Is there any standard policy for naming (4koma) pools?

(Note: This thread is about pool-naming in general, but mostly concerns 4koma-based pools.)

Recently, I created a new pool for a 4koma series, but wasn't sure what name to give it. I then did a search for pools with the word "4koma" in them to get some ideas.

... but it seems that there isn't any single standard on 4koma pool-naming. If you check the previous link, you'll see the pools are using different naming conventions from each other:

• [copyright] - 4koma ([artist])
• [copyright] 4koma ([artist])
• [copyright] - [comic_name] 4koma
• [copyright] 4koma - [comic_name] ([artist])
• [artist]'s 4koma series

So, my question is now: do we have any kind of a general standard on how we should name pools?

And if so, are the names of the linked-to pools in need of a bit of cleanup, or should they be left alone (as one universal 4koma pool-naming scheme can't accommodate all of them)?

Thanks.

Creating a naming convention would be appreciated simply for the sake of neatness.

On the other hand, I don't think I'd like seeing a [Vocaloid] 4koma - Chibi Miku-san (Minami) pool.

Ideally it would be possible to associate tags with pools as a whole so that all this metadata wouldn't have to be encoded in the pool name in the first place.

roastbeefy said:
On the other hand, I don't think I'd like seeing a [Vocaloid] 4koma - Chibi Miku-san (Minami) pool.

Yeah, a scenario like this is why I figured not all 4koma pool names might would work under the same scheme.

Verbosity is the price you pay for searchability and conformity, I guess? Unless we make pools taggable.

I'm all for
[copyright] [4koma] - [comic_name] ([artist])

It includes all relevant information you could want to search with. The ordering doesn't really make much of a difference for searching, but if we could sort pools alphabetically this would sort nicely according to copyright, and set 4koma apart from others. Besides being informative in itself, artist helps disambiguate between different title-less 4koma.

That is the format I would support.

I wouldn't suggest we go about changing any old pool names whatever the case. People may be subscribed to those pools and I'd hate to mess with their subscriptions.

You subscribe to the pool number, not the title.

If we do this, absolutely we should try to bring existing pools into line with this format. Why wouldn't we? Not doing that would defeat the entire point.

You've got to be kidding me. I've been typing out full names in the search box this whole time.

You can subscribe to either, actually. It may be easier to subscribe to the pool number but there's nothing stopping you from subscribing to the name.

We could run a script beforehand to change pool name subscriptions into pool numbers -- thus preserving subscriptions. Then we migrate pool names to a standard format.

That would be the thing to do. Also should probably just make it so you have to subscribe to the number, thus avoiding this issue in the future. Perhaps setting it up so that subscribing to the name automatically changes it to the number.

Not that I hate consistency, but rather than try to cram everything into the pool title, couldn't you make the pool description searchable?

.

If it absolutely must happen, I would prefer umhyuk's suggestion, but I'll note for the record that I am vehemently against encoding multiple pieces of metadata into titles or names. All packing done in this manner is a terrible kludge; unmaintainable, and ultimately a harmful frustration that is dated at inception.

.