, like what y'all should have done in the first place, so we're not going to have this problem again later on. Now can we close this? 02:13, February 22, 2015 (UTC)

Well, what's the decision on this one? Do keep the whole thing or use the trimmed version? 02:16, February 22, 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to keep the whole thing, but I don't really care either way. 02:58, February 22, 2015 (UTC)

I stand by my earlier statement: It's overly descriptive. Use the trimmed version Mega made. 03:02, February 22, 2015 (UTC)

If I may...seeing as how I'm the one at fault here, I would suggest using the original version...trimmed by me, not by someone who has been ranting about me for over a week. That way, there can be consistency between this summary and any future summaries I write because the same person will be deciding what is worth cutting out. Sound good?--Xilinoc (talk) 03:36, February 22, 2015 (UTC)

I'm fine with Xil's proposal to trim the summary himself. Any objection or what? 03:42, February 22, 2015 (UTC)