Contest3

This edit contest runs ran for seven days: The dates are: Monday Nov. 12th, Noon -- Nov. 19th, Noon EST

Challenges

Anyone can post challenges here to the unofficial points in the contest:

• Challenge to 1256 in points for new entries by SSchultz. A sampling of those new entries suggests the disqualification. For example, they include a silly Ham_Steak entry, with a whopping 6 points assigned to that. I suggest that all 1256 of these points be disqualified as an appropriate penalty to deter the harmful practice of over-crediting during a contest.--Aschlafly 09:38, 21 November 2007 (EST)

If you're going to challenge my entries, then I challenge all points from edits made to those entries after the fact. Greg Larson, for example, earned a significant number of point from categorizing my entries. If you're claiming the entries are invalid, then no one should get points from them and they should just be deleted from the site. SSchultz 15:26, 21 November 2007 (EST)

In the issue of fairness, if the work done by SSchultz is removed as are the alterations made by Greg Larson to those articles, then the edits that I made to those articles should be removed as well and my points adjusted accordingly. Thanks Learn together 02:39, 23 November 2007 (EST)

• Judges, please give advance notice of a close in challenges because there may be more. Thank you.--Aschlafly 09:38, 21 November 2007 (EST)

• I've noticed that the inquiries to the team captains dealt with concerns with irregularities from the other team. In that case, I'm not sure we are looking at this the right way. I was pleased to enter the contest to help out my captain while at the same time improving the overall Conservapedia website. But when the gun sounded to end the contest and I finished tabulating my totals, I now revert to being part of the larger Conservapedia team which includes all members from the other team as well. If there are any irregularities or areas for improvement from the contest, I would like to think it involves all of the participants as a unit giving overall insight, and that the temporary dividing lines that we put ourselves into last week are no longer an issue. That being said, here are my overall thoughts about the contest:

• I noticed some undeadended entries for articles of size where a single word on the top line was highlighted, and that was it. I believe in order to match the spirit of undeadending articles, that a pass through the article to apply other appropriate links should have been performed.

• If a quality new entry is worth 10 points, it seems to me that open ended articles that have no point limits should have some type of reasonable cap that fits within the overall structure of the contest and the value of that edit.

• If one team is being depopulated through no fault of their own, perhaps in an effort to keep the contest fair and close, the last user on the other team should be switched over to make the numbers more comparable.

• These are my thoughts. Thank you Learn together 02:39, 23 November 2007 (EST)

• Honestly, I'm not sure while this review of the results are being done. The Supply Siders out scored the Timberwolves by over 3000 points, and the only thing in dispute seems to be my edits. Even if you subtract the points for my edits, the Supply siders would still win by a very healthy margin. Moreover, point audits have never been done in prior contests. Why not simply declare the winner on the front page as has been the process in the past. SSchultz 20:16, 23 November 2007 (EST)

I don't think the challenges are over. The gap of 3000 points is not terribly large. I'm about to add another challenge for over 2000 points, and there may be further challenges both to protect the integrity of the contest, certify appropriate point totals, and enhance the level of play for the future. Don't take it personally!--Aschlafly 21:13, 23 November 2007 (EST)

• Challenge to User:BrianCo for his massive 2433 points merely for linking within American Government Lectures. While those points are probably legitimate in a strictly literal reading of the rules, I question whether the judges want to credit such a one-sided approach, without comparable substantive contributions to other entries. User:BrianCo is a great contributor and this challenge does not suggest any foul play or anything unfair, but the spirit of the contest and this imbalance in point totals may call for an adjustment or reconsideration of that approach for future contests. Well done, BrianCo, but perhaps a bit too well done! Godspeed.--Aschlafly 21:13, 23 November 2007 (EST)

More than changing points the experience should conduct to better rules for the future. A good article should get 20 points, uploading normal images 4 and quality ones 6. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 21:48, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Superb suggestions, Joaquin!--Aschlafly 21:54, 23 November 2007 (EST)

• Point total suggestion: in addition to Joaquin's suggestion, I propose that a quality edit to the Main page be worth 10 points, an ordinary edit be worth 6 points, and a minor edit (such as statistics or a correction) be worth 3 points.--Aschlafly 22:25, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Assuming your talking about for the next contest - then the only thing I would object to is the main page edit. Making a main page edit worth 10 points gives way too much of an advantage to sysops, in my opinion - perhaps 6 points instead?.--IDuan 22:41, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Judges

Sign up as a judge here to review the work, tally the results, and recommend changes (if any) for the next contest:

• HelpJazz
• Geo

The Teams

Timberwolves		Supply Siders
Captain	Andy	Captain	TK
Members		Members
Sharon Greg Bethany Luke Deborah TheGuy MexMax Jessica Member 9 Member 10		Iduan DanH Ed Poor Mathers Crocoite SSchultz Joaquín Martínez Learn_together Brian Feebasfactor

(The top 7 scorers on either team will qualify towards its point total.)

Those Interested

1. User:Aschlafly(captain team 1) - I'm in. I thought I was a captain, but I guess that has changed! Maybe each team should pick their captain.

As of now - you are! Just wanted to make sure you were able to be in.--IDuan 19:45, 8 November 2007 (EST)

1. User:Iduan
2. User:DanH
3. User:GregLarson
4. User:Dewey
5. User:SharonS
6. User:Lukecorlando
7. User:BethanyS
8. User:Ed Poor - provided my team captain helps me to keep track of my score (I'm a prolific contributor, but I hate taking credit for my work)You'll do as your told, and keep your own score, Poor! :P
9. User:Crocoite - provided the points scoring is amended to include Breaking News items and edits to associated articles. See my comments on the talk page.
10. User:Mathers Can I get in on this? I missed the last one.
11. User:DeborahB.
12. User:SSchultz - I believe I can contribute a lot, and a contest would be a lot of fun.
13. User:TheGuy - if it's not too late, I will hopefully have a bit of time on my hands in the coming weeks
14. MexMax - I've just signed up, but I have wiki experience, and I've been watching the site for a while (just too busy to contribute 'til now). May I join? Oh, I'll be happy to keep track of my own points.
15. User:BrianCo - May not always be online but can work offline. Regret having missed the earlier ones.
16. User:Learn_together - Have fun everyone! ;-)

Notices

Ok - so since Learn Together has yet to respond - and given his absence for quite some time now - I've asked TK if he wants to be a captain - and he has accepted.--IDuan22:44, 8 November 2007 (EST)

Point System

New entry

Quality new entry: 10 points

• Definition:A Quality New Entry includes at least two full-length paragraphs, three relevant citations, several links to other entries, some in-depth content and designations of category.
• Exception: Entertainment-related* Quality New Entries will receive only 5 points.

Ordinary New Entry: 6 points

• Definition: An Ordinary New Entry is a new entry which does not meet the qualifications for a Quality New Entry, but is of higher quality than a Short New Entry.
• Exception: Entertainment-related* Ordinary New Entries will receive only 3 points.

Short New Entry: 4 points

• Definition: A Short New Entry contains only a few sentences and may or may not have a reference.
• Exception: Entertainment-related Short New Entries will receive only 2 points.

Existing entry

Quality edit of an existing entry: 4 points

• Definition: 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, or adding a quality image to an article without any.
• Exception: Entertainment-related* Quality Edits will receive only 2 points.

Minor Edit of an existing entry: 2 points

• Definition: A Minor Edit is an edit which does not meet the qualifications for a Quality Edit. These edits might include small formatting changes, spelling and grammatical changes and/or the addition of a category.

Breaking News

Breaking News Item: 3 points

• Definition: A Breaking news item is placed on the Main page with wiki links to Conservapedia articles and a link to the external reference article.
• Exception: A non-administrator who submits an article to an administrator and the article is placed on the Main page will receive 1 point and the administrator will receive 2 points for adding the article and links. It is at the administrator's discretion whether to place the article on the Main page. Editing an associated article (wikilinked) will score points under the regular points system.

Bonus Points

• An additional bonus of 3 points is awarded for adding a new entry on the "most-wanted" list, Special:Wantedpages
• An additional bonus of 1 point is awarded for adding a link to an entry on the Special:Deadendpages, and thereby removing that entry from that list
• An edit to an existing entry may qualify as a New Entry if the edit is substantial enough.
• Adding a unique working link within a lecture: 2 points

• Adding an additional (non-unique) working links for the same term within the same American Government Lecture: 1 point

• Adding a relevant photo to Breaking News will receive a 2 points bonus.
• Adding two new terms to American Government Terms: 1 point
• Blocking a vandal/sock/troll or reverting their vandalism: 2 points. Cannot be doubled in case of those with blocking abilities.

Notes

An entry is "entertainment-related" if it relates to a subject not taught as core curriculum in a typical high school or college. This includes articles on sports, popular music, movies, and other entertaining but not necessarily educational subjects.

• Exception: Full credit will be given for notable or important historical subjects, and for political entries.
• Exception: Full credit will be given for reasonable subjects which are educational but not necessarily taught in a typical school.