Guides/Review

Shortcut:
GR

This page is for the community review of new guides. This is so the Guides page does not get filled up with nonsensical guides (like it was at one point,) and that there is a minimum standard of quality on the Guides page. Guides which pass this review have a template added to the page ({{GuideReviewed}}) and featured guides will have {{FeaturedGuide}} added to the page. Guides which do not pass a community review will not be added to the Guides page, but may still carry [[Category:Guides]]. This is so that guides that are deemed good and worthy by the community are easily findable by newer players, while less accurate guides can still be found, but aren't presented as prominently.

Guides are reviewed through a voting process. There are three eligible votes:

• Support - to indicate support for the guide's inclusion on the page
• Abstain - to not formally vote, but still offer input on the discussion
• Against - to indicate disapproval for the guide's inclusion on the page

After two weeks, the votes will be tallied.

• A guide which has more than 75% Support will be placed at a "Featured Guides" section at the top of the guides page
• A guide which has more than 50% Support will be placed on the page, in the appropriate section (survivor, zombie, or player killer.)
• A guide which has less than or equal to 50% Support will not be placed on the page
• Guides which don't attract any votes will not be placed on the page

General criteria which should be considered before a guide is included on the page are:

1. Formatting - There must be no obvious formatting errors in the text. The guide must work in all major browsers
2. Accuracy - The guide must be accurate
3. Clarity - The guide must be easy to read, with no obvious spelling or grammar errors.

If you are writing a guide and want feedback before taking it to review, please read the Developing Guides page.

Please note that neutrality and civility are not requirements.

Voting

Please add {{Guidesvoting}} on the guide before nominating it. Please inform the author if they are still active and can easily be found.

Shameless advertising for this discussion Linkthewindow  Talk  14:20, 19 July 2009 (BST)

There are no guides currently under voting.

Recent Nominations

The Feral Movement

- DevOhm 13:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

For

1. Author vote. Hope it reads well. - DevOhm 13:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
2. For it. It's a pretty extensive list of the possibilities of in-game communication and coordination of zombies.--Spiderzed 14:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
3. Well-written and helpful, but it's more of a group page than a guide. I figure it'll help new players though, so I'm voting for. 16:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
4. More of a policy than a guide. But lots of effort and some good advice. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
5. The information presented is well-written and somewhat origional. It does come across at times more like a group than a guide, but aside from that one easily-fixable problem it is a good guide.--~ Red Hawk One ^{Talk | space for lease} 19:52, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

   Any recommendations for making it less group-ish? I tried to do that with the disclaimer section at the beginning. - DevOhm 00:01, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

   Well, dump the group infobox for one. It gives the page a very strong 'group' vibe. Also perhaps suggest using the group field of the profile for a link to the wiki article, instead of just the name, as that says group too. 00:38, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

   Most of the article is fine; however, certain sections, such as 'Disclaimer," "Group Affiliation," and "The Feral Movement should be rewritten to shift the focus from the "group" (which should at best be an aside suggestion/endorsement) and more towards the concept. As Misanthropy suggested, you should either drop the groupbox, or create a custom model that doesn't use all the "group" variables.--~ Red Hawk One ^{Talk | space for lease} 02:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

   You know, having "tiny.cc/feral" as the group tag is a really great idea. Combining the group tag function with the wiki link is a great way to condense information even further. When the voting is up I'll definitely fold that idea into the guide. - DevOhm 06:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

6. Wonderfully written! A very good guide for a feral!!--Zaphord 00:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Against

1. Against, but only just. It's a well written guide at the bottom, but we cannot forget that it is indeed a group page. --Haliman - Talk 17:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

   I figured that a precedent for this sort of thing was set with X:00, which was pretty group-like at first. - DevOhm 00:01, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

2. Against interesting read but is it a guide? --C Whitty 00:03, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
3. Only barely against it, just because it does still read like a group page. Honestly, I'd take it to Developing Guides since it is a perfectly usable guide, but just needs to be de-groupified a bit. Give it a few days over there to polish it up, then bring it back here afterwards, I think. —Aichon— 00:56, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
4. As Aichon. A little polish and less group-ish and I'm 100% behind this guide. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 10:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
5. Against. Remove mentions of setting group affiliation and the stats page so it feels less like a group page and more like a guide to a style of feral life. --Papa Johnny 14:50, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Abstain

Please check the archive for older nominations