Regarding the issue and possible resolution of bad profiles

[Yobo_Blue]

So, as we all know, there has been some talk about quality control for profiles and mitigating the amount of poorly made profiles uploaded to the wiki. Now, while there is the verse audit group in the works for preexisting profiles of poor quality, it seems to me that more should be done for future profiles to be of superb quality as well.

Now, while this may seem like a extreme measure, but I think a group should be made that would specifically have skills in profile design and creation. The fact of the matter is, some people make better profiles than others, and because of this some verses end up with great pages while others end up with a lot of pages of questionable quality.

Now how would this help? Those who are designated here would have a few responsibilities, namely understanding wiki source code to a strong degree, having a history of making good profiles, and being generally capable. In terms of responsibility, they would help newer users create profiles and would serve as advisers to inexperienced users. It would be nice to have people officially recognized for profile creation instead of moderation, as certain practices like tabbers and optional equipment aren't used as much as they should be but aren't necessarily something in a Content Mod's job description. And just nudging people to have others help them with profile making would help not only improve overall wiki quality but also stymie the flow of profiles to a more reasonable pace. If necessary, they could also help make profiles for verses that are in progress.

Obviously this would be a big change, so this is more of a discussion of how well the idea could work for now, but it could grow beyond that.

 

[CinnabarManx421]

I think this is a good idea, but isn't it also possible to just to loop in these resposibilities to a Content Moderator as well?

 

[Yobo_Blue]

I think this is a good idea, but isn't it also possible to just to loop in these resposibilities to a Content Moderator as well?

It is, but either way the responsibilities would be a good addition. I'm not sure how all Content Mods would feel about having additional responsibilities though, nor are all Content Mods necessarily good with profile creation/development.

 

[CinnabarManx421]

Hmm I see. I suppose I'll wait and see what others think about this.

 

[CinnabarManx421]

You should also probably add topics so more people see this.

 

[Antvasima]

I suppose that creating a group of experienced editors who help others to properly create profiles might be an idea down the line, but there are a few potential problems.

One is that it might be redundant, given that we already have some pretty thorough instruction pages:

Standard Format for Character Profiles

Common Editing Mistakes

Another is that we used to have a series of official request threads for this, but they very quickly got crammed with requests, and almost nobody would know enough about the requested verses or characters to just suddenly create the relevant profile pages, so we eventually shut them down.

And a third is that it simply may not be realistic in terms of the required time and energy to constantly help out beginner editors. Our current system of simply deleting the bad profiles still gives rise to a steady stream of new acceptable ones, to the point that we have almost 22000 pages at this point, so there is no pressing need for it.

 

[AKM sama]

I agree with Ant.

 

[Andytrenom]

It would help a lot if there were a decent number of content mods in the staff. Currently they are super scare taking into account just how much pages and editors there are to look over

 

[First_Witch]

Rather than having them tinker at profiles themself, woudnt it be better if they teach those to create qualitative profiles?

 

[Antvasima]

This wouldn't have to be handled by content moderators though.

Also, we must always make extra certain that the CMs in question are suitable for their position.

 

[Ogbunabali]

Why not, instead of a request thread, have a QA thread where people post their blog/sandbox profiles and experienced members tell them what needs to be improved/corrected.

 

[Agnaa]

Like Ant said, I vaguely recall something like that already existing and getting too many requests with not enough evaluations.

Since there are more experienced members around perhaps it could be more successful this time, but we should be mindful of that idea failing in the past.

 

[Ogbunabali]

That thread was about requesting profiles to be made, not quality checking them. I really doubt there's going to be more or the same number of requests for this compared that.

But, yeah, it will fail if the ones that to do volunteer aren't dedicated to the thread. So that's something to keep in mind.

 

[Agnaa]

Ahh right, I forgot that was a "Please make this profile" thread and not a "Please check this profile" thread.

 

[First_Witch]

Why not, instead of a request thread, have a QA thread where people post their blog/sandbox profiles and experienced members tell them what needs to be improved/corrected.

I support that.

 

[Antvasima]

Why not, instead of a request thread, have a QA thread where people post their blog/sandbox profiles and experienced members tell them what needs to be improved/corrected.

That might be an idea, yes.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

@Ant

Well yes, but as we see right now those pages haven't done too much, likely because even if those pages were constantly updated they wouldn't be as helpful as actual human input.

On the second point, the big difference there is that the thread was open to anyone and was entirely based around others asking for stuff to be made with no input of the requested user. As you know, that thread was something I disliked, and this is different in purpose and execution even if the concept is similar.

While this could be argued, I would like to point out the fact many people have agreed with a verse audit group likely points to the fact that these issues are more prevalent than we think. Most new users tend to focus on the forum, which means that it won't be necessary to help every single new user anyway.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I suppose that Ogbunabali's suggestion for how to practically apply this might be an idea. However, first we need to let the audit group get organise and begin with their work. We cannot handle too many drastic new projects at the same time.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Fair. This is mostly a discussion of ideas after all.

 

[Skalt711]

I'm willing to help with the quality control!

 

[Yobo_Blue]

I do recall some Content Mods being given specific roles to work primarily on certain aspects of the wiki, so perhaps something similar can be done here.

 

[Antvasima]

The content moderators are busy enough as it is. Adding more to their workloads would likely be a bad idea.

 

[Skalt711]

I myself am not able to help 24/7

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. No problem.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

The content moderators are busy enough as it is. Adding more to their workloads would likely be a bad idea.

True, but we already do this with some Content Mods. If we were to do the same during the next round of Staff Recruitment it wouldn't be and extra workload for any involved.

 

[Antvasima]

It takes quite a lot of trust and reliability to get the content moderator position. We cannot just start to promote people who are not sufficiently qualified.

 

[Skalt711]

Yup.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

It takes quite a lot of trust and reliability to get the content moderator position. We cannot just start to promote people who are not sufficiently qualified.

Ant, I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying.

During previous staff recruitment drives, we have had certain people be specialized in certain topics. I am not suggesting that we suddenly get new Content Mods, I am saying that it would not be impossible to possibly during the next Staff Drive have someone trustworthy be specialized in this topic. That's all.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.