FANDOM


Forums: Index > Dobbstalk > Writing a good article


There are new guidelines I have posted for writing a good article at SubGenius Wikia Clench:Writing a Good Article, linked to from the main page of the wiki as well as the About/Rules page. Basically they describe the guidelines I myself followed with almost all the articles I wrote for this wiki that I consider good, and what I think all of the articles on the wiki should strive to be like.

If there are questions or comments about this or proposals to change these guidelines (remember they are just guidelines or suggestions and not rules that are enforced or have punishments if you go against them), you are welcome to discuss it in this thread... and of course you can edit that page too to change the guidelines but I would suggest people only do that if they think there is something wrong with the guidelines, like something missing from them, something that could be worded better, something unclear, or something that there is a consensus about it needing to be changed.

Anyway I posted those guidelines because some of the newer articles aren't quite the quality I would want them to be but I think with those guidelines there for people to read, people will know what to do to improve the articles. They cover everything from having pictures in articles to using categories to writing the content yourself instead of copying and pasting it from some other wiki or website to the style of writing you should try and aim for.

I also made a minor change at the top of the about/rules page SubGenius Wikia Clench:About with a better explanation of the subject matter of this wiki, along with inserting in the mention of these guidelines for writing a good article at the bottom of that page (you can look at the edit history to see the changes).

This thread is for any discussion about any of this. I do think it's pretty obvious there's a need for page explaining how to write an article that is considered "good" by the unique standards of this particular wiki. But if there are any disagreements, questions, comments, etc. regarding those specific guidelines I came up with, feel free to comment here as well as fix anything you find wrong with that page so that it does a better job explaining how to write a "good" article by the standards of this wiki. --The Overmind (talk) 12:57, October 21, 2015 (UTC)

CommentsEdit

I appreciate the work done here by The Overmind. Large Wikis often have something like this, and because Wikia is so varied from Wikia site to site, something to give editors an idea how to edit a particular wikia can be very helpful.
Not surprisingly, I do have some suggestions for changes.
Red Links: While I personally find it annoying to see a page filled with red links, if limited they do have their uses. Editing Tools has a function called Wanted Articles. This lists article names with red links, and is useful for finding articles the people editing a wiki want to be there.
Pictures and Videos: Agreed. I admit I'm very lax about finding and adding pictures, but am happy to have someone else add them. We could use a link to the video adding procedure. And I'd like to have something that encourages editors to add a video link without worrying about technicalities. That gives us a useful addition that another editor can "fix" later.
This is further supported here. Pope Hilde (talk) 19:18, October 26, 2015 (UTC)
Links: Agreed.
Copying articles from other sites: Agreed. In general I don't like articles here being word-for-word copies of articles easily available elsewhere on the Internet. Although I think there are exceptions, such as posting an existing historical piece that fits this site but isn't readily available in common SubGenius sources. If Creative Commons/GNU/kopyleft/public domain material is used from another site, it should be credited. Importing is sometimes the most efficient way to do this, and then it can be adapted for the website. For example, see the changes made on an article from the original Discordian Wiki import to the SubGenius version here. For another example, see SubGenius Wikia Clench:Editing Tools.
Articles should be halfway between sense and nonsense: Partially disagree. Most articles here, both old and new, might be seen by The CONSPIRACY to fit this. But I don't know that I like it as a guideline. I think new editors can easily get the feel of that just by looking at the site. There is the concept that everything written by an ordained members of the Church of the SubGenius is doctrine. I like that the idea that it's all true even if The CONSPIRACY cannot make sense of it.
Articles show SubGenius perspective if known: Agreed.
Humor: Disagree. I personally don't think all articles here need to be humorous. With no offense intended to certain Uncyclopedia editors who edit here, I personally don't want this to be seen as The SubGenius Uncyclopedia. I've read and heard a lot of SubGenius material that was quite straight forward, or at least serious, perhaps most of it done by leaders of the Church. I believe that's part of the Church tradition as well.
Categories: Agreed. Although I'd change the word "should". Again, I don't want to discourage creative editors by bogging them down in editing rules. There's a tool for finding articles without categories here. Some editor hate adding categories; someone else can do that for them.
Pope Hilde (talk) 21:02, October 22, 2015 (UTC)
  • COMMENT.
I'll try to keep this in order. I think some red links are OK but not too many. One of the founders of a wiki I edit encouraged lots of red links bcuz he thought they were pretty. :P
I love adding pics and links that's not a problem.
Really I don't see a prob having an article from another wikia. If it fits here why not use it?
I like mixing sense and truth with nonsense and lies. A lot of my articles are sporks and that's exactly what they are.
I think most things should be humorous here but not all. I'm the Uncyclopedia Girl. I've edited Wikipedia the most and it second, and I want more Uncyclopedia than Wikipedia here.
I started a project on Discordian Wiki to get all articles in categories. There were 104 articles without categories, but in two months we got that down to zero. Miley Spears Junior Bobbie Girl (let's talk) 03:27, October 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • COMMENT. Based on the discussion, I plan to make a few changes in the next day or so. As The Overmind wrote:
...of course you can edit that page too to change the guidelines but I would suggest people only do that if they think there is something wrong with the guidelines, like something missing from them, something that could be worded better, something unclear, or something that there is a consensus about it needing to be changed.
Of course my changes are just as subject to change if not more so. Pope Hilde (talk) 13:01, October 25, 2015 (UTC)
I'll check it out. Miley Spears Junior Bobbie Girl (let's talk) 02:39, October 26, 2015 (UTC)
Sorry if I didn't make it clear. I haven't actually made the changes yet, but may start now. Pope Hilde (talk) 19:19, October 26, 2015 (UTC)


  • COMMENT. I made some changes based on suggestions. My edits are not set in stone--they aren't scripture as dictated by "Bob", so feel free to make fixes and suggest changes. Pope Hilde (talk) 20:05, October 26, 2015 (UTC)
Nobody's said anything against it so so far so good. :) Miley Spears Junior Bobbie Girl (let's talk) 21:06, October 28, 2015 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.