Forum:Bye-Bye, Mirage Arena: Difference between revisions
LapisScarab (talk | contribs) |
SilverCrono (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
It is also supposed to be a ''motivation'' for editing. Members that don't have the required number of edits now have to get to work and start making productive ones. Some users have made it clear that they're perfectly happy to take on the burden of checking the edits of users to make sure they're of quality. Talk page edits aren't counted, but grammatical ones absolutely are. Just because they're small doesn't mean they're not important. Are we really going to block a user like [[User talk:Xion Valentine|Xion Valentine]] (should he/she ever want to participate) from the Arena because his/her edits are all "lowly" proofreading?}} | It is also supposed to be a ''motivation'' for editing. Members that don't have the required number of edits now have to get to work and start making productive ones. Some users have made it clear that they're perfectly happy to take on the burden of checking the edits of users to make sure they're of quality. Talk page edits aren't counted, but grammatical ones absolutely are. Just because they're small doesn't mean they're not important. Are we really going to block a user like [[User talk:Xion Valentine|Xion Valentine]] (should he/she ever want to participate) from the Arena because his/her edits are all "lowly" proofreading?}} | ||
{{EO|time=19:35, July 14, 2010 (UTC)|text=True, we should wait and see what develops (Lexaeus, anyone?). Maybe we can revisit this forum if things get out of hand. But if we were setting up 75 to ''motivate'' people, why not make it 10 edits? Why not make it 20? Why not make it 2,000? It's not a matter of numbers, but the number of those edits that are actually ''good'' edits! That's why we should up the number, so that even if someone strays away from good edits, they can at least have a majority of good edits.}} | {{EO|time=19:35, July 14, 2010 (UTC)|text=True, we should wait and see what develops (Lexaeus, anyone?). Maybe we can revisit this forum if things get out of hand. But if we were setting up 75 to ''motivate'' people, why not make it 10 edits? Why not make it 20? Why not make it 2,000? It's not a matter of numbers, but the number of those edits that are actually ''good'' edits! That's why we should up the number, so that even if someone strays away from good edits, they can at least have a majority of good edits.}} | ||
==Discussion== | |||
{{LapisScarab|time=19:21, July 14, 2010 (UTC)|inverse=The Arena has only been up and running for less than a week by this point, and there are still a few kinks to work out. Give it some time. Your point about it breaking from the wiki's normal strict attitude is exactly the point of the Mirage Arena; it's a place where hardworking users can just take part in a little popularity contest. It's point is to be fun, in the same way that the countless forums in the Twilight Town Library are meant to be for random, Kingdom Hearts related fun, unless you have a problem with those too. | |||
It is also supposed to be a ''motivation'' for editing. Members that don't have the required number of edits now have to get to work and start making productive ones. Some users have made it clear that they're perfectly happy to take on the burden of checking the edits of users to make sure they're of quality. Talk page edits aren't counted, but grammatical ones absolutely are. Just because they're small doesn't mean they're not important. Are we really going to block a user like [[User talk:Xion Valentine|Xion Valentine]] (should he/she ever want to participate) from the Arena because his/her edits are all "lowly" proofreading?}} | |||
{{EO|time=19:35, July 14, 2010 (UTC)|text=True, we should wait and see what develops (Lexaeus, anyone?). Maybe we can revisit this forum if things get out of hand. But if we were setting up 75 to ''motivate'' people, why not make it 10 edits? Why not make it 20? Why not make it 2,000? It's not a matter of numbers, but the number of those edits that are actually ''good'' edits! That's why we should up the number, so that even if someone strays away from good edits, they can at least have a majority of good edits.}} | |||
{{SC|time=20:54, July 14, 2010 (UTC)|armor=I feel sort of torn between the MA. On one hand, it seems a good idea, as a fun place to let loose and enjoy the community. On the other hand, it can easily spiral into the only thing people around here edit, much like the DNC on the Final Fantasy Wiki. I hate to say it, but a lot of users edit just for that (The sole reason I no longer visit it). I myself haven't voted on the MA, mostly because I apparently don't fit the "requirements", which need "quality edits". That seems kind of hypocritical, but I'll get to that later. Anyway, the MA isn't a motivation to edit; it's more like telling a child they'll get a cookie if they clean their room. They'll just eat the cookie and mess it up again, much like what will happen here. People will get to the edit number, and stop being good. If the edit count was insanely high, there would be few contributors to the MA. It's... complicated. | |||
Well, onto the "quality edits". Who is to decide this? There is no single user who has made every single edit "quality". All human beings enjoy having fun and not always working. Not everything a person does is "useful". Some people find their niche doing grammer edits (XionValentine, others), making redirects, disambigs, wiki-gnome stuff (Myself), or doing huge, flamboyant edits (A username fails me.). Everybody does their own thing. This brings up the subject of who is to judge what is quality; no user is perfect enough to say who makes good edits or not. I know I myself am not one to talk, as I have miniscule mainspace edits. I am working on it, though. But this isn't about me. It's about the MA. | |||
When first announced, I was all for it. It sounded cool, another place to vote on opinions. But in hindsight, it's not very useful. (Another reason why the DNC isn't the FF wiki's best feature.) It encourages off-topic discussion which can be done in IRC (and is heavily encouraged), and said discussion can lead to petty, even offensive fights. (Proof? [http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/index.php?title=Forum:Off-topic_DNC_discussions&t=20100324110319 This].) It also leads, once again, to users sitting around doing nothing when they can be editing. Again, I know I am not one to talk when about half of my edits are on talk pages (A flaw I am ashamed of and am trying to overcome), but I know my errors. I just hope this doesn't become the cesspool the DNC has become. There's my two cents (or more like 30, based on the wall of text).}} | |||
==New Rule Suggestions/Current Rule Improvement Suggestions== | ==New Rule Suggestions/Current Rule Improvement Suggestions== |
Revision as of 20:54, 14 July 2010
|
Discussion
|
|
Discussion
|
|
|
New Rule Suggestions/Current Rule Improvement Suggestions
|
|
|