What is a reasonable time limit for tagging a page incomplete or no effort?
 

Sorry but we have to codify this in writing.

We have the "incomplete" tag to mark pages that have gone on long enough that we are now inviting someone OTHER than the page's creator to help fix or complete it.

We have the "no effort" tag for pages which seem like the creator just abandoned it or didn't know what in the hell they were doing.

We have the "Nuke" tag for pages which are so incomplete or don't qualify for inclusion in IMFDB that they scream for deletion.

BUT we cannot slap these tags on pages without giving the creators fair time to work on the page or complete it. It is overzealous to tag something BEFORE a reasonable amount of time has passed for the page to be completed or complete enough not to be tagged. This is in recognition that it takes TIME to build a page and also that people have lives outside of IMFDB and sometimes life pulls them away.

So what is a reasonable amount of time? I propose each page creator is given minimum of a week free of harassment from any member or mod. That way ample time is given to the user/member to upload images, organize the page and write descriptions (especially in a page that is gun heavy).

Thoughts and input are welcome.

I'd say about a week is enough time to get either complete or finish a good chunk of a page. I would just add that TV shows or really gun heavy films should get more time.

As far as I'm concerned, a page that is simply "incomplete" doesn't need a time limit so long as it's got the required essentials (gun names, gun page links, gun pics, description of gun's use and by whom).

This is particularly applicable to pages that are made while a movie is in theaters and the only pics we can get are publicity photos/trailer screencaps, because such pages will never be complete until the DVD/Blu-Ray comes out (which won't be for several months at least).

You misunderstand me. I'm talking about slapping a tag on a page that someone just started building. IMHO it's ridiculous to slap an {incomplete} tag on a page fifteen minutes after it's been created. It's ridiculous to slap a {noeffort} tag on a page that was made 30 minutes ago. Not everyone can dump an entire complete page on IMFDB in a minute (we have some members who do that, but they chose to do an exceptional amount of work BEFORE uploading anything).

There is also the etiquette of not editing someone's page when they are in the process of building it. When I look at a recent changes history, I can tell when someone is building a page. I don't touch it until some time has passed. The ONLY time I may edit (after taking a peek) is to correct an obviously WRONG Identification of a gun, but that is rare.

edit: The {incomplete} tag, though most gentle of ALL of the tags, is still insulting in that it is someone OPENLY CALLING all other members to complete your work for you, since "you (the page creator) obviously cannot or will not complete the page to minimum IMFDB specs"....

Hope this helps.

I remember when this little incident happened to you MPM, it was out of line to slap an incomplete tag on something you just created 15 minutes prior. I had it done to me because some of my screencaps lacked captions, but my page had been up for a while. As far as what kind of time lapse before tagging a page incomplete I guess 2 weeks for movie pages. TV shows are another matter, they can take a long damn time.

Well, it was just that one time, but I've seen it happen to other members by a variety of people, and frankly, I can't really get annoyed with people for rules which have not been actually written. If there is a rule which explicitly outlines a span of time, the person can fire back saying 'Hey, you didn't give me enough time before you started calling for everyone else to complete my page for me'. It would be only fair to actually write a clear rule so that the membership has a chance to read it.

Sometimes I've left a page and kinda forgot about it for months (doh!) and those pages were slapped with a tag. That didn't bother me because I had already let the page lapse with no new content in a while. No one should have a problem with that.

I like either 1 or 2 weeks for a movie page (to give working folks at least 2 weekends to do it), not sure about the time to do the MINIMUM standard for a TV series page (since it is ongoing and many times the DVDs aren't released in a timely manner and many shows don't even have DVD releases). I don't know about Videogames. but after a while, the tags are merited.

Nevertheless regardless of any amount of time I would think it is appropriate to apply the {{nuke}} tag to articles not compatible with IMFDB.

What about pages that have been up long before the rule about documentaries and such?

Perhaps a {grandfathered} tag is in order? To indicate that though a page is technically against the rules, it has been given special recognition.

How about a {WorkInProgress} tag?

Both sound like great idea. The problem with having a grandfathered tag is the tags are supposed to be temporarily not permanent.
Mail Call has a simple note. '''NOTE: Though IMFDB does not permit documentaries this page had been made an exception by Administrators.'''
But I'm not sure that would stop people from adding a nuke tag on other pages, so the grandfathered tag may help.

IMHO I don't think pages should be on IMFDB until they are complete in the first place.

Another thing is that we should implement a policy that you are not to put any [[category:movie]] tags onto the page until it is finished.

That may work for pages which are really SPARSE, but some pages are just shy of being complete or the OP missed something and can't finish it. Those SHOULD be allowed, so that others can help.

Sounds pretty doable to me. I don't usually have much of a problem there, I tend to do my pages in a matter of 3 days or so, if they're gun-heavy.
I can see it taking longer if I don't have the large chunk of uninterrupted free time I need.

I got slapped with a Nuke tag on my Aliens vs. Predator 2 page before I was able to post pictures. The tagger was kind enough to remove it once the page was complete, though. I agree that there should be a grace period for people who have proven themselves before (by having made two or more reasonably complete pages). Otherwise, the incomplete tag would be appropriate for those who display a modicum of effort, the "lack of effort is duly noted" for less, and "nuke" tag only for those who explicitly break the rules on creating pages even with images.

Perhaps instead of flinging the negative tags around like Halloween candy it'd be better if there was a "flag for moderator review" button that put a flag on the page for a moderator to put it under review. That way the judgement process is left in the hands of those who have proven themselves.

You're on to something here.

The {noeffort} and {nuke} tags are pretty insulting. {incomplete} should only be a gentle reminder if some time has gone by and there is no more forward progress on the page. But slapping ANYONE with a {noeffort} or a {nuke} page is essentially telling them "You're EPIC FAIL!" The page should REALLY deserve it before slapping any of these tags on them. If they are truly atrocious then the makers should not be offended and learn from their mistakes. But I fear we drive off noobs who are terrified of being publicly humiliated for screwing up.

This is a really great idea. People keep asking us stuff like why we claim documentaries are not allowed even though we've left up some pages that predated the rule (and which took enough effort to make that deleting would seem unfair). I'm all for this.