Forum:Proposal for News Team additions

Hello all!

So I've been thinking about this for a while:


 * What if, instead of getting Smuff, N7 or CoD4 to do the weekly news roundup, we dissolve that and create a duty roster for admins, sysops and crats to create the weekly news roundup? This would certainly be an effective idea if passed, as it allows for variety.
 * I'm sure Smuff, N7 and CoD4 are tired of pushing the duty of this to each other,
 * And also I'm sure some of the crats/sysops/admins would like to try their hand at weekly news roundups (?)
 * Keep in mind that this is NOT pertaining to any news blogs like this or this.

I've talked to CoD4 and Sactage about this, so if we can get the community's approval, we can start a consensus and even create the roster here?

Opinions, people! 15:51, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
It would be easier if we had more users doing the weekly round-ups as they're obviously set at weekly intervals and it doesn't have to be passed around as much, certainly helpful now as I beleive Sactage did the weekly news this week as opposed to any of the normal weekly news writers, also I haven't seen Smuff as of late, so that only leaves the 2 regulars of N7 and Cod4 to write them. 16:12, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Suff's on a holiday at the moment. -kat
 * Not sure if they'd allow normal users, like myself, rights to create news posts for the weekly roundups. Sactage's a crat, you're an admin and you're very responsible guys, hence why i only referred to admins, crats and sysops to get the weekly roundups done. I'm afraid users can't do it. 16:25, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * How does a sysop have any more ability of writing a blog than a normal user? Its not like when they get sysop they are told "secrets" as to how to write a blog and such. If we are to expand the userbase that can write the blogs, I suggest that anybody can write them. (if approved, of course) EDIT: As a matter of fact, Kat just became member of the news team, proving my point. 16:37, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming the normal users you want to write the roundup are those with special rights (i.e. Custodian or Chat Mods)? Or every single person who wants to do it, to do it? 22:19, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me. It would add some variety into the news blogs. Conqueror of all Zombies 18:23, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

I like this idea. 18:27, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

What if a user, I'm using myself as an example for ease, wanted to try my hand at writing a weekly news blog? Would I go to an administrator and ask for a chance to be scheduled to write one? Would I have to prove my writing skill is that above a five year olds? 18:33, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm 8 and what is this. 18:35, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * It's mummy touching a strange man inappropriately. 18:45, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Seems fine by me. 19:16, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

While I don't like the idea of only limiting this to sysops, I would enjoy seeing some more diversity in the news blogs. Joe Copp 19:33, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Kat was added to the news team, although for clarity I think we should have "News team" and "Weekly news team" or something similar, unless Kat is a full on news team member now. 19:47, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Not really trying to promote the idea of creating a NEW team, which comprise of people doing the roundup permenantly, rather allow everyone to have a go at it. However, I think, since most of the people here approve of the proposal, we can proceed with the consensus, and sign up those who can and want to join.
 * I'm not talking about scraping a news team, I'm just saying we clarify which users can post weekly news and which ones post the on the spot news. 23:24, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Who should do the news blogs?
1. Admins, Sysops and Crats only

2. Anyone with Special Rights, including chat mods, custodians, blog patrollers, etc

3. Anyone and everyone who wants to do it.

4. Dissolve the current roundup team and appoint a completely new one

Option 4
Joe Copp 23:06, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * I like the sound of this system. How exactly would this be evaluated, may I ask? 23:12, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * We could have the user in question write about a past event (as if it were present) and submit their work to be evaluated by an administrator, and if it's good, they can be allowed on the team. Joe Copp 23:21, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

23:12, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

-- 23:26, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * I like Azuris's plan, sounds a bit more organized and takes a bit of a load off of Users. 23:28, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * That was what I put forward earlier, clarity between the teams, I apoligise if I wrote it in a way that was seen incorrectly for scrapping a news team. But I agree that we should have different teams for different news blogs. 23:30, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * In light of this new proposition, I've scrapped the polls. 23:38, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Moving Along
Building off of what Azuris was saying, what groups would the news team be split up into? Too me it seems like the best option is simply a CoD News Team (Game Updates) and a Community News Team (End of Week News, Community Events, etc.) I don't really see where any other teams would fit. 03:25, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * We could even have some sub-categories, such as "technical game updates," "DLC updates," and "other." I don't think that would be necessary for the community section, however. Joe Copp 03:31, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * Community would likely fall under other. They can likely do the weekly news, and any other news should someone in another category be busy. 04:10, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * We already have categories for news/community blogs. 04:15, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * I meant "other" to be a subcategory of Call of Duty news, and "community" as a separate category. Joe Copp 04:16, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, I triped up on your wording, I misread as no need for community category. 04:23, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

Great so we're going to have poorly made news blogs that me and Smuff will have to fix and make look better... Isn't this the whole reason we made a news team? ¬_¬ 10:25, April 9, 2012 (UTC) ??


 * Well thats what I believe that a requirement should be in order so "poorly made news blogs" won't be an issue yes? 10:36, April 9, 2012 (UTC)


 * So we're basically making a new news team even though the current one works fine? ok. 11:54, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

I believe that the "Community News Team" should be represented by different areas, such as a chat regular, a behind-the-scenes expert (so ID, WR regular), a sysop/crat, and a skilled writer (I've heard of a guy here that has a very high A-Level in English, he'll be perfect. Just my 2 pence. 11:47, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * Still waiting on that close bracket. 17:06, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that is a bad idea, having so called "regulars" from different parts of the wiki write them specifically would just lead to flame wars and un-necessary insults, which I do believe we have had past forums about. For the "behind-the-scenes expert", what is there to post about a WR or ID forum on the news blogs? If you want to know what is going on in either of them, go check them out, as they are already linked through the weekly news blogs. And for the "skilled writer", why do we need them? News is supposed to be straight-forward and to the point in the format we already have (weekly updates). You're complicating this far more than it needs to be. 21:08, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

Per N7. 16:14, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

Per n7. (totally not copy-and-paste) 21:08, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

We could just simply separate the news blogs into Call of Duty news and Community news, with no subcategories; each participant of said groups would take turns writing for each week. Joe Copp 21:12, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. 21:15, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * Does this mean new members to the news team? Or are we just making categories for our current one? 22:15, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * For new members also. There are like four people on the current team so it would be a bit rediculous to separate only them. Joe Copp 02:57, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, why do we need a new news team? 09:39, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * We're not replacing any of the current members, but rather introducing some new ones. Joe Copp 15:05, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * why 15:07, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * Cos variety. 15:12, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * Because having a group of 4 people do something that lots of other users could potentially do just as well or even better is a little exclusive. Joe Copp 15:14, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * But the reason we made the news team was because the news blog werent being made very well or at all. Now they're being made to a high standard and very regullary. 15:23, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * With peculiar exception to community news. 17:22, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * problem? 17:35, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 * The weekly blogs have left something to be desired. I don't really understand the whole internet leet speak talk or the ponies. They both convey a lack of professionalism that news blogs are supposed to convey. 02:56, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

Per N7. This is the whole reason we came up with the News Team. Let's be honest here; how many people can make good blogs, and how would we even know? 00:54, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yo dawg I heard you like good news blogs so we made loads of bad news blogs to see who makes good news blogs. 08:44, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

I've always opposed the News Team idea, because apparently I'm trusted to be an admin but not to post news blogs. It's one thing to have a group dedicated to making the news, but it's something else to not even have a clear application process to join the group. News blogs are taken from their original posters and reposted by News Team members even if there's nothing in them to fix. I understand the need to repost blogs for quality and standardization, but when there's nothing changed in the reposting process? News Team members aren't contributing anything by doing this. The News Team should be expanded and given an application process. 03:02, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree. The entire idea behind the group was pretty flawed from the beginning without a solid method of entry. Joe Copp 09:09, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Do we need a "solid method of entry" if its worked perfectly for the past year or so? I think this is more a case of butt hurt (again) that you and poketape aren't in the news team. 09:12, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * It "working perfectly" is something that can be debated. Joe Copp 09:18, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * So please debate your problems. 12:40, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Poketape, becoming an administrator does not automatically make you a good blogger, hell, it doesn't make you a good editor either. Meanwhile, I see no flaws with the News Team whatsover. If you want to abolish the News Team, come up with reasons. 14:46, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Please explain how being an admin doesn't make you a good editor. 21:49, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Look what he said again Expand does not mean Disband. While I have not seen any issues at all with the current News Team format, I also cannot see any disadvantages of having an application system. Otherwise all that happens is users with ability cannot use it effectively. TheDocRichtofen  (  Talk  ) 16:12, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

Mk. So... we have Poketape and Joe and Richofen wanting a way to add people to the news team. We also have N7 who wants to be a old person and stick to old traditions on the grounds that we made the news team to get better quality blogs (which is true). And we have all the other random nubs users saying "Per -insert walrus here-". Meh. I dont really have an opinion other than Have fun. 17:22, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) YL's idea would probably never work.
 * 2) Joe Copp's idea wouldn't work because the news team members make blogs based on who finds the next thing first, and the weekly news gets passed along from person to person anyway.
 * 3) "I don't really understand the whole internet leet speak talk or the ponies. They both convey a lack of professionalism that news blogs are supposed to convey." ~Poketape lrn2havefun
 * 4) LOOK AT ME I"M EDITING AGAIN!!!
 * Rebutting your point on my idea: how would introducing new members change this at all? Joe Copp 21:31, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Because they're not needed. 21:33, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Kat got added to the news team whilst this forum was running. 21:37, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * It was made official during the forum... but he's been a "member" for a few days before. :3 21:39, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * So now that Kat's in, we don't need any more? (not snide, general question). 21:42, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * yup i feel that now we've got Kat (and Damac) helping us in the news team we seem to be doing fine. 21:51, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * The purpose of the weekly news blogs are to give us news about CoD, not MLP. The whole point of the news team was to stop the creation of news blogs with bad grammar and spelling, so if anything what they're doing now goes against the reason they were created. 21:49, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * But the news blogs are professional... the weekly news is meant to be a bit of fun and I think people prefer it that way. 21:51, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with making the blogs funny, but I'd like them to have the news stories not written in a rather unintelligible manner. 21:56, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

I feel Kat's acceptance into the News Team hasn't gotten enough attention. Exactly why was he selected when News Team members have always said nobody new can be accepted? How was he vetted and can this criteria be made public? 21:56, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * We decided on IRC because we needed a member who can cover later in the day. 21:59, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * That just isn't fair to other people that wanted to be on the News Team. Why should one user get News Team membership because he uses the IRC? And as for the time argument why should each time be covered by a specific user? Why can't any user that shows himself capable be added to the News Team? 22:37, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * To be very specific, Kat made a news blog at 18:42 while I made one at 18:07. 22:43, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * From N7: "he didn't get chosen because he can use IRC. He got chosen via it" @ Poketape, And from me: Don't break whats not broken. 22:45, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Who made the decision? 22:55, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Poketape I do suggest you think of a rational, logical and effective way of test or application into the News Team. TheDocRichtofen  (  Talk  ) 22:49, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * The idea is simple; we allow each user that meets some sort of edit requirement the creation of one or perhaps two news blogs. Those that make acceptable news blogs are accepted into the news team. If their blogs fail or if the blogs they make after joining the news team are of bad quality then they will not be news team members. 22:53, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * But since when has edits made someone good at blogging? I get practise, but its not cause and effect. TheDocRichtofen  (  Talk  ) 22:56, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * True, but the editcount requirement is just a sort of trust thing to stop new users from submitting news blogs. 23:06, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * So basically, we would let a shitload of users do crappy blogs that thousands of anonymous users would view? 22:59, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Please explain how my idea would cause that. 23:06, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

I think we should have an application page for the News Team. 23:42, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well if you think so then that just about ends the discussion and we might as well begin a vote. 00:03, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well my word isn't final, but this discussion isn't really going anywhere at the moment - what would the vote be on? To make an application page for the news team? I'm asking since multiple things are being discussed... 00:10, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
 * From what I can gather, the major arguments are: News team stays as it is, News team becomes easier to join (App page) and possibly News team expands, but without an app page. 00:12, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd support the app page one. 00:18, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think Sam's break-down is correct. So a three-way vote on changes to the News Team? TheDocRichtofen  (  Talk  ) 09:08, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Vote
Because it looks like the actual discussion has ended. So this is whether or not the News Team will be expanded and how it should be expanded if it is to be expanded. 04:40, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Don't Change

 * 1) Per Drk.  17:25, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) As I see it, the News Team isn't broken and, as Drk said, doesn't need fixing. 18:29, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) As I see it, the News Team isn't broken and, as Drk said, doesn't need fixing. 18:29, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Expand with App Page
04:40, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Seems the best, and is the most fair out all of them. 04:44, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

08:54, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Joe Copp 09:10, April 13, 2012 (UTC)