Board Thread:Wiki Improvement/@comment-4748628-20150525013604/@comment-26535373-20150525213549

Jaredthefox92 wrote: My issue with this is what is the definition of "quality"? Proper grammar, proper spelling? Is it an article that doesn't stray from the "status quo"? How about articles which seem "mary-sue"ish, even when they're not? I do not like the idea that others may vote to delete your articles simply because they may not like it other than the article itself not adhering to the standards posted. While I do believe people should make proper articles the mere fact that if someone simply doesn't like your article without it voiding the standard criteria is a bit concerning. It's basically destroying creativity and originality base on the "popular" vote.

(Note: My current vote is against this until I am proven otherwise. The standard of "quality" is highly subjective in my viewpoint and I do not believe in giving special powers to admins to basically be capable of deleting articles that technically follow the standards that are provided when users make their pages. I feel a lot of "mary sue" labels will be tossed around at others to justify deleting perfectly valid articles just because it goes up against the status quo in the Sonic fandom. ) Remember this; ''"Absolute power corrupts absolutely". ''Corruption has been seen with this adminstration before, I think this quality power would be used for the wrong purposes. He kinda has a point there but either way It's a good idea.

Let see how it works.