So why are people putting charts in REVERSE chrono order again?

[Vangelis]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Yes, but I've pointed out to other users, especially those in other countries who seem to think that we have to be ALL to EVERYONE around the world .... that this is a U.S. based website. They should conform to U.S. standards and don't whine about it.

Well yes, but it's not the fact that it's a US standard I have a problem with, it's that unless the day is higher than the 12th a new user won't be able to tell it's supposed to be a US standard straight away. Three letters rather than two digits removes any potential for confusion.

[Gunmaster45]

We should stamp "MADE IN AMERICA" on the main page.

Or maybe this image:

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Vangelis

But when you get down to it, the people who's chief concern is how 'easy' it is will just add entries at the top or bottom regardless of any date order whatsoever and let someone else fix it for them. Unless we arrive at a state where we've covered every gun appearance in every movie currently in existence, most of the additions are likely to belong in the middle of the tables anyway.

I dunno, it seems to me as though the anonymous users who normally are hit-or-miss in regards to format conventions do seem to make the effort to keep the films chronological.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Because IMDB does it in reverse Chrono, I'm not going to be heart broken if the majority votes against Chronological order. It's not that important in the grand scheme of things (thought as a 'historian' I'm also used to things being a certain way, but I can adjust ), but it's good to have these discussions EARLY in the process. I'm sure IMDB had it's own board room discussions as to the best way to present their data.

Actually, IMDB has sometimes made changes regardless of how the users, or even many of the admins, felt. See the new format of the front page? The reason for this is that some users complained that, with all the ads and whatnot, the front page was taking too long to load, so it was streamlined. But some others complained that it doesn't look as nice. I'm not sure what kind of decision-making was done, but I gather a lot of people still seem pretty unhappy with it, looking at their boards.

[Ace Oliveira]

I know this is a old thread, but i oppose the idea of not letting anonymous users from editing. A lot of them make good edits. We just have to not let them create pages. That is all.

[Gunmaster45]

Some of them make good edits, a lot of them add wrong information, screw up formating, spam, troll, etc, etc...

[Ace Oliveira]

Well, looking at Wikipedia, most of the Anonymous users are like that. However, since our site is really small, most of our edits come from Anon users. So if we don't let them edit, we will lose a lot of content.

[Gunmaster45]

Well the main basis of the completed site is made by the 10 or so admins/super users, and the uncompleted half is built mostly by anonymous users just passing through. On occassion we get a good edit by an anonymous user, but would it be so damn hard to make a user name if you are dedicated enough to help out?

Anonymous users cannot upload images, so they can't complete pages properly. There editing is limited to minor text, so they can barely help our needs. They aren't a necessity to the site, and anyone who is can just log in.

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by Gunmaster45

Well the main basis of the completed site is made by the 10 or so admins/super users, and the uncompleted half is built mostly by anonymous users just passing through. On occassion we get a good edit by an anonymous user, but would it be so damn hard to make a user name if you are dedicated enough to help out?

Anonymous users cannot upload images, so they can't complete pages properly. There editing is limited to minor text, so they can barely help our needs. They aren't a necessity to the site, and anyone who is can just log in.

I agree. Log In, make a user name. What's so hard about that? We should require a login and a user name to make changes. The good is well outweighed by the tons and tons and tons of BAD.....

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

I agree. Log In, make a user name. What's so hard about that? We should require a login and a user name to make changes. The good is well outweighed by the tons and tons and tons of BAD.....

And I have to say that at this point, I'm starting to come around to this mindset myself.

To be fair, I dunno how many other Wikis are like this, but if they have the kinds of issues we've had, it's hard to imagine they wouldn't at least entertain the thought of making editing for registered users only.