Please remember that WiKirby contains spoilers, which you read at your own risk! See our general disclaimer for details.

WiKirby:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From WiKirby, your independent source of Kirby knowledge.
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Made a last-minute vote.)
Line 17: Line 17:
#I support. This sounds like a reasonable idea. Pages can be complete and be worthy of being marked as 'Good' and be under 2000 bytes. They can also be 'Good' even if their subpages are not. -- {{User:MetaDragon/sig}} 02:55, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
#I support. This sounds like a reasonable idea. Pages can be complete and be worthy of being marked as 'Good' and be under 2000 bytes. They can also be 'Good' even if their subpages are not. -- {{User:MetaDragon/sig}} 02:55, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
#As said by others above, if an article covers all information that can be added without question it deserves to be granted ''good'' status. Unnecesarily bloating pages with half-correct information to reach 2000 bytes only hurts the credibility of the wiki. For subpages, those often are only relatively minor in general and don't need to affect the main pages in a negative way. Support all the way. [[User:Infinite Possibilities|Infinite Possibilities]] ([[User talk:Infinite Possibilities|talk]]) 08:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
#As said by others above, if an article covers all information that can be added without question it deserves to be granted ''good'' status. Unnecesarily bloating pages with half-correct information to reach 2000 bytes only hurts the credibility of the wiki. For subpages, those often are only relatively minor in general and don't need to affect the main pages in a negative way. Support all the way. [[User:Infinite Possibilities|Infinite Possibilities]] ([[User talk:Infinite Possibilities|talk]]) 08:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
#The Good status is just for pages that are complete. The 2,000 byte limit just encouraged padding for small pages. {{User:Obsessive Mario Fan/sig}} 17:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
{{Oppose}}
{{Oppose}}
{{Neutral}}
{{Neutral}}

Revision as of 17:54, 29 March 2021


Your opinions matter!

Welcome to the Proposals page. Here, WiKirby's editors may propose changes to the way the wiki operates, including how to handle certain categories of content, quality standards, or even just making aesthetic suggestions. Any user who has Autopatrol status or above may make a proposal or vote on one, and after two weeks of voting, if it passes, it will be incorporated into policy. Please see below for the specifics on how to make and/or vote on a proposal.

How to make a proposal

Please use one of the following templates to make a new proposal:

Single vote: This is for proposals which only propose a single change to the wiki.

==(insert proposal here) (insert date here)==
(insert details of proposal here and sign with ~~~~)
{{Support}}
{{Oppose}}
{{Neutral}}

===Discussion===

{{clear}}

Multi-option vote: This is for proposals which include many possible changes to a particular element of policy. One option should always be to keep things as they were. It is recommended that no more than 8 options are given in a single proposal, including the "no change" option.

==(insert proposal here) (insert date here)==
(insert details of proposal here and sign with ~~~~)
{{Option|1|(option title 1)}}
{{Option|2|(option title 2)}}
{{Option|3|(option title 3)}}
{{Option|etc.|(option title etc.)}}
{{Neutral}}

===Discussion===

{{clear}}

Multi-facet vote: This is for proposals which want to make several smaller changes to a single element of policy (for instance, making several changes to how the main page looks). Each change needs to be voted up or down individually. There should not be more than 5 parts to a proposal like this. This type of proposal should not be made without approval from wiki administration.

==(insert proposal here) (insert date here)==
(insert summary of proposal here and sign with ~~~~)
===Change 1===
(insert details here)
{{Support}}
{{Oppose}}
{{Neutral}}
====Change 1 discussion====

===Change 2===
(insert details here)
{{Support}}
{{Oppose}}
{{Neutral}}
====Change 2 discussion====

===Change 3===
(insert details here)
{{Support}}
{{Oppose}}
{{Neutral}}
====Change 3 discussion====

etc.

{{clear}}

Once a proposal is made, the voting period begins (see voting regulations below). Voting period for a proposal ends two weeks after it starts, at 23:59:59 UTC on the 14th full day of voting. An administrator can veto a proposal at any time, although such action should always be justifiable and agreed upon by multiple admins. Administrators should not use this right to add more weight to their own opinions.

Restrictions

Users may propose many different changes or additions to the wiki. The following things, however, may not be voted on:

  1. Proposals which target specific users (such as bestowing or removing ranks or rights).
  2. Proposals which violate the law, as specified in the general content policy.
  3. Proposals which seek to overturn a recently (within the last 8 weeks (or 56 days)) approved proposal.
  4. Re-submitted proposals which were recently (within the last 8 weeks (or 56 days)) rejected, and which have not been significantly altered.

Current Proposals

Small adjustments to Good page criteria (March 15th, 2021 - March 29th, 2021)

So, it was briefly discussed on the Discord that some adjustments should be made to the criteria for deeming an article Good in order to accommodate pages covering entities that only appear once in the series and/or have little to be said about them. On behalf of those in that discussion channel, I propose the following changes to the Good articles criteria on the Featured content policy as follows:

  • Minimum number of bytes for a page to be Good to be reduced from 2,000 to 1,000 (assuming the page is otherwise complete).
  • Status of subpages to no longer be a factor in determining whether the main article is deemed Good or not.

This will be a relatively minor change to the policy, but it should allow many short but complete pages on our wiki to receive the Good mark, as well as sparing the blushes of many of our larger complete pages that have incomplete gallery sub-pages. What say you all? --Samwell (talk) 01:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Support
  1. Definite support. The main thing about a good article is that it should only have to be the best it can feasibly be. If the article's about a minor subject that can't reach 2,000 bytes, but it's still otherwise a fully fleshed-out article, that shouldn't have to hold it back. We definitely want as much detail as possible, but we don't want to encourage padding, either. StrawberryChan (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
  2. I agree. Some pages are fully completed but still under 2000 bytes. And a page can be good without it's subpages being so. --kirb 01:56, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
  3. Agreed, not all short pages are necessarily bad (an example that comes to mind is most of the K&TAM rooms). Removing the subpage requirement doesn't hurt either. ---PinkYoshiFan 11:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
  4. Actually I think we should remove the bytes requirement, which seems unnecessary IMO and can be an inaccurate metric for completeness (who knows, maybe someone suddenly knew of a way to abstract the content of a 1000-byte good article to a template, shrinking the article down to like 900 bytes. Should we demote the article just because someone knew of a better way to encode an article?), and let the patroller+ judge whether an article is complete enough and of good quality. But this is a good start. As said by others already, there are articles that are short but can't be expanded because it's already complete. --pandakekok9 (poyo) 15:34, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
  5. I support. This sounds like a reasonable idea. Pages can be complete and be worthy of being marked as 'Good' and be under 2000 bytes. They can also be 'Good' even if their subpages are not. -- Jellytost (talk) 02:55, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
  6. As said by others above, if an article covers all information that can be added without question it deserves to be granted good status. Unnecesarily bloating pages with half-correct information to reach 2000 bytes only hurts the credibility of the wiki. For subpages, those often are only relatively minor in general and don't need to affect the main pages in a negative way. Support all the way. Infinite Possibilities (talk) 08:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
  7. The Good status is just for pages that are complete. The 2,000 byte limit just encouraged padding for small pages. --DeepFriedCabbage 17:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral

Discussion

Proposal Archive

Successful proposals
Failed proposals

KSA Parasol Waddle Dee Pause Screen Artwork.png