O4 Mirror: https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-16979017/discussion-archived-pages-revisit
What is this?
This is a discussion thread regarding handling ARCs through the Rewrite Sub-team, and what we need to do to readjust the -ARC category.
The ARC category has long been an outlier; some articles have been archived for clear historical purposes, while others languish in the negatives, despite having been rewritten successfully. From discussions within staff, there has been a general sentiment that, yes, while there are a handful of articles that we do want to preserve for archival and/or historical reasons, that does not apply to each article listed as an ARC.
In addition, ARCs were intended to be rewritten, as per the Rewrite Guide, it says:
Q.) Can I rewrite an -ARC article?
A.) Sure! In that case, once the rewrite gets to a high enough rating, the original will be unlisted!
However, none of the -ARCs have been tagged as 'rewritable', nor does it seem like we want to unlist some of the highly rated or important articles; unfortunately, due to the tangled web of policy, it has been difficult to find any other context for this rule. As such, addressing the -ARC problem is a multi-layered conversation.
Why is this an issue?
Currently, we do not allow any new articles to be archived. While staff maintains the ability to archive an article, the general sentiment is that we should be trying to handle the -ARCs and reduce how many are within that category, rather than add more to them. The goal is not to remove the category, rather, to ensure that only works that are 'archived' are done so for a historical or archival purpose.
However, due to the complexity, and confusion regarding which staff team has purview over -ARCs, progress has slowed. As well, -ARCs themselves are referenced in some staff policy documentation, but not much; this issue needs to be addressed both in process, and in content.
Solution(s):
To address the -ARC articles, the first step is confirming that Curations/Rewrite has purview regarding how we want to rewrite the negatively rated -ARC pages. The confusion surrounding this is due to previous issues which lost the curations policies; as VC of Curations, I have been going through with the teams and recreating our policy trees, based on what we do as best practices, and what we can find from pages on both wikis.
Once that it confirmed, the next step is to begin to handle the -ARCs. There is not a single solution that works for all pages under that category, so I propose the following:
Archived Guides, Essays, and Administrative Pages — Nothing Changes
For any archived page, within the category covering guides, essays and administrative pages, nothing will be done, and those pages will stay archived.
Pages Archived for Specific Archival/Historical Purposes — Nothing Changes
For any page that has a proved historical or archival purpose, those will stay archived. The determination of what pages constitute having a valid archival/historical purpose is determined on a case by case basis, but generally requires that the page be significant to the history of the SCP EN Wiki in one way or another. Part of this discussion is also intended to identify any pages that have such archival or historical significance, so that they can remain archived.
As of posting, the following pages are considered as having specific archival or historical significance:Page | Reasoning |
---|---|
SCP-049-ARC | Archived version of the original Series 1, "Plague Doctor" |
SCP-257-ARC | Earliest surviving usage of 'Does the black moon howl?' |
Eberstrom's Proposal | One of the earliest surviving 001 proposals, Ebestrom's only page, referenced in HOTU, and many other pages. |
Archived Incident 076-2 682 | This is the earliest surviving tale on Wikidot, dating back to a little after the opening of the site (perhaps the earliest tale period, but this is unconfirmed) |
SCP-1023-ARC | A survivor of the Mass Edit, and the only surviving instance of 4-digit SCPs that predates Series II. |
Shoulda' Stayed in Dubai | Historical relevance in relation to Fishmonger, and is possibly the only Fishmonger-adjacent material onsite. |
Move Positively Rated ARCs to the Tales Category
Of the archived pages that remain, the next step is to take all stable, positively rated -ARCs, and make them into tales, removing the 'archived' tag.1 If we are not concerned that a piece will enter deletions, that will not be included in this move. For safety, that threshold has been initially set at +30. This would include the following -ARC pages:
Page | Rating |
---|---|
SCP-784-ARC | +131 |
SCP-776-ARC | +42 |
SCP-728-ARC | +31 |
SCP-517-ARC | +51 |
SCP-515-ARC | +63 |
SCP-091-ARC | +37 |
SCP-132-ARC | +46 |
SCP-157-ARC | +32 |
SCP-244-ARC | +93 |
SCP-051-ARC | +47 |
When a page has been moved into the tale slot, the information box at the top of the page will be removed. In the event that it contains relevant information, it will be ported to the comments of the page. Otherwise, the page will remain as is.
Tag the Remaining Archived Pages as 'rewritable'
The remain pages are below a safe, stable threshold, and range in rating from within deletions range, to low positives. These pages will maintain their 'archived' tag, such that they are excluded from the standard deletions process. These pages will be tagged 'rewritable', and will follow standard rewrite process. At the conclusion of a successful rewrite, once the new article is posted and stable, these pages will be unlisted, as per Rewrite policy. This includes the following pages:
Page | Rating |
---|---|
SCP-048-ARC | -51 |
SCP-400-ARC | +21 |
SCP-494-ARC | +7 |
SCP-922-ARC | -14 |
SCP-013-ARC | -24 |
SCP-112-ARC | +8 |
SCP-186-ARC | -11 |
SCP-232-ARC | -13 |
SCP-234-ARC | -32 |
SCP-338-ARC | +2 |
SCP-356-ARC | -16 |
SCP-406-ARC | -10 |
SCP-578-ARC | +10 |
SCP-837-ARC | +11 |
SCP-987-ARC | -10 |
With all of those pages having been moved and or tagged, all ARCs will either have a specific reasoning for their archival status, or will be integrated into the Rewrite system, as intended based on remaining documentation. I believe that this will best address the gap within policy regarding purview over -ARCs, as well as ensuring that the only pages remaining in this category have notable and distinct significance.
Benefits/Concerns:
In terms of the benefits, the primary benefit is reducing the number of archived works that are in the category for no tangible historical/archival reason. When you explore the category, it is not clear why a page has been archived, nor why it should remain as such. Based on the information we have at the moment, and the belief that non-archival pages should go through the rewrite process, this is the clearest path towards the resolution.
In terms of concerns, the largest potential issue is that a piece which has significant historical benefit would be lost. However, due to the fact that there are no plans to immediately delete a page, rather, they must go through the standard rewrite process before being unlisted, in addition to one of the topics of this discussion being determining if there are any other 'archived' pages that have historical or archival significance, I believe that this risk will be sufficiently mitigated.
The final benefit towards this realignment of the Archived category will allow staff to vote to move new pages into the Archived category, if it would be unlisted or deleted due to a Rewrite or through standard deletions process; by focusing on removing pieces that do not have historical or archival significance, we will be able to evaluate more clearly on a case by case basis what constitutes a page that we deem as having archival or historical significance.
What Would Need to Be Done?:
In terms of work that would need to be done following this adjustment of status, the majority would be handled by Curations, potentially in conjunction with MAST:
- Move all positively rated archived pages to the tales category. Given that this is limited to 12 pages, the work required is minimal.
- Tag the archived pages below the threshold, as listed above, with 'rewritable'. This also requires minimal work, adjusting the tags of 16 pages.
- Update the Archived Pages page, to indicate which are historically/archivally important, and which are available to Rewrite per the standard Rewrite Process. This change would not require a major amount of work either.
Other than that, the only other aspect of this proposal would be the rewrites of the remaining archived pages, which will be handled by the full userbase through the standard rewrite process, which we feel is a reasonable level of work to address the bloat of the category. Other than that, no additional labor by staff would be required.
I want to note that I am putting this proposal forward as the Vice Captain of Curations. I have Uncle Nicolini's support, as the Subteam Captain of Rewrite, as well as Riemann's support as the Captain of Curations.
Discussion will be open for a week, to discuss the proposal, and to raise any reasons that a page should be considered 'Archival or Historical'. Following the week, the proposal will be put to a vote.
Edit 1: Updated re: EstrellaYoshte's notes on other significant works.