Forums: Index > Village Dump > A new concept for VFD
Note: This topic has been unedited for 1699 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Yep. I've come up with a new idea for the look and functionality of VFD. I'm still working an a couple of other tweaks, but just so you're all aware of what the major changes are:

  • Trimming down the rules. This has removed most of the "jokey" nature of them, and some of the rules that are no longer really valid. It also removes all the threatening "you have been warned" stuff, and the stuff that's mainly for the admins/poopsmiths.
  • Adding in an easier way to nominate articles. The "nominate an article" in the middle of the rules section allows us to add a new article simply by replacing "ArticleName" with the name of the article being nominated. The downside to this is new nominations go to the bottom of the page, but given every other forukm and talk page works this way, I don't see this as a major issue - just a slight change in habit.
  • Changing the look of the VFD main template (now called {{VFDt}}), so that deletion votes are before the keep votes, and colourful sections make it more apparent which is which.
  • Other minor tweaks, such as a link to the history and talk pages of the article. I've also change the closed nomination template, which I've saved to {{VFDc1}}, but that will eventually become {{VFDc}}.
  • The other thing I'm looking at adding is an auto-check if an article has been a previous VFD survivor, and an auto-check if an article is a previous feature.

The example page is here: User:PuppyOnTheRadio/temp3. Test it out and see what you think.

If you can think of any other changes, additions, or just general thoughts you have about the way it's now working, please let me know.                               Puppy's talk page09:40 07 Oct 2013

rules: {{VFDr}}
preload: {{VFDp}}
example: User:PuppyOnTheRadio/temp3
editintro: {{VFDi}}
Header template - current: {{VFDn}}
Header template - closed: {{VFDc1}} to replace {{VFDc}}
Vote template: {{VFDt}}

Feedback here

Beautiful and distinctive! Cheers for not having to load the same photo of Braydies and monsters every time I load the page! Specific comments:

  1. Let's confine ourselves to the issue of how it looks and the software behind it, not policy; do not infect this Forum with drama about forest fires, campaigns to delete entire sets of articles, multiple articles per nomination, and why My Article got deleted you bastards. Those are separate debates that will impede arriving at a decision on this one.
  2. The third bullet is a chronic desire of mine. It has been raised before (Forum:Vote: Put "Delete" before "Keep" in VFD), though most of the debate was along the lines of, "This is so minor that you are wasting our time." It would be fine if we could achieve this in the same round of changes, but I would not want any drama over this to derail the Forum.
  3. Rules for Admins and Poopsmiths are summarized at Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion/For Admins, which the proposed Intro should reference, and not repeat. Spıke Ѧ 11:14 7-Oct-13
Point 3 has been incorporated into {{VFDr}}.                               Puppy's talk page11:47 07 Oct 2013

Looks good, but will take some getting used to with the slightly different format and templates. Since the Symbol keep vote Keep. and Symbol delete vote Delete. vote templates will remain the same, this should not affect things much for most people. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 20:12, October 7, 2013 (UTC)

Set against the need to adjust is the satisfaction of seeing evidence that good new work continues to happen at this website. It is significantly more attractive with hardly no additional bytes going over the wire. If anyone has serious issues with the red and green pastel, however, the new style could declare the rows of the ballot as belonging to a certain "class" rather than having a certain color; then individuals could view it however they like, via local style rule (CSS). Spıke Ѧ 22:18 7-Oct-13

  1. Like the current VFD, it requires ?action=purge or editing to make the clocks update.
  2. Why is the index to archives not at the end, as before? Is this necessary as your macros add new nominations by appending sections? Can this be minimized? Most people don't care about the VFD archives. Spıke Ѧ 00:38 11-Oct-13
  1. I'll add a purge link to the page. To avoid clutter I can set the clocks themselves as a purge link - it's predominantly admins/poopsmiths who need it anyway, so no real advantage in a big purge here for most users.
  2. Yeah - bottom of page can't have anything except for the last nomination for that reason. I'm thinking shrinking it down to the last couple and moving it below the shortcuts menu. Again it's mainly an admin/poopsmith thing anyway. Having it towards the top makes more senses with the top down chronological order anyway.                               Puppy's talk page07:38 11 Oct 2013

In recent news, Mimo&maxus has (have?) stepped forward to be VFD Poopsmith, with my blessing. It would be nice to give him credit in the VFD header; also to list me as the ministering Admin, while noting that other Admins can also wind up ballots. Separately, I am preparing to add to Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion/For Admins a tutorial on creating new Archive files and list it as a duty of the Poopsmith. Spıke Ѧ 13:24 16-Oct-13

Is it a tech reason why the drop down voting menu can't be used here as with VFH? --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:48, October 21, 2013 (UTC)

That drop down used on VFH uses some fairly intricate js that I've never bothered to look into in too much detail. Potentially it might be able to be adapted, but not without me having to go through a significant amount of effort. So not a technical issue as much as a gap in my tech skills.                               Puppy's talk page07:17 21 Oct 2013


Viting is closed. Unanimous support! As there does not appear to be any concerns about any particular area;


Shiva represents the "destruction" bit of Creative Destruction.

Should we use the revised system for VFD as detailed above?
Score: 5