Board Thread:General Wiki Discussion/@comment-24961441-20140524135441/@comment-24821182-20140524153544

First off, I want you to know that it's not my intention to be rude, but I just need to make some notes here:

- Making the assumption that no one has thought of this before.

- Making the assumption that successful CP-writers have the time and/or desire to read and criticize a vast amount of stories. Making the assumption there'll always be one of these writers online to critique new stories. Making the assumption that what a particular writer (or writers) likes must be objectively good.

- Making the assumption that your own writing is so much better, without providing examples. Making the assumption that there's no point in posting a story if you don't get attention. Also, making the assumption that your own ideas are original, when all CP-writers think their ideas are original.

- Making the assumption that concrit is an actual word that we're all familiar with. Making the assumption that copy-pasted stories are inherently bad, when it's those kinds of stories we are to thank for the CP wikia existing in the first place.

- Making the assumption that the admins will put their faith in a random user with almost no edits, and entrust this person with 12.000 articles. Making the assumption that because you're relevant on SCP Wiki it makes you relevant here.

You seem like you have a passion for maintaining quality, and that's a good thing, but what you're suggesting is near-impossible. We have Rollbacks and admins who dedicate immense amounts of their time to look for and edit awful stories, and even they can't possibly hope to get them all.

Also, I strongly object to your belief that writing is about getting popularity. It should be about doing something because you enjoy it, and if you're so certain your stories are original in concept and much better than what you're crusading against, you could always write a book.