Guides/Review

Shortcut:
G/R

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.

Guides:Danger Reports Guide

I wrote this guide in order to fill a spot that I felt was lacking: A comprehensive guide to the Danger Report System used throughout the wiki. The system set up really is quite awesome, and a very useful tool, but all the wiki code you have to look at (and also finding the reports!) can be a bit confusing. In addition, such a guide may intrigue new users who planned to just look at a few newbie guides, and then keep them as members of the wiki. Thanks for reading and voting!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Quinnr (talk • contribs) 22:51, 1 February 2013.

Abstain

• Putting this as an abstain for the moment, but it's more of a comment/suggested changes. A few things:
  • In the first paragraph of "Reading Reports", you should probably mention that no Danger Reports exist for open blocks (streets etc.);
  • When you ask for people to "change the status to "unknown"", you should probably specify a standard at which the status should be changed. The most common one I've seen is if a status is more than two weeks old, but given the lower activity levels on the wiki and ingame, we may want to bump that up to a month;
  • When you describe signing, you may want to include the text [[File:Sign.png]], which prints as , as new users may be unfamiliar with what a "signature button" is;
  • You may want to include a link to User:DangerReport/DangerCenter, which is the main place the reports are collated and give a broader view of statuses in Malton;
  • I would recommend keeping the pronouns consistent, probably all "you" (rather than "one"). Just a stylistic note.

Other than that, great job! If these changes are made, I'll definitely change to Support. And I look forward to linking to this guide in new Project Welcome messages! Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 19:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Guides:Managing Encumbrance (2)

Right, so I wrote this guide last year, took it to Deveoping Guides, got some input, made some changes and then brought it here for review. I then got more input and made more changes but people didn't change their votes so it failed by a very small margin (71% in favor). So here we are again. It also passed Featured Articles review unanimously if that makes a difference. Thanks. ~ _{00:30, 31 August 2012 (UTC)}

Support

1. For If this can be an FA it definitely deserves to be an FG. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 01:39, 31 August 2012 (BST)
2. Yes, please. -MHSstaff 04:26, 31 August 2012 (BST)
3. Author vote (why did I not do this last time). ~ _{05:20, 31 August 2012 (UTC)}
4. I already voted for last time. -- Spiderzed█ 06:26, 31 August 2012 (BST)
5. Looks really helpful and insightful.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 14:08, 31 August 2012 (BST)
6. Ridiculous. For --I'm not the Ross UDWiki needs, I'm the Ross it deserves. 15:05, 31 August 2012 (BST)

Abstain

Passed review. ~ _{06:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)}

Recent Nominations

Guides:Establishing a Safehouse

Don't think I'll ever be used to this change. Anyway since I want this off orphaned pages I might as well suggest it here for some sort of review as an excuse to link it. --Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 06:28, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Guides/New_Player's_Guide

I haven't had any feedback in discussion, so here goes!

I think that the Urban Dead interface is not that confusing, but new players can have trouble figuring out good strategies. I don't want new players to get frustrated by wasted AP (that seem to take forever to recharge), or struggling for a long time to get XP for those first few skills. This guide aims to offer new players everything they need if they don't want the fun of figuring it out for themselves, with explanations organized by concise bullet points so they don't get confused by excessive information.

Also, a lot of players get soured on playing as a zombie due to dying early on without much XP and being pretty much useless until they are revived. I offer a little encouragement to try it in the proper context, hoping to grow tomorrow's crop of zombies. You'll notice right now there's a real population shortage, only 30% zombies including the Mrh-cows, so I hope you don't mind a pro-zombie player posting! -Smiles 01:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Against

1. It's a well written guide, but all of this is already covered in swier's First Day in Malton guide among others. Check out Category:Guides for a list of all guides. I'm sure this guide has merit on its own but not enough to be considered featured. Perhaps if you spruce it up and include something not found in other guides, you can bring it back for review. ~ _{15:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)}

   Thank you! Swier's guide focuses largely on explaining mechanics, is more general, and is longer. My goal for this guide is definitely not to present any unique information, it is to provide a concise (8 steps, really) "walkthrough" (a clearly designated strategy that is highly effective for leveling). I hope, with improvements, I can get a walkthrough added to Guides! -Smiles 01:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

2. Not much new information. Poorly formatted and structured (no true section headers, no internal links, solely running text). This is going to need some polish, and even then, it needs to compete with a lot of guides with a similar focus like First Day in Malton or Guides:Harmanz. I'd recommend you to withdraw this for now and go to Developing Guides first. There more experienced users like me could at least help you to get it properly formatted. -- Spiderzed█ 15:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

   It is in Developing Guides, that's what I meant by no feedback yet. Now it's getting attention, hooray! This is my first webpage thingy and internal links are a very good idea, thank you. That table of contents/links Swier's has is pretty snazzy. My original goal was to make it concise enough that headers and table of contents were unnecessary, but that's probably not practical, and I should at least incorporate a table of contents. -Smiles 01:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

With zero fors and two againsts, the guide has been rejected. -- Spiderzed█ 23:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Guides:AP Efficiency

Here we go. --Penguinpyro 14:04, 21 April 2011 (BST)

Against

1. Needs much work still.

   Guides shouldn't suggest Extensions as a primary part of the guide. Make a separate section for extensions that improve AP Efficiency.

   Guides shouldn't suggest variant play styles to further primary play styles. Make a section for those and refer to them there.

   Keep in mind most players play as they lay.

   Until some of these things make more sense, it has been linked up, and it actually presents itself in a manner that's easy to follow I'm gonna say it should probably go back to the drawing board. --Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 14:25, 21 April 2011 (BST)

2. Cleaning Defiled Graffiti doesn't even cost AP... Kevan goes out of his way to suck Pro-Survivor dick and you guys don't even notice.--
   
   | T | BALLS! | 15:07 21 April 2011(UTC)

   And I quote from my guide-" Cleaning bloodstains or defiled graffiti is a last priority - (Currently, cleaning defiled graffiti takes no AP, but that may change in the future) As mentioned above, there is no place for hypochondria in the zombie apocalypse. Removing bloodstains and graffiti defiling is pretty damn useless on the grand scale of things." Congrats, ZL, you've win a prize for reading comp.--Penguinpyro 19:51, 21 April 2011 (BST)

   Yeah I didn't even get that far, because I comprehended much earlier...that this guide blows goats. I see you've already modified your little opening list so...you're welcome.--

   

   | T | BALLS! | 20:13 21 April 2011(UTC)

   How awesome! I've always wanted to write a guide that blows goats despite being digital. Does it blow digi-goats?--Penguinpyro 20:32, 21 April 2011 (BST)

3. Right. You've completely missed out on the benefits of zombies sleeping in dark buildings which is triply useful. No mention of combat reviving, and youve failed to cover the most ap efficient thing a survivor can do, namely run a RP. --Rosslessness 20:14, 21 April 2011 (BST)

   Added RP and CRing, but I don't really get the dark buildings deal. Can you explain it to me?--Penguinpyro 20:34, 21 April 2011 (BST)

   A zombie in a dark building is less likely to be headshot, so you save ap. In addition to this a zombie in a dark building cannot be dumped or even seen as a corpse until the building is powered, so you're less likely to be removed unless by concerted effort. Finally, even combat revives are less effective in the dark.--Rosslessness 20:46, 21 April 2011 (BST)

   Noted and added. --Penguinpyro 21:00, 21 April 2011 (BST)

   I think you've missed the point of opening a rp. Its about increasing survivor ap.--Rosslessness 21:15, 21 April 2011 (BST)

   Ohhhhh, I get it now.--Penguinpyro 21:18, 21 April 2011 (BST)

   Also stylistically, Id put basic tips first, you even start the topic with "first things first." Put that at the top. --Rosslessness 13:13, 22 April 2011 (BST)

Abstain

With zero for votes and three againsts, the guide has been rejected. Feel free to resubmit after overhauling it. -- Spiderzed█ 03:45, 7 May 2011 (BST)

Guides:Managing Encumbrance

Thanks. ~ _{05:38, 26 March 2011}

Support

1. Formatting could use some tweaking- there are too many headers here, which makes the guide a bit intimidating. Other than that, I can find nothing wrong with it- it's thorough, clear and interesting. Great work, Vapor. --Penguinpyro 09:48, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
2. Not bad. Would agree there may be too many headings - and the idea of 'Base 8, Base 10, etc' was confusing at first and could be made a little clearer. Yes there's a little work that could be done to it but these are small edits for what seems to be a good guide. --Neko 18:22, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
3. Thorougly done. Smyg 18:27, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
4. Nice. I like that you included the section on Zombies as well. Probably would have been overlooked by most.--
   
   | T | BALLS! | 23:04 26 March 2011(UTC)
5. Had nearly forgotten to vote. So, yeah, another good example of what Developing Guides can accomplish in polishing a guide. -- Spiderzed▋ 13:50, 30 March 2011 (BST)

   I wish I had gotten a bit more feedback on Developing Guides actually. Most of the feedback I've received is either on the guide talk page while I was working on it and here on Guides/Review. I chalk it up to few people with DG on their watchlist. What's the policy of making changes to a guide while it is up on review by the way. I need to make some changes but obviously it could null some votes if I did so. See below and the talk page. I pretty much need to do an overhaul on the section headers. ~ _{14:33, 30 March 2011}

   Minor alterations based on G/R input have often been done (as here or here) and have never led to nullifying. And yeah, DG is sadly a bit underused. -- Spiderzed▋ 14:41, 30 March 2011 (BST)

   I've made adjustments. I suppose they could be considered minor. I didn't change any of the content, just the presentation. Hopefully makes it easier to read. ~ _{18:51, 30 March 2011}

Against

1. Against, for formatting and clarity. It's interesting, well researched, and while it makes some suggestions that I don't agree with (like advising survivors against carrying "just in case" items like a tool box) I mostly like the basic content. Many sections could be merged or substantially simplified, though, and that would make it a lot easier- and more pleasant- to read and understand. I'll leave some specific examples on the guide's talk page. --FT 15:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

   Thanks for providing such thorough input. I will be implementing some of your suggestions. ~ _{20:43, 26 March 2011}

2. The tables are confusing and get redundant quickly. There's a mention that base encumberence should be no more than 22%, but no explanation of why, and no mention of what might be said base encumberance, which is a pretty big gap for an encumberance guide. It feels like it's still being written.--Ryvyoli ^{Y R} 01:56, 3 April 2011 (BST)

Abstain

With an approval rate of ~71%, this guide has been successfully reviewed. -- Spiderzed▋ 13:37, 10 April 2011 (BST)

Please check the archive for older nominations