Forum:VFI
I have an idea that will help Uncyclopedia's articles in many ways.
The idea is a new voting pages called "Votes for Improvement", or "VFI". Ever see those articles on VFD where some users plan on improving the article? Well this is what VFI is for. It replaces the 'rewrite' template in a way.
If a user thinks it's a good article, but it needs a bit of improvement, the user will put it on VFI. There will be a vote, the same way VFH and VFD are done, whether the articles needs to be rewritten or not. If it does, then one or a few users can help on the rewrite.
A good example of this system is Guru Maharaj Ji. I put that on VFD in early April. I didn't find it that funny, it was kind of mild humour. It was voted keep and a group of users fixed it up. Same with my article (which was also on VFD and survived) HAHAHA.
Thanks, and I hope this does well. --
Lollipop - CONTRIBS - WRITINGS - SHOP - Now adopting! - 03:09, 21 May 2011
- This is a good idea indeed. If we're still here, this would be great use to us.---
03:25, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- I fail to see if that would help anything. If something passes VFI, there is nothing that will ensure that it will actually get fixed. And if it fails, it is still more likely to be rewritten than an article with a rewrite template since the article will get more attention. Also, literally 30-40% of this wiki is of rewrite quality, most of the rest either being VFD bad or only moderately bad by still not really worth fixing. It would basically be a lot of voting to accomplish what could be done by one person via the various "fix this" tags (or fixing stuff yourself). --Mn-z 03:32, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- Agreed. A "VFI" would just elongate the process that is currently accomplished by ICUs and rewrite templates, and still doesn't guarantee an actual rewrite. The possibility of improvement is negligible compared to the extra time it would take to go through the voting process. ~
Talk 15:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Agreed. A "VFI" would just elongate the process that is currently accomplished by ICUs and rewrite templates, and still doesn't guarantee an actual rewrite. The possibility of improvement is negligible compared to the extra time it would take to go through the voting process. ~
- I fail to see if that would help anything. If something passes VFI, there is nothing that will ensure that it will actually get fixed. And if it fails, it is still more likely to be rewritten than an article with a rewrite template since the article will get more attention. Also, literally 30-40% of this wiki is of rewrite quality, most of the rest either being VFD bad or only moderately bad by still not really worth fixing. It would basically be a lot of voting to accomplish what could be done by one person via the various "fix this" tags (or fixing stuff yourself). --Mn-z 03:32, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- *dumps glootamoly on eveyone's heads* ~
01:22, 22 May 2011 - MORE VOTING --Roman Dog Bird 01:37, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
- I had another idea called "Votes for protection" where you vote if a page should be protected and for autoconfirmed or sysop. --
Lollipop - CONTRIBS - WRITINGS - SHOP - Now adopting! - 01:57, 22 May 2011
- I can't exactly see a VFP working but the VFI seems like a great idea. --
Frosty dah snowguy contribs GUN PLEB 
02:03, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
- You don't need to vote for protection. -- The Zombiebaron 02:07, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
- I can't exactly see a VFP working but the VFI seems like a great idea. --
- I had another idea called "Votes for protection" where you vote if a page should be protected and for autoconfirmed or sysop. --
- So you want to start UN:IC, whomever started this forum? We already have that. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 02:13, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
