Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-24325144-20150106201659/@comment-1738746-20150107093306

SuperSajuuk wrote: For Trivia sections are you allowed to say what the likely inspiration for something in-game was? For example: Dragonsreach was obviously heavily-inspired by Edoras from the Lord of the Rings, and Hermaeus Mora was obviously inspired by the Cthulhu Mythos. Under the current policy, if you write that, it will be removed. I 100% disagree with this, trivia is meant for any important points of interest that relates to the article in question, including obvious references Bethesda have made to real world things in the game. The current policy is subjective: what one person considers to be "speculation" is obviously not speculatory to a lot of others.

This is hopefully something that gets addressed in a new style guideline, because the current policy means that anything will be removed just because it's "speculation". I think there should be a compromise of some sort, because it's interesting to know where inspiration was possibly sourced from. Yes, it's not factual. But it's still interesting, which is why it would be nice to see a compromise where we make clear it's not factual, but allow it to remain on the article. I would recommend a tag like the Bug section has for PC, Xbox and PS?

Also, speaking of the Bugs section, I have some input on whatever policies are floating around Bug section editing. I would like to see people be more smart about the addition of bugs- far too many times I go to add a bug but end up having it removed because it's "unconfirmed" i.e. not discussed on the article talk page, despite the fact that half the internet has already experienced it and is discussing it/solutions to it. It would be nice if all information could be found on the Wiki, considering that's what the Wiki is for...