Board Thread:Wiki Improvement/@comment-4748628-20150525013604/@comment-26224470-20150526054658

Jaredthefox92 wrote: Gamedezyner wrote:

Shadow-Flare wrote: the idea's there but, as jared basically said, it seems far to easy to abuse it I actually trust the community we have here to not vote off things that aren't absurd or ridiculous. Everyone seems pretty defensive of creativity and I doubt they would all attack a sue-ish character just for that. I'm going to be blunt as well. From what I've seen by this community I would have to disagree with you, the Sonic fandom, as well as other fandoms are known for a sort of "social clique" mentality. While I do believe there are some old and ridiculous articles, (hotdog the hedgehog? Really?) I believe this is basically allowing admins who don't like someone else work for one reason or another to force it to a popular vote in which many admins will win basically by peer pressure. I agree with Smash that perhaps there should be that you either go after inactive articles or ask perhaps state what is wrong in the "quality" of said article so that the user may have time to mend the error. Stating specifically what the actual problem is, (and this has to be a majority problem, not just one the admin made up or has a pet peeve over) would perhaps give the author time to mend said article to where it is validated.

To basically call this or that article "crap" and force others to agree with you is bias, there should be a notification of what is wrong with the article and a grace period for the user to fix said article.Like Smash said it's the job of the admins to help people better their articles instead of enforcing a sort of admin sponsored "elitism" within the community. Yes there are some lazily made articles on this site that must be attend to, but keep in mind people might not have the time to update them in one sitting. Admins should serve the people, not the other way around. First of all, if someone makes a character like Hot Dog the Hedgehog ON PURPOSE, it would exempt if they have mentioned it to be a joke character. He was created specifically for entertainment value and nothing else.

You do raise a valid point about bias and such, I will give you that, but consider that if you have time to make an article that is less than three sentences and never complete it, why make that article. People should make their characters when they can devote the time and effort to do such.

It is not elitism, it is just his way of thinking. Honestly, the page is just a two-way conversation along with lists galore, and we don't even allow that anymore. That page should have been taken down in the first place for violating the rules.