Forum:The WIP problem

SQhi brought this problem up on Turnament's talk page. For those of you unfamiliar with the situation, the problem is that, when a new game is released, someone will create the game's page, but place a WIP on it. From here on, the editability of the page is based on the person taking Template:WIP off. Thus, the placer could leave for some time, and leave the page with the WIP on it, with people wanting to add the content unable to.

Does anyone have any suggestions that could solve this problem? -- 16:52, September 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * I told my suggestion the last time it was discussed, and I say it again: The articles about new/upcoming components cannot have a WIP untill "x" days after the release/announcement of the game/subject. Then, everyone can edit the page, an when an edit coflict is cuased, the editor only has to copypaste what he/she written to the other text chart. I suggested that, but I don't know why the discussion stopped. I don't see anything wrong with this solution, but if anyone does, we can modify this suggestion. 19:31, September 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I thought Santi already discussed this....
 * 21:47, September 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * Really? Oh... I thought the situation remained unsolved, as SQhi noted how something similar to what I had mentioned had already happened. Should 3 days be a good substitution for x? -- 22:13, September 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * SQhi here with an objective PoV(SQhi does not edit articles on new games). I think 3 days would be too long for newly created games. Many members would be clamoring to edit the newly sprouted articles. 22:58, September 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, all the users could edit, but the WIP template could not be placed. Then, all the users have a time (let's say 3 days) to edit the page about the newly released game, and if someone wants to keep the page for himself, he would have to wait a few days to do it. Do you understand it? Maybe I didn't explained it correctly before. 10:49, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Reset Indent I like your last comment's idea. So, if anyone is fine with the above comment's idea, may I close this forum topic and place it where it belongs (on which page do I place this new rule?)? -- 17:50, September 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * I like Santi's idea but we can't pass it yet. This would result is plenty of edit conflicts. Unluckily unlike chat we can't tell real-time if a member is editing the article. Perhaps WIP one hours should be permitted. Within 3 days of release of the game, such a WIP can only be used every six hours. Perhaps we could even have a queue on the talk page. OR we could teach everyone how to recover whatever they have added during an edit conflict. SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 18:10, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * One hour seems to long. How about 10/20 minute intervals? -- 19:12, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * We have to be pragmatic though, how much work can one get one in 10/20 minute intevals if one is writing an article and not merely editing it. How about 30 minutes? SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 19:39, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Depends on how long the periods of having a WIP up are that we're trying to protect against. I'd say that when I put a WIP up on a new page, it's to prevent edit conflicts and I take it down a few minutes later. I'd suggest 15 minutes, because they can always put it back up later after they're done. We need to find a way to monitor this... It'd be hard unless people watch the edit logs carefully. 19:45, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Reset Indent The edit conflicts would continue happening, because the people would wait for the exact moment when the users removes the WIP. I think that it isn't hard to learn/teach what the users have to do when an edit conflict happens. 19:51, September 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * You have got to be kidding me. That is going to be too difficult to monitor, and will most likely lead to a lot of users gaming the whole concept of a WIP template. We can reduce the amount of editing on newly released game pages by protecting them temporarily. By protecting, I mean restricting the editing to only registered contributors for a week or so.


 * To get the point across, it's much better to either allow them on a newly released game page or not. If we have these "few minute WIPs", it starts getting difficult to determine who placed a WIP and when they should remove it. I'm okay with saying "No WIPs on a page about a newly released game until three days after the game's release" and at the same time, restricting editing to only registered contributors. If an edit conflict happens, well, unfortunately, it happens.


 * Also, I think it's best to ask this: why NOBODY decided to place a WIP upon creating Turnament. As far as I'm concerned, he's the one who recognized this issue in the first place and brought it up in this blog post. 20:02, September 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * About the WIP on Turnament... well... I don't know. I guess I thought people would create it ahead of me, but then, I could have just replaced the other person's content with my content if I got edit conflicted. The main problem with WIPs on newly released games is because, when someone creates the page, they tend to not finish the general layout of game page's for some time. The main layout of the page is really what is causing this problem with the WIP, as for people who look up the game on the Nitrome Wiki, the game page will likely be under construction.


 * If we could somehow get the main layout of a newly released game's page preloaded, then someone can simply pick that if they create the page. I've found that some time after a game page is released, edits to the game page are less frequent. The main problem is really when a page is first created. -- 20:35, September 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * The funny thing is that when I made that above comment, I had an edit conflict with Santi. I noticed that the editor works properly now, so it also remembers your changes if you click Publish and another user edited before. If you added content that the previous user did not add before, then it is as easy as a copy/paste to the top editor.


 * With that in mind, I propose saying no to the placing of a WIP until at least three days after the game's release. Edit conflicts, which seem to be the main concern here, are inevitable when it comes to editing high traffic pages, and users should be aware of that before editing. Placing a WIP template might not change any of that. You can still have a chance of getting an edit conflict because another user might be adding a WIP template at the same time you do, or decide to ignore the WIP policy and edit the page anyways. It doesn't guarantee "safe editing". 07:21, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * The second alternative is better. My only reserve is how Wikia tends to screw up the editor (frequently) and the bottom box doesn't reflect what you have just added. A quick alt+left tends to solve the probl;em though.SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 10:17, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Reset Indent I think RSK is right. If you're going to make a large edit on a page, wait for a point where no one is editing, don't add a WIP. WIPs are meant for longer periods of editing when a user is making major changes to the format of the page and doesn't want to be interrupted. It isn't made to protect against edit conflicts. Users also might add a WIP because they want to add some info to start the page off with. I agree with the three days rule, because we won't be able to monitor it in minutes or hours accurately. 14:14, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think we can start voting. Support = you agree with the rule of the WIP. Oppose = you don't agree with that rule. 15:20, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * So, for this vote/support thing, will support support the idea of not having a WIP on a page if a new game until 3 days/72 hours has past? -- 18:37, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I think we should wait a little bit before. About the game page layout, I can make a button on the edit page so if anyone starts a game page, a dafault layout will appear like MediaWiki:Welcome-user-page. What do you think about that? 19:19, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, that will work... but only if the people who create the page know how to use it. Seeing as mostly people who know how to use templates create game articles here, I support using the game page layout preload button. -- 20:23, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * This discussion has run for almost a week now. I find this community tends to lose interest in a forum discussion after a few days. Let's focus on the issue of the WIP template itself and instead, make a decision now about the use of the WIP templates on newly released game pages. How about voicing your opinion about this: A WIP cannot be placed on an article about a newly released game until three days after its release. Go! 01:56, October 4, 2012 (UTC)

(indent reset) Yes, that would be the more viable option. I suggest we extend this to every new feature released such as Nitrome Touchy, icebreaker updates and blog posts. SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 04:02, October 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree! -- 14:52, October 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * The three day timer should be set for both when the game releases, and if Nitrome releases lots of information about an upcoming game. Under the current rules, people could place WIPs on Icebreaker iOS right after it was revealed, since it wasn't released yet. 23:54, October 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * GO!!! I shall push this forum topic through the bureaucracy. Please express support/reservations about the 3 day WIP rule and suggest the types of new releases which fall under this rule. (this who have done so, thank you) SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 04:21, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Seeking consensus
Second resolution. NOBODY pointed out it is hard work starting an article. A template shall be created to aid in the construction of newly-created pages. Anyone for Santi's idea? Let's go. Really. SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 04:21, October 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * Based on Santi's point, I'd support, but I'd like to know what template you have in mind for "[aiding] in the construction of newly-created pages". 06:27, October 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * About the past comments, I support the idea of "protecting of WIPs" the pages about newly released games, recently announced games/updates/other for a time period of 3 days. Also, I'll explain more about the new game page layout: It can be a page layout that appears if you choose it when loading a page, or it can be a edit toolbar button (a default game article text appears when you click on a button). The first idea is better, I think. 12:13, October 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think I stated "creating a game page is hard", I just said it may be hard for other people. Anyway, I'm voting for the "No WIP on new game page's for X days". -- 13:02, October 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * Are you talking about using the layout builder or using a createbox tag, which, upon clicking the "Create" button, allows the user to create an article with the preloaded text? For an edit toolbar button, do you mean edit buttons on the editor in source mode?


 * Anyways, the "game page layout" might be going a little off topic. Let's stick to this "voting" about WIP templates first, then discuss game page layouts later. My support is for delaying the placing of a WIP on an article about a newly released game until three days after its release. 06:35, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

(reset)let's consider the 3 days settled. Most participants have voice their support. Yes, we should have this for newly released games, but I strongly feel we should extend this to new features(profile, Nitrome Touchy, IOS). Previews are exempted. Updated to features are also exempted. Mini games are exempted. SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 07:53, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree to the "No WIP till 3 days". But, by 3 days, do we mean 72 hours after the creation of the page? -- 14:41, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * no WIP within 72 hours of the official release on Nitrome blog? It makes sense anyway, Nitrome is in London and uses UTC time. We can have a JavaScript countdown like the one Bluefire used. SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 02:38, October 9, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, two things to focus on now. 3 days(full days) or 72 hours prohibition on WIP after a release. + Which releases fall under this rule. RSK says for every game release. SQhi says for Main Games only. Super Snot Put as such would not be covered, since it's a pretty small game. TAKESHI says that large previews such as Nitrome Must Die and Icebreaker iOS should also be covered. SQhi further proposes new feature releases and their large previews should also be covered, such as Nitrome's rollout of profiles and Nitrome Touchy. Minor updates/previews and the likes of Double Edged???? and Icebreaker ResolutionsSQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 03:36, October 9, 2012 (UTC)

We're getting somewhere.


 * When I say "newly game releases", I forgot about the release of new features such as Nitrome Touchy, which I also agree that this rule should apply to. Mini games would have been exempted from this rule, except Nitrome has combined both mini and main games into one tab, so mini games would come under our own definitions now. It would be best to have one straightforward rule so that the answer can be a firm yes or no to the 3 day (72 hours) delay. If a new "mini game" is released, I would assume the game traffic wouldn't be as high, so users wouldn't have to worry about edit conflicts anyway when making their edits. 06:11, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree to no WIP on a page about a newly released game/feature for 72 hours/3 days. -- 13:21, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * NOBODY, the question here is whether we should count from the time of release in terms of days or hours. SQhi&bull;(talk)Ruby 13:56, October 9, 2012 (UTC)