User:Chicken7/Closure proposal

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Closing threads without implementation

As a wiki, we have a unique method of making decisions as a community, where everyone may have an equal say. All the time there are new proposals in our Yew Grove Forum, where we debate things and we allow our ideas to flourish. If a proposal is successful, the thread is closed and the admin writes their usual "The proposal will be implemented." But there's a sad truth; most of the time, the proposal is not implemented.

We have an issue in our system where threads pass, but the project just sits dormant, with little to no progress whatsoever. Often, this means that amazing ideas are either forgotten or only implemented partially. I will outline my point with a number of examples below:

  • Forum:Filenames - The closing administrator updated the Image Policy, but 6 months later and there has been no noticeable improvement in the standardisation of our file names. We should have continued to discuss how to tackle the issue, and organised users to go through categories moving images to their rightful place.
  • Forum:Articles for music pieces - We eventually did create articles for all the music pieces, but they were of sub-standard quality, even though the YG originally suggested numerous pieces of info that could be included. As a result, Forum:Music Article Stubs and Forum:Collapse music were created to discuss the incomplete nature of our music articles; this wouldn't have happened if the original proposal was fully implemented.
  • Forum:Articles for Jagex Staff - It passed, but as a result of the forum, only 1 extra article was created, giving us a grand total of 5 Jagex Staff articles.
  • Forum:Add_spell_costs_to_Template:Infobox_spell - This passed with full support, but of course, nothing ever happened.
  • Forum:Archiving_the_Yew_Grove - An ironic twist, a similar proposal to this was brought up by C Teng, but the proposal itself was closed without explanation or implementation.

There are dozens more examples. What I propose is an amendment to the closing procedure. An administrator may close a YG thread as successful, but it should remain unarchived until the proposal is implemented and the logistics have been discussed. This will avoid the situation explained above. It may mean that proposals are open for longer, and that our YG thread list is a little longer, but it's better than having all these ideas and proposals go to waste.

Thoughts? Queries? Comments? Chicken7 >talk 05:22, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Comments[edit | edit source]

Ugh totally agree. Forum:Archiving the Yew Grove. We've had so many discussions on this, and they've all passed, and we still keep closing improperly. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 06:51, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I remember that thread. It's ironic, because that thread was closed without implementation and consensus! Although, there was a time where we had a serious problem with like 94 Yew Grove threads. We had to seriously get some crap out of the way to make us efficient again. But now, we should be reconsidering this issue. Thanks for the input. Chicken7 >talk 23:47, January 8, 2012 (UTC)