Approved Submission New Guide for Reviewing Submissions

[Wes]

Submission URL

https://stararmy.com/wiki/doku.php?id=guide:reviewing_submissions

I've created a new guide for reviewing submissions, that is focused on giving a good experience and explains what should and shouldn't be in each submission.

Here's what I have so far. Please review it and let me know what you think about it.

 

[Alex Hart]

I'd kind of like to include instructions to avoid referencing events that haven't happened yet, actual examples of bombastic language, and instruction to check for copypasta directly within the checklist.

 

[Zack]

[ ] 10. The article doesn't break Star Army's rules in terms of damage ratings, speed limits, etc.

should be changed to:

[ ] 10. The article follows Star Army's rules in terms of damage ratings, speed limits, etc.

So that all of the items on the checklist are in the affirmative. Rather than having 9 things that are supposed to happen and one thing that isn't supposed to happen.

----


[ ] 6. The article fits the space opera theme of Star Army and fits into the Star Army universe


Should be removed, as it is not something that is quantifiable. Things like Phods/Kodians/low tech worlds/etc all fall into a questionable area that ultimately is going to be left up to how someone is feeling that particular day which will cause arguments in the NTSE. It would be better to have a list of things we're not interested in having on the site (Magic, new power sources, etc.) and have this rule be about making sure the submission does not fall into one of those categories.

----

[ ] 7. The article avoids the use of bombastic or extreme language and isn't "overpowered."

Should just be:


[ ] 7. The article avoids the use of bombastic or extreme language

For both reasons listed above. This makes the item be answered in the affirmative only, and "overpowered" is entirely arbitrary. The DR rules are there to say what is allowed in a quantifiable way so the overpowered part is already covered elsewhere in the rules in a better way.

 

[Alex Hart]

We absolutely do need to keep the check for OP-ness to make sure that no one tries to cheese the system, and since OP-ness is determined by the NTSE mods.

 

[FrostJaeger]

[ ] 6. The article fits the space opera theme of Star Army and fits into the Star Army universe


Should be removed, as it is not something that is quantifiable. Things like Phods/Kodians/low tech worlds/etc all fall into a questionable area that ultimately is going to be left up to how someone is feeling that particular day which will cause arguments in the NTSE. It would be better to have a list of things we're not interested in having on the site (Magic, new power sources, etc.) and have this rule be about making sure the submission does not fall into one of those categories.

That should not removed, @Zack, because it is quantifiable. If it's something Wes or an NTSE mod deems incompatible with the theme of the Star Army setting, then it should not be allowed in the setting - because not having this rule is exactly how a certain fantasy-themed faction was created.

 

[Ametheliana]

I am a little bit confused and a bit embarrassed. I rarely, if ever, utilize the post-approval aspect of this guide @Wes! I am so sorry! I tried to use it today but realized there are things I can not do on it as well as things on it that make reviewing articles less exciting when this is necessitated by the reviewer. I think adding the wording of "for the reviewer..." is what really stalled me.

The post-approval review with my notes in the brackets:
Thanks again for submitting an article to the wiki! Time for some final steps for the reviewer...

[ Easy! This is already my job!] 1. State clearly that the article is approved in the submission thread
[ Most submitters do this, though?] 2. Move the wiki article to its permanent (destination) location on the wiki
[ Again, easy as it is my job to do this!] 3. Move the submission thread to the Approved Submissions subforum or get a moderator to
[ I feel like that is best left to the submitter? I think it's like putting the cherry on top on my own articles and I like doing it myself as the submitter.] 4. Edit the article to add a link to the approval thread in the OOC Notes section
[ This I flat out can not do for the submitter. They know what needs to link to their own article so much better than I do AND probably have an intimate relationship with those articles anyway, so know where and how to do so.] 5. Link other articles to the approved article as appropriate (equipment lists, etc.)

Tagging reviewers: @Syaoran and @Charmaylarg Dufrain for thoughts.

 

[Charmaylarg Dufrain]

I do the post-approval every time. But i sometimes leave things out. If i cant tell where they want the article linked i often leave that N/A. But for putting the approval thread linked in the OOC section i feel is my responsibility. Because it ensures i get a final glance at the articles revisions and make sure its then marked as approved because the submitted 3/10 times might miss doing that and it'll cause problems down the road.

Linking other articles i also avoid because its all about the preference of the submitter on how they want things linked and how they have it set up.

 

[Wes]

What should link to a newly approved article?

1. The list(s) of items of that category, for example the list of firearms and combat gear, or the list of space stations. NOTE: Some pages have automatic lists that will save you an edit, for example, the list of planets lists every article in the planet namespace.

2. The timeline year article (e.g. YE 41) for when that item was made

These are not submitter preferences. Other links can be added by anyone as appropriate but the reviewer should get at least those two items.

Articles with no backlinks to them are subject to removal from the wiki, so it's critical that used articles have links to them and show they're in use.

 

[Charmaylarg Dufrain]

I at least meant where they want it linked. Like on the corporation or equipment page.

 

[Ametheliana]

For instance, I am trying to get the Monarchy of Dovania military skills and occupations backlinked. It's not something that has an appropriate list nor is the main faction page approved, so putting it on the timeline would not be appropriate until then. Even so, linking that sort of page on the timeline would be a stretch for me as a reviewer. I will add, I didn't add the approval timer on those pages, but I came in and approved it a few weeks after the timer was put up, so I don't have a great knowledge of the articles themselves but just want things to be tidy (out of wip URL, have accurate OOC Notes, etc) but those things being my responsibility along with backlinking is daunting. I guess... I don't have to because one of the articles backlinks to the other and one backlinks to wip and the wip MoD faction page, but the checklist says "as appropriate" and there should be more solid linked places than those, imo. But maybe I m wrong and I don't even have to do anything because they're pre-backlinked, it still stands that these pages wouldn't be on equipment lists or the timeline.

I, as the reviewer, really don't think it should be on me to find a place to the link the more niche things. Not everything submitted is an item. Sorry if this is complain-y, I jus haven't been doing something and, to me, there's good reason for it.

 

[Syaoran]

Okay well I do the first 4 things, but i haven't been doing five. I know there are the equipment pages and stuff, but I always felt that the submitter should be putting those links up. Not only because of there could be dozens of pages it should be linked to that aren't mentioned on the actual article (from organizations adopting the weapon in their standard issue equipment) but also it makes people familiar with the meta pages and the company product lists.

I was entirely unaware that things should go on the timeline though, unless they were something majorly significant like factions being discovered.

 

[Charmaylarg Dufrain]

Same. In fact when i first came back from my hiatus i was told you don't touch the timeline for anything that isn't a significant event.

And i was like... We used to put characters born and technologies created during that year here when they where approved, what happened?

And i was told there's simply too much stuff getting approved and happening, just don't.

Been a couple years since then but first impressions stick, ye know?

 

[club24]

Im not a reviewer but as a submitter I agree with us being in charge of linking it to different pages, its not the kind of thing where one size fits all its really a preference thing.

 

[Wes]

Maybe we could change the item to something like: remind the submitter to link to the newly-approved page whereever it makes sense to do so.

NOTE: In some cases it might make sense to ask me to use the batch edit plugin to replace all mentions of a term with a link to the wiki page. For example, if someone made an article for fried chicken, I could make all mentions of fried chicken link to that page.

 

[club24]

That might be a good idea in theory but it’d have to be super specific or we’ll have incorrect links popping up and in a lot of pages I’ve seen at least items are often referenced by a nickname or short name which can be similar to each other

Honestly just reminding people should work, if you put the efgort into writing a page its not much extra to link it on the corp or gov page or whatever it was made by ect

 

[Ametheliana]

I think Wes did that with pizza one day and it worked really well. Did you use the batch plug-in, Wes?

I think that works and I like it, Wes! Will you edit it or should I since I asked?

 

[Wes]

Edit what?

 

[Ametheliana]

The reviewing submissions article- specifically the part about post-approval and its following component: "5. Link other articles to the approved article as appropriate (equipment lists, etc.)".

I was just thinking of making it your direct quote: "Remind the submitter to link to the newly-approved page wherever it makes sense to do so."

 

[Wes]

OK.

 

[Ametheliana]

Thank you! I did so.