Click Below To Enter a New Report
Collab Log Pruning posted on 30 May 2014 19:13 by ProcyonLotor
Talking in staff chat, general consensus is the Collab Logs are incredibly bloated with low-quality content.
Of these, I'd say that Anomalous Objects and Extranormal Events are the areas of main concern (Bright's List, the only one of comparable size, is locked, last I checked).
This will have to be organized, obviously, but I felt it was a good idea to make a post, as similar suggestions have been agreed on and then forgotten about in the past.
I've made two separate sandboxes, one for each, where adjustments can be made once we set up a system.
This is Rewrite's Jurisdiction (mea culpa), and has been passed over to Cryo.
Click to edit: Collab Log Pruning (Updated on 30 May 2014 19:43 by ProcyonLotor)
Pages Needing More Concrit posted on 12 Jan 2014 23:13 by Pig_catapult
http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-1706 is currently at -24 as of my writing, but only has 7 comments and very little in the way of criticism. ~Pig_catapult
Click to edit: Pages Needing More Concrit (Updated on 12 Jan 2014 23:13 by Pig_catapult)
Deletion Votes posted on 11 Jan 2014 19:51 by Communism will win
I feel that, in order to ensure that every piece gets enough criticism, we should start exercising our ability to vote against deletion in cases where we judge that a piece hasn't gotten enough critical attention and/or this team hasn't sent someone in to provide staff critique.
Any questions/comments/concerns, edit them in.
(from Eric H.) An idea: Deletion votes should be started by a member of the Site Criticism Team, and not started until the page has gotten enough critique. We should decide on what "enough" means. Or: If other Staff are going to start deletion votes, they need to be aware of that standard, and also make sure the article has been reviewed by someone on this Team.
This way, we don't go back and forth, undoing each others deletion votes.
(from TroyL) Just a quick note: I don't like the idea of only the Site Criticism team starting deletion votes, since voting on deletion (and thereby, starting the votes) is considered a universal staff right. I do believe that Eric has the germ of a good idea here, though, and that simple staff courtesy could be extended to things which haven't gotten critical attention. Otherwise, I like Scantron's initiative here.
(from Eric H.) Here's another possibility: Let the voting take place as it does now, but when an article has its 4 deletion votes, check the amount of criticism it has gotten. If it needs more, put off the deletion (maybe put one of those timers on it to keep track) and encourage more comments for a day or two. Maybe we need an "Articles the Criticism team needs to look at" page going here in O5, so we can quickly see what needs review?
(from Scantron) I'm worried that if we let pages get to four deletion votes, a mod that's not on the site criticism team will carry out the deletion before we can get to it. I feel like voting against deletion would accomplish the same thing and be somewhat "safer". I do like the "Articles the Criticism team needs to look at" page idea, though. If we make it, we should put it in a report, so that we'll automatically get notifications when it's updated.
(from Pig_catapult) Pages Needing More Concrit has been created.
Click to edit: Deletion Votes (Updated on 12 Jan 2014 23:16 by Pig_catapult)
Site Criticism posted on 08 Jan 2014 05:55 by TroyL
This is the first written report for the Site Criticism Team. To write a report, simply create a new page using the new page template at the top of this tabbed document. All pages created using that tool will be logged here and kept.
Click to edit: Site Criticism (Updated on 08 Jan 2014 05:55 by TroyL)
Site Criticism Team
Team Captain: SoullessSingularity
Junior Staff: None.
Responsibilities: This team will be responsible for tasks related to criticism of articles posted to the site as completed work, such as:
- Respond to posted articles; attempt to ensure no posted article (SCP/Tale) goes without critique from a staff member.
- Keep criticism at an acceptable level of quality by preventing dogpiling and countering bad advice with stronger ideas.
- Report continued criticism policy violations to the Disciplinary Team.
- Assist the Rewrite Team by giving suggestions for improvement on articles that could use it.
- Maintain How To Write An SCP in conjunction with the other criticism team.
- Propose changes to other existing guides or documentation as necessary, particularly the Criticism Policy.
We endeavor to provide useful, helpful criticism in order to help writers improve their projects on the site.
This is our mission statement and it is important that this is kept in mind in every member. What will be posted on this page are responsibilities as well as useful links.
Members of this team are expected to:
1. Endeavor to accomplish at least 2 reviews per week, with more active members strongly encouraged to set higher goals for themselves. Priority will go to new articles and articles currently under review.
2. Provide occasional feedback to critiques. This is most recommended to be done through PM or with a reply stating agreement and reasons to agree. It is also important to correct when someone else isn't critiquing well.
Members of this team are recommended to:
1. Set goals for themselves based on activity level.
2. Report to a discipline team member if a user is continuously out of line.
3. Regularly visit the official channel and discuss topics as necessary.
4. Provide feedback/suggestions to the captain as necessary.
5. Visit, read over, and perhaps use this handy guide on criticism.
Please PM Soulless for suggestions! Use these links to either link to newbies when necessary or as a general addition to critique.
This page was created and is maintained by TroyL. If there are issues with this page, please contact him.