- 2,033
- 3,263
Option 2 or Option 3 works for me.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I am still perfectly fine with if we apply this project in the above-mentioned manner.Just a note that I think that the only way to handle this project withouth crippling our abilities to find and summon enough staff to content revision threads is to move the listed members in our knowledgeable members list page to "Knowledgeable Members" sections in the corresponding verse pages, while simultaneously moving the previously listed members in "Supporters", "Neutral", and "Opponents" sections to new "Somewhat Knowledgeable Members" sections.
If a member ends up redundantly being listed in both a "Knowledgeable Members" and "Somewhat Knowledgeable Members" section, the second one should be removed, and if our content moderators notice that members haven't been active in our forum for a year or more, their listed usernames should be removed completely from these lists.
We can then start a double-highlighted discussion thread here in this forum in which our members are encouraged to modify which sections that they are listed in in our many verse pages.
Ya, I have the same viewpoint as well.I don't think we should include "Somewhat" in the title, if that's your intention.
This seems very acceptable to me. Thanks a lot for helping out.Bump
There are 1600 pages of verses. I believe this project can be completed in 5-10 minutes or less.
Is everyone okay with converting the sections labeled "Supporters," "Neutral," and "Opponents" to "Somewhat Knowledgeable Members"?
@KLOL506, @Mr._Bambu, @LordTracer, @Antvasima, @Damage3245, @DontTalkDT, @DarkDragonMedeus
I have notified all staff members who participated in and discussed this thread.
The vote tally can be found here.
"Somewhat" definitely needs to be included. We can create "Knowledgeable Members" sections afterwards by copy-pasting from the following page, and, if members are listed twice, we can remove them from the corresponding "Somewhat Knowledgeable Members" lists.I don't think we should include "Somewhat" in the title, if that's your intention.
I stand by my vote, if you're seeking confirmation, and suspect we can go ahead and implement this. If you're using a bot for this, you have my support to begin whenever you like.
"Somewhat" definitely needs to be included. We can create "Knowledgeable Members" sections afterwards by copy-pasting from the following page, and, if members are listed twice, we can remove them from the corresponding "Somewhat Knowledgeable Members" lists.
Knowledgeable Members List (Verses)
This page is intended to be a list in alphabetical order of every verse page in this wiki, and the members who think that they are highly knowledgeable regarding them. Members who consider themselves as "experts" should have a significant amount of knowledge regarding a franchise, and are...vsbattles.fandom.com
Then they simply need to be removed. And liking or disliking a verse doesn’t automatically mean they have knowledge about the verse that’d be helpful for revisions or indexing.The people who have listed themselves there are mostly not truly knowledgeable. They just like or dislike a certain verse. Meaning they have some limited knowledge of it, but not in-depth.
It’s not even my solution, I was just agreeing with what Bambu said before…My solution would make this significantly easier to overview during our work processes, whereas your solution would significantly cripple our ability to efficiently organise our work by receiving feedback and evaluations when required, so I am afraid that I am not going to allow it. My apologies.
Header | Tabbers |
==Supporters/Opponents/Neutral== ===Supporters=== *User *User ===Opponents=== *User *User ===Neutral=== *User *User | <tabber> |-|Supporters/Opponents/Neutral= ===Supporters=== *User *User ===Opponents=== *User *User ===Neutral=== *User *User </tabbers> |
How can you do it that fast?To summarize: I am fully capable of handling it without any issues to 1600 pages in less of two minutes.
Okay, if you're dead set against "Knowledgeable Members", I want something short and decently formal. We may have to avoid the notion of "Knowledgeable Members" altogether, if this is no longer about volunteering themselves as knowledgeable.I suppose that "Relatively" might also work.
My point still stands than before, as it's rather a pointless changeI still think removing the "Supporters/Neutral/Opponents" thing isn't necessary for reasons above, and I already voiced how some of the verses I added myself as a supporter and/or opponent isn't something I consider myself that knowledgeable on. But as I already said, if I am outvoted, so be it.
Well, I do think that it seems more practical to, instead of replacing those sections, initially simply add "Knowledgeable Members" sections right above them, and also move all of the information from the corresponding sections in the following page to these sections for easier overviews, after which we can delete it for being redundant.I still think removing the "Supporters/Neutral/Opponents" thing isn't necessary for reasons above, and I already voiced how some of the verses I added myself as a supporter and/or opponent isn't something I consider myself that knowledgeable on. But as I already said, if I am outvoted, so be it.
I also thought that was the plan at first. But apparently Ant thinks we'll be able to do it in two years time.So we’re just changing it to “Knowledgeable Members” and nothing more, correct?
Yes, agreed, and I am guilty of this myself, but there are mixed cases in that regard. A part of the listed members are knowledgeable and a part of them are not, and we do need to know which members we should call for regarding different content revision threads, so maybe we can start by moving all of the contents of the following page to new "Knowledgeable Members" sections in the respective pages for the verses within it?In addition to that, users that know about a verse but aren't willing to contribute, especially those that only "tangentially" know a series would be removed, as the main reason there's a name change is because of the misconceptions it has made, namely users just listing themselves on verse pages out of merely sharing what they think of a verse, without being willing to help in CRTs or in some cases only merely being interested, having disinterest or not wanting to get into a verse (without really knowning much of note for our purposes), cases like Barney and Redo of Healer are blatant victims of this for the most part.
Hmmm, I think the use of "Somewhat" feels a bit out of place or doesn't feel professional, perhaps calling it simply Knowledgeable Members is fine as by default only members who actively participate or have a general knowledge of the verses should be listed, although I agree that those who don't participate at all despite being listed should be removed.For the time being we can also rename all Supporters/Opponents/Neutral sections to "Somewhat Knowledgeable Members" and then create a highlighted thread regarding that the members who do not truly know a lot about each verse in question should remove themselves from these sections.
There should be a Knowledgeable Members section in each verse page, but the contents in them should be moved from here:I recall it was agreed on previously for the new name to be "Knowledgeable Members", given that "somewhat" is quite informal, and Mr. Bambu has expressed he'd want something short and fairly formal. Maybe the rename could also include a link to this part of the Standard Format for Verse Pages (updating the name of the section beforehand of that page, of course) to make it evidently clear its intent and ensure it's not misused as easily again.
In any case, I agree with that way of handling it.
Again, we will have "Knowledgeable Members" sections. I just don't want us to mix genuinely knowledgeable members with ones who have simply heard of a verse and dislike it on principle, for example.Hmmm, I think the use of "Somewhat" feels a bit out of place or doesn't feel professional, perhaps calling it simply Knowledgeable Members is fine as by default only members who actively participate or have a general knowledge of the verses should be listed, although I agree that those who don't participate at all despite being listed should be removed.
It depends on if that list of members originates from the following page or a Supporters/Opponents/Neutral section.And on a different note, I recently recreated the verse page of the verse I am a supporter of and the sandbox seemed to implement "Knowledgeable Members" instead of Suppoters/Neutral/Opponents, should I revert it until this change is effective or leave it as such?
No. I think we should handle this in the manner I described above in order to do this carefully without mixing together different types of members.Would we just insert any user not already in the respective verse page as just a supporter for now? If so, I could handle this across the next week.