Difference between revisions of "Talk:John Augustyn"
(→Exams: new section) |
(Categories + response added) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | ==Initial Advice== | ||
Are all these "career accomplisments" really necessary? The regular-season results aren't all that noteworthy, clog up the page, and are easily found on HDWhite—only the national accomplishments really warrant being here, IMO. | Are all these "career accomplisments" really necessary? The regular-season results aren't all that noteworthy, clog up the page, and are easily found on HDWhite—only the national accomplishments really warrant being here, IMO. | ||
Line 12: | Line 13: | ||
This is possibly more of a general question, but should we really include exams on here? While run by a quizbowl adjacent organization, they are not quiz bowl. | This is possibly more of a general question, but should we really include exams on here? While run by a quizbowl adjacent organization, they are not quiz bowl. | ||
+ | |||
+ | – [[User:George Tagtmeier|George Tagtmeier]] ([[User talk:George Tagtmeier|talk]]) 16:04, 26 December 2022 (CST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Hello, | ||
+ | |||
+ | First of all, please sign your message in the future. It makes people’s lives just a bit easier to know who this feedback is coming from. | ||
+ | |||
+ | With regards to exams being included on QBWiki pages, a few pages of precedent exist on this matter to show that it is at the very least tolerated. | ||
+ | |||
+ | :[[Govind Prabhakar]], [[Quizbowl in Asia]], [[Alex Dzurick]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | I am of the opinion that it is most certainly okay to ask Jonah to make a clarification as to wether or not exam awards are allowed. He’s doing his absolute best to ensure that QBWiki is a well-maintained and consistent trove of knowledge, and I am certain that he could use the feedback that you have to offer. | ||
+ | |||
+ | What I oppose, however, is your “opinion” that exams should not be included when precedent exists that it is okay to do so. Moreover, you choose to act on this opinion and use my page as a proxy for this opinion. But, I see you have a mild tendency to ignore precedent in the first place (See: [[User talk:George Tagtmeier]]), so oh well. | ||
+ | |||
+ | In addition, IAC/NHBB is not merely a “Quizbowl adjacent” organization, but is a particular form of quizbowl that has been played for over a decade. Merely calling such an area “Quizbowl adjacent” is doing a disservice to those that staff, maintain, and participate in this tournament. As far as I am concerned, an award given by a reputable quizbowl organization, even when said award is not entirely for quizbowl and has no practical value, is worth mentioning. There is [[neg prize|precedent]] as well to back me up on this, but it is more debatable. | ||
+ | |||
+ | I apologize if this sounded passive aggressive. | ||
+ | |||
+ | – [[User:John Augustyn|John Augustyn]] ([[User talk:John Augustyn|talk]]) 00:01, 27 December 2022 (CST) |
Revision as of 01:02, 27 December 2022
Initial Advice
Are all these "career accomplisments" really necessary? The regular-season results aren't all that noteworthy, clog up the page, and are easily found on HDWhite—only the national accomplishments really warrant being here, IMO.
– Eric Yin (talk) 8:45, 10 February 2021 (CST)
I do get your concern, especially because most of these accomplishments are trivial at best, but my IAC accomplishments (which make up 15/19 of the accomplishments listed) aren't listed on HDWhite, and only NAQT Accomplishments are listed, of which a fraction of those total stats I have included in the overall Career Accomplishments list. You could also say that some of my awards listed, especially in the "Other Awards" subsection, aren't noteworthy and shouldn't be listed, in which case I would be happy to pull them from the QB Wiki article. Thank you for expressing your concern to me, as it will help me reconsider what to include on this QB Wiki article.
– John Augustyn (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2021 (CST)
It appears that several (all?) of these accomplishments occurred in the middle school division of NHBB; this should be probably be mentioned. I'd also generally recommend separating career sections into "elementary", "middle school", etc. sections so that it's easier to understand the chronology - I'm just going to go ahead and do this since I'm here. -Kevin Wang (talk) 09:04, 11 February 2021 (CST)
Exams
This is possibly more of a general question, but should we really include exams on here? While run by a quizbowl adjacent organization, they are not quiz bowl.
– George Tagtmeier (talk) 16:04, 26 December 2022 (CST)
Hello,
First of all, please sign your message in the future. It makes people’s lives just a bit easier to know who this feedback is coming from.
With regards to exams being included on QBWiki pages, a few pages of precedent exist on this matter to show that it is at the very least tolerated.
I am of the opinion that it is most certainly okay to ask Jonah to make a clarification as to wether or not exam awards are allowed. He’s doing his absolute best to ensure that QBWiki is a well-maintained and consistent trove of knowledge, and I am certain that he could use the feedback that you have to offer.
What I oppose, however, is your “opinion” that exams should not be included when precedent exists that it is okay to do so. Moreover, you choose to act on this opinion and use my page as a proxy for this opinion. But, I see you have a mild tendency to ignore precedent in the first place (See: User talk:George Tagtmeier), so oh well.
In addition, IAC/NHBB is not merely a “Quizbowl adjacent” organization, but is a particular form of quizbowl that has been played for over a decade. Merely calling such an area “Quizbowl adjacent” is doing a disservice to those that staff, maintain, and participate in this tournament. As far as I am concerned, an award given by a reputable quizbowl organization, even when said award is not entirely for quizbowl and has no practical value, is worth mentioning. There is precedent as well to back me up on this, but it is more debatable.
I apologize if this sounded passive aggressive.
– John Augustyn (talk) 00:01, 27 December 2022 (CST)