Club Penguin Wiki:Vote Page

The Wiki's Vote Page is made to hold all kinds of votes.

When a vote is held, you will be allowed to sign your username, using four tildes ~

Each vote will be published in this way:

 (0)

 * Suggested by and confirmed by

Comments
Nominee Notice: After being nominated, you can enter reasons on why you should be nominated next to the "nomination sentence". A vote closes when 14 days is up. The vote difference is calculated by the number of votes "for" subtracted by the number "against". The user option with the most vote differences wins.

Voter Notice: You must vote in either "For" or "Against". If you vote in for, you have to sign underneath the "For" heading. To do this you have to type this in:

#~

After you have signed it, you must change the number in the brackets up by 1. (e.g if it was at 3, it means 3 people have already signed it. Change it to 4 when you sign it.) This is also the same with the number by their name. If you vote for, you must also increase the number beside his or her name by 1.

Please remember to use "#" instead of the usual "*", because it numbers the votes making it easier to count them.

You can also remove your vote. If in any case you change your mind, do not remove your vote completely, just strike it out and move it to the back of the list.

Please discuss with an administrator before creating a new vote!

Please create votes under this line:

Changing Demotion Policy (Patrollers) (-1)
This vote will add another rule on the demotion policy page for Patrollers. This vote will require Patrollers to manually mark ONE edit as Patrolled each week. The reasons for this is it keeps users active using the Patrol tool when they are unable to delete pages, rename files, delete comments etc.


 * Suggested by Callum and confirmed by Jeserator

For (1)

 * 1) Callum

Against (2)

 * 1) Penguin-Pal   (talk)  21:03, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * 21:24, September 26, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

 * We'll add a criteria for that anyway, but i truely believe that A 1 parol per week is pathetic, and B it just seems to me like some people have taken user rights a bit too seriously recenntly. Penguin-Pal   (talk)  21:03, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Too seriously? lol-- THE RULER AND DICTATOR OF AWESOME HAS RETURNED!!!!!  TALK TO HIM, OR ELSE! 23:26, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I have mixed feelings about this. Considering that the patroller rank is one below admin, there should be a little more higher expectations. Patrolling merely one edit a week is not asking for a lot at all. This will keep patrollers a little more active hopefully, and not allow them to ride out almost two weeks, make a mainspace edit, and retain their rights. But of course, like the policy already says, if the user is unable to come one the wiki, then they are exempted from the requirement. Along the lines of the first thing P-P mentioned, again, one patrol a week is minuscule. If anything, I suggest more. Not sure of a number, but maybe a few more. This rule will hardly effect active patrollers, considering patrolling is quite simple. I see this more along the lines of keeping patrollers from, like I said above, just barely holding onto their rights simply by meeting the 2 week edit rule. I'd like to hear other opinions before I cast my vote. Jeserator   H T  T R  !   Football Pin.PNG 21:20, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll be honest, the only times I've ever manually marked edits as patrolled were on mistake. :P Anyway, I don't think this rule is necessary. Patroller rights are more useful when it comes to the other uses you mentioned. -- 21:24, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey.youcp, I sort of agree with the point you have made. Callum

No raiding rule (+2)
This rule will add one of the lines on the entering of chat/in the rules, "No raiding." If said raiders don't leave by 5 minutes, chat mods shall have the rights to ban them for raiding.


 * Suggested by Techman129 and confirmed by Apj26 

For (2)

 * 1)  I'm a Chocolate  Eclair!  18:02, September 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Callum
 * 3) '''this is my new signature

Comments

 * I believe that you first need to define what raiding is before nominating such a rule- it seems a bit vague to me. Anyway, from what i understand, if a few users that happen to edit the same wiki come to chat, a mod could ban them for no actual reason and get away with it. A big part of a mod's role is to use their judgement. I don't see why the policy needs to be doubled every year to make special cases for everything. Penguin-Pal   (talk)  19:05, September 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, P-P, what I believe is raiding is what's been happening a lot recently, like the Glee Wiki, Sonic Fanon Wiki, and the ERBoH Wiki. People have been raiding and swearing and all that stuff, so yeah, that's why I think it would be a good rule. I'm a Chocolate   Eclair!  19:09, September 27, 2014 (UTC)