User:Sneakysmith12/vetting procedure

If you agree with this, then add ' ' to your user page

A Reformed Vetting Procedure
This is just a thought. This will support articles to be rehabilitated rather then shut down.

New builds
Everyone is free to create a new builds article. When using the template in Style and formatting/Builds, most builds will start out in the category {Deleted Link}|untested builds]]. Those that lack proper formating/wording will be moved into category build stubs.

Discussion and voting
After the build arrives in untested builds, people will start noticing and discussing it. At one point the creator must put up a Rate-a-Build section on the builds talk page. This should be done within a week of the creation of the build. This will allow proper time to test the build. All discussions are to be civil and avoid personal attacks.

Everyone, other than the original author of the specified build, can vote for builds. Voting may only be done after testing the build in game. When voting on a build one must leave a detailed oriented comment on the build pointing out negatives or positives. Failure to do so will result in the removal of this vote. According to a vote on the builds talk page, builds are moved to tested builds if 3 more valid favored votes instead of unfavored. If 3 more valid unfavored votes, the build is moved to unfavored builds. If you see a build which is not in the correct category, please change the build's category.

Important notes on the votes section:
 * Do NOT strike out other people's votes or delete them for any reason. If you think a vote is objectionable in any way, report it to an admin (see GW:ADMIN for a list of admins).
 * Admin's are the only one's with power to remove invalid votes. In a case which one or more invaild votes would cause a build to be favored/unfavored then the build must be changed to a build-stub until it is further reviewed by an admin.
 * Do NOT discuss other people's votes in the voting section. Instead you may leave a unsigned reference number, which is latter put in a section titled Objectionable information toward votes. To do this it is as simple at number
 * There may be votes on votes, all though may only be called from a third party (that person may neither vote favored or unfavored).

Re-counting
Resubmissions don't. In other words if you have an unfavored build it will likely be unfavored later. To save time of everyone simply do not resubmit an unchanged build.

Re-voting
If the build has been sufficiently altered to render old votes invalid, sometimes a new vote is called. To do so, archive the old vote, put up a fresh Rate-a-Build section and move the build into untested.

Deletion of builds
There are only three ways for a build to be up for deletion:
 * 10 or more unfavored votes than favored votes.
 * An admin's decision
 * The creator no longer wishes it to be around. Yes, this applies to vetted builds.

Abandoned builds
If a build in untested or unfavored has not seen work on it in several weeks, it might be put into Abandoned. Builds there will be deleted after a (longer) period of time if no new work on them is done.

Build categories
All build categories with the exception of Build stubs/Abandoned/Untested/Unfavored are reserved for builds which are also in the tested builds category. Builds in one of the before-mentioned four categories should not be in any other builds category at the same time.

Archived builds
Builds that are no longer viable, but are kept for historical reasons are put into category archived builds.

Featured builds
The build portal currently has 2 featured build slots. The first, Current featured build, is reserved for tested builds. The second Featured Untested Build for immediate evaluation is for untested builds. Since there is currently no process comparable to wikipedia's featured articles, every registered user can change the featured builds. To prevent too frequent changes, users are asked only to change the featured tested build every 7 days, and the untested build upon evaluation of the previous one.