Conservapedia:Team contest

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Ladies and Gentlemen! We the Judges of the 1st Team Contest have finished tallying the records. Consequently Team 1 has emerged from this "Battle of the Titans" victorious. However we must say that both teams held their own and that in the bigger picture Conservapedia is the real, hands down winner. We urge both sides to be mindful of this and commend everyone for their sportsmanship.

Retrieved from "http://www.conservapedia.com/Judges_talk:Contest"

Conservapedia's team contest will be friendly competition between two teams of our best editors.

Team1:

   * Joaquín Martínez (captain)
   * Crocoite
   * Fox
   * Learn_together
   * BethanyS
   * DeborahB.
   * Karajou
   * Tash 

Team2:

   * SharonS (captain)
   * Aschlafly
   * DanH
   * Ed Poor
   * Philip J. Rayment
   * TK
   * RobS
   * Bohdan 

Contents

Need to pick judges

We need to pick about 3 or 5 judges to award the points. Let's pick from Sysops who are not on a team. Both sides should agree on the judges.--Aschlafly 19:37, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Geo.plrd says on his user page that he would like to judge. He would be an excellent choice. BenjaminS, CPWebmaster, and TerryH are all great candidates too. ~ SharonTalk 20:46, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
Great choices, all of them. As the captain of Team1, Joaquin's approval will be necessary. Joaquin, your view please?--Aschlafly 21:21, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

It is fine for us. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 00:23, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Has anyone else agreed to judge? Geo and I have opened our chambers.--TerryHTalk 15:00, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Rules

Two captains will be chosen from among our top users, and they will take turns adding members to their team, until they have seven team members beside themselves. They will invite users to join their team, and if the user accepts, they become part of that team. Records of the team members will be kept at Conservapedia:Team contest/Team one and Conservapedia:Team contest/Team two.

When the teams have been chosen, they will compete for one week to gain the most points by doing the best work on the site.

Rules

  1. Two Sysops shall be chosen (with their consent) to serve as captains.
  2. The captains will then begin a "draft" of players for their teams. They will take turns asking users to join their team. If the user declines, the captain may choose another user. If he accepts, the user will become part of his team, and the other captain will have a turn to pick a user. This process will repeat until each team has seven members aside from the captain.
  3. A panel of judges shall be chosen from among the Sysops who have not been chosen to compete.
  4. The contest will begin, and the teams will compete for one week, striving to make the best contributions to the site. They will keep a record of their work on a page set aside for that purpose.
  5. A team shall not work on any pages which the other team is working on.
  6. When a user unblocks and reblocks an account, credit may only be granted if not less than 24 hours has passed between the two events.
  7. When a username merits an immediate block, the welcoming of that user shall not count for any points
  8. When the contest is closed, the judge will decide the winner using the scoring system below. The team with the most points will win.

Scoring system:

  • Quality new entry: 10 points
    • A "quality new entry" includes at least two full-length paragraphs, three relevant citations, and more in-depth content than just a stub. In the case of a dispute, the inclusion/lack of an image can be used as a deciding factor.
    • One point of extra credit for having more than six relevant citations.
    • A new article is eligible for all forms of credit that can attach to an article--thus, submitting a quality new page with categorization will merit eleven points--ten for the article and one for the cat tag.
  • Quality edit of existing entry: 4 points
    • A "quality edit" to an existing article includes at least two extra sentences, an additional reference, and the inclusion of an important or relevant fact.
    • One point of extra credit will be given for enclosing the citations in ref tags and including the references tag to define a reference section.
  • Any new entry: 6 points
    • Two points of extra credit for submitting an article well-organized into sections.
  • Small edit of existing entry: 2 points
    • One point of extra credit for breaking an existing article into logical sections if it didn't already have any.
  • Quality contribution to the front page: 2 points
  • Blocking: 2 points
  • Categorizing entry: 1 point
  • Welcoming new user: 1 point
  • Uploading a image: 2 points
    • 2 points of extra credit for using it in an article
    • 2 points of extra credit if the image is of exceptional quality

Comment to Judges

In my humble opinion, as judges you have the power to use some discretion with this point system. My view is that this point system is advisory, and I personally do not insist on receiving a full 6 points for every single entry, no matter how simple. Also, I recall at least one block by User:DeborahB. that was worth far more than two points.

You are judges and while we don't want any judicial activism, I personally appreciate wisdom from the bench!--Aschlafly 14:04, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for the note, Andy. I'm not sure if you (currently) have the user rights to peek into the judges talk page (you could always give yourself that user right), but there is active decision-making going on regarding certain issues. Thanks, --ηοξιμαχονγθαλκ 14:10, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Question: a new entry that includes the cat tag, is that also counted? RobS 14:15, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

A new entry with a cat tag counts for 7 points (6 for the article, 1 for the tag). --ηοξιμαχονγθαλκ 14:21, 18 July 2007 (EDT)
And I assume that we didn't have to list such articles under both headings? Philip J. Rayment 19:36, 18 July 2007 (EDT)
Correct. --ηοξιμαχονγθαλκ 15:03, 19 July 2007 (EDT)
Personal tools