Uncyclopedia:UnProject Internal Consistency in Uncyclopedia
Goal[edit]
As hilarious as Uncyclopedia is, one of its greatest problems is a lack of internal consistency. Many pages proclaim things that are blatantly contradicted by other pages. Sometimes even pages themselves are internally inconsistent. The Internal Consistency in Uncyclopedia (ICU) project aims to fix this problem, by editing articles to bring complete consistency to Uncyclopedia.
Some examples of inconsistency:
- The Dr. Phil article states that Dr. Phil was created by Oprah and Bill Cosby, which their respective articles confirm. The article also states that Dr. Phil was conceived by Blade (this would be in 1777 according to the Bill Cosby article). The Blade article however, states that Blade was discovered by Oprah in 1990. 213 years after he impregnated Oprah!
- The Wicca Article claims that Buddha was a Wiccan. The Buddha article however, states that Buddha died in 543 BC, 2241 years before Wicca was invented (1968, according to the Wicca article).
- The Einsteinian Physics article claims that Newtonian Physics were invented by Henry Kelly. The article on Newtonian Physics, however makes no mention of its inventor.
- The Official List of the Best Things in Existence claims that the printing press was invented in 668, and that the second book printed with it was Hamlet. The Hamlet article, however claims that Hamlet was written in 1935.
Clearly, this cannot continue. Uncyclopedia cannot be considered complete when it is riddled with inconsistencies. It will be no small project to correct these errors, but the longer we let this go on, the greater the problem will become, and Uncyclopedia could be consistent by as early as 2013.
Procedure[edit]
When somebody finds an inconsistency, the following procedure will need to be followed:
- Tag the conflicting articles
- Use a template to tag the articles, and explain the inconcistencies on the project page. One of several specially elected (by a two thirds majority vote) ICU approvers will examine the inconsistency and if it's deemed valid, a page will be created to further discuss the inconsistency.
- Elect an inconsistency moderator
- A formal election will be held to select an uncyclopedian to oversee the discussions and votes regarding this inconsistency.
- Propose and discuss solutions to the inconsistency
- Every inconsistency can be resolved in several ways. Solutions can be proposed by emailing them to the inconsistency moderator, who will (after approving them) create a special subpage for them where they can be discussed).
- Nomination round
- After the discussion has been allowed to run for at least two weeks, a nomination round is held to nominate solutions that will make it to the final election round. This will last one week.
- Final vote
- A final vote is held on which of the nominees will be the implemented solution to the inconsistensy.
- Implementation
- The solution will be implemented by an admin (see below).
Should the chosen solution create new inconsistencies, the articles involved can be tagged again for a new inconsistency check.
Shutting down Uncyclopedia temporarily[edit]
To facilitate the project, it will probably be necessary to temporarily block new additions to uncyclopedia, while the existing content is made consistent. Based on current estimates a period of two years and three months will be required. As can be seen in the milestones layout of the project, we propose a gradual 'fading out' of editing rights.
After this, Uncyclopedia can be reopened and new edits can be verified for consistency. Penalties should be instated for adding inconsistent information.
Milestones[edit]
These are the milestones for the project and their estimated dates of completion.
- Creation of the project page (done)
- Large campaign to recruit participants (to be finished late 2006).
- Voting procedures to select committees for various tasks within the project (to be finished summer 2007)
- Inconsistency drive to tag at least 80% of currently inconsistent articles. The rest of the conflicting articles will be tagged as these articles are being discussed and fixed. Editing will be restricted to active members only (to be finished early 2008).
- Categorizing and discussing the tagged articles and the solutions. Editing will be restricted to admins only. Memebrs will only be allowed to edit pages in the project namespace so they can participate in discussions. (to be finished summer 2008)
- Editing the tagged articles for consistency. Editing will be limited to three admins, purely for the sake of removing inconsistencies. (to be finished late 2010)
- Gradual re-opening of uncyclopedia. (finished in 2011)
Criticism[edit]
While no one seems to be entirely opposed to the project, concerns have been raised that the procedures are not defined strictly enough. People fear that with such loose procedures, people will find ways to abuse the system, which will harm the project. To adress this problem an official idea proposal drive will be held to allow people to suggest improvements to the the rules. People will then be able to discuss the proposals for at least two months. After that a proposals refinement round will be held in which people can submit their refinements to the original ideas, based on the discussion. After more opportunity for discussion there will be a nomination round to nominate the best improvements to the rules after which the final improvements will be voted on.
If, after that, new improvements are deemed necessary any user (including anonymous IP's) can call a new idea proposal drive to repeat the process. The project will be temporarily halted until the voting procedure is concluded.