Forum:Rules for NRV and maintenance tagging

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Rules for NRV and maintenance tagging

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5702 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I've noticed a lot of people, even admins, who are not using NRV and other tags the way they are supposed to. In my frustration I have created Uncyclopedia:Ten Commandments of tagging. Please read through these. Most of these are long-standing policy that gets violated all the time. A few are new rules that seem very needed:

---

Uncyclopedia:Ten Commandments

---

Comments

Vanity

• Isra, how does {{vanity2}} fit in to this? — Major Sir Hinoa (Plead) (KUN) (20:50, 2 October 2006 (UTC))
  • ah, good point. rewording that commandment. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Userspace

• If we had a rule that articles had to be polished up in a user namespace first, all these tagging problems would drift away like morning mist. 21:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I disagree. Noobs don't know the rules. And many won't understand about using the user namespace. The onus is on us, the experienced users, to accomadate people who are acting in good faith to add something here. Sure, limiting immediate NRVing will frustrate people whose penis size corresponds directly to the number of articles they NRVed first, but this will be much easier on the people we are trying to help. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I enjoy your optimism, and hope this all just doesnt result in articles that need NRVing slipping past because people are too scared to tag them. 21:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

If an article gets deleted, the deleter, if s/he is smart and friendly, should put the article on a subpage. There, the user can edit it freely until it becomes decent sized enough to restore to the main namespace. Crazyswordsman...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 02:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Anti-list and AAP

• I like these rules. While I basicly do this stuff already, I will be the first to point out that I sometimes get lazy with this sort of thing. Heck, I even got banned for forgetting to {{VFD}} pages. --The Zombiebaron 21:38, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

And now I have a real idea for this list! You left out {{anti-list}}! Maybe that can be #10. --The Zombiebaron 22:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Isra, you also left out {{AAP}}, but I'm pretty much the only person who uses that anyway. --The Zombiebaron 22:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

To tell the truth I don't think the status of those two tags has ever really been resolved. I kind of think of anti-list as the "pass this judgement call off to Famine" tag. But I am not sure how well that tag gets processed, so I don't encourage its use. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 22:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Anti-list gets processed on a semi-regular basis. Basicially, I spot an article with it on it. I go, "Hey - I forgot about that tag. Let me see how many uncreative bitches have left that template on their page for more than a week or so." I then go through and delete the articles which have been left an unfunny list. It works well, and goes well with a drink in hand. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 23:16, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I polished off all the articles tagged with AAP when I first turned up, and they must have been sitting there for ages, as afterwards no more have been tagged. So, um... tag some more. 23:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I do. --The Zombiebaron 23:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I like these 10 commandments of NRV a lot and I believe they should become an approvied guideline for NRV tagging. I particularly like the "be helpful to the author" aspect. Maybe this could be the part of an article called "HowTo:Admin Uncyclopedia" or something like that (which I actually threatened to write once, but didn't because I figured (probably correctly) it would be a bannable action).--Hrodulf 19:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Plagiarism

• There should be an exception for plagiarism and sporkings, because it can take quite some time to figure out where something is stolen from... so, when the plagiarism/spork is revealed, we could be charitable and give the sporker a chance to alter it sufficiently, rather than delete it right away. But regardless, we might want to be fairly flexible about that. Or we might not... There's probably a special tag for it, but I'm too lazy to look it up. Aside from that, this is fine work, Isra! Bravo!  c • > • cunwapquc? 01:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to know of such a tag, other then {{Spork}} --The Zombiebaron 13:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

{{WIP}} vs {{Construction}}

i like all the ten commandments. most new users do not know that anyone can add templates and not just admins. this demoralizes them further when they see a NRV tag in their very first article (the CONSTRUCTION template on the other hand is encouraging for they like the attention). they don't even know that they can delete the NRV tag after revising the article and need not wait for an admin to come and remove it. it's frustrating to see that no matter how hard you work on the piece, the NRV tag still continues to remain. further, new users have no clue about user space and it's unkind to ask them to edit the article in their user space without first providing them with directions to their user space. they do not know that composing in one's user space is less of a strain on the server (besides shortening the article's actual history page for quicker browsing). Silent Penguin helped me a lot in my early days. there is no quick "search" feature in the wiki format to get help on a certain topic - this makes it difficult for new users seeking help and they must rely on other users and the welcoming committee to help them navigate further. returning to the point mentioned in this subject's heading, MoneySign made a valid point about phasing out WIP and encouraging CONSTRUCTION on his talk page in a discussion with me. most new users do not know how to use WIP correctly and forget to add the timestamp - something that is not required in CONSTRUCTION. he said:

But now taking back into account that WIP will at sometime be removed, we believe it is best to discourage its use and encourage {{construction}}. Sure, it's more to type, but it'll save us from encountering timestampless WIP-usages, which would otherwise prompt further consumption of server-resources by having to check the history as to whether or not the WIP has expired. I'm sure you understand that as we're growing from our still delicate size, it is imperative that we make the fluency of our services a stable and reliable one.

your 2nd commandment might want to highlight this. -- mowgli 11:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Surely {{WIP}} could just be changed into a redirect to {{construction}}? Problem solved. No phasing out necessary. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 11:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

i hope someone does this. really, {{WIP}} is redundant and {{construction}} looks prettier. -- mowgli 14:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

As of now, {{WIP}} is now a redirect to {{construction}}. If you have a problem with that, you know where I allow whining. ^_^ (Oh, and Mowgli, do I get any prizes? ;) ) — Major Sir Hinoa (Plead) (KUN) (15:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC))

of course you do. nothing goes unrewarded here. you get a free euroipod. all you got to do is click on the link, insert your mailing address and the mailman is ringing your bell. and oh, btw, thanks a bunch! -- mowgli 16:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Damn idea stealer. Always taking credit for my genius. You'll get your comeuppance one day! • Spang • ☃ • talk • 02:53, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I hate change. 13:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Had to bump this for UN:M/OCD-related reasons. You may now go back to your (pointless) lives. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 04:41, Mar 16