Club Penguin Wiki:Council/2015 Archive

Bring back the neutral section (+7)

Looking back on some of the reforms we have done over the years, there are many things I feel we should have done differently. In 2009, we eliminated the neutral section on votes in favor of only "For" or "Against".

After six years, I now feel that it was a mistake. By voting neutral, you are letting others know that you have read and are aware of the vote but have not yet made a decision. This could always be done with a comment but voting as neutral is simpler and easier to keep track of.

The only difference this time will be that unlike old style 2007-2009 RFAs, neutral votes won't count at all towards the outcome of the vote.

For (7)

1. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 23:27, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
2. --$harkbate ^{Talk Page} 23:28, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
3. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 23:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
4. --LordMaster96 23:59, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
5. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 15:01, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
6. Juca (discussão/talk) 17:13, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
7. Mrdave921 Talk Contribs 21:47, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• Honestly, it can't hurt. It would be easier to keep track of voting like you said. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 23:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
• Preferred if only for major votes such as council topics/RFAs/demotion votes. Keep it out of the Penguin of the Month. Voting neutral there will just overcomplicate things. --LordMaster96 23:59, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Actually my next proposal will be reforming POTM. Rather than For/Against it will be more like an election. You can only vote for one person. If you feel that none of the candidates are qualified, you can vote for "No POTM this month" --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 01:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
    • It's more like an approval voting system. --Refractor (talk) 20:30, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
• Sorry guys, I am NEUTRAL with this proposal. Too bad I can't vote for "Neutral" and instead have to leave a comment.
  --Perapin
  04:27, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • You're a funny guy. --LordMaster96 05:06, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • lol im neutral too C: Mario Rk ^{(T · C)} 19:53, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

ES Club Penguin Wiki Negotiations (+7)

So, last month I decided to research CP Wikias in foreign languages (as I've done before, though it was a while ago the last time I did it- just to check to see if any are active, that sort of thing. Well, as it turns out, we've been missing out on a huge opportunity to expand the network... the Spanish CPW is alive and well! Not only do they have 3,996 pages (possibly even 4k by the time some of you read this), they've had over 60 users edit since the beginning of May, and are up-to-date too, being decked-out for The Fair.

So, I asked Sea about it and he suggested I add it to the council. So, my suggestion (and this vote) is that we add this CPW to the network, by having our staff do as much negotiating as possible to convince them to move (the whole wiki) to the network. That way rather than our bad start with ES back in 2011, we are just adding a large, experienced community to the realm. The language barrier might pose a small problem, but I know at the very least, Swiss Ninja (from fanon) knows spanish thanks to Duolingo, so I think he could be the translator if need be (though I'd hope that at least one of 60+ users there can speak English also). So, the vote doesn't guarantee that they'll move (that depends on negotiations, and their community), but this is a decent start!

There's also two active ES Fanon wikis, and an up-to-date yet significantly smaller French CPW, but those can be saved until later on. CK 02:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

For (9)

1. CK 02:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
2. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 22:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
3. --Aquamarina14 ^(Talk) 22:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
4. --User:Swiss Ninja My Talk Page 23:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
5. --LordMaster96 09:57, 23 May 2015(UTC)
6. File:Revenge.gif Mrdave921 #thefair2015 File:Smile spin.gif 17:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
7. -Wonderweez ^{(Talk · Contribs)} 02:26, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
8. {{SUBST:Template:Mecsig}} 06:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
9. I can use Bing Translator, fresh new start! --Dave33333 all hail To the epic king. 16:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Against (2)

1. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 03:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
2. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 02:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• Read my statement above. CK 02:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
• Correction: I took Spanish in school and French, Dutch, and German on Duolingo. --User:Swiss Ninja My Talk Page 23:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
• More of a network and not a CPW issue. Maybe it doesn't belong on this page but I'll give my support for expansion regardless. --LordMaster96 09:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

• I agree, but we don't really have a CPWN council, this is the substitute for one as far as I know (since I think I suggested one a while ago anyways). Also, Sea suggested I add it here so I did :P CK 03:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

• I feel that we do not have the time or resources to complete such a large move. Besides the work of moving over all articles and images, we would have to deal with Wikia staff and the headaches that they will cause for us. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 03:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I'm not sure about "resources" or the technical stuff, but I know as for time and importing, there are plenty of users on our network that'd be willing to help import pages (and items if there's not a way to do that automatically), myself included, not to mention their users. I don't think wikia would make too much of a grumble about it if we don't bring it to their attention, just kind of abandon it, have the es admins leave a message somewhere saying the wiki's moved, and maybe a link or two. I think the largest issue we might have is convincing the ES community to move (if our past experiences with En cpwiki are any indicator), though I think it'd be a little bit easier than EN CPWikia because we're moving their own site over, unlike just convincing users to move. CK 03:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

• Not attracting the attention of Wikia Staff would be very difficult. They are always on the lookout for discussions about leaving, especially when there isn't a large wave of wikis leaving at the same time. When we left, everyone else was also leaving over Oasis so they couldn't focus all of their energy on just us. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 06:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
• From economical standpoint: If we want to convince wikians we have to offer at least the same, or rather better conditions than wikia – the gain for them has to be greater than the “cost” of the exodus. That would mean blogs, wysisyg etc. and also something that wikia doesn’t have. —Lisured (会話) 12:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

• True, Our tech staff would have to start working on some things to match or even outdo wikia, like an oasis-style skin, a new blog system (even if it has to be custom written), wikia-style chat, etc. Mostly the stuff they were going to make in 2012 when discussing the EN wikia merge. CK 21:37, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• If I find some time, I may work on some things to definitely make things easier to administrate. --Tux (*** SERVICE NOTIFICATION *** clubpenguinwiki.info IS UP) 08:44, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

• Hablo español con fluidez, por lo que posiblemente puedo ayudar a manejar el wiki. "I speak Spanish fluently, so perhaps I can help manage the wiki." -Wonderweez ^{(Talk · Contribs)} 02:26, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
• To save money, we could just allow the Spanish speakers to make Spanish version of pages. --File:Belarus flag.jpgSlender Talk to me 17:08, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

• Uhhh there's nothing to do with money... CK 02:53, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• Dave, please don't do that... It'd be for the Spanish users that already edit there and know fluent Spanish. Not English speakers using internet translators. CK 02:53, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I've been using Google Translate to edit the Portuguese wiki. Should I not do that, either? --

File:Revenge.gif Mrdave921 #thefair2015 File:Smile spin.gif 00:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

• When I do oppose something, it is usually for a good reason. Some examples of things I have strongly opposed include Portals, Partners, Merging with Wikia, and "Departments" (blegh). Do you know what all of those things had in common? They all failed. We have tried a Spanish CPW in the past and it did not work out. I understand this time it is a little different, but it will still fail. People are naturally stubborn. Telling them they have to leave where they are comfortable by people they don't know does not work. Just think back to our failed merge with Wikia. The same thing will happen here. I know from experience. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 03:22, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm afraid I side with Seahorse on this. All of our attempts to create other-language wikis have fallen through. If there were any viability in another language community, like the Spanish community on Wikia, it would've been created and bustling already. Not to mention, I think other-language communities have greater success when started and maintained by those who speak said language as their native tongue. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 02:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

New Favicon (+2)

I know you're all going to hate me for this, but before you get your torches and pitchforks hear me out.

Our current favicon is outdated. It's not even Club Penguin at all - it's just a penguin.

Here's a concept for a new one I made. It's the exact same shape, but now it looks more like Club Penguin. The goofy glasses that you can't even really tell are glasses are replaced with CP's Designer Glasses. The strange W on him is now a shirt, and for all you nostalgia guys it's still the same color. Also, he's orange now instead of the non-CP reddish-orange favicon we have.

Also, this doesn't have to be the final one, it's just a concept. I can change the color of the penguin, or the shirt, or the W, remove the glasses, stuff like that. Whatever you guys think would look best.

--Chill57181 Talk Contribs 14:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

For (2)

1. File:Revenge.gif Mrdave921 #thefair2015 File:Smile spin.gif 17:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
2. —Lisured (会話) 23:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Neutral (3)

• --LordMaster96 03:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
• --Misabr 【Talk•CPW Archives•Wikipedia】 22:05, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
• --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 02:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• We've already gone through this before. Personally, choices 2, 3, and 5 from those look better than your concept favicon. --Tux (*** SERVICE NOTIFICATION *** clubpenguinwiki.info IS UP) 01:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Three please. It would be sad to see our goofy penguin go after a good seven years but we should have changed it to a puffle a long time ago. --Tigernose Talk • Contribs 14:01, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
• At this rate we might as well live out the rest of Club Penguin's days with our existing favicon. --LordMaster96 03:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
• [1] --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 21:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
• I kinda like it (even more than the choices mentioned by tux), it works both on dark and light background.[2] Favicon should, however, be primarily designed 16×16 px which is still dominant size. If we want to be more fancy we can provide more resolutions.[3] —Lisured (会話) 23:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
• Not to sound like I'm supporting only my option, but I would consider changing it provided we use the example I provided. The changes I did were very minimal - we older folks get the nostalgia we like, and the newer folks get that fresh look. Otherwise, no, thanks. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 02:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Agreed. --LordMaster96 01:00, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Yeah, if we pick something new I want it to be Hat's new favicon. It's a perfect balance for the users who want a new favicon and the ones who don't. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 18:50, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm against using anything else because any Club Penguin fansite can use a puffle for their favicon - it's generic and boring. Not only is our current favicon an icon, it's unique because it was made by somebody. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 18:58, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Rollback Reformation (+2)

We no longer receive tons of rollback requests per day so I am proposing to scrap our current system, which I believe was based off of Wikipedia, to an election based format. Personally I'm not a fan of dealing with rollback requests as well as rollbacks who are either inactive or don't use their right, which admins currently have the ability of doing without much consultation from other admins. Some rollback promotions are also done without the use of our current requests page. Some newer users may also look upon rollbacks as leaders alongside the admins (especially if they are uncomfortable approaching us). In fact, as a result of fewer admin promotions, some of our newest admins were promoted from rollback. By changing it to an electoral system, users who have more than just a skill to click the rollback button will be favoured. Plus it gives users more of a chance to get involved. Here's how it works:

1. Elections will be held three times a year: April, August, and December.
2. All users interested in running in the election may apply on the requests for rollback page up until the deadline, usually the 10th of election month.
3. Admins will screen and select up to a maximum of 10 (this number may change over time) top candidates - users must still have sufficient activity and/or undos. All incumbent rollbacks are automatically in the next election if they apply by the deadline, regardless of activity.
4. Candidates prepare a brief message (maximum 150 words) on why they think they deserve rollback. This step is optional.
5. We vote! Depending on demand, a certain number of candidates will be elected (somewhere around 5 at this time). Any ties for the final spot(s) will be resolved in an immediate follow-up vote. All voting rules apply - users may not vote for themselves. Users can vote for the number of candidates that will be elected.
6. Users who abuse the right may still be demoted before an election; emergency promotions in the event of a vandal attack may still take place (if necessary).

--LordMaster96 05:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

For (2)

1. --LordMaster96 05:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
2. --Misabr 【Talk•CPW Archives•Wikipedia】 20:23, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Neutral (2)

1. --File:Revenge.gif Mrdave921 #thefair2015 File:Smile spin.gif 16:47, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
2. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 19:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• While I agree that the rollback promotion system needs an overhaul, I am uncomfortable making rollback appear to be something that it is not. It is merely a ueful tool that is given to trusted users, not a rank. Years ago we saw rollback as a "rank" or "position" comparable to Administrator or Bureaucrat. This was problematic, hence why we moved away from it. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 19:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
• Got a better plan. I'll close this one and bring the other one in. --LordMaster96 22:27, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Rollback Reformation: Plan B (+2)

As our current rollback system is falling apart due to the low demand for rollbacks/lack of requests I have devised this plan:

• All rollback application processes remain the same: new applicants apply on the Requests for Rollback page, and state a reason; incumbent rollbacks do not need to reapply.
• Rollback rights will be evaluated several times a year (I'm being general right now, we'll figure out a specific number later).
• Admins will evaluate existing rollbacks on their performance and prospective rollbacks on the frequency of undos. This will be done using a table like the one below. Users with over 50% approval will be able to retain the right/granted rollback.
• Any rollback promotions outside of this evaluation period will be considered temporary (e.g. during a vandal attack).

Candidate Name	Admin1	Admin2	Admin3	Admin4	Admin5	Approval (%)	Elected
User_1	✔	✘	✘	✔	✔	60.0%	X
User_2	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	100.0%	X
User_3	✔	✔	✘	✘	✘	40.0%

For (3)

1. --LordMaster96 22:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
2. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 22:38, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
3. -- Mrdave921 Talk Contribs 23:15, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Neutral (1)

1. --Misabr 【Talk•CPW Archives•Wikipedia】 21:21, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• Why not just promote rollbacks entirely at the discretion of administrators during large vandalism/spam attacks? --Refractor (talk) 02:30, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Definitely a good idea. i liek cheez 23:21, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • May not work too well. Mass vandalism/spam attacks do not happen very often anymore. Simply being there during a vandal attack has never been enough merit to grant permanent rollback status on this wiki anyways. I once granted Isai temporary rollback because of a large scale vandalism attack, in which I revoked not long after. And I'm glad I did so because we all know what happened later. --LordMaster96 05:39, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
    • In normal scenarios (maybe one or two vandals at most, and as a drive-by, not a sustained attack) you can simply undo and warn/alert an admin to ban. In this case, you don't need any permanent rollbacks. --Refractor (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
• AFAIK the rollback permission adds you just one button in the history - revert all edits by 1 user... that can be done without it --Misabr 【Talk•CPW Archives•Wikipedia】 21:21, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
• Sure, undoing vandalism can certainly be done without rollback. The rollback tool is handy only when there's an attack, which still happens from time to time. We could definitely have no rollbacks at all if our admins were available 24/7, but we're not. For this reason I'm not willing to shut down this user right group. --LordMaster96 21:38, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Plan C: End rollback requests (+1)

This may be a little unpopular. I see the current proposal for rollback making it perceived as a rank and a little complex. For the most part, rollback is not glamorous, and in most situations, it's just not needed. The normal undo tools and contacting an administrator (which rollbacks have to do anyways, they just rollback) have sufficient for the small-scale vandals we have. In case of a sustained attack, the administrators can promote and demote as needed, and if it's actually bad, lock down the site.

Another point: The thing is that since we own the site, we can lock down the site, but also create new ranks. The only reason why we even have rollback is because it exists in stock MediaWiki, and the one of the only rights to be had on Wikia. Should we consider minor rights like checkuser and importer to be rights to be promoted to and requested for casually?

The tl;dr: make rollbacks promoted at administrator discretion.

For (2)

• --Refractor (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
• --Tux (*** SERVICE NOTIFICATION *** clubpenguinwiki.info IS UP) 05:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Neutral

• Mrdave921 Talk Contribs 23:35, 14 June 2015 (UTC)