Fallout Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Fallout Wiki
Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Standardized Guidance Project
Wasteland survival guide by emptysamurai-d4919uu

Hello everyone!

As of this week, I will officially be returning to active editing, and my first step towards achieving that goal is announcing a personal project I had meant to start right around the same time that the New User Network was first introduced. Essentially, the SGP will be my goal towards reiterating upon various editing and social aspects found here at Nukapedia, in which myself and others will periodically write out peer-reviewed guides which can be used by the community as future reference material.

So how is this going to work? Well, for starters, I will be writing out a couple of basic guides to help get the project kickstarted, yet others can propose ideas as well, or even volunteer their time towards contributing their own guides here. Once a guide has been written out and proposed to the community, they can be discussed within this forum and peer-reviewed to help determine both their accuracy, and desirability. Even should a guide be peer-reviewed and generally accepted, the community reserves the right to get together at any time and express their desire to see it removed should inaccuracies be discovered, or should the times change enough where the guide might no longer be relevant.

As a general-note for those reading, there are also two subject matters that need clarity before reading onwards:

  1. Any guides presented here are only to be used as reference material. They will not, and cannot be enforced by disciplinary action should they not be followed, unless you are also breaking our established guidelines and/or policies.
  2. As reference material, we are simply aiming to create community consensus on various subjects around the wiki which are considered vague and misunderstood. If these guides are ever referred to in interactions with other users, please only use them as reference material, and not as indisputable argument points.

How can I ask for a certain guide to be written out?

1. Message one of the project leads. If the subject at question is valid enough for a guide to be written out, we will get straight to work!
2. Leave your thoughts in the comments. Should an idea for a guide be supported by 5 or more editors, we will add it to the drawing board.
3. If something around the wiki is gaining a bit of criticism due to a general lack of understanding, we will pick up on that and possibly write out a guide to help alleviate vagueness and controversy.


Can I become a project lead?

Anyone can come forth and volunteer their time towards creating a guide. Once written out and peer-reviewed by at least one other prominent editor, we will add your guide onto the SGP, and welcome you on as a project lead.


When does a guide become standardized?

1. When any guide is first created, it first must be peer-reviewed by at least 1-3 prominent editors.
2. After a guide has been peer-reviewed, it will be put up for a trial period of 2 weeks or more, in which the community gets together and expresses their thoughts over its validity. It should be noted that once the trial period is over, and even should the guide initially be standardized, it is always vulnerable towards criticism, and can be rebuked at any time.
3. Once standardized, the guide will represent the community's overall feelings on the subject, and can be used consistently as referral material across the wiki, until a time comes in which the guide is no longer relevant and/or necessary.

  • As a side-note, not all guides have to be over complicated subjects, and can instead tackle other aspects of the wiki such as template usage.
Drawing Board

Project Leads:

Pending Guides:

1. The Online Disinhibition Effect Guide - WIP

  • Estimate: 8/5/14

2. Interactive Wiki Maps Guide - Waiting for peer-reviews

3. Speculation Guide - NIP

  • Estimate: 8/12/14

4. Template:Talk Guide - NIP

  • Estimate: 8/8/14

5. Geek Knowledge Guide - NIP

  • Estimate: 8/15/14

Peer-reviews[]

Please note that once a peer-review session is over, all respective peer-reviews will be moved onto a separate archive. By commenting here, you are agreeing to these terms. Links to each archive will be provided on this forum as they are created.

Proposals[]

Please note that once a proposal has passed or been declined, all respective proposals will be moved onto a separate archive. By commenting here, you are agreeing to these terms. Links to each archive will be provided on this forum as they are created.

Requests for a guide's modification or outright removal[]

Please note that once a request has been finalized, all respective requests will be moved onto a separate archive. By commenting here, you are agreeing to these terms. Links to each archive will be provided on this forum as they are created.

Comments[]

All comments in this section must be relevant and civil towards the project. By commenting here, you are agreeing that any offending comments will be moved into the Other section.

I support this initiative and will help in anyway I possibly can. It's high time we had an effective and universal method of wiping out speculation and non-contextual editing. I'm probably not responsible enough to be a project lead for something like this mind you, but I can be an adviser to those in need of pointers or etcetera, or something like that. Enclavesymbol 19:06, July 23, 2014 (UTC)

Once my first two proposed guides are either standardized or rejected by the community, speculation will be one of the next big topics I will be covering, and I can go ahead and tell you now that it will be a doozy (you should see the notes I have already written on the subject over the past couple of years). Thanks for the offer, and I am sure we will be seeing a lot of you here on this forum. :) ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 19:09, July 23, 2014 (UTC)

I'm curious about the application of such guides, can I have a summary of what the two on the drawing board are about so I have a better idea about their applicability? --The Ever Ruler (talk) 17:38, July 24, 2014 (UTC)

The interactive map guide will be applicable to all editors that wish to create this feature that I will be bringing onto Nukapedia either today or tomorrow. In essence, we will now be able to easily create clickable locations which sends you to their respective articles, by utilizing maps already provided to us by the games themselves.
The other guide is for social applications, in which our users can better understand the unique effects entailed by creating and living through an Internet persona. Because of the anonymity effect, which helps tear down many social norms. This guide's purpose is solely to detail the downfall and hardships of many online communities (in which I will be focusing on Wikia communities), and how that can be avoided by embracing human decency and cooperation. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ask. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 17:54, July 24, 2014 (UTC)

Couldn't you use current practices/resources here to get the same points across? Like a blog for that internet persona thing and an article for the interactive map for example. --The Ever Ruler (talk) 19:31, July 24, 2014 (UTC)
This is a project, in which I will be seeking out and inspiring other users to contribute in a way that can help bring the entire community together through different aspects of the wiki. Serving as a directory which will be continually archived and updated, and can be sought after for either looking into already established guides, challenging old consensus, and even asking for project leads to write out specific guides. A standard blog dies. Articles can be created, but a guide will help establish use-normality.
In short, this will be a collaborative depot of knowledge that will continue growing as time goes on. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 20:09, July 24, 2014 (UTC)
Is there anything in particular that you feel prompts this addressing or is this something you've wanted to see done for awhile? I myself am having a difficult time seeing the necessity of such an endeavor compared to others. --The Ever Ruler (talk) 21:04, July 24, 2014 (UTC)
"...my first step towards achieving that goal is announcing a personal project I had meant to start right around the same time that the New User Network was first introduced."
There is no necessity involved; this is simply a project that can be done at a leisurely pace, such as with the New User Network. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 21:17, July 24, 2014 (UTC)
Could you pitch me this project? As in, could you convince me that it'd be a favorable use of my time compared to other projects? Right now, I'm not entirely confident the forgone benefit of not contributing by doing something else confers a loss in overall wiki quality. --The Ever Ruler (talk) 22:19, July 24, 2014 (UTC)
A few examples never hurt:
  • We have a user that enjoys the more social side of the wiki, and is wanting to create a blog or multiple blogs to help liven up the wiki. They might be having trouble, so they check up here where we might have a or multiple guides to help them understand what tools we have available, and a step-by-step tutorial on how to utilize those tools on their blogs. These might include features such as Template:Talk, the interactive maps I will be adding, and user/nav-boxes, to name a few.
  • A new user has joined the wiki, and they are confused as to why they cannot add certain information. We refer them to our guidelines/policies, but they do not understand the policies, and genuinely believe it would be better to not have those guidelines/policies. In cases such as that one, we might have a guide available here, which explains a guideline and/or policy in-depth, while also being peer-reviewed and thoroughly discussed. This will help confused users understand why we have our rules, instead of being told "Rules are rules."
  • The wiki might be faced with stressful times, where incidents occur that affect overall morale. In cases such as these, it would be beneficial to have a guide or guides available which detail similar incidents on other wikis, and how those incidents generally played out, so as to gain a better understanding of how to get through stressful periods with minimal damage. In incidents such as where multiple users are known to leave, or especially with incidents that cause users to resort to drastic measures such as contemplating mass reconfirmations, it would do us good to have information on hand to help diffuse those situations, as well as having community consensus on how to deal with those issues in a particular manner so our leadership knows the best course of action to take where more people are happy with the solution instead of unhappy. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 22:30, July 24, 2014 (UTC)

Other[]

Isn't this essentially recreating the New User Library? Agent c (talk) 22:46, July 24, 2014 (UTC)

While certain guides will certainly be aimed towards newer users, the SGP will not be solely dedicated towards that particular endeavor. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 22:50, July 24, 2014 (UTC)

So are we going to vote on this or is it just "hey guys, we're doing this now"? JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 00:02, July 28, 2014 (UTC)

No vote - none needed. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 01:09, July 28, 2014 (UTC)
Then why is in "Wiki proposals and applications" when this is nether a proposal or an application, but merely you telling us about a new feature you're adding? And there may be "No vote needed" in your personal opinion, but you don't seem open to discuss this at all, instead just choosing to implement it despite what other people may think. Since these guides will likely have an impact on the wiki I think it's only fair that the community votes on if we're going to implement them or not JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?"UserRichard 01:23, July 28, 2014 (UTC)
I see little harm in the guides themselves (probably could've achieved them with blogs and the NUN help section really) and the peer review ensures some level of neutrality. But I do worry why this was pumped straight into proposals and applications without any prior discussion or voting sequence. Atypical procedures set either a bad precedence or a double standard, and I'd prefer to avoid both wherever possible. --The Ever Ruler (talk) 03:56, July 28, 2014 (UTC)
Most discussion that does not pertain to improving the project, asking for clarification over the project's rules and how they work, or providing direct feedback for the guides it produces will more than likely not be answered here. Please take all 'Other' inquiries to my talk-page - thank you. This forum is already going to get bulky enough, and I would prefer keeping discussion here to relevant topics. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 10:10, July 28, 2014 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but, "This forum is for formal votes on user rights requests and proposals regarding the wiki that have completed the discussion process in Forum:Wiki discussion." so you'll have to forgive me when I have this crazy idea that this is the wrong place for you to declare and organize one of your personal projects that you feel doesn't need to be voted on or discussed before its execution. If you had declared this on a blog and treated it as you have described, "a personal project" then I wouldn't have any problems, but the fact you felt it necessary to declare on [[Forum:Wiki proposals and applications]] comes off as an attempt to pass personal endeavors off as official ones. Your insistence that no vote or further discussion is necessary unless it pertains to the execution of the project only augments my sediment. You do realize how presumptuous this all seems don't you? --The Ever Ruler (talk) 19:58, July 28, 2014 (UTC)
Eisegesis. ForGaroux Some Assembly Required! 20:19, July 28, 2014 (UTC)
Advertisement