Forum:Removing The Nicknames and Editor's Note Options
| Report post
|
After listening about Qualitipedia closing, we should also make some changes to make this place less toxic. First off, why am I comparing this to Qualitipedia? Well, Qualitipedia would always have bias and opinions to make the encyclopedia look very unreliable. It also doesn't help that it is one-sided. Anyways, here are reasons why I want these sections removed: 1. They can change constantly. Scare Factors used to be on the site have been removed in 2018 due to this reason, and the same should apply to these two sections. Not helping is that the Editor's Note option was created to replace the scare and cheesy factor sections. 2. They can have some bias with opinions. Sometimes, they can vandalized so much to the point where it would be impossible to clean-up. 3. The Editor's Note option is a rip-off of the Final Note option, to the point where they can just get merged. 4. Finally, they, alongside the scare and cheesy factors, are the reasons why the CLG Wiki can get corrupt easily. Not as bad as Qualitipedia, but still. So yeah, those are my thoughts on why they should be removed. If you have any questions or other thoughts, I would like to know. |
| Report post
|
Oh yeah, and here is a link to decide the fate of Qualitipedia: https://qualitipedia.miraheze.org/wiki/Requests_for_Comment/Closing_Qualitipedia |
| Report post
|
I will say that the Editor's Note's purpose is justified: to describe the impact and legacy of the logo. Sometimes, it is informative and has a point to be here, but other times it's basically exploited into being the cheesy and scare factors all over again. I previously discussed this issue in another forum, but this section is overall flawed not just because of that, but because of how many users think this section should be on EVERY page, even if there is nothing to write about regarding its impact. For the most part, it's pointless, but I think it's alright on a few pages if it delivers something informative rather than opinion-driven or just nothing. Also, I don't think it's a rip off of the Final Note option because the latter is for the fate of the company. The Editor's Note was misused in some pages that reflects this purpose rather than what it was initially intended to be. |
| Report post
|
Maybe the EN option should get reconstructed but yeah. It’s just the factors all over again. Some scare and cheesy factors have something informative in them but other than that, they just change constantly. |
