SmashWiki talk:Be Bold

Proposal discussion

Support, as nom.

--- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 18:38, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

Oppose in its current state. I'm not big on how the page is written right now. The opening section especially could use a more defined structure. In addition, the "what being bold is not" section should be reworded to more heavily emphasize what the "best way" to act bold is, and paragraphs are currently split up unnecessarily.

By the way, is this intended to be a guideline or policy? I feel it should be the former. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 19:49, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

I'll see if I can address your complaints, though I did intend for this to be strictly a guideline. Can't exactly ban someone for not being bold.

--- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 20:01, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

Oppose this seems kinda unnecessary. We shouldn't have to tell people to make edits they think will help? Also side-note how many proposals do you plan on making because this is kinda getting tedious. Alex Parpotta the flying lobster! 19:54, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

Something I've noticed is that we have quite a number of users who stay on Recent Changes and don't edit; furthermore, a number of former discussions received particularly disappointing turnout, something I feel that is detrimental to the Wiki. Also, by your logic, we should delete SmashWiki:You are valuable, since it "only" tells users that their edits are valuable.

And for your final question, I obviously plan on writing 105 different guidelines and policies in the future. Are you going to automatically oppose them just because I've written so many?

--- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 20:01, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

And that's another thing, this kinda seems supplementary to SW:YAV, and could probably just be covered there.

Also 105?! At this rate we'll be the future Soviet Union with all these rules... Alex Parpotta the flying lobster! 20:13, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

I disagree. YAV covers that editors are valuable; Be Bold covers that editors should be bold, two objectives that are separate, distinct, and different from one another.

Also, thanks to that snide remark, I now plan on writing 106 different guidelines and policies.

--- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 20:39, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

Neutral, sliding towards oppose. I'm undecided, but here's what I think. This kinda touches on what SW:YAV is, making it redundant. Furthermore, I don't like how it's written - if we're gonna use this, the writing must be improved significantly (hence why I might support this). Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the Internets go! :3 22:18, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

YAV is separate from Be Bold. YAV merely states that editors are valuable and their input is as valuable as that of a seasoned editor; Being Bold tells all editors to freely edit SmashWiki, no matter their experience, as to help the Wiki grow. YAV deals with ranking and perceived nepotism; Being Bold deals with editing.

Also, saying "I don't like how it's written" does not help in the slightest. If it sucks, you have to tell me why it sucks, not just that you think it sucks.

--- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 22:29, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

The readability is the main problem. It's not bad, but it's not the best either. The tone also needs to be made a little bit more formal - in particular, on line 3, instead of the word "upset", use "discouraged". I know you say this is different from YAV, but I still can't really see the difference. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the Internets go! :3 00:38, 16 July 2017 (EDT)