FANDOM


(Highlight removed)
(Thread moved)
 
Line 15: Line 15:
 
<strike>So, to start off voting, I feel like Option A. It's confusing to have an article that was created in October of 2013 to be in this category.</strike>
 
<strike>So, to start off voting, I feel like Option A. It's confusing to have an article that was created in October of 2013 to be in this category.</strike>
   
EDIT: I am actually changing my vote to Option C. The site is too young to have this category to be on here. Agreeing with what Xelrog said, and disagreeing with what Callie said. <ac_metadata title="Re-Evalutating the Classics Category"> </ac_metadata>
+
EDIT: I am actually changing my vote to Option C. The site is too young to have this category to be on here. Agreeing with what Xelrog said, and disagreeing with what Callie said. <ac_metadata title="Re-Evalutating the Classics Category" lastmove="1404093921"> </ac_metadata>

Latest revision as of 02:05, June 30, 2014

Alright. Lately, there has been a situation with the Classics Category. The Classics category pretty much holds articles that were created before and within a year after the wiki was created. Since this wiki is still a baby wiki, only being a year and 5 months old, I have three options relating to the category.

Option A: Re-classify the time period when the category is allowed on articles, and revoke the rule that Suggested Reading and Classics as a conflicting category.

What this means is that articles that were created before the wiki was created, and within a 2-4 month period, that are qualitative, are put in this category. And the rule that separates Classics and Suggested Reading from being together on a page is removed from our rules.

Option B: Re-classify the time period when the category is allowed on articles, but keep the rule separating Suggested Reading and Classics.

Same thing as option A, but the site keeps the rule separating SR and Classics

Option C: We get rid of the Classics Category.

The wiki seems to be in the wrong period to have this category allowed on this wiki. It's over a year old, and shouldn't have the category. The category will be removed from articles and, if they are worthy, will be replaced with the Suggested Reading category.

So, to start off voting, I feel like Option A. It's confusing to have an article that was created in October of 2013 to be in this category.

EDIT: I am actually changing my vote to Option C. The site is too young to have this category to be on here. Agreeing with what Xelrog said, and disagreeing with what Callie said.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.