User:Matttest/Websites Wikis proposal

Due to the lack of participation of qualitipedia members, the proposal is closed. For users who are still interested in software/websites, you are free to create another proposal yourself, or join Reception Privacy Softwares Wiki, which I recently created and have a narrower scope. This wiki reviews softwares/internet services from a privacy/anonymity standpoint.

Strong appeal: Users who are interested in reforming the websites wikis, are highly encouraged to comment under the section #Interested users. Other users are also encouraged to give cast your vote and express your opinions of the proposals. If this proposal goes under a situation that nobody participates, the Websites Wikis are very likely to be deleted.

Recently the websites wikis are closed and cut ties from Qualitipedia by consensus of the community, but there are also some of the users who thinks that the websites wikis have its own value and would like to volunteer to help fixing the issues in these wikis. Due to the fact that it is cut ties by consensus of the QP community, the decision on the reopening of the wikis are at the bureaucrats’ hands of the Websites Wikis. That’s the sole purpose of this proposal - to convince the local bureaucrats of the wikis to reopen the wikis under the circumstances of the below proposals. -Matttest (talk) 04:20, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 1: Merging the Websites Wikis
Merge the websites wikis into one wiki called “Reception Websites Wiki”. This will replace the rotten websites wiki and the fresh websites wiki by requesting another wiki at miraheze, and import pages from them to merge it.

Support

 * 1)  as nominator. Matttest (talk) 13:23, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 2.1 (Restrictions)
Allow only interested and experienced users (if you want to participate please comment at the last section) to clean up the pages in the wiki after created, and only re-enable it after the cleaning up process and new rules settings are done. Other users can only view but not edit the pages.

This will create a new group called “participants” which allow editing for interested users.

Support

 * 1)  as nominator. Matttest (talk) 13:23, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 2.2 (Restrictions)
Similar to Proposal 2.1, but this proposal will private the Reception Websites Wiki, so other users cannot view the wiki.

Abstain

 * 1)  I have no problems should consensus be favor of it, but it will be better if we go for proposal 2.1. Matttest (talk) 13:23, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 3 (New administration team)
Accordingly, this proposes to allow the community to elect bureaucrats and sysops.

Bureaucrats may be elected if:
 * At least ten (10) persons express a supportive view, with an 80% or better net support ratio; and,
 * They have made at least 250 constructive edits to the wiki and been a community member for at least ninety (90) calendar days

Administrators may be elected if:
 * At least ten (10) persons express a supportive view, with a 50% or better net support ratio; and,
 * They have made at least 100 constructive edits to the wiki and been a community member for at least thirty (30) calendar days.

Support

 * 1)  as proposer. Matttest (talk) 08:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 4 (Rules and Guidelines)
The previous Rules and Guidelines of the Websites Wikis are very long, but did not dive into the main point. I am therefore proposing to create a new one. Detailed guidelines:

Guidelines:
 * 1) Reception Websites Wiki documents the qualities of the websites and its corresponding software (if exists), no matter if it is in a positive range or not.
 * 2) The header of an article is “Good Qualities”, followed by “Bad Qualities”.
 * 3) Claims made in a page should be objective, and back by at least one reliable source.
 * 4) Words like “use xxx instead of xxx” are forbidden.
 * 5) Do not create new categories. If you think a new category is needed ask the admins and they'll make it for you if your suggestion proves to be useful.
 * 6) Categories can be placed in mainspace articles if it is appropriate. Blogs, user pages, and sandboxes should not use live categories at all.
 * 7) Websites like forums should not be part of the article list since it focuses on the userbase, not the website itself.
 * 8) Unfinished pages should be placed in a user’s sandbox. All pages in the main namespace are expected to be finished.

Behavioral guidelines:
 * 1) All users should follow the Code of Conduct.

Users in the “participants” user group are expected to clean up the pages per the rules and guidelines. Also, per guidelines#7, pages like reddit should be moved elsewhere or be deleted.

Support

 * 1)  as proposer. Matttest (talk) 08:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

General comments

 * 1)  I believe why the Websites Wikis are in such a mess is mainly because of the lack of care from other users, if we have enough users that are interested in helping out the wiki, we can discuss the path and reformation of the wiki at here. Matttest (talk) 13:35, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Lack of care and lack of initiative to do specific things essential for improvement are really key contributors to the mess. This is an interesting step that I'll keep an eye on. If it covers a proper content scope/relevancy and accuracy policy so pages have a guideline how to operate, and some rules to keep it that way you might be onto something. --Raidarr (talk) 14:42, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Interested users
If you are interested in participating in cleaning up the wikis according the rules and guidelines already set up and new rules that will be discussed, please comment below.


 * 1) I will be cleaning up and removing the unsourced qualities from the small amount of articles. Matttest (talk) 14:02, 6 July 2022 (UTC)