Board Thread:Wiki Improvement/@comment-7637833-20150218223947/@comment-27765057-20150225032145

Hello. It is I, your not-so-resident hero: Skullsworth. I have come to enlighten you all with my seemingly-infinite knowledge, charm, and witty humor. Thank God for me!!!

I feel that, despite my absence, it is important that I give off my opinions on certain matters on this wiki every once in awhile and that the wiki would very much benefit from my doing so, perhaps even more due to my unique position. With that said, I am wholly against this policy at it stands. While it certainly could improve the quality of the wiki, there is also the potential to afflict rather dire consequences on the community.

It is rather clear that the goal of this policy (as has been the goal of several users such as the Cleanup Group for quite some time) is to repair the reputation of this wiki; mainly in the context that this wiki hosts terrible articles. However, not only do I feel that this policy will very much fail to accomplish this, but I also believe that it is going about it the wrong way and will likely bring more harm than good.

To elaborate further on the first point, much of this wiki's reputation stems from the entire fandom's reputation as a whole, which cannot be repaired by any action this wiki decides to take. The fandom is and always will be noted for its terrible fanfictions, characters, and vast amount of jokes, and it is time we all accept that this is likely how it will always be viewed. If you cannot do that, then I simply suggest that you find another fandom to associate with.

As to my second point, a policy idea such as this will likely bring about a new reputation of the wiki: That we are overly harsh toward how we decide what articles stay and what has to go. There have been arguments by some users that our standards are unfair as they are now (which I don't believe at all), and further restricting them is only going to scare people away.

In conclusion, I don't like this policy idea and I feel that a better direction should be taken. What I would rather see is us finding ways to adjust the current standards so that users can be even more creative (perhaps coming up with more possible required headings for articles so that users don't feel as restricted). I'll be available for the rest of the evening to respond to anyone that feels like replying to this comment.