UDWiki talk:Administration/Policy Discussion/SD Criterion 12 Change

Discussion

I support it Completely. --Rogue 08:50, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Please feel free to discuss and add your input in those details that I mentioned on the policy text. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 01:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The category confirmed groups is too hard to enforce... make it that if a group page has had 250+ edits then it has to go through the deletions page for voting, perhaps? Something easy to confirm anyway -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 00:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

A set requisite of edits on the wiki page of the groups is workable and easy to enforce, yet is not a certain signal of activity or inactivity of said groups. Let's take as an example the Lime Brigade: No one doubts it's a confirmed group, but yet they have less than 50 edits on their page: if they went inactive right now they will deserve SD? Yet, as a young group, did they accomplish enough to qualify for Historical status in everyone's mind? I realize too that the confirmed groups category is hard to enforce, so if there's another, better way to affirm that a group was real and not a 2 days dream from an annonimus user, then I'm all ears. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 01:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, well they are only 2 months old, but I see the point. It's just that adding your page to a category is such a transient thing. My group was confirmed for a fair while, but as soon as the numbers dropped below the stats page cut off, we took ourselves off the confirmed groups category. I just don't think there's any perfect way to categorise what groups should be kept. It comes down to judgment calls. Just as long as we've got a list of valid reasons to keep a worthy group, that should be enough. So put up a list that includes both the confirmed groups, and page edits. People can still nominate groups, but it just gives "keep"'ers an objective reason for their votes -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 23:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok then. So, a list would include, IMHO:

• Appearance on the stats page.
• 250 or more edits made on the group's page.
• Edits made on the group's page by more than 10 different users, not counting vandalism and revertions.

If any of these criterion is met, any user can request on Category talk:Confirmed Groups for the category's tag to be added on the group's page. The request will then be reviewed by a Sysop and if the criterion claimed to be met is really met then the afformentioned process will be carried on and and the group's name will be added to a special page that will keep record of legitimate succesful attempts to obtain the tag (something like A/VD); if not the request will be dropped. Any number of requests can be made provided that the group's page isn't deleted at the time, and there's at least a month span from a request to another.

It's that ok? --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 04:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if anyone noted it, but the policy was changed and I would like to hear concerns about it. If I don't hear anything in a couple of days this will go to voting. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 05:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I would rather have those criterion brought up at the time of the speedydelete request, rather than make another administrative page/duty. If a group is nominated for A/SD, then anyone who thinks they are worthy of keeping can justify their keep vote by stating one of the above... perhaps once it is confirmed on A/SD, then that could be what triggers the addition of the confirmed group category -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 11:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

It could work that way too, BUT a record should be kept in order to differentiate between those that were added by valid reasons and those that are added to the category by someone's whim (confirmed groups will be a LOT, it would be hard to keep record of legitimate ones without a log). In fact, the only difference would be that with my changes groups can achieve confirmed status in advance and with yours it will only be achieved after they appear on SD, that is a rather risky last instance that could work but for some reason I don't like. The idea of having the possibility of voting "Keep - the group complies with criterion x of the confirmed group category --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 07:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)" is a good one tough. It will be added. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 07:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Time has passed an I think this is rather complete. I'll corect the last details and then send it to voting. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 17:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I Think this is a great Idea--Padfu-Zomfu 01:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)