Personally, I wouldn't mind a page on it.
Pretty sure Kagi is the only one here with a girl...
We're a sad lot of bachelors.
Discuss the original topic or don't discuss at all; that's what my pa always used to tell me!
I think increasing the number of votes necessary for admin nominations is unnecessary, although I understand the reasons for making the suggestion. Myself's proposal of seven participants seems reasonable to me, as well as a one-week voting period.
Give me a bit of time and I'll start working on the suggestions.
I also like the idea of editing the welcome message upon implementation of the other methods.
I stand corrected.
The truth is, I'm not exactly sure why we wait two weeks as you said. It seems something of a trial period for the undecided to make up their minds, as well as a wait to see if something against the candidate comes up. My current preference is to air on the side of caution and keep the two-week wait, but I'd also like to see if I can find an example of when the extra week was useful in the course of a nomination.
SpeedOfSoundSonic wrote: One week is too little time, in my opinion. There should be a longer assessment period for a position of such power.
Actually, it's two weeks for admins/crats. The one week wait is for rollbacks and mods.
This thread has been inactive for the past few days, so I think it's time to give it a little bump. The current suggestions are:
I don't see why we can't implement the first and third ideas, but I strongly recommend putting the second to a vote or taking it out for a spin in a one- or two-week test run.
My user tag says:
Yes, that's me!
Not crazy, just misunderstood.
MetalMickey272 wrote: I'd like to volunteer to do the Weekly Poll, if it would be alright with everyone else.
Go right ahead.
Genesjs wrote: Could always set up a page where people could put themselves up to the task if they want to do it. We can also have more than one person who could update the main page, and/or have multiple people collaborate if they wanna change things up.
Actually, after reading that, I think there may be a problem in terms of knowing what to do. I've heard before of people who want to help out but can't find a way to do it. We may want to invest in more ways to make it easier for people to see what needs to be done, or to volunteer themselves for a task.
EDIT because that was a super unhelpful comment: Examples of such measures would be an official to-do list (expanding our "Helping Out" section) and/or establishing a place where people can ask what needs to be done (I don't know if forums would be a good place to put it, but at least it can be highlighted).
Undoing or rolling back edits won't stop the user from progressing toward a badge. You can always contact an active admin, however, which is what we end up doing anyway in the event of spammers.
Mystic Monkey wrote: As long a sMonoBook users can have easy access to see their achievement progress and badges I'm up for it.
I don't know how that feature works in Monobook, or even if it works in Monobook.
Destiny of Awe wrote:As someone who hails from multiple Wikis that utilize badges, I'm completely against the idea of using them here. While they might stimulate edits, they always cause users to "badge hunt," the act of making tons of nonsensical and/or unnecessary edits just to achieve badges. My say in this may pale in comparison to the opinions of established admins, but I have first hand experience experience as a mod of this event occuring frequently.
This is my main concern. I think competitiveness won't be a huge issue upon implementation, or at least we don't know if it will. But badge hunting will definitely happen if we start using them. I say this as someone who used to make as many small edits as possible in order to increase his editcount as quickly as possible. Admins will have to start keeping an eye on wiki activity again (the way we used to have rollbacks on the lookout for anonymous contributors) in order to issue warnings and maybe even blocks to edit spammers, and even then the definition of edit spamming will be subjective.
However, this isn't a deal breaker for me. I believe that the implementation has the potential to motivate editors, and that the possible problems have the potential to motivate administrators, who can keep edit spamming to a minimum. A test period of couple of weeks (followed by a vote) would be a good step toward increasing productivity, provided that it isn't the only step we take.
Lame-o suggestion incoming:
We could try starting something or getting involved with Sonic-related fan projects outside our wiki in order to attract new users.
Monkey wins award for best bump to year-old thread.
I dunno about incorporating with YT channel, but I did build a much better PC than the one I had before, so once I get it up and running with Windows I might be able so record and play with only slight FPS drops (I hope).
But first you gotta see if anyone's still interested, and I'll play if we can get enough players.