150
edits
* I would support the 4 tier system if it also includes the template-based system. I think the biggest problem with our current system is it doesn't tell what the problem with the article is necessarily (e.g. what it's missing that's keeping it from being a higher rating). With templates saying things like "this article needs __________", users can more easily determine how they can help the article. Plus, looking at articles that are in "Category:Articles that need _____", users can browse articles that need improvement easier based on how they want to contribute. Right now if a user is in the mood to add LEGO.com descriptions to an article, they can't easily find a list of pages that lack that description. With the category, they'd be able to find those pages, rather than looking through every C4 article which would be a nightmare. Going way back in time to when I worked on the Ninjago Wiki, we only had a few templates. No classes (besides featured), but it was always ''so'' easy to find what needed work and how exactly they needed improvement. I know we already have templates like this but their use should be more regular. I guess the current ones just don't seem to contribute much to content improvement. For example, while there's {{tl|Update}}, that hardly ever says ''what'' needs to be updated. And often times, the update message box needs to be updated itself, for example I periodically see one that says a page lacks 2013 info, but it hasn't been updated in so long that it also lacks 2014 info and 2015 info. I think the problem is they lack detail. I think the most important one for us to adopt will be the stub template(s). Since Brickipedia is more broad than The Ninjago Wiki was, we'll probably need more than one stub template like Wikipedia, such as ones that will categorize them as "Minifigure stubs" or "BIONICLE stubs". This should be able to help users who want to contribute to a certain area find things that need work in those areas. {{C|I don't know if I already said these exact things above I just wrote it all out and thought "did I already write this?" lolol}} --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 05:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
** I think what me and Nova are thinking is that we used to have stub templates, but telling a user that a short page is short doesn't help loads. [[User:UltrasonicNXT|UltrasonicNXT]] ([[User talk:UltrasonicNXT|talk]])
*** Are loads a concern? Adding a couple extra bytes to a page shouldn't matter. The page will ideally become larger anyways and then remove the stub template, so really it's not like it'd ever "push" a page over the edge of how much the server can load. I think the benefits of stub categorization outweigh the concern of 50 extra bytes on a page at most. I'd much rather be able to filter something down to all the Bionicle-related stubs than have to sort through every Class 5, Class 4, and Class 3 article trying to find a Bionicle article that had something I knew how to improve. --[[User:ToaMeiko|ToaMeiko]] ([[User talk:ToaMeiko|talk]]) 16:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
===CJC's long rambling comment===
|