FANDOM


  • I'll keep this short.  Thinking over some recent discussions and developments, I don't think the "Delete Now" (DN) tag is something non-admin users should have access to.  In the hands of regular users, it doesn't serve a purpose that is different enough from "Marked for Review" (M4R) in my opinion, since and admin has to review what's been marked in either case.  The main difference between M4R and DN, as we've seen, is the effect of the punch to the original author, and that just doesn't seem fair.

    Furthermore, as I've suggested, without letting non-admin users have access to the DN tag, it makes sense to me to get rid of it altogether.  I think this could be another very important step toward making the wiki a healthier place.  We all seem on board with the general plan of reducing toxicity.

    To further reduce difficulties, I think marking someone's story M4R should trigger an automatic message to the original author/poster's talk page.  This message should clearly explain what M4R means in a positive and encouraging way.

    These are my thoughts.  I'd love to know what you think of them.

      Loading editor
    • Part of the problem is that the new userbase doesn't seem to be interested in reading why their stories were marked up to begin with. I'm just not sure how one would go about ensuring people at minimum put effort into their writing so as to make Deletion non-existent, except for trollpastas or broken walls of English. Besides perhaps, as its been brought up before, making Workshop front and center.


      Maybe it IS time to push the Workshop on front page, I mean its not that regulars dont have confidence in new users, it would be more of a small entrance quiz to make sure you know what you're doing. Another part of the issue is general internet ettiquette regarding reading Da Rulez and young demographics being prematurely exposed to creepypasta. 

        Loading editor
    • I agree with the things stated in this post. I think explaining what M4R means will be very helpful to reducing toxicity.

      On that note, I don't think the "Story Deletion" message explicitly states that people can ask for their story back if they don't have a copy, causing unnecessary stress. Maybe there could be text at the end of the message like "If you don't have a copy of the deleted story, ask {the admin who sent this message} for a copy,"

        Loading editor
    • I'm just not sure how one would go about ensuring people at minimum put effort into their writing so as to make Deletion non-existent....

      I'm not saying deletion should be non-existant.  As I understand it, only admins can actually delete something that's been marked, and that should still be the case.  This is part of why the Delete Now tag doesn't serve a purpose that's different from M4R.

        Loading editor
    • Jdeschene wrote:
      I'm just not sure how one would go about ensuring people at minimum put effort into their writing so as to make Deletion non-existent....
      I'm not saying deletion should be non-existant.  As I understand it, only admins can actually delete something that's been marked, and that should still be the case.  This is part of why the Delete Now tag doesn't serve a purpose that's different from M4R.

      Sorry, I deleted part of my response related to trollpastas and broken walls that basically said the same thing. Its a tool for admin first and foremost.

        Loading editor
    • I could probably get on board with this if we called the remaining category something other than Marked for Review, just to reduce confusion.

      We'd have to also scrub the templates to keep people from continuing to add the categories, but that's easily done. The biggest issue would be getting the memo out to everyone who doesn't visit the wiki every day that the M4R/Delete system has been done away with.

      I'm open to suggestions for what to call the consolidated review tag. However with a change this major to how we do things, Cleric might want to put it up to a community vote before we did it.

        Loading editor
    • What about "Pending Admin and Community Review" or something like that?

        Loading editor
    • I disagree with this. I could be wrong, but this is how I currently understand things:

      The Delete Now tag is for stories that are blatant trollpastas, involve blacklisted subjects, or have some other trait(s) that make them unsalvageable, AKA, they have some sort of fundamental flaw that means they couldn't possibly be allowed on the site, no matter how much polish is applied. Therefore, they must be deleted as soon as an admin can get to them. This is where NedWolfkin went wrong, as he was adding the Delete Now tag to stories that were not objectively flawed, but rather, had problems that were subjective in nature.

      The M4R tag is for stories that have potential, but are plagued by one or more issue/s that may hold them back from meeting QS (for example: grammar, formatting, plot problems, etc.). The issue/s could also not be directly related to the quality of the story, but rather, something like author permission or plagiarism. Either way, the main difference between this tag and Delete Now is whether the story in question is able to be fixed.

      Admins, feel free to correct me on anything I might have wrong about how these tags work. My basic point is that I don't think we should change this entire system based on the actions of one user, who has now been banned and therefore won't cause any future issues. If you're worried about people not using these tags correctly, then all we really need to do is make the definitions more accessible. Certain things people have mentioned, such as sending a message to the talk page of a user whose story has been marked for review, seem like helpful changes, but I really don't think removing Delete Now is a necessary action.

        Loading editor
    • Cornconic wrote:

      My basic point is that I don't think we should change this entire system based on the actions of one user, who has now been banned and therefore won't cause any future issues. 

      It wouldn't be based on the actions of one user.  It would be based on the fact---which you pointed out---that the result of either tag is the same: an admin has to review what's been tagged and make a decision about it.  This makes a difference between them functionally non-existant, even if they're "supposed" to be used for different things.  I can see only good things coming from removing the one that is most likely to be weaponized against new and younger users.

        Loading editor
    • The Delete Now tag is for stories that are blatant trollpastas, involve blacklisted subjects, or have some other trait(s) that make them unsalvageable, AKA, they have some sort of fundamental flaw that means they couldn't possibly be allowed on the site, no matter how much polish is applied. Therefore, they must be deleted as soon as an admin can get to them. This is where NedWolfkin went wrong, as he was adding the Delete Now tag to stories that were not objectively flawed, but rather, had problems that were subjective in nature.

      The M4R tag is for stories that have potential, but are plagued by one or more issue/s that may hold them back from meeting QS (for example: grammar, formatting, plot problems, etc.). The issue/s could also not be directly related to the quality of the story, but rather, something like author permission or plagiarism. Either way, the main difference between this tag and Delete Now is whether the story in question is able to be fixed.

      This is better said than I could have possibly stated, along with the addition that some people like to use subjective reasons for marking a story for deletion rather than review like stating a story simply "isn't scary" which in some cases can certainly be an objective point however in most situations what one person finds scary another doesn't. Something not being scary should ever be the sole reason to mark something for deletion over marking it for review. 

      I simply disagree with the removal of the delete now tag due to people misusing it, not understanding what it is actually for, or simply using their subjective reasons as for why a story should not be on this site. Delete Now is to be used sparingly and not as often as people seem to use it for this to be as much of an issue as it has come to be. A story containing graphic depictions of sexual activities that the story hinges is something that'd be marked as Delete Now. A story that just has some poor wording, flow, and grammatical issues would be Marked For Review if simply editting the story is out of the question due to the changes needed being signficant enough to require a total rewrite of some sections. 

        Loading editor
    • ChaoZStrider wrote:

      The Delete Now tag is for stories that are blatant trollpastas, involve blacklisted subjects, or have some other trait(s) that make them unsalvageable, AKA, they have some sort of fundamental flaw that means they couldn't possibly be allowed on the site, no matter how much polish is applied. Therefore, they must be deleted as soon as an admin can get to them. This is where NedWolfkin went wrong, as he was adding the Delete Now tag to stories that were not objectively flawed, but rather, had problems that were subjective in nature.

      The M4R tag is for stories that have potential, but are plagued by one or more issue/s that may hold them back from meeting QS (for example: grammar, formatting, plot problems, etc.). The issue/s could also not be directly related to the quality of the story, but rather, something like author permission or plagiarism. Either way, the main difference between this tag and Delete Now is whether the story in question is able to be fixed.

      This is better said than I could have possibly stated, along with the addition that some people like to use subjective reasons for marking a story for deletion rather than review like stating a story simply "isn't scary" which in some cases can certainly be an objective point however in most situations what one person finds scary another doesn't. Something not being scary should ever be the sole reason to mark something for deletion over marking it for review. 

      I simply disagree with the removal of the delete now tag due to people misusing it, not understanding what it is actually for, or simply using their subjective reasons as for why a story should not be on this site. Delete Now is to be used sparingly and not as often as people seem to use it for this to be as much of an issue as it has come to be. A story containing graphic depictions of sexual activities that the story hinges is something that'd be marked as Delete Now. A story that just has some poor wording, flow, and grammatical issues would be Marked For Review if simply editting the story is out of the question due to the changes needed being signficant enough to require a total rewrite of some sections. 

      Okay.  Again.  I understand the theoretical difference between the two tags.  However, there is no functional difference.  And regardless of what "should" or "should not" be happening, what is happening is an abuse of a tag that is functionally the same as a less dramatic, more forgiving one.

        Loading editor
    • Jdeschene wrote:
      ChaoZStrider wrote:
      CornConic wrote:

      The Delete Now tag is for stories that are blatant trollpastas, involve blacklisted subjects, or have some other trait(s) that make them unsalvagable, AKA, they have some sort of fundamental flaw that means they couldn't possibly be allowed on the site, no matter how much polish is applied. Therefore, they must be deleted as soon as an admin can get to them. This is where NedWolfkin went wrong, as he was adding the Delete Now tag to stories that were not objectively flawed, but rather, had problems that were subjective in nature.

      The M4R tag is for stories that have potential, but are plagued by one or more issue/s that may hold them back from meeting QS (for example: grammar, formatting, plot problems, etc.). The issue/s could also not be directly related to the quality of the story, but rather, something like author permission or plagiarism. Either way, the main difference between this tag and Delete Now is whether the story in question is able to be fixed.

      This is better said than I could have possibly stated, along with the addition that some people like to use subjective reasons for marking a story for deletion rather than review like stating a story simply "isn't scary" which in some cases can certainly be an objective point however in most situations what one person finds scary another doesn't. Something not being scary should ever be the sole reason to mark something for deletion over marking it for review. 

      I simply disagree with the removal of the delete now tag due to people misusing it, not understanding what it is actually for, or simply using their subjective reasons as for why a story should not be on this site. Delete Now is to be used sparingly and not as often as people seem to use it for this to be as much of an issue as it has come to be. A story containing graphic depictions of sexual activities that the story hinges is something that'd be marked as Delete Now. A story that just has some poor wording, flow, and grammatical issues would be Marked For Review if simply editing the story is out of the question due to the changes needed being significant enough to require a total rewrite of some sections. 

      Okay.  Again.  I understand the theoretical difference between the two tags.  However, there is no functional difference.  And regardless of what "should" or "should not" be happening, what is happening is an abuse of a tag that is functionally the same as a less dramatic, more forgiving one.

      I agree with this. I feel like what usually happens with the Delete Now tag is either:

      A) an admin deletes the story really quickly
      B) the story is fine, and the admins have to sit and look at the story until they finally take the "Delete Now" category off

      In case B, Delete Now is just M4R but with bad vibes. In case A, one could argue that Delete Now wasn't even necessary, and even then, one could argue that Marked for Review has the same effect when the story being marked for review doesn't meet quality standards.

      Also, the {{Delete}} template automatically puts a reason, but the {{M4R}} template doesn't.

        Loading editor
    • Functional Differences: Delete Now lets the admins know this story should be looked at urgently because it violates the blacklist, terms of service, and other such things and should be addressed and looked at immediately. Marked for Review is less urgent, and lets the admin and author know the quality of the story is in question and doesn't need to be deleted if the issues are fixxed and addressed. 

      From my looking into it, you(Jdeschne) have misused Delete Now when the more appropriate tag would have been Marked for Review. Granted you have not misused as much as Ned did (that does not say much however) but you have even agreed with Ned that a story should be marked Delete Now simply because the story "was not scary", which is a subjective reason and not an objective reason for a story to be deleted which is not the intended use of the tag. 

      Delete Now requires urgency, Marked For Review does not and means the story can likely be saved instead of needing to be deleted via editting by the author. 

      and Squid, "B) the story is fine, and the admins have to sit and look at the story until they finally take the "Delete Now" category off" when this is done it is because the person who applied the tag has misused it. That's not a problem with Delete Now but a problem with the person who applied the tag not understanding the use of the tag. If it were up to me I'd simply leave a warning on the talk page of the person who misused the tag to let them know the intended use of the tag, should they continue to abuse Delete Now they'd be punished for it. 

        Loading editor
    • ChaoZStrider wrote:
      Functional Differences: Delete Now lets the admins know this story should be looked at urgently because it violates the blacklist, terms of service, and other such things and should be addressed and looked at immediately. Marked for Review is less urgent, and lets the admin and author know the quality of the story is in question and doesn't need to be deleted if the issues are fixxed and addressed. 

      From my looking into it, you(Jdeschne) have misused Delete Now when the more appropriate tag would have been Marked for Review.  

      Again, these are only theoretical differences.  The reality is that things don't happen that way.  And I don't see what my history with the tag has to do with anything, especially since I'm advocating for its removal.  For all your detective work, you probably don't see that I had a story of my own successfully Delete Now'd a couple of years ago for the sole reason of not being scary.  So yes, it does and has worked for that.

      Also, from very recent experience, I know that marking a deletion-worthy story for review---guess what!---gets it deleted swiftly by an admin.  You have failed to make a case for the difference between them and clinging to what "should" be is not going to do it.  It's just not the reality.

        Loading editor
    • Personally, I think the two tags should be combined into something along the lines of "Marked for Review by staff" kind of thing that looks as ugly as the DN tag does now, and has a warning that the thing marked might be deleted by staff immediately after the review. Neither get used that frequently either way nowadays. 

      How do we make sure something that violates guidelines gets immediately deleted? We try to somehow enforce that the reason for marking is always stated upon marking. 

        Loading editor
    • No, Ned. That is an abuse of the template if someone is repeatedly adding it to things that do not really need it and indicates that the user in question should be using the M4R if they have clearly misunderstood the QS.

      Please do not liberally use M4R or Delete Now as it serves to clog up the categories and create more work for us. Delete Now should be used when you are sure something needs to be deleted. M4R is when you want people to review it. Do not use Delete Now to get admins to review stories.

      Delete Now on a spam story = good, great use of the template. Delete Now on a story with issues that could be fixed = no, bad, that would be M4R not Delete Now. Please stop doing this.

      5 days ago by ClericofMadness

      The site founder's own words. The problem itself is not with Delete Now, it is with the people who misuse it. You are one of them. Instead of learning when to use the templates and properly apply them, you claim that your own misuse of it is the reality of the situation. I am not going to be responding to this further so there is no real reason to respond to me any further, as I am not going to waste anymore time pointing things out to someone or at least trying to to someone who does not wish to learn how to properly tag things so this very issue would not be a problem. 

        Loading editor
    • ChaoZStrider wrote:
      No, Ned. That is an abuse of the template if someone is repeatedly adding it to things that do not really need it and indicates that the user in question should be using the M4R if they have clearly misunderstood the QS.

      Please do not liberally use M4R or Delete Now as it serves to clog up the categories and create more work for us. Delete Now should be used when you are sure something needs to be deleted. M4R is when you want people to review it. Do not use Delete Now to get admins to review stories.

      Delete Now on a spam story = good, great use of the template. Delete Now on a story with issues that could be fixed = no, bad, that would be M4R not Delete Now. Please stop doing this.

      5 days ago by ClericofMadness

      The site founder's own words. The problem itself is not with Delete Now, it is with the people who misuse it. You are one of them. Instead of learning when to use the templates and properly apply them, you claim that your own misuse of it is the reality of the situation. I am not going to be responding to this further so there is no real reason to respond to me any further, as I am not going to waste anymore time pointing things out to someone or at least trying to to someone who does not wish to learn how to properly tag things so this very issue would not be a problem. 

      Your copy and paste from Cleric a) has nothing to do with me and b) makes my case perfectly, so thank you for that. 

      I don't know why you've decided that I'm somehow the problem. 

      It leads me to wonder why you're so possessive of the status quo.  From my own detective work, I can see that you're not even an active or regular user.  The last contribution you made before inexplicably jumping in on this threat was in August of last year.  That's a solid eleven months of no activity from you, so it's not like you've got the most up-to-date sense of what's been going on here.

        Loading editor
    • Alright folks, please. Let’s not start jumping at each other’s throats and devolve this thread about templates into personal attacks.

        Loading editor
    • While I understand this is a topic that a lot of people care about and are vocal on, but please keep this civil. I'm in the process of drafting up an admin blog on the topic to get the userbase's opinion which I hope to post tomorrow once I properly find the words (i.e. my brain's fried from finals, Navle prep exams, and practicals so I want to work through a draft a bit before I write up something that will impact the site and its interactions with both new and old users alike.).

      We want what's best for the wiki (as do you all) so please take this time to formulate your opinions for the forthcoming blog on the topic. We will put out testers for how we want this wiki to proceed so you can discuss your points without getting heated.

        Loading editor
    • Jdeschene wrote:

      ChaoZStrider wrote:
      No, Ned. That is an abuse of the template if someone is repeatedly adding it to things that do not really need it and indicates that the user in question should be using the M4R if they have clearly misunderstood the QS.

      Please do not liberally use M4R or Delete Now as it serves to clog up the categories and create more work for us. Delete Now should be used when you are sure something needs to be deleted. M4R is when you want people to review it. Do not use Delete Now to get admins to review stories.

      Delete Now on a spam story = good, great use of the template. Delete Now on a story with issues that could be fixed = no, bad, that would be M4R not Delete Now. Please stop doing this.

      5 days ago by ClericofMadness

      The site founder's own words. The problem itself is not with Delete Now, it is with the people who misuse it. You are one of them. Instead of learning when to use the templates and properly apply them, you claim that your own misuse of it is the reality of the situation. I am not going to be responding to this further so there is no real reason to respond to me any further, as I am not going to waste anymore time pointing things out to someone or at least trying to to someone who does not wish to learn how to properly tag things so this very issue would not be a problem. 

      Your copy and paste from Cleric a) has nothing to do with me and b) makes my case perfectly, so thank you for that. 

      I don't know why you've decided that I'm somehow the problem. 

      It leads me to wonder why you're so possessive of the status quo.  From my own detective work, I can see that you're not even an active or regular user.  The last contribution you made before inexplicably jumping in on this threat was in August of last year.  That's a solid eleven months of no activity from you, so it's not like you've got the most up-to-date sense of what's been going on here.

      Just because I do not edit or post here doesn't mean I am unaware of what goes on here, I am friends with quite a few people from here and often get informed about things and just simply opt to stay out of it along with regularly checking this place to see if any old friends of mine resurface here to try and reconnect with them in some way. I'd refrain from making assumptions about whether someone is active or not here because well, you know what they say about assumptions, it makes an ass out of you and me. 

      That being said, you aren't the sole problem and I could have made that more apparant as my problem is not with you but with the misuse of the tag and reactions of people who hold a similar opinion of the tag to you when finding out its proper purpose. You misuse Delete Now and since, in your own opinion, it is not that different from Marked For Review than of course you and others with similar views to you would not care to learn the difference between the two tags and their proper usage. If any of the remarks or points made seem personal or empassioned than allow me to assure you that they aren't, you just happened to be a good example to use since you were the person I was addressing. Another good example would've been Ned and their friend with the O name, rather than learn the proper use of the tag when told it Ned simply jumped to its removal much like you are now. If any of what I have said has upset you or anyone else here than I apologize, I just do not feel that it is best to gingerly step around things when addressing them and that being blunt and honest makes it very clear where you stand and what your point is. 

        Loading editor
    • ChaoZStrider wrote:

      Jdeschene wrote:

      ChaoZStrider wrote:
      No, Ned. That is an abuse of the template if someone is repeatedly adding it to things that do not really need it and indicates that the user in question should be using the M4R if they have clearly misunderstood the QS.

      Please do not liberally use M4R or Delete Now as it serves to clog up the categories and create more work for us. Delete Now should be used when you are sure something needs to be deleted. M4R is when you want people to review it. Do not use Delete Now to get admins to review stories.

      Delete Now on a spam story = good, great use of the template. Delete Now on a story with issues that could be fixed = no, bad, that would be M4R not Delete Now. Please stop doing this.

      5 days ago by ClericofMadness

      The site founder's own words. The problem itself is not with Delete Now, it is with the people who misuse it. You are one of them. Instead of learning when to use the templates and properly apply them, you claim that your own misuse of it is the reality of the situation. I am not going to be responding to this further so there is no real reason to respond to me any further, as I am not going to waste anymore time pointing things out to someone or at least trying to to someone who does not wish to learn how to properly tag things so this very issue would not be a problem. 

      Your copy and paste from Cleric a) has nothing to do with me and b) makes my case perfectly, so thank you for that. 

      I don't know why you've decided that I'm somehow the problem. 

      It leads me to wonder why you're so possessive of the status quo.  From my own detective work, I can see that you're not even an active or regular user.  The last contribution you made before inexplicably jumping in on this threat was in August of last year.  That's a solid eleven months of no activity from you, so it's not like you've got the most up-to-date sense of what's been going on here.

      Just because I do not edit or post here doesn't mean I am unaware of what goes on here, I am friends with quite a few people from here and often get informed about things and just simply opt to stay out of it along with regularly checking this place to see if any old friends of mine resurface here to try and reconnect with them in some way. I'd refrain from making assumptions about whether someone is active or not here because well, you know what they say about assumptions, it makes an ass out of you and me. 

      That being said, you aren't the sole problem and I could have made that more apparant as my problem is not with you but with the misuse of the tag and reactions of people who hold a similar opinion of the tag to you when finding out its proper purpose. You misuse Delete Now and since, in your own opinion, it is not that different from Marked For Review than of course you and others with similar views to you would not care to learn the difference between the two tags and their proper usage. If any of the remarks or points made seem personal or empassioned than allow me to assure you that they aren't, you just happened to be a good example to use since you were the person I was addressing. Another good example would've been Ned and their friend with the O name, rather than learn the proper use of the tag when told it Ned simply jumped to its removal much like you are now. If any of what I have said has upset you or anyone else here than I apologize, I just do not feel that it is best to gingerly step around things when addressing them and that being blunt and honest makes it very clear where you stand and what your point is. 

      I really don't know where you are getting this idea that I "misuse" the tag when I honestly can't remember the last time I used it, if in fact I ever have.  Talk about making assumptions.  You're making completely baseless accusations.

        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.