Changes

Conservapedia:Contest5 (view source)

Revision as of 19:34, February 3, 2008

1,358 bytes added , 19:34, February 3, 2008

re

Line 10: Line 10:

<dt>'''Decreased the gap between normal and entertainment anything'''

: Can't say I agree with this. Entertainment entries are rarely educational or informative in any meaningful way. Frankly, most are a waste of time.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:28, 3 February 2008 (EST)

−

+

::While I agree that many entertainment articles are pointless - I think it's also tough to say that ALL are. Like for example - articles on sports teams are entertainment - but at the same time sports do have a big history, and it's certainly encyclopedic. That being said, an article on Britney Spears' hairstyles would obviously be less significant. Perhaps we should figure out how to distinguish these--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 14:34, 3 February 2008 (EST)

<dd>If someone spends the time to make a quality entertainment article, then they should still get close to the points of a quality regular article

: Same comment as above.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:28, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Line 29: Line 29:

<dd>This was only so I could increase the gap between a user who finds a breaking news article, and a sysop who adds that article to the main page

: Why do we want to increase that gap? I do agree that quality breaking news should be highly rewarded with points.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:28, 3 February 2008 (EST)

−

+

::I honestly don't really want to increase the gap - but in the last contest a user complained about the handicap of non-sysops, so I added it for him. But I'd befine if you reverted--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 14:34, 3 February 2008 (EST)

<dt>'''Increased the amount of points for a template'''

<dd>Templates take a lot - they should probably be getting the same amount of points as an ordinary entry, but I thought that doing that would be too drastic of a change.

Line 36: Line 36:

<dd>read:Userboxes don't count

: Right.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:28, 3 February 2008 (EST)

−

+

</dl>

'''General comment''': ''insightful'' entries should be rewarded more. Although subjective, these contests should create better incentives for the masterpieces, long or short, that deliver particularly good writing, insights, explanations, etc. Perhaps a "masterpiece" category that could be give special attention (and final decision) by judges after self-nomination of the best entries.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:28, 3 February 2008 (EST)

−

</dl>

+

:Ok! How about this: each team nominates ... about 10 ... of it's best articles, and then the judges pick the top two among those - and those articles will be worth 100 points.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 14:34, 3 February 2008 (EST)

===New entry===

Quality new entry: '''20 points'''

Iduan

SkipCaptcha, nsSupply_SidersR, nsSupply_Siders_

8,436

edits