Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

Summary:

Or why Kylen is Feeling Pissy

Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

Kylen Phylar 07 Dec 2009 06:16

As we all know, the Mass Edits are going on/Done. Granted, I can't tell which it is, because they decided to finish up in secret.

Thus leads to my problem.

The ONLY SCP I have created was deleted. This, would be fine, if someone had told me it was slated, and that I had a chance to save it, LET ALONE told me what was wrong so next time I could avoid those pitfalls.

Some might deduce that bad SCPs should just be burned, no reason, no questions asked. While this has some solid ground to stand on, this leaves writers of SCPs kind of in the dark about what was wrong with the ones that were burned to begin with, and with no chance of learning from the mistakes of that SCP.

Why not alert us when something we created is slated, if not for a chance to save it, then why it was bad and suggestions that could be made to improve the writer's skills at making SCPs. Else, we're going to be stuck with the ones we have, and where's the fun in that?

Re: Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

Sophia Light 07 Dec 2009 07:16

A few things:
We want, for one, formost, a really good website. Having things that are bad or less then good makes a bad website. The focus of the mass edit was the viewers, not the authors. And we wanted to get this done as quickly as possible (with the opinions of people we can trust as having good standards), so that our authors could get back to writing.

Lots of people have written bad SCPs, even and especially as first SCPs. That's alright when some get deleted, there are always more ideas out there. There's nothing wrong with just starting again.

That said, I can't imagine you wouldn't have a saved copy of it somewhere that you could dredge up in order to start on whatever revisions need to be done to put it back up. If you really, really can't find it and really want to put it back, I think Snorlison has some back-ups of the whole site. Alternatively, just remember the idea and start writing it down from there.

Again, we're sorry, and the idea you proposed would have been nice, but it would have taken far more time then anyone had the patience for, would have taken a huge amount of coordination, and a lot of the original authors of crappy scp's are either long gone or far improved. Always time to start again.

Re: Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

AdminBright 07 Dec 2009 07:31

Mass Edits were declared. Everything was up for a vote. Anything that was considered below standard was deleted or slated for editing. Yours fell below standard, and was deleted, end of story. We are not here to make you a better writer.

---

Admin, SCP Wiki

Re: Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

Edcrab 07 Dec 2009 08:00

I wouldn't take it personally- quite a few people have lost first and/or only articles. If you've got no backup, then that's sad, but there's nothing to stop you tweaking the idea and trying to bring it back in some form after a little group brainstorming session!

Re: Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

tunedtoadeadchannel 07 Dec 2009 14:55

The ONLY SCP I have created was deleted. This, would be fine, if someone had told me it was slated, and that I had a chance to save it, LET ALONE told me what was wrong so next time I could avoid those pitfalls.

Point: your SCP was deleted.

Point: SCPs considered salvageable were given notifications that they needed to be edited.

Point: you recieved no notification.

From these three points, we can deduce that your SCP was not salvageable. Therefore, being "told it was slated" would have profited you not at all. Thus, no effort was wasted in doing so. QED

Last edited on 07 Dec 2009 14:59 by tunedtoadeadchannel Show more

Re: Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

Dr Gears 08 Dec 2009 00:09

I can understand the confusion you may be having Kylen, but let me see if I can make it a little more clear:

We would have liked to have given every single entry a chance to be saved, however it's not feasible. We tried that before, and the edit, which was much more minor by comparison, ground to a screeching halt. We had to make some decisions on what could and could not be reasonably saved, and act accordingly.

The staff here, while a motley bunch, have a good group heart. also, we know this stuff. Some of these folks have been around since the first original /x/ posting. What this means is that, in some cases, you just have to take our word on things. If the whole staff decides that a entry cannot be saved, we're probably right. It's harsh, but true.

As others have stated, if you have a copy of your entry, please retrieve it, and we'll see if some pointers can be given. We don't mean to just "black bag" entries, but at times that's what we have to do.

Re: Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

DrClef 08 Dec 2009 15:16

I would like to bring up the title and certain moments in the text as evidence for why your article may have been deleted summarily. Aside from that, no ideas.

If you'd like help on that article, I suggest you pastebin an archive copy (you do have a draft, right?) and put it up on the chat to discuss with other users.

Re: Priave Mass Edits: Why it's a Bad Idea

tunedtoadeadchannel 08 Dec 2009 16:08

Also, for the record, there's an entire thread on the forum about the mass edit ending, so you really shouldn't have that first issue either.

As we all know, the Mass Edits are going on/Done. Granted, I can't tell which it is, because they decided to finish up in secret.

Yeah… pay attention.