FANDOM

 
33,486 Pages

This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums - Class Rating forums
This page is waiting to be archived by an administrator. Please do not edit the contents of this page.


Anyone who's had to archive a FAN or GAN knows that doing so is a huge pain and a fairly inconvenient process, especially FANs, which is why there are times when a stack of old noms just get left on the nom page- I wouldn't call it laziness, it's just that it's a long and tedious process, and well, people have better things to do than do something that doesn't really achieve much in the end.

So, what I'm propsing- we make all nom pages (FAN, GAN, C2N, C4N, C4N) look like Forum:Index, with all the noms listed, and one page for each nom. Then, when a nom is closed, instead of doing a 10-step archiving process, we could simply stick an "A" at the end of a forum header, and it would be archived. This would mean however that each forum would have a separate page, so you won't be able to edit them all together.

Since Jag's got Semantic Mediawiki enabled in all namespaces now, I can incorporate into the forum header properties for the date that the forum was made, and also for number of supporting and opposing votes. Then, in the main nom pages (that look like Forum:Index), it can display the vote count and time the forum should be closed under each entry, to give people a summary of how the nom's currently going without actually looking at the nom page.

So, that's the end of the text wall, feel free to support/oppose/discuss/whatever. NightblazeSaber 01:50, September 6, 2012 (UTC)

I actually only requested it for the User namespace :P Is it on all of them? Jag 01:53, September 6, 2012 (UTC)
But anyway, that is a minor inconvenience which can easily be remedied. I think it's a good idea, Support. Jag 02:07, September 6, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, oops, ignore that last paragraph then :P NightblazeSaber 02:26, September 6, 2012 (UTC)
But, like I said, that can be easily remedied. Jag 02:31, September 6, 2012 (UTC)
Awwwww, but I juuuust spent twenty minutes archiving everything. :P (SUPPORT) -Cligra Join the redlink war!
Yeah, that's what reminded me to start the forum :) And I've been thinking "I should archive FAN and GAN today" for the last five days, but it's so boring NightblazeSaber 02:26, September 6, 2012 (UTC)
And I was thinking that I should do it, but I didn't know what to do... Jag 02:31, September 6, 2012 (UTC)
I haven't ever archived anything, so I don't know the process, but support anyway. Agent Charge Please vote 02:32, September 6, 2012 (UTC)
Bah. Yes please. Takes soooo long to archive those dumb things, though this still doesn't solve lack of discussion :s ajr 03:04, September 6, 2012 (UTC)

  • Ok, since it's been unanimous support so far, I've switched over BP:FAN. Obviously, the "date nominated" and "nominator" fields are wrong in the examples, but this would be right if someone made a nom from now on. If we did ever get semantics enabled in the forum space, I'd probably remove the dpl forum stuff altogether and make a custom table which would show vote count as well, and highlight if the forum was due to be closed. Anyway, let me know what you think of the new setup. NightblazeSaber 00:48, September 9, 2012 (UTC)
    • (forgot to mention how to archive, ie the whole point why this is being done :P) Archiving is done simply by changing {{AFRHeader}} to {{AFRHeader|A}}. If you need to change the heading (eg, two noms for same article, meaning one has to go at say 7675 AT-TE (2), you can do {{AFRHeader||7675 AT-TE}}) to specify the correct title in the header, much like what's done in the QCG forums and formerly URR as well. NightblazeSaber
  • Sounds good - nxt
  • GAN now changed over. About the lower classes, what exactly should happen with the archiving process there? Eg, if a QCG says "not done" and archives it, then the nominator comes back and says they've fixed it, the page would still be in the archives and may not be seen. So, maybe we shouldn't archive the forums until 3 days after? Only thing is, that would mean people would be clicking on forums that have been rated.... any other ideas? NightblazeSaber 03:47, September 14, 2012 (UTC)
    • Semantic! SMW stuff solves everything. Have three colours, grey (unrated), green (done and archived), and not done (red). Jag 18:50, September 14, 2012 (UTC)
      • Semantic isn't enabled in the forum namespace ;( NightblazeSaber 02:50, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
  • Just when closing FANs or GANs, would it be ok for QCG's to put a {{Done}} or {{Not done}} at the bottom when they close it? Just so you can easily see the result of the nom. (or if someone wants to suggest anything else, please do so) NightblazeSaber 02:50, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
  • Started changing over the c2 page NightblazeSaber 04:17, September 16, 2012 (UTC)
    • Seen an oppose to changing over c2/3/4 forums, so are we keeping them as is, or changing them over? NightblazeSaber 08:09, September 17, 2012 (UTC)
      • Keep 3/4 the way they are. 2 should be in forum mode though. Also, I don't think that archives for 3/4 are needed. ajr 12:38, September 17, 2012 (UTC)
      • Personally think we should do this for all classes, but agree with Ajr about no 3/4 archives. - nxt