Current project: Nuking updating the guides

Required Guides:

Most recent edits:

  • 5 days ago - Adding the chat/site permanent ban policy
  • 71 days ago - Changing ban escalations
  • 137 days ago - Added link to donation policy

tretter's thoughts:

I kinda feel we need to clear up some of the language in the rules, particularly with the text at the top of the page that lists several actions that will not result in a ban. However, these two points kinda give me pause: Writing shitty SCPs and Having an unpopular opinion.

First, I feel that using profane language in this document detracts from the seriousness and credibility of the page, so I feel we should change "writing shitty SCPs" to "writing bad SCPs". Second, I feel we definitely do ban people for having unpopular opinions, especially as we never explain what "unpopular" means. For example, if we banned someone for being homophobic, that technically is an unpopular opinion within this community. I don't know how it could be reworded though.

I'd honestly just move that entire section down to the banning policy. That way the very first thing on the page are the rules themselves. I also feel we should expand the rules somewhat. The first three rules in behavior, feel woefully short and don't properly address a number of things that they should. As an example, "Arguments and Maturity" only talks about disagreeing with actions of other members and staff, but there isn't anything talking about acting respectfully or hate speech (Which is something I feel we should specifically mention).

It's all fine and good to have vague rules, but we should still try to tighten them up a little bit. I also want to note that I'm not the hugest fan of having all of our rules spread throughout various guides and threads. Some rules for the draft forums are on a thread on the draft forums. Some guidelines and "rules" (for lack of a better term) are gone over in the Guide for Newbies, and I would like to see them moved here, or at least re-iterated here.

Procy has also mentioned that it may be beneficial to cut down on the content in the Guide for Newbies and the FAQ and combine it all into a single page, both to reduce clutter, but also for user accessibility so they aren't required to read a half dozen pages and guides. I support this sentiment and would be willing to help with or action this project myself.

Most recent edits:

  • (53 days ago) Added explicit mention of punishment when messing with Helen's pronoun function
  • (58 days ago) Cleared up the language and formatting on the instructions for registering a nick to prevent confusion.
  • (68 days ago) Added Weryl as Half-op
  • (88 days ago) Added a link to the list of Helen's commands.
  • (98 days ago) Updated list of all roles and staff on the ops list.
  • (112 days ago) Re-instated Mibbit as the in-page client.

tretter's thoughts:

I don't see anything wrong with this page, the Ops do a good job keeping this page updated and relevant. And in all honesty, I kind of see this as the level of editing and updating that we should strive for with all staff pages.

Most recent edits:

  • (384 days ago) Changed the Series numbers to reflect the inclusion of Series 4
  • (793 days ago) Clarified language concerning the 24-hour grace period articles have.

tretter's thoughts:

There are a few things that I think we should reevalute for the guide, particularly this bit from the Standard Process section:

If an author requests a stay of deletion to make edits or rewrite a page, these may be granted.

I have never seen this allowance given, as usually the authors are directed to use the sandbox and try again. If this statement is for old articles, I still feel that this can be re-stated that old articles can be given the in-rewrite tag to save them from deletion.

Secondly, it should be stated somewhere on the page that classical articles will be placed under the in-rewrite tag and are exempt from being deleted while they are in the process of being rewritten.

Other than that, this guide seems fine. It is clearly written and doesn't contain any profane or unprofessional language.

Most recent edits:

  • (3 days ago) Updated policy to reflect our change to the amnesic/amnestic policy.
  • (107 days ago) Changed link from sandbox 2 to sandbox 3.
  • (347 days ago) Updated from Series 3 to Series 4

tretter's thoughts:

There are a bunch of answers that need updating or should be straight up removed:

Most Recent Edits:

  • The last update to the page that explicitly added rule-changing content was in april of 2017, when a line was added to specify that users shouldn't link to rule breaking content in their profile pictures or profiles.

tretter's thoughts:

Overall, this guide looks very good. However, I do have some thoughts on the "Tips for Writing" tab.

In the first bullet on this tab, "RTFM", it lists the Cliche Guide, a satirical essay that lists all the cliches for SCPs that this community has written a lot of. However, like the Guide for Newbies points out. It's old and outdated, even when this guide was re-written. And because of that, I think the mention should be removed.

The second bullet, "Search", could use some updating as well. Firstly, I'd suggesting adding a link to the site generated recommended reading thread so people can quickly look through and see if their idea shows up there. Additionally, I'd add a link here to the Ideas and Brainstorming subforum as that is another good way to see whether an SCP with someone's idea already exists and how to differentiate their ideas from stuff already on the wiki.

Additionally, I'd add a new bullet point between "Search" and "Announce" that briefly covers the the drafting process and includes a link to the sandbox and the draft/critique subforum. The last bullet is otherwise fine.

As for the rest of the tab, I would add an explicit mention of the sandbox within the first sentence of the second section of this tab. Additionally, I'd remove the mention of Pastebin as a place to put SCP drafts so it's only the sandbox. Because while pastebin is good for little bits of text and some tales and things like that, not being able to practice with wikidot formatting is going to cause more problems than it will help.

Most recent edits:

  • Other than minor updates to language, numbers, links, and some minor policy changes, no major changes have been made to the page since June of 2015, which itself was just to clarify that crosslinking was allowed.

tretter's thoughts:

I'm going to go through this on a tab by tab basis.