Forums / Maintenance / Suggest Ideas

This way, article spam (Like FNAF and MLP characters) can be reduced, as only Mods can prove they're worthy for an article.

The absolute wonder this could do for dealing with the occasional spam bot entry is unimaginable.

You know that a lot of the articles this post is talking about were made by moderators, right? For example, out of the current Pony articles, I made Pinkie Pie, and Particle Mare, another mod, made Twilight Sparkle and Rainbow Dash. The only one that wasn't made by one was for Fluttershy, and even then that got fixed up by some of the mods. If this were to be implemented, it would not be extremely useful because the mods would simply approve any article they make.

That does not seem like a good plan. Submissions already have a requirement of time, spread, and popularity before they are confirmed. Staff and moderators already have to pick and choose which entries meet those requirements from submissions. Many do not agree on whether or not a meme is noteworthy right away, and requiring them to be presifted would remove many potentially valid entries.

Not to mention, some submissions are noteworthy, but with a bad creator. Moderators would shelve these right away, even though some other user might be capable of bringing the entry up to standard. If they can not see these submissions, then they will not have an idea of what they can work on.

The submission process seems to do okay with weeding out bad entries. Moderators already go through those, so adding an extra unneccessary step seems like it would only create problems. If spam is becoming a problem, then they either need to check more often, or add more people. From what I have seen however, it is not a problem.

The problem with these systems are always the minimum replies it requires: 1 mod? 3 mods? ALL mods? And then what happens if we reject the entry, would it get hidden or deadpooled?

We're a fairly big collection of entry mods (this is entries we're speaking off), so it's normal we don't always share the same opinions on entries or the notability of the topics they cover. Our area of knowledge also varies. So what if it's a legit entry to one mod, but a different mod that believes it's a bad entry replies first? If it then gets hidden that's not gonna help our database.

Currently we have a fairly decent amount of entry mods, who manage to weed out the bad entries fairly quickly. Although I can certainly support such a system if we have some way of preventing unfair hiding, currently it's an extra step inbetween that won't help much.

(Not to forget your examples are all legit entry topics, but just happen to be badly written.)

Another problem: often times, newly-written entries will start with their main image and a short blurb, along with maybe a "work in progress" note at the top. It will then be slowly added to over the course of several minutes to a couple of hours as the creator and/or the other users do more research and editing. If the page isn't posted, will they be able to continue editing it behind the scenes? And how will they recruit other users to help? Or take credit for being the one to start the page? Because, from the looks of it, this system would require the user to get the page mostly finished right off the bat or risk having it batted down by a mod. You'd end up killing a lot of good pages in the cradle.