Inkipedia talk:Policy/User content

This is a vote for the user content policy. If the vote is successful, the policy will be passed.

This policy proposal was created by Trig Jegman. For more details, see Trig's original post.

Voting will last 2 weeks, but will automatically be extended to 4 weeks if there is a tie, or if there is clearly not a consensus. Update: voting has been extended to a total of 4 weeks due to about 20% of people opposing, which some could consider as a non-consensus. Since voting started at 19 February 2023 at 00:31 UTC, voting will end on 19 March 2023 at 00:31 UTC.

Please vote by editing this page, and optionally adding your argument in the respective area.

Support (42)

1. Support With these guidelines user content will become more organized. It will also help direct users to editing Inkipedia's mainspace articles. Odd (Talk) 00:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
2. Support I 100% agree with this change. This is a wiki, not a social media platform. I understand that making a user page can be fun and it's fun to show it off to other players, but the main goal here is to provide an easily accessible place for Splatoon info. There are other places to discuss and talk about Splatoon (Reddit and the Discord to name two). DaRootBeer1231 (talk) 00:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
3.  GX_64 (talk)  01:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
4. Support Yoshifan52 (talk) 01:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
5. Considering I wrote the thing, I'd hope that I would vote for it. I think this is the greatest compromise between freedom of some user content while not losing focus as to what the site is about: Documenting the Splatoon franchise in an encyclopedia/wiki format. Trig - 01:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
6. Setting a limit on these things prevents people from treating this wiki as a place to dump fanon when it just isn't a place for that. Seeing as the 5 subpage limit only takes into account fanon pages, not pages made as drafts of mainspace or so, it seems pretty generous to me. And I don't know how most users like to upload personal images, but 7 doesn't seem to me as a low limit, though making it a bit higher in a fanon heavy wiki like this may not do too much damage. Kirbeat (talk) 01:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
7. Support Inkipedia is not meant to be a site focused on fan content. Lately it seems like a lot of images are being uploaded for personal use, and a handful of them do not seem to be in use at all. Limiting the amount of user images will help keep things tidy and focused on the site's intended purpose. FancyRat 01:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
8. Strong support. Inkipedia staff, including me, have spent significant time moderating personal user content that was uploaded to the wiki. This time would be better spent moderating actual contributions to Inkipedia. For user content, such as art and stories, we have the Inkipedia Discord, with its own fantastic team of moderators that are actually skilled at moderating that type of content. So please, let's pass this policy to encourage submitting the right content in the right places! Heddy (talk) 01:35, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
9. Support Islar74 (talk) 01:43, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
10. Support. I do feel that this policy will keep the focus and main goals of Inkipedia in the headlight— of not only our wonderful staff who moderate it— but the equally wonderful editors who support it. To add some comment on points I've seen in other votes: I think 5 userpages is a great middle ground. The thought of more does seem reasonable to me, though perhaps with some specific criteria for editors? As for user images, I don't really have a lot knowledge here. While I can see, again, reasonable concern for more. I don't think the scope that would bring is necessarily within the scope of the wiki. Again, I don't want to overstep myself, so I'd aprreciate if someone else could add comment on this section of the policy specifically to make sure we have a true consensus on all parts of the policy. Awildmusk(Hablo español?) 02:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
11. Support I think this is a good decision, and support the idea of making the wiki a more "Hey I'm going to look this up" rather than "this is my personal account that is chock full of personal information." File:S3 Tableturf Card Toni Kensa.pngℂ𝕝𝕒𝕣𝕚𝕟𝕖𝕥.𝕠𝕔𝕥𝕠 File:S3 Tableturf Card Annaki.png (ℙ𝕣𝕒𝕥𝕥𝕝𝕖) 02:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
12. Support. I just want to say that this is a great idea, and it gives the users more to express with, and show off their personality more. I would like to add that there should be more file implements... maybe 10 or something. -BRD05,8:57 PM, 18 February 2023 (CST).
13. Support. This is a great idea, it still allows for users to have their own pages and stuff, while keeping the wiki more focused on mainspace articles. And since the exact details, like number of files allowed, can be changed, this policy would only need to be modified not replaced. Brycerw11 (talk) 04:19, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
14. Support. Encourages official Splatoon content editing and prevents Inkipedia server bloat. People can use AO3, Blogspot, or the like for their own fanmade stuff. — Exaskliri _(they/them) (talk | contribs) 06:55, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
15. Strong Support. This is a wiki, not social media, and not a place to host fanfics or fanart. 7 personal embedded images and 5 user subpages are absolutely more than enough to give users a high degree of creative freedom in designing their user pages or "profiles". I could even see the limits being set a bit lower, but the proposal is fine as-is. In addition, I would support a cutoff sooner than September 1, as (active) users do not need six months to "prepare" for this; no one is (or should be) using the wiki as their personal storage drive with no other backups, and users will not be significantly impacted by any deleted content. If this very generous cutoff does not satisfy someone's desires, they should realize they perhaps may be on the wrong type of site, and can venture elsewhere. While younger users (who I suspect this will primarily impact, based on observations) may unfortunately be used to platform capitalism and only hanging out on a few websites total, they in turn may become encouraged to make a webpage of their own – and independently-hosted content is what the MediaWiki project & philosophy are all about, after all! To address concerns of those opposed, sure, this can perhaps be argued to be "discouraging" to some, but we should recognize that as OK in this context – because, again, a wiki's main purpose is not social networking. This is an encyclopedia, not Geocities. :) To add, Heddy's point above is very important too, as moderation of this content takes, and historically has taken, quite a lot of admins' time; this time and energy is much better spent elsewhere, on tasks that matter more and are more critical to the wiki. –Eli (talk) 08:35, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
16. Support. This seems like a more than fair amount of user content. For any affected users who wish to move their excess content to Neocities in particular, I would be willing to help them out by writing a guide and supplying template html/css, if there's interest. Sourguppyworm (talk) 09:10, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
17. Support. The policy proposed is well thought out and fair, concerning the balance between a users personal content, fan-fiction, etc. to keep in balance with Inkipedia being a wiki rather than a fandom or similar social media platforms. Personally to admit is, that I am not in use of anything being affected by this policy as of this date, making me not able to relate to other users attachment to their personal pages, files, etc. as strong but in the end this policy will keep more balance between user-only related contend and the main priority on Inkipedia, namely the content related to the Splatoon series.   Perfectionist   (talk) 12:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
18. Support. I definitely agree with all of this. I think the proposed number of pages and images is more than ample for users on a site that is, after all, supposed to be dedicated to wiki content first and foremost. Although it may be a bit of a hurdle to implement at the start and could require quite a bit of policing, it'll definitely be less work for us than we currently have to do! And like others have said, if we need to alter any elements of it later, we can! GloverMist (talk) 12:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
19. Support. I think that this will really help organise the wiki! Leel0oo! :-) (talk) 14:30, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
20. Support. Considering most of my contributions to the wiki were categorizing images, I was able to see firsthand just how much of the uploaded content is user page focused, sometimes not even being used. I think the limits are pretty fair and don't discourage users from making their own pages, and if proven to be too extreme, I'd be down to expanding it later | ☆ ninckvinny ☆ 15:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
21. Support. I'm guilty filling user pages with fan content and I think the user content limit is just enough for users to test and explore things on the site or share things about themselves. I definitely agree that Inkipedia is not for fan content, even though my own edits were mostly to my user pages. Inktoling (talk)
22. Support. I agree with this. NIWA currently has a fanon Pikmin wiki, so I think we should split like that. Fanon content goes there, and main canon content goes here. I also think that we should maybe increase the limit for users with more rights. (like Admins can have 15 images or sandboxes while regular Users can only have five/seven or so) File:Octoseeker close up 3.jpeg エスクヰト・美奈() 03:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
23. Support? While i do agree that fanon should be kept to itself (maybe make a separate fanon wiki?) i feel that the limit of 7 images is a tad too small, as some people may desire more for userboxes. 10 seems like a reasonable number for this, otherwise i agree with everything else. Adalent (talk) 03:58, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

    @Adalent: userboxes and their respective images do not count towards the limit because they use already-existing article images. You can use as many article images as you want on your userpage. Heddy (talk) 04:06, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

24. Support This is a wiki made for information about Splatoon. It is not a social media site, nor a forum or a blog. We need people adding images, and editing the actual mainspace, not their user page. I think this will help people stop adding so much to user pages, and help Inkipedia grow. There are many articles that need expanding, images etc. There is plenty of work to do. This proposal has my full support. I also think that 7 images is enough. It'll encourage less random files being added. -Woomy? (talk) 14:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
25. Support I fully agree with your statement. the octoling girl 15:03, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
26. Support Having seen the original discussion, I personaly leaned towards a limit of 5, since I felt not much more reasonable could be done with 7 or 10 images. I was unable to reply due to internet issues, hense bringing it up for the first time here. However, I'm happy to go with a limit of 7 since it works as a middle ground. With some saying it's too much and some saying it's too little, along with many saying it's the right size? I think that goes to show that it works as an average number. Inkipedia has always been for mainspace edits first and foremost, along with the discussion/contribution in talk pages and sandboxes that contributes to that. Whilst it's nice to have your own space in a user profile, I believe it's important that they don't become bloated distractions. I'm unsure how exactly it would be governed (automated? patrolers?), but I'd hope it wouldn't be too big of a load to take on. I also personally thought that the policy was clear enough, but there's already a bit of confusion on this talk page about what counts as a user file. (Barnsquids, user boxes, etc). It might be good to eleborate on specific aspects like these; ones that are prevelent parts of the wiki user culture. 🐙owen⛥puppy⛥21🐙 (talk) 15:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

    Fully agree that more clarification on the application of the policy is needed. Many of the comments here on the voting page already seem to indicate that many people are turned around by some of the not-very-obvious aspects (ex. custom barnsquids, user images not being the same as mainspace wiki images used on a userpage, tags for those who still keep them around, and others). I think if we were to move forward with the policy, some extra clarification and perhaps examples of things that do and do not count towards the totals for either restriction is absolutely needed. Awildmusk(Hablo español?) 17:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

27. Weak Support As someone who both has and has seen a vast amount of users with massive amounts of user projects or things within their user spaces, I fully support this idea. As I heard someone say, this is a wiki, not a social space for the Splatoon fandom. Since this is a wiki, this is an info space, and I haven't seen very many people actually helping to improve the wiki. We do not need more distractions from actually working around here. Conversely, though, people do need some sort of connection, and while the limit isn't exactly too restricting, it might not make users come around here too often anymore. Arivaki-Kun (banter) 18:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
28. Support I think having a limit isn't a bad idea, as no limit increases the load moderators have and such. This isn't a social media site, and while my limited useage of the site outside of viewing images for art refs and such might bias me I'm sure there's plenty like me. Goldendoodle252 (talk) 22:14, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
29. Support I concur with all written above. Nothing much else to say. -Xando (ping) 22:31, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
30. Support This is very much needed to clean up the site and keep this focused more on what this site is supposed to be. User:SCP fnfSCP fnf (talk) 15:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
31. Support This would be very helpful in keeping inkipedia to just the facts. User:Hescracked75Hescracked75 (talk) 7:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
32. Strong support. I haven't been an active editor for the longest time, but even in my brief experience, I've seen quite a few userpage edits that were not intended to eventually contribute to the mainspace. The currently active editor base for the wiki isn't the largest, and a considerable number of these editors appear to mostly work on their userpages. While I think creativity should be allowed to encourage socialization and help keep the community healthy, the Inkipedia Discord exists for that reason. On top of this, I feel that implementing this policy would help to refocus the creative side of the community into helping with mainspace editing, though I am willing to concede that this policy will likely drive some of them away. In my opinion, this loss would be worthwhile as the policy's benefits would contribute to the wiki's main goal of providing accurate information as staff attention can be moved away from userspaces and more users will ideally be editing the mainspace, outweighing the downside of lost editors who were not already contributing to it. Bruhsfx2dotwav (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
33. Support Saying this as someone who doesn't really use their user page, but I think user pages should not be consuming significant amounts of time and data. FOCUS TREE (talk) 16:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
34. Support The wiki page is not social media: we already have Discord. Seriously, are we going to allow talk about, like, non-Wiki junk? Cut the clutter, I say, and keep it organized. beackers (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2023 (UTC) 12:50 PM, 22 February 2023 (CST)
35. Support Fandom Wikis have massive issues with this. Some wikis that allow free user content have hundreds of thousands of images that put stress on both moderators and servers. Let's not bring that to Inkipedia ...Also, as someone who had an incredibly cringy user page on an old account that I made when I was 12, I'd love to see that stuff purged ProfessorOfK3ology 07:00, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
36. Support I think this is a fair compromise. Unlimited personal images could get very hard to manage in the long run, and as many people stated before, this shouldn't be the go to site for documenting personal content in the first place. Seven personal images sounds more than reasonable, since you can decorate your user and talk pages with any wiki image already. ✦Shisei✦ 22:41, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
37. Support sure, why not? makes sense. KelpTheSquidkid (talk) 03:11, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
38. Support definitely an important restriction to have in place, especially for longevity. The limits provided are reasonably restrictive! The Giant Mole 00:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
39. Support Its true that there is a lot of User pages not related to what the wiki is really about. Things should be kept professional and not as a social website at all. Sandboxes should be for texting or to familiarize with how to edit the wiki. Great idea! Platelet✨(talk👌🏻) 21:37, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
40. Big Support Inkipedia is a wiki platform for finding and discovering data. Images are being uploaded for personal content, and are useless. Limiting the amount of user images will keep things tidy. Konemara (talk) 14:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Konemara 15:45, 5 March 2023 (CET)
41. Strong support. Wikis are a place of learning. They're not, nor should they be treated as a social media platform. Jennifer Crowley (talk) 00:48, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
42. Support A wiki shouldn't be used a social media, so I support the policy. Harristic (talk) 21:35, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Oppose (13)

1. Kinda Oppose: I still agree, but maybe increase the limit if you have experience? Maybe add 5 more each month to each Inkipedia user and add 10 more when you get better user rights. The limit should be less images for less experienced people. Maybe that could help? KPOfficial26 (talk) 01:04, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

   @KPOfficial26 The thing is, what would any user need that many personal images for? If there is truly a need, then the limit may be increased in the future. Keep in mind that you can actually have unlimited images on your personal page as long as they are images that are already on the wiki; it's just personal images that would be restricted to 5. As for experience-based rights, well, that could work. But you have to ask, is Inkipedia the place to put all that content? I would like to hear an example of how someone could need that many personal user images. Heddy (talk) 04:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

   Well, if there is a file limit of 7, then all of the File Barnsquids would have to be obsolete. KPOfficial26 (talk) 12:04, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

   Oh no, the new policy proposal is only for personal use images. We would be able to have a maximum of 7 for images like the OC on your userpage. :] Files like our gear close-ups are used on pages outside our userpages, so they wouldn't count. FancyRat 02:26, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

   Thank god, that saves the purpose that the models I uploaded would stay on the wiki. KPOfficial26 (talk) 14:03, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

2. I also oppose. I feel like putting restrictions would make people not want to edit the wiki more. That's what I feel like is happening with bulbapedia. I also think user pages can help new users get familiar with the wiki. YOLO2020 01:10, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

   User pages and images would still be allowed, including user sandbox pages (which exist to encourage testing and experimentation). All that's being proposed is a hard limit on the amount of such pages and personal images, as there is currently no limit to either. Yoshifan52 (talk) 01:36, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

   To add to this: Pages that are for learning the wiki or building content for the wiki are fine. They are not included in the limit of five. The five userpages are explicitly for fanon or otherwise not-site-related material. Trig - 01:55, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

3. I oppose as well. I fully agree with the point YOLO2020 made. If we put this policy in place, it may deter new users from editing the wiki. WolfTamer File:S3 Icon Callie.png 02:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
4. Discouraging policy. Shahar (talk) 02:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
5. I oppose. User pages are a great way to connect with the community, and user files let you show your Splatoon characters and mastery. Lofiguy (talk)
6. I agree, this doesn't have to be some stuck-up get-down-to-business wiki. We should be able to loosen up, have a little freedom of using OUR chats as OUR personal systems. Octoling E s3 (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
7. Oppose 𝚂𝚑𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚛𝟷𝟶𝟷 (talk) 21:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
8. My user content is shorter then most, having only 1 file and a few words, but I believe having expansive user pages doesn't hinder wiki progression, therefore people should be able to do it. If someone wants facts about this series, they aren't gonna even see user pages unless they want too. People giving ideas and opinions on personal pages only for friends to see, won't hold back expansion. These people have dedicated time to this wiki, making it, in a way, their wiki as well, and I believe they should have rights to their own personal spaces. Wind Waker (talk) 05:51, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

   Yes! I used (I say used because I’m not on here a lot anymore) to love making tiny little things on my page and getting inspired by others too! It was cute and I don’t think this proposed rule is too good. OctoWebber (talk) 01:12, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

9. More oppose than not. While restricting the ammount of user content can save some space, I think it should be at least not that drastic. 1. I think it doesn't hurt the wiki to have user pages and images as long as they're sorted out. 2. As a person who really enjoys editing my page and subpage, my opinion's that too drastic restrictions, especially without much of a reason, can lead to heavy discouraging and kills people's creativity. Yes, wiki is a place for rough facts, but this is why we have user pages where we can still be people, not just editing machines. Especially when it comes to such a great piece of art as Splatoon. 3. User sandboxes are an excellent place to practice your wiki editing skills. In concludion, I'd like to propose a compromise: to not be ridiculous with the ammount of user pages and files, we can limit them to, let's say, 15-20 subpages and 50-80 user files. That way there won't be any spam and people won't feel as restricted at the same time. Milchik (talk) 3:29, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

   Trig and I said it above, but reiterating: sandboxes (as in, pages for users to experiment with the software/markup or create drafts of mainspace articles etc.) will continue to be 100% allowed separate from userpages. The matter at hand here isn't removing personal flair/fanon/blog content from userspaces either, it's simply limiting the amount of total images and pages allowed. 50-80 files per person could add up very quickly if even only five individual editors reach that limit. Yoshifan52 (talk) 05:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

   I see, thanks for clarification about sandboxes. Tho, I still think that 7 user images is too little, you can barely add anything to your user page and subpages with such an ammount. If 50 is too much, at least 15-20 should be allowed imo. Again, if they're properly sorted, they shouldn't be a big issue. Milchik (talk) 05:24, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

   Just for reference, this wiki has over 4500 users who have made edits. Allowing 50-80 per person, or even 20, is pretty preposterous. This is not a personal webhost. People (perhaps minus valid exceptions, for good reason, if admins grant it) do not need dozens of their personal images hosted on this server. –Eli (talk) Eli (talk) 05:55, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

   If such a trifle doesn't hurt anyone (or even better, raises people's morale and makes them want to spend more time here and contribute to the actual wiki pages at almost no cost), I don't see the reason to implement such big restrictions. I think that 15-20 user images per user would be more than enough for everyone to feel comfortable. I say that as a person who moderates images for a 95k people server that creates more than 5k images per month (and I don't mean memes that were found on the internet or something, I mean actual new images that people make by their own for this server specifically). It's not quite the same thing as posting pics for your profile on wiki, but if you say that we have over 4500 users, I think that 15-20 images per user is enough. Milchik (talk) 10:49, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

   I'm also gonna add, I don't think that all 4500+ users will upload and use user images up to the very limit. Some don't care about it, some are inactive, and this should make things even easier. Milchik (talk) 11:19, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

   Inkipedia has 101 active users. With a limit of 15 images the max amount of user images owned by active users would be 1515. For 20 images the total would be 2020. Some users don’t use the images they upload and they don’t marked their unused images for deletion. Having a limit of 15-20 files would defeat the purpose of trying to keep Inkipedia organized. Odd (Talk) 15:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

   Either 1515 or 2020 images doesn't look like a big deal. Idk, maybe I'm just too used to organizing 70k+ images together with my team of 5 people, but having a limit of just 2k images total for so many years of this wiki existing really doesn't sound anywhere near bad. Milchik (talk) 18:44, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

   I mean, if it really is that bad for you guys to organize, you're always free to do whatever you want, this is a volunteer work after all. But if you didn't care about other people's opinion, you'd not make a vote to discuss and decide, so I'm trying to explain myself as clearly as I can and not trying to insult anyone's work. I'm just making this clear to not sound rude. Milchik (talk) 18:53, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

   As an editor who only occasionally helps clean up non-userspace images, I don't think it's a reasonable amount at all. If you're used to dealing with tons of images, and are able to help here, maybe you should offer to help this site's staff with a higher image limit as part of opposing this proposal. Yoshifan52 (talk) 03:17, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

   If I ever step out of my current moderating duty, I actually don't mind applying for help at all! :> I don't think I'll be able to do that in at least few years tho, but thank you for the opportunity. I really hope this vote will result in a reasonable compromise. Milchik (talk) 06:58, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

   I'm not offering you an opportunity, I'm suggesting you at least be available to help with what you're proposing. If you're unable to immediately help with the large amount of images the "20-80" limit would allow, please imagine how busy the staff and plain editors that do help with these must already be. Yoshifan52 (talk) 01:02, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

   Are people allowed to oppose only if they're able offer their help? Again, if staff weren't able to handle the current ammount of user images, they could make changes without voting, and if voting is up, I feel free to express my opinion as well as other people do so that staff can take these opinions into account and think what they're able and not able to do. Sorry but I can't possibly know how busy or free the current staff is and this shouldn't stop me from expressing what I think, epecially when my opinion doesn't hurt anyone, as it can easily be ignored if staff thinks that it's irrelevant. I friendly ask you to end this discussion if saying that I should be able to offer my help directly to be able to propose things is your only point. Thank you and stay safe. Milchik (talk) 01:19, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

10. Opposed mostly I understand why people want this, but one of the biggest parts of any fandom is the community, I understand that this is a wiki and there are other places to interact and talk about this game, but this is the place where we can all come together and gain knowledge of something we all love and still be able to socialize with others . Ratch 14:44, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

    Inkipedia is not used to socialize. I'm not trying to say you can't – this just is an observation. The vast, vast majority of users do not use… encyclopedia sites for that, naturally (??? why would you), and it is quite obviously not intended to be a place focused on that. Limiting how many unrelated, random files someone can have on their personal pages (taking up space and resources and others' time in order to moderate the content as admins have expressed concerns about above), i.e. slightly limiting people who are incorrectly using wiki as their personal hosting server or fanfic repository, is sorely needed; it's not infringing on anyone's "rights", considering you are not owed that by a wiki/encyclopedia. This is not only not the site for that, a wiki is not typically even the type of site for that. –Eli (talk) 05:50, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

    Strongly agree with this reply. This wiki site and the software it runs off were never intended to be used as a community hub. This is a Splatoon encyclopedia running on wiki software, not a Splatoon-focused social media website to hang out on. Yoshifan52 (talk) 03:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

11. Opposed mostly I good with users can have only 5 sandboxes, but 7 pictures only?! I'm not okay with this. For example: I'm right now creating my 5th and final sandbox. My 5th one is about my Oc's and I have 30 of them; that means I need 30 pictures plus the 4 pictures I have for my user page. Totals up 34 pictures I need. I feel like the max of pictures should 50. File:S3 Icon Callie.png Splat girl File:S3 Icon Shiver.png(talk) 12:07, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

    I'm strongly agree with this. As a compromise (or even an advice for you personally, as I do the same stuff), I think that it's possible to merge several OC pictures in one to save up space. Imo, at least 15-20 user pics won't hurt anyone and will balance both points of view perfectly. Milchik (talk) 12:20, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

    I just don't think that it is fair. File:S3 Icon Callie.png Splat girl File:S3 Icon Shiver.png(talk) 20:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

12. Opposed IMHO this is a decision that should have been made years ago if you wanted to set limits. I know Inkipedia's not supposed to be used to blog and/or socialize, but the fact of the matter is that it is being used that way, has been for years, and because of that a lot of content has been posted here under people's user pages (and I know I'm probably one of the biggest offenders of that). Setting these limits will put a huge damper on the Inkipedia community as a whole. Many of us started expanding our userspace simply because you can do so many things on a wiki interface that you can't do on, say, Facebook, Twitter, even longform blog sites like Tumblr, and getting our own wiki space somewhere else disconnects us from the rest of the Inkipedia community. The Discord can only do so much. So yeah, in conclusion, and tl;dr form: Opposed, because it's too late to both do it and keep the community together. -DJParticle (talk) 14:14, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
13. Strongly Opposed I think that people should not be restricted to this. People should be able to express themselves. Although we are a wiki, we shouldn't be this serious about it. Octopedia (talk) 22:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Neutral (9)

1. Abstain: I do not want anyone to be swayed by my opinion on this matter. I encourage folks to consider:
   • Commenting on what could be improved about the policy proposal, as well as the vote itself.
   • What do you see Inkipedia is, and should be? Does this proposal help that?
   • Will the policy benefit or hinder the wiki in the long run? Why?
   • Does this policy build trust in both the Inkipedia community and its readers?
   • Does this policy encourage on-topic editing and discipline, or discourage editing and experimentation?
   • Does this policy suitably capture expectations? Will there be disagreements within the community as to what "breaking the policy" is?
   • Will this policy reduce or increase the amount of overhead for staff?
   • Will we require additional resource to enforce this policy? Is it self-governing?

   Slate Talk Contribs 02:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

   I see Inkipedia as the greatest Splatoon encyclopedia but also a place where you can have a cool user page. The proposal helps because it will reduce the workload (less pages and user images to review and moderate), while still allowing people to create cool userpages or feature their latest fics and art. It's completely fair to have a limit in place so long as the limit does not prevent people from making a cool user page; I believe the policy will be adjusted to perfection in the future, to ensure user pages can shine while not having excessive amounts of content.

   The reduced workload will help Inkipedia in the long run, and for people who were using it as a personal image host or blog, it will help them too because they will find a wider audience on the proper websites (full blogs, full fanfic wikis); and they can still feature their latest content on Inkipedia, removing content as it gets old or close to a limit in place.

   I don't believe this policy would discourage editing or experimentation, because: 99% of users do not exceed the proposed limits, meaning that they will never be warned about the policy and may actually never become aware of the policy. And if someone does become aware of the policy, they should see that the limits are quite reasonable and chock full of exceptions allowing unlimited of almost everything people put on user pages (user boxes, stat icons such as cash icons or Splatfest icons, barnsquids, productive draft/sandbox stuff, images already used on the wiki).

   There is already quite a bit of confusion visible about what "breaks the policy". This will be easily cleared up. Trig has already started working on new helpful text and example images to add to the policy.

   The overhead for staff shouldn't be too bad, because it should be relatively self-governing. I expect Inkipedians to give each other friendly reminders of the policy if anyone comes close to breaking it, and active users have already been quite good about removing excess content on their own without staff involvement. In the event staff involvement is required, it won't take too much effort, just a friendly warning or two. In the hopefully rare event that the warnings are ignored, staff would have to process a deletion for multiple images and/or pages, which will be time-consuming. The initial wave of deletions once the deadline hits may take significant time to work through. Inkipedia is a community effort so I do hope that many users will help each other with these changes. Heddy (talk) 03:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

   I can see why you will want to enforce this change I think personally that have this in for maybe a couple of weeks see what happens and see if more edits happened or less it's a matter of seeing the outcome i may be new but I can see both point of views I think we should try and wait if less work is happening because of this we may need to revert it back thank you. Supergsmer (talk) 13:34, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

2. Neutral. I support yet oppose this idea. On paper, it's fine. I've noticed some users uploading too many user images, so having a limit is a good idea. However, 7 files may be too little, but a limit of 10 seems fairly reasonable. As for the subpages,the 5 page limit is reasonable. I don't see how people need 5 subpages for their userpage. Although I like the concept of limited Inkipedia to information and facts and not a source for fandom and other things, but putting too many limits might be a little problematic. Userpages are a good way to get to know another user on the wiki, and restricting too much wouldn't necessarily be ideal. Idk though. I think it's fine to have a reasonable limit to things that aren't related to the wiki and stuff. OrderSquid38 [Talk] 23:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

   Absolutely agree with you, OrderSquid38. I couldn't have said it better myself. -Gulliblepikmin 14:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

   Actually, you're right. I lean more towards support myself, but you do have a point, OrderSquid38-san. Arivaki-Kun (banter) 18:05, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

3. Support but kinda not. I think that this is a good idea, but I'm not super sure. Userpages are fun and definitely have their place here, and this limit will help keep a balance between userpages and mainspace edits. However, I feel like there should be different restrictions for different levels of editors. If you're a patroller who frequently helps and has been for years, then you should be able to have a few more images or whatever than someone who made an account a month ago and has made zero helpful edits. The subpages thing is good though, since I can't imagine a situation where you would need more than five. I do wonder though, how much work for staff would this require to implement and maintain? WoomyGirl85 (talk) 01:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
4. Neutral. I have been using Inkipedia as a source of information since the early days of Splatoon 2 and got an account originally to help with the fonts page recently. In this time I have never been directed to or really explored user pages as they didn't seem related to the function of the wiki. On the one hand, if a large portion of traffic is related to people using the site as their own personal repository of non-canon, non-official information then that should be something that's looked into. On the other, personal pages exist for a reason and I think it's a really cool way of strengthening the community around the wiki. I would support adding the proposed measures to try and stop people only using this as a place to store their OC lore or projects, but I feel like the decision to not grandfather in any accounts will be overly disruptive. Honestly, I don't feel qualified to cast a judgement that will effect the whole wiki and there is a lot of nuance in this. Whatever the result of this vote, I would ask that things are considered carefully and people from both sides listened to as to how we go forwards. SirNerdbird (talk) 14:28, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
5. Neutral Personally, I don't care, but I do hope that others think about it well before they vote. I'm just here on the wiki for working on the wiki as it is an info space. SP☆CEBOY (talk) 20:10, 23 February 2023
6. Neutral While there's a lot of support for this policy and I share some of their sentiments; ultimately, this isn't something I feel strongly about and will be okay with whatever decisions are made. StarAdamStar (talk) 02:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
7. Neutral, so im kinda new/late to the party, i think 2 might be the better one nlg but i understand the why it's just kinda confusing to see this when you 1st start out. *idk this site i just made an account and don't know exactly the format and what not and idk if this will post and join the count* Rip-tide (talk) 05:40, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
8. Yes, but no., Im new here, and after reading this, I think yea, we whould use this policy. The only place i think it should not be enforced on is on personal user pages. Toad64 (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
9. Neutral I support it but at the same time... I don't. I feel like this rule will make contributors angry and leave the wiki... which means less immediate content, or help. We're already struggling as is, so imagine what damage this rule could do to it's community. This rule is a factor in rendering user's creativity, just because User pages don't matter to some people, doesn't mean it doesn't matter to everyone. if the issue is 'to many unused images', those images should be deleted and the creators of the image should be warned... maybe hire moderators specifically for that purpose? On that note, I do believe that people shouldn't be having ten to fifteen images on their User pages anyway. From what I'm aware, this doesn't ban User pages from using images, but it only limits the amount. People shouldn't need that many images, but I think they should be able to take it up with the moderators if they do need more than seven images. I find it kind of hypocritical that the target of this rule is Userpages, which don't contribute to the wiki; when there are other pages such as Inkfests which aren't targetted by these rules, mind you, Inkfest don't contribute to the wiki. What is the end goal here? I also just wanted to mention, the main issue of this wiki, and the main reason why this rule was created was because of lack of contributors, or more 'talk less work', right? How will this rule in anyway change that? I know what it's like to be restricted by rules, and usually, being restricted by rules doesn't make you follow them, they make you want to rebel as a non-peaceful protest ( if you call rebelling non-peaceful ). Why should what people do on their userpages matter anyway? As long as this wiki is the center of attention, that's all that matters. It feels like moderators are more focused on user pages more than their own community. Hated

Comments

• I mostly support this, but maybe it could be upped to 10 files instead of 7? ArgentuTA164 (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  @ArgentuTA164: In the discussion that led to this proposal, some Inkipedians wanted it to be 10, and most wanted it to be 5, so 7 was chosen as a compromise. Personally, I can't think of an example where someone needed to have 10 personal images on a user page, as that amount of personal content is better suited to a blog like Tumblr or Twitter. Inkipedia simply does not have the resources to moderate people using it like a social media site, and even if we did have the resources, such usage would hinder the goal of Inkipedia: to build the best Splatoon wiki! Heddy (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  I want to add that this number can easily be changed in the future, because Inkipedia runs on community agreement. As more Splatoon games come out, people might want more images, so if Inkipedians agree then the number can go up. Heddy (talk) 03:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

• @User:Heddy; If this policy does come to pass, would I have to completely remove my Sandboxes' content to comply with it? As my Fan-Fic is my prized passion project. If so, I would like some people to offer advice on to making a site for it that I can freely edit/update it and put a link to it on my user page, but I want it to be only viewed by the wiki's viewers/users. I'm open to any suggestions. Also, we have to consider Minifest images as well, so maybe 10 files can be the limit instead. Sincerely, P.J. GT(talk) 01:05, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  @User:P.J. GT You can keep your pages, as long as the subpage limit of 5 is not exceeded. Any pages that are drafts for Inkipedia articles don't count towards the limit.

  If you decide to move the content elsewhere, you could try using Tumblr and using the private/password-protected option if you don't want the general public to see the content. Maybe other people will have other suggestions for other websites to try.

  Minifests do not count towards limits because they are not personal; they are considered a "project", many people participate in them, and the main community page is in the "Inkipedia" namespace. Heddy (talk) 01:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  @User:P.J. GT I am seeing your sandboxes and I think that they don't fall into this limit at all, as they are 3 out of 5 and they have zero personal images. Though if they were, the thing is that Inkipedia isn't a place for fanon content like that, Fan-Fics like those aren't made to be hosted here, but in other sites. I don't know if there is some way so that only people from here can view content from other sites, aside from manually accepting each user one-by-one I guess, but your sandboxes are already public; they can already be seen by whoever going to your userpage, even if they don't have an account in this wiki. Kirbeat (talk) 01:47, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

• To cover several comments at once: Seven was chosen as a middle ground of five and ten: The logic being two images for each splatoon game (Your inkling, your gear etc) and a seventh "fun" image. Most users don't even have seven images. In regards to PJ, may I encourage Fanon Wiki? They have a dedicated Splatoon namespace that could be used. Additionally, you did not come up in my list of people with 5 or greater user pages, which means it would not be an issue if you kept the literal number of pages low. Trig - 01:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
• Question, how do Inkfests not count as social activities? The Inkipedia is to inform, correct? Aren't Inkfests for entertainment purposes? This was probably answered somewhere, but I can't find the answer right now. Hated 02:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  @Mosthated That is considered a community project, listed in the sidebar / navigation menu. The proposed policy doesn't forbid "social" stuff, it only forbids "personal" images and pages submitted only for your own personal use that are not intended to improve wiki articles. Heddy (talk) 02:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  I understand what you mean... but how do Inkfests improve wiki articles?Hated 02:28, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  I never said that, nor did anyone say that. Respectfully, if you are trying to make a point, please say it outright. Heddy (talk) 02:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  Not exactly trying to prove a point here. More or so, I just want to know how they improve wiki articles; im a curious person. Nothing against anyone in particular, so there's no reason to get any more defensive than you are now (respectfully). Hated 03:04, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

  Inkfests do not improve wiki articles. Heddy (talk) 03:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

• I mostly support this, however, I am a little bit concerned about userspace templates. There are undoubtedly a decent number of templates (presently stored within userspace) used on various user pages which are very likely to get deleted as a result of this policy, which could lead to some disappointment from users whose userpages might end up getting mangled as a consequence of this. I think this probably could be alleviated if, in case a template is getting deleted, you were to automatically replace all uses of that template with a subst: (or a safesubst:), but not sure how much time and effort getting that to work would involve. YetAnotherContrivedUsername (zhe/purr) (talk・edits) 11:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

  Userspace templates are not personal, they are intended for community use, so they would be exempt from this policy. Anything that is endorsed by Inkipedia (like signature files) or used by the community (like templates, userboxes, etc.) would not count towards any limit. Heddy (talk) 06:19, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

  That makes sense.

  I would suggest amending the policy to make that exemption explicitly clear though YetAnotherContrivedUsername (zhe/purr) (talk・edits) 12:31, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

  I agree. Trig has drafted some improved wording and examples to add. If the policy is passed, I will add Trig's improvements which should make things much clearer. Heddy (talk) 23:37, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

  I've got a description that's better than that Trig - 00:38, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

  i'd like to ask, to anybody... it their an way to change the text and formating, i hate looking at a bunch of paragraphs stacked together, it just look's bad... anyway to space each user / sorce / comments / anything else i might've missed Rip-tide (talk) 05:44, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

  Replied on your talk page. Heddy (talk) 23:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

• How will this limit the amount of user content? There are some users with a lot of things on their page, but no images. Walrus(talk) 05:37, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

  The policy would limit the number of images to 7 and the number of subpages to 5. This would greatly reduce the amount of user content that one can submit, as currently there is no limit at all. If someone only has one page with no images, then obviously they are not submitting much content and there is no reason for the policy to do anything against such a low level of content. Heddy (talk) 09:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)