JoCopedia talk:QVFD

From JoCopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

A request for comment has been made for this page. Please add your thoughts!


See following for RFC:

Create a criteria for what warrants quick deletion

  • Not about JoCo or even vaguely related to anything to do with him
  • Vanity - i.e. pages about how cool the user is, how dumb their friend is or how much they hate their school.
  • Random rubbish - Rather similar to the above but less coherant
  • Unneeded pages - i.e. redirects from when pages have been moved, user pages the user no longer wants (note, only the user themself should nom their user pages for deletion, userspace is sanctuary imo)
  • Double redirects ~ Percephene ~ talk contribs 04:40, 30 April 2008

Have an agreement between moderators on who will handle the deletions

I'm guessing all, since this will be a fairly quick and infrequent job. ~ Percephene ~ talk contribs 04:40, 30 April 2008

Agree on process that will take place if a moderator does not swiftly delete the page, i.e. they decide it is good enough to keep.

Either a template that mods can post into the page saying "I've check up to here" and then dilligent users can go through and nom checked pages for VFD (I'd be happy to do this) or the mod who checks it VFDs it themself or if its totally worth keeping the mod should quickly write this next to the page's link so decent pages who get joke-nommed or accidently-nommed don't waste time on VFD. ~ Percephene ~ talk contribs 04:40, 30 April 2008

If we draw up the "this page has been nommed" template, then of course that should go on the page that's been joke/accidentally nommed. For now I've set up an archive, so this page doesn't get bogged with old noms, not sure if we want to keep non-deleted pages on the main QVFD page for a while before moving, though. --Lex (talk - contribs) 06:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
Well because its Quick VFD I wasn't going to bother with a nommed template because it is likely to be deleted within minutes/hours. As for keeping them there for a bit I would think that would be a good idea, just for a record, and so non-mod users can see what has and what hasn't been huffed (bahleeted). You could quite happily get away with archiving every month or so IMO. At Uncyc we separated the QVFD noms by a day header for clarity but I doubt that will be necessary here, just yet anyway. I think its nice to leave them there so we can see progress! ~ Percephene ~ talk contribs 04:18, 01 May 2008

Do we want a QVFDSurvivor template like

Wilson.jpg    VFD Survivor
This page survived a Vote for Deletion. It should not be nominated for deletion again without reasonable grounds.
?

~ Percephene ~ talk contribs 04:39, 10 May 2008

Feedback

This seems to be working great! Thanks to the admins who clear it so diligently! :D How is everyone finding the system, is it working for you? I would like some feedback on the questions above this too so we can agree on the process and set it in stone :P Cheers! ~ Percephene ~ talk contribs 12:38, 06 May 2008

Hey, belatedly answering this. It seems to be working fairly straightforwardly, although I need to remember to actually, y'know, check the links before I rush off and delete them... I think the actual trouble will come with VFD, but QVFD are usually pretty easy to tell, aren't they? --Bry 23:14, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, QVFD are very quick to decide. VFD will require a voting process, but one I don't believe we will need often. I intend to work more on these pages shortly and de-Uncycify anything I sporked >.> ~ Percephene ~ talk contribs 06:34, 08 May 2008

Capitalization redirects

Let's use The Doifter as an example. If you try to link to The doifter or the doifter, you'll get a red link. Only when you link using the correct capitalization will you get the correct link, such as The Doifter. This is a good thing, since it promotes proper capitalization.

However, when you have a multi-word title for an article where every word is capitalized, the wiki software is more lenient when you type in the article title in the search box on the left side of the page. Typing in "The Doifter" and clicking Go yields the same result as "The doifter", "the doifter", and "tHe DoIfTeR".

As another example, The Future Soon/Lyrics may be reached by typing "The Future Soon/lyrics" or "the future soon/lyrics" in the search box.

If the intention is to make wiki article-writers' jobs easier, we should keep some capitalization redirects. If the intention is to force Wiki pages to use proper capitalization, we should remove the redirects. In either case, the wiki reader is unaffected, since they can continue to type "The FUTURE sOoN" and reach the correct page.

Wesley | 23:39, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

OK, I'll buy that logic. (I thought you were just saying it always automatically redirected, and I didn't want to delete if that's what you were thinking.) I'm going to vote for keeping "Christmas is Interesting" because it, like other JoCo songs, has a hard-to-remember capitalization -- quick, no peeking, is it "A Talk with George" or "A Talk With George"? "Soft Rocked by Me" or "Soft Rocked By Me"? But the rest can go, I agree. --Bry 07:09, 18 June 2008 (EDT)
(To clarify: I'm willing to be forgiving if wiki editors miscapitalize songs, but I'd rather not encourage improper style by allowing editors to link to "Jonathan coulton". --Bry 07:15, 18 June 2008 (EDT))
In fact, for titles that mix uppercase and lowercase, such as A Talk with George, the wiki software doesn't fix searches like "a talk with george". In that case, we really want a redirect with title "A Talk With George" so that the wiki software can do the right thing. In other cases, like Christmas Is Interesting, I agree that a redirect is a good compromise that makes sense. (Summary: I agree.) — Wesley | 05:00, 19 June 2008 (EDT)