User blog:Leolab/Third Deadliest Fiction Policy Review

So the Wiki's sixth anniversary's coming up, which means I'm going another round of policy reviews. Removals are striked through, and all changes have explanations. Usually additions are in red, but that sometimes doesn't work out with the coding, and I don't want to fix it because that would be a pain.


 * -| Article Policy =

Titling

 * Articles must have grammatically correct titles. Articles with titles that lack capitalization in proper places will be moved/renamed. Bad title example: john Smith.
 * The title for a Warrior Article is what they are best known as in real life, not in-universe. So, Thomas Anderson would be Neo, not Thomas Anderson or Mr. Anderson. If they are real-life warriors, then the title should be their formal name.
 * In cases where there are multiple well-known real life names, the title should be the most formal one. So, Captain America would be Captain America, not Cap.
 * When Romanizing names from languages with different naming conventions, such as Japanese, their wikis and/or Wikipedia are good guidelines for the format to use. Himura Kenshin is known as such on his own wiki, using the Japanese conventions of the last name first. Ichigo Kurosaki is mentioned as such on his own wiki, following the English conventions. These are both right - however, Kenshin Himura and Kurosaki Ichigo are both wrong as titles.

Grammar/Writing Mechanics
All articles are allowed to have limited amounts of grammar errors. Pages with these mistakes will be edited, but pages with a large amount of mistakes must be fixed within a few weeks of its creation date. After that period, the article will be deleted if it still has a large amount of mistakes.

Mistake Limits
Small amount of mistakes: 3-7 mistakes

Large amount: 10+

Coding Mistakes
Wiki coding is hard but if you do have a hard time, please consult an admin or a long time wiki editor. Like grammar and spelling error above, small amounts of coding mistakes are tolerable and will be edited out, while large amounts of coding errors are grounds for deletion.

Requests for Deletion
If a user wishes to delete an article they must use the Delete template, code:.

Automatic Deletion
Articles will be deleted if they meet this criteria:


 * A large amount of mistakes (see Mistake Limits, including not meeting the criteria, below)
 * A battle that is written on an article, not a blog post
 * A spam page (page with unrelated subjects/images)

Page Criteria
All warrior-related articles must meet the Warrior Page Criteria. Mandatory criteria includes : the history, infobox, and the battles the warrior has taken part in. See Creating an Infobox for help creating and using the right infobox. A battle written is not mandatory, but the status of the warrior must be included, ex. Defeated by So-and-so or Victorious over So-and-so. Any reserved battles listed on battle status put up by users inactive for over three months can be removed at the discretion of the editor. All battles placed in the infobox must have headers placed in the page, regardless of whether or not the battle has been made. Furthermore, warriors without any battle status may not have pages made, and shall be deleted.

Expert's Opinions
A brief explanation no longer than a paragraph on the outcome of said match-up should be placed after the simulation of every written battle on a page. If the author provided an explanation, then it may not be edited without their consent. However, if none was given by the author, any user editing the page may type one up themselves. The author of the battle reserves the right to revise this explanation to their contentment.

Plagiarism
Note that plagiarism is not allowed on this wiki. Copying and pasting or using text word for word from any media source is illegal. Articles that have plagiarism will be labeled with the template. The author of the article has the responsibility to delete and reword the content. If the article is not fixed after a long period of time, it will be deleted. If given proper attribution, the Plagiarize template will not be used. Instead, the page will be placed under the Pages in need of Biography Rewrites category.

Illegal Source
Articles with content from a source that was not supposed to release information to the public may be deleted, if the author does not rid of the illegal content. An example is publishing plot information from a game that has not been released yet and the plot was not planned to be released by the game developer.

Edit Wars
Edit wars on one page will result in locking said page. Edit wars across multiple pages will result in the offenders being banned for a length of time at the banning admin’s discretion. Use chat to discuss edits and reasoning before it turns into an edit war.

Sockpuppeting
Sock-Puppeting is not tolerated. Sock-Puppeting is creating another wikia account and using it while using your current account or to attempt to circumvent a ban. If any admins find you Sock-Puppeting, you will get a temporary or permanent ban at their discretion. Use of sockpuppets may result in reporting to Wikia Staff, at the discretion of any user who hears about it.

Blog Rezzing
Any blog that has not had any comments for over 30 days is considered dead. Users and anons are not to comment on it, nor are they to try and disable the javascript that has been put in place to stop this. Commenting on a dead blog, or Rezzing (sometimes called Necroing on other sites), results in a permanent ban. Non-vote comments should go on the article for one or both of the warriors in question.


 * -| User Policy =

Rights
All users, including unregistered contributors, have certain rights on this wiki.


 * All users must be respected
 * No one receives special treatment, even sysops
 * All users may contribute their own ideas on blogs

Good Faith
All edits will be considered "clean" and not as vandalism. However, if an edit is considered an unclean edit, users may revert it and the vandal must be reported to an admin. Users that have been labeled as vandals lose this privilege of good faith. The admin notified may take action at their discretion.

Insulting/Trolls
Personally attacking a user is considered flaming. The first user to start flaming against another will be warned and if they continue their misbehavior the user will be blocked for a length of time at the admins' discretion

Sandboxes
Trying new code and creating battles is best done in a sandbox rather than on a blog or page. To create a sandbox, simply create a new page called User:/Sandbox.

Sockpuppeting
Sock-Puppeting is not tolerated. Sock-Puppeting is creating another wikia account and using it while using your current account or to attempt to circumvent a ban. If any admins find you Sock-Puppeting, you will get a temporary or permanent ban at their discretion. Use of sockpuppets may result in reporting to Wikia Staff, at the discretion of any user who hears about it.

Blog Rezzing
Any blog that has not had any comments for over 30 days is considered dead. Users and anons are not to comment on it, nor are they to try and disable the javascript that has been put in place to stop this. Commenting on a dead blog, or Rezzing (sometimes called Necroing on other sites), results in a permanent ban.


 * -| Battle Policy =

General
In general, a A battle must be written in blog format. This allows users the chance to criticize/offer their opinions about the warrior. Battles written on a page will be deleted after a span of 1-2 days at the discretion of the administrator to give the user a chance to move the information. Do not have unfair match-ups. If the general audience or administrators agree that the battle is unfair, it will be deleted, ie. Assyrian vs. SWAT. Additionally, there are certain matches that are strictly prohibited here. These include, but are not limited to: battles that have happened on the Deadliest Warrior show and battles that have happened before within a a warrior's canon. Multi-man battles are judged this way based on each warrior against each opponent.

For help creating battles or blogs see Creating a Battle.

Warriors
Any characters posted by the user in a battle will be considered a warrior out of our good faith policy. However, if a user discovers that a character is not truly a warrior, ex. Spongebob Squarepants, then all articles relating to that character will be edited to reflect this, and all battles with that character will be closed.

How to Tell
To tell whether or not your character is a warrior, see the definitions below; a character has to match at least one of the following criteria:

1) Fights for a living

2) Fights on a daily basis

3) Has being a fighter a core part of their character*

4) Leads other fighters in battle

5) Has superhuman powers allowing them to fight, and has used those abilities for that purpose

6) Commands a warrior/weapon like unit to fight

7) Is a representation of a user on this wiki

* Killing people can be considered "being a fighter," but only if the killer is fictional (i.e., someone like Dexter Morgan is a warrior, but Jack the Ripper isn't)

Prohibited characters include:


 * Cartoon characters that have not truly engaged in combat
 * Child soldiers (as in real-life child soldiers just to be clear.)
 * Any character that does not meet the definition

Images
Try to limit images on your battles to pictures of their respective weapons and of the character themselves. This is to reduce image trafficking and slow loading time.

Tips
Tips on how to attract a large audience/attention


 * Keep your battle simple
 * Have warriors people have heard about
 * Try to avoid using criminals/persons who have caused national tragedies. Ex. Lee Harvey Oswald
 * A healthy amount of advertising on chat and on other users' talk pages is allowed. Don't go overboard to the point of spamming though.

For the Author
Users must have voting periods of a minimum of three days before closing their battles. Disregarding the valid votes of the audience toward a particular warrior is not allowed. If any of the policies are violated in a battle, the author of the battle will be issued a warning. After three warnings, the author is expected to follow the rules. However, if the author continues to disregard the votes and/or any of the other policies, then they will be blocked for a month length of time to be determined by the admin taking action. For battles that have ended in a tie, the author can:

a.) Choose which warrior will be the victor

b.) Extend the voting period

c.) End the battle in a tie, so that both warriors are victors

If, however, there is a tie in the form of zero votes, the author may not choose the victor and must either keep the battle open or end it in a tie.

As the author, you are allowed to give yourself a vote if you like. However, if the battle ends in a tie along with your vote, or if you are the only voter on your battle, you must end the battle in a tie, as choosing your preferred warrior under these circumstances would essentially be giving yourself two votes. The one and only exception to this is in an elimination tournament, where there MUST be one victor, so the author is allowed to determine the outcome if there is a tie.

For the Voter/Audience
If you are going to vote, please use the voting method the author provides and states you should use. When voting, please try to provide a good and strong reason why that warrior should win.

User Battles
User battles are fictional battles between two or more users, ie. Omnicube1 vs. MrPacheco101 Cfp3157 vs WanderingSkull. If you are planning to write a user battle, please consult the user(s) you will be facing in your battle. They must provide the weapons, training, or any forms of debate they will be using. Failing to list the appropriate weapons/provided items will result in a deletion of that battle. In order to prevent the wiki from being flooded by a torrent of user characters, individual user warriors do not qualify for pages.

User Tournaments
User Tournaments are held one at a time. Tournament ideas are proposed by the authors in a forum during a defined entry period and the Admins would choose the author to have the spot for that period, the author would need to complete it in that time and an award could be made and given to the winner.

In order to run a User Tournament, the user proposing to run the tournament must post a proposal in the Challenge Arena board. Afterwards, the user has one month to get approval from a majority of the admins/bureaus. If and only if this is achieved, the user may then post sign-ups and start the tourney. Only two tournies may run at any one time.

Note that additional policies will be added as needed here, due to the unpredictable nature of User Tourneys.

Proposals
At the start of the period, the Admins would post a forum in the Bounty Board forum. This thread would be a place for all users interested to pitch their tournament plans. Example User one pitches a Superhero tourney. User two pitches a Army battle tourney. User three pitches a western style tourney.

Any proposed tournament would have to have as many details as possible, including details, the number of expected participants, and rules to make sure the tournament is viable.

In addition to one normal-styled tourney at a time, one massive tourney - akin to the User Siege Tournament in length - may run as well.

Selection
Once several tournaments are pitched, or after large amount of time passes from thread creation, the Admins would elect to choose one to go with. The choice can depend on how creative the idea is, how well its pitched, but also the Author's record.

If we know the Author to not finish their tournaments or battles, or they've previously had the spot and failed, or didn't do so well, etc. it would weigh in on whether or not that user gets the spot for the three months.

Post-Selection
After a tourney is chosen, the tournament's author can create their intro and/or sign-up blog. The blog must be kept up to date with all of the battles linked on it.

The author has a predetermined period to finish the tournament, depending on how many entries they get, and to complete the battles. If completed, an award can be made if the Author chooses and given to the winner. If the Author completes the battle earlier, the thread for new pitches will be made right away.

Rematches
Rematches must be done with the original author's approval. If the author disapproves, the user requesting the rematch can gain the publicly written support of at least three other users and at least two admins who support the cause of the rematch, which will override the disapproval of the author. If the original author has had his disapproval overridden, but still feels that a rematch should not be done, he is allowed to gain the publicly written support of other users against the rematch. The side with the highest number of supporters wins, with ties going to the original author. In the case of inactive or retired authors, the three supporters rule still applies, and an admin approval is needed as well.

If at any point, even after a rematch is done, sockpuppets are found to have been used as supporters, the side using them automatically has their position revoked. If the rematch was already done and found to have been invalid, then the original outcome will be posted in the battle status and the section will have a notification that the rematch was considered void due to sockpuppetting for votes.

Nerfing and Buffing
Wizards, super heroes, god warriors, force users, and other warriors with natural abilities cannot be limited to a certain set of powers. All powers canonically used by that warrior are to be accounted for in all of his/her battles. Linking to other sites that provide a full list of the warrior's abilities is allowed. Furthermore, using said warriors from a time period in which they do not have certain powers is not nerfing, so long as all their other equipment and powers is from that point in time.

In addition, it is also a violation of policy to buff, or increase, a warrior’s powers or abilities to points above where they are in canon. This includes, but is not limited to: giving them weapons they never used, powers they did not have access to, or applying game mechanics (i.e, increased durability that is not a canon power) as abilities.

Unfair Battle Rebuttal

 * 1) One person brings up the idea of the battle being unfair and must provide a valid reason why said battle is unfair, then they must get two other supporters who must clearly state that they agree to the protesters' terms and want the battle to be deleted.
 * 2) The protester cannot use old comments to support the deletion of the blog. If the claim goes without any support within one week then it is invalid.
 * 3) If a user who thinks the battle is fair, provides a reason why, and also gets two other supporters, then rebuttal from before is invalid; however if there is no one to support it then it is also invalid.
 * 4) If it comes a time for an outstanding challenge, then it will be decided via voting poll.
 * 5) Battles may not be closed while there is a fairness challenge

Please note that "unfair" means that the battle swings far in favor of one warrior as represented in the battle itself, not the votes. It is not exclusive to one warrior overpowering another enough that there is zero chance of them winning. Battles that are "one-sided" are unfair.

In battles which combine multiple warriors from different media into one team or in a free-for-all battle, called multi-man battles hereafter, the battle may be declared unfair via the Unfair Battle Rebuttal for any match-up between any two combatants in said multi-man battle being unfair. Even if there are other combatants that the weakest warrior might possibly be able to hold his own against, the inevitability of that warrior's loss against other members of the team make it as unfair as a normal fight.

Sockpuppeting
Sock-Puppeting is not tolerated. Sock-Puppeting is creating another wikia account and using it while using your current account or to attempt to circumvent a ban. If any admins find you Sock-Puppeting, you will get a temporary or permanent ban at their discretion. Use of sockpuppets may result in reporting to Wikia Staff, at the discretion of any user who hears about it.

Blog Rezzing
Any blog that has not had any comments for over 30 days is considered dead. Users and anons are not to comment on it, nor are they to try and disable the javascript that has been put in place to stop this. Commenting on a dead blog, or Rezzing (sometimes called Necroing on other sites), results in a permanent ban.


 * -| Chat Policy =

Spam
Spamming is considered posting links, saying the same thing, speaking in all caps, or speaking in disjointed sentences* at least three times in a row or multiple times to the annoyance of other users. In a given chat session, the first spamming will be hit with a kicking. Any further spam will result in kicks or bans at the discretion of the chat mod enforcing the policy. For Admins, Bureaucrats, or Chat Mods doing the same, the first offense is a warning on public chat. Subsequent offenses will lead to removal of chat mod status at the discretion of a consensus of Bureaucrats. Afterwards, the demoted user is treated like a normal user who has had their first offense.

* Disjointed sentences are as follows:


 * Hey guys, I


 * found


 * this new


 * battle;


 * it looks


 * intere


 * sting

etc. It could have been written as follows without a rule break:


 * Hey guys, I found this new battle.


 * It looks intere


 * * interesting.

Chat Mods
Users should listen to chat mods. If any user is found breaking the rules, the chat mod has the right to kick or ban as the rule states, or if nothing is stated then it is at their discretion. Kicking may be done as a joke so long as the Chat Mod makes it completely clear to the kicked user that it is meant jokingly. Banning is not allowed as a joke.

Any chat mods accused of abusing their power will be contacted by an admin or a bureaucrat. If the chat mod was found to be abusing their power, they will have their chat mod status revoked. Abuses of power include, but are not limited to:
 * Kicking or Banning for no reason
 * Kicking or banning a user for disagreeing with them
 * Repeatedly kicking a user (joke or not)
 * Banning a user the instant they appear on chat

The one and only time a ban or a non-joke kick is allowed without the recipient having broken any rules is if they literally, in public chat, ask for it. (i.e., they write "Please ban me" or something to that effect)

Kicking
A kick for a rule break should be taken as a warning, and should be the first punishment used unless the user has made an enormous violation. Since kicking can be undone by getting back on chat, kicking may be done as a joke so long as the Chat Mod makes it completely clear to the kicked user that it is meant jokingly.

Banning
A user may be banned at the discretion of a chat moderator for excessively breaking rules. Banning may not be done as a joke. Unfair bans should be protested to an Admin / Bureaucrat directly.

Language
Limited cursing is allowed. Words like shit, damn, hell, bitch, and fuck are fine to use in limited quantities. Excessive use of curse words is grounds for a kick or a ban at the discretion of the chat mod.

Sockpuppeting
Sock-Puppeting is not tolerated. Sock-Puppeting is creating another wikia account and using it while using your current account or to attempt to circumvent a ban. If any admins find you Sock-Puppeting, you will get a temporary or permanent ban at their discretion. Use of sockpuppets may result in reporting to Wikia Staff, at the discretion of any user who hears about it.

Blog Rezzing
Any blog that has not had any comments for over 30 days is considered dead. Users and anons are not to comment on it, nor are they to try and disable the javascript that has been put in place to stop this. Commenting on a dead blog, or Rezzing (sometimes called Necroing on other sites), results in a permanent ban. Non-vote complaints can be voiced in Chat instead.