FANDOM

9,367 Pages

Forum: The Situation Room > Rating system


Hey. I'm new here but I've worked on some different wikia over the past few years. Whilst looking for a way to work on lesser articles here I found your Insufficient Information system. While that looks really good I found it quite confusing and I'm sure some others would as well. Also, this system is only used on articles which are deemed not to have enough information.

I propose that we use a rating system similar to Wikipedia's. This system rates all articles. This would mean that readers would be able to see how well an article is rated before reading it as well as allowing editors to see what level they are on and how much they need improving. I'll start working on templates etc. on my user space. :)

Thoughts anyone? --Tricky.Wiky 19:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

This idea is a good one, and seems to work especially well with large wikis. I'm not convinced this would work here, however, because we get limited traffic and, when compared to other wikis, a small number of registered users who stick around. The burden of rating would fall on the shoulders of a small group, and the argument that instantly comes up is: the time of that small nucleus of users would be better spent making changes instead of experimenting with a rating system on all the articles. Understand that I would agree with you right away if we had an increase in dedicated users here! But for now that's my two cents. Others need to weigh in on this. While I gotcha here, I'd like to say it's always good to have an seasoned wiki contributor around, and I hope you have a great experience with us  :D – Blue Rook 21:29, 6 January 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs
I've never understood why we even have the Insufficent Information system. I personally have never used it, as I'd rather put up a specific PNA, stating what's wrong with an article. Also, my assumption is that pretty much all pages on Wiki 24 can stand to be improved in some way. To me, it seems more practical to tag pages that the community deems to have "Sufficient Information." And in a way, we do, I guess: The Featured Article. --Proudhug 22:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I would also like to phase out that old system as well. The one thing I like about it, however, is how unobtrusive it is compared to the PNAs. The PNAs are a horrifying kick in the face, whereas the less specific Insufficents are visually more subtle and do less to interrupt the article. But I'm just bitching since it's too much of a hassle to actually go and change the Notice appearance.
On a more serious note, I recommend we remove any mention of the Insufficents from any policy statements or guides to phase them out, and then replace them with a list of the PNAs:
1) {{Template:Pna}} - general, non-specific notice for attention and talk page discussion
2) {{Template:Pna-copy}} - alert for material copied from another source
3) {{Template:Pna-realworld}} - alert for non-24 sourced real-world (OOU) material
4) {{Template:Pna-tense}} - alert for improper verb tense
5) {{Template:Verify}} - alert for 24 IU facts of dubious veracity
6) {{Template:Afd}} - to nominate a page for deletion
I will check this out very soon if nobody beats me to it. – Blue Rook 08:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs

Cool. Sounds good. Lets go with that then. --Tricky.Wiky 00:35, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I went and made the appropriate changes to the Bullpen, here. If I missed a PNA tag or something, drop it in. – Blue Rook 09:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs
Thanks for that, Blue Rook! I'd also like to create more PNA templates in the future, so if we think of any other useful ones, we can just add them to the lists. Also, the "Verify" template should probably renamed "pna-unverified" or something, to fit with the others, I think. --Proudhug 14:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. I agree with that suggestion too so I wrapped that up. On the topic of new PNAs, one PNA I'd like to see is a pna-stub. We already have Wiki 24:Stub and Template:Stub, but I'd like to delete those and morph them into a new PNA. We need this because that old stub tagging system is unused and doesn't conform to the PNA format we're developing. Also, since stubs will keep getting created, a new one is best because we don't want people turning to those "Insufficient Information" tags anymore either. (Also, none of the existing PNAs does the job.) Good, no? – Blue Rook 06:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs

Sounds good. --Proudhug 09:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.