Minimum Requirement for making a Verse page

[Random-Helper323]

Erased yourself

I'm not sure if I'm supposed to talk here. I'm only a Content Moderator, after all.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Oh, okay. Should I shut up, or?

If that's the case, the rule for one profile is already in place. I can see arguments for all three options. 1 means no empty verse page, none means more freedom to work, 2 means no verse page with just one profile. All three ideas have merit.

No, you can talk. I like having more input and I trust you to give it, even if the rules technically disqualify you from having a formal vote; I meant to say that I don't necessarily, personally align with the rule. "Should" implies personal feeling. I just wanted to object to that.

And... not really, no. The OP suggests that these profiles be held to a higher standard. "Well referenced" is not simply "Referenced"; if a profile needs only one reference, is it well referenced, or isn't it? It further demands that the profile link to evidence, and a vaguely "well-made" verse page. I don't think we should have any more standards for these profiles than we do with any other profile, is my perspective. I don't want more standards bogging down people creating things for their hobby.

I mean, if the profile not being good, not up to the standard, it is going to get deleted so.....

I don't remember we have a concrete rule about deleting the verse page with 0 profile, like i joined the wiki back in 2017 iirc, and most of the time we just delete the verse page because "this verse have 0 profile so no point keeping it so delete it" or we delete the verse page along with its profile because "the verse is too outdated and all supporters left, no one maintains it so let delete it"

Probably i could have missed something, like one or two lines among our forest of rules, so someone please point it out

The rule might not exist in writing. It has certainly been enforced, though, as you say, and by organized means. If we wanted to create a rule for it (I don't see it on our rules page), I would propose something like this:

There must be at least one indexed profile from a given verse before a verse page can be created. Verse pages with no profiles linked to them will be deleted.

...to the first section here. Any phrasing reworks are welcomed.

 

[Vietthai96]

I'm not sure if I'm supposed to talk here. I'm only a Content Moderator, after all.

Personally i think it is fine to talk here, present your opinion, since Content Mods need to deal with profile and page a lot, they should be allowed to voice their thoughts, of course since this is wiki policy change, only Admin, Super Moderator and Bureaucrat vote count, but i don't think it stop Thread Mods and Content Mods from voicing their opinion

 

[Random-Helper323]

No, you can talk. I like having more input and I trust you to give it

Thanks, I appreciate that.

even if the rules technically disqualify you from having a formal vote; I meant to say that I don't necessarily, personally align with the rule. "Should" implies personal feeling. I just wanted to object to that.

I figured since you raised the issue that you were suggesting to discount votes like KLOL, or to streamline the issue. It's okay, more input probably is best, I just didn't know if that applied to me here.

And... not really, no. The OP suggests that these profiles be held to a higher standard. "Well referenced" is not simply "Referenced"; if a profile needs only one reference, is it well referenced, or isn't it? It further demands that the profile link to evidence, and a vaguely "well-made" verse page. I don't think we should have any more standards for these profiles than we do with any other profile, is my perspective. I don't want more standards bogging down people creating things for their hobby.

Yeah, that makes sense. The problem is that if you need a lot of requirements for something like that people give up and nothing gets done. When Robo wanted to make edits to pages and was having trouble with the source code, they said they'd give up and I stepped in to try to make it easier for them. Same applies here; if people will give in simply because source code is complicated, adding extra requirements makes it harder to get things done.

The rule might not exist in writing. It has certainly been enforced, though, as you say, and by organized means. If we wanted to create a rule for it (I don't see it on our rules page), I would propose something like this:



...to the first section here. Any phrasing reworks are welcomed.

I raised an issue earlier that someone might make a verse page and then work on the profiles. I guess we could include a note about reaching out to staff about that so it doesn't get deleted? Or we could just get them to always make the profile first.

 

[Vietthai96]

The rule might not exist in writing. It has certainly been enforced, though, as you say, and by organized means.

Yeah, that why i said we don't have a concrete rule

I would propose something like this:

My "vote" don't matter but it is fine too me. Though what about my suggestion that in case verse page have no profile but have link to accepted calculation blog or cosmology blog (cases with big cosmology verse) which outline the verse's general power and scale?, supporter can use them as ground to work on verse's character profiles later, since this pretty much is a hobby, i don't want to constraint people too much, one or two alternative routes is a good thing in my eyes

 

[Antvasima]

My view here is that we should not allow verse pages to be created if we do not know any non-guesswork statistics for a verse in question, whether they have been determined via accepted calculation blogs or content revisions threads (in cases of levels of infinity or above), as otherwise it would be kind of pointless for our type of wiki. That is all. If this requirement has been fulfilled, preceding pages for the characters are not necessary.

 

[Random-Helper323]

It goes without saying we can't have unsubstantiated stats added. Some kind of calculation or thread is needed.

Edit: thinking it over, I'd now say that at least one profile is probably best, but I'm not sure we need a concrete rule for that, depending on context. Ideally a verse page should have at least two profiles, or at least a profile and at least one blog. Having that as a solid rule seems like just a barrier to adding verses though.

I'd suggest something like this: "A verse page should be well referenced, and should have at least one profile in it. Preferably a verse page should have more than one profile, but this is not a requirement."

Sorry, not my best wordsmithing, I'll fix any wording issue when I look it back over.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Yeah, that already goes for our profiles.