ISSUE: Our definitions across multiple sources are inconsistent when talking about successful pages and greenlighting privileges.
I had been working on a 'How to become a Greenlighter' post for the discord server, and noticed that we have a couple different definitions of what a 'surviving article' on the wiki means, across multiple different places. I wanted to raise this as a discussion here, as we need to unify the different definitions and codify that throughout. Below I'll go through the current issues, before proposing a solution.
Surviving Article/Successful Page
We have a number of definitions for this, but due to confusion around what allows an author to skip the idea critique, we've made clarifications within both the forums and Discord.
- Crit Forums: A successful page is considered so if it is at least 24 hours old and rated +10 or more (https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-10629348/new-draft-forum-policies)
- 19cord: A surviving piece of writing on the site that is stable with a +10 rating after 24h (https://discord.com/channels/877710488673329162/877732938958131229/907813612402405386)
- Author Pages: A 'successful' page is one that remains on the SCP Wiki at above 0 for 24 hours after being posted. (https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/authors-pages)
This disconnect extends further into a larger conflict between what counts as an 'acceptable successful page' for each definition.
What Pages Count?
Between the multiple locations, we have different definitions of what *types* of pages count towards the different landmarks.
- Crit Forums: "One successful mainsite piece" is the requirement to bypass greenlights
- 19cord: "A surviving piece of writing" is the requirement to bypass greenlights
From a critstaff discussion from 2023 (https://discord.com/channels/869208975047016558/1156015598824849460/1156022786066747434), the following pages 'count' towards receiving greenlight abilities:
- Counts: SCPs (-j, -ex, 001 proposals), Tales, GOI formats, Writing process related essays and guides, Site and Hub Pages (see footnote below for clarification)
- Does NOT count: Art pages, Comics, Collaboration Pages, Non-writing related essays and guides, News pages, Resource Pages, Author Pages, Artist Pages, All Import Pages (Component, Theme, fragment etc.), Translations, Contest pages, Staff-use pages
Update/Edit (05/30): Following discussion below and consulting the discussion again, the above list has been edited to include site, hub, supplement, news, resource and other missed page types.
Author pages use completely different definitions towards what types of pages 'count'.
- Author Pages:
- "you've authored or translated from another language"
- "including SCP articles, GoI format documents, Site dossiers, Joke pages, tales, artwork pages, essays and guides"
The reason that this is an issue is the direct conflict between the two sources - the ability to earn greenlighting privileges is inconsistent between the three primary sources. As a review, there are three ways to earn the greenlighting privileges:
- Having Been Featured as a Reviewer in the Reviewers' Spotlight: Consistent between forums and 19cord
- Qualify for an author page/have an entry on the page: This point is not consistent between locations.
- Completion of a Critique Flight: This has split definitions.
- Forum Draft Policy Page: This qualification is not present, instead listing being 'on the butterfly squad roster'.
- 19cord: 'Have completed a crit flight.'
- Crit Flight Forum Posts: 'Officers deemed ready by their commanders will be given greenlighting privileges (if they do not have them already).'
Between the conflicts in how to earn them, as well as with the definition of what counts towards and author page, this gets messy.
Proposed Solution
To resolve these conflicts, we need to update the language between the sources, and redefine what counts towards greenlighting privileges. To this end, I propose the following changes:
1. A Successful (Writing) Page:
We unify the definition of a successful/surviving page, and specify to: "A successful writing page is defined as any SCP (including -j, -ex, 001 proposals etc.), Tale, GOI Format, Writing Process Related Essay and Guide1, or Site and Hub Page2 that is at least 24 hours old and rated +10 or more".
1a. Author Page Requirements:
We update the language on this page to say "If you've authored or translated from another language at least three pages with a rating of +0 or more (including SCP articles, GoI format documents, Site dossiers, Joke pages, tales, artwork pages, essays and guides)"
2. Greenlighting Privileges:
We update/unify the definitions between all sources to three ways that you can earn the ability to greenlight:
- Having Been Featured as a Reviewer in the Reviewers' Spotlight (Unchanged)
- Have Three or More Successful Writing Pages (Using the new definition above)
- Have Successfully Completed a Crit Flight or are a member of the Butterfly Squad/Moth Squad (Unifying the related points, and noting that the greenlighting abilities are given by the crit flight commander at the conclusion of a 'successful flight')
This removes having an author page as a qualifier for greenlighting abilities - based on how critstaff have been handling this on both the Forums and 19cord, it makes sense to update the definition accordingly.
Benefits/Concerns
In terms of the benefits of this wording change, having a consistent definition between all sources will reduce errors or confusion, especially as we head into the summer months.
In terms of concerns, if we made this change, it could potentially cause some hiccups with users who had greenlighting privileges under the old definition, and no longer do (due to having an author page, but not 3 'successful writing pages'). However, this is a relatively minor edge case, and shouldn't have a significant impact.
What Would Need to Be Done?
In terms of scope of work needed to implement these changes, the primary thing will be to update the language in 19cord, the Forum Policy Threads and The Author Pages Repository.
The goal of this discussion is to discuss any potential issues or conflicts that might arise from this change. If anybody has additional issues or thoughts, please mention that below!