AVID:Requests for Comment/Making The Wiki More Reliable With Use of Sources: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m Closing as passed |
||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
:The following discussion is closed. '''Please do not modify it'''. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
::Closing as '''passed'''. [[User:HibiscusCrown20|HibiscusCrown20]] ([[User talk:HibiscusCrown20|talk]]) 06:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
----
So if you have noticed, some users are not liking the current direction of the site as it still has information that maybe opinionated, even if the infamous factors and the nickname section is gone now, so I have this idea to make the site more reliable.
Line 19 ⟶ 23:
==Comments==
# To make this a more actionable RfC, can you provide specifics on how exactly this would be implemented? "I want more sources" is all well and good but that does nothing to say how it would be accomplished. --[[User:Raidarr|Raidarr]] ([[User talk:Raidarr|talk]]) 19:28, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
----
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. '''Please do not modify it'''. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
</div>
[[Category:Requests for Comment]]
| |||
Revision as of 06:38, 9 December 2022
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
- Closing as passed. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 06:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
So if you have noticed, some users are not liking the current direction of the site as it still has information that maybe opinionated, even if the infamous factors and the nickname section is gone now, so I have this idea to make the site more reliable.
Basically, what this site can use for notable information, especially legacy sections and nicknames, can be legit and reliable sources. These can help users know how the logo made a real impact to the community. Some legacy sections do not need sources though, since they could describe something in the logo while not opinionated.
So yeah, that is what I planned out. If it goes out well, the wiki will have some more notable information. If you want to know why I made this? Some RFCs would like to suggest changing the wiki a lot, for better or for worse. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 04:26, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Support
Support Bingo. 
· Talk · Edits 05:11, 28 November 2022 (UTC)- Support Good idea
(The Third Place) 09:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC) - Support I've always wondered why that wasn't really implemented as much in the past. But I'm going ahead with it. Doctorine Dark (talk) 13:29, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support AVID is back!!
(• USER TALK! •) 13:40, 4 December 2022 (UTC) - Support. This will help strengthen the quality of the wiki in the post-CLG era. --Pingu (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support This is one of the things that will make the wiki even better than ever! EsaïeGregoryPrickett (talk) 21:30, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Abstain
Oppose
Comments
- To make this a more actionable RfC, can you provide specifics on how exactly this would be implemented? "I want more sources" is all well and good but that does nothing to say how it would be accomplished. --Raidarr (talk) 19:28, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
