guide:submission_rules
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
| guide:submission_rules [2019/04/20 20:21] – redlinks removed wes | guide:submission_rules [2020/12/23 12:55] – wes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
| - Articles must be on the wiki in the correct namespace and URL to be approved. | - Articles must be on the wiki in the correct namespace and URL to be approved. | ||
| - Articles will not be approved via forum private messages or in IRC. Approval should be posted in the thread only. | - Articles will not be approved via forum private messages or in IRC. Approval should be posted in the thread only. | ||
| - | - Unapproved articles | + | - Unapproved articles |
| - If you're submitting a new warship, you should also submit a civilian ship (to help develop factions). | - If you're submitting a new warship, you should also submit a civilian ship (to help develop factions). | ||
| * Alternatively, | * Alternatively, | ||
| Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
| - All reviews must be done in a constructive manner. This is an expectation and will be enforced. | - All reviews must be done in a constructive manner. This is an expectation and will be enforced. | ||
| - Remember Technology & Setting Forum Staff and Admin reviews hold the weight in terms of approval or disapproval. While it is important to keep the suggestions of your fellow players in mind, you should be focusing more on these reviews. | - Remember Technology & Setting Forum Staff and Admin reviews hold the weight in terms of approval or disapproval. While it is important to keep the suggestions of your fellow players in mind, you should be focusing more on these reviews. | ||
| - | - Avoid [[guide:submission_rot]] if possible. | + | |
| + | |||
| + | ==== Avoid Submission Rot ==== | ||
| + | Both the submitter and the reviewer should do their best to avoid submission rot, which is when threads linger forever in limbo. Submission rot usually comes in 3 types: | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Type 1 === | ||
| + | |||
| + | When a reviewer sees a submission that is beyond their immediate field of technical expertise or understanding, | ||
| + | |||
| + | However, when a technology falls between or beyond the immediate fields of technical expertise of the entire reviewer collective, the submission is often left idle for very long periods of time and is forgotten until bumped. Even after bumps, such submissions are usually left to rot longer. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This tends to happen with more scientifically advanced-sounding submissions. Tech staff will sometimes reply to these submissions with minor suggestions, | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Type 2 === | ||
| + | Submissions that could drastically alter the roleplay, and are therefore controversial, | ||
| + | |||
| + | It used to be these submissions were collectively ignored whether they were controversial or not. Commonly they were race-related submissions of technology, such as a weapon for a certain race. The Submissions Office now handles these, so Type 2 is less frequently seen. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Type 3 === | ||
| + | Submissions that are so huge or numerous (subsystems, | ||
| ==== Appeals ==== | ==== Appeals ==== | ||
| Line 106: | Line 125: | ||
| * Damage capacity | * Damage capacity | ||
| * Special capabilities | * Special capabilities | ||
| - | * Damage Rating version (i.e. converting from [[guide: | + | * Damage Rating version (i.e. converting from DRv2 to [[guide: |
| - We suggest that you add an OOC section to the bottom of your article that gives the following information: | - We suggest that you add an OOC section to the bottom of your article that gives the following information: | ||
| * Author(s) information | * Author(s) information | ||
guide/submission_rules.txt · Last modified: 2024/06/22 12:49 by wes