Talk:Guides/Review

Extend voting period

.... to 2 weeks, please. --WanYao 07:50, 30 June 2009 (BST)

At the moment we have to work on getting all the current guides through, and because Link and I didn't want to clutter up this page with 30 guides at once, we are currently trying to cycle through them all, about 10 at a time. During this time, I will make sure the notice stays on Template:WikiNews so we make sure the coverage continues. After that, once we hit normality and only new guides start featuring on the Review page, then I agree with two weeks. But given our process at the moment I think one week is apt. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:45, 30 June 2009 (BST)

DDR pretty much summed up my exact thoughts. Not to mention that most voting happens in the first few days anyway, with nearly everything else. Linkthewindow  Talk  08:54, 30 June 2009 (BST)

I think 2 weeks is more important now than later. So the community has as much say as possible on the guides already there. --WanYao 07:28, 1 July 2009 (BST)

Progress count

For you, Link. Better to keep this on the talk page. So, as of 1st of June, we have Guides for Both and Language Guides up for voting. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 15:58, 30 June 2009 (BST)

It's 15 July now and we've got all the zombie ones up. Linkthewindow  Talk  07:18, 15 July 2009 (BST)

Question

This might sound a little stupid, but what about Guides having exactly 50% in favor and 50% against? It currently says "more than 50%" and "less than 50%", but nothing about which way 50% goes. Surely it should have been either "Guides with 50% or more support will be placed on the page" or "Guides with 50% or less support will not be placed on the page". Either way, one of them has to include the chance that the votes could end up tied.

And also, the voting time for some of the guides is over. Can anyone close them and tally the votes? - User:Whitehouse 00:31, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Be bold and close them. No one will hurt you, and I think it's safe to say that we already have an upper level after bieng listed ont he page that we can assume 50% and below means not listed. Thats just me though.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 00:33, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Ok, what about votes which were placed after the one week was up, strike them or leave them? - User:Whitehouse 00:37, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Go ahead and leave them. I'd have made the vote two weeks anyway.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 00:38, 8 July 2009 (BST)

I'm going to go ahead and make it a majority vote - 50% is not successful - for now. Contest it if you like. If it comes to a vote, is 50% successful to implement 50% being unsuccessful or do we need a majority? XD --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 00:53, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Alrighty. How about a 50% vote where one of the votes is from a user that just registered and whose only contribution was to vote against? I believe you know that I am referring to civility vote. Also, can you explain why the language is now being changed and why the hurry to rush this through when the voting section on the Dead has still not been finished? Come on, don't change stuff around to keep out my little guide.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 01:01, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Don't cry because your guide was kept out.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:02, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Blech, oh well, you rushed it through. Bureaucracy wins over civility and common sense again. --_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 01:03, 8 July 2009 (BST)

He didn't rush anything. Don't cry because your guide was kept out. XP --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 01:05, 8 July 2009 (BST)

I didn't rush anything, I wasn't the one who closed it. Hell, I didn't even vote on your guide.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:06, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Ehem, usually you round up, not down. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:13, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Not when you only want the best in there. I feel majority is the way to go. If it isn't up to snuff, fuck it. There are better guides to take it's place.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:14, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Seems like people are more indifferent, really. Is that guide page such a clutter? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:17, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Maybe....--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:18, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Indeed, for comparison, deletion votes with 50% are kept. Har, I have superior logics, I wins, you loses, neener neeener! --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:21, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Yeah, but deletions are permanent and can't be recovered except via cache or something. No one's going to lose anything if a guide doesn't get featured as good. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 01:22, 8 July 2009 (BST)

That's not entirely true, except images, but even that will change if Kevan gets around to updating someday. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:30, 8 July 2009 (BST)

50/50 splits in cases where there is no 2/3rds majority rule always result in the negative outcome by default. Deletions, contentious A/VB cases where every sysop weighs in, [other thing I can't think of] etc. --Cyberbob 01:46, 8 July 2009 (BST)

No, there is no negative or positive outcome. Ties in misconduct, vandalism result in it reverting back to what it originally was, ie. not being vandalism/misconduct and the same with deletions, reverting back to being there (kept). Same would be here, unless Link intended otherwise. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:49, 8 July 2009 (BST)

All of which are exactly the same thing as the negative outcome, durr. --Cyberbob 01:52, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Oh, I see what you mean. You don't mean "bad"... I'm pretty sure it would be the positive outcome, though. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:56, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Whatever. --Cyberbob 01:57, 8 July 2009 (BST)

It just doesn't belong on the Guides Page. It's more like amusing propaganda for a certain attitude towards the game, rather than a real guide. It can still exist somewhere else, eh?--

| T | BALLS! | 01:23 8 July 2009

Hell, modify it and make it like UDWiki:Think_about_the_children. Guide material though? No, not really.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:27, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Thars a place. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:30, 8 July 2009 (BST)

A better place at that. I smell a non-binding community project! :D --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:31, 8 July 2009 (BST)

Ah yes, to clarify, suicide - when I said "you" rushed it through, I was referring to "you" in general, meaning you Vogons. And I was bitching about the way "you" jumped into hyperdrive at the precise moment when the vote was 50/50 so you could crush my heart of gold. It looked something like this skip to 4:57.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 00:46, 9 July 2009 (BST)

But we didn't jump just because it was at 50/50. White house simply asked a few questions and I gave my answers. :( --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 02:00, 9 July 2009 (BST)

AHLG you moronicle, your logic just supports SA. Deletion votes that are 50% are kept because 50% vote is not enough to change it from its current state, which is keeping said image/page on the wiki (as it was before the deletions vote). Same goes here, if you can't get straight majority, your page doesn't go from off the Guides page to on the guides page, it stays off, as it was before the vote. as Deletions. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 02:22, 9 July 2009 (BST)

The guide was already on it, this is here to remove it, same as a deletion vote would be there to remove something. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:27, 9 July 2009 (BST)

By default, the new guides page will have only the successful ones on it. the old guides page doesn't apply. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 02:57, 9 July 2009 (BST)

Not really making sense there, we're removing guides, and adding a couple of sections. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:22, 9 July 2009 (BST)

<Grim s>I'm right.</Grim s> I'll compromise by making Guides a redirect to Category:Guides, since they're basically near duplicate pages, and the category one holds more information. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:38, 9 July 2009 (BST)

What doesn't make sense? Guides that didn't get 51%+ support in voting get removed, and that little reorganization is obvious - "Siege PKer's Guide" does not belong under "Guides for both." --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 18:41, 9 July 2009 (BST)

What? I'm we're not talking about that, we're still talking about whether it 50% is keep or remove, after DDR resurrected this issue for some retarded reason. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:43, 9 July 2009 (BST)

"A guide which has less than or equal to 50% Support will not be placed on the page"
Why are you being so dumb over this one stupid guide? --Cyberbob 19:10, 9 July 2009 (BST)

I am aware of that, seems somewhat contradictory, all the guides were on the page beforehand, unless we're going to pretend that we're starting from scratch, now? Whatever, this conversation was done at whatever. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 19:13, 9 July 2009 (BST)

For all intents and purposes we are starting at scratch because this is the first time guides have ever been voted on so instead of making a whole new page we're just using the framework that's already in place. --Cyberbob 19:15, 9 July 2009 (BST)

Ok. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 19:17, 9 July 2009 (BST)

Indeed - this is Guides Review, and if you look in the history, some of the Guides (a prime example being the one on Civility) were just added on there with no review to begin with or anything. (edit conflicted by Gnome's "ok") --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 19:18, 9 July 2009 (BST)

Sorry I couldn't participate in this further Gnome (was absent), but yes, my retarded reason is that which has now been resolved, thanks to Bob. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 14:49, 11 July 2009 (BST)

Changing it from one to two weeks

Anyone against me changing the period of voting from one to two weeks? Since this will no longer permanently be on the Wikinews, it's probably a good idea to have the guides on this page for longer. Linkthewindow  Talk  07:48, 17 August 2009 (BST)

Just do it. The last two batches of votes lasted that long anyway because no one was around to close them. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 08:35, 17 August 2009 (BST)

Grammar

I am noticing a common grievance expressed by reviewers is the presence of mild to severe grammatical mistakes in nominated guides. To remedy this, I propose we establish an editorial process (once over with spell-check) on guides that pass the vote, in order to fix up any grammatical mistakes that could interfere with the guide's presentation to the community. Thoughts?--~ Red Hawk One ^{Talk | space for lease} 19:00, 2 October 2009 (BST)

Developing Guides? Nip the problem in the bud. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:02, 2 October 2009 (BST)

Really? Nice. I still recommend we spellcheck passed guides, as (unfortunately) not everyone with a good idea will use it, and there's no promise we'll catch every mistake.--~ Red Hawk One ^{Talk | space for lease} 19:08, 2 October 2009 (BST)

Fair enough. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:19, 2 October 2009 (BST)

I'm game for running guides through the proverbial ringer, if you need someone to do the actual grunt work. 22:41, 2 October 2009 (BST)

Meta-Guides

So...what is the policy on guides that focus on a more meta-like topic? I've always wanted to do a how-to guide on zombie propaganda / recruiting, but if it doesn't belong here or no one cares, then I'm not going to waste my time. -MHSstaff 23:36, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

There aren't policies on guides. As long as it has to do with Urban Dead, it can be about metagaming. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:08, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

We haven't had a guide come by that's really focused on the meta-game; regardless, if it's well written, it should pass (just make sure to run it by DG for some review before sending it to the publishers).--~ Red Hawk One ^{Talk | space for lease} 00:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)