FANDOM


Storage for all past improvement ideas I came up with to help the wiki.

Step 1: General Improvement (Passed)

Alright, everyone remembers the fight that's occured recently. Many people would prefer to forget the incident, let it die, and move on. However, keeping this incident in mind will, I believe, give us the motivation to make some much-needed improvements to this wiki. As I'm sure some of you know, I made a poll on my page (look here if you wanna see and vote). Most of the people voted on improving all parts of the wiki mentioned in the vote. So, I'm going to make some suggestions:

Improving articles: To do this, people should look through articles and correct any mispelling they see. Instead of sneering at the person who made the mistake, take the initiative and fix it for them. Be careful of certain words though, because sometimes they're intentionally mispelled so as to signify something in a person's fandom.

Next are one-liner or badly made articles. The way to go about this is relatively simple; leave a message on the talkpage of the said article, telling the owner what they need to fix and that if they don't, the article will be deleted. However, there's one specific thing I should mention: PLEASE be respectful when giving a review that isn't asked for. These people might be mature, they might not be; they may be young, they may not be. Since you don't know anthing about the person, you need to do as much as you can to avoid insulting the person, and igniting a fight. Speaking of which, such fights will be covered later.

Now, if the person doesn't respond or do anything to the article in about... 3-5 days after getting a warning, go tell an admin and give a link to said article, so that they can delete it. With the link, the article can be restored if the person has a legitimate reason for not being on.

Better Roleplay Standards: Now this, I'm sure we can all agree on. The wiki is flooded by plot-minimal RPs created 3 times a week. The standards I had in mind was that the the RP must have a distinct plot to carry the RP. It doesn't necessarily have to be a long, very specific plot idea (should you want a simple, free-play RP), but it should be more than just "Going to a resturaunt" or "Pool Party". In addition, I think that a limit needs to be put in place on how many Roleplays a person can create per month, so that people don't flood the wiki. Like a limit of say.... 3 or 4 RPs per month. That way people can't just make an RP, let it die in a few days, and make a new one; they want to RP, they have to figure out how to carry the RP.

Monitoring Users: This is something everyone and anyone can do. If you see people that have a history of being involved in big fights on the wiki (like me) are involved in a debate or an issue that seems to be heating up, keep an eye on where the issue is occuring. If things get out of hand, don't be afraid to get involved and try to defuse the situation. Or, if you aren't confident that you can bring the fight down, go find someone you believe can do so properly. In doing this, we can keep fights from blowing up, and hopefully preserve the wiki's peace.

The wiki can't go on being a timebomb for drama and a desert of boredom. We always say that we need to do something about the issues on the wiki, but we never do. With what's happened just a few days ago, I think this is the perfect motivator for us to do what we can to improve and help the wiki, so that we can prevent or at least reduce the chance of fights and trouble occuring on the wiki.

So, what do you guys think about this?

EDIT:

  • Support:
    • WrathOfTheNerd9000
    • Hikaru-yami having fun*
    • Smash the Echidna
    • E-113:Xi
    • Memphis the light
    • Sakura Misato
    • Artemiscat55
    • Ryushusupercat
    • Sonicfan919
    • Dragongirl0905
    • Tailsman67
    • Hedgeidna97
    • Shadow-Flare
    • Scroundernuts
    • Taggev
  • Neutral
    • Lightning2315
  • Against:
    • Wh!te$tar

Anyone I didn't put down hasn't given explicit support or dislike of the ideas I've put in place. So feel free to say something. But with the seemingly overwhelming support, I think I'll go to Flash with this soon, and come up with some additional policies that will hopefully assist the wiki in improving.

Policies

These are the policies I have come up with based on the aforementioned ideas.

Articles

  1. )NO one-liners! An article that has only one line of information, no template, no categories, and no headers is no longer acceptable, and are to be considered possible spam.
  2. ) As such, a User who sees such a page should notify the owner on the article talkpage that the page does not make additions and changes to the page, it shall be deleted.
  3. ) If the user does not respond within three to five days, the user must notify an admin and give a link to said page so that it may be deleted.
  4. ) Users must be civil and respectful towards the other person and their character. We may not know the person who made the page, so treating them with respect is the best way to avoid problems. As such, If the more experienced User is not respectful and a fight breaks out, the User who has been here longer will be considered at least partially responsible. If the user is verbally attacked or trolled without provocation, they should notify an admin so that the admin may step in.
  5. ) If the owner of the page responds but is unable to make the necessary changes in time, the more experienced User should (with notification given prior) place the Construction and if necessary, the Stub template.
  6. ) If the owner does not know how to, a more experienced User may put categories in place on the article, and then must explain the categories concept to the owner of the page.
  7. ) A user is permitted to edit any and all percieved mispellings and grammar errors in an article. However, this does not extend to the name of fan-made locations and fan-made characters not already on the wiki.
  8. ) If a page that requires construction has not been edited within three weeks and the User has also not made any edits on the wiki in that time, a seperate User is permitted to mark it for deletion (you are NOT to blank whatever information is there). Afterwards they are to notify an admin, and give a link to the page.
Standards

In order to be permitted to remain on the wiki without any sort of template regarding its percieved incomplete status, pages of each type must adhere to the following standards. Any articles that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the above rules:

  • Characters
    • Must have infobox template with at five parts regarding character information filled.
    • Must have at least three headings with three to five complete sentences of information. Trivia counts as well.
    • Must be properly categorized with at least five pre-existing categories.
    • Must have minimum spelling/grammar errors.
  • Locations
    • Must have at least two-to-four sections regarding population, signficant areas within location, ecology (climate, terrain, weather etc.), and if possible, history. If the location is uninhabitated and/or has no significant history, those headings are permitted to be left out.
    • All headings must have at least three complete sentences of information under each section. Trivia does not count.
    • Must be properly categorized.
    • Must have minimum spelling/grammar errors.
  • Groups/Races
    • Must have at least four headings, under which members of the group/race, the policies/religion of said group/race, the primary base of operations/habitat of the group/race, and the general abilities and/or style of operation (tactics, strategies, etc.) of said group/race must be adressed.
    • Must be properly categorized with at least three pre-existing categories.
    • Specific characters (if any) that have articles must adhere to the above standards for characters.
    • Must have minimum spelling/grammar errors.
  • Items/Weapons
    • Must have two-to-four headings, which must cover past (if any) and current wielders, significant history of said item/weapon, abilities of said item/weapon, and creator of said item/weapon.
    • All headings must have at least three complete sentences of information.
    • Must be properly categorized.
    • Must have minimum spelling/grammar errors.
  • Techniques & Abilities
    • Must have three-to-four headings concerning description of technique, known users of technique, variants of said technique, and rank of the technique. The description of the technique must have at least three complete sentences.
    • Must be properly categorized with at least three pre-existing categories.
    • If the technique originates from a different franchise, copy-and-paste articles are NOT permitted.
    • Must have minimum spelling/grammar errors.
  • Fanfictions
    • Must have two headings covering plot overview and characters in the story, with a minimum of two paragraphs (three-to-five complete sentences minimum for each paragraph)
    • If there are multiple parts to the story, previous and future chapters/episodes should be linked in the article.
    • Must be properly categorized
    • Must have minimum spelling/grammar errors.
  • Relationships
    • Must have six headings covering overview, fanfics supporting the relationship, and fanfics against the relationship. The other three headings should allow for people to put whether they support the relationship, are against it, or are neutral about the relationship.
    • Must have a paragraph of three to five complete sentences minimum describing the overview of the couple. Crack pairings do not require this. If there are multiple overviews for multiple fanfictions, they must be seperated using subheaders.
    • Must be properly categorized.
    • Must have minimum spelling/grammar errors.

To recap: any articles that do not meet the above standards must be edited to meet the above standards within three-to-five days of notification/creation, or must be labeled with the apropriate templates.

Roleplays

  1. ) Roleplays must have at least three complete sentences describing the plot of the Roleplay.
  2. ) The plot of the RP must be capable of driving the RP without allowing it to go off-topic.
  3. ) Must be specified as free-join or invite-only. This does not have to be mentioned in the Roleplay's name, but must be mentioned in the RP page rules.
  4. ) If any User believes an RP to not meet the standards in terms of plot, they should notify three admins, so that the status of the RP may be discussed. If at least two of the three admins believe the article requires improvement, the user must comply. If they are unable or unwilling to comply, the RP will be deleted.
  5. ) Each User is permitted to create only three roleplays a month, and only one a day: no exceptions. If a User exceeds this limit, they must pick one of their older RPs to be deleted, or have the just-created RP deleted. A User may create their RPs at any time during the month, so long as it adheres to the aforementioned rules.

Users

  1. ) If multiple Users (at least two) known for being involved in starting fights (with each other or in general) are communicating as opposing sides over a topic, a User must notify an admin so that the admin may monitor the issue.
  2. ) If Users start fighting, an admin must intervene immediately and difuse the situation. Non-admin Users are permitted to do the same, and if they are experienced and/or know at least one of the users involved in the fight, are expected to intervene.
  3. ) If the fighting continues, an admin is permitted to ban whoever they deem responsible.
  4. ) If a fight cannot be dropped, those involved are permitted to instead take it to another location, away from the SFW.
  5. ) If the fight started due to an unprovoked verbal attack from one User, that user must be banned. The time of the ban is up to the discretion of the notified admin.

These are the policies that I intend to introduce. Anyone with objections must say so within three days, and explain their reasoning. If objections do not outweigh the support, these policies will be put in place.

Roleplay Cleanup: Now this is a priority for a lot of us. We seriously need to clean up old, low-quality RPs that are deader than the Grim Reaper. So, we need to figure out what to do with these ones, and how to seperate good, bad, and those with potential.

Administration Nominations: When I went to the nomination page to nominate someone, I was reminded that the page had been totally wiped. So with this, I figured it was a good idea to figure out how to format the page on top of standards and requirements for nominations.

Additional Quality Rules: Further rules might be needed to make sure articles meet a decent level of quality on this wiki.

Wiki Chat: Alright, I want a Community Vote on this outright: who wants chat, who doesn't? It doesn't affect me since I use Monobook so I don't really mind. I'm just concerned about issues that may arise that I won't be able to handle because I'm not involved on said chat.

Step 2: Miscellaneous & User Ideas (Passed)

Alright, here's what I came up with so far. I haven't been able to figure something out for "RP Cleanup" or "Additional Quality Rules". However, I will cover "Administration Nominations" and "Wiki Chat".

Administration Qualifications

1) Must have at least 1000 constructive edits, meaning no spam or vandalism.
2) Must have been active on the wiki for at least 6-8 weeks. For users who make new accounts, time spent on the previous account counts to time on the wiki.
3) If the user has been banned for vandalism, spam, or trolling, they must wait four weeks after the ban is lifted before they are viable for adminship. This time does not count to time spent active on the wiki. The ban does not count if it was unjustified; such distinction is up to the discretion of the current admins.
4) Nominee must know and adhere to the policies of the wiki, and must actively enforce these rules as an admin.
5) The user must be capable of being respectful and civilized to all Users, and must do so.

Bureaucracy Qualifications

1) Must have at least 7000 constructive edits, meaning no spam or vandalism.
2) Must have been active on the wiki for at least 3 months. Time spent on previous accounts does not count.
3) User must have at least 6 weeks of adminship experience.
4) If the user has been justly banned twice, they are immediately exhempt from any bureaucracy nomination.
5) Rules 4 and 5 for Administration Qualification also must be adhered to for Bureaucracy Qualifications.

For:

  • Lightning
  • Memphis
  • Kit/Pocky
  • Hedgeidna
  • Sonicfan
  • Wrath
  • Emoferret
  • Hunter
  • Kagi

Neutral:

  • Wh!te

Against:

Wiki Chat

Well, people have been using it and it seems pretty popular. So, I guess we're gonna keep it active. Any problems with that?

For:

  • Lightning
  • Memphis
  • Wh!te
  • Needlemouse
  • Emoferret

Neutral:

  • Kit/Pocky
  • Hedgeidna
  • Wrath
  • Kagi

Against:

  • Sonicfan

Recolor Identification

Okay, a lot of people have mixed reactions about recolors. Some people believe they are needed as a stepping stone in improvement, some believe they should be banned completely. This idea is a compromise for that. Here it goes: If someone uploads a recolor image, they must admit it is a recolor and name the source. There would also be a category for recolored images as well, and all recolored images would be categorized as such. If anyone uploads a recolored image and claims it as their own original image, proof to the contrary would warrant immediate deletion of the picture in question.

For:

  • Sonicfan
  • Sakura
  • Kit
  • Wh!te
  • Lightning
  • Kagi

Neutral:

Against:

User Ideas

Ideas from other Users.

Map of Mobius

Credit goes to: Schoolbus13

The thought behind this idea is that we create a map of Mobius, which maps out the locations of both canon and fanon locations, showing where they are in relation to one another.

For:

  • Sonicfan
  • Emoferret
  • Hedgeidna
  • Wh!te
  • Lightning
  • Flashfire
  • Kagi

Neutral:

  • Sakura

Against:

RP Bulletin Board

Credit goes to: Sonicfan919

With this one, a section on the Main Page is dedicated to displaying the latest Roleplays created, allowing people to see and find prospective RPs to join.

For:

  • Sonicfan
  • Emoferret
  • Hedgeidna
  • Wh!te
  • Bluray
  • Lightning
  • Kagi

Neutral:

  • Sakura

Against:

Game Blog

Credit goes to: Wh!te$tar

A game corner or something along those lines where we put up updates concerning upcoming games, keeping everyone updated on games and other SEGA news.

For:

  • Hedgeidna
  • Wh!te
  • Lightning
  • Sonicfan

Neutral:

  • Sakura
  • Kagi

Against:

Trivia

Credit goes to: Wh!te$tar

A "did you know" randomizer thing that shows random trivia about various places, characters, and aspects concerning the Sonic franchise. Other wikis would be used to verify the trivia put up.

For:

  • Hedgeidna
  • Sakura
  • Wh!te
  • Lightning
  • Sonicfan

Neutral:

  • Kagi

Against:

Special Events

Credit goes to: Wh!te$tar

Special events coordinated by an admin/crat monthly, to give the wiki an extra something to do. Examples given include murals, contests, and whatnot.

For:

  • Hedgeidna
  • Sakura
  • Wh!te
  • Lightning
  • Sonicfan
  • Flashfire
  • Kagi

Neutral:

Against:

Step 3: Refinement 1 (Passed)

Adminship Refinement

Restrictions

Something both me and White came up with. The idea is that after an admin loses their adminship legitimately 2 times, they should be restricted from having it again. The reason behind this is because if such a person loses their adminship repeatedly, they shouldn't be allowed to get it again and again, running the risk of more problems. It's the same as no bureaucracy after being banned twice.

For

  • Sonicfan919
  • Tails6000
  • ParaGoomba
  • Guyviroth
  • Hunter
  • Numbuh
  • ArcherGirl
  • Ryushu
  • White
  • Memphis
  • S-Flare
  • Xi
  • Maryxgil
  • Hedgeidna
  • Wolf9400
  • Makuta
  • Smash

Neutral

  • Juely

Against

Improved Voting Process

Another something me and White came up with, which would separate the voting process for admins and normal users. Both votes would still count, but would be counted separately. This way, an admin can be judged not only on their popularity and favor with the wiki community, but can also be judged on whether or not the majority of the admins find the nominee to be responsible. A user will require majority vote in BOTH sections in order to gain adminship. So that way, people who are popular but don't know a lick about being an admin can't become one, while a smart User who isn't capable of amiable interactions with the majority of the wiki also has to wait.

For

  • Numbuh
  • ArcherGirl
  • Ryushu
  • White
  • Memphis
  • S-Flare
  • Xi
  • Maryxgil
  • Hedgeidna
  • Wolf9400
  • Makuta
  • Smash

Neutral

  • Hunter

Against

Roleplay Restriction

Streamlining

The idea for this is to restrict substandard RPs. Using something like the RP Bulletin Board, people put up their RP concepts and ideas. Then, the RPs get voted on, and the ones with positive votes are allowed to be made. Ones without enough support are required to be refined or simply nixed.

For

  • Sonicfan919
  • Tails6000
  • ParaGoomba
  • Hunter
  • Numbuh
  • ArcherGirl
  • Ryushu
  • White
  • Memphis
  • S-Flare
  • Xi
  • Bionicleboy
  • Makuta
  • Smash

Neutral

  • Juely
  • Guy
  • Hedgeidna

Against

  • Mayxgil
  • Wolf9400

Step 4: Refinement 2 (Passed)

Nomination Tiebreaker

Something I noticed in the latest adminship nomination is that for some nominations, one of the sections ended up in a tie, while the other had majority vote one way or the other. This idea is that when it comes to a tie in one section of the nomination, the decision will be made by the other. In other words, if there's 2 admins for and 2 admins against, the User majority vote will be the deciding factor. In the case that both of the sections ended up in a tie, the slates will be cleaned for people to re-cast their votes.

For:

  • Xi
  • Flash
  • Draon
  • Hunter
  • Sonicfan
  • Scroundernuts
  • Wrath
  • Smash
  • Hedge

Neutral:

  • Tails6000

Against:

Article Protection Refinement

Now, we all remember what happened with the articles Saber The Leo and Onyx Leo: blatantly terrible articles that were protected by Construction templates. This refinement is meant to hold even articles Under Construction to a higher standard. Now, here are the current ideas:

Standards

A page that is under construction now has to meet at least three new standards within one week of being marked for Construction. If it does not, it may be deleted. Said standards are:

  • Must have at least three headers on the page, empty or not. Sub-headers do not count to this total.
  • Must have an infobox on the article, even if it's totally barren.
  • Must have at least three categories on the article.
  • Must have proper grammar and punctuation.

Deletion

An article may be deleted regardless of a Construction template on-sight if it falls under the following circumstances:

  • The "article" consists of only one line of information, or consists of only a few sentences.
  • The page has blatantly terrible quality and grammar. Example: "Blast dAh headghoge iz fastur dan Sawnik da hedhog! Blast iZ da moest ausum evar!"; it doesn't have to be that bad, but you get the idea.

If an Under Construction article has not been edited for three weeks with irregular or nonexistent general activity from the owner in the time of a month for no given reason (i.e. vacation, family issues, etc), the page is up for deletion at the discretion of admins.

For

  • Xi
  • Flash
  • Tails6000
  • Draon
  • Hunter
  • Sonicfan
  • Scroundernuts
  • Wrath
  • Smash
  • Hedge

Neutral

Against

Welcome Message

A serious problem around here is that new Users don't know nor pay attention to the Policies. I think the Welcome Message needs to be updated and revamped to put higher emphasis on reading and following the policies. I also believe a tutorial in the basic functions and uses of the Wiki's features may be necessary, so new Users can understand just what things like "headers" are.

For:

  • Tails6000
  • Xi
  • Flash
  • Draon
  • Hunter
  • Sonicfan
  • Scroundernuts
  • Wrath
  • Smash
  • Hedge

Neutral:

Against:

Step 5: Chat

Chat RP Restrictions (Vetoed)

Several Users have complained about the amount of talkplaying and roleplaying that goes on on the chat, when we have talkpages and roleplays, and to a lesser extent user-talkpages and blogs. On the other hand, TPing/RPing varies widely from person to person, and in some cases the talkplaying, though excessive, keeps it off the wiki. With these two sides of the argument in mind, I want people to vote on whether or not to restrict RPing on the chat.

For:

  • Guyviroth
  • Wrath
  • Makuta

Neutral:

  • 09jhero
  • Smash
  • Shima
  • White
  • Bloodnova
  • Hedge
  • Vegas
  • Bioniclboy

Against:

  • Hunter
  • Pandaboy
  • Xi
  • Bluray
  • ParaGoomba
  • Niktendo
  • Wolf9400
  • OmegaEdge


Chat Mod Requirements (Passed)

1) Must have at least 850 constructive edits, meaning no spam or vandalism.
2) Must have been active at least 6 weeks.
3) Must not have been previously kickbanned from chat (for a time of 12 hours or more) more than twice
4) Must understand, follow, and enforce all SFW policies while on chat.
5) Must not be biased or make disparaging or demeaning insults towards other Users on chat.
6) The user must be capable of being respectful and civilized to all Users, and must do so.

For:

  • Smash
  • Xi
  • Maryx
  • Jon
  • Makuta
  • Hunter
  • Vegas
  • Tails6000
  • Wrath
  • 09jhero
  • Sonicstar
  • Dandygirl
  • Ryushusupercat
  • Emoferret
  • OmegaEdge
  • Winduct
  • Hedge
  • Metal
  • Flash

Neutral:


Against:

  • ZombieKiller

Step 6: Refinement (3)

Pairings "Fanfiction" Section (Result: Passed)

A lot of pairing articles were marked for deletion or not meeting standards because they lacked this header, including some owned by myself and other active/significant Users on the wiki. This is the single policy that I personally feels could be lifted, or at least rendered optional. I mean Hell, I don't use it myself anyways; why enforce it on other people. So, I wanna see what the community says. Should the "Fanfiction" section be rendered as an optional aspect of the standards for relationship articles, or not?

  • For
    • Kagimizu
    • Knightofchaos
    • NerotheHedgehog
    • Tails6000
    • Doom72
    • Ryushusupercat
    • Scroundernuts
    • Vampire93
    • Smash The Echidna
  • Neutral
    • Hunter1034
    • ULF294
    • Niktendo7
  • Against

Roleplay Standards Revisions & Additions (Result: Passed): Policies suggested by E-113:Xi

A common complaint among some Users (specifically veterans and admins) is that the RP standards are too lax. So to fix that, I'm putting down policies Xi suggested so that they can be voted on and added to the policies. Here they are:

  • Must be directly stated as Freejoin or Invite Only.
  • Must include headings which detail the roleplay's Plot Overview, Participating Users, Characters Involved and the Roleplay itself.
    • Plot Overview must include three or more sentences of information.
  • Must be properly categorized with two or more existing categories.
  • Each user is only permitted to create only three roleplays per month and one roleplay per day.
Roleplay Behavioral Standards
  • Godmodding is strictly prohibited. Whether or not a user is godmodding is up to the discretion of the other participants in the roleplay. Any user found godmodding in a roleplay is to be given one warning before being expelled from the Roleplay entirely. Godmodding includes, but is not limited to:
    • A character being able to use techniques/abilities that he/she would logically have no access to.
    • Autohitting: having your character's attack hit while the controller of the defending character has no say in the matter.
    • A character knowing information that he/she should not logically know.
    • A character inexplicably having in his/her possession plot-related/plot-derailing items. Example: the Chaos Emeralds.
    • A character taking no damage from attacks, or being able to inexplicably dodge any attack directed at him/her.
  • The direction of the roleplay's plot is up to the creator of the roleplay. Users are not permitted to alter the plot of the roleplay to go against the creator's intentions.
  • Any character who logically has a significantly higher power/skill level than most is not allowed within roleplays that mostly involve combat, unless they are directly related to the plot of the roleplay. Such character make the experience unfair for others, and should remain out of said roleplays in respect to fellow users.
  • For
    • Smash The Echidna
    • NerotheHedgehog
    • Shadow-flare
    • Knightofchaos
    • E-113:Xi
    • Scroundernuts
  • Neutral
  • Against
    • Sonicfan919

Construction Standards Revision (Result: Passed)

Construction Article Standards- Page

"An article under construction must have at a least paragraph worth of information in the article. This can be spread apart through the article in the form of at least one sentence per the minimum three headers required, or placed under one header in the form of a complete paragraph."

A few people have complained about the "Under Construction" standards being too laxed, so this is a first step towards fixing that. This requires Users to place at least some information in the article, but allows them the flexibility to do so in a way that best suits their capabilities. For example, if you aren't able to or have difficulty determining a character's personality and/or history, you can at least fill out the Abilities section, to show you have some sort of idea for your character.

For:

  • Hunter1034
  • E-113: Xi
  • Shadow-Flare
  • Smash The Echidna
  • Flashfire212
  • Exodvs

Neutral:


Against:


Construction Article Standards- Infobox

"An Infobox must have at least four sections filled out, and (should the template include it) the section that displays who the original creator is."

Like the aforementioned revisions for articles, this revision suggestion is designed so that people can prove they are at least willing and able to work on the article. As these policies refer to articles that are incomplete, the requirements are less compared to full page standards.

For:

  • Hunter1034
  • E-113: Xi
  • Shadow-Flare
  • Smash The Echidna
  • Flashfire212
  • Exodvs

Neutral:


Against:


Construction Article Standards- Protection

  • If an article is marked as Under Construction, the owner must have at least three other articles that meet full page standards for the article to be left untouched, and said article must meet Construction standards. If the owner owns no articles that meet full Page standards, then they are given three weeks to make it so at least three articles meet full page standards.
  • If an article does not meet Construction Standards but the owner owns three articles that do meet full page standards, they are given the standard 3-5 day reprieve to edit the article to meet said standards.
  • If the owner of an article owns less than three articles, none of which meet full page standards, they are given two weeks to edit said articles to full page standards.
One of the biggest complaints is that the {{Construction}} template works as a permanent barrier to prevent deletion; meet the minimum standard and your article is fine and dandy indefinitely. With this, for a person's article to be completely safe they must have prior history of bringing their articles to completion, which acts as proof saying "hey, it might take a while, but I've edited my articles to completion before, and sooner or later I'll do it again with this one". This prevents rookie Users from slacking off on their articles, while at the same time it avoids punishing people who have large amounts of articles (at least some of which have quality) who may or may not be able to meet the Standards otherwise. If a person doesn't have many articles, they are given the opportunity to work on at least three of them with a week each; plenty of time to meet full standards.


For:

  • Hunter1034
  • Shadow-Flare
  • Smash The Echidna
  • Flashfire212
  • Exodvs

Neutral:


Against:

  • E-113: Xi

Wiki Chat Minimum Edit Requirement (Suggested by ULF294; Vetoed) =

It has been suggested that in order to prevent trolls from entering the wiki chat and causing trouble, there should be a minimum edit requirement before being permitted on the wiki chat. SFW's sister wiki Sonic News Network has a similar rule, requiring a 100 edit minimum. The current minimum edit requirement suggested is: 50

For:

  • ULF94
  • Doom72

Neutral:

  • TDlfan93
  • Smash The Echidna
  • Precursor Daxter!
  • Tenshibara

Against:

  • Gamedezyner
  • Wh!te$tar
  • TailsKid26
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.