Forum:The END of the WiP
Forum:The war against WiPs got halfway there. But I propose a potentially drastic new measure that I think will substantially curb the amount of crap that comes onto the site. I propose we eradicate the {{construction}} and {{WIP}} tags. Before you go right ahead and say "Hell no, you stupid shit, this is ridiculous!" hear me out.
These tags have caused a helluva lotta trouble in their time. Ohadaloni being, of course, the most extreme example, there are plenty of IPs that do the same as him. There are also plenty of useless pages with {{construction}} on them that will just as soon be deleted.
Now, how do I propose to replace the tag? Simple: increased support for userspace construction. Once the article is complete in the userspace, it can be let out into the wild to fend for itself, without any pesky loopholes. At this point, ICU can still be applied, as can any other "Make this better" tag that is applicable.
What if, you ask, an IP wants to create an article a little at a time? Simple, I say: word processor. They exist, they come at little to no cost, and they serve the same purpose. Lemme know your thoughts.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 22:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- If {{construction}}s go, then so do {{ICU}}s. ICUs and WiPs both give the article a week to improve, and the system can be abused anytime by removing the templates at any time. There is virtually no difference between the two templates except that ICUs are added on by people other than the author. Both have the same time span and the same flaws. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • SU&W) 23:01 Sep 08, 2007
- The point is to take the control of an article's stay of execution out of the author's hands, at least officially. If you're watching a page you have ICU'd (I personally have every page I edit watched), then you can tell when something has gone amiss. However, with construction, one tends to leave it be because it's construction.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 00:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe people should make it a habit to watchlist WiP's too then. I don't know, really. I haven't seen it happen all that often that someone creates an article, WiP's it, and then removes the tag. Maybe if this were more common I'd think we have a problem. At the moment, I don't, and I find the tags useful. I wanted to start Bathroom humor and then go to bed, for instance, so I put the WiP tag on it. Stop sign I'm in the middle of rewriting with a WiP tag on it, because if I moved it into my userspace, double redirects would abound, but I still want to be able to communicate to people that I'm working. Obviously articles are gonna slip through the cracks. In fact I recently QVFD'd a few articles towards the bottom of Special:Newpages that weren't any more than one-liners, and they didn't have tags of any sort on them. If anything WiP helps matters, because newbies add it and then forget about it, saving us the hassle of finding it and QVFD'ing it, when it'll be deleted by an admin in a few days anyhow. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • SU&W) 00:19 Sep 09, 2007
- The point is to take the control of an article's stay of execution out of the author's hands, at least officially. If you're watching a page you have ICU'd (I personally have every page I edit watched), then you can tell when something has gone amiss. However, with construction, one tends to leave it be because it's construction.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 00:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- How about no. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 12:48, 09 Sep 2007
- I'm unsure as to whom you are referring to. Is that to my idea or to the Drs?-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 02:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I had an idea? – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • SU&W) 02:39 Sep 09, 2007
- Both, if Dr. Skullthumper's was a suggestion. Yes, I heard you out. And I say no. When you say, These tags have caused a helluva lotta trouble in their time, I'd like to know exactly what helluva lotta trouble you're talking about, because I haven't seen any of it. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 02:50, 09 Sep 2007
- Also also, Ohadaloni was an arse for reasons other than the tags. He was an arse 'cuz he never finished the damn articles he started. If we weren't so quick to yap at him, his articles would have died a peaceful death anyway — he never removed a tag to let it slip past RC. In fact as I think I've said before, I never saw anyone remove a construction tag without finishing the article first. (Oh, and for the record it wasn't a suggestion, just pointing out that if you can't trust a construction tag, I don't know why you would bother to trust an ICU.) – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • SU&W) 02:58 Sep 09, 2007
- I'm unsure as to whom you are referring to. Is that to my idea or to the Drs?-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 02:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't get it. If you wanna start a page, why not just start it in your userspace? It's so much easier, less stressful, no chance for deletion, and makes things easier for everyone else. We should make a BIG mention of that in UN:RTFM if it isn't there already. Perhaps everywhere we use the words HTBFANJS we should make a mention of userspace. How about we just move every new page with a WIP tag into a user's userspace for them? Maybe we could do that to kinda give them the idea. Anyways, just throwing some ideas out there, you can all shoot them down now. P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon 
(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 01:00, Sep 9, 2007
- Come on, if a page is under construction, what are the chances anyone will see it, except people looking for stuff to delete? And still, the WIP tags aren't just to let the maintainers know it might be finished some day, they're also to let any reader who comes across the article know that it's not finshed, and not just a bad article.
- Forcing everyone to create articles in userspace first is not necessary, let alone not enactable. What are you going to do, qvfd everything that doesn't spring from userspace fully and perfectly formed? • Spang • ☃ • talk • 02:50, 09 Sep 2007
- You can lockdown page creation to limit it only into userspace with only a group of users having permissions to move the page with the Lockdown extension, but I doubt anyone would want that for this wiki, and I doubt any admin has access to Uncyclopedia's LocalSettings.php or FTP for that matter. I personally find WIP useful at times when creating new episodes of TYATU because updates to the series come slowly. Other than that I can work out of userspace for most things. ~
Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p.
9/09/2007 @ 03:40
- You can lockdown page creation to limit it only into userspace with only a group of users having permissions to move the page with the Lockdown extension, but I doubt anyone would want that for this wiki, and I doubt any admin has access to Uncyclopedia's LocalSettings.php or FTP for that matter. I personally find WIP useful at times when creating new episodes of TYATU because updates to the series come slowly. Other than that I can work out of userspace for most things. ~
We inturrupt your pointless Quality Control discussion to bring you this equally unimportant announcement.
The best article ever. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • SU&W) 04:08 Sep 09, 2007
- Thank you. I think I just won several hundred multitudes of internets. --
TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 
15:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
So...
IPs can't upload images, they can't edit certain pages, and their votes count as only half of a full vote. Now we're proposing that they can't use a certain template for creating pages? I disagree with this entirely. I think that IPs should be encouraged to tag their articles with the construction and WIP template, the former of which currently reads:
"This page is a work in progress. But let's give it a chance. The author will finish it later. Or maybe not. Should they choose the latter, within seven days, this page will not exist anymore. Now, go away!"
In other words, this puts a 7-day limit on the article as well. However, my only problem is that this template doesn't include a timestamp. The WIP tag should also be encouraged. Who are we to tell our contributors how to do their work? If they don't want to use word processor or create it in their userspace, they have the right to. Articles in the construction category should actually make it easier to find incomplete old junk and get rid of it, rather than having an IP's crappy article lay around uncategorized and collect dust. As with any template, there are responsibilities. To me, this isn't a problem, and I think these are very useful templates. --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 05:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'm also happy with the current system, just as long as we continue to delete WIPed pages in cases of WIP abuse. I also wonder why some registered users WIP pages instead of using their userspace, but I don't think it's a big problem.
Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 13:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
What? Another one?
See the other topic for my response to this. Also, people do remove the tags. Sometimes. But I think they're mostly caught, and those that aren't end up on VFD eventually. Also also, I tend not to vocally encourage construction tagging too much to the n00bs - although a useful tool, I don't want everybody to know about it so I at least get to delete some stuff on QVFD. -- Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 13:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I think we're missing an important link here
Like seriously. Not every article created on Uncyclopedia every day has to be VFH or Quasi material. There's no rush to huff all the bad stuff. It's not hurting anything. We've already got two systems that take care of the worst stuff just fine. There's nothing wrong with creating articles that just exist. I've created quite a few of them. Once in a while they appear on VFH, but if they don't, big deal.
Yeah, quality sucks. But just because it sucks at the moment doesn't mean that it'll suck forever. Lookit Chuck Norris or Oscar Wilde, articles that have been doing nothing but collecting crap and have finally gotten a rewrite. They didn't have to be huffed to be changed. Crappy articles aren't doing anything bad unless they're vanity or hurtful or the like. And really crappy articles get VFD'd eventually.
So what's the big idea? Why's everything suddenly have to be perfect, or at least closer to perfect than usual? Why's it that people can't create articles and edit them a little bit at a time? Not everyone's going to get their first article on VFH, or second, or third. So what's with the Quality Control crusade? Just wondering. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • SU&W) 17:51 Sep 09, 2007