Board Thread:News and Announcements/@comment-24660155-20181001135052/@comment-30696685-20181002022002

AllianceScoutAiothai wrote: Funny, I was going to bring up the topic of demotion later on... ha... For one thing, we have a bunch of bureaucrats who do nothing to improve the wiki. With all due respect to Loconator, there are non-bureaucrats who do more work than he does. Let me be clear that I'm not trying to pick on him, as I'm sure there are others, but it makes no sense for a new editor to get an automated message from Loconator when there are more qualified staff they could go to for help. The last time I messaged Fandom (then Wikia) they said there needed to be a consensus among users before someone could be demoted. I also don't think we should nessercarily limit ourselves to two bureaucrats, as that's really not the problem.

Back to the subject at hand, Rafi summed up my feelings perfectly. If someone wants to make some Fallout-esque scenario or something inspired by the Handmaid's Tale, more power to them, but articles that are completely implausible and are clearly "just for the lulz" should not be permitted. Yeah. I don’t want to sound like a dick or anything but after two years of being a bureaucrat and actually working on the wiki a lot (Even when I was busy with school at the start of this year), as well as keeping the discord active and trying to fill someone else’s role while they were gone, plain and simply - I don’t want to be demoted. I have 5600 edits and 11,110 achievement points, despite a year long hiatus. I really think people who work like me, or even harder than me, deserve their place as a Bureaucrat or Admin (Sidewinder is an example)

And on the topic of implausible articles, we’ve had map games like that in the past and made sure not to make too many of them, but I think an entire scenario set on (for example) Lil Pump establishing a space empire and inventing humanity, that’s ridiculous and shouldn’t be here. Same goes for explicit language in articles, possibly even in comment sections too.

Honestly, look back to articles made in the period of 2005-2009. I wonder what Paranoid would think of the wiki now. I’m not saying we should completely return to that degree of strictness, but I don’t think the wiki should be 1995 Somalia either.