All posts by
I kind of get where Game's coming from, but also somewhat agree with the other side of the issue. At least, I think I get it. Correct me if I'm wrong.
"Quality" seems to mean two different things to Game and Chames. One believing it to mean "it meets a criteria that should be standard for all articles" while the other seems to interpret it as "worthy of praise or recognition". If that's the case, then perhaps some re-wording is in order.
People's content should be on here without fear of it being removed or drastically altered without just cause, that much I think we're all in agreement on. However, when said "content" is only one paragraph, or some joke in poor taste, or a page with so little detail that it's hardly an aritcle in the first place, then a line should probably be drawn.
We've got well over 9,000 articles on here. Some of them are "works of art", others are not so much. As long as they meet the requirements necessary for a page, that is fine. As stated, this is a place for people to post their Sonic-related content. It'd be snobbish to remove an article that some view as "bad". However, of those 9,000 articles, there are several that are so sparse and lacking in any sort of information or content that it's practically spam.
Some of your proposals, like archiving old articles to keep the wiki "efficient", were always very jarring to me because it contradicts the purpose of this wiki: to share and create Sonic-related content without, like Akrivus put it, bloated, rigorous restrictions.
Could you define what's meant by "bloated, rigorous restrictions"?
I tried to use the template, but it wouldn't take. Maybe I was using the wrong wording or something. . .
Did we seriously get rid of the neutral/maybe voting template? I'm not really sure we actually need another admin at this point and time. Wiki's barely treading water as it is.
EDIT: Removed my vote, replacing it with a no.
16. I'm unfollowing this. This is just ridiculous at this point. If you want to continue with this, be my guest. :/
2 (Fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnneeee)
My game uses the RPGMaker 2003. That's all I can tell you.
2k3 was before they added the option of writing your own scripts. Here all you have to rely on are the things provided for you: Events and Common Events.
Frost the Wolf wrote:
just close voting no one's gonna vote no on this
http://www.troll.me/images/defiant-fat-kid/ehhhh-you-cant-make-me.jpg
just close voting no one's gonna vote no on this
"Wait, forth wall break WITHIN a forth wall break? That's like. . . Sixteen walls!" - Deadpool
Oh wait, we have to choose quotes from Sonic related material?? My bad. :P
Alright, I apply for the position of a judge. I would just need to be contacted on Skype, since, as I said, I'm seldom on here anymore to keep up with current events.
In case you need a neutral judge (if you don't know what I'm talking about, I'm refering to this thread: http://sonicfanon.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:467126#34), I can apply for the role, since I don't allow my content to be nominated in the first place.
"Oy, ya hear that, Eggman? We're coming after you! And I'm gonna make you tell me what Eggmanland is!" - Marine the Raccoon (Sonic Rush Adventures)
Honestly, ANY quote by Marine is a favorite. She's just so funny.
Not even close, dude. What I mean is, when a user is forced to vote neutral for their character which ultimately prevents them from moving to the final round, we should bring in a new voter to give them a second chance. A voter who has no characters in any categories; Any category he or she votes in won't put him or her in the user-forced neutral situation, thus making them the odd one out. If all it takes is one vote to decide whether someone's character is in or out of the final round, then someone who the user-forced neutral rule does not apply to would be ideal to bring in to vote.
Come to think of it, that sounds like something I could do. I've personally asked for all of my content to never be allowed for voting anyway, so I'd always be said "third party voter".
Cursing under his breath, Frost puts away his rifle. "Then let's go. Now." he says impatiently. Couldn't anything go right for once?
Even though I practically don't take part in this (or hardly even the wiki itself) anymore, why not just redact the rule stating the creator of an article/character has to vote neutral on their own creation? Rather than having someone else come in just to vote towards an article you can't vote for because you made it?
I get why the rule was implemented in the first place, but I trust MOST people on here wouldn't just vote only for their own article and give everyone else a negative vote in hopes of getting a fancy recognition of "best in such-and-such category" on their own creation. Most people who even get nominated to begin with usually seem responsible enough to vote fairly.
(I'm really hoping I actually understand what this is about, otherwise I just made myself look like a complete idiot.)