Real Life Big Animals CRT 2

[H3110l12345I20]

I was trying to go and do moa profile. And while we do have a profile on-site, the thing here is that the sizes of Moa heavily varied among species. One adult can even be the size of a turkey (which I'm planning to reconfirm it's 10-C rating for males). That's how inaccurate the profile is.

Unlike other animal profiles, the Moa is an extinct order rather than species in terms of scientific classification. And the fact that it's 9 species are very widespread among an archelpelago means that there will be heavy differences among types of Moa compared to numerous subspecies among a species. The 10-C to 9-C range is heavy compared to subspecies differences like the gray wolf.

I feel conflicted on whether to keep the moa (real world) profile or to take it away. It's not really composite, though the profile assumes the heaviest, tallest bird when we have Moa the size of a Turkey. If we choose to keep it and add Varies from 10-C to 9-C. I don't how that's going to be no different than putting a Varies between 10-C to 9-C among a profile for the canid branch of mammals (a more consistent version of composite canid). I want to see if there's reasoning as to how the current moa profile should be kept without it being "circumventing rules" type of thing or any valid and seemingly weird problem on the profile.

Like, someone might say having a tallest moa profile is redundant, and how is that redundant when the actual profile should technically have a 10-C rating? We can either do a makeover of the profile or delete it (which I would agree with the latter). I already have a profile of the tallest moa as a blog.

 

[Antvasima]

What you have collectively agreed about here can probably be added to our wiki now.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

What you have collectively agreed about here can probably be added to our wiki now.

Important thing for everyone here. The discussion rules say that a minimum of 2 staff members are needed to sign off a change in CRTs (I'll keep this in mind for the future). And the only other person to my knowledge that are the most likely to accept stuff here would be @Dalesean027.

And we have 2 threads worth of this CRT. And some of the proposals are major changes to the profiles. Antvasima, what should we do here? This CRT may take even more time to reevaluate for the staff and for contributors to edit than expected.

Also... Feedback on this page for source credibility standards?

Standards for the Reliability, Trustworthiness and Evaluation of Sources for The Real World On-site

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Also... Feedback on this page for source credibility standards?

Standards for the Reliability, Trustworthiness and Evaluation of Sources for The Real World On-site

vsbattles.fandom.com

bump; added this section into my reply there.

 

[Dalesean027]

bump; added this section into my reply there.

This world probably require its own thread actually

 

[H3110l12345I20]

This world probably require its own thread actually

In that case, I would need to plan that thread eventually and link it in this CRT.

 

[Dalesean027]

In that case, I would need to plan that thread eventually and link it in this CRT.

Yup sounds good and great work!


Is there anything else that needs evaluation here btw

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Is there anything else that needs evaluation here btw

Besides waiting on Ant on what to do about some of these revisions that technically have usually been done by 1 Admin+Bearucrat and 1 very experienced user, not much else on this thread.

Though if you want or if you have the time, you can evaluate either of these calcs here to start small (doesn't have to be all of them):

Black Bear AP KE (The American Black Bear's AP in KE calcs haven't been explicitly confirmed)

Great White Shark Energy & Bottlenose Dolphin KE+the latter's predators' dura

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[Antvasima]

@Mr. Bambu @Damage3245 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Wokistan @Armorchompy @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Agnaa

It would be greatly appreciated if any of you are willing to regularly help out here.

Also, what do we currently need to evaluate here?

 

[H3110l12345I20]

The discussion rules say that a minimum of 2 staff members are needed to sign off a change in CRTs (I'll keep this in mind for the future)

That's the problem. And this CRT is pretty much months worth of change at this point. What extra staff member is going to recheck everything in this CRT and then supervise such changes in this CRT in the future?
"In order to ensure that all revisions are thoroughly reviewed and approved, it is necessary for a minimum of two staff members to sign off on any proposed changes. The concluding evaluations must be handled by Thread Moderators, Administrators, and Bureaucrats, who should make an effort to base their evaluations on valid arguments, not personal opinions."

 

[Antvasima]

Well, we need more of them to come and help out here, and preferably ones with some calculation skills, as I mostly only have time to handle my wiki tasks nowadays, which is why I sent a notification to several of them above.

If you create a post that explains everything that you currently need evaluated here, that would be very helpful for them.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Well, we need more of them to come and help out here, and preferably ones with some calculation skills, as I mostly only have time to handle my wiki tasks nowadays, which is why I sent a notification to several of them above.

If you create a post that explains everything that you currently need evaluated here, that would be very helpful for them.

Ok. It's only been you and occasionally other staff like dalesean that's been accepting stuff. That's why I brought the rule up. There's going to be that one person that will eventually say "H3's revisions are invalid since they didn't follow this rule" even though rules are meant for order, and me doing the heavy-lifting in these revisions aren't really doing harm, but helping the IRL animal profiles more.

It's going to take a lot of time and reliving my trauma of someone naive but with good intentions on this. Since I'll have to read like, 30 pages worth of replies to make sure the revisions have a strong logical foundation for them being valid.

Future staff and people following this thread, prepare for a potentially large reply.

 

[Dalesean027]

Ok. It's only been you and occasionally other staff like dalesean that's been accepting stuff. That's why I brought the rule up. There's going to be that one person that will eventually say "H3's revisions are invalid since they didn't follow this rule" even though rules are meant for order, and me doing the heavy-lifting in these revisions aren't really doing harm, but helping the IRL animal profiles more.

It's going to take a lot of time and reliving my trauma of someone naive but with good intentions on this. Since I'll have to read like, 30 pages worth of replies to make sure the revisions have a strong logical foundation for them being valid.

Future staff and people following this thread, prepare for a potentially large reply.

I'll also take a look at some of the calcs above when im off work later today

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you both for helping out.

 

[Antvasima]

@Elizhaa @Colonel_Krukov @Mr. Bambu @DarkDragonMedeus @Crabwhale

Are any of you willing to help out here please?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Willing, yes. Time for this may be limited, however. I will try.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you greatly for your help. This is a discussion thread for cleaning up our real world pages, so it is very important, but I have unfortunately been too busy with wiki edit-patrolling work and real world issues to properly help out with it and other content revisions here in this forum.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

@Elizhaa @Colonel_Krukov @Mr. Bambu @DarkDragonMedeus @Crabwhale

Are any of you willing to help out here please?

I got back from work, but what's the current topic? I seem to have been behind on notifications.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Basically this for any staff following vvv

The discussion rules say that a minimum of 2 staff members are needed to sign off a change in CRTs (I'll keep this in mind for the future)...And we have 2 threads worth of this CRT.

Ok. It's only been you and occasionally other staff like dalesean that's been accepting stuff. That's why I brought the rule up. There's going to be that one person that will eventually say "H3's revisions are invalid since they didn't follow this rule" even though rules are meant for order, and me doing the heavy-lifting in these revisions aren't really doing harm, but helping the IRL animal profiles more.

It's going to take a lot of time and reliving my trauma of someone naive but with good intentions on this. Since I'll have to read like, 30 pages worth of replies to make sure the revisions have a strong logical foundation for them being valid.

TL; DR, I need at least 1 more extra staff, a total of 2 to accept future revisions (either Thread Moderators, Administrators, or Bureaucrats). And with a potentially large reply for this second CRT, 3 staff members of the aformentioned types (Thread Moderators, Administrators, or Bureaucrats) or a high-quality assessment of the reply are needed for my potential reread of the 2 threads in order for the revisions to have a logical basis of stay on the profiles. And this is according to the approval rules here.

If I misinterpreted something, feel free to point it out.