User blog talk:Cp kid/Adoption procedure

And what happens if two people want to adopt a page simultaneously? Competition?

Perapin

06:21, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Perapin. If a person wants to adopt the page they have to edit first, but someone else can just barge in and compete to get the article. Then a huge edit war starts and bam... --Penstubal ^{(Talk) (Edits)} 11:48, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Is CK going to address this yet?

Perapin

21:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea what would happen. You tell me. That's why I asked for opinions and ideas. WannaTalk? 02:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I have no perfect solution. I am checkmated. But the next best thing is for users to write to the admins their intentions of what they would do if they adopted the page. The user with the best intentions would become the adopter and would have the OOC rights.

Perapin

03:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Here's my idea:

Any article that is an LQA and hasn't been edited for 3 months is up for adoption

Any article who's creator or current owner has quit or hasn't edited in 6 months is up for adoption

Articles that are fair game and hasn't been edited in 6 months is up for adoption. However, some fair game articles should never be adopted; these are the ones that are very general or important, such as large countries, cities, species, and all articles from Club Penguin Canon.

Anyone can allow someone to adopt their article. However, if someone wants to adopt an article due to the above reasons they have to add 2000 bytes to the page through their edits, as well as create or own 3 MQA+ articles that relate to the page.

So if I want to adopt a character I have to edit the page to add 2000 bytes of content, and own or create 3 medium or high quality articles that relate to the character, such as relatives, close friends, employees, ect. When all these requirements have been fulfilled then the article can be adopted.

If two people fulfill the requirements and wish to adopt the article around the same time, then they will share it. Other disputes can be settled in CPFW court.

Mectrixctic ^{Talk to me!} See the articles I worked on.. ^{see my edits!} 19:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Your LQA and normal article requirements are good. Technically, all articles that don't have a current OOC holder (active creator or adopter) are in fair game, per the policy (if a user quits or is banned, all of their articles automatically become fair game unless the user leaves a will giving the articles to certain people). But, I don't think any articles already labeled as fair game (with one of the templates) should be adopted, as their creator most likely made it that way. As for the "must own three AQA articles relating to the article"... it sounds good, but then people would want to adopt three articles that they're never going to edit in order to obtain one. Or, they would create three small articles with the bare necessities (that they'll never touch after it's an AQA) in order to adopt the other article.

While I understand the 2000 bytes idea, it seems a bit over the top to put a number on it. I think that any administrator should have good enough judgement to tell if the user has greatly improved an article. Just a note, to my knowledge the "CPFW court" isn't a thing anymore, as I've never seen it (and I've been here for a year and a half). Although, both yours and perapin's ideas for two people wishing to adopt an article are good ones. I do hope that you still like the adoption page idea that was the main proposition of this page? Because if not, most of the stuff you suggested is our current (unofficial) adoption procedures (LQAs, and articles that are untouched). WannaTalk? 21:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

my opinion

Overall I don't think an admins approval should be required for adopting an article since it created hierarchy between the users. Admins should be here to enforce the rules, protect pages from vandalism, and maintain articles, not act as rulers over the wiki. So we should have set rules for adoption.

As for fair game articles staying that way if their creator willed it, this could become problematic if it doesn't go anywhere and nobody except the adopter wants it. If they are willing to write for the article then it is fair that they should have it.

The 2000 bytes is there to be objective in article improvement so that people won't be biased towards it's improvement.

The problem of creating articles just so they are related to one of your previous articles wouldn't be unique to adoption. Adoption will guarantee that they are MQAs unlike the plethora of LQAs that people created to make their article more relevant. Requiring this makes sure the adopter is serious about this.

The court probably seems like it's not a thing because most users have quit and we aren't getting many new users so there a lot less editing and drama for the court to be here. But if the wiki does become active again there will likely be issues.

Mectrixctic ^{Talk to me!} See the articles I worked on.. ^{see my edits!} 04:12, 31 January 2015 (UTC)